Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout006-08 RT 50 Assisted Living Facility - 10.24 Acres RA to B2 - Back Creek - Backfile (2)DATE No. p 7 9 7 ♦ RECEIVED FROM 00 CD AD RESS 0, o A p N DOLLAR$/ LL ® �� j N FOR RENT ❑FOR ' O Q cn > 2 ♦ .y U bq �y to AMT OF ACCOUNT CASH •� •� U AMT. PAID f/ 3;� CHECK BALANCE DUE MONEY ORDER BY k„ DATE -I lo-6 NO. RECEIVED FROM I RESS VA ----------DOLLARS $1 Ll FOR Ll FOR 0 • AMT. ACCOUNT • CASH AMT. PAID CHECK BALANCE DUE MONEY ORDER lb REZONING TRACKING SIEET Check List: -D &lam lvf C , Fee &Sign Deposi� Application Form Deed Proffer Statement L Plat/Survey Impact Analysis L' Taxes Paid Statement Adjoiner List ✓ Impact Model Run DATE 61 c Application received/file opened 6 aC Reference manual updated/number assigned �0 3 D-base updated c d/ Copy of adjoiner list given to staff member for verification Four sets of adjoiner labels ordered from data processing �C & Color location maps ordered from Mapping 7.01.01�, ice-- File given to office manager to update Application Action Summary 0 b� PC public hearing�&4 ACTION: /0 BOS public hearing date ACTION: 7,77""4 Signed copy of resolution for amendment of ordinance, with conditions proffered [if applicable], received from County Administrator's office and given to office manager for placement in the Proffers Notebook. (Note: If rezoning has no proffers, resolution goes in Amendments Without Proffers Notebook.) Q o Action letter mailed to applicant U ka t7 0 S Reference manual and D-base updated ') �� PFile given to office manager to update Application Action Summary (final action) D File given to Mapping/GIS to update zoning map 1 [ilG.7 /b Zoning map amended U \Bev\Common\Tracking sheets\REZ_tracking wpd Revised. 05/09/02 6 '� M kOQ?IERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 October 27, 2008 Michael P. Pointer, ASLA Bowman Consulting Group, LTD 124 E. Cork St. Winchester, VA 22601 RE: REZONING #06-08, ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY PINS 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 53B-3-24 and 5313-3-25 Dear Michael: This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of October 22, 2008. The above -referenced rapgusiness) District,cation was �with proffersed to rezone , for up to .47 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (Genesouth of Route 50, 75,000 square feet of assisted living care facility use. The propeprn Pilce sare Routec50),1 in the Back Cr ek west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Northwest Magisterial District. The proffer originally dated February 22, 2008 and revised last on October 20, 2008, which was approved as a part of this rezoning application, is unique to this property and is binding regardless of ownership. Enclosed is a copy of the adopted. statement for your records. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding the approval of this rezoning application. Sincerely, Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director MTR/bad Enclosure cc: Darla Funkhouser and Sharon Poe, 277 Hilda Dr., Clearbrook, VA 22624 PHTH Properties, LLC, 1151 Cedar Creek Grade, WinchesterV 2260 United Bank, Attn: Ang02 ie Boa, 514 Market St., Parkersburg, ,V Gary A. Lofton, Board of Supervisors, Back Creek District Cordell Watt and Greg Unger, Back Creek Planning Commissioners Jane Anderson, Real Estate Commissioner of Revenue 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 0 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 REZONING APPLICATION #06-08 ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: October 15, 2008 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director STAFF UPDATE FOR 10/22/08 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The Planning Commission recommended denial of this rezoning request at their October 1, 2008 meeting. The Plarming Commission discussed several issues that were still outstanding from their previous meeting. These included the value of the monetary contributions for fire and rescue and transportation, the language in the proffer statement concerning a sunset clause for road dedication, and the unresolved access to the site. Members of the Plarming Commission were not in favor of placing a conunercial entrance on Route 50; they believed other options were available for the applicant to achieve another access point. They also did not believe the applicant went far enough to mitigate the traffic impacts imposed by the proposed use. Since the Plarming Conunission meeting, the Applicant has modified their Application. A new Proffer Statement, dated October 10, 2008, was submitted with the following changes. The Applicant has modified the additional entrance on Route 50 to provide a right -in only entrance. Previously, this additional entrance was designed a s a right -in and right -out entrance. • The Applicant has corrected the problematic sunset clause proffer language regarding the dedication of the road to the rear of the property, and the triggers for their contributions. • The monetary contribution for fire and rescue purposes has been increased from $10,000.00 to $25,000.00. In addition, the proffer includes an annual contribution for fire and rescue services in the amount of $5,000.00 per year. This contribution shall expire based upon fee for service approval. The County Attorney is reviewing this final revision to the Proffer Statement. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 2 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 08/20/08 Tabled 45 days 010/01/08 Recoimnended Denial Board of Supervisors: 10/22/08 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers. LOCATION: The properties are located south of Route 50, west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50, Northwestern Pike. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 53B-3-24, and 53B-3-25 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) PRESENT USE: Residential and vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) B2 (Business General) South: RA (Rural Areas) East: RA (Rural Areas) B2 (Business General) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential Conunercial Use: Candy Hill Campground Use: Residential/vacant Bank Use: Residential PROPOSED USES: Up to 75,000 square feet of Assisted Living Care Facility Use. ITwever, all ^t' uses j3u,•.=ure,a � l-- — E-m inents t!el ting to the proposed !a d , F r thi —4te)-. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virl4inia Department of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a measurable impact on Route 50. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is not satisfied with the transportation proffers offered; no proffers were offered addressing transportation. 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. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to continent on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This perinit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Please see additional comments pt•ovided by Mr•. Mattheiv Stith, VDOT dated August 26, 2008. Fire Marshall: Plan approval recommended. Department of Inspections: No Comment. Department of Public Works: 1. Refer to the Impact Analysis under suitability of the site: The discussion of the bedrock should be expanded to address the potential for sinkhole development within the limestone which underlies the entire site. 2. Refer to the Impact Analysis under drainage: Indicate if there are sufficient off -site drainage channels and/or culverts to acconnrnodate the storm flows derived from the proposed storniwater management facility. Also, indicate if the proposed storniwater pond will be designed as a BMP facility to attenuate storm flows and maximize nutrient removal. 3. Refer to Impact Analysis under Solid Waste Disposal Facilities: Expand the narrative to include an estimate of the yearly solid waste in tons produced by the proposed development. 4. Refer to Impact Analysis under Impact on Cornintmity Facilities: Explain the reference to the impact on the City of Winchester when Frederick County provides all the services required by the proposed development. 5. Refer to the Wetland Assessment prepared by ECS: This assessment indicates a topographic high of 825 MSL with approximately 20 feet of total relief. This observation is in conflict with the plan of the existing natural conditions prepared by Bowman Consulting which indicates a topographic high of 834.6 with approximately 35 feet of relief. This conflict needs to be corrected. 6. Refer to the MDP, sheet 2 of 3: Delineate any karst features which could impact the site development. 7. Refer to the MDP, sheet 2 of 3: Indicate the locations of any existing wells and/or drainfields which will need to be properly abandoned to accommodate development. These features currently exist on the property identified as Map I.D.: 5313-3-25. 8. Refer to the MDP, sheet 3 of 3: Any site development should be designed to ensure that storm runoff is diverted to the proposed stormwater management/BMP facility and away from the single family residences fronting on Ward Avenue. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: No comments. Sanitation Authority Department: There should be sufficient sewer and water capacity to serve this project. Department of Parks & Recreation: No comment. 0 0 Rezoning 406-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 4 Health Department: Unless the proposal has changed since the attached Health Department connnents dated 2/21 /08 were sent to the owner, those comments are still valid. 2/21 i08 — The Health Department has no objections. According to the "Sewer & Water Exhibit: public water and sewer are to be provided. Permits from this office will be required for food preparation facilities. Winchester Regional Airport: We have reviewed the proposed rezoning application and determined that the proposed development plan will not have an impact on operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. While the proposed site lies within the airport's airspace, it does fall outside of the airport's Part 77 close in surfaces, therefore, special conditional will not be requested. Frederick County Public Schools: We offer no connnents. Historic Resources Advisory Board: It appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. Attorney Comments: Please see letter dated August 14, 2008 from Mr. Rod Williams. PlanninLy Department: Please see attached memorandum. PlanninI4 & Zoninr4: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies these properties as being zoned A-2 (Agriculture General). The County's agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject property and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensve Policy Plan, p. 1-1 ] 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 5 Land Use The property is located in the area covered by the Round Hill Land Use Plan which was most recently updated on November 11, 2007. The property is within the SWSA and is designated as an area of commercial land use. The Round Hill Land Use Plan addresses the corridor appearance elements of the Round Hill Community along Route 50. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Route 50. Landscaping, lighting, and building layout and form should be carefully planned to ensure that this is achieved. Examples consistently used in the current development in the corridor have included brick construction and in several cases, standing seam metal green roofs. Along Route 50 West, a 50 foot landscaped buffer has been recognized as a desirable landscaped area that promotes the corridor appearance goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Recently rezoned projects in several corridors have consistently applied this approach. This property is located in an area that contains a number of established residential properties. Special consideration should be provided to ensure that the impacts to the adjacent residential properties are sensitively addressed. A tailored approach to the buffering and screening of these properties may be warranted. Transportation This application must address the transportation components of the Round Hill Land Use Plan. The Round Hill Community Land Use Plan calls for a transportation network that would feed traffic to and from Route 50 at controlled intersections, and discourages a proliferation of entrances along Route 50 itself. The Round Hill Plan states that commercial establislunents should front feeder roads which connect to Route 50 at signalized intersections. This discourages individual business entrances on Route 50 both for aesthetic reasons as well as transportation efficiency. The Round Hill Land Use Plan identifies a local collector street connecting Ward Avenue to Round Hill Road in the general vicinity of the southern boundary of this property. The dashed line on the GDP does not give sufficient guidance as to how this application addresses the road. The associated proffer language with this road provides minimal assistance in providing this important road connection. More detail needs to be provided regarding Ward Avenue, its associated right-of-way, and the ability to modify and expand upon, or dedicate the right-of-way to provide for an acceptable access to and from the site. Ward Avenue is an existing State Road that does not meet current street standards. Consideration should be given to improving Ward Avenue to a public street standard that meets .all current standards. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 6 In Frederick County's Eastern Road Plan, Route 50 is classified as a minor arterial road. The Eastern Road Plan Generalized Cross Section Designation Map identifies this section of Route 50 as a six -lane divided road section. The Comprehensive Policy Plan also states that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. This application does notprovide that Level ofService (LOS Q. In addition, this application fails to accurately model a level of service consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Site Access and design. Site Access is proposed to be provided from two locations. Primary access to the site is via Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access point is proposed to be provided from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) via a right -in right -out only entrance. A third access point would be permitted to the rear of this property in the future. Please recognize that the proposed access onto Ward Avenue is ve,-jy constrained The parcel acquired by the applicant is 50' in width and may not sufficiently accommodate a full two way access road that meets the necessary setbacks from the adjacent property line to the north and respects the required buffer to the south. The applicant is proposing to locate the access drivewav within the active portion of the required buffer. This should be clarified in the application prior to the Commission's recommendation. In addition, the entrance on to Route 50 should be carefully evaluated As noted previously, additional entrances along such a significant transportation corridor should be avoided. The design of the site is specifically illustrated on the Generalized Development Plan for this project. The GDP provides a degree of certainty as to how the site is proposed to be developed. 3) Site Suitability/Environment The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. In particular, there are no identified areas of steep slopes, mature woodlands, floodplain or wetlands on the parcel which are identified in this application. Two reports prepared by ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC were perforrmed in conjunction with this application, a wetlands study and a preliminary geotechnical evaluation. Please see the letters dated October 26, 2007 and January 29, 2008 respectively which further describe the reports. 4) Potential Impacts When considering this request, it should be recognized that the approach taken in this application seeks to minimize the use in an effort to minimize the impacts that need to be addressed in the application. It may be more desirable to take a greater advantage of the location of this property and enable a more intensive use of the property than that which is proffered. It would appear as though there is ample space to enable additional compatible land uses on the property in the future. Such additional uses may include day care facilities and medical and professional office uses. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 7 The rezoning amendment process is a process that requires the applicant to identify and address all impacts associated with the request. This Applicant has chosen an approach that is not desirable. They have stated that they intend to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use and that all other B2 uses shall be permitted on the property. In essence, that this is a rezoning request that would permit all B2 uses with no development limitations; subject only to future TL4 s with no guarantees as to how future impacts maV be addressed To reiterate, this approach is not acceptable. A. Transportation Traffic Impact Anal The TIA prepared for this application was based upon the development of an eighty-four bed assisted living facility. Primary access to the development was modeled from Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access point from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). The Applicant evaluated the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50 and the intersection of Echo Lane and Route 50. As the Commission is aware, the Comprehensive Policy Plan seeks to ensure that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. An acceptable level of service to Frederick County, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. This TIA's evaluations and conclusions are based upon a level of service D or better. This is not acceptable. Therefore, the conclusions of the TIA are not acceptable. This application has not accurately measured the transportation impacts associated with the request. Transportation Program. It is anticipated that additional right-of-way and improvements may be necessary along Route 50 and Ward Avenue. A mechanism should be considered which would enable any right-of- way necessary for the planned improvements to be dedicated to the County or VDOT. Future right-of-way dedication should be based upon the road improvement plans as approved by VDOT and Frederick County. Access management of Route 50 is a significant consideration. An additional entrance onto Route 50 should be avoided. The function of the existing signal at Route 50 and Ward Avenue should continue to be enhanced. It does appear as though additional improvements are being proposed on the GDP along the properties frontage with Route 50. These improvements should be clarified and specifically incorporated into the language of the Proffer Statement. On recent rezonings, other projects have contributed additional funding for transportation improvements in the general area of their requests. This has been done in recognition of the need to address the broader transportation improvements in the developing areas of the County in addition to the specific improvements they may be proposing. Such an approach has been considered with this request. Rezoning 406-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 8 The applicant has proffered $25,000 towards such improvements. However, a sunset clause of 5 years has been added to the Proffer as has a restriction on the distancefi•om the property (500') the funding could be used. The result of these two restrictions may invalidate the proffer. The application has not provided for any right -of way dedication along Ward Avenue or Route 50. Ward Avenue is identified as a 40' right-of-way. The minimum right of way needs of VDOT should be recognized, in addition to any additional right of way necessary to implement access to and from the site. Pedestrian accommodations have been provided in a coordinated manner internal to the project, to and along Ward Avenue, to the Route 50 frontage, and along the Route 50 frontage. This has been addressed but should be specifically incorporated into the proffer language. The application identifies a local collector street connecting Ward Avenue to Round Hill Road in the general vicinity of the southern boundary of this property. The dashed line on the GDP does not give sufficient guidance as to how this application addresses the road. The associated proffer language with this road provides minimal assistance in providing thisimportant road connection. In addition, the reservation language and sunset clause of five years is once again insufficient to address the importance of this future connection identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The entrances identified on the GDP should be addressed at this time and the future construction should be consistent with the GDP. The Applicant has written additional flexibility into Proffer 2.1 which may provide additional flexibility. B. Design Standards The application provides for the addition of an enhanced landscaping buffer area along the properties frontage with Route 50. In addition, the application includes minimal architectural language, loosely written in an attempt to address the corridor appearance design elements of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Community Facilities The development of this site will have an impact on community facilities and services. However, it is recognized that commercial uses generally provide a positive impact on community facilities through the additional generation of tax revenue. This application, however, is not a typical revenue generating commercial land use (please refer to a previous comment about the intensity of the land use at such a key location). This application's effort to address the impacts to community facilities is limited to a $2,000.00 contribution to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. 0 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 9 5) Pi --offer Statement — Dated February 22, 2008; revised June 24, 2008. A) Generalized Development Plan The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan (GDP dated January 2008 and revised through June 24, 2008) for the site. The GDP is very specific which may cause conflicts with existing requirements and engineering and site development issues during the development of this project. Staff does recognize that this is more detailed than that initially provided, as requested; however, with this request it should be simplified. Staff would suggest removing the utility lines and parking lot striping and handicap details. It is not clear how the erdlanced buffer details are different from those required by Ordinance. The Applicant should clarify this item. In addition, the applicant should address the Ward Avenue entrance on the GDP. The GDP shows a right -in right -out only entrance on Route 50 and a full entrance on Ward Avenue. The location of three potential locations for possible inter parcel connections is also shown on the GDP. B) Land Use The Applicant has stated that they intend to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use and that all other B2 uses shall be permitted on the property. In essence, that this is a rezoning request that would permit all B2 uses with no development limitations; subject only to future TIA's with no guarantees as to how future impacts may be addressed. To reiterate, this approach is not acceptable. The rezoning amendment process is a process that requires the applicant to identify and address all impacts associated with the request. This Applicant has chosen an approach opposite to that required and opposite to best practices, an approach that does not provide the County with the appropriate measure of control and security to make sure the impacts associated with the request can be adequately addressed. The applicant has proffered a 100' enhanced landscaped road efficiency buffer along the Route 50 frontage which will include mixed ornamental plantings generally consistent with the exhibit included with the GDP. C) Transportation The applicant has proffered to limit site entrances to two as shown on the GDP. Direct access from Route 50 shall be limited to a right in only entrance. A third entrance to the rear would be permitted in the future. The Applicant has a commitment to reserve up to 25' along the southern boundary for possible right of way dedication for the extension of existing Round Hill Road by others. To reiterate, this element should be addressed to a greater extent. In addition, the sunset clause in this and other proffers should be removed. 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 10 Inteiparcel connection opportunities have been identified. The Applicant has proffered a $25,000 contribution for future road improvements to Route 50, Ward Avenue, or the extension of Round Hill Road within 500' of the property. Please note the concerns previously identified with distance condition and the sunset clause. D) Cormntmity Facilities The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $2,000 to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. No additional contributions have been made to address the other community facility impacts recognized by the County's development Impact Model (DIM). An overall concern with this request is the approach the applicant has taken to the administrative triggers and mechanisms for the Proffers that are aimed at mitigating the potential impacts associated with this request. The approach is undesirable. The approach proposed by theApplicant is complicated and more confusing than it needs to be. It is the County's desire to ensure that the proffer language is clem• and concise. Further, that the proffers actually address the impacts generated by the specific request. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 08/20/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Round Hill Land Use Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan, in particular the Round Hill Conuntuuty Land Use Plan. Particular attention should be paid to the proposed entrances to the facility, impacts to Ward Avenue, and how the application addresses the comprehensively planned road to the rear of the property. In addition, significant concerns have been raised regarding the details of the Proffer Statement and the triggers and mechanisms for the Proffers, the conclusions of the TIA, and the important fact that not all B2 land uses and there potential impacts have been evaluated. Following the requirement for a public hearing, a recommendation by the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors concerning this rezoning application would be appropriate. The applicant should be pa•epa•ed to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 11 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 08/20/08 MEETING: The staff and Commission recognized the applicant had just recently submitted a revised proffer statement, dated August 18, 2008, which did not arrive timely enough to be placed in the Conunission's agenda or reviewed by the staff or the public. Staff announced that the Commission's Bylaws stipulate that if information is not received within 21 days prior to the meeting, the Commission may table the request for 45 days. Connnissioners commented that the revised proffer statement significantly changed the application. Two citizens spoke during the public comment portion of the hearing. The fast citizen, Mr. Gregory Bishop, commented about the shared easements and right-of-way and that Mrs. Smith's access was blocked by a gate. Mr. Bishop spoke in favor of the Round Hill/ Ward Avenue connection. He also had questions about public sewer lines, reminding the Commission that individuals in the community were waiting for public sewage capability. The second citizen, Mrs. Patricia Smith, had the right-of-way on Echo Lane through the applicant's property. Mrs. Smith said that no one has spoken with her about this proposal and she was not notified in writing about the meeting. She wanted to know how she and the other neighbors along Stonewall Drive would be affected. The applicant and his legal counsel were available to describe the project and the revised proffers and information. Connnissioners questioned the applicant on why he continued to pursue an entrance onto Route 50. Commission members suggested the applicant be prepared to address the comments raised about the shared access agreement on Route 50, a possible tie-in to Stonewall Drive, and the 50-foot requirement across the main entrance on Ward Avenue before coming back before the Commission. In accordance with the Connnission's Bylaws regarding submission of revised proffers, members of the Conunission unanimously voted to table the rezoning for 45 days in order to provide sufficient time for review of the revised proffers by the Commission, the staff, and the public. STAFF UPDATE FOR 10/01/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Applicant previously provided the Planning Commission with a revised proffer statement dated August 18, 2008 inunediately prior to your 08/20/08 meeting. In this revision, the Applicant attempted to address several issues identified in the staff report and those items identified by Mr. Rod Williams during his legal review dated August 14, 2008. Following this Commission meeting, the Applicant further revised their proffer statement in an effort to address several issues identified by the Planning Commission. The date of this latest revision to the proffer statement is September 5, 2008. In summary, the changes to the substance of the proffer statement are as follows. The most significant modification to the Application and Proffer Statement is the inclusion of Parcel 53B-3-24 owned by United Bank into the application. The primary purpose to this addition is to provide for sufficient area to implement the proposed Ward Avenue access road to the facility as identified on Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 12 the GDP. This change alone necessitates the additional Public Hearing requirement which has been duly advertised. Please recognize that the proffers for this rezoning have been crafted to apply to the 5' area to be adjusted into the Assisted Living Facility from the United Bank. The balance of this parcel to be retained by United Bank would not be subject to these proffers. The next significant modification is the clarification that the land use for this property shall be only for an assisted living care facility of up to 75,000 square feet. All other B2 uses shall not be permitted on this site. In addition, the Applicant has included an exhibit, Exhibit A, which would guide the architectural elevations of the buildings construction, and has broadened the potential use of the $25,000 transportation proffer to the general vicinity of the project rather than direct it to a specific improvement. In addition to those concerns previously identified in the staff report, several concerns remain regarding the proffer statement's triggers including the timing of the above $25,000 transportation contribution, the timing of the site improvements, and the sunset clause for the dedication of right of way to the rear of the property for the Round Hill Road extension. The importance of this future road comlection, dedication of the necessary right of way, and potential construction should continue to be stressed. The proposed entrance onto Route 50 has been modified but has not been removed at this time. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 09/24/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Round Hill Land Use Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensue that they fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan, in particular the Round Hill Commurity Land Use Plan. Particular attention should be paid to the proposed Route 50 entrance to the facility, impacts to Ward Avenue, and how the application addresses the comprehensively planned road to the rear of the property. In addition, concerns remain regarding the Proffer Statement and the triggers and mechanisms for the Proffers. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 10/01/08 MEETING: The Planning Commission discussed several issues that were still outstanding from their previous meeting. These included the value of the monetary contributions for fire and rescue and transportation, the language in the proffer statement concerning a sunset clause for road dedication, and the unresolved access to the site. Members of the Planning Commission were not in favor of placing a conunercial entrance on Route 50; they believed other options were available for the applicant to achieve another access point. They also did not believe the applicant went far enough to mitigate the traffic impacts imposed by the proposed use. 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility October 15, 2008 Page 13 There were no public continents. The Planning Commission recommended denial by the following majority vote: YES (REC. DENIAL): Unger, Ambrogi, Manuel, Ruclanan, Oates, Wilmot NO: Ours, Thomas, Triplett, Kerr (Note: Commissioner Molnn abstained; Connnissioners Watt and Kriz were absent from the meeting.) • 0 Bowman C O N S U L T I N G October 14, 2008 Mr. Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director County of Frederick Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Rezoning Application #06-08 BCG Project #5132-01-003 Dear Mr. Ruddy, OCT 14 K08 Attached with this correspondence are the exhibits and supporting materials for the above -referenced rezoning application for inclusion in the agenda packet for the Board of Supervisors public hearing on October 22, 2008. The key revisions made to the application subsequent to the Planning Commission's recommendation are as follows: • Route 50 Access — The proposed access on US Route 50 has been modified to a "right -in only" entrance, which has been reviewed and accepted by VDOT. The revised design will accommodate ingress and egress for over -sized Allegheny Power vehicles, but is configured to preclude egress for assisted living facility traffic. • Monetary Contribution for Fire and Rescue — The lump sum monetary contribution for Fire and Rescue has been increased from $10,000.00 to $25,000.00. In addition to this lump sum payment, the proffers have been enhanced to include a recurring contribution for Fire and Rescue services of $5,000.00 per year. • Revision of Proffer Language — The text of the proffer statement has been revised to reflect County Attorney comments and clarify implementation triggers for certain provisions. On behalf of HHHunt and the entire project team, I would like to thank you for your continued assistance with this proposal. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, BOWM CONSUL G GROUP Xicel P. Point r, A L Principal Attachments Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. 124 East Cork Street • Winchester,VA 22601 Phone: S40.722.2343 • Fax: 540.722.5080 • www.bown)anconsulting.com REZONING APPLICATION 406-08 ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: September 17, 2008 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Plamling Director STAFF UPDATE FOR 09/24/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MELTING: The Applicant previously provided the Plamling Commission with a revised proffer statement dated August 18, 2008 iminediately prior to your 08/20/08 meeting. In this revision, the Applicant attempted to address several issues identified in the staff report and those items identified by Mr. Rod Williams during his legal review dated August 14, 2008. Following this Commission meeting, the Applicant further revised their proffer statement in an effort to address several issues identified by the Planning Connnission. The date of this latest revision to the proffer statement is September 5, 2008. In summary, the changes to the substance of the proffer statement are as follows. The most significant modification to the Application and Proffer Statement is the inclusion of Parcel 5313-3-24 owned by United Bank into the application. The primary purpose to this addition is to provide for sufficient area to implement the proposed Ward Avenue access road to the facility as identified on the GDP. This change alone necessitates the additional Public Hearing requirement which has been duly advertised. Please recognize that the proffers for this rezoning have been crafted to apply to the 5' area to be adjusted into the Assisted Living Facility from the United Bank. The balance of this parcel to be retained by United Bank would not be subject to these proffers. The next significant modification is the clarification that the land use for this property shall be only for an assisted living care facility of up to 75,000 square feet. All other B2 uses shall not be permitted on this site. In addition, the Applicant has included an exhibit, Exhibit A, which would guide the architectural elevations of the buildings construction, and has broadened the potential use of the $25,000 transportation proffer to the general vicinity of the project rather than direct it to a specific improvement. In addition to those concerns previously identified in the staff report, several concerns remain regarding the proffer statement's triggers including the timing of the above $25,000 transportation contribution, the timing of the site improvements, and the sunset clause for the dedication of right of way to the rear of the property for the Round Hill Road extension. The importance of this future road connection, dedication of the necessary right of way, and potential construction should continue to be stressed. The proposed entrance onto Route 50 has been modified but has not been removed at this time. • 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 2 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 09/24/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Round Hill Land Use Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan, in particular the Round Hill Conununity Land Use Plan. Particular attention 'should be paid to the proposed Route 50 entrance to the facility, impacts to Ward Avenue, and how the application addresses the comprehensively plaimed road to the rear of the property. In addition, concerns remain regarding the Proffer Statement and the triggers and mechanisms for the Proffers. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 3 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 08/20/08 Tabled 45 days 09/17/08 Pending Board of Supervisors: 09/24/08 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers. LOCATION: The properties are located south of Route 50, east of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 53B-3-24, and 53B-3-25 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) PRESENT USE: Residential and vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential B2 (Business General) Commercial South: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Candy Hill Campground Bast: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential/vacant B2 (Business General) Bank West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential PROPOSED USES: Up to 75,000 square feet of Assisted Living Care Facility Use. T-'ewe all Othe • .B2 uses pef hied (please see eenHnents ,•el.,ting to t13e-pr-&p&sed land , f ,. this site). Rezoning 906-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 4 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virl4inia Department of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a measurable impact on Route 50. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is not satisfied with the transportation proffers offered; no proffers were offered addressing transportation. 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. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work perfonned on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Please see additional comments provided by Mr. Mattheiv Smith, VDOT dated August 26, 2008. Fire Marshall: Plan approval recommended. Department of Inspections: No Corm -lent. Department of Public Works: 1. Refer to the Impact Analysis under suitability of the site: The discussion of the bedrock should be expanded to address the potential for sinkhole development within the limestone which underlies the entire site. 2. Refer to the Impact Analysis under drainage: Indicate if there are sufficient off -site drainage channels and/or culverts to accommmodate the stone flows derived from the proposed stormwater management facility. Also, indicate if the proposed stonnwater pond will be designed as a BMP facility to attenuate storm flows and maximize nutrient removal. 3. Refer to Impact Analysis under Solid Waste Disposal Facilities: Expand the narrative to include an estimate of the yearly solid waste in tons produced by the proposed development. 4. Refer to Impact Analysis under Impact on Community Facilities: Explain the reference to the impact on the City of Winchester when Frederick County provides all the services required by the proposed development. 5. Refer to the Wetland Assessment prepared by ECS: This assessment indicates a topographic high of 825 MSL with approximately 20 feet of total relief. This observation is in conflict with the plan of the existing natural conditions prepared by Bowman Consulting which indicates a topographic high of 834.6 with approximately 35 feet of relief. This conflict needs to be corrected. 6. Refer to the MDP, sheet 2 of 3: Delineate any karst features which could impact the site development. 7. Refer to the MDP, sheet 2 of 3: Indicate the locations of any existing wells and/or drainfields which will need to be properly abandoned to accommodate development. These features currently exist on the property identified as Map I.D.: 53B-3-25. 8. Refer to the MDP, sheet 3 of 3: Any site development should be designed to ensure that stone runoff is diverted to the proposed stormwater management/BMP facility and away from the single family residences fronting on Ward Avenue. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: No comments. Sanitation Authority Department: There should be sufficient sewer and water capacity to serve this proj ect. Department of Parks & Recreation: No comment. Rezoning 406-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 5 Health Department: Unless the proposal has changed since the attached Health Department continents dated 2/21 /08 were sent to the owner, those comments are still valid. 2/21/08 — The Health Department has no objections. According to the "Sewer & Water Exhibit: public water and sewer are to be provided. Permits from this office will be required for food preparation facilities. Winchester Regional Airport: We have reviewed the proposed rezoning application and detennined that the proposed development plan will not have an impact on operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. While the proposed site lies within the airport's airspace, it does fall outside of the airport's Part 77 close in surfaces, therefore, special conditional will not be requested. Frederick County Public Schools: We offer no comments. Historic Resources Advisory Board: It appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. Attorney Comments: Please see letter dated August 14, 2008 from Mr. Rod Williams. PlanninjZ Department: Please see attached memorandum. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies these properties as being zoned A-2 (Agriculture General). The County's agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject property and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-1] • Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 6 T,a"d Use The property is located in the area covered by the Round Hill Land Use Plan which was most recently updated on November 11, 2007. The property is within the SWSA and is designated as an area of conunercial land use. The Round Hill Land Use Plan addresses the corridor appearance elements of the Round Hill Community along Route 50. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Route 50. Landscaping, lighting, and building layout and form should be carefully planned to ensure that this is achieved. Examples consistently used in the current development in the corridor have included brick construction and in several cases, standing seam metal green roofs. Along Route 50 West, a 50 foot landscaped buffer has been recognized as a desirable landscaped area that promotes the corridor appearance goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Recently rezoned projects in several corridors have consistently applied this approach. This property is located in an area that contains a number of established residential properties. Special consideration should be provided to ensure that the impacts to the adjacent residential properties are sensitively addressed. A tailored approach to the buffering and screening of these properties may be warranted. Transportation This application must address the transportation components of the Round Hill Land Use Plan. The Round Hill Community Land Use Plan calls for a transportation network that would feed traffic to and from Route 50 at controlled intersections, and discourages a proliferation of entrances along Route 50 itself. The Round Hill Plan states that conunercial establishments should front feeder roads which comiect to Route 50 at signalized intersections. This discourages individual business entrances on Route 50 both for aesthetic reasons as well as transportation efficiency. The Round Hill Land Use Plan identifies a local collector street connecting Ward Avenue to Round Hill Road in the general vicinity of the southern boundary of this property. The dashed line on the GDP does not give sufficient guidance as to how this application addresses the road. The associated proffer language with this road provides minimal assistance in providing this important road connection. More detail needs to be provided regarding Ward Avenue, its associated right-of-way, and the ability to modify and expand upon, or dedicate the right-of-way to provide for an acceptable access to and from the site. Ward Avenue is an existing State Road that does not meet current street standards. Consideration should be given to improving Ward Avenue to a public street standard that meets all current standards. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 7 In Frederick County's Eastern Road Plan, Route 50 is classified as a minor arterial road. The Eastern Road Plan Generalized Cross Section Designation Map identifies this section of Route 50 as a six -lane divided road section. The Comprehensive Policy Plan also states that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. This application does notprovide that Level ofService (LOS Q. In addition, this application fails to accurately model a level of service consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Site Access and design. Site Access is proposed to be provided from two locations. Primary access to the site is via Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access point is proposed to be provided from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) via a right -in right -out only entrance. A third access point would be permitted to the rear of this property in the future. Please recognize that the proposed access onto WardAvenue is very constrained. Theparcel acquired by the applicant is 50' in width and may not sufficiently accommodate a full two way access road that meets the necessary setbacks from the adjacent property line to the north and respects the required buffer to the south. The applicant is proposing to locate the access driveway within the active portion of the required buffer. This should be clarified in the application prior to the Commission's recommendation. In addition, the entrance on to Route 50 should be carefully evaluated. As noted previously, additional entrances along such a significant transportation corridor should be avoided. The design of the site is specifically illustrated on the Generalized Development Plan for this project. The GDP provides a degree of certainty as to how the site is proposed to be developed. 3) Site Suitability/Environment The site does not contain any enviromnental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. In particular, there are no identified areas of steep slopes, mature woodlands, floodplain or wetlands on the parcel which are identified in this application. Two reports prepared by ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC were performed in conjunction with this application, a wetlands study and a preliminary geotechnical evaluation. Please see the letters dated October 26, 2007 and January 29, 2008 respectively which further describe the reports. 4) Potential Impacts When considering this request, it should be recognized that the approach taken in this application seeks to minimize the use in an effort to minimize the impacts that need to be addressed in the application. It may be more desirable to take a greater advantage of the location of this property and enable a more intensive use of the property than that which is proffered. It would appear as though there is ample space to enable additional compatible land uses on the property in the future. Such additional uses may include day care facilities and medical and professional office uses. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 8 The rezoning amendment process is a process that requires the applicant to identify and address all impacts associated with the request. This Applicant has chosen an approach that is not desirable. They have stated that they intend to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use and that all other B2 uses shall be permitted on the property. In essence, that this is a rezoning request that would permit all B2 uses with no development limitations; subject only to future TM s with no guarantees as to how future impacts may be addresser. To reiterate, this approach is not acceptable. A. Transportation Traffic Impact Analysis. The TIA prepared for this application was based upon the development of an eighty-four bed assisted living facility. Primary access to the development was modeled from Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access point from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). The Applicant evaluated the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50 and the intersection of Echo Lane and Route 50. As the Commission is aware, the Comprehensive Policy Plan seeks to ensure that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. Ali acceptable level of service to Frederick County, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. This TIA's evaluations and conclusions are based upon a level of service D or better. This is not acceptable. Therefore, the conclusions of the TIA are not acceptable. This application has not accurately measured the transportation impacts associated with the request. Transportation Program. It is anticipated that additional right-of-way and improvements may be necessary along Route 50 and Ward Avenue. A mechanism should be considered which would enable any right-of- way necessary for the planned improvements to be dedicated to the County or VDOT. Future right-of-way dedication should be based upon the road improvement plans as approved by VDOT and Frederick County. Access management of Route 50 is a significant consideration. An additional entrance onto Route 50 should be avoided. The function of the existing signal at Route 50 and Ward Avenue should continue to be enhanced. It does appear as though additional improvements are being proposed on the GDP along the properties frontage with Route 50. These improvements should be clarified and specifically incorporated into the language of the Proffer Statement. On recent rezonings, other projects have contributed additional funding for transportation improvements in the general area of their requests. This has been done in recognition of the need to address the broader transportation improvements in the developing areas of the County in addition to the specific improvements they may be proposing. Such an approach has been considered with this request. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 9 The applicant has proffered $25, 000 towards such improvements. However, a sunset clause of 5 yews has been added to the Proffer as has a restriction on the distancefrom the property (500') the funding could be used. The result of these two restrictions may invalidate the proffer. The application has not provided for any right -of way dedication along Ward Avenue or Route 50. Ward Avenue is identified as a 40' right-of-way. The minimuin right of way needs of VDOT should be recognized, in addition to any additional right of way necessary to implement access to and from the site. Pedestrian accommodations have been provided in a coordinated mariner internal to the project, to and along Ward Avenue, to the Route 50 frontage, and along the Route 50 frontage. This has been addressed but should be specifically incorporated into the proffer language. The application identifies a local collector street connecting Ward Avenue to Round Hill Road in the general vicinity of the southern boundary of this property. The dashed line on the GDP does not give sufficient guidance as to how this application addresses the road. The associated proffer language with this road provides minimal assistance in providing this important road connection. In addition, the reservation language and sunset clause of five years is once again insufficient to address the importance of this future connection identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The entrances identified on the GDP should be addressed at this time and the future construction should be consistent with the GDP. The Applicant has written additional flexibility into Proffer 2.1 which may provide additional flexibility. B. Design Standards The application provides for the addition of an enhanced landscaping buffer area along the properties frontage with Route 50. In addition, the application includes minimal architectural language, loosely written in an attempt to address the corridor appearance design elements of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Community Facilities The development of this site will have an impact on coninunity facilities and services. However, it is recognized that commercial uses generally provide a positive impact on community facilities through the additional generation of tax revenue. This application, however, is not a typical revenue generating commercial land use (please refer to a previous comment about the intensity of the land use at such a key location). This application's effort to address the impacts to community facilities is limited to a $2,000.00 contribution to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 10 5) Proffer Statement — Dated February 22, 2008; revised June 24, 2008. A) Generalized Development Plan The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan (GDP dated January 2008 and revised through June 24, 2008) for the site. The GDP is very specific which may cause conflicts with existing requirements and engineering and site development issues during the development of this project. Staff does recognize that this is more detailed than that initially provided, as requested; however, with this request it should be simplified. Staff would suggest removing the utility lines and parking lot striping and handicap details. It is not clear how the enhanced buffer details are different from those required by Ordinance. The Applicant should clarify this item. In addition, the applicant should address the Ward Avenue entrance on the GDP. The GDP shows a right -in right -out only entrance on Route 50 and a full entrance on Ward Avenue. The location of three potential locations for possible inter parcel cormections is also shown on the GDP. B) Land Use The Applicant has stated that they intend to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use and that all other B2 uses shall be permitted on the property. In essence, that this is a rezoning request that would permit all B2 uses with no development limitations; subject only to future TIA's with no guarantees as to how future impacts may be addressed. To reiterate, this approach is not acceptable. The rezoning amendment process is a process that requires the applicant to identify and address all impacts associated with the request. This Applicant has chosen an approach opposite to that required and opposite to best practices, an approach that does not provide the County with the appropriate measure of control and security to make sure the impacts associated with the request can be adequately addressed. The applicant has proffered a 100' enhanced landscaped road efficiency buffer along the Route 50 frontage which will include mixed ornamental plantings generally consistent with the exhibit included with the GDP. C) Transportation The applicant has proffered to limit site entrances to two as shown on the GDP. Direct access from Route 50 shall be limited to a right in only entrance. A third entrance to the rear would be permitted in the future. The Applicant has a commitment to reserve up to 25' along the southern boundary for possible right of way dedication for the extension of existing Round Hill Road by others. To reiterate, this element should be addressed to a greater extent. In addition, the sunset clause in this and other proffers should be removed. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page I I Interparcel connection opportunities have been identified. The Applicant has proffered a $25,000 contribution for future road improvements to Route 50, Ward Avenue, or the extension of Round Hill Road within 500' of the property. Please note the concerns previously identified with distance condition and the sunset clause. D) Community Facilities The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $2,000 to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. No additional contributions have been made to address the other community facility impacts recognized by the County's development Impact Model (DIM). An overall concern with this request is the approach the applicant has taken to the administrative triggers and mechanisms for the Proffers that are aimed at mitigating the potential impacts associated with this request. The approach is undesirable. The approach proposed by theApplicant is complicated and more confusing than it needs to be. It is the County's desire to ensure that the proffer language is clear and concise. Further, that the proffers actually address the impacts generated by the specific request. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 08/20/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Round Hill Land Use Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan, in particular the Round Hill Cornrnunity Land Use Plan. Particular attention should be paid to the proposed entrances to the facility, impacts to Ward Avenue, and how the application addresses the comprehensively planned road to the rear of the property. In addition, significant concerns have been raised regarding the details of the Proffer Statement and the triggers and mechanisms for the Proffers, the conclusions of the TIA, and the important fact that not all B2 land uses and there potential impacts have been evaluated. Following the requirement for a public hearing, a recommendation by the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors concerning this rezoning application would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address -till concerns raised by the Planning Commission. Rezoning 906-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility September 17, 2008 Page 12 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 08/20/08 MEETING: The staff and Conunission recognized the applicant had just recently submitted a revised proffer statement, dated August 18, 2008, which did not arrive timely enough to be placed in the Commission's agenda or reviewed by the staff or the public. Staff announced that the Commission's Bylaws stipulate that if information is not received within 21 days prior to the meeting, the Commission may table the request for 45 days. Commissioners conunented that the revised proffer statement significantly changed the application. Two citizens spoke during the public comment portion of the hearing. The first citizen, Mr. Gregory Bishop, conunented about the shared easements and right-of-way and that Mrs. Smith's access was blocked by a gate. Mr. Bishop spoke in favor of the Round Hill/ Ward Avenue connection. He also had questions about public sewer lines, reminding the Commission that individuals in the conununity were waiting for public sewage capability. The second citizen, Mrs. Patricia Smith, had the right-of-way on Echo Lane through the applicant's property. Mrs. Smith said that no one has spoken with her about this proposal and she was not notified in writing about the meeting. She wanted to know how she and the other neighbors along Stonewall Drive would be affected. The applicant and his legal counsel were available to describe the project and the revised proffers and information. Commissioners questioned the applicant on why he continued to pursue an entrance onto Route 50. Commission members suggested the applicant be prepared to address the comments raised about the shared access agreement on Route 50, a possible tie-in to Stonewall Drive, and the 50-foot requirement across the main entrance on Ward Avenue before coming back before the Commission. In accordance with the Commission's Bylaws regarding submission of revised proffers, members of the Commission unanimously voted to table the rezoning for 45 days in order to provide sufficient time for review of the revised proffers by the Conunission, the staff, and the public. REZONING APPLICATION #06-08 ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: August 6, 2008 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. Reviewed Planning Commission: 08/20/08 Board of Supervisors: 09/24/08 Action Pending Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 10.24 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers. LOCATION: The properties are located south of Route 50, east of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 53-A-81, 53-A-82 and 53B-3-25 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) PRESENT USE: Residential and vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) B2 (Business General) South: RA (Rural Areas) East: RA (Rural Areas) B2 (Business General) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential Commercial Use: Candy Hill Campground Use: Residential/vacant Bank Use: Residential PROPOSED USES: Up to 75,000 square feet of Assisted Living Care Facility Use. However, all other B2 uses permitted (please see comments relating to the proposed land use for this site). Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility August 6, 2008 Page 2 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virl4inia Department of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a measurable impact on Route 50. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is not satisfied with the transportation proffers offered; no proffers were offered addressing transportation. 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. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Mai -shall: Plan approval recommended. Department of Inspections: No Comment. Department of Public Works: 1. Refer to the Impact Analysis under suitability of the site: The discussion of the bedrock should be expanded to address the potential for sinkhole development within the limestone which underlies the entire site. 2. Refer to the Impact Analysis under drainage: Indicate if there are sufficient off -site drainage channels and/or culverts to accommodate the storm flows derived from the proposed stormwater management facility. Also, indicate if the proposed stormwater pond will be designed as a BMP facility to attenuate storm flows and maximize nutrient removal. 3. Refer to Impact Analysis under Solid Waste Disposal Facilities: Expand the narrative to include an estimate of the yearly solid waste in tons produced by the proposed development. 4. Refer to Impact Analysis under hnpact on Community Facilities: Explain the reference to the impact on the City of Winchester when Frederick County provides all the services required by the proposed development. 5. Refer to the Wetland Assessment prepared by ECS: This assessment indicates a topographic high of 825 MSL with approximately 20 feet of total relief. This observation is in conflict with the plan of the existing natural conditions prepared by Bowman Consulting which indicates a topographic high of 834.6 with approximately 35 feet of relief. This conflict needs to be corrected. 6. Refer to the MDP, sheet 2 of 3: Delineate any karst features which could impact the site development. 7. Refer to the MDP, sheet 2 of 3: Indicate the locations of any existing wells and/or drainfields which will need to be properly abandoned to accommodate development. These features currently exist on the property identified as Map I.D.: 5313-3-25. 8. Refer to the MDP, sheet 3 of 3: Any site development should be designed to ensure that storm runoff is diverted to the proposed stormwater management/BMP facility and away from the single family residences fronting on Ward Avenue. Frederick -Winchester Service Authoritv: No comments. Sanitation Authority Department: There should be sufficient sewer and water capacity to serve this proj ect. Department of Parks & Recreation: No comment. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility August 6, 2008 Page 3 Health Department: Unless the proposal has changed since the attached Health Department comments dated 2/21 /08 were sent to the owner, those cornrnents are still valid. 2/21 /08 — The Health Department has no objections. According to the "Sewer & Water Exhibit: public water and sewer are to be provided. Permits from this office will be required for food preparation facilities. Winchester Regional Airport: We have reviewed the proposed rezoning application and determined that the proposed development plan will not have an impact on operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. While the proposed site lies within the airport's airspace, it does fall outside of the airport's Part 77 close in surfaces, therefore, special conditional will not be requested. Frederick County Public Schools: We offer no conunents. Historic Resources Advisoiy Board: It appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. Attorney Comments: Pending. Planning Department: Please see attached memorandum. PlanninI4 & Zonina: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies these properties as being zoned A-2 (Agriculture General). The County's agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject property and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living enviromnent within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-1] 0 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility August 6, 2008 Page 4 I.nnd Use The property is located in the area covered by the Round Hill Land Use Plan which was most recently updated on November 11, 2007. The property is within the SWSA and is designated as an area of commercial land use. The Round Hill Land Use Plan addresses the corridor appearance elements of the Round Hill Community along Route 50. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Route 50. Landscaping, lighting, and building layout and form should be carefully plam-ied to ensure that this is achieved. Examples consistently used in the current development in the corridor have included brick construction and in several cases, standing seam metal green roofs. Along Route 50 West, a 50 foot landscaped buffer has been recognized as a desirable landscaped area that promotes the corridor appearance goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Recently rezoned projects in several corridors have consistently applied this approach. This property is located in an area that contains a number of established residential properties. Special consideration should be provided to ensure that the impacts to the adjacent residential properties are sensitively addressed. A tailored approach to the buffering and screening of these properties may be warranted. Transportation This application must address the transportation components of the Round Hill Land Use Plan. The Round Hill Community Land Use Plan calls for a transportation network that would feed traffic to and from Route 50 at controlled intersections, and discourages a proliferation of entrances along Route 50 itself. The Round Hill Plan states that commercial establislunents should front feeder roads which connect to Route 50 at signalized intersections. This discourages individual business entrances on Route 50 both for aesthetic reasons as well as transportation efficiency. The Round Hill Land Use Plan identifies a local collector street connecting Ward Avenue to Round Hill Road in the general vicinity of the southern boundary of this property. The dashed line on the GDP does not give sufficient guidance as to how this application addresses the road. The associated proffer language with this road provides minimal assistance in providing this important road connection. More detail needs to be provided regarding Ward Avenue, its associated right-of-way, and the ability to modify and expand upon, or dedicate the right-of-way to provide for an acceptable access to and from the site. Ward Avenue is an existing State Road that does not meet current street standards. Consideration should be given to improving Ward Avenue to a public street standard that meets all current standards. In Frederick County's Eastern Road Plan, Route 50 is classified as a minor arterial road. The Eastern Road Plan Generalized Cross Section Designation Map identifies this section of Route 50 as a six -lane divided road section. 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility August 6, 2008 Page 5 The Comprehensive Policy Plan also states that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. This application does notprovide that Level ofService (LOS Q. In addition, this application fails to accurately model a level of service consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Site Access and desi�,,n. Site Access is proposed to be provided from two locations. Primary access to the site is via Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access point is proposed to be provided from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) via a right -in right -out only entrance. A third access point would be permitted to the rear of this property in the future. Please recognize that the proposed access onto Ward Avenue is very constrained. The parcel acquired by the applicant is 50' in width and may not sufficiently accommodate a full two way access road that meets the necessauy setbacks from the adjacent property line to the north and respects the required buffer to the south. The applicant is proposing to locate the access driveway within the active portion of the required buffer. This should be clarified in the application prior to the Commission's recommendation. In addition, the entrance on to Route 50 should be carefully evaluated. As noted previously, additional entrances along such a significant transportation corridor should be avoided The design of the site is specifically illustrated on the Generalized Development Plan for this project. The GDP provides a degree of certainty as to how the site is proposed to be developed. 3) Site Suitability/Environment The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. In particular, there are no identified areas of steep slopes, mature woodlands, floodplain or wetlands on the parcel which are identified in this application. Two reports prepared by ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC were performed in conjunction with this application, a wetlands study and a preliminary geotechnical evaluation. Please see the letters dated October 26, 2007 and January 29, 2008 respectively which further describe the reports. 4) Potential Impacts When considering this request, it should be recognized that the approach taken in this application seeks to minimize the use in an effort to minimize the impacts that need to be addressed in the application. It may be more desirable to take a greater advantage of the location of this property and enable a more intensive use of the property than that which is proffered. It would appear as though there is ample space to enable additional compatible land uses on the property in the future. Such additional uses may include day care facilities and medical and professional office uses. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility August 6, 2008 Page 6 The rezoning amendment process is a process that requires the applicant to identify and address all impacts associated with the request. This Applicant has chosen an approach that is not desirable. They have stated that they intend to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use and that all other B2 uses shall be permitted on the property. In essence, that this is a rezoning request that would permit all B2 uses with no development limitations; subject only to future TIA's with no guarantees as to how facture impacts may be addressed To reiterate, this approach is not acceptable. A. Transportation Traffic Impact Analysis. The TIA prepared for this application was based upon the development of an eighty-four bed assisted living facility. Primary access to the development was modeled from Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access point from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). The Applicant evaluated the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50 and the intersection of Echo Lane and Route 50. As the Commission is aware, the Comprehensive Policy Plan seeks to ensure that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. An acceptable level of service to Frederick County, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. This TIA's evaluations and conclusions are based upon a level of service D or better. This is not acceptable. Therefore, the conclusions of the TIA are not acceptable. This application has not accurately measured the transportation impacts associated with the request. Transportation Program. It is anticipated that additional right-of-way and improvements may be necessary along Route 50 and Ward Avenue. A mechanism should be considered which would enable any right-of- way necessary for the planned improvements to be dedicated to the County or VDOT. Future right-of-way dedication should be based upon the road improvement plans as approved by VDOT and Frederick County. Access management of Route 50 is a significant consideration. An additional entrance onto Route 50 should be avoided. The function of the existing signal at Route 50 and Ward Avenue should continue to be enhanced. It does appear as though additional improvements are being proposed on the GDP along the properties frontage with Route 50. These improvements should be clarified and specifically incorporated into the language of the Proffer Statement. On recent rezonings, other projects have contributed additional funding for transportation improvements in the general area of their requests. This has been done in recognition of the need to address the broader transportation improvements in the developing areas of the County in addition to the specific improvements they may be proposing. Such an approach has been considered with this request. Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility August 6, 2008 Page 7 The applicant has proffered $25,000 towards such improvements. However, a sunset clause of 5 years has been added to the Proffer as has a restriction on the distance from the property (500') the funding could be used. The result of these two restrictions may invalidate the proffer. The application has not provided for any right -of way dedication along Ward Avenue or Route 50. Ward Avenue is identified as a 40' right-of-way. The minimum right of way needs of VDOT should be recognized, in addition to any additional right of way necessary to implement access to and from the site. Pedestrian accommodations have been provided in a coordinated mailer internal to the project, to and along Ward Avenue, to the Route 50 frontage, and along the Route 50 frontage. This has been addressed but should be specifically incorporated into the proffer language. The application identifies a local collector street connecting Ward Avenue to Round Hill Road in the general vicinity of the southern boundary of this property. The dashed line on the GDP does not give sufficient guidance as to how this application addresses the road. The associated proffer language with this road provides minimal assistance in providing this important road connection. In addition, the reservation language and sunset clause of five years is once again insufficient to address the importance of this future connection identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The entrances identified on the GDP should be addressed at this time and the future construction should be consistent with the GDP. The Applicant has written additional flexibility into Proffer 2.1 which may provide additional flexibility. B. Design Standards The application provides for the addition of an enhanced landscaping buffer area along the properties frontage with Route 50. In addition, the application includes minimal architectural language, loosely written in an attempt to address the corridor appearance design elements of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Community Facilities The development of this site will have an impact on community facilities and services. However, it is recognized that commercial uses generally provide a positive impact on community facilities through the additional generation of tax revenue. This application, however, is not a typical revenue generating commercial land use (please refer to a previous comment about the intensity of the land use at such a key location). This application's effort to address the impacts to community facilities is limited to a $2,000.00 contribution to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. 0 0 Rezoning #06-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility August 6, 2008 Page 8 5) Proffer Statement — Dated February 22, 2008; revised June 24, 2008. A) Generalized Development Plan The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan (GDP dated January 2008 and revised through June 24, 2008) for the site. The GDP is very specific which may cause conflicts with existing requirements and engineering and site development issues during the development of this project. Staff does recognize that this is more detailed than that initially provided, as requested, however, with this request should be simplified. Staff would suggest removing the utility lines and parking lot striping and handicap details. It is not clear how the enhanced buffer details are different from those required by Ordinance. The Applicant should clarify this item. In addition, the applicant should address the Ward Avenue entrance on the GDP. The GDP shows a right -in right -out only entrance on Route 50 and a full entrance on Ward Avenue. The location of three potential locations for possible inter parcel connections is also shown on the GDP. B) Land Use The Applicant has stated that they intend to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use and that all other B2 uses shall be permitted on the property. In essence, that this is a rezoning request that would permit all B2 uses with no development limitations; subject only to future TIA's with no guarantees as to how future impacts may be addressed. To reiterate, this approach is not acceptable. The rezoning amendment process is a process that requires the applicant to identify and address all impacts associated with the request. This Applicant has chosen an approach opposite to that required and opposite to best practices, an approach that does not provide the County with the appropriate measure of control and security to make sure the impacts associated with the request can be adequately addressed. The applicant has proffered a 100' enhanced landscaped road efficiency buffer along the Route 50 frontage which will include mixed ornamental plantings generally consistent with the exhibit included with the GDP. C) Transportation The applicant has proffered to limit site entrances to two as shown on the GDP. Direct access from Route 50 shall be limited to a right in only entrance. A third entrance to the rear would be permitted in the future. The Applicant has a commitment to reserve up to 25' along the southern boundary for possible right of way dedication for the extension of existing Round Hill Road by others. To reiterate, this element should be addressed to a greater extent. In addition, the sunset clause in this and other proffers should be removed. Rezoning 406-08 — Route 50 Assisted Living Facility August 6, 2008 Page 9 Interparcel connection opportunities have been identified. The Applicant has proffered a $25,000 contribution for future road improvements to Route 50, Ward Avenue, or the extension of Round Hill Road within 500' of the property. Please note the concerns previously identified with distance condition and the sunset clause. D) Community Facilities The applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount of $2,000 to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. No additional contributions have been made to address the other community facility impacts recognized by the County's development Impact Model (DIM). An overall concern with this request is the approach the applicant has taken to the administrative triggers and mechanisms for the Proffers that are aimed at mitigating the potential impacts associated with this request. The approach is undesirable. The approach proposed by theApplicant is complicated and more confusing than it needs to be. It is the County's desire to ensure that the proffer language is clear and concise. Further, that the proffers actually address the impacts generated by the specific request. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 08/20/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Round Hill Land Use Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan, in particular the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan. Particular attention should be paid to the proposed entrances to the facility, impacts to Ward Avenue, and how the application addresses the comprehensively planned road to the rear of the property. In addition, significant concerns have been raised regarding the details of the Proffer Statement and the triggers and mechanisms for the Proffers, the conclusions of the TIA, and the important fact that not all B2 land uses and there potential impacts have been evaluated. Following the requirement for a public hearing, a recommendation by the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors concerning this rezoning application would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. Route 50 Assisted Living facility August 18, 2008 Meeting Agenda Land Use 1. All other permitted B-2 uses are out. Up to 75,000 sf of assisted living facility only. 2. Rte. 50 corridor enhancement. Details updated to show additional materials grouped where existing residences are located. Groupings of materials along Rte. 50 also to get away from the staggered course of evergreens and afford some views into the site to see the on -site landscaping and people etc. Transportation 1. Revised TIA delivered to Jerry Copp Friday since Lloyd Ingram originally commented and there have been no further comments since we resubmitted. Original TIA did not show 3 through lanes and turn lanes and with this revision, the LOS C is achieved or exceeded. 3 thru lanes into 2 thru's and a turn lane as shown. 2. Dedication of the 25' along the rear of the property generally along the alignment shown in the RHLUP for Round Hill Road extension by others. 3. Contribution specifically to go to Botanical Drive improvements needed to further improve that leg of the intx. Site Access 1. Ward Avenue access and comments for 5' setback or one way traffic. 2. Ward Avenue right-of-way dedication and improvements shown. 3. Rte. 50 existing right-in/right-out is being improved and must be maintained based on recorded access for the power station and the Poe property. Revised Proffer Statement 1. A revised proffer statement has been completed based on having received County Attorney comments last week. 8 52 A I ■ S2 A L ■ m � ro y ■ ">♦ ",� h m N m m N N y0 0^ e ry y7 ■ry h ry � ti h h nlip h0 h h H 1h p In hm N 0 yh ■ Q Q h 53 A 86 53 A 82 53 A 86A 53 A 74 52 A Y v ■ �� 57 A 75 $ m V � $ S3 7' 53 A 76 • 1 53B 3 ) 538 3 538 3 2538 3 f0 538 3 2654 3 11 78,,, 538 3 2J■ ■ 538 3 2838 3 13 5J8 3 ■?9 53: 3 30 ,� 538 3 15 538 J 'V Q 538 3 O 16 SJ� J 32 4' ■ 538 J 17 538 3 33 3Q 538 3 18 538 3 3# ■ 53 A 83 538 3 538 3 35 19 ■ 5J8 3 20 538 SO 36 5�8 3 21 '341 3 37 538 3 22 ■ 538 3 38 wB 3 23 ■ 53 A 86B RT 50 Assisted Living Facility ReZoning w REZ 06 - 08 PIN: 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 53B-3-25 44 ,Mh. nJa Ilk Aw- OP M r t ii+ r �� �` •-maw! J _• , ! j•. 46 A_T I r a,, { ' ,( e HIM - all. Pit 1 ✓ � J � it �� � � ' •' rip WhLIL Ilk Case Planner: Mike QREZ0606_Asssited1_wingFadMy Zoning M2 (Industrial. General Distrito -- —^ Future Rt37 Bypass 4011, BI (Business. Neighborhood Distrito - MHI (Mobile Home Communal) District) Urban Dctclopmcm Area 4` B2 (Business. Gcncral Distns) - MS (Medical Support Distrito 4n%O SWSA • Bt (Business. Industrial Transition District) - R4 (Residential Planned Communm District) • EM (ECtraetl\-c Manufacturing Distrito • R5 (Residential Rmrea tonal Communm District) - HE (Higher Education DLSMCO ` RA (Rural Area District) — MI (Industrial. Light District) RP (Residential Performance District) 0 250 500 1,000 Feet I* 0 C REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA be completed by Planning Staff ping Amendment Number, Hearing Date Fee Amount Paid $ Date Received BOS Hearing Date_ The follolving information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: HHHunt Corp (W.R. Cook, Jr.) Telephone: 919-461-0587 Address: 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 Cary, NC 27511 •) 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: See attached Telephone: Address: 3. Contact person if other than above Name: Michael P. Pointer Telephone: 5 4 0 - 7 2 2 - 2 3 4 3 Bowman Consulting 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map x Agency Cominents x Plat x Fees x Deed to property x Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of taxes paid x Proffer Statement x 10 ' S. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to • rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: HHHunt Corporation (W.R' Cook, Jr.) Darla Poe Funkhouser, Sharon S. Poe PHTH Properties, LLC Marathon Bank (United Bank) 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Vacant/Residential B) Proposed Use of the Property: Assisted Living/Health Services 7. Adjoining Property: See Part IV PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING J • between 8. Location: The property is located (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): the intersections of Ward Ave and Rte 50 (to the east) and Round Hill Rd and Rte 50 (to the west) on the south side of Rte 50.Y Echo'!Ln provides access from Rte 50 through the site to an Allegheny Power Substation off -site, but behind the suject property. • 11 0 0 0 • • 9. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed : Single Family homes: Non -Residential Lots: Number of Units Proposed Townhome: Mobile Home: Square Footage of ProUosed Uses Multi -Family: Hotel Rooms: Office: Service Station: Retail: Manufacturing: Restaurant: Warehouse: Other: �--A► _-fq rAGrLITY 10. Signatut•e: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia, I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Plaruung Connnission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. A licant s : 666? ail Date: �i n pP () Owner(s): 12 ef ��7 Date: Date: ` ��7oog Date: SEP�' S_Zoa$ 0 . PROPERTY OWNERS Darla Poe Funkhouser 165 Jennings Farm Court Front Royal, Virginia 22630 and/or 272 Hilda Drive Clear Brook, Virginia 22624 Sharon S. Poe 2840 Back Mountain Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 PHTH Properties, LLC 1151 Cedar Creek Grade Winchester, Virginia 22602 Marathon Bank (United Bank) PO Box 189 Dunbar, WV 25064 :7 0 • REZONING APPLICATION FOR ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY Revised September 4, 2008 OWNERS Darla Poe Funkhouser 165 Jennings Farm Court Front Royal, VA 22630 and/or 272 Hilda Drive Clearbrook, VA 22624 Sharon S. Poe 2840 Back Mountain Road ca Winchester, VA 22602 PHTH Properties, LLC 1151 Cedar Creek Grade Winchester, VA 22602 Marathon Bank (United Bank) PO Box 189 Dunbar, WV 25064 APPLICANT HHHunt Corporation Mr. W. R. "Bo" Cook, Jr. 117 Edinburgh South — Suite 100 Cary, NC 27511 Ph: (919) 461-0587 AGENT Bowman Consulting Group 124 East Cork Street Winchester, VA 22601 • Ph: (540) 722-2343 f' • • 41 J EXISTING 20' INGRESS, �'GRE$$ ESMT. N/F De C652 PG OW5 FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE MAP ID: 53—A-81 1 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 t1.9 ACRES EXISTING 50' / / iv /F HAHN. RARBARA A. MAP ID: 536- , -1 ZONED: RA USE, RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 53B-1-1 MAP ID: 538-1-2 / /o / ROUTE 50 _ NOR IVA+MAe11 .r, � w » RN PIKE MAP ID: 57B-3-5 INGRESSAGRESS ESMT DB 0738 PG 0"5 / / N/F / P ID: 538-3-24 BUTCHER, TIMOTHY S. / v/ MAP ZONED; RA-29 // // SUB CT PROPERTIES USE- RESIDENTIAL / STONEWALL DRIVE — RTE g58 � / 1 � / 1 / 1 EXISiV4G 50' / N/F W-RESS EGRF.-S ESMT / PUFrENBERCER, JUDY N. DD o73s PG "45 / MAP I,): 538 -24 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL N/F / SMITH, PATRICIA M. / MAP ID: 53-A-81 ZONED: RA / USE: RESIDENTI , n M N/F a UNITED BANK MAP ID: 53B-3-5 ZONED: B2 USE: COMMERCIAL 3 DOSTINC 7-11 N/F _-- UNITED BANK MAP ID: 53B-3-24 ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 USE VACANT t.24 ACRE / --"J N/F MAP ID: 538-3-26 PHTH PROPERTIES LLC / MAP ID: 538-3-25 / ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 MAP 518-3-27 t.23 ACRE N/F FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE: MAP ID: 538-3-28 N/F FORD, GUY W. & ARMITH A. MAP ID: 53-A-82 MAP ID: 53B-3-26,27,28 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 I ZONED: RA f8.0 ACRES I MAP ID: 53L•' 3-29 USE: RESIDENTIAL "'AP ID- 53R-.3- 3 01 N/F MAP ID: 538-3- 1 RITTER, CALVIN LEE MAP ID: ZONED RA 30,31,32 rw^.? :^. 538-3-3 USE: RESIDENTIAL , \\-POTOMAC EOISON CO. EASEMENT D8 783, PG 941 ADJACENT OWNER EXHIBIT N/F ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY O'DONNFLL, TRUDY POE(\ FREDERICK COUNTY, VA 5132-01-003 MAP ID: 53-A-86 SCALE: NTS DATE: JANUARY 2008 REVISED 09-05-2008 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 53B-3-33 N/F MAP 1 538-3-34 SCRUGGS, JOSEPH 1. MAP ID: 53B-3-33,34,35 MAP ID: 53B-3-39 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 5).2-3-30 �n , N/F 4Q`Z- ANBODAN PROPERTIES LLC MAP ID. 5313-3-37 MAP ID: 53B-3-36,37,38 '• ZONED: RA � USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 538-3-38 LEGEND EXISTING DESCRIPTION EDGE OF PAM"T PROPERTY LINE DEPARTNG PROPERTY UNE ONCE LINE ADJACENT PROPERTIES SU&ECT PROPERTIES NOTES- 1. RECENT ROUTE 50 IMPROVEMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY ARE NOT REFLECTED IN THE CITY OF MANCHESIER MAPPING UTILIZED IN THIS EXHIBIT. Bowman C O N S U L T I N G +G' - } o�'•. ;'* fiJ" 'k��r 4 �' 1 �- � � fY _ :lr r P � ! i a ` 4 ' v INCHESTER . �4, r �' SUPS CENTER MEDICAL Aim �. , ) ` � ( stir z s �- /` . �% • �. � `�. �.1 + � �. �GMG _ RR MARK trc V�O `W SITERr. ' C R WFNCHESTER t-�V►:COMPLEX . - " " RESIDENTIAL{ UNITED _ � •. s �. �'" � ., OVA oC1T N -� SUBJECT ARME�R r' r VIVIJtlo - R� Y PROPERTY LNESTOC►K '•� F. -1 OT - " � . '°REGYCL�NG `�';�/q y 3 ♦ ti �.,ft`t .} , ' �y ,. � � f �•�� 'RESIDENTIAL '•4 ^. K ` -SrJ r ,. ' � �9��'q �.* .,per '` ��� '.+.'.�y���f�y.J, ���.`� 4-�IL `•�� f\� �• � t; T \ ` N r' y. .•� AS ADOPTED. l�Q 'J► r NOV.2007_PER y .'h � THE RHLUP ' �`�� +• �t ' _ + 4 ti xrk ... ti� CANDY HILL Jr - CAMPGROUND Klk CONTEXT EXHIBIT IROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY % 1+1 FREDFRICK COUNTY. VA 5132-01-003 SCALE: NTS DATE JANUARY,2008 REVISED 1 • 1 11 i ] . � •_ y 1. �y,f� ,`Ty}�_ ',y` ** ai I '-e • • N /F WOLFORD, GUY W. & ARMITi- MAP ID: 5313-3-26 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIA' N /F ORD, GUY W. & ARMITHA W. MAP ID: 53B-3-27 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL (TO BE RAZED) CG12 HC RAMP O tr f5' ROW DEDICATION FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO WARD AVENUE ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACT LI FREDERICK COUNTY, VA PROJECT 05132-01-003 SCALE: NTS DATE AUGUST 2008 REVISED SEPT. 09/0512008 POSSIBLE SWM/BMP FACILITY -- BOUNDARY UNE ADJUSTMENT FOR REQUIRED SETBACK TO OCCUR PENDING REZONING APPROVAL PROPOSED 5' SIDEWALK AND CURB AND GUTTER TO EXTEND N/F TO UNITED BANK PARCEL PHTH PROPER IES LLC MAP ID: 53B 3-25 ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 t.23 AC E la to rn c� N /F UNITED BANK MAP ID: 538-3- 4 ED: RA TO BE REZ NED B2 USE: VACANT f.24 ACRE CG12 HC RAMP - CURB AND GUTTER TIED INTO ADJACENT UNITED BANK PARCEL i N /F UNITED BANK MAP ID: 53B-3-i ZONED: B2 j I USE: COMMERCIAL I WARD AVE. - RTE. 1317 (40' RIGHT-OF-WAY) D.B. 202, PG. 267 DESIGN SPEED - 35 MPH LEGEND Bowman 0 5' ROW DEDICATION C O N S U L T I N G Roll-rc .-_ STONEWALL DRIVE - RTE. 858 SITE ILLUSTRATIVE ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FREDERICK COUNTY, VA PROJECT #5132-01-003 SCALE NOT TO SCALE DATE: AUGUST 2008 REVISED OCT. 2008 MANY CESS Bowman C O N S U L T I N G Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: �� h� �� ,cct.i'redericic.� a.us Departnheut of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 I Facsimile 540-665-6395 Phone 540-665-5651 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Darla Poe Funkhouser (Address) �U� � �yJ�� la��� C � 1�sSrtl , �, ZZ the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by Instrument No, Cq,5 on Page \'n , and is described as Parcel: Lot: Block: (N Section: — Subdivision: V, do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) W.R. "Bo" Cook, Jr. (Phone) (919) 461-0587 HH Hunt Corporation (Address) 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100, Cary, NC 27511 To act as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for m), (our) above described Property, including: x Rezoning (including proffers) X Conditional Use Permit X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) X Subdivision x Site Plan X Variance or Appeal X Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. C� In. Witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this day of G(, Jy0 , 200? Signature(s) �� �►.�� `11��-�,� State of Virginia City/County of X To -wit: ' I a Notary Public in and for the juriscj�b ' , afores i , certify that the •sou(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally a )eared bolo hrre gUC and acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this t day of °0 PU18a098 r. _ � : RAG• My Commission Expires: lZ%! 1 dq MY (;OMMISSION : �[ E, '. �PIR Nota Public :�� ' •. ��Q Revi d3/17/08 • Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: i�ti�rr.cc�.i'rcderick.va.0 Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 I Facsimile 540-665-6395 Phone 540-665-5651 L .. .... .... . .. . .. — - . ... Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Sharon S . Poe (Phone) (Address) the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by Irtst� WAAt--No. �~L� on Page \V�� , and is described as Parcel: Lot: z 1 Block: ,k Section: — Subdivision: do licreby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) W.R. "Bo" Cook, Jr. (Phone) (919)461-0587 HH Hunt Corporation (Address) 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100, Cary, NC 27511 To act as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for m), (our) above described Property, including: x Rezoning (including proffers) Conditional Use Permit X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) X Subdivision X Site Plan X Variance or Appeal X Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. In witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this day of , 200P ' Signature(s) ir--V _ lI E State of Virginia, City/County ofjiud-Luzi, , To -wit: %%% I,,,l \� JAR ,,���� I, a Notary Public in and for the jurisdic't� • "' NOTARY afores i i, certify that tl person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared befot'e��e PUBLIC and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this 91 day of , 2a "REG. #184098 - � %Z �3 ln'. MY COMMISSION •: My Commission Expires: IEXPIR S (q Notai t Public Revis 13/17/08 �'��N�'EALTH Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: �� �r.cc►.Il ederick.� a.uti- Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Phone 540-665-5651 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) PHTH Properties, LLC (Phone) (Address) 1V�\ U- A) c;�P& the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by Instrument No.M�'zz % on Page UOnL\ , and is described as Parcel �_ Lot:_2� Block: -) Section: Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) W•R. "Bo" Cook, Jr. (Phone) (919) 461-0587 HH Hunt Corporation (Address) 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100, Cary, NC 27511 To act as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including: X Rezoning (including proffers) Conditional Use Permit X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) X Subdivision X Site Plan X Variance or Appeal X Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. Tn witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this /fL day of o %,1, , 20091 Signature(s) Z6�z State of Virginia, City/Cem}t3F-of �� IC To -wit: AIL^ r�J CL P %' a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction I, L aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has ack wledged e same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this /5 day of J�� , 200,L. My Comtnissioti Expires: Id — 17710 Pub c Revised Rcvlset13117108 W 0 • • REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA be completed by Planning Staff ping Amendment Number Hearing Date t o Fee Amount Paid $ U . o C) Date Received 027 ov BOS Hearing Date " - of The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: HHHunt Corp (W.R. Cook, Jr.) Telephone: 919-461-0587 Address: 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 Cary, NC 27511 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: See attached Address: 3. Contact person if other than above Name:Michael P. Pointer Bowman Consulting Telephone: Telephone: 540-722-2343 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map X Agency Comments _ X Plat X Fees X Deed to property X Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of taxes paid X Proffer Statement X 10 r' ' S. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: HHHunt Corporation (W.R*� Cook, Jr.) Darla Poe Funkhouser, Sharon S. Poe PHTH Properties, LLC 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Vacant/Residential B) Proposed Use of the Property: Assisted Living/Health Services 7. Adjoining Property: see Part IV PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING between S. Location: The property is located (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): the intersections of Ward Ave and Rte 50 (to the east) and Round Hill Rd and Rte 50 (to the west) on the south side of Rte 50. Echo'!Ln provides access from Rte 50 through the site to an Allegheny Power Substation off -site, but behind the suject property. 11 9. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed : Single Family homes: Non -Residential Lots: Office: Retail: Restaurant: 10. Signature: Number of Units Proposed Townhome: Mobile Home: Sauare Footage of Proposed Uses Multi -Family: Hotel Rooms: _ Service Station. -- Manufacturing: _ Warehouse: _ Other: Health Services Facility I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applieant(s): w Date: 1 Date: Date: • • 0 • • • PROPERTY OWNERS Darla Poe Funkhouser 165 Jennings Farm Court Front Royal, Virginia 22630 and/or 272 Hilda Drive Clear Brook, Virginia 22624 Sharon S. Poe 2840 Back Mountain Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 PHTH Properties, LLC 1151 Cedar Creek Grade Winchester, Virginia 22602 06/14/2g08 • vi CAS �!::• �•...'•s'f3�� 4- ti + �'/�i'llir �Ii�o�•.�-5,���,� .s �• i :yii � !r•.. )'ry5.<_ ,.i. `'.t�, i1., Ri ..ash :dmAud Thomas Moore Lawap_ 540-665-0050 • Lawson & SiYek, P.L.C., P.O. Box 2740, WinC-hegter, VA 22604 it; March a tit NOTARY f and has sst al i sd 3tl PUBUC G� ' sREG 3a7188 • / MY COWtml55i0N EXPIRES 413009? 06/24/2008 12:54 FAX ICJ QQJ/QQJ C, 0"W"Of W7 NIP Special Limited Power of Attorney County -of FreatrIC14 Virvialo Fttdod& FjauMbg Wob M"t kJ10WAII Mob Byq$m pfeftu TwI(W-0) Darla Poe Funkhouser the IN -QMIDN�. 5-40-.G14S 2 LM A filbY Thomas Moore Lawson 540-665-0050 • Llkwa= & Silek, P.L.C.P.O. BOX 2740, Winchester, VA 22604 T-0444 M 14 bor Ow p .mod*a WM And, aunwoly. I -Ibr M x Y V"M�A-0r-A$ip*4 . I MY fib* to 4ft PMQftb4: 000AW *A •W aulk� wqndmpo tD k 01111111-1111// Z/ U"UIdA 14 9" ZI fto Md PUBLIC MY e,91 t7m ,";fig Adjacent Owners/ Parcel Numbers Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Parcel ID #(s): 538-3-5, 53B-3-24 Zoned: RA Owner: The Marathon Bank PO Box 189 Dunbar, WV 250G4 538-2-24 RA Judy N. Puffmbercger PO Box 1 13 Winchester, VA 22, 53B-I-I RA Barbara A. Hahn 21 17 Northwestern Pike Winchester, VA 22GO3 538-2-29 RA Timothy 5. Butcher 1 13 Stonewall Drive Winchester, VA 22GO2 Parcel ID #(s): 538-3-2G, 53B-3-27, 53B-3-28 Zoned: RA Owner: Guy W. * Armitha Wolford 108 Ward Avenue Winchester, VA 22GO2 538-3-29, 53B-3-30, 538-3-3 1, 53B-3-32 RA Calvin Lee Ritter 152 Linden Drive Winchester, VA 22GOI 538-3-35, 53B-3-33, 53B-3-34 RA Joseph I. Scruggs PO Box 243 Winchester, VA 22GO4 Parcel ID #: 538-3-3G, 538-3-37, 538-3-38 Zoned: RA Owner: Nanbodan Properties LLC 2054 Northwestern Pike Winchester, VA 22GO3 Parcel ID #: 53-A-8G Zoned: RA Owner: Trudy Poe O'Donnell 200 Ward Avenue Winchester, VA 22GO2 On -site Easement The Potomac Edison Company Dg 763, PG 941 Allegheny Power Service Corp. West Winchester Substation Address: 882 Baker Lane Winchester, VA 22GO3 Location: Echo Lane off of Route 50w •} Parcel ID #: 53-A-8 I A Zoned: RA Owner: Patricia M. 5mith I I G Stonewall Drive Wnche5ter, VA 22GO2 • 41 A Di //r •�• r• / �3 41 A 168 a 126.5 41 A 169 184z1 ¢ 4 52 t,, 29, 41 A 170 52 A 1 Z2.5 / Q 274.16 �1.25 � �, ,sy ti • j CO Y 1 * 52 A 92A 55 V\jam`/r f \ S 'yhruhi � 5ti / f 122 ` // rr I 44 rA I J If 135.87 _ v 52 A 256 23 425.9 s 52 A 300 1 \,� 305.43 \ /' 52 A 305 ti V. ��'A / 42 n 180 i 105.20 / 'b\ n 1,` 53 A 69 w y 120.9 a i 4► a 1 R/4 m•o�4 � r A 08 t Y Yu�CltajlLT: 9.9261 53 n 9zn 145.E4 1_ 10 � Round Hiii Community Land Use Plan DRAFT I (Feet 0 750 1,500 Proposed Collector Roads I ai; SMA Expansion Request Proposed Traffic Signal Streets railroads Lakes Streams Urban Development Area SWSA � Parcels • Community Center Business Part. Frederick County Dept of Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 www.CO.FREDERICK.VA.US Julie1996 Updated as of April 27, 200C DRAFT REQUEST DEC 2-Mr, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LONG RANGE LAND USE MAP / Roads Ej Buildings Parcels F j County Boundary 4` M 74 Towns K 75 4 Long Range Plan j aB8A + _� \710 71A232 \ � � � LT' � Co�wrtAV�anior 24�A 0 81 83 Hloo :54A ¢ 32 tl �W311C11A9fE! IndUS14 38 O 4� 14 TiKdd'Y 12 34 1 age 10 Rwawn 2b Rasidsntmi /24 S RSA ��QQ p b, 4- 412 _1 4 19 p I t 1 C119 "p v 258 6 Frederick County Dept. of GIS For questions please contact the Frederick County Dept. of Parcel Mapping Service GIS at 540-665-5614 DRAFT iv /C HAHN. RARBARA A. MAP ID: 53Li—'I -1 ZONED: RA USE: rccCl�^.EtiT1AL ROUTE SU NORTHWEST fvAR1.u»'0R TM �� wA�ERN PIKE MAP ID: 536-1-1 MAP ID: 538-1-2 / EXISTING 20' NGRI:SS/L''GRESS ESMT, OB C652 PG 0685 N/F / FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE MAP ID: 53-A-81 / ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO 82 f1.9 ACRES / EXISTING 50' -� INGRESS/E�JRESS ESM7 DB 0/09*/5/ / N/F/ BUTCHER, TIMOTHY/ `�•� p MAPZONED: RA—SUBJ CT PROPER, IES USE• RESIDENTIA/ STONEWALL DRIVE — RTE 858 /' / 1 N EXIS NG ,O' N/F INCRESS EGRFSS ESMT PIJFrENFsE�1GER, JUJY N DFl O'733 PG C � "1AP ID: 53B- --24 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL N/F SMITH, PATRICIA M. MAP ID: 53-A-81A�/ ZONED: RA // j USE: RESIDENTIAZ \—POTOMAC EDISON CO. EASEMENT DB 783, PG 941 FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE MAP ID: 53-A-82 1 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 1 t8.0 ACRES ADJACENT OWNER EXHIBIT N/F ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY O'DONNF;-L, TRUDY POE FREDERICK COUNTY, VA 5132-01-003 M INP ID: 53—A-86 ZONED: RA SCALE. NTS DATE: JANUARY 2008 USE: RESIDENTIAL �MAH IU: 5'ti—s—J MESTBOUND EASTBOUND M N/F THE MARATHON BANK N MAP ID: 53B-3-5 ZONED: B2 USE: COMMERCIAL xz 3 EXISTING 7-11 N/F AP ID: 53B-3-24 ------THE MARATHON BANK MAP ID: 53B-3-24 ZONED: RA USE: VACANT N/F MAP ID: 53B-3-26 PHTH PROPERTIES LLC MAP ID: 538-3-25 ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 MAP 5313-3-27 t.25 ACRE MAP ID: 53R-3-28 N/F LFORD, GUY W. & ARMITH A MAP ID: 53B-3-26,27,28 ZONED: RA MAP ID: 53C 3-29 USE: RESIDENTIAL :.1P ID 53R- 3- 3C N/F MAP ID: 5313-3-?1 RITTER, CALVIN LEE MAP ID: 53B-3-29, 30,31,32 ZONED: RA MAP !D. 538-3- 3 USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 531B-3-33 N/F MAP 153B-3-34 SCRUGGS, JOSEPH I. MAP ID: 53B-3-33,34,35 MAP ID: 53B-3-35 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 53L4-3-3(; sn ' `�- N/F ANBODAN PROPERTIES LLC MAP ID. 53B-3-37 MAP ID: 538-3-36,37.38 ZONED: RA � USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 5313-3-38 LEGEND EXISTING DESCRIPTION EDGE OF PAVEMENT PROPERTY LINE DEPARTING PROPERTY LINE FENCE LINE ADJACENT PROPERTIES SUB,ECT PROPERTIES NOTES: 1. RECENT ROUTE 50 IMPROVEMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY ARE NOT REFLECTED IN THE CITY OF WINCHESTER MAPPING UTILIZED IN THIS EXHIBIT. Bowman C O N S U L T I N G + • " rt•y v 1 •r ,� jrr' I f!(' f t�t r/ . ° r � , �. . �i 4 . . a � . (�. • .. • +' C �r -°5i... - 1. a���� x ,? � ► WALMART � �" �,' • rNCH�, ' '�rri'a`a} �`,J-�'J rJ �� SUPERCENT€R J IkIED�f',• �(' �i., p ' r �f , , ,�a �� .� . '� s E r • •�• r -� r 7•�# c 1 � :L ' , .;; i � � rid O s_= _ j 'i 11 i j to h _ \- • ..Y - r r f ? COURTYARD f• J�+ t� 4 , pr , r# �,�•.a -�..�- is R�U7`E 50N �' MARRfOrr� •. t i�.'A' .,� • � '•i '4 �V' .Y Lf •.' l .s .. VDOT � ESQ 1��. �` ;=• •"� Ei 04. '` 1tVrNGHESTER < r ilf;P�KF� _ _ . 5 ,' :RST STARE :�; COMP ► ti ��� ' r MARATI N •z __ L`i$'-Rou; RESIDENTIAL t • Vq R OU SU JEC F'ARMERs 'vr.� < OPERTY ? LNESTOCK U 1i - Ra . r - . ExcrlAN'G fa Jj a s f' RECYCL IN�G `i;'Q(�i, • �`� y" ,� ��� ,}. ' • r i I►j n V �T - ��''".. `• s�y _ n 4.. i, My ' ��` �, U`� � , ^ � s�� 3,. .��..', r � � ter, •�+ /� r • ' (Y - Y ;,' _'S. 'tom .i•. •f0(/i y1' '�'�� - ! J - .✓• '�# - •�' 4 RESIDENTIAL tin* AS ADOPTED'. NOV. 2007 PER t r iy THE RHL' UP' ' / r; - R .meµ , f . •' - , �_ .per � ��` •i �'�j}pJ' � ;�`fs .:. �- - CAMPGROUND LEGEND FUTURE COLLECTOR ROADS TAKEN FROM THE ROUND HILL '! tt 76 CONTEX7 EXHIBIT .40 FREDERICK 1 11 COUNTY.ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY 1 i l` wRa iw! i i r M^ • ', � � - � may` ; f. j,1 :.�+ , �; . � f • 1 �?�{f �� • • _. - -t 4: '• i J �'r . . L .4y •Si �lot P. ..3Q1 i � l• ,'� r. ¢ ffn[,. �i • REZONING APPLICATION ROUTE OWNERS Darla Poe Funkhouser 165 Jennings Farm Court Front Royal, VA 22630 and/or 272 Hilda Drive Clear Brook, VA 22624 FOR o ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY Revised June24,2oo8 Sharon S. Poe 2840 Back Mountain Road Winchester, VA 22602 PHTH Properties, LLC. 1151 Cedar Creek Grade Winchester, VA 22602 APPLICANT HHHunt Corporation Mr. W. R. "Bo" Cook, Jr. 117 Edinburgh South - Suite ioo Cary, NC 27511 Ph: (919) 461-0587 AGENT Bowman Consulting Group 124 East Cork Street Winchester, Virginia 226oi • Ph: (540) 722-2343 COUNTY DEARICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 October 22, 2013 Spring Arbor of Winchester Attention Paula Rose 2093 Northwestern Pike Winchester, VA 22603 Dear M$. Rose: Re: Rezoning #06-08 Route 50 Assisted Living Facility The rezoning #06-08 Route 50 Assisted Living Facility agreed to make an annual contribution in the amount of $5,000.00, to the Frederick County to be used for fire and rescue purposes. Said payment shall be made on or before each annual anniversary of the issuance of the first building permit for the Property. Said annual $5,000.00 payment shall expire when and if Frederick County requires a fee -for - service for the dispatch of fire or rescue vehicles. Effective October 1, 2013, the County will start charging when a fire and rescue vehicle is dispatched to a location. The yearly contribution of $5,000.00 is now void. Sincerely, Mark Cheran Zoning Administrator M RC/pd cc: HH Hunt Corp, 800 Hethwood Blvd., Blacksburg, VA 24060 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 .0 0 Diane Walsh From: Diane Walsh Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 8:50 AM To: rhwilliams@hhhunt.com Cc: Mark Cheran (mcheran@fcva.us) Subject: FW: Spring Arbor of Winchester Attachments: Proffer Letter - Spring Arbor.pdf Tracking: Recipient Delivery rhwilliams@hhhunt.com Mark Cheran (mcheran@fcva.us) Delivered: 9/11/2019 8:50 AM Mr. Williams — Please find attached the letter from back in 2013 that you requested. Let us know if you need anything additional. Diane Walsh Frederick County Planning Department 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 540-665-5651 dwalsh@fcva.us From: Mark Cheran <mcheran@fcva.us> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 6:46 AM To: Diane Walsh <dwalsh@fcva.us> Subject: FW: Spring Arbor of Winchester From: Richard Williams <rhwilliams@hhhunt.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 3:35 PM To: Mark Cheran <mcheran@fcva.us> Subject: Spring Arbor of Winchester Hey Mark, good to talk with you today. This is a reminder to email me a copy of the letter from back in 2013 that confirms that the proffer condition related to the $5000 annual payment to fire & rescue has expired since the County voted to require a fee -for -service for the dispatch of fire or rescue vehicles. Thanks again for your help. Richard Williams 0 0 C." / Senior Vice President 919.461.0587 ext.127 rhwilliams@hhhunt.com Spri n ,ArborLiving. com 0 • 1401 Sunday Drive, Suite 109 affilOrmf Raleigh, NC 27607 HHHUNT SENIOR LIVING Diane Walsh From: postmaster@hhhunt.onmicrosoft.com To: rhwilliams@hhhunt.com Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 8:52 AM Subject: Delivered: FW: Spring Arbor of Winchester Your message has been delivered to the following recipients: rhwilliams@hhhunt.com (rhwilliams(&hhhunt.com) Subject: FW: Spring Arbor of Winchester Diane Walsh From: Microsoft Outlook To: Mark Cheran (mcheran@fcva.us) Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 8:50 AM Subject: Delivered: FW: Spring Arbor of Winchester Your message has been delivered to the following recipients: Mark Cheran (mcheran(&fcva.us) (mcheranCd)fcva.us) Subject: FW: Spring Arbor of Winchester r COUNTY of DERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 October 22, 2013 Spring Arbor of Winchester Attention Paula Rose 2093 Northwestern Pike Winchester, VA 22603 Dear M$. Rose: Re: Rezoning #06-08 Route 50 Assisted Living Facility The rezoning #06-08 Route 50 Assisted Living Facility agreed to make an annual contribution in the amount of $5,000.00, to the Frederick County to be used for fire and rescue purposes. Said payment shall be made on or before each annual anniversary of the issuance of the first building permit for the Property. Said annual $5,000.00 payment shall expire when and if Frederick County requires a fee -for - service for the dispatch of fire or rescue vehicles. Effective October 1, 2013, the County will start charging when a fire and rescue vehicle is dispatched to a location. The yearly contribution of $5,000.00 is now void. Sincerely, Mark Cheran Zoning Administrator MRC/pd cc: HH Hunt Corp, 800 Hethwood Blvd., Blacksburg, VA 24060 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 0 July 3, 2013 Mr. W.R. Cook, Jr. HH Hunt Corp 800 Hethwood Blvd, Blacksburg, VA 24060 RE: Proffer for Spring Arbor of Winchester Dear Mr. Cook: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 This letter is to inform you that the annual proffer of $5,000.00 has not been received by Frederick County for the above referenced. Proffered condition #4.1 FIRE & RESCUE of Rezoning # 06-08, approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on October 22, 2008, states that an annual monetary contribution of $5,000.00 is to be paid for fire and rescue purposes. As of the date of this letter, this proffer has not been paid. Please make arrangements to pay the total sum of $5,000.00 to Frederick County. We request payment within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any questions please call me at (540) 665-5651. Sincerely, �' Markq. Cheran Zoning Administrator MRC/pd 107 North Dent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 J AMENDMENT'(�S' c� Action: GO - PLANNING o d Cj a � � I � � 11 PLANNING COMMISSION: September 17, 2008 - Recommended Demq BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: October 22, 2008 ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING a-+ '5 C) 1130 j ,D- THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING 406-08 OF ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY WHEREAS, Rezoning 906-08 of Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting, to rezone 10.47 acres h-om RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers dated February 22, 2008 and final revision dated October 10, 2008, was considered. The properties are located on the south side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50), west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50, in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 53-A-81, 53- A-82, 5313-3-24 and 5313-3-25. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on August 20, 2008, and a public meeting was held on September 17, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on October 22 2008; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. PDRes 1/32-08 • the alignment of the southern road (anticipated to be the future Round Hill Road extension) changes such that all or any portion of the proposed dedication is outside of the new alignmment, the Applicant will be relieved of the obligation to dedicate all or a portion of the right of way to the extent that the proposed dedication is outside the new alignment. 3.2 Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the Ward Avenue frontage of Parcel 5313- 3-24 and Parcel 5313-3-25 to permit the continuation of the three (3) lane curb and gutter road section to the southern boundary line of the Property (Parcel 53B-3- 25), and to allow for the construction of the proposed improvements to Ward Avenue as shown on the GDP. The Applicant shall dedicate all such right-of-way within twelve (12) months of Zoning Approval. 3.3 The Applicant will allow for inter -parcel access to adjacent properties to help facilitate future connectivity within the Round Hill Land Use Plan (RHLUP) area. The location(s) of such future inter -parcel comzections shall be determined after agreement with the adjacent property owners. 3.4 The Applicant agrees to contribute to Frederick County the sum of $25,000.00 for additional road improvements in the vicinity of the development. The payment shall be made by the Applicant upon the issuance of the building permit. 4. FIRE & RESCUE 4.1 The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County the sum of $100,000.00 for fire and rescue purposes upon the issuance of the building permit. In addition, the Applicant agrees to make an annual contribution in the amount of $5,000.00 to Frederick County to be used for fire and rescue purposes. Said payment shall be made on or before each annual anniversary of the issuance of the first building permit for the Property. Said annual $5,000.00 payment shall expire when and if Frederick County requires a fee -for -service for the dispatch of fire or rescue vehicles. [SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES] • I I I I t� I t I NOTES R E C E I F RECEIVED FR 2& ADDRESS ---B- FOR DATE ACCOU T HOW PAI AMT. OF ACCOUNT CASH AMT. CHECK 1 L PAID �/ BALANCE MONEY DUE ORDER NO. g55P37 .'-') 40 MON _t'-Iss� she d L:v,� na ?2001 REEM— — * 8L818 • }� '}� }f ; 4{� {,j �{ V Q�j THE FACE OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS A COLORED BACKGROUND ON WHITE PAPER Ai4 Us UHUNT, Wells Fa lc N A r y� San FranciscoCisco, CA 800 Hethwood Boulevard Blacksburg, VA 24060 11-24 (540) 552-3515 1210 www.hhhunt.com DATE CHECK NO. AMOUNT X July 16, 2013 1652037 $******5,000.00 w Pay:*****Five thousand dollars and no cents X PAY FREDERICK CO, TREASURER TO THE CO. OF FREDERICK ,VA. .X� ORDER OF !X P.O.BOX 220 WINCHESTER, VA 22604 �i14 sx X'j X X N'X 3J'J'j X N n :N LATHE BACK OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS AN ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK —HOLD AT AN ANGLE TO VIEW X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X III IG52037110 1:1,21,0002481: 2L0002L72949Lill • 12 3 d P n r b Cka n .L p,,O r,o l d add-r �- 9 VY 2 C,00Y, r. fhr"t H H u_nf CAr rc�h�r1 Corp . aoo f-{ �a,�'1,vvc�oct E3.S�..vd . To C of Ada Z At} n Poi k °u P"O ,d. Q r i t :l kr bo r of ► i nC,ItiQ �fiEr 2aq S `t�Co rrn''�r.�,dt P l K t Cuu-r 2ni'�-"� CO n� ,scow . 00 n kq Co wi bu:"Or) . • -)l IOII�) C 1 0) l 22 3 Op rA. G(Ln d Ol) , - k-4 ri n � b o r 0� •" f� r 6� � bf� U C� n Pro rn o 1 d a.d (J-r �- iw j' vv P (COoK Jr. Po' H H U-n+ COY PO r Cr1 v�rCod g L✓d To �4 C vV I}d� rdz 0 yp n, { I y Aitn ' P a' ri n ? kT bor of Ki C �. 2,0g5` (Orth►v- &font PikC of i o eh-(.Af&Y , VA zz-U 0 3 CLLrr 2 ni' Co .S__fli n n P �.y h� -Q� r • 5-�,c� ,ace ex - f ,r�++•- irk �i ul� �►�� �� sir �{ , AMENDMENT --�Cv d C�',/) -1 (2, 1 ] ( J ; l --. I Z.z 0 �( Action: V'�C� `� I PLANNING COMMISSION: September 17, 2008 - Recommended Dew BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: October 22, 2008 ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING a-+ & .' ©U 113oj, TIIE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #06-08 OF ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY WHEREAS, Rezoning 906-08 of Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting, to rezone 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers dated February 22, 2008 and final revision dated October 10, 2008, was considered. The properties are located on the south side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50), west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50, in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 53-A-81, 53- A-82, 5313-3-24 and 5313-3-25. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on August 20, 2008, and a public meeting was held on September 17, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on October 22 2008; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. PDRes 1/32-08 r •. the alignment of the southern road (anticipated to be the future Round Hill Road extension) changes such that all or any portion of the proposed dedication is outside of the new aligmnent, the Applicant will be relieved of the obligation to dedicate all or a portion of the right of way to the extent that the proposed dedication is outside the new alignment. 3.2 Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the Ward Avenue frontage of Parcel 5313- 3-24 and Parcel 53B-3-25 to permit the continuation of the three (3) lane curb and gutter road section to the southern boundary line of the Property (Parcel 5313-3- 25), and to allow for the construction of the proposed improvements to Ward Avenue as shown on the GDP. The Applicant shall dedicate all such right-of-way within twelve (12) months of Zoning Approval. 3.3 The Applicant will allow for inter -parcel access to adjacent properties to help facilitate future connectivity within the Round Hill Land Use Plan (RHLUP) area. The location(s) of such future inter -parcel connections shall be determined after agreement with the adjacent property owners. 3.4 The Applicant agrees to contribute to Frederick County the sum of $25,000.00 for additional road improvements in the vicinity of the development. The payment shall be made by the Applicant upon the issuance of the building permit. 4. FIRE & RESCUE 4.1 The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County the sum of $100,000.00 for fire and rescue purposes upon the issuance of the building permit. In addition, the Applicant agrees to make an annual contribution in tree amount of $5,000.00 to Frederick County to be used for fire and rescue purposes. Said payment shall be made on or before each annual anniversary of the issuance of the first building permit for the Property. Said annual $5,000.00 payment shall expire when and if Frederick County requires a fee -for -service for the dispatch of fire or rescue vehicles. [SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES] • i NOTES R EC E I F RECEIVED FRAM ADDRESS600 �� — DATE T- 1 43 ACCOUNT HOW PAID AMT. OF CASH ACCOUNT AMT. CHECK/65 3' PAID BALANCE MONEY DUE ORDER NO. ME BYP K2001 raELMdtM t 8LB18 THE FACE OFTHIS DOCUMENT HASACOLORED BACKGROUNDONWHIT EPAPER �{}�'{{'': WeIlgFargaBank N.A. t' 1UNUr" San Francisco, CA 800 Hefhwood Boulevard Blacksburg, VA -04060 11-N X (540) 552-35 t5 1210 www.hhhunt.comIX DATE CHECK NO. AMOUNT X July 16, 2013 1652037 $******5,000.00 X - X X Pay:Five thousand dollars and no cents X X X PAY FREDERICK CO, TREASURER X TO THE CO. OF FREDERICK ,VA. rX ORDER OF P.O.BOX 220 / X 4e, WINCHESTER, VA 22604 aX 4X XXXXX}rs;{;{;{;{XXXXX NTHE BACK OFTHIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS AN ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK —HOLD AT AN ANGLE TO VIEW XXXXXXXXX'XX'XXXX. III L65203?0 1:L2L0002481: 2L00021729t,9Liia 40 July 3, 2013 Mr. W.R. Cook, Jr. HH Hunt Corp 800 Hethwood Blvd. Blacksburg, VA 24060 RE: Proffer for Spring Arbor of Winchester Dear Mr. Cook: • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 This letter is to inform you that the annual proffer of $5,000.00 has not been received by Frederick County for the above referenced. Proffered condition #4.1 FIRE & RESCUE of Rezoning # 06-08, approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on October 22, 2008, states that an annual monetary contribution of $5,000.00 is to be paid for fire and rescue purposes. As of the date of this letter, this proffer has not been paid. Please make arrangements to pay the total sum of $5,000.00 to Frederick County. We request payment within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any questions please call me at (540) 665-5651. Sincerely, ,,"'MarkR. C �eranl Zoning Administrator MRC/pd 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 �J 0 July 3, 2012 Mr. W. R. Cook, Jr. HH Hunt Corp. 117 Edinburg South, Suite 100 Cary, NC 27511 Re: Proffer for Spring Arbor of Winchester Dear Mr. Cook: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 This letter is a reminder that the annual proffer of $5,000.00 is due before July 21, 2012 to Frederick County for the above referenced project. Proffered condition #4.1 FIRE & RESCUE of Rezoning #06-08, approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on October 22, 2008, states that an annual monetary contribution of $5,000.00 is to be paid for fire and rescue purposes. If you have any questions, please call me at (540) 665-5651. We appreciate your prompt response. Sincerely, R. Cheran Zoning & Subdivision Administrator MRC/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 AMENDMENT Q.+ (4 : �,- Ni,,4 &-p,s, 4 6 -16 Z;Zp Action: 01c o a 0 8 t PLANNING COMMISSION: September 17, 2008 - Recommended De m BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: October 22, 2008 ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED � -on '7 2 ill a AN ORDINANCE AMENDING 3.'ov pose-ec! 1301 �.)_ THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING 406-08 OF ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY WHEREAS, Rezoning #06-08 of Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting, to rezone 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers dated February 22, 2008 and final revision dated October 10, 2008, was considered. The properties are located on the south side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50), west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50, in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 53-A-81, 53- A-82, 5313-3-24 and 53B-3-25. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on August 20, 2008, and a public meeting was held on September 17, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on October 22 2008; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT .ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. PDRes 432-08 the alignment of the southern road (anticipated to be the future Round Hill Road extension) changes such that all or any portion of the proposed dedication is outside of the new alignment, the Applicant will be relieved of the obligation to dedicate all or a portion of the right of way to the extent that the proposed dedication is outside the new alignment. 3.2 Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the Ward Avenue frontage of Parcel 53B- 3-24 and Parcel 53B-3-25 to permit the continuation of the three (3) lane curb and gutter road section to the southern boundary line of the Property (Parcel 53B-3- 25), and to allow for the construction of the proposed improvements to Ward Avenue as shown on the GDP. The Applicant shall dedicate all such right-of-way within twelve (12) months of Zoning Approval. 3.3 The Applicant will allow for inter -parcel access to adjacent properties to help facilitate future connectivity within the Round Hill Land Use Plan (RHLUP) area. The location(s) of such future inter -parcel connections shall be determined after agreement with the adjacent property owners. 3.4 The Applicant agrees to contribute to Frederick County the sum of $25,000.00 for. additional'road improvements in the vicinity of the development. The payment shall be made by the Applicant upon the issuance of the building permit. 4. FIRE & RESCUE 4.1 The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County the sum of $100,000.00 for fire and rescue purposes upon the issuance of the building permit. In addition, the Applicant agrees to make an annual contribution in the amount of $5,000.00 to Frederick County to be used for fire and rescue purposes. Said payment shall be made on or before each annual anniversary of the issuance of the first building permit for the Property. Said annual $5,000.00 payment shall expire when and if Frederick County requires a fee -for -service for the dispatch of fire or rescue vehicles. [SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES] O c v E i✓ C v a E o a, a LD p N Y � N O 0 l�D C U .tY E lD a� Z O C r- C o v (p > Lf) DATEm NO. 124622 RECEIVED FROM• ' ��-- 1 r �1 _-L �. • ��71'—DOLLARS s 5000too ■ FOR - �� � • WAIM '1010101_11�• • AMT.OF CASH ACCOUNT I AMT. PAID I CHECK �./ MONEY -m"E ORDER BY�e 4 rj 5 K THE FACE OFTHISDOCUMENT HASACOLORED BACKGROUND ONWHITE�YPAPER}f1 .i rt 31 WaChbvia Baw,tW r 1T' 4HHUN Richmond, VA ;r yr X 800 Hethwood Boulevard Blacksburg, VA 24060 68-141 X (540) 552-3515 510 www.hhhunt.com ,,. DATE CHECK NO. AMOUNT =< July 25, 2012 1613490 $**"***5,000.00 Pay. r*********************************"****Five thousand dollars and no cents ;r X X =r PAY FREDERICK COUNTY �r TO THE 107 North Kent Street ORDER OF Winchester, VA 22601 IX "✓:i:i;i;1 INININ- ;X 'THE BACK OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS AN ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK —HOLD AT AN ANGLE TO VIEW �{YSSYs�i �s' s1s X III LE, L349011• 1:05LOO14LLX 2L0002L72949L0 irq Ln m (17 lO r-q CO ru Iro 0 0 171 Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Postage Mr. W.R. Cook, Jr. Sent To HH Hunt Corp 7%hr Postmark Here rree�.Ai w 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 o, Po Box No. C NC 27511 City, srere, ziP, �'� Certified Mail Provides: ■ A mailing receipt ■ A unique identifier for your mailpiece ■ A record of delivery kept by the Postal Service for two years Important Reminders: ■ Certified Mail may ONLY be combined with First -Class Mails or Priority Mail®. ■ Certified Mail is not available for any class of international mail. ■ NO INSURANCE COVERAGE IS PROVIDED with Certified Mail. For valuables, please consider Insured or Registered Mail. ■ For an additional fee, a Return Receipt may be requested to provide proof of delivery. To obtain Return Receipt service, please complete and attach a Return Receipt (PS Form 3811) to the article and add applicable postage to cover the fee. Endorse mailpiece "Return Receipt Requested". To receive a fee waiver for a duplicate return receipt, a USPS® postmark on your Certified Mail receipt is tired. ■ For an additional fee, delivery may be restricted to the addressee or addressee's authorized agent. Advise the clerk or mark the mailpiece with the endorsement "Restricted Delivery". ■ If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt is desired, please present the arti- cle at the post office for postmarking. If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt is not needed, detach and affix label with postage and mail. IMPORTANT: Save this receipt and present it when making an inquiry. PS Form 3800, August 2006 (Reverse) PSN 7530-02-000-9047 n r '�COJNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 July 26, 2011 Mr. W.R. Cook, Jr. HH Hunt Corp 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 Cary, NC 27511 RE: Proffer for Spring Arbor of Winchester Dear Mr. Cook: This letter is to inform you that the annual proffer of $5,000.00 has not been received by Frederick County for the above referenced. Proffered condition #4.1 FIRE & RESCUE of Rezoning # 06-08, approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on October 22, 2008, states that an annual monetary contribution of $5,000.00 is to be paid for fire and rescue purposes. As of the date of this letter, this proffer has not been paid. Please make arrangements to pay the total sum of $5,000.00 to Frederick County. We request payment within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any questions please call me at (540) 665-5651. Sincerely, lafk . Che Zoning Administrator MRC/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Spring Arbor 800 Hethwood Boulevard Blacksburg, VA 24060-4207 Certified Mail Provides: ■ A mailing receipt ■ A unique identifier for your mailpiece ■ A record of delivery kept by the Postal Service for two years Important Reminders: ■ Certified Mail may ONLY be combined with First -Class Mailo or Priority Mail®. ■ Certified Mail is not available for any class of international mail. ■ NO INSURANCE COVERAGE IS PROVIDED with Certified Mail. For valuables, please consider Insured or Registered Mail. ■ For an additional fee, a Return Receipt may be requested to provide proof of delivery. To obtain Return Receipt service, please complete and attach a Return Receipt (PS Form 3811) to the article and add applicable postage to cover the fee. Endorse mailpiece "Return Receipt Requested". To receive a fee waiver for a duplicate return receipt, a USPS® postmark on your Certified Mail receipt is required. ■ For an additional fee, delivery may be restricted to the addressee or addressee's authorized agent. Advise the clerk or mark the mailpiece with the endorsement "Restricted Delivery". ■ If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt is desired, please present the arti- cle at the post office for postmarking. If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt is not needed, detach and affix label with postage and mail. IMPORTANT: Save this receipt and present it when making an inquiry. PS Form 3800, August 2006 (Reverse) PSN 7530-02-000-9047 O • • � `��� ��f1�� 11 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 July 26, 2011 Spring Arbor 800 Hethwood Boulevard Blacksburg, VA 24060-4207 RE: Proffer for Spring Arbor of Winchester To Whom It May Concern: This letter is to inform you that the annual proffer of $5,000.00 has not been received by Frederick County for the above referenced. Proffered condition 44.1 FIRE & RESCUE of Rezoning # 06-08, approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on October 22, 2008, states that an annual monetary contribution of $5,000.00 is to be paid for fire and rescue purposes. As of the date of this letter, this proffer has not been paid. Please make arrangements to pay the total sum of $5,000.00 to Frederick County. We request payment within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any questions please call me at (540) 665-5651. Sincerely, �fkR. Chem Zoning Administrator MRC/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 r�Cv o�� lc I11 0-4 Uo r l <zei THE FACE OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS A COLORS 11� l r � r D BACKGROUND ON WHITE PAPER, Wachovia Bank, N,A r 800 HethWOod Bom! r �l3Cksbur , Richmond, VA (540) 552-3515 9 V 4,24060 wwwhhhLI+ nt, com 68-141 �. Pay: ***** DATE 51p� » r» r*** r**** r* r r rw r* r r******* r CHECK NO. :l August 3, 2011 AMOUNT Five thousand dollars and no cents 1573651 a� 0.00 PAY Frederick County TO THE ORDER OF 107 North Kent Street Winchester, V A 22601 J. 1. I. I. ,{ .............. z Z�� z t.ITHE BACK DOCUMENT CONTAINS AN OF THIS ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK —HOLD AT +: lie 15 7 3 6 5 Ilia • .ti • 0 5 10 Q 1 4 4 AN ANGLE TO VIEW 1 • 21000 21 7 z,�zzzz izjT�'` 2949111■ DATE / ` I N0.208079 O RECEIVED FROM (V DDRESS La G EDOLLARS Q O V) fV $ (200 ❑ FOR REN 5� IQ4�,� FOR > ¢ U C/� ,> Q • • f� �V O Y N y s: �p AMT.OF ACCOUNT CASH U CAA � N •� •%,. AMT. PAID — BALANCE I CHECK MONEY n \ JJ \ "'lll DUE ORDER BY I,,1 N cd t` E O 6,,a-:,3kn FY COUNTY of F'REDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 July 26, 2011 Spring Arbor 800 Hethwood Boulevard Blacksburg, VA 24060-4207 RE: Proffer for Spring Arbor of Winchester To Whom It May Concern: This letter is to inform you that the annual proffer of $5,000.00 has not been received by Frederick County for the above referenced. Proffered condition 94.1 FIRE & RESCUE of Rezoning # 06-08, approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on October 22, 2008, states that an annual monetary contribution of $5,000.00 is to be paid for fire and rescue purposes. As of the date of this letter, this proffer has not been paid. Please make arrangements to pay the total sum of $5,000.00 to Frederick County. We request payment within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any questions please call me at (540) 665-5651. Sincerely, arlc R. Cheran Zoning Administrator MRC/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Action: 1 ! icod c4 -t(zi o� (k'+ (4 : �5- AMENDMENT � &poS, 46 -�, t -I I Z;Z-/ d q C v . C61� l "-'JJ 0 n" T. �, K PLANNING COMMISSION: September 17, 2008 - Recommended Denial LLB I 60 �- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. October 22, 2008 ID APPROVED ❑ DENIED / AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING 406-08 OF ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY WHEREAS, Rezoning 406-08 of Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting, to rezone 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers dated February 22, 2008 and final revision dated October 10, 2008, was considered. The properties are located on the south side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50), west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50, in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 53-A-81, 53- A-82, 53B-3-24 and 53B-3-25. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on August 20, 2008, and a public meeting was held on September 17, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on October 22 2008; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT .ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. PDRes 432-08 i • :This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 22nd, day of October, 2008 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Aye Gary A. Lofton Gary W: Dove Gene E. Fisher Philip A. Lemieux Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr Aye A COPY ATTEST Aye Aye Aye John Riie�, Jr. ,- — Fr Orrick County Administrator PDRes. #32-08 AMENDMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: September 17, 2008 - Recommended Denial BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: October 22, 2008 ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING 406-08 OF ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY WHEREAS, Rezoning 406-08 of Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting, to rezone 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers dated February 22, 2008 and final revision dated October 10, 2008, was considered. The properties are located on the south side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50), west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50, in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 53-A-81, 53- A-82, 5313-3-24 and 5313-3-25. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on August 20, 2008, and a public meeting was held on September 17, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on October 22 2008; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. PDRes 1132-08 This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 22nd day of October, 2008 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye A COPY ATTEST Joh }hr /131. Rlle'�, Jr. " Fr rick County Administrator PDRes. #32-08 PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RA TO B2 PROPERTY: 10.47 Acres/ Tax Map Parcels: 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 53B-3-24 & 53B-3-25 RECORD OWNERS: Darla Poe Funkhouser Sharon S. Poe PHTH Properties, LLC Marathon Bank/United Bank APPLICANT: HHHunt Corporation PROJECT NAME: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility PROFFER DATE: February 22, 2008 Revised: June 24, 2008; August 18, 2008; September 5, 2008; September 29, 2008; October 14, 2008, October 20, 2008 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property"), as identified above, shall be in strict confonnance with the following conditions. In the event that the above referenced rezoning is not granted as applied for by the applicant ("Applicant"), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property with "final rezoning" defined as that rezoning which is in effect on the day following the last day upon which the Frederick County Board of Supervisors' (the "Board") decision granting the rezoning may be contested in the appropriate court. If the Board's decision is contested, and the Applicant elects not to submit development plans until such contest is resolved, the term rezoning shall include the day following entry of a final court order affirming the decision of the Board which has not been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed on appeal. Any improvements or other requirements proffered herein below shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the Property adjacent to or including the proffered improvement or other proffered requirement, and no later than the time of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless otherwise specified herein. When used in these proffers, the Generalized Development Plan shall refer to the one page plan entitled "HHHunt Corporation Route 50 Assisted Living Facility", dated January 2008 and prepared by Bowman Consulting Group, LTD. and bearing the revision date October 14, 2008 ("GDP"). The five foot (5') strip acquired from the Marathon Bank/United Bank property (Parcel 53B-3- 24) shall be incorporated by Boundary Line Adjustment plat into Parcel 53B-3-25, as shown on the GDP, and shall be subject to all applicable proffers. With the exception of Paragraph 3.2 below, the remainder of Parcel 53B-3-24 shall be exempt from these proffers. 0 1] The headings of the proffers set forth below have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The term "Applicant" as reference herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. The Applicant hereby proffers as follows: 1. LAND USE/ BUILDING 1.1 The Applicant intends to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use. All other B-2 uses shall not be permitted on this site unless they are approved by Frederick County as part of a revised Proffer Statement. 1.2 All site improvements, as shown in the GDP, such as: Route 50 frontage improvements; Ward Avenue frontage improvements; an enhanced 100' road efficiency buffer along Route 50; enhanced Category B buffer yards along east, west, and south property lines; on -site drive aisles and parking; sidewalks; and site landscaping and lighting shall be constructed or bonded by the Applicant at the earlier of within twenty-four (24) months of Zoning Approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. This does not include connections to future adjacent roads as illustrated on the GDP. 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT 2.1 Site entrances shall be limited to three (3) as shown on the GDP. The primary access to the site will be from Ward Avenue and the secondary access to the site will be by an improved right in/right out entrance along Route 50. Egress via the right in/right out entrance shall be restricted to Allegheny Power vehicles only, and shall be posted with signage accordingly. The third access point is shown along the southern boundary to maintain access to the existing Allegheny power service substation and to allow for a future connection to the Round Hill Road extension by others. The exact design and location of each entrance shall be determined upon final engineering and pursuant to the specifications and approval of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). 2.2 The Applicant agrees to use a mix of brick and siding to break up the elevations of the structure and to provide an attractive facility generally as depicted in exhibits provided and which are attached and incorporated as Exhibit A. Any future additional structures will be required to use compatible materials for design continuity. 3. TRANSPORTATION 3.1 The Applicant agrees to dedicate a 25' right of way to allow for the construction by others of the future Round Hill Road extension as depicted on the GDP. Such dedication shall occur within ninety (90) days of receipt of a written request from either VDOT or Frederick County. If it is determined by Frederick County that 2 the alignment of the southern road (anticipated to be the future Round Hill Road extension) changes such that all or any portion of the proposed dedication is outside of the new alignment, the Applicant will be relieved of the obligation to dedicate all or a portion of the right of way to the extent that the proposed dedication is outside the new alignment. 3.2 Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the Ward Avenue frontage of Parcel 5313- 3-24 and Parcel 53B-3-25 to permit the continuation of the three (3) lane curb and gutter road section to the southern boundary line of the Property (Parcel 5313-3- 25), and to allow for the construction of the proposed improvements to Ward Avenue as shown on the GDP. The Applicant shall dedicate all such right-of-way within twelve (12) months of Zoning Approval. 3.3 The Applicant will allow for inter -parcel access to adjacent properties to help facilitate future connectivity within the Round Hill Land Use Plan (RHLUP) area. The location(s) of such future inter -parcel connections shall be determined after agreement with the adjacent property owners. 3.4 The Applicant agrees to contribute to Frederick County the sum of $25,000.00 for additional road improvements in the vicinity of the development. The payment shall be made by the Applicant upon the issuance of the building permit. 4. FIRE & RESCUE 4.1 The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County the sum of $100,000.00 for fire and rescue purposes upon the issuance of the building permit. In addition, the Applicant agrees to snake an annual contribution in the amount of $5,000.00 to Frederick County to be used for fire and rescue purposes. Said payment shall be made on or before each annual anniversary of the issuance of the first building permit for the Property. Said annual $5,000.00 payment shall expire when and if Frederick County requires a fee -for -service for the dispatch of fire or rescue vehicles. [SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES] 9 0 • Respectfiilly submitted, UL r(_ & 4 W. R. "Bo" Cook, Jr. (Applicant) STATEMNTyI V I ftYZ D, , AT LARGE -CST-Y/ f , To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this cA day of Zoos, by W , e , (5h" POOK : j(, \0\W1 �A L/21 4/ &W S�N NOTARY PUBLIC •` ��••NOTAftY ''••.. �;:' PUBLIC My conunission expirei: G##324329 Registration No.: = MY coM Q ��y�.. 101'31120�� •���\ 0 i i c) R_ Darla Poe Funkhouser (Owner) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this `� )kh day of , 2008, by W.R. "Bo" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. .`` �� ' NOTARI'' NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC REG # 324329 = My commission expires _ Q : MY CGM:MI•SSION Registration No. 101^129 r'� 1 J PHTH Properties, LLC (Owner) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this J0 day of 2008, by W.R. `Bo" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. �So�.... p0 �mvv%,�� NOTARY PUBLIC �v ' NOTARY ' . PUBLIC My commission expir(Fs: REG # 324329 = Registration No.: Q NY COMMISSION �20 10/31/20�J .•�q G 9 W� Sharon S. Poe (Owner) COMMON -WEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2008, by W.R. "Bo" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. 0, LIAM GIA-T ON r NOTARY PUBLIC \''••••NOTARY ' PUBLIC My commission expires:- REG # 324329 = Registration No.: - MY COMMISSION n. r1013111.01 7 0 9 MARATHON BANK/UNITED BANK B Its: STATE OF �Y ,� , AT LARGE -�'/ COUNTY o , To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this dam'` day of CAWW, 2008, by_ L �knoef o� - ,gbu E J0°lyq���NOTA PUB C ham.° NOTARY • ���' My coininission expires: `o e PUBLIC Registration No.: MY COMMi4gIgN o EXPIRES a �® • �07/31/20A; °(y�_� `111,106 ALTH ��696160610 PROPOSED ENHANCED 100' ROAD EFFICIENCY BUFFER AND CATEGORY "B" BUFFER U.S. ROUTE 50 NORTHWESTERN PIKE 50' INACTIW SAFER YARD 50 Y �__ SnAR FACILITY ,• ENNAN= 100' RDAD FFN:IPNCY BUFFER SCALE: +'-30' NOTE: 1) M ADOTION TO THE REWIRED EVERGREENS FOR A ROAD EFFICIENCY BUFTER (PER 165(EX3)). 114E MOM HAS BEEN ENHANCED VAIN STREET TREES AND UNOWtANTED SHRl.9S PER THE ADOPTED ROUND HILL LAND USE PLAN DESIGN PRNCPLES 2) ENHANCEMENTS. B CANOPY TREES 2 ORNAMENTAL TREES 24 spaiss } 5W NACrA RLXTrR YARD ACnI£ GRAFTER YARD ENHANCED CAIECIIRY 'BL BUFFER YARD SCALE. ,-_30' NOTE: I) N ADDITION TO THE REOUNED 3 PLAN7S PER 10 RF. ADO111OKAL PLANTS HAVE BEEN ADDED TO FLWTHER SURER ADJACENT HOVSNG 2) ENHANCEMENTS. BO EWEGEEE N5 2 %*WS 3) RANT MATERIAL LOCATED WTHW THE POFER COMPANY EASEMENT SNN1 DE GONSSTENT MTH ALLEGHENY POWER RECOMNEQD PLANT TYPES GRAPHIC SCALE r A,A ( IN FEFT I I loch - 50 It lowWF TB OUND --�.-__ PROP MOIMTABIE. RIGHT IN EXISTING 20' INGRESS/EGRESS ESM1. DB U52 PG 0685 (TO BE ABANDONED) N/f' FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE AND POE, SHARON S. MAP ID:' 53-A-81 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 +1.9 ACRES EXtSTING 50' INGRESS/EGRESS ESMT. DS 07M PG 0945 (TO BE ABANDONED / AND RELOCATED TO NEW ACCESS ROAD) `J F pL TC,C�. TWO-1-V e / MkF IC: 53P. 76NCL- 3� TL, ! EX'S7NG UNDERGROUND �7 ELECTRIC LINES EXISTING 50' INGRESS/EGRESS ESMT. DB 0738. PG 0945 •J � I L ___f_ _ ENIRANCE EM(,INc F3EC-PIXF-� 1�-M� �:'. -1._ (ToercRENOVFD) ^.� :_-i_ -a.' --�Rl BLE- aNgp Tat-Ro JIBE -- +�• _.. _._ PROP. DIPECTNxJM. \ -WAx�- EASTBOUND EMT SIGNS C ` - 3 - -- Y4 `2 "'► ND 12 nL�:.i•Eti- wr I] - . - /^PROP. NO ..IXIRB AND GUTTER TO TIE R1T0. .. _ �..., 9GN �'y at"" THE EX CURB AND GUTTER AND . CO-12 RAMP OF THE ADJACENT POSS / \. BWM/IBLE BAEP UNITED BANK. VE__ _ FACILITY Y PREP.clim Mamri56E - LN EL' 3AV = VI, F -pRlVAj r Dr27 MP a j - Jr ,_[ Y LNE ADJUSTMENT FOR REGARFD A / , • / •� / _ i i 71, 1-PPROVBIAIDAR10 OCCUR, PENDING REZONING - �� : ( i r ' \ �`, •} 1 APPROVAL POE, SHARON S. MAP ID: 53-A-82 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 ±8.0 ACRES At `\ A -•'eEt �>tApE ` Nll',70• i�(]hi a �+ec" Rob 17 NW ' P,OLF i^C.�-Y :Y 4 ARMIT bT lV 53E-3 2e :FINED RA 11A_ F .- M4 - 1 7 LSE: RES'Dc'ELA_ h !f FITI R. C.ALAN i_FE -- LAY=J:.. -A JEE: RfSCEN-I4L J\ ,1+ i IF F. y_01. LFi� It Ac ' `36-3-3� - CNLC: HP I 53C-3-3Z- I 01 ; D: W, ' it:.- I. P _ �. ' C• 533-3-33 35 F� J: G: Rc. Q 3 N !_ VA-, i /F SCRL X: A'rI I - MAP ID: 53E-3-3^ 'OM1CC. F.A 1.h� F.F.S0rNT A. r P.-Rormll-, "Lc .^.'JFc , FA U' T __, _LC E i L ' '-TO ALLOW FOR FUTLOE 50' RGHT OF WAY (PER t5' ROW RESERVATION) -CURB AND CUTTER TO ERD AT PROPERTY LNE TO i THE SOUTH AND TIE INTO THE EMSTNG CURB AM - OUTRR OF THE ADJACENT UNTIED RANIL /---PROPosm _ - SEONID ENTRANCE -- LOCATION _.-. . __!Y ROW RESERVATION - N/F N,F — PHTN PROPERTIES LLC FA'r.VFRS _IvT5:0^_K EycJ wJ.^= .N,- MAP ID: 538-3-25 MA° C: 53-Ay53 ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 Za:L_t R.A' t.23 ACRE JS°. C-VIYERC.AL t —gb�N-n�,e730o 300 NOTE 1. NoSTEEP SLOPES OVER 50% AND GREATER EXIST ON THE SITE. 2. FINAL LAYOUT SUBJECT TO ENGINEERED SITE PLAN. -- LEGEND EXISTWG DESCRIPTION ... Nat COM7011 N1n0AI cowl" EDGE OF PMUFRI mpem li NPARTWD "A." LINE Ta UK IEIQ IK SIMIAV SETA UTUTY POLE/ OECVC LIME: STOW SEER INK PROPOSED DESCRIPTION r• DW OF PAVINOT W MAIIPLINE SwTARY SEW" _FUTURE DESCRIPTION POIOOOI RIAM aLUCTOR ROAD ING11 FROM DE ROMD NU LAND Vi PLAN AS EIWWD MOV. TtlOT a Z lY 5 z z Q Z Q O O LL- Y � U LJ _ 0 LL1 Z d pJ O a- > 00Ld U p U) o N ZQ Q J � iY Lo ~ N tL3 _ W Fw- D Y 0 W � W U Y U Q m • �� �7,lTH OF �, 9J.W. CODY FRANCL4 s : - Le No. 34091 CTO JAE DESECN ACIOW SCALE HMZ I'-50' _ VERT. _ JOB No.5132-01-003 DATE JAN. 2008 FILE No. 5132-D-ZP-001 511EFT 1 OF 1 .............. .REZONING: PROPERTY: RECORD OWNERS APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: PROFFER DATE: PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT RA TO B2 10.47 Acres/ Tax Map Parcels: 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 53B-3-24 & 53B-3-25 Darla Poe Funkhouser Sharon S. Poe PHTH Properties, LLC Marathon Bank/United Bank HHHunt Corporation Route 50 Assisted Living Facility February 22, 2008 ':.Revised: June 24, 2008; August 18, 2008; September 5, 2008; September 29, 2008; October 14, 2008, October 20, 2008 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development ("Property"), as identified above shall be in of the subject property In the event 'hat the above referenced rezonin is notf °��Ce With the following conditions. ("Applicant"), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawnanddsh�abe applied for by the applicant these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property and void. Further, that rezoning which is in effect on the day followingP � �� ���� rezoning" ' County Board of Supervisors' (the "Board") decision g defined as the last day upon which the Frederick the appropriate court. If the Board's decision is contested, and the Applicant el granting the rezoning may be contested in development plans until such contest is resolved, the term rezoning shall P elects not to submit following entry of a final court order g include the day appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has be e decision of the Board which o has not been affirmed on appeal. Any improvements or other requirements proffered herein below shall be Provided development of that portion of the Property adjacent to or includingP ded at the time of or other proffered requirement, and no later than the time of suance of rad P unprovement Occupancy unless otherwise specified herein- When used in these rollers Certificate of Development Plan shall refer to the one page plan entitled proffers, the Generalized Assisted Living Facility", dated Jams «mount Corporation Route 50 LTD• and bearing the revision date October 14, 2008 ("GDP',). repared by Bowman Consulting Group, The five foot (5') strip acquired from the Marathon Bank/United B 24) shall be incorporated by Bound arik property (Parcel 53B-3- �y Line Ad the GDP Adjustment plat into Parcel and shall be subject to all ap53B-3-25, as shown on plicable proffers. With the exception of Paragraph 3 below, the remainder of Parcel 53B-3-24 shall be exempt from these proffers. 2 • • the headings of the proffers set forth below have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The term "Applicant" as reference herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. The Applicant hereby proffers as follows: 1. LAND USE/ BUILDING 1.1 The Applicant intends to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use. All other B-2 uses shall not be permitted on this site unless they are approved by Frederick County as part of a revised Proffer Statement. 1.2 All site improvements, as shown in the GDP, such as: Route 50 frontage improvements; Ward Avenue frontage improvements; an enhanced 100' road efficiency buffer along Route 50; enhanced Category B buffer yards along east, west, and south property lines; on -site drive aisles and parking; sidewalks; and site landscaping and lighting shall be constructed or bonded by the Applicant at the earlier of within twenty-four (24) months of Zoning Approval or issuance of a Certificate, jof Occupancy. This does not include connections to future adjacent roads as illustrated on the GDP. 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT 2.1 Site entrances shall be limited to three (3) as shown on the GDP. The primary access to the site will be from Ward Avenue and the secondary access to the site will be by an improved right in/right out entrance along Route 50. Egress via the right in/right out entrance shall be restricted to Allegheny Power vehicles only, and shall be posted with signage accordingly. The third access point is shown along the southern boundary to maintain access to the existing Allegheny power service substation and to allow for a future connection to the Round Hill Road extension by others. The exact design and location of each entrance shall be determined upon final engineering and pursuant to the specifications and approval of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). 2.2 The Applicant agrees to use a mix of brick and siding to break up the elevations of the structure and to provide an attractive facility generally as depicted in exhibits provided and which are attached and incorporated as Exhibit A. Any future additional structures will be required to use compatible materials for design continuity. 3. TRANSPORTATION 3.1 The Applicant agrees to dedicate a 25' right of way to allow for the construction by others of the future Round Hill Road extension as depicted on the GDP. Such dedication shall occur within ninety (90) days of receipt of a written request from either VDOT or Frederick County. If it is determined by Frederick County that 2 • the alignment of the southern road (anticipated to be the future Round Hill Road extension) changes such that all or any portion of the proposed dedication is outside of the new alignment, the Applicant will be" relieved of the obligation to dedicate all or a portion of the right of way to the extent that the proposed dedication is outside the new alignment. Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the Ward Avenue frontage of Parcel 53B- 3-24 and Parcel 53B-3-25 to permit the continuation of the three (3) lane curb and gutter road section to the southern boundary line of the Property (Parcel 53B-3- 25), and to allow for the construction of the proposed improvements to Ward Avenue as shown on the GDP. The Applicant shall dedicate all such right-of-way within twelve (12) months of Zoning Approval. The Applicant will allow for inter -parcel access to adjacent properties to help facilitate future connectivity within the Round Hill Land Use Plan (RHLUP) area. The location(s) of such future inter -parcel connections shall be determined after agreement with the adjacent property owners. The Applicant agrees to contribute to Frederick County the sum of $25,000.00 for. additional road improvements in the vicinity of the development. The payment shall be made by the Applicant upon the issuance of the building permit. :E & RESCUE The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County the sum of $100,000.00 for fire and rescue purposes upon the issuance of the building permit. In addition, the Applicant agrees to make an annual contribution in the amount of $5,000.00 to Frederick County to be used for fire and rescue purposes. Said payment shall be made on or before each annual anniversary of the issuance of the first building permit for the Property. Said annual $5,000.00 payment shall expire when and if Frederick County requires a fee -for -service for the dispatch of fire or rescue vehicles. [SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES] y submitted, 6jk-" W. R. `To" Cook, Jr. (Applicant) STATE OF V f ILYAD, , AT LARGE -C-HY-IT f COUI�Y f To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2008, by t5b" N K 4, �/l I AA INI k h-Ay ��1411111(�� oN T P• NOTARY PUBLIC � ••NOTARY •'•.• Q;: � pUBL1C My commission expires: G#324329 Registration No.: = MY coM — ���?� '•., 10131120 �) J4� J ALT\A ��`� 0 Darla Poe Funkhouser (Owner) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this aft day of , 2008, by W.R. `Bo" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. `\�,�IIIIIII/III, .�SON T. �///// P.• ' NOTARY ' .: �, NOTARY PUBLIC PUBLIC REG # 324329 My commission expires= MYCGMMISSION Registration No. ''•;',-ALTH 0� ,'IIII���l�1�-`' 5 I/FREDEIRICK.COUNTY, Properties, LLC er) MONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of C 2008, by W.R. `Bo" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. ON. r ,00 '% NOTARY PUBLIC P. 'NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: REG # 324329 Registration No.: MY COMMISSION A .III J � •� /����AtTH 0��.41',• /!!!!llllli!ll2 s 6 W� Sharon S. Poe (Owner) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2008, by W.R. "Bo" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. 0 1'tAn `�`�spN T•.�o ��''% NOTARY PUBLIC NOTARY ' PUBLIC My commission expires:= REG # 324329 Registration No.: - MY COMM►35lo %0�� • 101311i0�. • : �C� :� o•• • yam, ; • 1'rrririii,�11�. 7 THON BANK/UNITED BANK B > STATE OF ` Y 1 Ar , AT LARGE ,ffTY/ COUNTY o , To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 94344` day of OA, 2008, by `}Cr0.�d L • ���(1OP� 4 ; lE JO ��i -a NOT PUB C �'........�kq��i� NorARY My commission expires: �: PUBLIC :2 Registration No.: ? My con�M�ssicu O EXPIRES �= �07/3112OA. ALTH 0 a°°° CE A.RGE CARD FORM Name Vy . -)� Coo f \ Phone9 ) I U (Py Company Name Address .) k �� City, State, Zip Code P P-0--'CL �AC �;'- -? S 0 a Card Type V Q Card # 4423 59 SianatulBC W R OWU Exp. Date Og 13 DatLC(� / 3 — /(0 Please Accept payment for the following fee(s) by credit card as noted below: W) Item BudLyet Amount Code V/ Booklets & Maps PCO1 $ Description 604 FEES o � $ s oo Proffers Y"Q'Wln' �-I 4 J- Lkni %odside Estates II 1OBH $ Saratoga Meadows lOBQ $ Valley Mill Estates MCC $ Briarwood Estates H - IX 1 OCN $ -� &O-1: liivy\& 19ruFF ( 44 4q-y�i I OCQ $ 5,O00• Sign Deposit C�iQzs�n`n b��a 1095 $ Applications ZASP $ Zoning & Subdivision Ordinance PCO2 $ Sale of Amendments (Zoning/Subdivision ord.) PCO2 $ Sale of GIS Material 10 DL $ Subtotal $ rJ 5 0 D •0 b card user fee + I a .5 Q A:\chMecardfb=wpd Total $ .5 O W 0 4-4 0 b a� o o00 co .� N a� K A O N , b Qr v, U�j U d4� N �o waC) 5 3 -A- 31 DATE alb l NO. 1179 11 !!I RECEIVED FROM �� ADDRESS ls� JFOR RENT JFOR _ AMT.OF CASH ACCOUNT AMT. PAID �r CHECK 3 BALANCE MONEY DUE ORDER v ayo �G� 60LLARS $ 2 eu�n��t ob-og tsul9ss��C4 BY r rRICTlrttot� cF l / .��:, �� >1 (. " �f ;r 800 Helhwood Boulevard Blacksburg, VA 24060 _ sa 141 ;r (540) 552-3515 510 0 r www.hhhunt.com DATE CHECK NO. AMOUNT =< July 14, 2009 1493764 $****125,000.00 p ;< Pay. One hundred twenty-five thousand dollars and no cents c =r � X PAY Frederick County TO THE 107 North Kent Street C ORDER OF Winchester, VA 22601 C k� 0 eX � C C n �i :i si sz X "� :i si X X'j i siTHE BACK OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS AN ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK —HOLD AT AN ANGLE TO VIEW vs: II'LL.93764'in 1:05L00L11L41: 2L0002L72949L0 0 0 PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RA 'I O B2 PROPERTY: 10.47 Acres/ Tax Map Parcels: 53-A481, 53-A-82, 53B-3-24 d'r. 53B-3-25 RI:;CORD OWNERS: Darla Poe r'unkhollser Sharon S. Poe PHTH Properties, LLC Marathon Banl</United Bank APPLICANT: HHHunt Corporation PROJECTNAME: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility PROFFER DATE: February 22, 2008 Revised: June 24, 2008; August 18, 2008; September 5, 2008; September 29, 2008; Octobei-10, 2008 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property"), as identified above, shall be in strict. conformance with the following conditions. In the event that the above referenced rezoning is not granted as applied for by the applicant ("Applicant"), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall he null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property with "final rezoning" defined as that rezoning which is in effect on the day following the last day Upon which the Frederick County Board of Supervisors' (the "Board") decision granting the rezoning may be contested in the appropriate court. If the Board's decision is contested, and the Applicant elects not to submit development plans Until such contest is resolved, the term rezoning shall include the day following cntiy of a final court order affirilling the decision of the Board which has not been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed on appeal. Any improvements or other requirements proffered herein below shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the Property adjacent to or including the proffered improvement or other proffered requirement, and no later than the time of issuaiiec of a Certificate of Ocenpancy unless otherwise specified herein. When used in these proffers, the Generalized Development Plan shall refer to the one page plan entitled "HHHunt Corporation Route 50 Assisted Living Facility", dated January 2008 and prepared by Bowman Consulting Group, I_,TD. and bearing the revision date October 14, 2008 ("GDP"). The five foot (55) strip acgnired from the Marathon Bank/I_Jmted Bank property (Parcel 5313-3- 24) shall he incorporated by Boundary Line Adjustment plat into Parcel 53B-3-25, as shown on the GDP, and shall be subject to all applicable proffers. With the exception of Paragraph 3.2 below, the remainder of Parcel 5313-3-24 shall be exempt from these proffers. The headings of the proffers set forth below have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the inneaning or be taker as an interpretation of any provision of' the proffers. The term "Applicant" as reference herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest, The Applicant hereby proffers as Follows: LAND USE/ BUILDING 1.1 The Applicant intends to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use. All other 13-2 uses shall not be permitted on this site unless they are approved by Frederick County as part of a revised Proffer Statement. 1.2 All site improvements, as shown in the GDP, such as: Route 50 frontage improvements; Ward Avenue frontage improvements; an enhanced 100' road efficiency buffer along Route 50; enhanced Category B buffer yards along cast, west, and south property lines, on -site drive aisles and parking; Sidewalks; and site landscaping acid lighting shall be constructed or bonded by the Applicant at the earlier of within twenty-four (24) months of Zoning Approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. This does not include connections to fixture adjacent roads as illustrated on the GDP. 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT 2.1 Site entrances shall be limited to three (3) as shown oil the GDP. The primary access to the site will be from Ward Avenue and the secondary access to the site will be by an improved right in/right out entrance along Route 50, Egress via the right in/right out entrance shall be restricted to Allegheny Power vehicles only, and shall be posted with signage accordingly. The third access point is shown along the southern boundary to maintain access to the existing Allegheny power service substation zinc] to allow for a future connection to the Round Hill Road extension by others. The exact design and location of each entrance shall be determined upon final engineering and pursuant to the specifications and approval of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). 2.2 The Applicant agrees to use a mix of brick and siding to break up the elevations of the structure and to provide an attractive facility generally as depicted in exhibits provided and which are attached and incorporated as Exhibit A. Any future additional structures will be required to use compatible materials for design continuity. 3. TRANSPORTATION 3.1 The Applicant agrees to dedicate a 25' right of way to allow for the construction by others of the future Round Hill Road extension as depicted on the GDP. Such dedication shall occur within ninety (90) days of receipt of a written request f-orn either VDOT or Frederick County. If it is determined that the alignment of the 2 1 L J 4. southern road cllangcs such that all or any portion of the proposed dedication is outside of the new alignment, the Applicant will be relieved of the obligation to dedicate all or a portion of the right of way. 3.2 Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the Ward Avenue frontage of Parcel 5313- 3-24 and Parcel 5313-3-25 to permit the continuation of the three (3) lane curb and gutter road section to the southern boundary line of the Property (Parcel 5313-3- 25), and to allow for the construction of the proposed improvements to Ward Avenue as shown on the GDP. The Applicant shall dedicate all such right-of-way within twelve (12) months of Zoning Approval. 3.3 The Applicant will allow for inter -parcel access to adjacent properties to help Cacilitate future connectivity within the Round Hill Land Use Plan (RHLUP) area. The location(s) of such I'uture inter -parcel connections shall be determined after agreement with the adjacent property owners. 3.4 The Applicant agrees to contribute to Frederick County the suns of $2.5,000.00 Ior additional road improvements in the vicinity of the development. The payment shall be made by the Applicant upon the issuance of the building permit.. FIRE & RESCUE 4.1 The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County the sum of $25,000.00 for fire and rescue purposes upon the issuance of the building permit. In addition, the Applicant agrees to rake an annual contribution 111 the amount of $5,000.00 to Frederick County to be used for fire and rescue purposes. Said payment shall be made on or before each annual anniversary of the issuance of the first building permit for the Property. Said annual $5,000.00 payment shall expire when and if Frederick County votes to require a fec-for-service for the dispatch of fire or reselle vehicles. (SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES] 3 Respectfitlly submitted, �)P& 44- W. R. "Bo" cook, Jr. (Applicant) STATE OF V VA , AT LARGE; 'file forepm ittstrumetit was acknowledged before ❑ic this i�) I day of 2008, by Zu T r�i�� NOTARY m- Llc �gU ...:. QOt '�. y t � Q�'•'''NOtAFtY''•.,y r. M commission eX ire5� Registration No.: REG It 324329 p EXPIRES v•• 1013o 1l2011 ''rrrrrirllt```� • 0 ONA Darla Poe Punkhouser (Owner) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FRLsllERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this r� clay of 2008, by W.R. "Bo" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. �0 �oN T ?o%,NOTARY PUBLIC \ P�\ ' NOT ' •�1� '; My commission expires puQLIC Registration No.: = REG 11324329 ----'�IJiYCOA1f 1tSSifiNJ— �_ - o EXPIRES ti % � �/ • 10131120i[ ����11111114��\ 5 0 PHTH Properties, LLC (Owner) ''OMMONWEALTu OF VIRC;INIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this �% day of 2008, by W.R. "Bo" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. J. 1\ \S0.N T 4D,,,, NOTARY PUBLIC. • P.•''"IVOTAf21'' O� �� My conunission expires`_ Registration No.: _ REG # 324329 c� 4M15810N O ' EXPIRE, `r '�., �1 LTH1 (ft \\,\`\� 10 6 • COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICIt COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before Inc; this clay oI'� 2008, by W.R. "I3o" Cook, Jr., attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power ol'Attorney. \\\\11111111111 O.N.-V b� NOTARY •'••Y1, PUBLIC commission expil2s: REG It 324329 - Registration No.: _ MY COMMISSION LZnr uU�u nZ - ~;fir , 10131/20/ O I J. NOTARY P JBLIC WAL-MART SUPERCENTER RIGHT IN 50' _ENTRANCE PVOP. DIRE TIONA , L _E IT. SIGNS LEGEND EXISTING PROPOSED � I CURB AND GUTTER TO EXTEND TO UNITED BANK PARCEL ROUTE 50 NORTHWESTERN MINOR (VARIABLE ARTERIAL ROAD PIKE WIDTH RICH DESIGN SPEED 4 0 T- OF -WAY) MPH EXISTING ELECTRIC ±326 (T-(Y--BE -REM O-V.ED)--__ OP. MOUNTABI E 12' CURB 12' .2 I ff tiyl 5' SIDEWALK PROP. "NO EXIT" ASSISTED LIVING Z SIGN FACILITY ) -STRIPING Q LI-jo -.,EXISTING Na (TO BE REMOVED) E PROP. MOUNTA L CURB POSSIBLE If SW M/ BMP UNITED BANK IF FACILITY A� 0-0 ROUTE 50-NORTHWESTERN PIKE IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT. ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FREDERICK COUNTY, VA PROJECT# 5132-01-003 'Bovman SCALEA OTTO SCALE DATE:SEPT 2000 REVISEDOCT.2000 FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY C O. N S V L IT I N I G W e I oe ,.q � t�l� •hJ � y �l r -- -......._.........................._.. .,-.,,-,.m _ ---- - -- - -- ------- _ -- — -1 — - ------- - --- - — — - - --- ---- - MT ----_ — - ----—-1 } I _ _— -- — -- _-- RIGHT ELEVATION 3 rt SCALE: 3/32" =1'-0" o 0 3 W M- --------------- --------------------- — - - — - - _ T 3a ME O E RIGHT ELEVATION 3 0 -� SCALE: 3/32" =1'-0" LL � � L - a - 0 .....15 .. G -i -- _ : I LEFT ELEVATION 3 SCALE: 3/32" =1'-0" ' oERNo' a "9jM.Mw'' 9�[EIGII tyG 0 DATE PROJECT: 08070 04.2R 0 ISSUE: ISSUE DATE REVISIONS: 00 q O P \ i 's I z — CD1� Q - - - ----- -- - - - - - -- ------ =u - - --- --- ------ --- -- -- - - ------ -- I c r r p z J n �` ,:..: ,-,'Sr 5:.:;.- I � _: ::_>. _ :_: _. �_. __._. ....... _—. .___ ..F .,.. ..',-... ra_ i..m - t—: � E-_-�� -- � t .• - - __� f I. CHECKED BY: DRAVIN BY: [Mill M CON TENT: ' G 3 e FRONT ELEVATION SCALA3.01 E: 3132" =1' 0' Ity a i5 SPECIAL CARE RIGHT ELEVATION 4 SCALE: 3132" = V-0" 0 z 0 � �l t 0 — ❑ � _ H MEE C SPECIAL CARE RIGHT ELEVATION 3 SCALE: 3132" =1'-0" I ws } ftIN HIN,-- c nd --i — — — — -- - F — e SPECIAL CARE LEFT ELEVATION 2 SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" E 00 I i N � � INTERIOR COURT ELEVATION SPECIAL CARE FRONT ELEVATION 5 SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" IACHIiFcr �$ S CERT. NO ; 51206 9g7�K �a DATE PROJECT: 06078 04-23a ISSUE:IISSUE IDATE DRAWN BY. I' ECHECKED BY. 12 CONTENT: � I A3.02 ELEVATION 4 SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" ELEVATION 3 SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" ELEVATION SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" 2 S 8 LZ L U) a) U 4- O L- .L3 O -s� -o2l L L =vJ� G ,$TytCWIECtS day ✓"'rtcny�9. CERT. NO.Y+ 51208 9�TEGtl !y4 DATE PROJECT. B6378 04.2aM IM11"ISSUE I DATE ELEVATION SCALE: 3/32" = V-0" J /r HA.HN., RARBARA A. MAP ID: 53B-1 -1 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 5313-1-1 MAP ID: 538-1-2 / EXISTING 20'-- INGRESS/tGRESS ESMT. N/F DB ce52 PG 06M FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE MAP ID: 53—A-81 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 f1.9 ACRES EXISTING 50' - INGRESS/EGRESS ESMT DB 0738 PG 0945 I N/F /( BUTCHER, TIMOTHY S. MAP ID: 53B-2-29 ZONED: RA USE- RESIDENTAL / STONEWALL DRIVE - RTE. 858 / i SUB ,1 1 EXS't G y / N/F INCRESS / PUFrcNBEn:,ER, JUDY N. D° 0733 MAP ID: 53B—Z-24ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIALN/FSMITH, PATRICIA M. MAP ID: 53—A-81 ZONED: RA / USE: RESIDENTI CT PROPERTIES N/F FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE: MAP ID: 53—A-82 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 t8.0 ACRES \\—POTOMAC EDISON CO. EASEMENT DB 783, PG 941 ADJACENT OWNER EXHIBIT N/F ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY_ o•DONNFLL, TRUDY POE FREDERICK COUNIY, VA 5132-01-003 MAP ID: 53—A-86 ZONED: RA SCALE: NTS DATE- JANUARY 2008 REVISED 09-05-2008 USE: RESIDENTIAL ROUTE 50 _NOR TM►'11ESTERN PIKE (v ft&ll? AL _"a-wAyl MAP ID: 5'B-3-5 P ID: 53B-3-24 "-UA ' I0: 53" EAWBOUND n M N/F a UNITED BANK MAP ID: 53B-3-5 ZONED: B2 USE: COMMERCIAL 3 DOSING 7-11 N/F _-- UNITED BANK MAP ID: 53B-3-24 ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 USE: VACANT t.24 ACRE ---,J ---, N/F MAP ID: 53B-3-26 PHTH PROPERTIES LLC MAP ID: 53B-3-25 ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED 82 �MAP53B--3-27 t.23 ACRE N/F MAP ID: 538-3-28 FORD, GUY W. & ARMITH A. MAP ID: 53B-3-26,27,28 RA MAP ID: 53U 3-29 USEZONED: : RESIDENTIAL N/F MAP ID: 538— 3— '. RITTER, CALVIN LEE MAP ID: 53B-3-29, 30,31.32 ZONED: RA MAP !0. 53B-3-3 USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 53B-3-33 N/F �MAP53B-3-34 SCRUGGS, JOSEPH I. MAP ID: 539-3-33,34,35 i1;1P !D: 536-3-35 ZONED: RA I USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 512-3-3C -CiQN /F Z - ANBODAN PROPERTIES LLC MAP ID. 53B-3-37 MAP ID: 538-3-36,37.38 --1 1 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 538-3-38 LEGEND DOSTING DESCRIPTION EDGE OF PAMaUT PROPERTY UtE OEPARING PROPERTY LINE FENCE LINE ADJACM PROPERTIES SUBJECT PROPERTIES MOTES 1. RECENT ROUTE 50 IMPROVEMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY ARE NOT REFLECTED IN THE CITY OF VANCHESTER MAPPING UTILIZED IN THIS EXHIBIT. Bowman 0 C O N S U L T I N G - .y ,t,.. - •. �. � ..:,� "�- r T rs' 'i! :.r'/ °` ix ,i ,L°'t •i'"{'�Y �lt�+�Y .i re , ,. : ' ',!• ,p � �: r' •'� x •� 1r ,gyp' , -, � •s.. • , � _ .r '.i' ' ,.,, L � ^ 's �4"` •r,�'� '-.- "� �• ^'_W�r -a .,� , '! � ,.;'` fir.` �, , ' f � I •c • • ! 3i Vol "` : • .` WAL - T � � � . � 3 INCHESTER _ t UPERCE=NTE A• MEDIGALi > lip ke ? � e _. .. ..�� 1, •� :'t .� � a^ " � � � �j� � .• � 7`t � •. > `1, ftr. U$' COURTYA� JARRI � .�, voo• f S�T�R�, P �, � �, •,� � �. .:,� �'".. y ; ., T� .� REE Will,N7CHE-S • -R I t `'�>•! � �jk�� _ .�-... HyERS? S It �rC©MPL� • RESIDENTIAL-bV• i BANFC CF G ` A RO(J,7;�,, �`O "_' SUBJECT ARMERS 1r 1 UIyp.H.l� RD r ?,� .p , J PROPERTY LNESTOC•K• ".� `' g.�; gip► OT t ' ~. , . ��, y� , / �� , «_ '..r - .a RECYCL.IN6 � � fi'4CyF �' s f � !! / �-. ,� ,�'�' x e ✓ ir ar v _ S��y�< _ �R ,• 'RESIDENTIAL �° }t '� SAS ADOPTED. + f NOV. 2007 PER Q7 l THE RHLUP f _ - C'ANDY HILL ,CAP'GROUND LEGEND yr'i� yD 7ti 3'F °fr A�Ca FU71JRE COLLECTOR ROADS TAKEN FROM THE ROUND HILL LAND USE PLAN, AS ENACTED - O j CONTEXT EXHIBIT /tv<. y - Y + , .l ,, • y , s psi ` ' i , r J 1 y. , 1' ROUTE F/ irk !•t: .rYxwr POSSIBLE SWM/BMP FACILITY s ' i ! -- BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR REQUIRED I _ SETBACK TO OCCUR PENDING REZONING APPROVAL N /F WOLFORD, GUY W. & ARMITI MAP ID: 53B-3-26 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL_ N/F )RD, GUY W. & ARMITHA W. MAP ID: 538-3-27 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL (TO BE RAZED) CG12 HC RAMP i N /F - PHTH PROPER IES LLC MAP ID: 536 3-25 NED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 f.23 ACRE N /F UNITED BANK MAP ID: 538-3- 4 ED: RA TO BE REZ NED B2 USE: VACANT t.24 ACRE CG12 HC RAMP N i - CURB AND GUTTER t5' ROW DEDICATION UNITDNTO BANKDJACENT PARCEL 1 TH FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO WARD AVENUE ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FREDERICK COUNTY, VA PROJECT #5132-01-003 `'(;All NI-1 DATE: AUGUST 2008 REVISED SEPT. 09105f2008 PROPOSED 5' SIDEWALK AND CURB AND GUTTER TO EXTEND TO UNITED BANK PARCEL i N /F ti UNITED BANK i MAP ID: 53B-3-$ ZONED: B2 USE: COMMERCIAL. WARD AVE. — RTE. 1317 (40- RIGHT-OF-WAY) D.B. 202. PG. 267 DESIGN SPEED - 35 MPH LEGEND Bowman 0 5' ROW DEDICATION C O N S U L T I N G STONEWALL DRIVE - RTE. 85f SITE ILLUSTRATIVE ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FREDERICK COUNTY, VA PROJECT 05132-01-003 SCALE NOT TO SCALE DATE: AUGUST 2008 REVISED OCT. NOR 0 • • PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RA TO B2 PROPERTY: 10.24 Acres/ Tax Map Parcels: 53-A-81, 53-A-82, & 5313-3-25 RECORD OWNERS: Darla Poe Funkhouser Sharon S. Poe PHTH Properties, LLC APPLICANT: HHHunt Corporation PROJECT NAME: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility PROFFER DATE: February 22, 2008 Revised: June 24, 2008 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property"), as identified above, shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions. In the event that the above referenced rezoning is not granted as applied for by the applicant ("Applicant"), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property with "final rezoning" defined as that rezoning which is in effect on the day following the last day upon which the Frederick County Board of Supervisors' (tile "Board") decision granting the rezoning may be contested in the appropriate court. If the Board's decision is contested, and the Applicant elects not to submit development plans until such contest is resolved, the term rezoning shall include the day following entry of a final court order affirming the decision of the Board which has not been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed on appeal. Any improvements proffered herein below shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the Property adjacent to or including the improvement or other proffered requirement, unless otherwise specified herein. When used in these proffers, the General Development Plan ("GDP") shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Route 50 Assisted Living Facility" comprised of one (1) sheet, prepared by Bowman Consulting Group, LTD., and shall include the following: -"Generalized Development Plan" dated January 2008 and revised through June 24, 2008 The headings of the proffers set forth below have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The term "Applicant" as reference herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. The applicant hereby proffers as follows: LAND USE/ BUILDING 1.1 The Applicant intends to develop the property with up to 75,000 SF of assisted living care facility use. All other B-2 uses shall be permitted on this site provided a new Traffic Impact Analysis is commissioned and any reasonable recommendations from said study will be addressed with the submission of a site plan for said uses. • 1.2 All site improvements, as shown in the Generalized Development Plan (GDP), such as: Route 50 fi•ontage improvements; Ward Avenue frontage improvements; an enhanced 100' road efficiency buffer along Route 50; enhanced Category B buffer yards along east, west, and south property lines; on -site drive aisles and parking; sidewalks; and site landscaping and lighting shall be constructed or bonded by the Applicant within the earlier of 1 year from Zoning Approval or issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. This does not include potential connections to adjacent (Or future) roads as illustrated on the GDP. 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT 2.1 Site entrances shall be limited to three (3) as shown on the GDP. Direct access to the Property from Route 50 shall be limited to an improved right in/ right out Only entrance. Secondary access is to be provided to Ward Avenue. The third access point is shown along the southern boundary to maintain access to the existing Allegheny power service substation and to allow for a future connection to the Round Hill Road extension by others. The exact design and location of each entrance shall be determined upon final engineering and pursuant to the specifications and approval of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). 2.2 The Applicant agrees to use a mix of brick and siding to break up the elevations of the structure and to provide an attractive facility generally as depicted in exhibits provided. Any future additional structures will be required to use compatible materials for design continuity. • 3. TRANSPORTATION 3.1 Up to a maximum of 25' along the southern property boundary will be reserved for possible right-of-way dedication for the extension of existing Round Hill Road by others, consistent with the Round Hill Land Use Plan (RHLUP) provided said road is installed within five (5) years of this zoning approval. 3.2 The applicant has provided for potential inter -parcel access locations to adjacent properties in the general locations noted on the GDP to help facilitate connectivity within the Round Hill Land Use Plan (RHLUP) area. 3.3 A revised Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) will be submitted for any future development of this site. 3.4 The Applicant agrees to contribute to Frederick County the sum of $25,000.00 for future road improvements to Route 50, Ward Avenue, or the extension of Round Hill Road within 500 feet of the Property provided the improvements are completed within five (5) years of this zoning approval. The payment shall be made by the Applicant upon receipt of notice of commencement of the aforementioned road improvements provided said Notice is received within five (5) years of the approval of this rezoning. 4. FIRE & RESCUE • 4.1 The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County the sum of $2,000.00 for fire and rescue purposes, upon the issuance Of a building permit. • Respectfully submitted, W / � 94 W. R. "Bo" Cook, Jr. (Applicant) 1 / STATE OF 'V I k OI 14 , AT LARGE CITY/ COUNTY of E , To -wit: The for of ns • e wa acknowledged before me this Z6,'�'( day of r 2008, by • ��nr e�1HNFATHERD. NOTARY PUBLIC n KEHOE My commission expires: B zg� 2-6a�7' Registration No.: Darla Poe Funkhouser (Owner) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisday of June, 2008, by Thomas Moore Lawson, Esquire, attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. \\11111111111/// V .`SoN T �� �,,�, NOTARY PUBLIC P,••' NOTARY .V-k PUBLIC My commission expire: REG # 324329 _ Registration No.: _ 0 MY COM�viISSION EXPIREs '. 10/31/20f/ •'��� 0 p� Tq pv_4VA'eal- PHTH Properties, LL ram' (Owner) l COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Q,?54 'day of June, 2008, by Thomas Moore Lawson, Esquire, attorney -in -fact pursuant to a Special Limited Power of Attorney. Omlo­ ON .... O �'�'�. NOTARY PUBLIC NOTARY'�L PUBLIC My commission expires: REG # 324329 = Registration No.: MY COMMISSION vLAHIRES?� 1�,.. 101311201L • 0 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Plarming Director FROM: Roderick B. Williams PV County Attorney DATE: September 2, 2008 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us RE: HHHunt Route 50 Assisted Living Facility — Revised Proffer Statement I have reviewed the above -referenced Revised Proffer Statement, dated August 18, 2008. It is my opinion that the Revised Proffer Statement is generally in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following: Second paragraph — To avoid any potential ambiguities, the language at the beginning would better read, "Any improvements or other requirements proffered herein ..." and the word "proffered" should appear before "improvement" in the second line. Also, the term "at the time of development" is unclear as to precisely what constitutes "development" for purposes of commencing proffered obligations. Finally, it would be helpful if the reference to the GDP stated that the GDP is comprised of one page. Proffer 2.2 — The Revised Proffer Statement does not include the referenced Exhibit A. In the absence of such an exhibit, the Revised Proffer Statement should at least state any minimum percentages of each surface (brick and siding) that would be required in the elevations. Proffer 3.1 — The ultimate dedication of the 25 feet of right-of-way for the Round Hill Road extension is contingent on a factor out of the County's control, namely that "others" would "install" the facility. In this regard, the Revised Proffer Statement does not account for what happens if the "others" inform the County that "construction of said road will commence within a reasonable period of time", as the Revised Proffer Statement suggests, and the County in turn 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 Michael T. Ruddy, AICP September 2, 2008 Page 2 informs the Applicant, per the Revised Proffer Statement, but for some reason the construction does not occur or is not completed. Proffer 3.3 — Again, consistent with my comment above regarding the second paragraph of the Revised Proffer Statement, which paragraph provides that the proffered improvements "shall be provided at the time of development", the proffer may be unclear as to when the obligation would commence. Also, the reference to `Botanical Drive" should be changed to "Botanical Boulevard", which is the correct name of the road. My previous comments remain that the Rezoning Application and the Revised Proffer Statement will need to be signed by both of the individual owners (Darla Poe Funkhouser and Sharon S. Poe, or their attorney(s)-in-fact) of Parcels 53-A-81 and Parcels 53-A-82. In addition, the application materials need to include copies of any powers of attorney that have been used, with the power of attorney for Parcel 5313-3-25 indicating the capacity (office/title) in which the signatory for PHTH Properties, LLC is acting. Along similar lines, the Applicant will need to resolve the questions regarding the ownership of Parcels 53-A-81 and 53-A-82. The only documentation that the Applicant has produced so far are two deeds for Parcel 53-A-82 (the eight acre parcel), each conveying a one - quarter interest jointly to Ms. Funkhouser and Ms. Poe. This leaves unexplained the remaining one-half interest in the parcel, as well as the entire interest in Parcel 53-A-81 (the one acre parcel). Until all owners of all relevant parcels have executed the Rezoning Application, the matter is not properly before the Commission or the Board. Furthermore, the Revised Proffer Statement would not be binding as to owners of relevant parcels that do not execute it. I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by staff and the Planning Commission. Mike Ruddy From: Chris Mohn [cmohn@bowmanconsulting.com] Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 5:34 PM To: Mike Ruddy Cc: Chris Oldham; Michael Pointer Subject: Emailing: Weave Analysis - Technical Memo 09.05.08.pdf Attachments: Weave Analysis - Technical Memo 09.05.08.pdf <<Weave Analysis - Technical Memo 09.05.08.pdf >> Hello Mr. Ruddy! Attached is the weave analysis prepared for the right in/right out entrance proposed with the HHHunt rezoning. It was inadvertently left unattached to your copy of Michael Pointer's response letter to Matt Smith/VDOT's comments. Our humble apologies for the oversight. Note that VDOT has been provided with the weave analysis as well as the revised proffer statement and GDP (both dated September 5, 2008). Please advise should you have any questions or concerns regarding the attached information. Best, Chris Christopher Mohn, AICP I Bowman Consulting The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: Weave Analysis - Technical Memo 09.05.08.pdf Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. 1 • 0 Phone: 703-787-9595 GOROVE/SLADE ASSOCIATES, INC. Fax:703-787-9905 3914 Centreville Road / Suite 330 / Chantilly, VA 20151 MEMORANDUM TO: Bo Cook Michael Pointer, ASLA FROM: Tushar Awar, P.E. Chad Baird DATE: September 5, 2008 HH Hunt Bowman Consulting SUBJECT: HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility— Weaving Analysis INTRODUCTION The proposed HH Hunt assisted living facility is located just outside the city of Winchester along the south side of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) bounded by Echo Lane to the west and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard to the east. The proposed HH Hunt development plan consists of an assisted living facility with approximately 87 beds. The development will have primary access from Ward Avenue and a secondary access (RIRO) from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). A revised traffic impact study dated August 15, 2008 prepared for the proposed development was submitted to VDOT for review. One of the comments received from VDOT on the traffic study pertaining to the right -in right -out access along Route 50 was: ' In regards to the right in/right out entrance on Route 50 as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (GDP); we have concerns that the right out turn movement may create potential weaving problems at the intersection for drivers exiting the entrance and then entering the left turn lane. VVe question the need for the right out at this secondary entrance and would pr fer it be limited to a right in only entrance as was done for the adjacent bank parcel. WEAVING ANALYSIS Per VDOT's request, a weaving analysis was conducted for the PM and Saturday peak period to evaluate any potential weaving problems at the intersection for the drivers turning right out and then entering the left turn lane at the downstream intersection. To be conservative, all traffic turning right out of the limited access entrance was assumed to use the left turn lane at the downstream intersection. The distance between the right -in right -out entrance and the downstream intersection is approximately 500 feet. TICS+ software was used to conduct the analysis. Type C (b) weaving shown in Exhibit 13-10 (shown on the next page) in the HCM manual was used. TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC and PARKING www.goroveslade.com . 0 HH Hunt Assisted Living September 5, 2008 Page 2 Exhibit 13-10: Two -Sided Weave EM1131T 13-10• TYPE C 141EAVNG SEOMEUTS a. MoiorY-W e% ilhouf Lane galanr,of f/Prg1ng A----------------------- �,_-���__ -- ._- -- ,--_------ �C b. T%Yo-Sid i VleaNv A_______________ __________p �— - - _--_ _-----_w_.-. j B Table 1: Weaving Analysis Results Weaving Analysis PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour LOS Weaving Segment Density LOS Weaving Segment Density A 9.19 oc/mi/In A 10.6 r)c/mi/In CONCLUSIONS Type C ,veaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.5. The volume ratio* for the PM peak hour is 0.04 and for the Saturday peak hour is 0.03. The weaving analysis results show that the weaving movement will operate at acceptable levels of service conditions. The HCM output sheets are attached at the back of the memorandum. *Note: The volume ratio is the proportion Of f nveaving vehicles in the total flow computed as the weaving volume divided by the total volume in the weaving area. TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC and PARKING www.goroveslade.com HH Hunt Assisted Living September 5, 2008 Page 3 HCM Output TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC and PARKING www.goroveslade.com 0 HCS+: Freeway Weaving Rele0e 5.21 Phone: Fax: E-mail: Operational Analysis Analyst: TA Agency/Co.: Gorove/Slade Associates Date Performed: 8/20/2008 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Period Freeway/Dir of Travel: Eastbound Route 50 Weaving Location: Between RIRO and Ward Avenue Jurisdiction: Frederick County Analysis Year: 2010 Description: HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility Inputs Freeway free -flow speed, SFF 55 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 3 Weaving segment length, L 500 ft Terrain type Level Grade a Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.04 Weaving ratio, R 0.14 Conversion to pc/h Under Base Conditions Non -Weaving Weaving V V V V A-C B-D A-D B-C Volume, V 1278 1 41 7 veh/h Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 355 1 11 2 v Trucks and buses 10 10 10 10 Recreational vehicles 10 10 10 10 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.935 0.935 0.935 0.935 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 1519 1 48 8 pc/h Weaving and Non -Weaving Speeds Weaving Non -Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.31 0.06 Weaving and non -weaving speeds, Si 49.28 57.52 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation (Exhibit 24-7) 2. Maximum number of lanes, w (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity Weaving segment speed, S 57.18 mph Weaving segment density, D 9.19 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS A Capacity of base condition, cb 6010 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 5617 pc/h Capacity as a full -hour volume, ch 5055 pc/h Limitations on Weaving Segments If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 56 3500 a Average flow rate (pcphpl) 525 2250 b Volume ratio, VR 0.04 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.14 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 500 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. C. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three -lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four -lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type A), 4,000 (Type B), 3,500 (Type C). g. Five -lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. 0 HCS+: Freeway Weaving Relefe 5.21 Phone: Fax: E-mail: Operational Analysis Analyst: TA Agency/Co.: Gorove/Slade Associates Date Performed: 8/20/2008 Analysis Time Period: SAT Peak Period Freeway/Dir of Travel: Eastbound Route 50 Weaving Location: Between RIRO and Ward Avenue Jurisdiction: Frederick County Analysis Year: 2010 Description: HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility Inputs Freeway free -flow speed, SFF 55 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 3 Weaving segment length, L 500 ft Terrain type Level Grade o Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.03 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 Conversion to pc/h Under Base Conditions Volume, V Peak -hour factor, PHF Peak 15-min volume, v15 Trucks and buses Recreational vehicles Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population adjustment, fP Flow rate, v Non -Weaving Weaving V V V V A-C B-D A-D B-C 1470 1 42 10 veh/h 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 408 1 12 3 v 10 10 10 10 0 10 10 10 10 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.935 0.935 0.935 0.935 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1747 1 49 11 pc/h Weaving and Non -Weaving Speeds Weaving Non -Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.35 0.07 Weaving and non -weaving speeds, Si 48.41 57.18 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation v (Exhibit 24-7) 1. Maximum number of lanes, w (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity Weaving segment speed, S 56.84 mph Weaving segment density, D 10.60 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS A Capacity of base condition, cb 6010 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 5617 pc/h Capacity as a full -hour volume, ch 5055 pc/h Limitations on Weaving Segments If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 60 3500 a Average flow rate (pcphpl) 602 2250 b Volume ratio, VR 0.03 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 500 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. C. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three -lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four -lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type A), 4,000 (Type B), 3,500 (Type C). g. Five -lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. 0 • From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [mailto: Rhonda. Fun khouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov] On Behalf Of Smith, Matthew, P.E. Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 9:42 AM To: Michael Pointer; Eric Meske Cc: John Bishop; Candice Perkins; mruddy@co.frederick.va.us; Copp, Jerry; Smith, Matthew, P.E.; Baluch, Stephen Subject: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility - Revised Entrance - VDOT Comments to Rezoning A VDOT review has been conducted on the revised rezoning application with the latest proffers dated September 5, 2008 for the Route 50 Assisted Living Facility. This rezoning appears to have a measurable impact on Route 50 and Route 1317, Ward Avenue. These routes are the VDOT roadways which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the revised transportation proffers and the revised entrance (as shown on the attached pdf) addresses transportation concerns associated with this rezoning request. The Route 50 entrance design shown on the attached pdf needs to be incorporated in the Generalized Development Plan. <<5132-D-CP-001-00-RTE 50 ENTRANCE RIGHT IN2 11x17 (1).pdf>> 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. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right- of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. Matthew B. Smith, P.E. Residency Staff Engineer VDOT - Edinburg Residency 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 Phone # (540) 984-5615 Fax # (540) 984-5607 I 0 0 Mike Ruddy From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov] on behalf of Smith, Matthew, P.E. [Matthew.Smith@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:09 AM To: Michael Pointer Cc: tlawson@lsplc.com; mruddy@co.frederick.va.us; John Bishop; Copp, Jerry; Short, Terry; Hoffman, Gregory; Smith, Matthew, P.E. Subject: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility - VDOT Comments to Rezoning A VDOT review has been conducted on the revised rezoning application with the latest proffers dated August 18, 2008 for the Route 50 Assisted Living Facility. We have the following comments: In regards to the right in/right out entrance on Route 50 as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (GDP); we have concerns that the right out turn movement may create potential weaving problems at the intersection for drivers exiting the entrance and then entering the left turn lane. We question the need for the right out at this secondary entrance and would prefer it be limited to a right in only entrance as was done for the adjacent bank parcel. • Proffer 3.3 - Whatever monetary transportation contribution that is agreed upon should not be limited to a specific improvement, but rather be able to be used for transportation improvements in the general area of the development at the County's discretion. VDOT also has concerns with limiting the funding to only 5 years from the date of the zoning approval. The primary entrance off Ward Avenue needs to continue the existing 3 lane curb and gutter section established in front of the United Bank to the southern property line of the Assisted Living Facility. Additional right-of-way dedication needs to be provided to accommodate all roadway improvements. The 50.50' lot frontage width forces the commercial entrance off the right-of-way and onto parcel 53B-3-24. Additional right-of-way, agreements, and easement will need to be obtained from parcel 53B-3-24 to allow proposed improvements as shown on the GDP. • Traffic signals along this stretch of Route 50 are coordinated to work together. The TIA's recommendation of adjusting the signal timings and cycle length at the Route 50/Ward Avenue Intersection may have negative impacts on the overall function of the signals along this corridor. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs and drainage features for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements 1 and drainage. Any work pe*med on the State's right-of-way n1lt: be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. Matthew B. Smith, P.E. Residency Staff Engineer VDOT - Edinburg Residency 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 Phone # (540) 984-5615 Fax # (540) 984-5607 0 0 Mike buddy L'I' �IY�IM�i�IR.IL-rwayrai: .Sf-�,�+�a..i-rm� From: Rod Williams [rwillia@co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 1:25 PM To: 'Mike Ruddy' Subject: RE: new proffers Mike, I have now reviewed this latest version of the proffer statement and believe that it addresses the remaining legal and ambiguity issues that I had raised. Roderick B. Williams County Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (540) 722-8383 Facsimile: (540) 667-0370 E-mail: rwillia .co.frederick.va.us From: Mike Ruddy[mailto:mruddy@co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 12:13 PM To: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us Subject: new proffers Attached fyi. Mike. SEp 2 4 2008 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us MEMORANDUM TO: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director FROM: Roderick B. Williams P�v County Attorney DATE: September 23, 2008 RE: HHHunt Route 50 Assisted Living Facility — Revised Proffer Statement dated September 5, 2008 I have reviewed the above -referenced Revised Proffer Statement, dated September 5, 2008, and the correspondence from Bowman Consulting, dated September 22, 2008. It is my opinion that the Revised Proffer Statement is generally in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following: Third paragraph & Proffer 3.2 — The Revised Proffer Statement should provide a specific identification, other than what is shown on the GDP, of the precise portion of the Marathon Bank/United Bank property (Parcel 5313-3-24) that is subject to the rezoning and the Revised Proffer Statement. Also, throughout the Revised Proffer Statement, it may be best simply to refer to the bank as "Marathon Bank/United Bank". Proffer 3.2 — The Revised Proffer Statement does not explain that the referenced items in Proffer 3.2 are on Ward Avenue. Likewise, the reference to "the southern boundary line of the Property" should clarify that it is to the southern boundary line of the Marathon Bank/United Bank property, as that is what appears to be intended. Seeing as how Marathon Bank/United Bank has now joined as a party to the Revised Proffer Statement (which Marathon Bank/United Bank has signed), the Revised Proffer Statement should state that Marathon Bank/United Bank will grant or dedicate the referenced right-of-way, easements, and the like. Finally, the Revised 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 • Michael T. Ruddy, AICP September 23, 2008 Page 2 Proffer Statement should identify a specific time or event which triggers Marathon Bank/United Bank's obligation to make the undertakings. Proffer 3.3 — The Revised Proffer Statement currently contains two items numbered as 3.3. The second 3.3 should be changed to 3.4. In the first 3.3, the word "potential", used to describe inter -parcel access, creates ambiguity as to whether the Applicant will in fact allow any inter -parcel access. The Application will need to be signed by all owners of all affected parcels and the application materials need to include copies of any powers of attorney that have been used for the Application and/or the Revised Proffer Statement. In this regard, I note that Mr. Cook has now signed the Revised Proffer Statement for all persons other than Marathon Bank/United Bank. Also, the jurat for Ms. Sharon Poe's signature still indicates that Mr. Lawson was signing for her, but the signature appears to be that of Mr. Cook. Finally, the power of attorney for Parcel 5313-3-25 will need to indicate the capacity (office/title) in which the person granting the power for PHTH Properties, LLC is acting. Along related lines, the Applicant will need to resolve the questions regarding the ownership of Parcels 53-A-81 and 53-A-82. The only documentation that the Applicant has produced so far are two deeds for Parcel 53-A-82 (the eight acre parcel), each conveying one - quarter interests jointly to Ms. Funkhouser and Ms. Poe. This leaves unexplained the remaining one-half interest in the parcel, as well as the entire interest in Parcel 53-A-81 (the one acre parcel). Until all owners of all relevant parcels have executed the Rezoning Application, the matter is not properly before the Commission or the Board. Furthermore, the Revised Proffer Statement would not be binding as to owners of relevant parcels that do not execute it. I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by staff and the Planning Commission. Mike Ruddy From: Rod Williams [rwillia@co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 1:07 PM To: 'Mike Ruddy' Subject: HHHunt rezoning Attachments: HHHunt proffer statement of 2008 08 18.doc Mike, Attached is my memo with comments on the revised proffer statement dated 8/18/08. 1 will send a hard copy to you in the interoffice. You will note that, in the second to last paragraph of my memo, I have noted the concern about the titling of the parcels (specifically the Poe/Funkhouser parcels; title to the Ward Avenue parcel looks OK). I had the opportunity to take a look at the land records, including the old ones that are only available at the Courthouse, and not remotely, and I found no other conveyances from Ralph Poe to Darla and Sharon, other than the two one -quarter interests. If Darla and Sharon have previously acquired the remaining one-half interest, they did not do so directly from Ralph Poe. Mr. Lawson and company absolutely need to get this straightened out before we can proceed further, because right now we do not have (all of) the necessary parties/interests before the County with the rezoning application. Roderick B. Williams County Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (540) 722-8383 Facsimile: (540) 667-0370 E-mail: rwillia(a)co.frederick.va.us r 0 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us MEMORANDUM TO: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director FROM: Roderick B. Williams County Attorney DATE: September 2, 2008 RE: HHHunt Route 50 Assisted Living Facility — Revised Proffer Statement I have reviewed the above -referenced Revised Proffer Statement, dated August 18, 2008. It is my opinion that the Revised Proffer Statement is generally in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following: Second paragraph — To avoid any potential ambiguities, the language at the beginning would better read, "Any improvements or other requirements proffered herein ..." and the word "proffered" should appear before "improvement" in the second line. Also, the term "at the time of development" is unclear as to precisely what constitutes "development" for purposes of commencing proffered obligations. Finally, it would be helpful if the reference to the GDP stated that the GDP is comprised of one page. Proffer 2.2 — The Revised Proffer Statement does not include the referenced Exhibit A. In the absence of such an exhibit, the Revised Proffer Statement should at least state any minimum percentages of each surface (brick and siding) that would be required in the elevations. Proffer 3.1 — The ultimate dedication of the 25 feet of right-of-way for the Round Hill Road extension is contingent on a factor out of the County's control, namely that "others" would "install" the facility. In this regard, the Revised Proffer Statement does not account for what happens if the "others" inform the County that "construction of said road will commence within a reasonable period of time", as the Revised Proffer Statement suggests, and the County in turn 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 Michael T. Ruddy, AICP September 2, 2008 Page 2 informs the Applicant, per the Revised Proffer Statement, but for some reason the construction does not occur or is not completed. Proffer 3.3 — Again, consistent with my comment above regarding the second paragraph of the Revised Proffer Statement, which paragraph provides that the proffered improvements "shall be provided at the time of development", the proffer may be unclear as to when the obligation would continence. Also, the reference to `Botanical Drive" should be changed to "Botanical Boulevard", My previous comments remain that the Rezoning Application and the Revised Proffer Statement will need to be signed by both of the individual owners (Darla Poe Funkhouser and Poe, or their attorney(s)-in-fact) of Parcels 53-A-81 the application materials need to include copies of any powers of attorney that have been used, with the power of attorney for Parcel 53B-3-25 indicating the capacity (office/title) in which the signatory for PHTH Properties, LLC is acting. Along similar 'lines, the Applicant will need to resolve the questions regarding the ownership of Parcels 53-A-81 and 53-A-82. The only documentation that the Applicant has produced so far are two deeds for Parcel 53-A-82 (the eight acre parcel), each conveying a one - quarter interest jointly to Ms This leaves unexplained the remaining one-half interest in the parcel, as well as the entire interest in Parcel 53-A-81 parcel). Until all owners of all relevant parcels have executed the Rezoning Application, the matter is not properly before the Commission or the Board. Furthermore, the Revised Proffer Statement would not be binding as to owners of relevant parcels that do not execute it. I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by staff and the Plamling Commission. 0 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director FROM: Roderick B. Williams County Attorney DATE: August 14, 2008 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us RE: HHHunt Route 50 Assisted Living Facility — Proffer Statement I have reviewed the above -referenced Proffer Statement, dated June 24, 2008, and received by me on August 7, 2008. It is my opinion that the Proffer Statement is generally in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following: Second paragraph — To avoid any potential ambiguities, the language at the beginning would better read, "Any improvements or other requirements proffered herein ..." and the word "proffered" should appear before "improvement" in the second line. Also, the reference to the GDP is unclear. I have only the single sheet entitled "Generalized Development Plan HHHunt Corporation Route 50 Assisted Living Facility," dated January 2008, and prepared by Bowman Consulting, and it does not include any other documents or bear any indicia of being "revised through June 24, 2008." Proffer 1.1 — The provision regarding the conditions under which other B2 uses would be allowed may be of limited effect in restricting other B2 uses, as the provision does not indicate who makes the determination of what constitute "reasonable recommmendations" nor does it indicate any standards for making that determination. In addition, the recommendations would be made solely by a consultant of the Applicant's choosing. Proffer 1.2 — The reference to the earlier of one year from zoning approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, concerning construction of the specified improvements, is likely 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 Michael T. Ruddy, AICP • August 14, 2008 Page 2 meaningless, seeing as how it appears that no structure contemplated by the rezoning application could lawfully be occupied in compliance with County zoning until the rezoning is approved. The period should be based only from zoning approval. Also, for clarity in the last sentence, regarding other road connections, "adjacent (or future) roads" would better read "future adjacent roads." Finally, the word "potential" makes it unclear whether- the Applicant is actually committing to construct the connections to future adjacent roads. Proffer 2.2 — The proffer does not state any minimum percentages of each surface (brick and siding) that would be required in the elevations. The proffer also indicates that the appearance of the facility will be "as depicted in exhibits provided." No exhibits have been provided to me, nor have any exhibits been stated to be incorporated as part of the proffer statement, as they would need to be in order to have any binding effect as a proffer. Proffer 3.1 — The qualifier "possible" before "right-of-way dedication" makes it unclear whether the Applicant is actually committing to make the dedication, even if the Round Hill Road extension is "installed" within the five-year period. The term "installed" is also in need of further definition, so that the proffer is clear as to what constitutes occurrence of the condition precedent within the stated five-year period. Generally, as well, the County may wish to consider the limitations to it of the five-year period. Proffer 3.3 — The proffer- is unclear as to what future development of the site the referenced revised TIA would be submitted for. The proffer is also unclear as to how concerns raised in that revised TIA would be addressed. Proffer 3.4 — The proffer for a contribution to road improvements, within 500 feet of the property, to Route 50, Ward Avenue, or the Round Hill Road extension, says that it is conditioned upon such improvements being completed within five years of the zoning approval, but then says that payment "shall be made" upon Applicant's receipt of a notice of commencement of the improvements. The proffer needs to clarify which time frame determines the obligation. Generally, as well, the County may wish to consider the limitations to it of the five-year period. The Proffer Statement will require a signature by the Applicant that indicates the capacity in which the signatory for the Applicant is acting (e.g., title) and, as well, the Proffer Statement will need to be signed by both of the individual owners (Darla Poe Funkhouser and Sharon S. Poe) of Parcels 53-A-81 and Parcels 53-A-81. In addition, the application materials need to include copies of any powers of attorney that have been used and the power of attorney for PHTH Properties, LLC will need to indicate the capacity in which the signatory executing same for that entity is acting. Finally, staff will want to make sure the signatures on the Rezoning Michael T. Ruddy, AICP • August 14, 2008 Page 3 Application forth satisfy the same requirements as indicated here for the signatures on the Proffer Statement. I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by staff and the Planning Connnission. FN lir N DF 4C�x' 7 LJlkl\ Irmf 7 N (K� PIZELIA41NARNI GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 9 ACRE PARCEL, ROUTE SO WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA FOR AIR. C. ALLAN LOGAN, SR. HHHUNT OCTOBER 26, 2007 0 0 GeOteC11I11cill C(3I1Sti'llctlOn i\'I ' iltelli ils {.,I11`lI'i3IiIllCtltiil )<ilCilltiCS October 26. 2007 Mr. C. Allan Lo,uan. Sr. 1-11-11-1 u n t 117 Edinburgh South Suite 100 Cary, North Carolina 27511 EC'S .lob No. 9194 Reference: Preliminary Geotechnieal Evaluation 9 Acre Parcel, Route 50 Winchester, Virginia Deal' Mr. Logan: As authorized by acceptance of our proposal No. 17249-GP, EC'S Mid -Atlantic, LLC (ECS) has completed the preliminary geotechnical evaluation for the referenced site. This report provides aoeotechnieal information and preliminary recommendations addressing the suitability of soil, rock and groundwater conditions for installation and support ofproposed development. The site appears suitable for the proposed assisted living development. There are, however, some: ueoteclinical issues that must be considered for planning and budgeting. Of prinl.uy concern are the characteristics of the underlying limestone bedrock. The depth to bedrock is highly variable throughout the site due to the pinnaeled weatheiing which occurs in this geologic ten*ane. Additionally,, large detached boulders may also be encountered in the soil profile. Refusal depths in limestone generally represent the practical limits of conventional excavation. A total of six (6) test pits were excavated with some encountering bucket refusal on hard rock: and others to the limits of the equipment. The depths of the test pits excavated ranged from bucket refiisal at approximately three. (3)' feet to equipment limits at 1 1 feet below, e.xistino gn'ades. Therefore. dependent of final grading plans and maximum cuts and fills. deep utility installations and confined excavations may encounter shallow limestone bedrock: which could require more costly rock excavation Methods (e.g., dIillinfand blasting of lloe-i'allimillg) to !'each the proposed utility inverts and road and building pad grades. The site is located in a geologic terrine that is identified to have karst development potential. For construction recommendations regarding karst development. please see the "Special Considerations - Karst Terrane" section of this report. The I'esidual soil profile weathered from limestone presents additional challenges to site grading. Specifically, these materials, described as low plasticity silts and clays. are unstable when expoSCCI and Sat'lll'ated, especilll), ill roadNvays and heavily traveled areas. Excavated matel"fill reused is fill can be difficult to wort: with under wet conditions. and extended drying periods 166 Windy I -Jill Lane. AVinchesler. VA 22602 °(540) 667-3750 'hA\ (540) 667-1730 Ahrr�lrcn..ltl) • tlaitinaore, %lD,Clmnlillr. VA illr. V.1 - hedericl.. Aiil I�rz�ElrrirL lyw�. 1,1 � tl.m,r1t1�, VA CW; Allt Richmond. VA • Kwcmohr. VA - Viluinia k .tch. VA • W1 alllod. MI) 11 illiani,h�u . � \ • \l iuihr,lcli VA • Yolk. PA t tisiaie era+i r. onik • 0 9 Acre Parcel — ltorlc iQ I-C's Job 1\10. 919-1 October 26. 2007 Page 2 may be required to reduce moisture content to levels suitable for fill. Therefore, earthwork costs hlgllCl" thall usual can be anticipated during the wetter months. Additionally, for this reason, earthwork operations should be perlorllled under the guidance of a qualified geoteclillical engineer. We will be pleased to provide these services Cluring construction. The soil samples analyzed were classilied as low plasticity clays. High plasticity soils are encountered in this pographic region and may be encountered during earth work on this site; therefore, we have enclosed the section on "Special Considerations — High Plasticity Soils". If` high plasticity suspect soils are encountered, these materials should he tested for their swell potential before tieing utilized as fill material. It has been a pleasure working with you on this project. If you have questions regarding this report, or if lve can be of ftu"ther assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respeetfillly, ECS Alid-Atlantic, LC 1 ` t• tiY , r 7,\-, 1"i .Joshua ��1. J-follonian, C.P.G. Stl.lart B. jklaybe- , E. g� StUarL B. P�4a berry, a Senior Engineering Geologist Senior Project Engineer ; � (,lr, No. 36551 261 o I:.Gcrnechuicis�l (teprnts\919.1_Rye_50_9_Acr&,019.1_Me_5f1_9_Acre_Gcador SlDIr ������� " 1 AL . ` �t ' TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE OVERVIE -1 Prolcet Description I Scope Of NVork I EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Subsurihec Exploration PPOCedln'es I I..aboratory Testing Program I EXPLORATION RESULTS Regional Geology 2 Soil Conditions and Test Pit Observations 2 Groundwater Conditions 3 Seismic Considerations 4 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Subgradc Preparation and Earthwork Operations 4 Rock Fill G Blasting Operations Foundations % Slab -On -Grade S Building Below Grade Drainage 9 Exterior Pavement 9 Special Considerations - High Plasticity Soil I I Special Considerations - I`.arst Terrain 12 Closing 14 AITENDIX OVERVIEMI proied Description The project parcel, approximately nine (9) acres, is situated along US ROLIte 50 in Frederick County, west of Winchester, Virginia. The property is eLlrrelltlll utilized for aUriCtlitUral purposes. The site is characterized as slightly rolling terrain, predominantly grass )a slightly pastures with isolated stands of brush arlcl tress. Numel-OLIS limestone outcrops, commonly referred to locally as rock "breaks'. were encountered, typically within the tree, lines Of (lie pastures. Scope of Work The conclusions and recommendations contained herein are base(] on a site reconnaissance, reViCW Of Soil SUITCYS and geological references, and excavation and observation of six (6) test pits, with visual and laboratory classification of soil materials. Select samples were tested 1br ng ell0illecri&I Z7 , properties including Atterberg Limits, Grain Size Analysis, Natural Moisture Content and California Bearing Ratio (CBR), A Ribber tired backlioe Was LitiliZCCI to CNCaVatC the soil test pits. I -lie pits were (jenerally excavated to either bucket rehusil oil hard bedrock or to C:� the maximum equipment reach of approximately I I beet. Tile test pits Nvere excavated under sub -contract with Tire Distributors of Virginia, Field activities were supervised and directed by ECS personnel. Test pit locations were selected and marked in the field based oil information from the provided property plat.. topographic: plan and tr aerial ph otograpll. EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Subsurface Exploration Pi-oeedums A total of six (6) test pits were excavated using a Case Model 580 xvith a maximum reach Of about I I feet. Dense rock was encountered in flour (4) of the excavated pits, at depths rangint, fi-oni about approximately three (3) to 8.6 feet below existing g7-ades. Observations of soil and rOCk CllarlC10riStiCS are SLIllimarized oil the test pit logs in the appendix. All test pits were immediately backfilled and then bucket tamped to consolidate the backfill. Please be advised, however, that loose back ill in structural locations may require some re -compaction, undercutting, and replacement or other improvement prior to placement of subbase stone Ibr pavement, or construction of footings or building slabs. Laboratory Testing Program All experienced geologist classified soil and rock materials ill the Field oil file basis of texture and plasticity ill accordance with the Unified Soil Classification S I rl System. All clata obtailm oill the visual chissifications are included oil file respective logs ill the Appendix. Tile group symbols I-bi, each soil type are indicated ill parentheses hillowing the soil descriptions. A briefexplanatioi) of 0 • 9 Acre Parcel - Rome 50 ECS Joh No. 9194 Ocmber 26, 2007 Iazge 2 the Ullilkd System is inCludesl with this report. TI)c geologist grouped the various soil types into the major zones or strata noted oil the logs. Variations ill the depth and type of soil and rick conditions between test pits should he expected. Select samples were also laboratory classified itn. engineering properties to verify the accuracy of' the field classilications. The laboratory testing included the l61lowinu parameters: Atterberg Limits - Liquid Limit (I..L) and Plasticity Index (PI) Natural Moisture Content (NMQ e Grain Size Analysis (GSA) California Bearing Ratio (C13R) The soil samples will be retained for a period of 60 days unless other instructions are provided 1`61- their disposition. EXPLORATION RESULTS Re!,donal Geolognt According to the Geologic �1iap of tlu� i rr-inia Portion of the 11`inchester 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle (2001)1 the site is underlain by the Con oeocheague. formation. The Conocoelieuggue Formation is composed oi' algal limestone Nvitll interbedded apllanitic limestone and dolomite with siliceous and dolomitic laillinatioils colllllloll and lower portions containing oolites, intralormallonal congloinerates and Stromatolite StRiC'.tures. Allele arc minor sandstone bells throughout the formation. Depth to rocI: can be extremely variable clue; to the pmrlICIC(l, solutioned nature ol'weatherim-, that occurs over carbonate bedrock materials. Ledges or vertical sills (I)innacics) of' resistant rock may be encountered at or ileac the surface separated by deep zones oI'residual soil (cutters). Soil Conditions and 'Pest Pit Observations The test pits were excavated to depths ranging from about three (3) to I 1 feet below existing, grades. Dense limestone bedrock was encountered in Iour (4) of' the excavated pits at depths ranging up to approximately 8.6 feet. Most of the refusals represent boulders or ledges of dense limestone exposed in only a portion of the pit. In sonle instances, sleeper zones of soil were observed directly adjacent to the outcropping bedrock. Topsoil tliickness observed oil the site ranged from approximately 12 to 15 inches t}lrougholit the site. Residual soils in the ui)pernlost strata classified as low plasticity clays. The soil was generally compact and Stiff with moderate excavation resistaIlce. No loose zones or sldewall collapses were observed ill any of the excavations. The plasticity index (PI) values of samples submitted for testing ranged from 18 to 27 with liquid limit wallies ranging from 37 to 49 and plastic limits ranging from 19 to 22.' These soils are 9 Acre Parcel — Route 50 ECS Joh W 9194 Ociober 26. 2007 10ye 3 classified by the LISCS as Imv plasticity clays (CL). upiew Soils with a Pi value or25 may be moderately expansive while Soils with a PI value greater than 30 may he 1601y expansive, depending on the mineralog, Chven the vnAble liquid limits, some of these materials may be expansive. 'file Stability of these Soils is highly sensitive to moisture changes or construction disturbance. Fleavy WWI and saturation kequemly can cause destabilized subgrades that are IN%mie to pumping and rutting under construction traffic. Conversely, extended periods of drought will lead to Severe desiccation. Consequently, moisture control of these materials, both in cum and where the soil is remolded in engineered 611s. is critical during earthwork operation,,;. Standard Proctor Wing or a collected bulk Sample indicates a maxiinurn dry density of 105 pounds per cubic foot (per) at an op hnurn moisture content of 18.9 percent. The soil was gcnawlly moist at depths greater than one lbot. Moisture contents were determined to be in the range of I A I to 319 percent. Op6muni moisture content for these types of soil call be expeewd to be in the range of about 14 to 21 percent. Groundwat-er Condidons In this geologic terrine, a shallow water level typically develops near' the soil/buhuck WaKe at deliths ol'approxiniately 20 to 30 feet below existing grades. Groundwater tends to now laterally along the soil/rock interface, generally mimicking topography. Impervious beds, highly permeable fi-aCtUre zones and utility trenches may distort seepage patterns. Observations for perched groundwater (i.e., resting) on top of rock) or shallow water level conditions were made during drilling operations, sual oi )s , tio s V I erva 11 of Soil samples 111,13' also be used to evaluate seasonal groundwater conditions. Soils that are periodically saturated will exhibit gray inuted colors (gleyed) or niQt[ling due to changes in the oxidation state of iron, manganese and other (race minerals, Usually, rainfall will infiltrate the overburden Soils until it readies competent bedrock, or other impervious strata, whereupon it begin s to flow down gradient, occasionally surfacing as Nvet springs and intermittent streams. A persistent water level generally occurs only in low-lying areas and adjacent to Creehs: otherwise, it is related to rainfall and thus only transient in occurrence. No groundivater was observed in any of the test pits. However, excavations performed during or shortly R)HONving, precipitation could encounter water flowing on top of the rock. ]'he highest groundwater levels are normally encountered in late winter anti early Spring. Variations in depth to the perched water table may ocCLIr as a result of changes in precipitation, evaporation, rtinol'17 and other Ackns not immediately apparent at the Hine of this exploration. Therefore. we strongly urge duit grading be undertaken to coincide with better weather periods. Otherwise. fill operations may he Mowed by moisture control measures (i.e., or wetting - drying). . y • 0 9 Acre Parcel -- Route 50 EX'S .lob No. 919-1 October 26. 2007 Ilaue -1 SCisillic Considerations The 2003 Ldition ofthe International Building Code (113C) requires that a Seismic Site Class be assigned fur nCw structures. The seismic Site Class may be determined by calculating fl 111 value I'm- subsurface materials to a depth of 100 feet. For this determination, N values of six (6) were assigned to the material encountCJ'C i in tile. test ])its and arc used fiu the overburden soil. All lllatcrials below the depth 01• bucket refusal oil hard rock is (to a depth o1. 100 feet) assigned an N-vallie of 100. For this report, (he Site Class was determined using the A' value method. I'lard nick was encountered at depths ranging from approximately t1irce (3) to over 11 feet. With this infurnlation. all A' value of 50 bpf or less is calculated for this site, indicating the site has a Seismic Site Class of D. Seismic site classification play be refined during the detailed geotechnical investigation by either evalliatirig the soil test borings or by conducting geophysical testiny� io CJetcillllil( the actual subsurface seismic velocity profile fur the site, as warranted, dependent on foundation design and expense considerations. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following i•ecolnill ell datloils are based on visual and laboratory analysis of soil and rock materials exposed in the test pits at the project. To summarize, most of tile site is underlain by dense limestone at variable depths. Tile overburden soils are characterized as low plasticity clays. These iaterials are ]generally a marginal source of fill and may be suitable for foundation support provided their are properl)J nloistut'e conditioned. These soils are sensitive to moisture changes: therefore, special precautions Should be taken when placing these materials in controlled stRIC1.111•al fill iiltCllded 10 support pavement or I undatioil systems. The folloxving sections provide a more detailed discussion of issues related to rock excavation, fill placement, subgrade preparation and other construction considerations. At a minimum. we recommend that additional samples of proposed fill material from onsitc or offsite borrow sources be collected prior to COIlstructioll so that moisture -density relationship (i.e., "Proctor") tests can be performed. This data can then be used to assist inspectors in quality control monitoring of Compaction requirements during subsequent fill placement and sub`grade preparation activities. Sub�xrade Preilaration and Earthwork Operations Subgrade preparation should consist of stripping all vegetation, root mat. topsoil. and any other soft or unsuitable material from building and pavement <u•eas. Based on our observations, all average strippillg thickness of' 12 to 15 inches should be assumed across (lie site. Deeper areas of 0 I* (I Acre Parcel -- Route 50 ECS Job No. 9 194 mober 26� 20l)-1 Nwe 5 soft. Compressible topsoil and root-lilat 111,11crial ve'ere noted onsi(e that lllay YeCIL61V SCICCOVC undercutting. depending on filial grades. However. we anticipate that these materials Illay be blended Nvitjl controlled fill (.)I' 1'eSI)I-Cad in 11011-Sh-LICt U N)I g]Vell al-CaS as long as the blended orgallic content of engineered fills is less then 3 percent and the fill is ftee of root material greater then 1,z-illcll diameter, We recommend the earthwork clearing be extended a minimum of 10 flect bey011d the building and pavement limits and all additional one (I ) foot laterally for each vertical foot of Jill required. After stripping to the desired grade, and prior to fill placement, the stripped surface should be observed by all experienced Geolechnical E-n-gineer or his authorized representative. Proof rolling 118illl-' II loaded dUlIll) truck. having all axle xveigh( of at least tell (10) tons should be used to Identify localized soft or unsuitable material. Ali.), soil or unsuitable materials encountered during proof rolling, should be removed and replaced with an approved backfill compacted to the criteria provided below. No ,rotindwater was observed ill any of the test pits. However, excavations perfim-med (11.11-ing oI- shortly after precipitation could encounter water flowing on top of the rock. Groundwater flow can usually be controlled throug-Ill trenching operations. Trenching should be aggressively undertaken to actively intercept water flowing upgradient of work area. The flow call UsuallyZ11 Ile channeled down all existing drainage s\vale or around the excavation to minimize P-oundivater problems. Any soil placed as engineered fill should Ile all approved jnaterial, fi-ee of organic matter or debris, non -frost susceptible, and non -swell prone. Unacceptable fill materials il)CILICIC tOJ.)S0il. organic materials (011, OL), C011S(I'Lletion debris, large rock and high plastici(y swell prolle Sill all(] clay. Tile shrink swell potential of soil sliall be assessed through a combination of Atterberg, Limits, Gradation Analysis and/or swell tests ill the laboratory. All SLICII Illatel-ialS I-CIIIOVe(l during -I-adina operations should be either stockpiled for later use in landscaped areas or placed ill approved disposal areas Either oil site or off site. Fill should be placed ill lifts not exceeding 12 inches ill loose thickness before compaction with heavy vibratory compaction equipmeill, all(] moisture conditioned to within percentage points of the Optimum moisture content. We recommend that each lift be compacted to a mininium of 95 percent of the maximum dry density obtained in accordance with ASTIM D-698, Standard Proctor Method, Fill materials sliall not be placed oil fi-ozen soils. All fi-OZell Soils ShOUld be, removed prior to COIltillUati011 Of fill operations. Likewise, bon -ow shall not contain frozen materials at the time of placement. All fi-ost-heaved soils S)lOL)ld be removed prior to placement of fill. stone, concrete. or .1spliah. All fill operations and Rlbgl-ade preparatioil should be observed on a flull-time basis by an authorized representative of the Geotechilical Engineer to dclennine that compaction requirements are being met. The limits of proposed building and pavement areas should be field staked prior to fill placement. Grade control ShOUld be Maintained throughout earthwork • 0 9 Acre Parcel _ Route 50 t_C'S .lob No. 9194t October 26. 2007 Pate 6 operations. A minilllum of' one compaction test pc;- 2,500 square feet Should be lierfm'nled (or each lift placid to verify field observations. C'olnpaction tests shall be conducted utilizing a properly Calibrated nuclear moisture -density gauge. or sand c011c IlppaNIlus. 'file elevation and location of field tests should be clearly recorded. I'll coretically, any equipment (�'l]C'. call be used f01- compaction as long as the required density is achieved. However, granular soils achieve best compaction with a smooth Ch'1t111 vibratory roller or rubber -tired compactor. Cohesive Soils should be compacted with a vvedgefoot roller. fill containing an abundance Of, rock and fine-grained soil rliatrix Sllou)id be COMINICted utilizing a vibratory roller, All areas receiving bill Should be graded to facilitate positive drainage and prevent ponding of•water, Rock Fill Depending upon the extent 017 grading, large VOIl.Iiiles of shot rock and boulders may be generated in sleeper cut areas and utility excavations. Larglcr fl'a,' 1IICI1tS SIlOulld be SI-If-f1CiClitljl c111shed for use in engineered fill and the use of' this material should be carefully controlled to prevent settlement or consolidation of fill below roadways and structures. Selection of' proper equipment and a -�ressive working ol� these materials will be necessary to reduce the rock to sufficient size and generate adequate fines to Bill vcaids. In this regard, loose lift thickness in controlled fills should be maintained at eight (8) inches or less to ensure adequate crushing and blending ol'the rock Willi soil and rock mines. Maxinlunl I•ock particle Size should be less then six (6) inches Within the upper five (5) feet of fill beneath structures and the upper two (2) feel of fill below pavement. The fill material should have a minimum of 20 percent passing the 1200 sieve and 50 percent passing; the 7=10 sieve. The maximum rock particle size in deeper fill should he maintained at 10 inches or less. Normally, a vibratory sheepsfool roller with a minimuni dynalllic free of' 15 to 25 tons is required to accomplish this sire reduction. In some cases large boulders may be reduced to acceptable particle sizes utilizing a hoe -rani. Blasting patterns in more competent rock can also be set to sufficiently break the rock so that it can be directly incorpoI'alted into the fill mass. \ale anticipate that. I)CI-i0diC I11olSftll'C C011ditiollulg of file fill materials Will also be necessary to aCllieVC all acceptablC InolStlil•e level to obtain maximum density. Careful monitoring of this pl•oCCSS of C Ishillg, illoisture conditioning and blelldlll4Z 1S 1leCeSSai•y tcl ellSur'e a il(llfol'iill}� compacted till mass. Therefore.. full time Observation and testing by a qualified representative of the geotechilical ell :1111cer is recommended during all controlled fill operations. Tile C)cotechnical Engineer should select the most appropriate "Proctor curve" for earthwork compaction. Blasting Operations Grading.! and utilily installation 111a3! involve rock excavation. It it 1111likely that the limestone can be c(7ficiently excavated below our reliisall depths. Blasting Ior installation of utilities ol• Illass excavation is a comnloll practice in this geographic area. OFI)alamount concerli, and a problem 0 • 9 Acre Parcel Route 50 t3C'S R-1) Wi. 9194 October 26.2007 tage 7 of significant potential cost, is that of "overshooting" file Incic. Overshooting is more pi-ohlematic in Inminated materials where seismic forces generated by blasting are transmitted downward and outward beyond the shot point. Ivlassive formations, such as limestone, typically absorb most or the shot force resulting in only localized breakage. Hom ever, soil hiss into the, voids created by blasting can lead to future settlement, especially when cartlle.n All is placed over shot rock. Themkwe, charge patterns and depths shmild be carefully selected. If overblasting occurs. the dimurbed materials may require ivinoval and replacement. depending oil the location relatkle to Structure's. The Geolechnical Engineer should meet with the grading contt'aclor and blasling crews to rcv env shot pa"ams and blaming procedures to mamnlize difficulties associated v ith overhlasting, if iaecessary. Found,, tions Subsurface conditions at the site are ,judged suitable for supporting the proposed structures and other similar loaded structures on shallow foundation systems consisting of isolated and/or continuous footings. Footings will likely bear oil residual soil or dense limestone. For preliminary planning, a net allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 I-)sf should be used for the foundation design. The net allowable soil bearing pressure reRm to that pressure which may be transmitted to the foundation bearing soils in excess of the Anal minimum sunnunding overburden pressure. Shallow Pock was encountered dining our investigation that will potentially ret:Ilin'e removal during foundation excavation. If foundations are to beat' oil multiple Surfaces such as rock and suI'i'oundijig Soils; the reconinlend pedbrnling a one ( I ) foot undercut into the Pock and placing is :cushion" of' engineered All to rahwe the potential Rw differ iltial Settlement. )"ngineelS Ail material criteria are outlined In the `'S11b rade Ne'Jmration and Eartliwork 01;er Itlems" section of this report. If the majority of the footing excavations encounter rock, the recommend that soil filled zones between the exposed rock be excavated to rock and backfilled with VDOT No. ? 1-13 stone. Footings resting; in engineered fill may also be designed for a soil bearing pressure, of 2,000 psf, provided that the material is placed in accordance with the recommendations provide(] in the section entitled "Sakgrtale Pi-elaration emir/ Etirtlin,ork 01wratim ". The bearing capacity at the f-boting elevation should be verified and documented by the geotechnical engineer to ensure that it is ade(Iuate fbi- the design loads. Settlement of individual footings, designed in accordance with these recommendations, are expected to be small and within tolerable limits fir the, proposed structure. `fatal sc;tt]cnaCIlt of less than one (I) inch with diffixential settlements of less than W inch area anticipated. lfiffhential settlements along continuous wall footings are not expected to exceed an angular distortion of 0.002 inch/inch. °hhese settlement estimates are based on our en ineering experience and are provided to guide file structural engineer in the design. 0 l Anv Farrel — Route 50 HC:S Job 10. u t y_t Oclober ?h, 2007 Page y In naler to prevent disproportionately small footing sizes, we recommend that continuous footings have a minipill width of 1.5 feet and that isolated column footings have a minin1L1111 lateral dimension 15 feet. The illllllli urn dimenskins recommended above- hell) reduce tilt: possibility of foundation bearing failure and excessive settlement Clue to local shear or "punching" action. In addition, fbotings should be placed at a depth to provide adequate Frost cover protection. Therefore, we recommend that footillgs in heated areas he placed at a minimum depth of two (2) feet below the finished grade, and perimeter footilh�s, subject to climatic variation, be located at a IllillnllLllll depth of?.S feet below finished grade. Exposure to the environment may weaken the soil of the footing bearing level if the foundation excavations remain open for too long a time. Therefore, foundation concrete should be placed the same day that excavations are performed. If' bearing soils are sofiencd by rainfirll, the softened soils must be removed front the foundation excavation immediately prior to placement of concrete. It' the excavation must remain open overnight, or if rainfall becomes lIllmineilt while the bearing soils are exposed, we mcommend that a one (1) to three (;)-inch thicl: "mud mat" of "lean" concrete be placed on the bearing soils before the placement of reinfiorcing steel. An authorized representative of the GeotediIlimi Engineer should observe footing installation. Upon completion of footilrg and foundation wall construction the excavation should be haddilled with Clean suitable I11awrial in accordance with current building; codes. Further; any water accumulated in foundation excavations prior to baekfiillillg should be pumped out ininiediately. Care should be exercised to preserve the hearing; capacity of' foundation soils in this manner .Ind should not be considered as an insig;niHea nt detail. Slab -On -Grade Slab subgrades should he prepared in , accordance with the Subgrade Preparalion and Earth► w* OpcJrr dons section of this report. floor slabs should be designed assuming a Modulus of Subgrade Reaction OQ of 100 pci. Subgrade soils should be observed prior to placement of stone Or the subslab. Any soft soils identified should be removed and replaced with suitable granular materials. We recolnmend that the Moor slab he isolated from the Inundation footings so that differential settleinellt of the structure will not Induce stresses on the floor. Also, in ordeI' to minimize the crack width of any shrinkage cracks that may develop near the surface of the slah, We recommend that mesh reinforcement (6x6N6 W\\1F) be included in the design. 'File mesh should be placed in the top half of the slab to he ei'llective. Special attention should lie given to the suriilce of the slab in order to minimize uneven drying and associated cracking or curling. During cold weather concrete placement, when temperatures fall below freezing, the slab should be protected with insulating; blankets or other devices fo mainfain an acceptable curing temperature. 0 0 1) Acre Parcel -- Rome iO ECS Job No. 9 194 k1oher 26, 2007 Pave 9 We also recommend that the: slab -on -grade be underlain by a minimum offour(4) inches ol'Nlo. 57 stone. This granular layer will facilitate fine grading -L 'Iding and minimize intrusion ofwater, Prior 10 t, placing tile stone;, the Subgrade Should be properly compacted, proof'rolled and Free of Standing water, mud. and frozen soil. Belbre placement of Concrete, a six (6)-mil vapor barrier of polyethylene SheCtillQ ShOUld be placed on top of the stone t . o provide additional 1110iStIll-C protection, If floor loads ill excess of 500 psf are expected. we recommend that the g2-IMIL11,11- material beneath the floor be increased to a minimum thickness of six (6) inches, with additional reinibreing placed, as determilled 11), the structural engineer'. The s(ructural engineer" should also review and modifj, the concrete slab thickness in these areas, if -appropriate. Final site grading should provide for it minimum of a five (5) percent positive slope in older to drain water away from the; building all(] off paved areas. If positive surfiace slope cannot be maintained around the building, then a four (4)-inch dianicterslotted PVC perimeter drain should be installed 011 to]) 017 tile I00tillf'S outside the building. The draill should slope to a Suitable. outlet or sump. Buildim-, Below Grade Drainage As required by the Building Code, all bOlOW grade Willis should, at a minimum, be danipprooFed. and the bunking should have ,ill exterior perimeter draimme system. The dammirooiinu shall extend from the toll of file fibotin-g- to above file finished exterior grade, and should consist of sealing holes. recess". joints and penetrations with rill approved bituminous material,followed by parging the masonry walls With a 3/8-inch minimum thickness coat of Portland Cement. and applying at least one coat of approved bituminous material at the recommended )-ate. 17liall plasticity soils are (MICI-ally LIMICCCI)tabIC for Use as below grade wall backfill. Tile perimeter col-1-11m drainage system should consist of'slott d ted drainpipe located around the L e --AI perimeter of file beloxv grade outside walls and slightly below the basement floor level. These drain lines should IX SUITOUnded by a minimum of six (6) inclies of free draining granular material VDOT B57 stone. Tile granular drainage material SI1OL11d be wrapped Nvith geotextile fabric. As previously mentioned, we recommend that any basement floor slab be underlain by a miiiinium of fiour (4) inches offif-CC (11-aillillg gl-allUlal' Material. The undersial.) draiiiage blanket alld draill files should be designed for discharge bN gravity where possible, or to all interior sump pit or daylight drain, Exterior Pavement, For tile design and construction of flexible pavements, we recommend that topsoil and any other soft or unsuitable materials be removed from the paved area, Tile stripped surface should be proof -rolled and carefully observed during COIlStRICti011 to idClltifj' IOCaIiZCd soft Or L111SUitable material tcs be removed. 9 :lore Parcel - )torte 50 LC'S .hk No. 9194 Oc fciht r 26. 2007 Pave 10 An impor(ant consideration in the design and Construction cif' pavcmcllis is surface and subsurface drainage. Where. standing water develops, either oil the pavement surface or withitl the base course layer, softening of the subprade and other problems related to deterioration of -'tile. pavenlellt should be expected. Maintaining positive surface drainage will minimize Saturation and deterioration of the pavement Suht;rade, An additional Measure, consisting of'installation of under dIr►ills LIIICICI-IyiIIQ the pavement section should be installed in order to prevent saturati011 01" sub,!rade soils and resultant premature pavement degi.,wation. Tile under chains should be routed to appropriate storm drains or day lighted to appropriate outlets. C13.R testing of a collected bull: sample is being conducted. C131Z test results will be submitted under separate cover at a later elate. For preliminary pavement clesion, a C'BIZ value of'six (6), as recommended by \ DOT for this geographic region, was utilized. The on -site soils are generally considered pool' to marginal SUbgrade materials. Based on the preliminary CBR design value of' six (6), in conjunction with the guidelines from the Asphalt Institute, the recommended pavement Sections for this project al-e as follows: Recommended Pavement Heavy Traffic Liglit Duty Section Areas (in.) Traffie (in.) BitUIllinOUS ccalca•cte surface course 1.5 1.0 Bituminous base course 5.0 2.5 Unheated aggregate Subbase (21 B) • 6.0 6.0 (Asphalt Pavemetlt Thickness Design; A Simplified and Abridged Version of the 1981 Edition of'7'lie Asphalt Institute's'Fhickness Design Manual ONIS-1), Second Edition January 1983) It should be Voted that these pavement design recoillmen datloils may not SalisFy the Virginia Department of Transportation (\/DOT) for deceleration lanes or intersections. Any roadways constructed for public: use or to he dedicated to the State for repair and Maintenance illust be designed in accordance with VDOT specifications. This will require that final CBR tests be performed oil the actual subglade soils prior to paving. Final pavemenl design will be based on these CBR results and traffic frequency informatioll. Large, h'ont landillg trash dulllpstel'S frequently oppose coil centlated front -wheel loads Oil p IV0111ents dining loading. This type of loading typically results ill rutting of the pavement and ultimately pavement and SUbgrade fliltire. Therefore, we recommend that the pavement ill dumpster collection areas consist of a six (6)-incli thick, mesh reinl'orced concrete slats with a illinimunl unconfined compressive strength of'4;000 psi. 9 Acre Parcel --- Rome 50 ECS.1oh r,,Io. 9194 Am% 2k NW7 Page I I Special Coil Side ra tions - Hi(gli Plasticit, ! Soil As noted, the samples that were analyzed consisted of low plasticity clays allhoiqdi high plasticity soils Illay be encountered oil the site. When encountered, the high plasticity soils will become weak and unstable when saturated, especially in a Wurbed condition (Le., in Nils or traffic areas). If high plasticity soil is excavated and reused as JUL these materials can often be difficult to work CC when rnois(urc contents are high. Extended drying periods are required to reduce the moisture to a level suitable for placement as fill. Thereflorc, higher carillwork costs should he anticipated when dealing Nvith these materials during wetter months. Within building areas we recommend that high plasticity soils not be utilized as engineered NJ]. Furthermore, if soils which appear to have high swell potential arc. C-11COUntered during Inundation excavation, the swell potential of the soils shall be verified cither through performing swell tests in a CBR mold or performing a swell pressure analysis utilizing another suitable imeMod. Soil exhibiting swell greater- Man three (3) percent by volume or swell pressures greater than 500 psfshail be undercut so that the footings extend to a minimum ofat least Tour (4) feet below lop OF slab or finished exterior grade. If the bottom of the swell prone soil is shallower than ibur (4) feel, then the lbundations need only be extended to The depth required to completely step through the material, The purpose of embedment is to ensure that the lbotings are placed below tile seasonal 1110iStIll-C Change elevation. Where seasonal moisture change call be reduced, volumetric changes (e.-,, shrinkage and swelling) in the soil will be impeded. At the embedment depth. the Iootings may be designed with the necessary width and utilizing the recommended bearing pressure. Swell prone soil with plasticity indices greater than 25 at the slab subgrade should be undercut a IllillillIL1111 of two (2) feet and replaced Nvith non -expansive structural JUL Again, the Impose of the undercut is to reduce Moisture Variations and tile resulting potential for volumetric change. Further, file. non -expansive III replaced in to undercut provides additional confining pressure to resist swell Of the underlying Soil. Beneath pavements, high plasticity swell prone soil should not used within two (2) I'M of the finished subgrade elevation. The final two (2) Sm of fill should be select material, meeting the criteria previous]), defined for engineered JUL The major limitation to the use of these materials is that they are extremely moisture and Asunbunce sensitive. Even when compaual, these soil materials may rapidly destabilize when saturated and SU1jjCCt to construction traffic. Special Conskleridions - Karst Terrane As noted previously, this site is loaded within a geologic terrane where sinkholes and other karst l"catures are. common. Development, growth an(] the uhinmic subsidence or collapse of'sinkholes is primarily influenced by sudhce water. Infiltrating acidic SUIT11CO water dissolves the rock over geologic firnescales, opening subsurface channels and conduits, and may lead to erosional lass of' overburden soils into AN in the rock, leaving sari voids above. Changes in the surface or substu-Nee hyd1imulic chmmocHsHes of a she can lead W the fbi-mation or these failures or enhance the potential For silt holes to open either gradually or catastrophically. If karst risk 9 mere Parcel — Route 50 ECS .lob A. 919=1 Page 1 , reduction is desired, in addition to geotechnical services iclr the detailed investigation, lve recouunend a geophysical Study be completed once the design and footprints fin• structures and roadways are completed. \Ve will be pleased to provide these services once the final building locations are determined. Except under the most obvious of circumstances, it is difficult to determine the exact location of sinkholes. Our review of geotechnical investigations in the area as well as geologic and sail maps, indicate that there are clusters and structurally -controlled bands of sinkholes in the geographic vicinity of the site. There are certain customary precautions which are recommended fir planning and construction that will reduce the risk of a sinkhole, collapse feature or other Hot impact Urn developing and damaging constructed roads, buildings and subsurface i n hustruchnv. As previously noted this site potentially has sinkholes or soil domes yet to be encountered. if suspect features are encountered, we recommend exploratory rock drilling prior to CollStrUctloll Of the foundation elements, tale also recommend that the following preventative measures be implemented in order to minillike and/or eliminate the potential inducement of a kal•St feature in proposed building and paved areas: 1. All earthwork operations should be graded to drain away from the building area at all times. Upon conlpletlon of daily earthwork operations. the ground surface should be sealed by thorough rollkig to minimize infiltration of precipitation and facilitate runoff: ?. All sediment control management facilities should be located outside of planned construction alvas. NVhere practical, inlets associated with storm drain systems should not be utilized as temporary sediment control devices during construction. 3. During construction; care should be taken to ininrilnze and/or elimbate the ponding of' surface water in and/or adjacent to the building or pavement areas. The foundations should be excavated and poured the same day, if possible, or the foundation soils must be plovided with a mud milt. 4. Visual observations during all carthwclrk operations should be carried out in order to detect any previous uliexposed or recently created collapse features. Any such feature should be called to the geotechnical engineer's attention fbr repair. 5. Consideration should be given to lining storm water ponds, if incorporated in the development. wide the more 'impervious clays excavated from the site to reduce bottom seepage. 6. Positive grading around buildings with a relatively ilnperviotls capping fill or tying of downspouts into storm sewer lines should also he provided to nbri nlize infiltration of' water below foundation systems. All foundation construction should be. carefully 0 0 9 Acre Parcel -- Route �O EX's Job No. 919-1 Ckloher 26. 20()7 I I, w, C I I monitored to verify the integrity of the exposed soil and rock. Where large voids or soil pipes are discovered. these areas should be excavated and restored with an inverted filter. Typically, the inverted filter consists of c(.,)arser aggregate at the bottom of the void. SUh.,,;eLlL1CJlt lifts of stone become progressively finer towards the surface or subgradc. The filler is then choked oil' with a suitable filter fabric- to prevent loss of soil fines from (lie remaining fill placed over it. 101-e specific QLlida1lCC 161- COMStRiCti011 of (lie inverted filter call be provided during site Work Nvllell the geoteclillical eligincer can closely examille the 11-ca and make the appropriate recommendations for stone sizing. For smaller Voids, it may be more effective to simply sea] these off with low strength concrete or Ly 1*0 tj 7. Rock blastim, should also be minimized to avoid opening deep fractures In the rock that might act is conduits for soil loss and enhanced corrosion. BlaStillg 011ffafiOJIS should be careflully monitored to assess the impacts 017 blasting on nearby undisturbed rock after the shot has been made. Areas of exposed rock that are cracked or fissured by blasting should be covered with sufficient soil and gaded to prevent pondin-g. If additional CV'Llftlati011 Of J)Otelltial karst risk is desired, Nve recommend COMILIctilig" additional co =.0physic, 'if Surveys of" tile planned struct-tiral locations and identified 1-eawres. Ill particular, all electrical resistivity survey of the planned fbOtjVillt Of the StJ*LlCtUJ-eS and immediate areas would assist in the evaluation of potential karst feaftlf'C development within the underINring carbonate bedrock, Subsurface characteristics, such as sinkholes, soil pockets, sub -rock voids.. solution channels, bedrock fractures, pinnacled bedrock surfaces, di-ffiurentiallv weathered lineaments and planes, and (goundwater conditions, call potentially be imaged with electrical resistivity surveys. Evaluation of the collected data would assist ill (lie delineation of* subsurface karst features and risk associated with potential karst and sinkhole development. SLlbStall1i',lI Cost savings may be realized by determining the location of potential karst features prior to final design acid the initiation ofearthwork activities and project' development. y Acre Parcel - Rome 50 hC'S 1oh No. 9194 Ocwkr 21 _'1M Page 14 Closill This report has been prepared for the civil engineer and developer to guide I ul design of` referenced property. Once Final plans are mmilable, EC'S should he retained to review the plans to detel'l bne what furlhc:r investigation of analysis of soil or foci{ conditions may be wanunted. We strongly recommend that earNmork and foundation construction activities be monitored by a qualified geotechnical engineering Firm to provide necessary overview and to determine this suitability or the suhgrade S(lil and nxic for supporting Aundmions and slabs. This will requh-e frill milt; observation and testing during earthwork activities. ' Radlc T w it S _ i �t �r ,� / `'`� 1 APPROXIMATE SITE ! J; f LOCATION 4 It •� 1. r. � 1 �- �l:'. ''+ �• � jl 7 % Al it ���) J ��� J �j',�1 f} �.- y 1. ' lr/J •••!�' i •f l� 1 "�" t.1'� l � '�r .y.%:�'t---`1C�� 1. ra•a . �j�, • s Cr ``C c j i .. t�i �r� f !� • 'T 7•' fir' lI ! ...�,�,-- Mf/. ,.r. ,.� =y�.� �/��i �1�'� � � rid �,� •�tt+Jl �'�l . } '%� /' l�j /�j 11 f �u� • ice; ,f:i',I•,. .�., -_-` ��:- �- _' l., ' � � ;,if i- ����,� -ram o -,- ,� �• I �� f 1. �l /,/ � j � � r 7 ;� � .� r; � r.�'� �• ofj} yf I, ,'' �f ;r� ��a �, - �_ �/ (; � • ! '� .��. J ti,'. � ..f } ( �• l,•'� I : (fir : ( � �. . (I} ` t �... 4 j�� - � I l 1 ,/•j r JI` �"' i' � ' �' � l r /1 (i (1 1!}�tl`�`�`'•, , � �� =�;•'\ • �•-.ti-�i , %1 � �' � r�' V `�r 1 �,� "� � 'll. 'f,�j '' � � it ��,�- ' f � 166 Windy Hill Lane \Vincliester, VA 22602 Route 50 — 9 Acre Parcel Site Topographic IMap Winchester, Virginia ECS Project 9194 iLL6 &Z 2 L TP-6 82TP.4 166 Windy Hill Lane Winchester. VA 22602 Route 50 — 9 Acre Parcel Test Pit Location Plan Winchester, Virginia EICS Project 9194 L'I I D IIE:r �11- 5 3 Tj TE S T PIT vt rff ROUTE 50 PROPERTY TP-1 LC '7 URFACE 9194 ELEVATION w NVID-ATLANTIC DEPTH .; E,,--- jFT. I FREDERICK COUNTY, VA rEfC;71FT101i OF t-'47EFIAL TOPSOIL DEPTH 12" Silly CLAY, Reddish Brown, Moist, (CL/CH) 2 G BUCKET REFUSAL @ 8.6' 10 14 m PEt, LARKS. L 7HE f TPA TIFICA 71011 L INEC REFPEfE,,.,T 7HE,4FPF0 >,'/VA TE POWIC AP L11-EI-1 T, TU T -E TRAI.ISITION VA Y-,-GR -;rV4L E.07,-,':EFFORT: E-EAS1 V - '=F,CULT VD - VEF YVIFFIC ( IL 7 CONTRACTOR! 1-"PERA TOR: UU,--'F SEIM DA TE 10/16/07 REACH: CAF,4CIT'r 1E,no'lish a a PROJECT NAVE. TEST PIT ;1: ROUTE 50 PROPERTY TP-2 LLC dop SURrACE 9194 ELEVATION: MID-/YT-I_ANTIC DEPTH ELEV. LOCATION: ARC14.1ENG: (FT.) (FT.) FREDERICK COUNTY, VA T FJCP ('.W NO COW 0— DESCRIPTION OF 14ATERIAL TOPSOIL DEPTH 12" Clayey SILT, With Rock Fragments, Ton, Moist, (IALIMH) E 2 Clayey SILT, Red, Tan, Moist, (CL) NN 4 6 8 10 xI \\N E14D OF TEST PIT @ 11.0' 14 18 22— THE S TPA TIFICA 71ON LINES REPRESENT THE APPROX(MATE BOUNDARY LINES BE TIVEEN SOIL TYPES, lN-S17'UTtIETPAI,'SITIC)1441.-I1'BECRILIUIL EXCAVATION EFFORT: E - EASY 6 1 - 1.fEDIU/; f 0 - DIFFICULT VD - VERY DIFFICULT CONTRACTOR: OPERATOR: ECS CNGP.- SBIA UAKE. MODEL: DATE: 10/16/07 REACH: UNITS: English PROD CtT tMAI:: 7C-'ST f�F"1 ii—ROUTE 50 PROPERTY TP-3 F�L— 7:F,,,, t.. CLIEItT: JOF II' SURFACE 9194 ELEVATION: MID-A'rL AN'T IC DEPTH ELEV LOCATION: r1RCF$.if ItG: (FT,J IF-T) FREDERICK COUNTY, VA 7'11"'' _ DESCRIPTION OF L,ATE"?IAL TOPSOIL DEPTH 13" X' E Clayey SILT, With thin bedded Limestone, Ton, moist, (ML/MH) 2— 4 — Silty CLAY, Red, Brown, Moist, (CL/CH) G M 8 BUCKET REFUSAL @I 9.0' 10 14 18 22 -'---- Rc`kfAF?FfS: Tf-IE STF?ATIFIC-ATI0IV LIt jES REPr-ESCPFT ThE APPP O,4FLIATE BOUNDARY LINE'S 8ETtAIEEN « OIL TYFES, Itd-SITU 77-tE TRAI,,SITioI,, t>xa Y a GRAr) viL EKCAk�,ATIOJ f EFFORT: k - EASY ,',I-VEOJUI;{ D - DIFFICULT VD - VCR DIFFICULT CONTR rCTOF? OPERATOR: ECS ENG :: r. SBIV I.3AFCE: MODEL: GATE: w 10/16/07 m rYEt,CIP: { CAPACITY: UNITS: English 0 0 =7PRO.IECT NAUE: L~ TUSTPITk ROUTE 50 PROPERTY TP-4 Y, EUU,SLLC CLIENT: do B 'V: SURFACE 9194 ELEVATION; Warn -ATLANTIC DEPTH ELEV. LOCATION. ARCR,EhIG: (FT.) (Fr) FREDERICK COUNTY, VA OR, s. -!%E fir). e.101.1 C01.111 0— DESCRIPTION OF AfATERIAL TOPSOIL DEPTH 12" E Silty CLAY, With Rock Fragments, Reddish Ton, Moist, (CL/CIA) 2 M BUCKET REFUSAL @ 3.0' 4 6 8 10 14 18 22— RUJIAPKS: THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THEAPPROXIA 1A TE B OU14Di-jp y L 11-JES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES, 114-St TLI 7HE MANSITION A M Y BE GRADUAL EXCA VA 7101V EFFORT: E - EASY J.f - t1ED1U1&1 0 - D1rF1Ctj1_T III - VERY DIFFICULT CONTRACTOR: OPERATOR: ECS ENGIR: SBIA MAKE: MODEL: DATE: 10/16/07 REACH: CAPACITY. UNITS: English E Pf�OJECT IJ.rI JE _ -- - ROUTE 50 PROPERTY TEST PIT PI: TP_6 ' LLC CLIENT.' JOB;,,: 9194 SURFACE ELEVATION. rs o-a-r�ANTIC DEPTH (r-T.) ELEV (FT.) LOCATION: FREDERICK COUNTY VA � ;Rctr.;ElrG: e,:c.w. r?i•Fi:izl' t3CP CY s.wrlc IJO. ;.to,sr. CU/Jt. _ 0 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL TOPSOIL DEPTH 14" E Silty CLAY, Red —Tan —Brawn, Moist, (CL/CH) 2 M 4— 6- silty CLAY, Reddish Brown, Moist, (CL/CH) 8— M 10 END OF TEST PIT @ 11.0' 14 18 22 — REI,t: R1rS; THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXMIATE BOUldDt'iRY LINES BETbYEEN SOIL TYPES, IN -SITU TFIE TRAIJSITIOIJ 1itAi' BE GRADUAL E}:CAV41TION EFFORT: F_ - EAST' 1.1- l.IEDIUI,I D - DIFFICULT VD - VER I'DIFFICULT CONTRACTOR: OPERATOR: ECS ENGR. SBM VARE. MODEL: DATE: 10/16/07 REACH: CAPACITY-' UNITS: English trfe/or Division N �w c n O u ry O z c .c Group 7'),P ct-t Rome. Gtr:' W6JJ-gradrzd graven, grrvcl-send mix. turut, littlt or no finis GP Poorly graded gravcit, gravol-sand mix. lures, littie or no fines d Silty gravels, grevut.sand•silt mixtures GC 1Clayey gravelt, gravel -sand -cloy mix. lures Star well-grodedsonds,gravtUyLands, little or no lints SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines $ rl Silty sandt, sand -silt mixtures SC I Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures Inorganic silts and very fins sends, c ML Foci? flour, silty or clayey fin& sands, n r or clayey silts with slight plasticity a Z P Inorganic clays of low to medium CL plasticity, gravtily clays, sinay cixys, E silty city$, Iran city$ OL Organic silts and organic silty city, of ' low plasticity a to c Inorganic tilts; micaceous or diatomtE. w MH ccous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts G CH lnorgenic clays of high plasticity, tit E iz C3N Organic claysof medium to high plasticity, organic silts '„ Pf Pact and other highly organic $sells / Lrrbcrr�rrory Ctrrtslficcrlon t�'itcrir a 9 N M Cu ,. groctcr then 4; Cc{ Cio 0 fit X D between #and GO o Z foot meeting, till gradation roquiromrnts for Gtrr' E u Z Atterberg limits bellow "A" line or P.I. lest than,4 Atmvt ..A,. lino with P.f bctt+vsen 4 and 7 are borrfar: N c w c Atterborq lirttits below "A" tint cases retlulrin use o- dual symbols g u C7 sty line With P.I. orteter then 7 o =� c C Cu " ao greater then G; Cc w Qto 1p30 ! W%van 1 and I Flo X D60 n dalion r*qu"*ments for SW E�T vrt "A'•ev '" 4 Limits plotting in hatehad with M Ln 4zone P.1. between 4 c v Y AtterNM limps above „A„ and 7 are txardarttnc atlas vtine with P.l. greater than 7 t0QUfiring use of dual sym boil a 30 V aw 20 10 i t, Plasticity Glut ■ J U 20 30 40 SO 60 70 80 90 100 U uid limit "Division of GM end Sf,R grouts into cubdivisione of d and a era for roadz and oirfialds only. Subdivision is bettd on A tttarbarQ ikntiitx; aufI d u d L.L. It 213 or fast and the P.1. it 6 rd or late; the suffix u uaWhen'L.L. Is praattr than 7tt, bSordorlint a lauaificatfont, used -for soils posaysalnp charcotoristicr of "tiro ay c daaJ suousaar, i)neted by combinations of grouts rrtbofc, For oxc:t�i�la: GW-GC, well-arodod graval.%ond mixture with city bindar, , er ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC Winchester, Virginia Laboratory Testing Summary Project Number: 9194 Project Name: RT.50 (9-ACRES) Project Engineer: JH Principal Engineer: SBM Date: 10/25/07 Summary By: =_vv Boring Number Sample Number Depth• (feet) - a • Index Percent • No. 200 Sieve• Compaction �" • Density i• Moisture ' . Summary Key: SA = See Attached S = Standard Proctor M= Modified Proctor V = Virginia Test Method OC = Organic Content Hyd = Hydrometer Con = Consolidation DS = Direct Shear GS = Specific Gravity UCS = Unconfined Compression Soil UCR = Unconfined Compression Rock LS = Lime Stabilization CS = Cement Stabilization 0 MLIPvi.xls go 97 C, U CL 95 1 93 91 Street Zero Air Voids Curve Gs 2,65 89 -1. --- - - 13 9MM, '15 '17 l9 21 23 25 27 Moisture Content Liquid Limit (LL) 49 Plastic Limit (PL) 22 Plasticity Index (P 27 Liquidity Index (LI: Description Red Clay Classification Specific Gravity 1 2.65 Test Standard I D-698 Project: Rt.50 (9-acres) Project No.: 9194. Date: 10123/2007 I Natural Moisture Content 21,6 Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve 72.2 Percent Retained on No. 4 Sieve 13.7 Percent Retained on 3/4" Sieve 0.0 Maximum Dry Density (pcf) 99.2 Optimum Moisture Content 21.6 Corr, MaximumDry Density (pcf) 105.0 Corr. Optimum Moisture Content 18.9 Percent Gravel as Tested 13.7 Percent Gravel Total Test Method A ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC Winchester, Virginia f0ofsture Density Relationship Curve PROCTOR.As 80 70 i% 60 X w z 50 U a 40 Q 30 20 10 0 R 0 CL or OL I6 IAL or OL 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 LIQUID LIMIT, LL "A" LINE MH or OH 90 100 110 BORING/ WATER SAMPLE DEPTH TEST CONTENT No, feet SYMBOL DESCRIPTION p/o LL PL PI / I r-1 b-b' u I AN ULAY 4U 11 1 18 / TP-2 2-5' : TAN CLAY 37 19 18 / TP-5 2-4' 16 RED CLAY 49 22 27 X - - - / O - - - / a - - - Project: .50 (9- L S) Project No.: 9194 Date: 10/25/2007 ECS 10id-Atlantic, LLC Winchester, Virginia Plasticity Chart 10LI(AxIs • • r Ah Virgh-da department of"Trmispoftafion wr Mail to< Virginia Department of Transportation Attn: Resident Enghleer 14031 Old Valley Pipe Edinburg, Virginia 22824 (540) 984-5600 Flalnd deliver to'. Virginia Department of Transportation Attn: Resident Engineer 2275 Norflm,estern Pike Winchester, Virginia 22603 Applicant.- Please fill out the information as accurately as possible ill order to assist the Virginnia Departinenit of Transportation) with their review, Attach three copies of your apptication foral, location lllap, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other Pertinent inlformationl. Applicant's Name: HHHunt Corporation Telephone; q 19 4E 1? 0 5 8 7 Mailing Address: 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 Carv, NC 27511 a f Location of property: The _pro erjy is located between the intersdctions of Ward Ave and Rte 50 -(to the ea§t) and Round Hill Rd and Rte 50 (to the west) on the south side of Rte 50. r,urrent zoning: RA Zoning requested: H 2 Acreage: 10.2 319 Via°ginnia Department of'fr ansportatioll ComitneaAs: See attached email from VDOT to Bm man Consulting Group dated May 12, 2008. VDOTignatnin R Date: t� = 05/12 08 -- Notice to VDOT -):Tease Retur.n Form to Applicant 18 1tVLl. LI.. Jll 170J1JLVL.I. 1-1 V111` 1 CIL•111Ly - 11.1111 LEI IL �-V1 iJV 1 CILI V II - V 1JV 1 VV11111 o-I I LJ LV 1�-UI I 116 Chris Oldharn From: Cody Francis Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 10:48 AM TO: Chris Oldham; Michael Pointer; Eric Meske Subject: FW: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility - HHHunt Corporation - VDOT Comments to Rezoning Attachments: SCN_20080512'122928_001.pdf J.W. Cody Francis, P.E. Bowman Consulting Group 571-436-1002 cell F6 oin: Funl<houser, Rhonda [mailto:Rhonda.Funl<houser@VDOT.Virginia.gov] On Behalf Of Ingram, Lloyd Seat: Monday, May 12, 2008 12:30 PM To: Cody Francis Cc: Ingram, Lloyd; Eric Lawrence Subject:: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility - HHHunt Corporation - VDOT Comments to Rezoning The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a measurable impact on Route 50. This route is the VDOT roadways which has been considered • as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is not.-sadsfied that the-transp-Qrtation_.protFers ofifered; no proffers were offered addressing transportation. 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. Trip Generation Manual,_ Seventh .Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right-of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. <<SCN_20080512'l 22928_001. pdf>> Lloyd A. Ingrain, Transportation Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Edinburg Residency - Land Development 14031 Old Valley dike Edinburg-, Virginia 22824 Phone #(540) 984-5611 Fax #(540) 984-5607 5/20/2008 • 0 0 Department of 11mining and Development 54W665065I FAX: =6650395 W V100.1"A NOT wy I , Al}i NIr. W.R. (Zook—Ir. III i I lent Corporation 117 F. Edinburgh South. To WO Care. North Carolina 27511 RE: Request for Hisiot•ic Resources Advisoi-)' Boa t-d (14RB) Comments route SO Assisted Li`•mb Faacilit� Rezoning f'i!NS #-53-A-8I, *53-A-82, -53B-3-25 Dear IMr. Cook: Upon review of the proposed rezoning. it appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a 1'o1•mal review of the • rezoning application by the I-IRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study, of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. 'Hiank you l'or the chance to comment on this application. Please call if YOU have anS- gtwsHons or concerns. Sincerer'. Amber Powrs Planninu 'I'echniciata ALP*hd Vf.) "°4ov ll. 'V,-!nm sirnh Me 202 a Wi3ZS.ht,.i$k..'n Fron LIFESAFE 0 02/20/2008 16:09 i #807 P.002/002 • • Control number RZOO-0003 Project Name Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Address 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 Type Application Rezoning Current Zoning RA Automatic Sprinkler System Yes Other recommendation Emergency Vehicle Access Not identified Siamese Location Not Identified Emergency Vehicle Access Comments Access Comments Additional Comments Date received Date reviewed Date Revised 2/1912008 2/20/2008 Applicant HHHunt Corporation City State Zip Applicant Phone Cary NC 27511 919-461-0587 Tax ID Number Fire District Rescue District 53-A-81, etc. 15 15 Recommendations Automatic Fire Alarm System Yes Requirements Hydrant Location Not Identified Roadway/Aisleway Width Not Identified Election District Back Creek Residential Sprinkler System No Fire Lane Required Yes Special Hazards No Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Signature . Yes J. Neal Title ..ft-1 ,- �V 19c(). '5- 13 R-o 1--o a3 E C7 • April 10, 2008 Mr. Christopher Oldham Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. 124 East Cork Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Public Works 540/665-5643 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 BiMAN CMITIN ; APR I I N RECEIVED RE: Rezoning Application and Master Development (MDP) Plan for Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Frederick County, Virginia Dear Mr. Oldham: We have completed our review of the rezoning application and MDP for the proposed Assisted Living Facility located off of Route 50 in Frederick County, Virginia and offer the following comments: 1. Refer to the Impact Analysis under suitability of the site: The discussion of the bedrock should be expanded to address the potential for sinkhole development within the limestone which underlies the entire site. 2. Refer to the Impact Analysis under drainage: Indicate if there are sufficient off -site drainage channels and/or culverts to accommodate the storm flows derived from the proposed stormwater management facility. Also, indicate if the proposed stormwater pond will be designed as a BMP facility to attenuate storm flows and maximize nutrient removal. 3. Refer to Impact Analysis under Solid Waste Disposal Facilities: Expand the narrative to include an estimate of the yearly solid waste in tons produced by the proposed development. 4. Refer to Impact Analysis under Impact on Community Facilities: Explain the reference to the impact on the City of Winchester when Frederick County provides all the services required by the proposed development. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 is Route 50 Rezoning pp.__.ition and Master Development Pan t Page 2 April 1O, 2008 5. Refer to the Wetland Assessment prepared by ECS: This assessment indicates a topographic high of 825 MSL with approximately 20 feet of total relief. This observation is in conflict with the plan of the existing natural conditions prepared by Bowman Consulting which indicates a topographic high of 843.6 with approximately 35 feet of relief. This conflict needs to be corrected. 6. Refer to the MDP, sheet 2 of 3: Delineate any karst features which could impact the site development. 7. Refer to the MDP, sheet 2 of 3: Indicate the locations of any existing wells and/or drainfields which will need to be properly abandoned to accommodate development. These features currently exist on the property identified as Map I.D: 5313-3-25. S. Refer to the MDP, sheet 3 of 3: Any site development should be designed to insure that storm runoff is diverted to the proposed stormwater managementBMP facility and away from the single family residences fronting on Ward Avenue. I can be reached at 722-8214 if you have any questions concerning the above comments. Sincerely, • QLI Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works Y • HES/rls Cc: Mike Ruddy, Planning and Development file U:\rsargen t\Rh on da\TEMP COMMENTS\RT50W ASSISTEDLIVINGREZ&MDPCOM. doc • 0 • Rezoning Comments >F`z-ederick--Whichester Service Aiahority ma l tq:, Hand deliver to; Fred -Wilk Service Authority Fred -Winn Service Authority Atliz: Jesse W, Moffett, Executive Director Affn:.Jesse W. ivlofjfbtt P.D. Box 43 107 North Itent Street AVirichester, Virginia 22604 Winchester, Vil-Onia (5110) 722-3579 Applicant: Ptense fill otif 11-jo infori7latiorr as �iecuratcJy as ossi�te in order to assist T P the 1 red-Winc Service Authority With their review Attach a copy of',yocrz• applicntioll form, locatio na"p, Proffer staterzlent, impact analysis, lad ally other Por tinent information. Applicant's Name: HHHunt Corporation Tel eph.orae: ( 919 ) 4 61--0587 Mailing Address. _117 Edinburgh South, Suites 100 ��, IVC 27511 Locatioar of pj,operty: The Property_ is located between the intersections of Ward Ave and Rte 50 (to, the east.) and Round Hill Rd and Rte 50 (to the west.) on the south side of Rte 50. CUrrent zoning: RA Zoning requested: B 2 Acreage: 10 . 2 319 T'zed���izzz: Ser^�ice Azrthority's Cornzazczzts: Free{- Winc Sexvice A Signature & Date: bs Y Notice to Fred-Whic Service Authority - Please Return form to AvOicant :> I a -d CDT T D-•, A.L I Novii U AN3S 3H I M L''T•I, DT 80 DC -Idu 0 • • Rezoninf4 Comments Frederick County Sanitation Authority Mail to: Frederick County Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer P.O. Box 1877 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (540) 868-1061 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer 315 Tasker Road Stephens City, Virginia Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Sanitation Authority with their review. Attach a copy of your application form, location xnap, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent information, 11 Applicant's Name: HHHunt Corporation Telephone: (919) 4 61- 0 5 8 7 Mailing Address: 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 Carv, NC 27511 Location of property: The property is located between the intersections of Ward Ave and Rte 50 (to the east) and Round Hill Rd and Rte 50 (to the wrist) on the south side of Rte 50 Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: B 2 Acreage: 10.2 319 Sanitation Authority Comments: 72Z- '43F S//004.0 �f SU�i�ic'/,F��i" 5•cvs�.F'�4 �i�Q �/� Tr�'R �".9�,��G'/�Y T o S,Eip �i�- T.�/S �•4 Sanitation Authority Signature & Date: f��©'f'Vf/�/%?l'L /4P11�?06 Notice to Sanitation Authority Please Return This Form to the Applicant 23 Frederick -Winchester Health Departmept Mail to: Frederick -Winchester Health Department Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Dent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 722-3480 Hand deliver to: Frederick-Whichester Health Department Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Dent Street Suite 201 Winchester, Virginia Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Frederick -Winchester Health Department with their review. Attach a copy of your application form, location neap, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent information. Applicant's Name: HHHunt Corporation Telephone: (919) 461-0587 Mailing Addross: 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 Carr, NC 27511 Location of property, The property is located between the intersecti.orms of Ward Ave and Rte 50 (to the east) and Round Hill Rd and Rte 50. (to the west) on the south side of -Rte 50. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: B 2 Frederie- Winchester Health Department's Comments* Acreage! 10 .2319 I Unless the proposal has changed since the attached health department comments gent to the omner, those eoM:-n--m--e-ntS are- Still- valid-'f RTC Wp) 11 Health Dept. Signature & Date: Notice to .Health Department - Please Return This Form to the Applicant 24 • Frederick Cou Virginia Mastoevelopment Plan Application Package Request for Master Development Plan Comments • Frederick County -Winchester Health Department D Mail to: Hand deliver to: 0 2 J 2" Fredericic-Winchester Health Department 21id Floor, Suite 200 Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 N. Kent Street 107 N. Kent Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 722-3480 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach one (1) copy of the MDP with the sheet. Applicant's Name: HHHunt Corporation Address: 117 Edinburgh South, Suite 100 Cary, NC 27511 Phone Number: (919) 4 61- 0 5 8 7 Name of development and/or description of the request: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility `- Locationofproperty: The property is located between the intersections • of Ward Ave and Rte 50 (to the east) and Round Hill Rd and Rte 50 (to the west) on thessouth side of Rte 50. Freden7c1c County -Winchester Health Department's Comments: � Page 29 RECENEO ��b • E U • is I+redericli, County Department of Parks & Recreation Mail to: Frederick County Department of Parks &Recreation 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 665-5678 Hand deliver to: 1734 Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation County Administration Bldg., 2nd Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Viiginia Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order td assist the Department of Parks & Recreation with their review. Attach a copy of your application form, location Inap, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent Applicant's Name: HHHunt Corporation Telephone: (919) 461-0587 Mailing Address: 117 Edinburgh South, Suibb 100 Cary, NC 27511 Location of property: The prpperty is located between the intersections of Ward Ave and Rte 50 (to the Bast) and Round Hill Rd and Rte 50 to the west) on the south side of Rte 50. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: B 2 Acreage: 1 0 3 i 9 Department of Parlcs & Recreation Comments: Pks. & Rec, ,Signature & Date: L�04, Notice to Department offarlcs & Recreation - Please Return This Form to the Applicant 21 • • -/ o1-6vy 0 ols Fre erick County tau Ec Schools . to ensure all 5tudent-s an excellent education FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHERT 3 2i To: Cody fillilds From wgYae ;f e Coardin-ator of -Phau ng and Deve1optaeent FAx Nu i Rl;ft: (540) 722-5080 t)A#o: %larch 13, 2008 (COMPANY- TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING OVER: 3 Q i LENT ❑ roe. iiLviLw Q P'LLASTS COMMI:NT ❑ r),I A8L RMI .S� RP-C er 1. Notes aind rcps comments application. Comments: re: Route 50 Assisted Living 1=acility rezoning application and master development plan 1`f10 AfnnefSkwreel P.O. Box 3508 Winchester, V11 h1a 22604.2540 Yn1A'V,f 0de-nCK,KI4Va,V5 D4V100/--300!j CXL 0041tu 540-662-4237 fax leev t N-deduk112.vo.us J 0 tiporinteiident of Frederick County Public Schools AMU to: Ftbdbricle Comity Nblic Schools Aft, is Superh tendmt P.O. Box -3509 Winchester, Vugiziia 22604 (540) 662-3988 .land deliver, to: Frederick Comfy PLiblic Sobools A.tttl; 8'aperintendent School A.dmi.iistration Building 1415 Amherst Street Winchester, Virginia it: Please fill out the hiformation as aepiamteiy as possible in ordex to assisi the mdont of Public Soliools With his mview. Attach a copy of your al)pReation fama, XJ aj), pf-offer stf.tcxnent, impact anftlysis, and any oth&r pertinent In-for1 Adopt qfS NaMe. HHHUnt Corpoz at; on Telophone: (919) 4 q 1- 0 5 8 7 Address: 11.7 Edinburgh South k Suite 1.00 Carve IBC 27511 ion of plol7crtiy: ThP .p? � +� t r_is located. 'bet:weea .the :Lntersections Vard, Ave and Rte 50 (to the Oast;) an.e7. Roun.d...tHi.11' Rd anal_-Rte_ 50 on the south side of Rte 50. idiot zoning: RA GonWg requested: 1�2 Acrearr 10. 2319 intendent of Public, Schools' Comments: m ignatme & Date: Notice to School uperinfendent.- Return- This Foi-m to the Applic,,iut `IV121) - BOWMAN r,0;,MSPUL'T1NGi' L. Preston Bryant, Jr. Secretary n/'Acaturai Resources January 25, 2008 ,7, Department of Historic Resources 2801 Kensington Avenue, Richinnond, Virginia 23221 Chris Oldham Bowman Consulting Group 124 East Creek Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Detailed Archives Search Route 50 Assisted Living, Health Care Facility Dear Mr. Oldham: Thank you for your recent request for information from our archives on prevlot archaeological and architectural resources within the area of potential effect, < map, for the above -referenced project. Please note that your request for infor Department of Historic Resources (DHR) Archives concerning the location of not relieve you or your client from possible obligations under state or federal f regulations. I strongly recommend that you contact Dr. Ethel Eaton of the DH and Review Division at (804) 367-2323, extension 112, if you have any quest and federal regulatory requirements, Kathleen S. Kilpatrick Director Tel: (804) 367-2323 Fax: (804) 367-2391 TDD: (804) 367-2386 wwiv.dhr.virgiuia.gov isly recorded is delineated on your nation from the iistoric resources does istoric preservation R's Resource Services ins concerning state Enclosed are the maps showing the locations of any archaeological or archit ctural resources within your project area. Copies of files on resources found within your project area are also enclosed. These copies include survey and site forms, photographs, and other pertinen material. Also included is a spreadsheet printout from our architectural database with information on properties within your project area. The printout contains the DHR file numbE r, resource name, register status (the "V/N" column), eligibility status ("Y" for potentially eligible, `N" for not potentially eligible and blank if not previously evaluated by DHR), and date of eligiletermination. We have also examined our records for information concerning eligibility determinations for archaeological sites within your project area. If any such determinations have been made, a spreadsheet printout from our archaeological database with information on si es within your project area has been included. The printout contains the DHR site number, resour e name, register status, eligibility status ("Y" for eligible, "N" for not eligible, "potentially" if found pote tially eligible and blank if not previously evaluated by DHR), and date of eligibility determination. is for the charges incurred through your use of o jr archives search Finally, an invoice enclosed service. Administrative Services Capital Region CIA= Tidewater Region Office Roanoke Region Office 1030 Penman Avenue, G 1Ninelicster Region Office Suite 203 10 Courthouse Ave. 2801 Kensington Office 14415 Old Courthouse Way Floor Roanoke, VA �4013 A 22601 W ilclieslee VA Petersburg, VA 23803 Tel: (804) 863-1624 Richmond, VA 23221 Tel: (804) 367 2323 Newport News,VA 23608 Fax: (54(1) 857 7588 5 22 ; 2 Fax:((54U) 722 7535 Fax: (804)862-6190 Fax: (804) 367-2391 Tel: (757)886-_807 Fax: (757) 886-2808 DHR serves as the official state repository on historic resources. This informal compiled primarily by independent cultural resource consultants. DHR makes fitness of the data for any purpose. The absence of historic resources in DHR necessarily mean that no historic properties are present. It is advisable to chef government planning offices for information on any properties that may meet tf significance tests of the National Register criteria and have not yet been recor( archives. Also, the area in question may not have been systematically survey( possibly necessitating a survey and submittal of that data with your Project Re, Please contact me at (804) 367-2323, extension 125, if I may be of further assl Sincerely, Ann Drur.,y�ellfoi{d� Archives - DHR Administrative Services Capital Region Office Tidewater Region Office t0 Courthouse Ave. 2801 Kensington Office 14415 Old Courthouse Way Petersburg, VA 23803 Richmond. VA 23221 2"" Floor Tel: (804) 863-1624 Tel: (804) 367 2323 Newport News, VA 23608 Fax: (804) 862-6196 Fax: (804) 367-2391 Tel:(757)886-2807 Fix: (757)886-2808 Roanoke Region Office 1030 Penmar Avenue, SE Roanoke, VA 24013 Tel: (540) 857-7585 Fax: (540) 857-7588' )n has been o warranty as to the cords does not ( with local age and .d in the DHR for resources, lew application. �tance. Winchester Region Office 107 N. Kent Sheet, Suite 203 Winchester. VA 22601 Tel: (540) 722-3427 Fax: (540) 722-7535 Project Site 1 CIO -of • 'O 034 0469 034 0467 034-0354 44FK0533 j ^ r t 453 r . fj Y — r- 034-0470 f r• .- - 034 1153 ■; 44FK0514 �# ! _ tdS ' i 16 ZIP 78 r 034-0466 I An n. , r �. y l �► "sl 4.. , 034-1 154 ,1 — y �} • %` ` { ltiLj; yy itiy +r . r f f iryf,,5 44FK05157�it lb f Route 50 Assisted Living, Health Care Facility 0 0.125 0.25 0.5Miles Bowman Consulting Group Winchester Quad/Frederick County 0 Archaeological Sites 01/25/2008 Architectural ResourcE Drury WellfordNDHR 0 • 0 Architectural Resource DHR# Resource Name Cit /Count Re i/Ease 034-0346 Linden (Lupton -Woods House. 301 Round Hill Rd) Frederick 034-0354 Singhas House Frederick 034-0466 Renner, Charles, House Frederick 034-0467 Old Hoover Place Frederick 034-0469 Folk Victorian Farmhouse, Rt. 50 Frederick 034-0470 Farmhouse, Rt. 50 Frederick 034-1153 House 100 Stonewall Dr. Frederick 034-1154 House, 101 Stonewall Dr. Frederick Architectural Resource Comment Eli i? I Eli i Date destroyed, July 2006 (fire) Y 22-Sep-94 N 23-Aug-94 N 23-Aug-94, N 23-Aug-94 N 23-Aug-94 VIRGINIA File no. 34-346 DIVISION OF HISTORIC LAT�TDMARKS Ne n s . 9621 HISTORIC DISTRICT/BRIEF SURVEY FORM City/Town/Village/Hamlet rural county County Frederick Street address or route number Route 803 U.S.G.S. Quad Winchester Historic name The Lupton —Woods House Common name Linden Present use residential Building Style vernacular Original use residential Building Date(s) c . 1840--1860 1. Construction Materials wood frame ❑ brick bond: ❑ English ❑ Flemish ❑ -course American ❑ stretcher ❑ other ❑ stone ❑ random rubble ❑ coursed rubble ❑ ashlar ❑ dressed ❑ rock -faced ❑ log: ❑ squared notching. ❑ V-notch ❑ saddle ❑ square ❑ concrete block ❑ terra cotta ❑ steel frame ❑ other 2. Cladding Material ❑ weatherboard 0 vertical siding Eboard & batten ❑ shingle: ❑ wood ❑ asbestos ❑ asphalt ❑ bricktex ❑ other ❑ unsquared ❑ half dovetail ❑ full dovetail ❑ diamond ❑ composition siding ❑ stucco ❑ aluminum or vinyl siding ❑ cast iron ❑ sheet metal ❑ enameled metal ❑ glass 3. SStt,°ries (number) 2 2 Y9 low basement split—level raised basement 4. Bxys (number): front 3 side (church) symmetrical ❑ asymmetrical 5. Roof Type ❑ shed hipped ❑ part? ❑ pyramidal? ❑ gable ❑ mansard ❑ pediment? ❑ false mansard ❑ parapet? ❑ gambrel ❑ clipped end? ❑ flat ❑ cross gable? ❑ parapet? ❑ central front gable?' ❑ roof not visible ❑ other 6. Roofing Material' ❑ shingle ❑ composition (asphalt, asbestos, etc.) ❑ wood C� metal C� standing seam ❑ corrugated ❑ pressed tin (simulated shingles) ❑ the ❑ pantile ❑ flat ❑ glazed ❑ slate ❑ not visible 7. Dormers (number): 0 front side ❑ gable ❑ pediment? ❑ shed ❑ hipped 8. Primary Pare I style Colonial Revival S[OReS 1 levels full height bays 3 _ materials wood description and decorative details Tuscan columns: plain balusters and handrails i 9. General supplementary description and decoration: paired 1/1 windows; 2 interior end brick chimneys; paired frieze windows; cellar vent windows w/ wooden bars; i di;:i, detail; ti /ti � 10. Major additions and alterations: windows on side; L— side screened —in porch; shaped plan w/ int, endl enclosed rear ells porches chimney; rear 1—story 11. Outbuildings: 2—story porches; side concrete block shed; screened in porch frame shed; modern plv- 12. Landscape Features: mature trees; apple orchard; old cistern to side of orchard 13. Significance: Only board —and —batten sided dwelling that surveyor has found in this area of the county. Surveyed by: Maral Kalbian Date: 6 / 8 9 Prmlary Sources t Published Sources Quarles, Garland R. Some Old Homes in Frederick County, Virginia, 1971, p. 199--201, #98. Plan and Massing (Note original features, additions, and alterations) Drawing of Plan i Sketch of Site Plan Interviews Name Address Phone Date Name Address Phone Date Name Address Phone Date Historical Information P. Quarles, 199--201, #98. I VIRGINIA DIVISION OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS HISTORIC DISTRICT/BRIEF ("'" SURVEY FORM File no. 3 Negative n s . City/Town/Village/Hamlet Rural County County Frederick Street address or route number Route 50 at Route 37 U.S.G.S. Quad Winchester Historic name Common name Sinahas House Present use residential Building Style vernacular Original use residential Building Date(s) late 18th-early 19th century 1. Construction Materials ❑ wood frame ❑ brick bond: ❑ English ❑ Flemish ❑ -course American ❑ stretcher ❑ other ❑ stone ❑ random rubble ❑ coursed rubble ❑ ashlar ❑ dressed ❑ rock -faced ©slog: ❑ squared ❑ unsquared notching. ❑ V-notch ❑ half dovetail ❑ saddle ❑ full dovetail ❑ square ❑ diamond ❑ concrete block ❑ terra cotta ❑ steel frame ❑ other 2. Cladding Material ❑ weatherboard ❑ vertical siding ❑ board & batten ❑ shingle: ❑ wood ❑ asbestos ❑ asphalt ❑ bricktex ❑ other ❑ composition siding ©"stucco ❑ aluminum or vinyl siding ❑ cast iron ❑ sheet metal ❑ enameled metal ❑ glass 3. Stories (number) 2 r ❑ low basement aised basement 4. Ba (number): front 4 side (church) symmetrical ❑ asymmetrical 5. Roof Type ❑ shed -parapet? © gable ❑ pediment? ❑ parapet? ❑ clipped end? ❑ cross gable? ❑ central front gable? ❑ other ❑ hipped ❑ pyramidal? ❑ mansard ❑ false mansard ❑ gambrel ❑ flat ❑ parapet? ❑ roof not visible 6. Roofing Material ❑ shingle ❑ composition (asphalt, asbestos, etc.) P wood © mevdl m standing seam ❑ corrugated ❑ pressed tin (simulated shingles) ❑ We ❑ pantile ❑ flat ❑ glazed ❑ slate ❑ not visible 7. Dormers (number): front side ❑ gable ❑ pediment? ❑ shed 13 hipped 8. Primary Porch style wprn a ri i l a r stories 1 levels full rpi c>bt. bays 3 materials wand description and decorative details CJlncr ri i n i,dth = 1 ast i r sheet i ng,; ,sepia rp ­j33D lnrt-.; ,plain haliici-Arg anrd handrail-_ 9. General supplementary description and decoration: 6/6 windows; 1 central chimney; square attic windows in gable end; 2-story rear ell with interior end flue 10. Major additions and alterations: new stucco; 1-story rear wir new paired 6/2 windows on side elevatior.;l-story rear porch enclosed 11. Outbuildings: stone spr ing,/wel !house (?) with split-shE roof and narrow "gun -slit" windows --eighteenth centui frame garage 12. Landscape Features: very overgrown yard.; Route 37 runs alongside 13. Significance: Interesting stone outbuilding in front o', house; property is threatened by proximity to Route 37 and new construction nearby. Surveyed by: Leslie Giles Date: 06/89 ?rimary Sources Published Sources Plan and Massing (Note original features, additions, and alterations) Drawing of Plan n Sketch of Site Plan �4v4e ctd�)ttij((I 11C Name Address Phone Date Name Address Phone Date Name Address Phone Date Historical Information I VIRGINIA w File no. —a DIVISION OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS kNega've nos . 9796 HISTORIC DISTRICT/BRIEF ,' 0•yp4R T4''' ' - SURVEY FORM City/Town/Village/Hamlet rural county County Frederick Street address or route number Route 50 U.S.G.S. Quad Winchester Historic name Common name Marl ac RannPr Rn„c:a Present use residential Building Style Colonial Revival, Amer. 4—Squar� Original use residential Building Date(s) c. 1932, 1940s 1. Construction Materials 3. Stories (number) 2 j Cv7 wood frame C� low basement ❑ raised basement 4. Bays (number): front 2 side (church) ❑ brick bond: ❑ English ❑ symmetrical asymmetrical ❑ Flemish 5. Roof Type 1 ❑ -course American ❑ stretcher ❑ shed d1 hi ped El other ❑ parapet? pyramidal? ❑ stone ❑ gable ❑ mansard ❑ random rubble ❑ pediment? ❑ false mansard ❑ coursed rubble ❑ parapet? ❑ gambrel ❑ ashlar ❑ dressed ❑ clipped end? " ❑ flat ❑ rock -faced ❑ cross gable? ❑ parapet? ❑ log: ❑ central front gable? ❑ roof not visible ❑ squared ❑ unsquared ❑ other ` notching: 6. Roofing Material ❑ V-notch ❑ half dovetail ❑ saddle ❑ full dovetail 1 ❑ square ❑ diamond NJ shy' gle ❑ concrete block 6d composition (asphalt, asbestos, etc.) ❑ terra cotta ❑ wood ❑ steel frame ❑ metal ❑ other ❑ standing seam ❑ corrugated ❑ pressed tin (simulated shingles) 2. Cladding Material ❑tile ❑ pantile ❑ flat ❑ glazed ❑ weatherboard ❑ composition siding ❑ slate ❑ vertical siding ❑ stucco ❑ not visible ❑ board & batten ❑ aluminum or vinyl siding 7. Dormers (number): front side k ❑ shingle: ❑ cast iron ❑ wood ❑ sheet metal ❑ gable ❑ pediment? . . ❑ asbestos ❑ enameled metal ❑ hed ❑ asphalt ❑ glass hipped ❑ bricktex 8. Primary Porch other brick fari nq style Praftsmanr stories 1 levels full height bays 2 materials wnod, hri ck f description and decorative details '= square battered columns on brick piers; plain dal test rs and handrail-, 9. General supplementary description and decoration: Paired 3/1 wind ilti—pane door w/ multi —pane sidelights; ext. end dmney; 2-pane cellar windows; flat arches over windc 10. Major additions and alterations: House was moved approximatel 00 yards from its previous site; 2—story rear porch 11. Outbuildings: Smokehouse w/ quarters/storage upstairs; yramidally hipped roof garage; board and batten barn; rame shed; ruins of summer kitchen. 12. Landscape Features: Mature trees and shrubs. 13. Significance: House, smokehouse, garage moved back w/ t widening of Route 50 (barn was originally behind and to the side of the house). Surveyed by: Date: Leslie .Giles 7/89 Primary Sources Interviews Name Mrs. Charles Renner Address Route 50 Winchester, VA 22601 Phone Date 7/89 Name Address Published Sources Phone Date Name Address Phone Date Plan and Massing (Note original features, additions, and alterations) Drawing of Plan Sketch of Site Plan L-J Historical Information VIRGINIA DIVISION OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS HISTORIC DISTRICT/BRIEF SURVEY FORM File no. 34-467 Negative nos . 9796 City/Town/Village/Hamlet rural county County Frederick Street address or route number Off Route 50 U.S.G.S. Quad Winchester Historic name Common name The Old Hoover Place Present use residential Building Style vernacular Original use residential Building Dates) c. 1840--1860 1, Construction Materials 3. ries (number) St Plow basement ❑ raised basement ❑ wood frame 4. Bays (number): front side (church) dd symmetrical ❑ asymmetrical ❑ brick bond: ❑ English ❑ Flemish 5. Roof Type ❑ -course American ❑ stretcher ❑ shed ❑ hipped ❑ other parapet? ❑ pyramidal? ❑ stone dd gable ❑ mansard ❑ random rubble ❑ pediment? ❑ false mansard ❑ coursed rubble ❑ parapet? ❑ gambrel ❑ ashlar ❑ dressed ❑ rock -faced d iog: ❑ clipped end? ,. ❑ flat ❑ cross gable? ❑ parapet? ❑ central front gable? ❑ roof not visible ❑ squared ❑ unsquared ❑ other notching: ❑ V-notch ❑ half dovetail 6. Roofing Material ❑ saddle ❑ full dovetail ❑ square ❑ diamond ❑ shingle ❑ concrete block ❑ composition (asphalt, asbestos, etc.) ❑ terra cotta /El wood ❑ steel frame tal ❑ other standing seam ❑ corrugated ❑ pressed tin (simulated shingles) 2. Cladding Material El/Weatherboard ❑ composition siding ❑ the ❑ pantile El flat El glazed ❑ slate ❑ vertical siding ❑ stucco ❑ not visible ❑ board & batten ❑ aluminum or vinyl siding 7. Dormers (number): front s e S ❑ shingle: ❑ cast iron ❑ wood ❑ sheet metal ❑ gable ❑ pediment? - - ❑ asbestos ❑ enameled metal ❑ shed ❑ asphalt ❑ glass ❑ hipped ❑ bricktex 8. Primary Porch ❑ other style vernacular stories 1 levels full heiciht bays 3 t, materials wood description and decorative details Turned columns. s 9. General supplementary description and decoration: 6/6 windows; German lap weatherboard on sides; 1—story kitchen ell paired 6/6 sash and 6—pane casement windows; original 10. Major additions and alterations: INew ext. end concrete block flue; new shutters;rear e side porch enclosed c. 1900--1920 w/ German lap sidin 11. Outbuildings: Board and batten chicken house; frame garage. 12. Landscape Features: Mature trees and shrubs; located • - along an apple orchard. 13. Significance: One of the oldest houses in the immediat area; threatened by commercial.:growth around the new hospital complex. iSurveyed by: Leslie Giles Date: 7/89 P:inary Sources Published Sources Plan and Massing (Note original features, additions, and alterations) Drawing of Plan Sketch of Site Plan (! itii c�[ eve I�cu�R- cS Interviews Name Address Phone Date Name Address Phone Date Name Address Phone Date Historical Wormation ba VIRGINIA DIVISION OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS ' o HISTORIC DISTRICT/BRIEF SURVEY FORM File no. 34-46c) Negative no(s).9796 City/Town/Village/Hamlet rural county County Frederick Street address or route number Route 50 U.S.G.S. Quad Winchester Historic name Common name Present use residential Original use residential I. Construction Materials & wood frame ❑ brick bond: ❑ English ❑ Flemish ❑ -course American ❑ stretcher ❑ other ❑ stone ❑ random rubble ❑ coursed rubble ❑ ashlar ❑ dressed ❑ rock -faced ❑ log: ❑ squared notching: ❑ V-notch ❑ saddle ❑ square ❑ concrete block ❑ terra cotta ❑ steel frame ❑ other ❑ unsquared ❑ half dovetail ❑ full dovetail ❑ diamond 2. Cladding Material weather oar lap ❑ composition siding ❑ vertical siding ❑ stucco ❑ board & batten ❑ aluminum or vinyl siding ❑ shingle: ❑ cast iron ❑ wood ❑ sheet metal ❑ asbestos ❑ enameled metal ❑ asphalt ❑ glass ❑ bricktex ❑ other Building Style Folk Victorian Building Date(s)c• 1880--1900 3. Stories (number) 2 ❑ low basement raised basement 4. Brs (number): front 3 side (church) S symmetrical ❑ asymmetrical 5. Roof Type ❑ shed ❑ hipped P parapet? ❑ pyramidal? gable ❑ mansard ❑ pediment? ❑ false mansard ❑ parapet? ❑ gambrel ❑ clipped end? ❑ flat ross gable? ❑ parapet? central front gable? ❑ roof not visible ❑ other 6. Roofing Material ❑ shingle ❑ composition (asphalt, asbestos, etc.) ewood tal standing seam ❑ corrugated ❑ pressed tin (simulated shingles) ❑ the ❑ pantile ❑ flat ❑ glazed ❑ slate ❑ not visible 7. Dormers (number): front X,ide'_ ❑ gable ❑ pediment? ❑ shed ❑ hipped 8. Primary Porch style Folk Victorian stories 1 levels full height bays materials wood description and decorative details Turned columns; decorative brackets. 9. General supplementary description and decoration: 2/2 pointed Got windows in central front gable; paired square f-light attic windows in gable ends; 2-pane cellar windows; 10. Major additions and alterations: Concrete block foundation (moved from across the road the iTid6ning of Route 50); rear 1-story side porch en U. Outbuildings: - Modern misc. sheds. 12. Landscape Features: Surrounded by orchards. 13. Significance: A large late-19th century farmhouse w fine Folk Victorian detailing. Surveyed by: Date: Leslie Giles 7/89 Primary Sources Interviews Name Address Phone Date Name Address Published Sources Phone Date Name Address Phone Date Plan and Massing (Note original features, additions, and alterations) Drawing of Plan Sketch of Site Plan t� S A 4 Historical Information Owned by C. L. Robinson Co. Orchards. �i OLIX"� 5 U r i T VIRGINIA File no. 34-470 i Ne ative no s). 9796 DIVISION OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS °.• HISTORIC DISTRICT/BRIEF SURVEY FORM City/Town/ Village/ Hamlet rural county County Frederick Street address or route number Route 50 U.S.G.S. Quad Winchester Historic name Common name Present use residential Building Style vernacular Original use residential Building Date(s)c.. 1890--1910, C. 1898 1. Construction Materials 3. Stffiies (number) 2 1 0 low basement split level raised basement 9 wood frame ❑ brick 4. BVs (number): front side (church) bond: ❑ English I 19symmetrical ❑ asymmetrical ❑ Flemish ❑ -course American ❑ stretcher ❑ other ❑ stone ❑ random rubble ❑ coursed rubble ❑ ashlar ❑ dressed ❑ rock -faced ❑ log: ❑ squared notching: ❑ V-notch ❑ saddle ❑ square ❑ concrete block ❑ terra cotta ❑ steel frame ❑ other 2. Cladding Material ❑ unsquared ❑ half dovetail ❑ full dovetail ❑ diamond dweatherb&d7man +ffomposition siding ❑ vertical siding ❑ stucco ❑ board & batten ❑ aluminum or vinyl siding ❑ shingle: ❑ cast iron ❑ wood ❑ sheet metal ❑ asbestos ❑ enameled metal ❑ asphalt ❑ glass ❑ bricktex ❑ other 5. Roof Type ❑ shed ❑ hipped Vl parapet? ❑ pyramidal? gable ❑ mansard ❑ pediment? ❑ false mansard ❑ parapet? ❑ gambrel ❑ clipped end? ❑ flat ❑ cross gable? ❑ parapet? ❑ central front gable? ❑ roof not visible ❑ other: 6. Roofing Material ❑ shingle ❑ composition (asphalt, asbestos, etc.) wood EZ metal [d standing seam ❑ corrugated ❑ pressed tin (simulated shingles) - ❑ the ❑ pantile ❑ flat ❑ glazed ❑ slate ❑ not visible 7. Dormers (number): front stde'' ❑ gable ❑ pediment? ❑ shed ❑ hipped 8. Primary Porch style vernacular stories 1 levels full heictht bays 5 materials wood description and decorative details Square columns; plain balusters and handrail 9. General supplementary description and decoration: 2/2 windows; in nd flue; stone foundation covered w/ concrete; paired —light attic windows in gable ends; 2—story rear ell S Major additions an on exterior, 11. Outbuildings: Frame shed. 12. Landscape Features: Mature trees; sits on hill; pring nearby. 13. Significance: One of the older houses remaining on thi rea of Route 50. Surveyed by: Leslie Giles Date: 7/89 Assemblage Description: Partial listing over 100 69 calibre round balls (dropped and wormed) 3 gun wrenches 5 eagle V buttons 1 Virginia button 6 flat buttons 1 sword scabbard 2 bullet worms 1 Georgia button 1 infantry hat insignia 1 bayonet scabbard tip 1 spoon (engraved R. Y. Carmichael, listed as a 1st Georgia soldier) 1 1853 quarter 1 Sheet brass buckle 1 base of inkwell iron kettle fragments other artifacts recovered reported by other individuals indicate that approximatley 40 Virginia buttons, 15 Georgia buttons and 12 eagle V buttons have been recovered from this site total Additional Comments: 1. Late discovery letter dated 1-24-95 from Mike Kehoe to Jackie Hernigle describing location of site and artifacts recovered never responded to. Cara Metz and David Dutton of DHR were provided with a copy of M. Kehoe's letter on 1-29-96. Project was written off without any additional identification efforts on 7-1-96. 2. See attached project maps indicating types of artifacts found and artifact concentrations drawn by Mike Kehoe and George Semples. 3. Site will be destroyed by construction of the VDOT Winchester Regional Headquarters. Site has already been disturbed by the excavation of backhoe trenches for perk tests. Additional work at this site is needed. Work should consist of informant interviews, metal detector survey and testing of areas identified as artifact concentrations. See recommendations for work on Civil War sites outlined in "The Best Ever Occupied" by James B. Legg and Steven D. Smith. 4. Historical research conducted to date indicates that the camp was used for several weeks in 1862 by General Loring. Five regiments, including two Georgia (1st and 2nd) and three Virguua units were camped here. 5. Site has excellent research potential. This is an early CSA camp using militia units. Troops were mustered out at this camp accounting for the prolific discard of equipment that would otherwise has been held on to. of pits and but sites and professional excavation of anything worthwhile. Any artifacts found could be displayed at a local, museum. At least an opportunity should be given to salvage what ever artifacts can be gleaned from the site, as an important part of the local history. Please contact me at (703) 869-3087 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Michael Kehoe attachments: O /,:� C N Arl (', ' - r U.S. POUTE 50 )WEST BOUNOI U,S. ROUTE 501EAST BOUN01 `O O O Q O O JJ A�Ip A I AJp 1 A O 1 I EI E3p o E.>r 01 O o O • .. f l v OOCUMENTEO LIMITS OF o� • ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 1{ c 1 C Jo C0 O co O K�. • O �i C1 C�I,Lp C� I• O C6 qo Ci ej WETLAND AREA INOT TESTED) A9AAMS CAEEK (CNANNAL/ZED) FIGURE 6:(SIte 44FK514 WELL HOUSE - i i mot o i ., A.1h � O NousE PousE C1• J O 0 I VQ 7 m' U v � LEGEND J~ 0' POSITIVE SHOVE) TEST A IPREHISTORIC MATERIALI C1 O — — DEPRESSION PROJECT BOUNOA / 9 o-10n POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST O I HIS TORIC MATERIAL) //, N • POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST IPREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC MATERIAL) Nuwte�v� s AR �t�A CIS O NEOATIVE SHOVEL TEST ROCK OUTCROP FENCE SLOPE O TREE — AREA BOUNDARY • Sf f0 sn 6/I fowrJ D i// G� jh �Sh1 eJ Rrceia . • • MEMO To: Cara Metz From: Bob Jolley Date: 1-26-96 Re: VDOT Winchester Area Headquarters Two individuals have expressed concern over VDOT impacts to Camp Mason, a Civil War military encampment. They indicate that the site will be impacted by proposed VDOT consttruction of the new Winchester Area Headquarters Office located near Hill Crest at the juncture of Route 50 and Route 803. One of the individuals indicated that he had collected Civil War military artifacts from this location. The site files indicate that VDOT performed a cultural resource survey at this location in 1994 resulting in the recordation of one prehistoric site (44FK514) and one late 19th century domestic site (44FK515). CI OUHAap C-A &L-NMs �� slept, CIA 3ucu healjy Cvv\c-"- ro-iLm- _ I waP •�/w �/ 0 ae o / at I,t ••, O DOCUMENTED UM ITS OF 8S "h fG * ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 0-2 Y•P C 1 �i G1 G•.!P CI •••••41. C4 ,•� �1' I , 4 q ` y E`�i\ �o fin♦ O n I&3s v r WETLAND AREA (NOl' TESTED) r i r y i Y •, •• ABRA MSCREEK ICNANNA FIGURE B: Site 44FK514 i wO, I 1 � O � �2n 1 • : Oq- e � 1 O 3 4 I -�� WELL HOUSE O OUf ® 1 clat3o z Q Hpuu Hpuu I , � . DI / O D � LEGEND 0 A4 1�40 0.110, POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST ♦ ,�P (PREHISTORIC MATERIAL) y 0 1 6(3 POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST O • DEPRESSION N IHISTORIC MATERIAL) / a , • POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST PROJECT O Ct L (PREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC MATED O NEGATIVE SHOVEL TEST ROCK OUTCROP FENCE t~t- 1� SLOPE O TREE -.- FM AREA BOUNDARY 0 Il 6p 3 Y /-1714E KEf/1! 6� g-Z`/ - `/lam 0 VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM City/County: Frederick VDHR Site Number: a FK 5-33 Site Name: Other VDHR Number: Temporary Designation: Mi'---_V)uwyyrywM. Cultural/Temporal Affiliation: Historic, 3rd quarter 19th century Site Class: X Terrestrial, Open -Air _ Terrestrial, Cave/Rockshelter _ Underwater Thematic Contexts: Defense/Military Site Function: Military encampment Specialized Contexts: USGS Quadrangle: Winchester UTM Zone:17 Easting: 740690 Loran: <`-Northing : 4341420 (Attach photocopy of appropriate section of USGS 7.5 minute series topographical map showing site boundaries.) Physiographic Province: Ridge and Valley Drainage: Shenandoah Landform: Uplands Aspect: Elevation: 850-87 0 Slope: Site Soils: Adjacent Soils: Nearest Water Source: Abrams Creek Distance: 700 ft. south Ownership Status: _ Private Owner Name (if private): Owner Address: Informant Name: Informant Address: _ Public/Local: X Public/State: VDOT _ Public/Federal: Surveyed By: M. Kehoe and G. Semples Address: 117 Dower Lane, Strasburg, Va, 22655 Site Dimensions: 700' N-S X 1000' E-W Owner Telephone: Informant Telephone: Affiliation: �9 s V Survey Strategy: _ Historic Map Projection _ Informant _ Observation _ Surface Testing X Subsurface Testing Survey Description: Metal detector survey Site Condition: 4) Surface deposits present and with subsurface integrity a. intact cultural level (trash pits and hearths) Site disturbed by VDOT backhoe trenches for perk tests Current Land Use: A-gricultliral field: pasture Specimens Obtained: _X Yes —No Depository: Personal collections Assemblage Description: see attached _ Date:9-1987 6 0 Specimens Reported: X Yes _ No Owner Name: VDOT Owner Address: Assemblage Description: Machine cut nails, bottle glass, ceramics (see Phase I report Figure 6 and Appendix B) The Phase II study listed 18 mid 19th century artifacts recovered from an adjacent prehistoric site. The report indicates that these artifacts most likely are from the CSA encampment reported to them by a local relic hunter (see Pages 11-12 of the Phase II report) Field Notes: X Yes _ No Depository: VDOT Photographic Documentation: X Yes _ No Depository: VDOT Report(s): X Yes —No Depository: VDOT and DHR Reference(s): 1994 Phase I Cultural Resource Investigations for the proposed Virginia Department of Transportation Winchester Area Headquarters. Louis Berger & Associates, Inc. 1996 Archaeological Significance Evaluation 44FK514, Frederick County, Virginia. VCU. r • Additional Comments: See attached 1 Scale: Form Completed By: M. Kehoe, G: Semples kind II..'oLev Affiliation: ASV Date: �'•3-96 Address: 11 i Dower Lane, Strasburg, Va 22655 For VDHF. St4ff Only Virginia Register Status: National Register Status: Easement Status: VDHR Library Reference Number(s): VDHR Number Assigned By: Date: Data Entered By: Date: Revisions/Updates By: Date: i •_ C^.rrh� �� °11pri�.', ;i 'lN 1�x 'J u �(/f 7-4 Radi To, Igh .gyp '• �/ 1y ��\_ - ; Yi! - J�::t 17 _ _�ert-Ir �'_'� i 1. a ,F- �\ - (', ` ���\ I i r�M _ _ .n- �•\J , � l /. - ' _ •und" Hill �.:: _ i ) ./ •A. Ir ' .- f^') - - • •gin-_ �Jl� •- / � ��, ��` � !/i � -,• Y \ - �i� - � ,,\- .:'i o'er � �i�, �' � ��y"^ -�, a v' K7r I . )Ij I Al b J .r'1/• �(f / .� a„ ` 949P /, '�_'�'j b �� J\�\� i`=Jl _ ��,1. `_� � —~�° yr A �ti f -` %• ^ r� ' �1 wl'� \. 900� i j1 w )` ! '\ }- ti� sl %i Z ; `\\\ 8 •' 82 97 l �\\ - � \ �1 ('\ .1\ 1� I �_ � ( � j/ � � 11 /- 'J-Q •\ 1j �I. Iti,' ,� 1 • ' �j1� � J-i /.�,I _ •,; � V`•j.. �' tl -- 1 , ' T .'- (/I ' j• max' Ix if \ l � ' ��''' • �� � \\ w. � // } gym- ) ) 1 \Y�� % � , /' r%• / // -o 1t y/� CE27A72_- ��. \3\\ �`• --CREEK ,`.I(,•, 1 �' i, ��) /' - U \/ �i� 0 A III A2 0 0 0 C DOCUM LIMITS OF @3 ARCHAEOLo L SITE 04 0 0 0 C3. C-1 G,.tp C2 a ....... C-6 0 co q. Qp, o </ WETLAND AREA (NOT TESTED) ABRAMS CREEK ICHANAUZ&j 5 --b- XOUTF 50 (FAST BOUND) WELL HOUSE A 1 070 0 r - — - — - — -- 6 0 0 0 cl I H0U= 0 al SIC, 421k CIO • c 2 0 0 O. 0 LEGEND At POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST CI f (PREHISTORIC MATERIAL) 0 POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST �l--\l-7—DFPRESsioN 0 PPC-!:CT BOUNDARY — (HISTORIC MATERIAL) 0 POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST (PREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC MATERIAL) 0 NEGATIVE SHOVEL TEST ROCK OUTCROP FENCE SLOPE o TREE — AREA BOUNDARY Far a Ing 1'IAP a y C, E0126E -S E m('Q5S S, - 24 -7 4, FIGURE 6: Sib 44FK514 0 Archaeological Resources* DHR# I County I Resource Name Other DHR# I Eli l? I Eli i Date I Re i I VLR Date 44FK0514 Frederick null N 30-Apr-01, 44FK0515 Frederick null N 30-Apr-01 44FK0533 Frederick null Archaeological Resources I NRHP Date Comments 0 VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM City/County: Fbederick, VA VDHR Site Number: Lf Ll 1_4:� S Site Name: Other VDHR Number: Temporary Designation: Site 1 Cultural/Temporal Affilition: PrehistcriCAHU1341 Site Class: X Terrestrial, Open -Air _Terrestrial, Cave/Rockshelter Underwater Thematic Contexts: Ibrestic Site Function: Cth Specialized Contexts: USGS Quadrangle: Vdnch9ster, VA 7.5' Loran: UTM Zone: 17 Easting: 740650 Northing: 4341500 (Attach photocopy of appropriate section of USGS 7.5 minute series topographical map showing site boundaries.) Physiographic Province: Valley & Ridge Landforrn: Valley Elevation: 850' Site Soils: Hag 1 clay lean Nearest Water Source: Abrars Cieek Ownership Status: X Private _ Public/Local: _ Public/Stale: Public/Federal: Owner Name (if private): C.L. BJTxx9n Owner Address: Winchester, VA Informant Name: Informant Address: Surveyed By: Kathy Fbices-Jaccby Address: 100 HaLsted Street, Bldg. 120 Fast Orange, NJ 07019 Site Dimensions: 300'x300' Survey Strategy: _ Historic Map Projection _ Surface Testing Drainage: P0bMae/,c11A131-dMz Aspect: Southwest Slope: 2-6% Adiacenl Soils: �'r Plus � �Y �� Distance: Adjacta t to site Owner Telephone. - Informant Telephone: Affiliation: his Bzrger & Associates Date: 7/6/94 _ Informant _Observation X Subsurface Testing Survey Description: b1KvWE3d by plaamg shuvel test Pits @ 100' irr�s in high site potential areas. Steep, rocky slopes were not surfed. SIP's were dig into the B Ir_trizcn until culturally sterile cgos.its were read -Ed. Survy is anfined to tl-te project area, so site baadaries akside of that are rot yet defined. iite Condition: I b surface artifacts, but with subanfaee ; begr-; ty. SIP G1,N has a high da ity of of artifacts (+30) which rray be stratified. =urrenf Land Use: Agria=ltira1 Field: PastUrP_ & fallCW land specimens Obtained: _ Yes X No Depository: MTR lssemblage Description: About 100 lithic flak, prinarily dirt & d-aloada y w/sere quartz. Q-:e scraper was identified. Zhe eert does rrt appear to be the sane as the local d-ert farad as black fragTErts cn the site. It may, trzAEver, acre fran Flint Ridge, sale 2.5 of es to the na-th. 0 0 Specimens Reported: _ Yes X_ No Owner Name: Owner Address: Assemblage Description: Field Notes: X. Yes _ No Depository: \4M Photographic Documentation: x Yes _ No Depository: MM Report(s): X Yes _ No Depository: M-M Reference(s): 013ffla-dm, TtM J. and Tracy A. ClxrAM 1994 'rase I Cbltlrral �= may, P VDUI' Wind-E ter Area 1- nJ Art=. a brd-tted to the V; mi n; a DTart� cf Trar�ticn, Ridirrrrl, by laps B2Lk & AaMiateS-, Inc., Pddrrrt-d. Additional Comments: r1 pcarticn cE site is rat test be avid kq:acLM the arm. Ojistnact cri CIE U.S. PT 50 (1960's?) nay taw inpactsd a rtajar perticn cE the site. 00 00 �•' �o - ` ^ Radi�ower"s" •T� J�%l `� „-�'..) --r � u 1674 830 and Hill /, • . -n'� JJ• � i )� rl asr ' i' i J,� • � .'' 1 ,� "., I ` c ��r.� � „Eii11��Ci+ t + ; � -i,�. � ,i�•o�-_:._.. - / ZI I 3' / . r 9 6 x o " ✓._ Spy ,; .. �.: ( j- Form Completed By: 'Kart Chadhrdai Address: 1001 E. Brced Street, Suits 220 adimr-d, VA 23219 Scare: 1 � � = 2 00' Affiliations Bgrger & Associates Date: 7/14/94 For VDHR Staff Only Virginia Register Statue: National Register Status: Easement Statue: VDHR Library Reference Number(s): VDHR Number Assigned By: ,C j Data Entered By: Revisions/Updates By: Date: i !% Date: bate: r , J77..i1kid �i __. I -- - I - 'Il - -•I�- - ----I -• ---I -.. I I .._I .. I _ il� I �� ��I: I'�� I � I °I �,r I I 1 n Ttrc1 _ _ �. �- I ! _. I _. —� i ! � I -'-�--- I-:• i i;�lii 1 I .... . ' � � �•'�' �--.�Iz--- I - --- 1 _ I ._..l__ I O.I ?� .�� I -__ __ i _ i '~ A-3 I \ �--1—J I �� .—f. —'--• _ _— —.. .. �. I _ I i V _ I I i I I i � 1 �1 � . I i � -•--t;�-1 I - .: ic a1— <L—j prr,+ r.,,pd4,lr 4s �Ae ._._. IY., J_ Ma/1"/j/j��_,•/ ..i_ .5� ` r ..I I 18 y '..• i, 44, 1 0 77 I ) N y it i i r 1--7- -- -!•- — I I. f liis I I. i - 11 J . 1 ' . ; X ' I I l I • 1.77 Mil � •1' i 7M S•�P6 [t iGMx.r. /•x� J� — 19 11 • VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Cily/County: Fredrick, VA VDFttt Site Number: ZJ4/Y!` Site Name: LLubc 1 lime Other VDHR Number: Temporary Designation: Site 2 Cultural/Temporal Affilition: 19rh Ctrb Ly/4th Q_art-jer Site Class: X Terrestrial, Open -Air _Terrestrial, Cave/Rockshelter Underwater Thematic Contexts: DUTestic Site Function: Sirgle d im Specialized Contexts: USGS Quadrangle: Wi:raj-ester, VA 7.5" Loran: UTM Zone: 17 Easting: 741050 Northing4341480 (Attach photocopy of appropriate section of USGS 7.5 minute series topographical map showing site boundaries.) Physiographic Province: Valley & Ric1�j, Landform: vauey Elevation: 850' Site Soils: -t[zrn clay lean Nearest Water Source: ,a Ownership Status: Private _ Public/Local: _ Public/Slate: Public/Federal: Owner Name (if private): C.L. PckAri c:m Owner Address: 6Virrhester, VA Informant Name: Informant Address: Surveyed By:.Nathy Ft.bs-,Tacd,7y Address: 100 HalstEd Strut, ELOG 120 Eist a -drip-, N7 07019 >ite Dimensions: 150'x75' Drainage: p0tQiEC/qja-anCbaZ Aspect: Flat Slope: 0_2% Adjacent Soils: :M, plus rCL gh S%Ty gLayd Distance: Cri site Owner Telephone: Informant Telephone: Affiliation:Iuds Berger & Associates Date: 7/8/94 iurvey Strategy: _ Historic Map Pro jec(ion _ Informant X Observation _ Surface Testing X Subsurface Testing survey Description: CQr)crete fcu riatiaais are di mauA-Ae by chservatirn. A series cE si gel test pits ire dig to rmi es gate aimim e dq=t:s. ite Condition: The site is yWy dishn±ed. It is the mgmal location ctf the am Hj_z , Wuch ties mid 4m Rt 50 vas oaistn� (1960?) ard is fitly located direr-tly re th cE the site, acrow the higl�y. `There is riD wicia-re fcr aclviitianal atbuiku gs. urrent Land Use: )ecimens Obtained: X Yes _ No Depository: VM ssemblage Description: VariQcs hist=c oerani.c, glass & tretal fragnazts. 0 Specimens Reported: _ Yes _ No Owner Name: Assemblage Description: Owner Address: Field Notes: X Yes _ No Depository: \;EHR Photographic Documentation: x Yes _ No Depository: Report(s): X Yes _ No Depository: MI-p Reference(s): i, Tm J. and Tracy, A. Qaning 1994 Phase I Ci11tural Resa= Sur�,W, P -q 0 VDOr Windiestsr Area FL�rl � iart . I1)crt sulmtte3 to the Virginia n; a DqmrbTat cf n--anspc �atirn, ach r d, IV I c uis Be rgcr & Associates, Inc., PddTrerd. Additional Comments: Form Completed By: Tb-n Address: 1001 E. Bread Street, Suite 220 Ridiu-d, VA 23219 Affiliation: La i s Berger &Assoc. , Inc. Date: 7/14/94 For VDHR Staff Only Virginia Register Status: National Register Statue: Easement Status: VDHR Library Reference Number(s): VDHR Number Assigned By:f`1..1 Data Entered By: Revisions/Updates By: Date: `p Date: Date: 0 /f -, Qo j 15 IP P-s f Tefi- 17, r] 4 ... IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE REZONING OF: ROUTE 50 -ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY INTRODUCTION: (See Appendix II: Context Exhibit) (See Appendix IV: Round Hill Land Use Plan) (See Appendix V: Long-range Land Use Plan) This 10.47 acre site composed of four parcels is proposed for rezoning from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General) for use as an Assisted Living, Health Services Facility as a by -right use under that zoning category. It is located west of the City of Winchester on Route 50 (south side) approximately'/4 mile west of the Route 37 bypass. The site is situated between, but not adjacent to, the cross streets of Ward Avenue and Round Hill Road and has an access road near its western property line (Echo Lane). Tax map identification numbers for the four properties are: 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 53B-3-25 and 5313-3-24. The existing uses in the vicinity are relatively equal parts of residential, commercial, and open space. It is within the Round Hill Land Use Plan, as enacted in November 2007, and designated for business uses in the Comprehensive Plan. The anticipated completion date is Fall 2009. A. SUITABILITY OF THE SITE: (See Appendix VI: Existing Natural Conditions for delineations, if applicable, of the following subjects.) 1. 100 year flood plain: Per the latest FEMA Panel Number 510063 0115 B (July 17, 1978) there is no floodplain onsite. The closest flood plain to the site is associated with Abrams Creek approximately 450 ft behind the rear property line of the subject parcel parallel with the Winchester and Western Railroad tracks. 2. Wetlands: • (See Appendix VII: Wetlands study by ECS) There are no wetlands onsite per a study conducted by ECS on a site visit November 26, 2007. 3. Steep slopes: The site is composed of primarily rolling topography over its area. There are small areas of steep slopes scattered around the site that are typically associated with rock outcroppings. There is approximately 34,848 sf (0.8 ac) of land in slopes of 15-25% and 4,356 sf (0.10 ac) of land in slopes of 25% and greater. 4. Existing Vegetation Report: This site is primarily one of pastured farmland. There is no mature forest stand on this site. Most of the trees on this site are "advantageous" trees that re -seed readily in most environments. The total area of the canopy of vegetation onsite is approximately 72,550 sf (1.65 ac). Pasture land: -AREA (all areas are approximate) -OVERALL FOREST CONDITION 10.47 acres The treed areas onsite are of a fair to poor quality. 2/3 of the trees are growing in areas that are noticeably rocky and the buttresses of the trees are molding around the rock. This starts a choking process in getting nutrients to the tree and many are dying due to this. Being a cattle field for many years, there is also much compacting of the soil from the cows. • �I • -CANOPY TREE SPECIES: -CANOPY TREE HEIGHT: -CANOPY TREE CALIPER RANGE -UNDERSTORY TREE SPECIES: -UNDERSTORY TREE HEIGHT: -UNDERSTORY TREE CAL. AVER -MAJOR SHRUBS SPECIES: 5. Soils & Bedrock: Primarily black locust and tree -of -heaven (about the only two trees capable of tolerating the conditions)/ also includes eastern redcedar, Siberian elm, hackberry, and persimmon. Variable, but averages approximately 40-50' in height. 12-28" (See canopy trees) 15-25' 3-10" barberry, honeysuckle (shrub & vine), and various briars Prime Agricultural Soils: Two of the three soils on this site are deficient in some way when relating their usefulness to agriculture. The third soil is not actually a part of the site (per the Soil Survey of Frederick County by the USDA), but may be impacted as far as potential road improvements to Route 50 are concerned. The site is comprised of different types of silt loams with a tendency toward rock outcroppings. -6C - Carbo-Oaklet Silt Loams (2-15% sl), ±0.22 acres This soil type is poorly suited to cultivated crops. It is commonly used for pasture (although overgrazing increases runoff). This is due to the erosion common, soil clods common in tillage, and frequent rock outcrops. Fertility is medium and natural organic matter is low. -14C - Frederick-Poplimento Loams (7-15% sl), ±2.4 acres isThis soil type is considered moderately well -suited to cultivated crops. It is also used for pasture and hay uses. The limitation on growing crops in this soil is the chance for erosion. The subsoil extends to a depth of 60" or more. Given the chance for erosion, pasture uses would need to be limited to prevent excess compaction. This soil type can also contain areas of rock outcrops. This site does have areas of rock outcrops that are scattered particularly around the high points of the site where erosion over time, and pasture use, has worn away the soil. -17C - Frederick-Poplimento Rock Outcrop Complex (2-15% sl), ±0.020 acres This soil type is not considered well -suited to cultivated crops or hay (tillage is impractical). It can be used for pasture, but the erosion of this type of soil limits that use. The subsoil extends to a depth of 60" or more, but bedrock is also common at 60". Relation to development: Two of three types of soils are acceptable to development. There is much development in the area despite any limitations noted herein. -6C - Carbo-Oaklet Silt Loams (2-15% sl), ±0.22 acres Development is mainly limited with rock outcrops, shrink/ swell potential being high, and low permeability. -14C - Frederick-Poplimento Loams (7-15% sl), ±3.8 acres Development is mainly limited with clayey subsoil, shrink/ swell potential being high, low strength, moderate permeability, severe erosion, moderate slopes (up to ±20%), and some shallow bedrock. -17C - Frederick-Poplimento Rock Outcrop Complex (2-15% sl), ±0.020 acres 0 Development is mainly limited with clayey subsoil, shrink/ swell potential being moderate, • moderate permeability, medium surface runoff, severe erosion, moderate slopes (up to ±30%), and some shallow/ surface bedrock areas (visible onsite). Bedrock: Of note is that this area has been found to have the potential for sinkhole development. In a separate study by ECS, LLC, this subject is expanded upon further. Please see the "Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation" in Appendix VII. B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES & PROPOSED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN (See Appendices II, III, & XII: Architectural Graphics) There are two existing neighborhoods that flank the subject property to the east and west. They feed into Stonewall Drive and Ward Avenue respectively. The neighborhood to the west (Stonewall) has been subdivided a number of times over the past 55 years; the latest house being built in 2005. The neighborhood to the east (Ward) has a similar background with houses dating from 1941-2005. All houses within these neighborhoods are single-family detached and vary extensively in type/ style due to the continual development. The lot sizes average %to'/z acres and the zoning is RA. In addition to those existing RA developments, there are other adjacent and/ or nearby lots that have larger lot sizes and/ or different zoning categories. Adjacent and to the south is another RA -zoned property that is ±14.55 acres and includes an easement containing the Allegheny Power Sub -Station (access of which is obtained through the previously mentioned Echo Lane through the subject property). Also zoned RA in the vicinity of the site is the Candy Hill camping ground and the Farmers Livestock Exchange. Also adjacent to the subject property are two lots owned by United Bank (Marathon), one of which is zoned B2 and contains an existing bank facility. The other lot is zoned RA and has been used by United Bank as a buffer from other Ward Avenue lots. This parcel (53A-3-24) has been added to the • rezoning application to enable a boundary line adjustment necessary to accommodate the proposed facility's primary entrance on Ward Avenue, which will be located on Parcel Number 53A-3-25. The BLA will be completed pursuant to rezoning approval. Nearby lots that are listed as B2 are the Courthouse Marriott and the properties associated with/ including the Walmart Supercenter. The nearby Citgo station, opposite the bank, is zoned RP. The proposed architecture of this assisted living facility will tie into its surroundings in an aesthetically pleasing way. While having the design ethic of a neighboring house, it will also share the size of its nearby business counterparts and fit within a future B2 zoned area. C. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: (See Appendix VIII: Traffic Impact Analysis) The TIA included (dated February 1st, 2008), was performed by Gorove/ Slade Associates, Inc. Note that per a meeting with Lloyd Ingram of VDOT December 11, 2007, they do not want internal public access through this lot parallel to Route 50. D. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT: (See Appendix IX: Sewer & Water Exhibit) As mentioned in the introduction, the proposed facility property is fully contained within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) of Frederick County per the adopted Round Hill Land Use Plan into the Comprehensive Plan. Sewer to the site will be provided by Frederick County Sanitation Authority. There is an existing sewer line along Ward Avenue with service proposed for this site through an extension of approximately 280' of sewer line. The sewage will be treated at the Opecluon Water Reclamation Facility, which has an overall capacity of 8.4 million gallons of water per day. The available • capacity is currently ±60,000 gallons/ day per Earl Wiley, engineer for the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). There are existing parcels north of Route 50 with reserved capacity and the Opequon •Facility is expected to expand by 2011. Please reference the calculations below for both the water and sewer flow demands: Typical Demand: Number of Beds = 87 Average Daily Demand= 87 beds x 200 GPD/bed = ±17,400 GPD Peak Hour Demand: 17,400 GPD x 2.5 = ±43,500 GPD E. WATER SUPPLY: (See Appendix IX: Sewer & Water Exhibit) Water to the site will be provided by the James T. Anderson Water Treatment Plant, which has an overall capacity of 4.0 million gallons/ day (expandable to 6.0 mgd). Earl Wiley of FCSA has stated that there is no shortage of use available from this facility. There is currently no water main extending along either side of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). This site will be served through the extension of approximately 280' of waterline along Ward Avenue. If requested, a water system analysis will be performed prior to site plan approval to determine if the existing 20" line on Ward Ave has adequate pressure and flow to meet the needs of the proposed site for both domestic and fire service although it is unlikely one will be needed. Water supply systems must be designed to supply 1,000 GPM at no less than 20 PSI per section 90-4 E Fire Prevention of the Frederick County General Code. Please reference Section D, Sewage Conveyance and Treatment for the demand flows for the water. F. DRAINAGE: •(See Appendix VI: Existing Natural Conditions) Currently, approximately % of the site drains toward Route 50 storm drains (with eventual drainage into Abrams Creek). The back Y4 of the site drains, via wide swale fingers, back to Abrams Creek. The grade along most of these swales is relatively gradual at <15%, with a few areas of steeper slopes. Preliminarily, one storm water management facility is anticipated near Route 50, as depicted. This location is subject to change with final site design/ engineering. G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES: The 87 beds and care uses within the Route 50 Health Services Facility property will be serviced via private carriers contracted by the property owners. An acceptable amount of waste/ person per Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works is 3.5#/ person/ day for this type of use. As such, the total waste would approximate: 87 people x 3.5#/ person = 305# total/ day H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES: (See Appendix X: Historic Site Letter and Study) Per the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Historic Resources, there were no architectural or archeological sites onsite. 0 I. IMPACT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES: • (See Appendix XI: Generalized Development Plan) The Route 50 Assisted Living Facility property is a project that accomplishes the Round Hill Land Use Plan guideline of developing commercial areas in which, "Commercial, medical support, medical offices... are important components of the RHLUP." This development will help the community as far as economic development is concerned. There are few small-scale assisted living facilities in the Winchester area and this proposed development will fill a void in particular within the Round Hill Community. Given the target group using this site, Frederick County Public Schools and parks & recreation will be affected very little. Police protection is also likely not to be impacted much on a daily basis. The one service that might be affected would be fire & rescue protection for ambulance transport, of which Winchester Medical Center is within '/2 mile of the proposed facility (see Appendix 1) and the Round Hill Fire & Rescue is approximately 1.0 mile away. This was a prime reason for choosing this location. As a result, the applicant has proffered a $10,000.00 contribution toward fire and rescue. • 0 ft 0 0 0 Traffic Impact Analysis HH HUNT Assisted Living Frederick County, Virginia February 1, 2008 Prepared For: Bowman Consulting Group 124 East Cork Street Winchester, VA 22601 Prepared By: Gorove/Slade Associates, i ft • • 0 r—'7.1OOROVE/SLADE ASSOCIATES, IIVC. 7r any �a��rtatir�r7, Trot€ic. arisl Partsirig PREPARED BY: Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. 3914 Centreville Road Suite 330 Chantilly, VA 20151 1140 Connecticut Avenue Suite 700 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: 202.296.8625 Fax: 202.785,1276 Tel: 703.787.9595 Fax: 703.787.9905 ADDITIONAL OFFICES: 651 Holiday Drive Suite 300 Pittsburgh, PA 15220 Tel: 412.928-1730 Fax: 412.928.1731 www.goroveslade.coni 825 Chicago Avenue Suite D Chicago, IL 60202 Tel: 847.733.1390 Fax: 847.733.1391 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of services, is intended for the specific purpose and client for which is was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization by Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc., shall be without liability to Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. HH Hunt Assisted Livl`iraffic Impact Analysis L� TABLE OF CONTENTS Listof Figures----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Listof Tables----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 ExecutiveSummary---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 Introduction------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 Scopeof Study----------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 ExistingConditions 2 00 8--------------------------------------------------------------- 4 ( ) ---------------- Existing Roadway Network--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 ExistingTraffic Volumes------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 Existing Conditions Capacity Analysis--------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 Future Conditions Without Development (Future Background 2010)-------------------------------------7 Planned Roadway Improvements --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 Future Conditions without Development Traffic Volumes----------------------------------------------7 Future Conditions without Development Capacity Analysis-------------------------------------8 Future Conditions With Development (Total Future 2010)----------------------------------------------- 10 SiteDescription-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- 10 SiteAccess-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 Site Generated Volumes--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 Directional Distribution, Trip Assignment, and Total Future Traffic Volumes----------- ---- 11 Total Future Capacity Analysis------------------------------------------------------------- -- 13 Warrant Analyses- Right Turn Lane-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 Pedestrian and Bike Facilities on Site------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16 Queuing analysis 2 01 0------------------------------------------------------------- 16 Conclusions----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17 February 1, 2008 HH Hunt Assisted Livin_raffic Impact Analysis LIST OF FIGURES • Figure 1: Regional Map and Site Location......................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Existing (2008) Conditions............................................................................... 6 Figure 3: Future Conditions without Development (2010)..................................................... 9 • 0 Figure 4: Site Generated PM/SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes..............................................12 Figure 5: Future Conditions with Development 2010 ................14 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Existing (2008) Intersection Capacity Analysis......................................................... 5 Table 2: Future Conditions without Development (2010) Intersection Capacity Analysis ................ 8 Table 3: Proposed Site Trip Generation (2010)................................................................. 10 Table 4: Future Conditions with Development (2010) Intersection Capacity Analysis ................... 13 Table 5: Warrant Analysis for Right Turn Lanes................................................................15 February 1, 2008 HH Hunt Assisted Liviwraffic Impact Analysis ' En EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • The following report presents the findings of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed HH Hunt Assisted Living development in Frederick County, Virginia. The site is located just outside the city of Winchester along the south side of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) bounded by Echo Lane to the west and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard to the east. The proposed HH Hunt development plan consists of approximately 84 beds for assisted living housing. The development will have primary access from Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). The project is scheduled to be built -out by the year 2010. The analysis presented in this report supports the following major conclusions: Existing Conditions (2008) ■ No mitigations are required at the study intersections under the existing conditions based on the criteria set forth by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) (LOS D or better per lane group). Future Conditions without Development (Future Background 2010): ■ No mitigations are required at the study intersections under the future conditions without development scenario based on the criteria set forth by the Virginia Department of • Transportation (VDOT) (LOS D or better per lane group). • Future Conditions with Development (Total Future 2010): ■ The projected site trips for the assisted living development will have a negligible impact on the roadway network within the vicinity of the site. ■ The HH Hunt development during the peak traffic hours will generate: ❑ Approximately 25 trips during the PM peak Hour (13 in and 12 out) and 34 Saturday peals hour trips (18 in and 16 out). ❑ Approximately 1 trip every 2 minutes will travel along Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) in the PM and Saturday peals hours. ■ All intersections operate at an acceptable level of service based on the criteria set forth by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) (LOS D or better per lane group). February 1, 2008 HH Hunt Assisted Lim Traffic Impact Analysis L__7 0 • • INTRODUCTION This report presents the findings of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed HH Hunt Assisted Living development in Frederick County, Virginia. The site is located just outside the City of Winchester along the south side of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) bounded by Echo Lane in the west and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard to the east. The general location of the site is indicated in the regional map found in Figure 1. The proposed assisted living development plan consists of approximately 84 beds for assisted living housing. Two (2) access points to the proposed site will be provided. The primary site drive is along Ward Avenue, just south of the intersection of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) with Ward Avenue. The secondary site drive is located along Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) along Echo Lane (Limited Access). The development site is currently zoned as a Rural Area (RA). A rezoning of the property to B2 is being proposed for the assisted living residential development. The following tasks were undertaken as part of this study in accordance with direction received from VDOT staff in a scoping meeting held on January 17, 2008: ■ Field reconnaissance in the vicinity of the site was performed to collect information related to existing traffic controls, roadway geometry, and traffic floe characteristics; ■ Traffic counts were conducted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 and Saturday, January 12, 2008 during the afternoon and Saturday peak hours at the intersections located within the study area; ■ Future traffic conditions were projected based on inherent traffic growth of two percent compounded annually over a two-year period to account for regional development along the roadway network along with the trips generated from the background development within the vicinity of the study area and the proposed site plan. ■ Site traffic volumes were generated based on the methodology outlined in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation, 7th Edition. The ITE Trip generation rate for assisted living developments is approximately 4 trips per day per bed. Intersection capacity analyses were performed using Synchro, version 6.0 based on the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. Traffic analyses were performed for the existing conditions (2008), future conditions without development (Future Background 2010), and future conditions with development (Total Future 2010) at the intersections and roadway segments contained within the study area. Sources of data for this study include Frederick County, VDOT, and the office files and field reconnaissance efforts of Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. February 1, 2008 1 HH Hunt Assisted LivilrTraffic Impact Analysis E • • Figure 1: Regional Map and Site Location - p M$-� * at Br (el let zC Round Hill Fo-L A1r4uy 522 v - Hill Crest � ,y;nh 'E'2:15. et �•T,, [ Mero Ffedetick gLLfpiny Krulls so 522, + ci yHeigh',±; Bari n11 Winchester w r E �"rocy., dr Alt F�c `r 11 Si 31 -.V N 11 E :1 T E RtP ' Aa, 17 �a A Jim 4 Fc '+x U, Rarnett- F Jul Park ELc V I R G I N 1 A r N' erm ` � �� Apple or Graze v'•''�' y`" :s'3 [IkT»Cnr r' F F' E L, E k ,aer Icerth f':esle rn pike Ml Ix n F:. SITE February 1, 2008 ,4+`f Wrryd'3estn L'f� Akdita'Cer;er C J�crcYestt:t �C .c� dcal Ccnter-Er v v! j s SQ rryct ' ,o` J Y 2 HH Hunt Assisted Livi-Traffic Impact Analysis ft Scope of Study • The following intersections were identified for inclusion in this study: • U • Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) and Echo Lane; ■ Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard; ■ All site driveways associated with the proposed site. This report presents the findings of analyses performed for the following conditions: ■ Existing Conditions (2008): Consider existing traffic volumes and existing roadway configurations during the weekday evening and Saturday peak hours. ■ Future Conditions without Development (Future Background 2010): Consider future traffic conditions resulting from inherent traffic growth, but do not include volumes generated by the proposed HH Hunt Assisted Living development. ■ Future Conditions with Development (Total Future 2010): Consider future traffic volumes -,with the background growth and traffic generated by the proposed site. The results of the analysis and the traffic impacts associated with the proposed development plan are presented in the Conclusion section of this report. February 1, 2008 3 HH Hunt Assisted LivirWraffic Impact Analysis • EXISTING CONDITIONS (2008) I• Existing Roadway Network A description of the major roadways within the immediate vicinity of the site is presented below: ■ Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) is a four -lane, divided roadway with posted speed limit of 35 mph in the vicinity of the site. ■ Echo Lane is a two-lane, undivided roadway. There is no median break at the intersection of Echo Lane. Hence, the northern and southern approaches have a right -in right -out access. ■ Ward Avenue is a two-lane, undivided roadway. There was no posted speed limit sign in the vicinity of the site. ■ Botanical Boulevard is a four -lane, undivided roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph in the vicinity of the site. Figure 2 illustrates the local roadway network with the existing intersection lane uses and traffic control devices. Existing Traffic Volumes In order to determine the peals hour turning movement traffic volumes, traffic counts were conducted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 from 4:00 PM to 7:00 PM and on Saturday, January 12, 2008 from 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM. Analysis of the existing traffic data determined that the weekday afternoon • peals hour occurred from 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM and the Saturday peals hour occurred from 12:45 PM to 1:45 PM. • The existing peals hour traffic volumes for the intersections contained within the study area are shown in Figure 2. The existing turning movement counts are included in the Technical Appendix. February 1, 2008 4 HH Hunt Assisted LivWTraffic Impact Analysis • 0 • • Existing Conditions Capacity Analysis Intersection and roadway capacity analyses were performed for the existing conditions at the intersections and roadway segments contained within the study area during the afternoon and Saturday peals hours. Synchro, version 6.0 was used to analyze the study intersections based on the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. The results of the intersection capacity analyses are presented in Table 1, and are expressed in level of service (LOS) and delay (seconds per vehicle) per lane group. Figure 2 illustrates the results graphically. Table 1: Existing (2008) Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection (Lane Group) Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour Level of Delay Level of Delay Service (sec/veh) Service (sec/veh) Route 50 and Echo Lane Drive (Unsignalized*) Northbound Right A 0.0 A 0.0 Southbound Right A 9.1 A 9.7 Route 50 and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard (Signalized) Overall A 8.6 A 8.8 Eastbound Left D 45.5 D 51.9 Eastbound Through A 7.6 A 8.2 Eastbound Right A 6.0 A 5.6 Westbound Left D 45.6 D 50.7 Westbound Through A 6.2 A 6.6 Westbound Right A 4.9 A 5.0 Northbound Left/Through D 43.2 D 49.5 Northbound Right D 42.2 D 48.1 Southbound Left A 0.0 D 49.0 Southbound Left/Through A 0.0 D 49.1 Southbound Right D 44.4 D 48.5 * There is no median break at the intersection of Echo Lane with Route 50. Hence, the northern and southern approaches have a right -in right -out access According to VDOT guidelines on traffic operations performance, it is desirable to achieve a LOS D or better per lane group. The results presented in the Table 1 conclude that: ■ No mitigations are required at the study intersections under the existing conditions based on the criteria set forth by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) (LOS D or better per lane group). February 1, 2008 5 HH Hunt Assited Livin • • Existing Lane Configuration and Traffic Control 76 L T Route 50 Northwestern Pike i LEGEND —� Existing Conditions -� Lane configuration � w © Traffic Signal -�- Stop Sign w Q v 3 Existing PM/SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes m �2/13 I �0/0831/1046 J ` --851/1069 J L `-40/17 Route 50 Northwestern Pike J 217 —J -sir 768/9 6 � --- 7239/40 ~ � � o mrm mom LEGEND l'— 00/00 Peak HourTraffic --00/00 Volumes r 00/00 a 3 Existing PM/SAT Peak Hour Levels of Service m 0oA/A 0aaa jc j:—::]A/A ilr (—Dro Route 50 Northwestern Pike A%A r D/D — c a A/A[—_— A/A— oe o0 t w LEGEND L A/A Peak Hour Level of a Service 3 Figure 2 Existing (2008) Conditions • February 1, 2008 HH Hunt Assisted Livi raffic Impact Analysis ' FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT (FUTURE BACKGROUND 2010) 0 Planned Roadway Improvements There are no planned roadway improvements in the area. Future Conditions without Development Traffic Volumes The construction of the proposed assisted living development is anticipated to be complete in 2010. Typically, future traffic volumes are projected by increasing existing traffic volumes to the build -out year using a growth rate based on historical traffic growth. Based on historical data obtained from VDOT, an inherent growth rate of two (2) percent per year over a two-year period, or a total increase of 4.04% was applied to the existing traffic volumes along Route 50. The Valley Health Systems, Degrange Property and WWW Property sites were the approved developments identified at the scoping meeting with VDOT and the County. These approved developments are located in close proximity of the proposed Assisted Living Facility, north of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). The traffic studies for these approved developments were prepared by PHR+A, and were utilized in order to calculate the trip generation and distribution. The trip generation tables and distribution for the approved developments is attached in the appendix section of the report. The trips generated by the background approved developments along with the inherent growth were • added to the existing volumes to estimate the future volumes without development as illustrated in Figure 3. February 1, 2008 7 HH Hunt Assisted Livisaffic Impact Analysis • UFP. Future Conditions without Development Capacity Analysis • Intersection capacity analyses were performed for the future background conditions at the intersections and roadway segments contained within the study area during the afternoon and Saturday peak hours. Synchro, version 6.0 was used to analyze the study intersections based on the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. • • The results of the intersection capacity analyses are presented in Table 2 and Figure 3. The detailed analysis worksheets are contained in the Technical Appendix. Table 2: Future Conditions without Development (2010) Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection (Lane Group) Future Conditions Without Development PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour Level of Delay Level of Delay Service (sec/veh) Service (sec/veh) Route 50 and Echo Lane (Unsignalized*) Northbound Right A 0.0 A 0.0 Southbound Right A 9.1 A 9.5 Route 50 and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard (Signalized) Overall B 17.5 C 28.8 Eastbound Left D 46.2 D 41.9 Eastbound Through B 15.9 D 36.6 Eastbound Right A 9.3 B 14.2 Westbound Left D 47.7 D 42.3 Westbound Through B 13.3 C 20.6 Westbound Right B 11.2 B 13.5 Northbound Left/Through D 45.7 D 37.8 Northbound Right D 44.8 D 37.0 Southbound Left D 44.0 C 33.2 Southbound Left/Through D 44.0 C 33.3 Southbound Right D 41.4 C 25.2 * There is no median break at the intersection of Echo Lane with Route 50. Hence, the northern and southern approaches have a right -in right -out access As mentioned earlier in the report, it is desirable to achieve a LOS D or better per lane group. The results in Table 2 conclude that: ■ All study intersections operate at an acceptable level of service under the future conditions without development scenario. February 1, 2008 L HH Hunt Assisted Livin • • n LJ Future Background Lane Configuration and Traffic Control m U I I m ti _ r +lY -r Route 50 Northwestern Pike s. LEGEND } Existing Conditions o Lane Configuration �— W Traffic Signal �- Stop Sign ti Q a `m Future Background PM/SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes o mo� o �207/97 coo J I L t—p/0 m --1104/1608 J I L --1053/1487 f—42/18 Route 50 Northwestern Pike 0/0 - 1 62/116 —) 1312/1512 — 1209/1354 — m m 1/0� 41/42� mom LEGEND L00/00 Peak HourTraffic —00/01) Volumes r 00/00 Future Background PM/SAT Peak Hour Levels of Service m UUU 4 B/B 000 c �B/C aCIO Route 50 Northwestern Pike BBC r D/D 3 B/Dt:�_— o A/B — 00 U W LEGEND Peak Hour Level of > �A/A Service E m 3 Figure 3 Future Conditions without Development (2010) February 1, 2008 i HH Hunt Assisted LivirWraffic Impact Analysis • FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH DEVELOPMENT (TOTAL FUTURE 2010) • Site Description The proposed HH Hunt Assisted Living development is located just outside the city of Winchester along the south side of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) bounded by Echo Lane to the west and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard to the east. The proposed development plan consists of approximately 84 beds for assisted living housing. The development will have primary access from Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). The project is scheduled to be built -out by the year 2010. Site Access Two access points to the proposed site will be provided. The primary site drive will be along Ward Avenue (Full Access), whereas the existing right -in right -out access (Echo Lane South) along Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) will form the secondary site drive (limited access). Site Generated Volumes In order to calculate the trip generation for the proposed development, the ITE's Trip Generation, 7`h Edition publication was used to determine the trips into and out of the proposed site for the weekday afternoon and Saturday peals hours as well as for the entire day. Table 3 presents the new trips generated by the proposed site. • Table 3: Proposed Site Trip Generation (2010) Total Future Trip Generation Land Use ITE Code Size PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Assisted Living 254 84 Beds 13 12 25 18 16 34 231 Total Site Trips 13 12 25 18 16 34 231 February 1, 2008 10 HH Hunt Assisted Livialraffic Impact Analysis 0 Directional Distribution, Trip Assignment, and Total Future Traffic Volumes • The distribution of the proposed site trips was based on existing volumes and anticipated traffic patterns. Based on the location of the proposed site and the existing traffic data, the inbound and outbound trips calculated for the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours were routed in the roadway network to the site based on the direction of approach assumptions presented below: • Direction of Approach: ■ Route 50 (west of Echo Lane) = 10% • Route 50 (east of Ward Avenue) = 90% Number of vehicles entering and exiting the site entrances: ➢ Inbound (PMPH/SATPH) • Primary site drive (Ward Avenue) = 12 / 16 (90%) • Secondary site drive (Echo Lane) = 1/2 (10%) ➢ Outbound (PMPH/SATPH) ■ Primary site drive = 5/6 (40%) • Secondary site drive = 7/ 10 (60%) The site traffic assignment for the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours is illustrated in Figure 4. The proposed site trips were added to the future background volumes in order to establish the total future 2010 traffic volumes, and are shown in Figure 5. February 1, 2008 11 HH Hunt Assited Livin nt • • Total Future Lane Configuration and Traffic Control L o m _J T Route 50 Northwestern Pike i 1 LEGEND J Existing Conditions -- Lane Configuration t � w Traffic Signal �- Stop Sign a `m 3 m' m ' 900/0 Route 50 Northwestern Pike 10 D/0 -� J W LEGEND �00%00 Peak HourTrafflc d Volumes a (--00/00 E m 3 Background Site Generated Traffic Volumes m 000 om 0 ao o/o II / J I L —1/2 Route 50 Northwestern Pike -� 14 ( 12/16 0/0- r 10-- ' I r 7/ 1/2 J 0 o/o n 0 �o n as W �o +— O LEGEND -J �00/00 Site Traffic Volumes 5/6—J a' 00 0/0 a r 00/00 0 oo 0 3 Figure 4 Site Generated PM/SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes February 1, 2008 HH Hunt Assisted Liviwrraffic Impact Analysis t..- Total Future Capacity Analysis Intersection capacity analyses were performed for the total future 2010 traffic conditions at the intersections and roadway segments contained within the study area during the morning and afternoon peals hours. Synchro, version 6.0 was used to analyze the study intersections based on the Hi hwa Capacity Manual methodology. The results of the intersection capacity analyses for the total future conditions are presented in Table 4. The detailed analysis worksheets are contained in the Technical Appendix. Table 4: Future Conditions with Development (2010) Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Conditions With Development Intersection (Lane Group) PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour Level of Delay Level of Delay Service (sec/veh) Service (sec/veh) Route 50 and Echo Lane (Unsignalized*) Northbound Right B 14.8 C 16.8 Southbound Right A 9.1 A 9.6 Route 50 and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard (Signalized) Overall Eastbound Left Eastbound Through Eastbound Right Westbound Left Westbound Through Westbound Right Northbound Left/Through Northbound Right Southbound Left Southbound Left/Through Southbound Right B 18.1. C 34.0 D 44.8 D 50.4 B 16.7 D 39.5 A 9.7 B 15.4 D 47.0 D 44.1 B 13.7 C 28.3 B 11.5 B 18.0 D 45.2 D 41.8 D 44.2 D 40.8 D 43.5 D 36.8 D 43.4 D 37.0 D 40.9 C 27.9 Site Drive (Full Access) and Ward Avenue (Unsignalized) Eastbound Left/Right A 9.2 A 9.0 Northbound Through A 0.0 A 0.0 } There is no median break at the intersection of Echo Lane with Route 50. Hence, the northern and southern approaches have a right -in right -out access As mentioned before, it is desirable to achieve a LOS D or better per lane group. The results in Table 4 conclude that: ■ All the study intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service. ■ The proposed HH Hunt Assisted Living development will generate approximately 1 trip/ 2 minutes along Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) in the PM and Saturday peals period respectively. Figure 5 shows the results graphically. February 1, 2008 13 HH Hunt Assisted Livinul&elopment --- _- • • Total Future Lane Configuration and Traffic Control m � f— Route 50 Northwestern Pike i LEGEND Existing Conditions C Lane Confguratlon W OTraffic Signal _ 1If -�- Stop Sign t i-: •: Site Improvements 4 Q � A 3 Total Future PM/SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes J I 0/0 -- 1/105/1609 _o �E Route 50 Northwestern Pike J 207/97 1053/1487 (—' 54/34 J � I r 1312/1512 2/2 J 1216/1354116 41/42---) covom nJ L W11 U] \� N_ on LEGEND �00/00 00 Peak HourTraffic Volumes 5/6-J 0/0 r00/00 `m N o� v 3 Total Future PM/SAT Peak Hour Levels of Service m coo B �—BIB aa0 a I m B/C Route 50 Northwestern Pike)D/D BBC r D/D , v B/Dr' m � A/B o0 o 00 U W LEGEND ` LA/A Peak Hour Level of A/A �Q Servlce jl v � a Figure 5 Future Conditions with Development (2010) • February 1,2008 HH Hunt Assisted Livioraffic Impact Analysis F":' t�r WARRANT ANALYSES- RIGHT TURN LANE • Right turn warrant analyses were reviewed for the right -in right -out site entrance along Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). Based on Virginia Department of Transportation .(VDOT) Road Design Manual, warrant analysis for right turn lane was performed at the proposed driveways to determine if a right turn lane is required. It should be noted that the VDOT Road Design Manual provides a guideline for left -turn and right -turn facilities to be considered on four -lane highways. Table 5 presents the results of this analysis. Table 5: Warrant Analysis for Right Turn Lanes Approach Right Turn Right Turn Warrant Analysis Intersection Volume Volume PM SAT PM SAT PM Right Turns SAT Right Turns Route 50 and Secondary Site Drive 1314 1514 2 2 Right turn lane Right turn lane (RIRO) not required not required Notes: 1. Source: VDOT Road Design Manual (Table C•1.9). 2. Warrant Analysis is based on the future with development (2010) volumes As shown in Table 5, right turn lane or taper is not required at the intersection of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) with Secondary Site Drive (RIRO). • The VDOT Subdivision and Commercial Entrance Spreadsheet for the Edinburg District for four lane divided highways was also used in order to check the requirement for a right turn lane. The spreadsheet revealed that a right turn lane is required at the entrance. The Subdivision and Commercial Entrance Worksheet recommends turn lanes based on a combination of factors such as Posted Speed Limit, Highway Traffic Volume etc. The factors taken into consideration are translated into points, which are tallied in order to come up with the recommendations. The traffic volume data i.e. existing as well as site generated (VPD's) is also converted into points based on the range in which they fit in. The ranges in which traffic volumes are evaluated is depicted in increments of 500 VPD's, starting from 0 working up to 6,000. The Subdivision and Commercial Entrance Worksheet is therefore very generic in structure as compared to the VDOT Road Design Manual Guidelines. The VDOT Road Design Manual guidelines are very specific, especially for right turn bay analysis. The recommendations are based on the specific peak hour volumes for approaches and especially right turns. • Based on the above information coupled with the fact that the Secondary Site Drive (RIRO) has a projected peak hour volume of approximately 2 vehicles turning right in the peals hour, a right turn bay is not recommended at this Site Entrance. The detailed analysis worksheets are provided in the tecluzical appendix. February 1, 2008 15 HH Hunt Assisted LivhWraffic Impact Analysis • 0 PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE FACILITIES ON SITE For non -vehicular transportation features on the site, please refer to the concept plan prepared by Bowman Consultants that will accompany this report. QUEUING ANALYSIS (2010) Queuing analyses were performed at the existing and proposed intersections contained within the vicinity of the proposed development to determine any queuing issues under future traffic conditions (2010). The queuing analyses were performed using Synchro, version 6.0. The queuing analyses results are expressed in terms of the 95th percentile and 50" percentile queue length (in feet). The 50th percentile queue length is the average queue length observed during the peak hour. The 951h percentile queuing results show the worst -case scenario and has the probability of occurring approximately once in the peak hour. Hence, for design purposes, the 50th percentile queue results are representative of the actual conditions. The queuing analysis results table and worksheets are included in the Technical Appendix. February 1, 2008 16 HH Hunt Assisted Livin-raffic Impact Analysis W K21 CONCLUSIONS • This report presents the findings of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed HH Hunt Assisted Living development in Frederick County, Virginia. The site is located just outside the city of Winchester along the south side of Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) bounded by Echo Lane to the west and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard to the east. The proposed HH Hunt development plan consists of approximately 84 beds for assisted living housing. The development will have primary access from Ward Avenue and a secondary limited access from Route 50 (Northwestern Pike). The project is scheduled to be built -out by the year 2010. The analysis presented in this report supports the following major conclusions: Existing Conditions (2008) ■ No mitigations are required at the study intersections under the existing conditions based on the criteria set forth by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) (LOS D or better per lane group). Future Conditions without Development (Future Background 2010): ■ No mitigations are required at the study intersections under the future conditions without development scenario based on the criteria set forth by the Virginia Department of • Transportation (VDOT) (LOS D or better per lane group). Future Conditions with Development (Total Future 2010): ■ The projected site trips for the assisted living development will have a negligible impact on the roadway network within the vicinity of the site. ■ The HH Hunt development during the peals traffic hours will generate: ❑ Approximately 25 trips during the PM peals Hour (13 in and 12 out) and 34 Saturday peals hour trips (18 in and 16 out). ❑ Approximately I trip every 2 minutes will travel along Route 50 (Northwestern Pike) in the PM and Saturday peals hours. ■ All intersections operate at an acceptable level of service based on the criteria set forth by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) (LOS D or better per lane group). February 1, 2008 17 PROPOSED ENHAM-D 100' ROAD EFFICIENCY BUFFER AND CATEGORY "B" BUFFER U.S. ROUTE 50 NOR THWESTZN_PIKE 0 0 5! SIDEWALK 50' INACTIVE BUFFER YARD 5-0 77- r a -, — SYN FACILITY 817, 1 ENHANCED lOO&D EFFICIENCY BUFFER NOTE- 1) IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIRED EVERGREENS FOR A ROAD EFFICIENCY BUFFER (PER 165(Ex3) HE BUFFER HAS BEEN ENHANCED WITH STREET TREES AND UNDERPLANTED W. SHRUBS THE ADOPTED ROUND HILL LAND USE PLAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES. 2) ENHANCEMENTS: a CANOPY TREES 2 ORNAMENTALTREES 24 SHRUBS Be INACTIVE BUFFER YARD 50' ACTIVE,!U�FFER ENHANCED CA�ffX BUFFER YARD NOTE 1) IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIRED 3 PLANTS PER 10 LF, ADDITIONAL PLANTS HAVE BEEN ADDED TO FURTHER BUFFER ADJACENT HOUSING. 2) ENHANCEMENTS: 80 EVERGEEE S 2 SHRUBS 3) PLANT MATERIAL LOCATED WITHIN THE POWER COMPANY EASEMENT SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH ALLEGHIENY POWER RECOMMENDED PLANT TYPES. ENTRANCE FWH k4 GHT STBOUND all- TE N-e < E_UA U -21516u7, —WA14_ EASrBOw N/F 4 t /H HNC 8 ROARA-Al, ID:' . 53._; 1 8057, :ONXD: RA- L vz A D IL / AND wTroe [o TIE V \3 TO ws _ LOSSIBLE, J OF I)iE �OJACENT 304.1, t ItWJGAR E 09 0652/P SS E (TO BE AS DONED) t I N/ i j q/F UNITED B N/F IFLIN HLTdbLkL A, POE AND MAPZID; 5..81 3-5 1 N/F 7/17 S. ? POE. SFRO I MAP IDy 538-t3-1 'ISE COW ex W TER RIP %EACIAL TONER RA TO 81� EZONED TO B:� A, ZR" MAP ID: �53—A-81 LINE ADJJSTM FOR I Y ETBACK OCCUR. PENG REZONING INGRE GRES A)— D8 07 PG 09 r -�J_Q 13L I ABANDONED TO I�E T. F --- / - --- ____ 7�� �:�C UNITED W UANKTN N/F MAP ID: 538- BUTCHER, TIMOTHY S. JONEC� RA TO BE R IJ QIZONED� USE: VACANT ONED1 B —2-29 ,�AP2& 53B _ I RA' 4 ACRE USE: REE40�NTIAt"­' OW FOR FU7URE-W-"T OF WAY ER I ROW'��ATIOM) /. T / -�. -- `,i:' , A ,f AND GUTTER TQig��Al PRGREILW A`NTO •'BAW EXISTING 'UNDERGROUND ADJACENT URM ELEC7,�'_­UTS ------- I, AW5 7. W G W.x A MAP 10; 538-3-26 ZONED: RA Tow SE: R 4 • '41F N/F IukmwG W*?T.%Y W.-* ARMITHA,-*- �_A`I�PROIRERTIES LLC ERS LIVESTOCK A)(GE INC 538-3-27 ZONE.- — MAP ID: 53-AISI 7 ­*.2,3 ACRE e USE, AMER/J.' GUY W. &-ARMO MAP I.: ZONED: ­7 RQDIENTIAL WRF NILU RA t MER CALK LEE 2§ ZONED: --USE: RESIDENTIAL % _ I \,i _�� Ib-..3, �\ r�,'' Il ' Ir \ A�%R 'eALVIN Lii--- 0 BA -1 �Z-w RESIDENTIAL = T, L 7 EXIS GAO EM 'L TI4 I 'Ni NGRFSMr -T. Fr R7F RITTER, CAOAN _ID-5A -BUILDIkG MAP 38-3- c " LOP OVER,AND QN QPTHE E `.iCT TWo,KE/PLAN. -.811TER, CA N PullFENBERGER­UDY MAP`ID--53D-3 r, 7r 3 SMITH. PATR16A^M MAF\ID: 5-A-Sik E:DR��j� - R9.11AL RE EN 5' ED, RA -f p LISE: 'RESI� 1( V I, SCRUGGS, JOSEPWI. LEGEND )OL11 D. // �/ _USE: EXISTING DESCRIPTION RESIDENTIAL f N/T INOU CONTOUR ----------- - CONTINUED ACCESS ALLEGHENY POVJER­ \SCRUGGS JOSEPH I. NTDIAWIE OONT" MAP ID: '538-3-34 vi SERVICE S EDGE OF PAVDIENT IR ESD�:.RA MAINTENAN PRCPIXTY UNE NPARTING PROPERTY UK j N/F BUILDING HOUSER, D -A. N% L P AND, SCOGGGS, JOSEPH 1. NEE LINE _4RL A, FENCE LINE POE,.a­IARON 38-3-35 S. kAP ID: 5 a ' MAP 10: 53-A-82'\ I - ��D:, RA I RESIDENTIAL MTMK 'r ZONEO-IfA TO BE REZONED B2 F SO.TARY SET. g *8,R ACRES ====cs) NANS09 PRGK"E %—MAP ­5 ZZ7 UMM POLE/ EUCTRIC LNE Z 60 A .,!-;z S70RU SEIIER LNE E�IDE 4CIrIv 1; PROPOSED DESCRIPTION NA PkrpE4UjES,_Uf- - DOGE OF PAVDQff G. �eAFORE C -3--4; , _—:_ - - / �l ---- — -- -j, ,'/ IN WATMNE koo O "WID '3 DEN ,T� -AC Inv! _14LE: R DEN :4 SOWITAKY SEWER 0'90NNEt. TRUDY POE L FUTURE DESCRIPTION OPERTIfS LkC,. k Ll kqsE! ?ksm)E 'n Fu �AA.BODAN PRft M�pz 10: 7 N ZONED' RA 618.3 C SCALE I 4E k �AP Q: 538-3-38 i 1/z I'll RA COULEM Rw ED. T�IQEN FROM INE ROUND Li HIUL LAND Ug pLM PoronuE rungs 4J04ESIDENTIAL T 40 AS ENACTEDWy 2W7 E�, ELECT 50 7' NOT TSCALE z < Z < 0 0 0 LL. z � F— Li < Z ct 5; LLj 0 0 :3 x LL_ LJ ILL, OH V) C) LLI N V) 25 V) Z < :D < D = 0 fiI rN- (K LLI z Ld Ld < 0 LLI LLI C) m V e f ,�,LTH i;.. LAO 140 34091 CTO I O)WAME I DERGN CHKD sw HOR17-1-W MORT. JOB No. 5132-01-003 DATE FU No. 5132—D-ZP-001 = 1 OF 1 ELEVATION SCALE: 3/32" =1'-0" CU CZ- L- .� O -� B jo2l ELEVATION SCALE: 3132" = 1'-0" N 2 U ^^ ��L- = vJ OQ„ G �— +►+ -- GP ELEVATION 2`°� n . - SCALE: 313T = r-0 ELEVATION SCALE: 3/32" =1'-0" A3.03 EXHIBIT A NOT TO SCALE i 11BERGLASS SHINGLES ON 30f FELT OVER 5/8' SHEATHING (24/0 APA) W/ CLIPS— e i-- INSULATION 11011 WOOD SfOR. TRUSSES 0 24- O.C. (23/32' PLYWD. FLOOR /'/�' f'" ANCHOR 0 STORAGE AREA) /—TRUSS _ R-30 INSULATION FLASHING TYPE V --. - ��^( 2.8 FACIA ALUM WRAP - - --�-�� B' CUTTER AND DDMWOUT 1/2- GYP. DO. (PANT) 5/16- HARD -SOFFIT WITH / CONTINUOUS VINYL VENT — R-13 NSUL 1 x6. ALUM. WRAP — HARD -SIDING Zv 7/18' APA RATED SHEATHING —_- 2.4 STUDS 0 18' D.C...___-- 5/8' DIAMETER ANCHOR BOLT 0 32' W O.C. WITH 7' INN. ENBEDUM IND. 615E (PAINT) —SEALED CONIC. 2.4 > PPf W/ 1/2' AB - i (ENTIRE FLOOR) 0 4'-0' O.C. MAX / 4' CONC. SLAB " R-5 ROD PERM. INSUL 24' WOE 1—�--6 I _ MIL POLY Y.B. _ _ II'-�II_II III 'III I -II'__ _ II _i I, ,° `—.! I ---CONT. CONIC . FOOTING —III III _I I III—) I I PIT', —I� 1-I I,l _ III I .I I�_; SEE STRULT. DWGS. ,I =i I lip -Nil SEE SIRUCT. MAINTANCE BUILDING WALL SECTION F SCALE: 314' =1'-0" • LOWERPMODEL /661828 EACH SIDE 3 1/2- TRIM i i - 1 CONCRETE (RUBBED RNISH) MAINTANCE BUILDING ELEVATION 4 SCALE: 1/4" =1'-0" 2 5 --bd FACK WRAP N mm 14 ow i.— ---- --- - -- - — — -- -- --- - --- --- -- -- --- NNW. ._.__ - - ---- - --- ---- — ---- ------.-- --- ----- FWip-SDING D00�!< 1,4 IwmI-CORNER IV L.LL.YA11\JIY 2 SCALE: 1/4': U P • W a �a �3 � Q 3 H a O ^ P VENT e --"-_----- - ----- 2X8 RAKE BO. W/1X3 TRIM. WRAP IN ALUM.ALUM. L �, Qo -- GUER R DS W/ SPLASH = BLOCK rr DI -SIDING PER BUILDER i LIGHT RXIIAE (TYP) r� — - 3 1/2' NAND -TRW PER BUILDER ' HA CORNER TRIM PER BUILDER 6 PANEL INSULATED STEEL DOOR A� bbbSSS O 4— CB O Q MAINTANCE BUILDING ELEVATION 3 SCALE: 1/4" =1'-0" 21'-0' I o O 5 G� ESIDENT STORAGE > CERT. NO s12I/ W201 DATE QO Y S � DRAWN er g a+ECKEoev - -- -- LS CONTEW I MAINTANCE BUILDING PLAN SCALE:114"=,'-0" MA2.01 EXHIBIT A NOT TO SCALE NOTES w 0.5\' o.z'z1. THE PROPERTY DELINEATED HEREON IS LOCATED ON FREDERICK COUNTY (5) O TAXMAP 53-A, PARCELS 81 AND 82, TAX MAP 538-3-24 AND TAX MAP 538-3-25 AND ARE ZONED RA. 0.3' _ 1.8' 1- 2. THE PROPERTY IS NOW IN THE NAME OF DARLA POE FUNKHOUSER AND SHARON S. POE AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 925, AT PAGE 1175 AND ®•- DEED BOOK RTIE . PAGE 924 (TAX MAP INSTRUMENT PARCELS 5 AND (TAX DETAIL AREA "A" DETAIL AREA "B" DETAIL AREA "C" DPHTHEED PROPERTIES. LLC AS RECORDED IN INSTRUMENT ELLS 818A (TAX MAP 538-3-25) AND UNITED BANK (FORMERLY THE MARATHON BANK) AS RECORDED IN INSTRUMENTS 050015166 (TAX MAP 53B-3-24) AMONG THE 7:'� r - ORTHW oS TERN PIKE > LAND RECORDS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA, U.vDH ION. ) L "\ (FORMERLY NORTi WESTERN 3. BOUNDARY INFORMATION AS SHOWN HEREON IS COMPILED FROM EXISTING / DETAIL AREA "A' _ GRADE) LAND RECORDS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA AND A FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED BY BOWMAN CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. IN NOVEMBER. 2007. •-�- _ 4. NORTH MERIDIAN INFORMATION AS SHOWN HEREON IS IN THE VIRGINIA I II E IRF �_ �-\ •�� "'T� COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. NORTH ZONE AND WAS ESTABLISHED BY IRF CPS METHODS. NGS MONUMENTS HTCC, LOY4, LOYC, LWX1 AND ZOC1 WERE I X / 15 1" E Y3 (BENT) IT'y;t16.t14077- USED TO ESTABLISH THE GRID USING GEOID C2003UO8. IIl IDISK FOUND a C7 It, 566891.52 IRF DISK �4 - % FOUND 5. VERTICAL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL r DATUM 88 OWN HEREON WAS PERFORMED (BY B)WMANNDCONSULTING GROUP.H MO � - I IRF' 6. THE PROPERTY AS SHOWN HEREON IS SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS AND I �P / \ \ 24• IIE21 �?> RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD AND THOSE RECORDED HEREWITH. BOWMAN ' I ,.,.,.,.,•:::._;::; ,...,.,., / \ �. /I S 13'43'23' W (FORMERLY THE MARATHON BANK) L PROVIDED11 REPORT AN CONSULTINGETHIS P LTD. S NOT B NECESSARILY NDICATE THE REXISTENCE OOF - 181.76' INSTR. 040018770SO THEREFORE S PLAT DOES T I / I 0 / ,\ y C \ -I g'� - / INSTR. 050003499 ANY COVENANTS 4ND RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY. I✓ • .< -:':_ O.B. 206, PG. 404 / f\ y� 1'� O�70'�ED 82 ^ INSTR. 060018270 (BLA) I I 20NESI N � E J .. /� `ZpNING N� � ZONED: 82 ZONING REQUIREMENTS USE: RESIDENTIAL v I / / USE: BANK / / >a1 N 44" (EXISTING ZONING) �' ; ,IRF S 76' 2.00.5'lr' UNITED BANI{ TM 53-A-81 / t 1004" F 3 Z6y6, (FORMERLY THE MARATHON BANK) O ZONED: RA (F'JRAL AREA DISTRICT)) / 83,766 S.F. �j 1 IRF 9`i 38" f INSTR. 050015166 TOTAL SITE AREA: 456,006 S.F. OR 10.46846 AC. // .... / .... PINCHED Mh /� . 9.2301 ACRE ✓ \ ` 1 IRF\ 28' / T.M. 538-3-24 ./ 10.301 S.F. SITE AREA TO BE REZONED: 456,006 S.F. OR 10.46846 AC. PIPE FOUND �� Q <'.V21 0.23648 ACRES SLED v` MIN. LOT SIZE 5 ACRES (TRADITIONAL. AGRICULTURAL) IEJ> - 1-2 ACRES AND 1-5 ACRES / —D LA ��I,nnE/ I N 1 IRF —PHTH PROPERTIES, LLC (FAMILY DIVISION) D.B. 242. PG. 585 h / / ISKJfO0N1) +N / 76?9• �- INSTR. 020005868 MINIMUM LOT WIDTH: 250' AS FRONT SETBACK / / ��� •` / TM 538-1-29/ /— / / /FUNKHDUSER� / 01I 35 Vi 209'.Z.7 IRf^ S 13'36'12" INTMO, O6 S.F.25 MAXIMUM DEP Di: 4:1 q. / ,/ 4 // P // SAND SHARON S. POE f OFF) -' hl� 102.44' 0.22970 ACRES •t--p / SETBACK REQUIREMENTS: (S.L) j I / 4, /✓ / r DEED BOOK 925, PAGE 91 4rJIL FRONT: 60' (TRADITIONAL LOT) DEED BOOK 929, PAG 9 4 I _ !r / TM 53-A-82 SIDE/REAR: DETERMINED BY ADJOINERS USE IPF - 1' �� SYMBOL LEGEND REAP.: 50' (6 ACRES OR LESS) -- a AEr / i 351.933 S.F. �ry I 8.07927 ACRES ' / / / Zm SIGN 100' (MORE THAN 6 ACRES) v 40' RIG (MORE _W5 �� „I I (NO BUILDINGS) \�" 200' (ORCHARD) D.B. 242. PG 585_ 1 Wo/ J//- m 87• 4 q�L �Eil L AREA o -'.' / / ID PHONE PEDESTAL /'� 456.006 S.F. ^ __ '�> POWER POLE 200' (AGRICULTURAL/FOREST DISTRICT) / 10.46846 AC \ gyp LIGHT POLE / •`.'; Qe W / I \ *= 3�' BUILDING HEIGHT MAX: 35' TACK FWNO I i I ! TOTAL PROJEC ^ `"�_ _ _ q4 _ GUY WIRE IN WOODEN p(Si�•FOUNO.._ / ) 1 ' 1^ °� Q'i� i�i YARD INLET -GRATE o FENCE POST 1 I 1-•.r ^ ~^\ / (ROPOSED ZONING) ' @ STORM MANHOLE ( ZONED: B2 ( BUSINESS GENERAL DISTRICT) /:•.::.:.:-.::,..: :. _ _ / / / / \ ^]??_N ` _; :::; / �I CCU SANITARY MANHOLE / •. / - - �� / ti SETBACK REQUIREMENTS: 35' ON COLLECTOR OR MINOR STREETS / / / / .::. 'i .. " b� 0 p• ��j/ / / /.� N 4 r WATER VALVE 50' (ON PRIMARY OR ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS) FIRE HYDRANT FRONT: D.B. 652. PC 685 / / \ W PROPERTY CORNERS FOUND / ZONED: RA �' / o � �� j / ` o �� I — — EDGE OF GRAVEL BUILDING HEIGHT MAX: 35" ........ / USE: RESIOENTIAL,ph `j / / —OHE -- OVERHEAD ELECTRIC MARK INROC;y/� / �-- ,r I EDGE OF CONCRETE EDGE OF PAVEMENT \� (0�0\ Q•TP / / / �- / / 2 J 1 —— CENTER LINE "x" MARK J ' / E I IN (/ / K-x- Bn BEOWOVEN FWRE FENCE EXHIBIT SHONANG FOUND Nv.= 833.55 / P HED r PROPOSED B2 ZONING IN ROCK j}/ SK EABNp-- OPOSEqq B� PIPE FOUND ` -- DITCH P.0.6. / / 20NING LINE \ \ �� P.O.B. POINT OF BEGINNING ON THE PROPERTY OF .ej (ON) ON THE PROPERTY DAR / INv.= 830.42 6 4M �9 �/ / \ \ ` �� L� / I OFF THE PROPERTY AND POE FUNKHOUSER (OFF) �A D SHARON S. POE IPS PROPERTY CORNER SET DEED BOOK 925, PAGE 1175 \ M1 IPF IRON PIPE FOUND DEED BOO 29, PAGE 924 / DISK FWD IRF IRON ROD FOUND AND RCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE PHTH PROPERTIES, LLC 0 CPP CORRUGATED PLASTIC PIPE INSTR. 020005868 N 75 , 115.944.60 ' E 11,566,394.97 --y �F) — — _-, — —j _ _ - -_— - - AND / UNITED BANK WOvEN WIRE FENCE EASEMENT LEGEND DETAIL AREA .,C" (FORMERLY THE MARATHON BANK) ` El EX. POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY ACCESS AND ELECTRIC LINE EASEMENT / N 7 115,867 41/ INSTR. 050015166 �1 0.8. 738, PG. 941 -- i'.:. ...�� .:'.:........... E 11.565.655.84 BACK CREEK DISTRICT '` EX. POTOMAC EDISON COMP -ANY SUBSTATION EASEMENT D.B. 929, PG. 921 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA { E2 1 D.8. 738. PG. 941 SCALE: 1" = 100 DATE: JANUARY 21, 2008 ZONED: RA USE: COMMERCIAL <IEI> EX.INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT REVISION 0.8. 652, PG. 685 o�4,,NLTI{O�, Df 9-4-OB ADDED UNITED BANK <`E2ACCESS EASEMENT IN omman > INSTR. 060018276 /� U L 1 T ' N G IN 1 9 20' STORM GRAIN EASEMENT / r C O N S 1 S0 1 INSTR. 060018276 FRA / EX. 30' FCWA WATER AND SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT t W1 1 INSTR. 060018276 Lie. No.002023 Bowman Consulft Group, Ltd Phone. (540) 722-2343 ` C/ t24 Fast Cork Street Fox- (640) 722-WOO ` EX. 20' FCSA WATER EASEMENT CURVE TABLE �- I-�8 Winchester, VtrgWo 22eOl www.bowmenconsulftcom r W2 1 INSTR. 070008788 'L,4N p4' O Bowmen Co Or Lld ,( CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHORD BEARING CHORD I DELTA TANGENT DS()R�E DWG:P:\5132 - Route 50 Assisted Li49\502-01-001 (STIR)\Surrey\Plats\5132-C-NP-001.dwg BY: DO CHK: 100 0 100 200 C1 2976.79' t31.79' S 84'31 20" E 131 78' 02'32'12" 65.90 BCG PROJECT NO:5132-01-001 1 TASK: 3 COUNTY REF NO:53-A-82 SHEET 1 OF 1 GRAPHIC SCALE _ _ _ I NOT TO SCALE O 0 Nv HAHN, RARBARA A. MAP ID: 53B-1 - i ZONED: RA USE: RES![)ENTIAL 17 MAP ID: 538-1-1 MAP ID: 53B-1-2 / EXIsnNG 2o' INGRESS, -'GRESS ESUT. N/F C652 PG 06E5 FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE MAP ID: 53—A-81 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 f1.9 ACRES EXISTING 50' - INGRESS/E',YZESS ES►RJ \' DB 0738 PG 09N5 I Y N/F A BUTCHER, TIMOTHY S. MAP ID: 53B-2-29 / / ZONED: RA / / USE RESIDENTAL / h / 1 Q- / 1 STONEWALL DRIVE — RTE. 8M �� / / 1 11 1 E)GSANG 50' - N/F W -RESS EGRFSS ESNT / PUFr'ENBERGER, JUDY N Do 0733 PG C'J45 MAP I,: 53B-2-24 / ZONED: RA / USE: RESIDENTIAL / N/F / SMITH, PATRICIA M. / MAP ID: 53-A-81 ZONED: RA / USE: RESIDEN11 ROUTE 50 _ NORTHWESTERN PIKE (VA F� M A20%&T�� wAl� SUBJECT PROPERTIES N/F FUNKHOUSER, DARLA POE MAP ID: 53—A-82 ZONED RA TO BE REZONED TO B2 f f8.0 ACRES f . \\-POTOMAC EDISON CO. EASEMENT DB 783, PG 941 ADJACENT OWNER EXHIBIT N/F ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY O'DONNE_L, TRUDY POE64 FREDERICK COUNTY, VA 5132-01-003 M 4P ID: 53-A-86 SCALE- NTS DATE JANUARY 2008 REVISED 0&05-2008 LONE RA USE: RESIDENTIAL _1Ad�P IDi:D: 55B;-3--5 D--;324P IDB ;- n M N/F a UNITED BANK MAP ID: 53B-3-5 ZONED: B2 USE: COMMERCIAL 3 EASTWC 7-11 N/F _-- UNITED BANK MAP ID: 53B-3-24 ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 USE: VACANT t.24 ACRE _j ---, N/F MAP ID: 53B-3-26 PHTH PROPERTIES LLC MAP ID: 53B-3-25 ZONED: RA TO BE REZONED B2 �Mw t.23 ACRE 538-3-27 N/F MAP ID: 538-3-28 ORD. GUY W. & ARMITH A. MAP ID: 53B-3-26,27,28 RA MAP ID: 53L, 3-29 USEZONED: : RESIDENTIAL . AP ID• 538-3-3 N/F MAP ID: 53[3- 3-31 RITTER, CALVIN LEE MAP ID: 53B-3-29, 30,31,32 ZONED: RA MAP !^: 53B-3-3 USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 53B-3-33 N/F 1---�MA�Pl538-3-34 SCRUGGS, JOSEPH I. MAP ID: 53B-3-33,34,35 4 f MAP ID: 53B-3-35 ZONED: RA USE: RESIDENTIAL I MAP ID: 53L4-3-3C � n ' N /F -"`— ANBODAN PROPERTIES LLC MAP ID. 53B-3-37 MAP ID: 53B-3-36,37,38 '• ZONED: RA � USE: RESIDENTIAL MAP ID: 53B-3-38 LEGEND EXISTING DESCRIPTION EDGE OF PAVEMENT PROPERTY UNE DEPARTING PROPERTY ONE FENCE LINE ADJACENT PROPERTIES SUBJECT PROPERTIES 1. RECENT ROUTE 50 IMPROVEMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY ARE NOT REFLECTED IN THE CITY OF 1MNCHESTER MAPPING U71UZED IN THIS EXHOIT. Bowman C O N S U L T IN G v '�rt �.i =i',�:'•{ r,�,�'Y +.r,xr "° 1 rx •� ,F''J/j �..�, f � '✓'" ''q. tT � G�S � 'i , � _ { .rx' ' �• T'�0.a' � •� .l; _ �. •�, �';; f rrx Y,rrt {^vjAw S"' ., t .•� ; r�. .: � , �'�,.` ♦ xY} .,-1 , � I'c'rJ • 1 ( i _ .' r�� y- �f�t,I ' t ��r /� .fir .{p. /%'� J '�, `�,}'�'• i, ' f t• rf � { r�Y: � rr.?itdr v: ,; .. Y- SUP=RC►E• •�= 1. �. .. v• t >^ t 1. s t. _ �. ��� k r •', Z. � kc: ''• �-a is � Y •yU,S'RO .. 6"-Y•.r ' � - r c, C O URTYA� § , 411614 .. ' �• �r _-�U7���try,' F -�� �} MARRtOTT voo 1 tWFSTERIV s' ,� ® r - ; 1. K •"Y It NCHES -'e` _ ..,,I�` `�,' - oMP"�iE�c .. +�'�; ' ' �r� � " - - - - %� -- ..-- •7 - _ ."�OU�?E 50 �� _t - -- RESIDENTIAL x : 1 Y� ♦'VA ROUrT - !� * N, -_, SUBJECT E { PROPERTY ' " LtVESTtvti �+�'�+. R � - �:: G • f . • �'":°� EXCHANGE. "y�1y �a ti ' ' `�- \4, REGYCL low- " ; %L.6 +. V Yr -,• . `•"� i. `�yi<�I•K 'i TO'TL �'RESIDENTIAL _" '' - •i ,' a:. • •Y I .. •�. 1 Oki AS ADOPTED. ....� �. N �, • . , 4( 'i ` sy NOV. 2007, PEA THE RHLUP CANDY HILL J '�• cy • -a; �. 'Qy 1CAAAPGROUNOLEGEND FUTURE COLLECTOR ROADS TAKEN FROM THE ROUND HILL k•,./�J°,! �[; / . i ^ . - •. �l • J y �It D ROUTECj, *51 0 ASSISTED LIVING IF 1 I 1 l' {' , , `.� • yt ., •' :4'-+ .� �� F' f , i ,,,r $ l\ '!1, V ,.t„��.. S FRF 5132-DFRICK COUNTY. VA 4. }SCALE NTS DATE JANUARY.2008 .� ' � J' ` '. ..�s'r •:.yy{{ ii t � �a�.f�i� ���� ..T - ilQ•. t7� - — - • _ �. eu WmTBOUN _ W • TE 5 •_ NOR �TERIAL RO Cr\i� �{l� � , e' 7 /•?- -jr RIGHT- W,A- �`�. _ y r+' 44 14 .r. i Wo L tP 3 Y FUWHOUSE,R, RARLA v 1 / 1 •/ MAP W 82 ^ +� / .: ✓ _ ZONE, RA TO BE ONED 1 ► v%ft— • - }A0 ACRE SAW STANDARD LEGEND F DOSING DESORPTION Ir '171 1 ♦ J� I i X Y �. ,Y B x � ow SN7M RA � n A4111i s,. _- w1EnmA1E LOu1OIR I • • • • SOILS ORMEA8a1 UIE F c .iK SLOPES �S 1YER -RIF i.10 ACRES TWI 75f , r 0 It • o:F �e-al ;7e �: SOILS LEGEND ,► - - �!'lAl 4! / ' ` t� 7 j 3 :, ► - ` sYMBOI ----- - NAW SLOPES HYDROLOGIC GROUP - ` i..✓..vim,. r / • � ' � �: �/� J - ' l / �J /, Al . 6c; CARBOQ4KLET SILT LOAF14 i 2-1596 C 14< FREDERIC(-PCf'UMEN'R'?L04MS 7-75M. E I� 17C FREDERICK-PCPUMENR?ROCK 2.15% E '4 A aUrcRDP COMPLEX air \ -. �`� \� .. e . ` �'-ice /. ` • A, ' C « i• NOTE: 1. THERE ARE NO FLOOD PLAINS ONSITE PER FEMA MAPI:510063 01158 (JULY 17, 1878) 2 THERE ARE NO KNOWN WETLANDS ONSITE PER A STUDY CONDUCTED BY E C.S ON A SITE VISIT NOVEMBER 26 2001 Af l •�. • i— \. 3 THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY IS IN 2CONTOUR INTERVALS AND TAKEN FROM THE FREDERICK COUN Y GIS DATABASE. eysR'�� • ` �,, I� , ! �/ �� 7 I 1 ` / / / • 1J Jy / / ; / GRAPHIC SCALE EXISTING NATURAL CONDITIONS T 'WEN 1 ��•'FFII/_.\e i \+,+ i!R /11,-` / _ I Inn - so n �\ A K , .• ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY/VESI / FREDERICK COUNTY, VA 5132-01-003 ti � 7 - Bowman SCALE: NTS DATE: JANUARY 2008 REVISED 09/05/2008 / — - �,9 - = T o / / C 0 N S V L T i N G J r ♦ / SEWER TO BE TREATED a AT THE OPEQUON WATER' SwS RECLAMATION FACILITY ♦ ' ��/ �� ♦ 'c') SOURCE OF WATER IS FROM Q THE JAMES T. ANDERSON Q�® ART 20„ J WATER TREATMENT PLANT JO♦ TO WALM WI N C H E S TE R DEVELOPMENT MEDICAL4 20" � WALMART CENTER SUPERCENTER 16" • a. ROUTE 5EXISTING WATER LINE 0 _ NDRT H WES TERN VDOT Pi moo. N SEWER & WATER EXHIBIT ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FREDERICK COUNTY. VA 5132-01-003 SCALE N TS DATE JANUARY 2008 REVISED 09/0hi?1X10 ROPOSED- ATER LINE PROPOSED SAN. SEWE SITE Alk u TO COURTYARD r • �0 MARRIOTT 12" / •• EXISTING 20" SAN. SEWER I 20'` l 2" a 20 CONNECTION a Q� 1 2" TO EXISTING a UTILITY LINES a r a a • �\`1 �0 S-T =<v _■. LEGEND SWSA I EXISTING PUMP STATION I# EXISTING MANHOLE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING WATER EXISTING SANITARY SEWER UNDER CONSTRUCTION WATER — — UNDER CONSTRUCTION SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN —'N — PROPOSED WATER — PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER Bowman C O N S U L T I N G HH Hunt Assisted Liviwfraffic Impact Ana APPENDIX 0 0 HH Hunt Assisted Livin'raffic Impact Analysis TECHNICAL APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX A EXISTING (2008) TRAFFIC VOLUMES & COUNT SHEETS APPENDIX B LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS APPENDIX C SCOPING DOCUMENT APPENDIX D INTERSECTION CAPAC/TYANAL PSIS RESUL TS - EXISTING CONDITION APPENDIX E INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESUL TS - FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT APPENDIX F-1 TRIPS GENERATION FOR BACKGROUND DEVELOPMENTS APPENDIX F-2 TRIPS DISTRIBUTION FOR BACKGROUND DEVELOPMENTS APPENDIX G INTERSECTION CAPACITYANAL PSIS RESUL TS - FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH DEVELOPMENT APPENDIX H QUEUING ANAL YSIS (2010) 0 HH Hunt Assisted Livhwraffic Im Analysis • APPENDIX A • 0 EXISTING (ZOOS) TRAFFIC VOL UMES & COUNT SHEETS Gorove/Slade ,Associates Protect Name : HHHUNT ASSITED LIVING Protect 49: 2151.001 Location WINCHESTER, VA nara s„��rro ----A. —A. e«..�,��e� Intersection: NORTHWESTERN AVENUE (RTE. 50) AT ECHO LANE AM PEAK .. - Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound .Eastbound Roadway: ECHO LANE RTE. 50 ECHO LANE RTE. 50 Movement:, Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds 6:00 AM It. 6:15 AM 6:15 AM to 6:30 AM 6:30 AM to 6:45 AM 6:45 AM to 7:00 AM 7:00 AM to 7:15 AM 7:15 AM to 7:30 AM 7:30 AM to 7:45 AM 7:45 AM to 8:00 AM 8:00 AM to 3:15 AM 3:15 AM to 8:30 AM 8:30 AM to 8:45 AM_ 8:45 AM to 9:00 AM PM PEAK Direction: - Southbound Westbound. Northbound Eastbound . Roadway: ECHO LANE . " RTE. 50 : ECHO LANE RTE. 50 Mo-ment.• Right Thru Left .Peds Right Thru Left Peds Ripht Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds 4:00 PM It. 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 227 0 0 4:15 PM to 4:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 201 0 0 4:30 PM to 4:45 PM 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 186 0 0 4:45 PM to 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 177 0 0 5:00 PM to 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 214 0 0 5:15 PM to 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 186 0 0 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 178 0 0 5:45 PM to 6:00 Put 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 0 3 6:00 PM to 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 184 0 0 6:15 PM to 6:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163 0 0 6:30 PM to 6:45 PM. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 0 0 6:45 PM to 7:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 0 0 PEAK HOURS Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Roadway: ECHO LANE _ RTE. 50 ECHO LANE- RTE. 50 Movement: Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru - Left Peds- Right. Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds AM INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR. ; - 6:00 AM to 7:00 AM I. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ., 0 0 0 0 0 PAI INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 791 0 0 AM SYSTEM PEAK HOUR 6:00 AM, to 7:00 AM 10 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM SYSTEM PEAK HOUR 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM I 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 755 0 0 PEAK HOUR Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound FACTORS ECHO LANE RTE. 50 ECHO LANE RTE.50 Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Lett Peds AAIPEAKHOUR 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A PMPEAKHOUR 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.50 - 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.88 0.00 N/A Overall AM PEAK HOUR FACTOR = MDIV/O! Overall PM PEAK HOUR FACTOR = 0.88 AM Period Intersection Volume: 0 PM Period Intersection Volume: 2177 Date of Counts: Thursday, January10, 2008 AM Weather Conditions:1 Mild, Clear PM Weather Conditions: 1 Mild, Clear AM INTERSECTION PEAK VOLUMES AM SYSTEM PEAK VOLUMES ? 1I w PM INTERSECTION PEAK VOLUMES lit 4 ¢2 RTE 50 RTE 50 0 g } 0 0 0 0 791 —� v 1 0 0 o Q 2 /— w i PM SYSTEM PEAK VOLUMES 1 o I N 2 w Z 0 0 0 � p w 0 '-- 0 RTE. 50 —� 755 I RTE 50 H • Gorove/Slade Associates Project Name : HHHUNT ASSITED LIVING Project � : 2151 001 Location : WI I HESTER, VA Intersection: NORTHWESTERN AVENUE (RTE.50) AT WARD AVE. AM PEAK Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound ,Eastbound Roadway: BOTANICAL RTE. 50 WARD AVE. RTE. 50 Movement., Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Pods Right Thru, Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds 6:00 AM to 6:15 AM 6:15 AM to 6:30 AM 6:30 AM to 6:45 AM 6:45 AM to 7:00 AM 7:00 AM to 7:15 AM 7:15 AM to 7:30 AM 7:30 AM to 7:45 AM 7:45 AM to 8:00 AM 8:00 AM to 8:15 AM 8:15 AM to 8:30 AM 8:30 AM to 8:45 AM 8:45 AM to 9:00 AM PM PEAK Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Roadway: BOTANICAL RTE. 50 WARD AVE. RTE 50 Movement: Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Pods 4:00 PM to 4:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 392 11 0 2 1 8 0 5 184 0 0 4:15 PM to 4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 1 383 9 0 3 0 14 0 12 180 0 0 4:30 PM to 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 3 381 10 0 0 0 7 0 2 165 0 0 4:45 PM to 5:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 411 12 0 2 0 11 0 10 177 0 0 5:00 PM to 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 409 9 0 3 0 5 0 16 184 0 0 5:15 PM to 5:30 PM 2 0 0 0 1 446 11 0 7 0 14 0 4 177 1 0 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 1 393 8 3 4 0 6 0 8 167 1 0 5:45 PM to 6:00 PM 2 0 2 0 1 338 15 0 7 0 11 0 9 161 0 0 6:00 PM to 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 2 287 8 0 2 1 8 0 8 175 1 0 6:15 PM to 6:30 PM 0 0 1 0 2 299 9 0 2 0 6 0 7 163 2 0 6:30 PM to 6:45 PM 2 0 1 0 0 230 9 0 3 1 4 0 10 144 0 0 6:45 PM to 7:00 PM 1 1 0 2 0 1 200 3 0 3 1 5 0 8 114 0 0 PEAK HOURS Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Roadway: BOTANICAL RTE. 50 WARD AVE. RTE. 50 Movement: Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru, Left Peds Right Thru . Left Peds AM INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR 6:00 AM to 7:00 AM I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM 3 0 0 0 _ 2 1659 40 3, 16 0 36 0 38 705 2 0 AM SYSTEM PEAK HOUR 6:00 AM to 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PMSYSTEMP£AKHOUR 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM 3 0 0 0 2 1659 40 3 16 0 36 0 38, 705 2 0 PEAK HOUR Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound FACTORS BOTANICAL RTE.50 WARD AVE. RTE. 50 Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Pods AMPEAKHOUR 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 . N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 NIA PMPEAKHOUR 0.38 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.50 0.93 0.83 N/A 0.57 0.00 0.64 - N/A 0.59 0.96 0.50 N/A Overall AM PEAK HOUR FACTOR = 99#«d Overall PM PEAK HOUR FACTOR = 0.94 AM Peneo Intersection Volume: 0 PM Period Intersection Volume: ooui Date of Counts: Thursday, January 10, 2008 AM Weather Conditions: PM Weather Conditions: AM INTERSECTION PEAK VOLUMES AM SYSTEM PEAK VOLUMES If 01 PM INTERSECTION PEAK VOLUMES lit 0 0 F. F. o Z m �D —0 RTE 50 0 0 RTE 50 0 —� 0J ¢ 0 —+ 3 0 E. 0 PM SYSTEM PEAK VOLUMES III 0 • -GereVe/Slade Associates Project Name: HHHUNT ASSISTED LIVING Project # : 2151 001 Location WINCHESTER, VA nata s� • is Intersection: NORTHWESTERN AVENUE (RTE. 50) AT ECHO LANE AM PEAK Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound _.... _. Eastbound . Roadway: ECHO LANE RTE. 50 ECHO LANE RTE. 50 Movement: Right . Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds 11:00 AM to 11:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 223 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 251 0 0 11:15 AM to 1 i:30 AM 0 0 0 0 3 220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 219 0 0 11:30 AM to 11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 273 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 229 0 0 11:45 AM to 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 281 0 0 12:00 PM to 12:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 225 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 263 0 0 12:15 PIA to 12:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 238 0 0 12:30 PM to 12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 244 0 0 12:45 PM to 1:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 228 0 0 1:00 PM to 1:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 265 0 0 1:15 Phi to 1:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 264 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 0 0 1:30 PM to 1:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 0 0 1:45 PNt to 2:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 0 0 PM PEAK Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound ..Eastbound Roadway: ECHO LANE RTE. 50 ECHO LANE RTE. 50 .. Movement: Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds 4:00 PM to 4:15 PM 4:15 PAt to 4:30 PM 4:30 PM to 4:45 PM 4:45 PM to 5:00 PM 5:00 PM to 5:15 PM 5:15 PM to 5:30 PM 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM 5:45 PM to 6:00 PM 6:00 P1vl to 6:15 PM 6:15 PM to 6:30 PM 6:30 PM to 6:45 PM 6:45 PM to 7:00 PM PEAK HOURS Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Roadway. ECHO LANE RTE. 50 ECHO LANE RTE. 50: Movement: Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left . Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right. .Thru - Left Peds AM INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR " 12:45 PM to 1:45 PM 1 3 0 0 0 0 1069 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 972 0 0 PM INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 AM SYSTEM PEAK HOUR :2:45 PM to 1:45 PM I 3 0 0 0 0 1069 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 972 0 0 PAT SYSTEM PEAK HOUR 4:00 PM to 5,00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 PEAK HOUR Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound FACTORS ECHO LANE RTE.50 - ECHO LANE RTE.50 Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds AMPEAKHOUR 0.75 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.99 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.92 0.00 N/A PMPEAKHOUR 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0,00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A Overall AM PEAK HOUR FACTOR = 0.96 Overall PM PEAK HOUR FACTOR = 44499 AM Period Intersection Volume: 5955 PM Period Intersection Volume: 0 Date of Counts: I Saturday, January 12, 2008 AM Weather Conditions:1 Mild, Clear PM Weather Conditions: Mild, Clear AM INTERSECTION PEAK VOLUMES AM SYSTEM PEAK VOLUMES 1417 It L 2 � 0 0 RTE 50 RTE 50 0 g 0 0 0 972 —� w 0 PM INTERSECTIONPEAKVOLUMES l I 0 0 0 Z 0 �D RTE 50 1 RTE 50 0 0 ~ = w o 0 0 0 PM SYSTEM PEAK VOLUMES lit Z 0 0 o 5 w RTE 50 0 0 � 0 r —I *,— 0 —0 RTE. 50 0 Gorove/Slade Associates Prolect Name : HHHUNT ASSITED LIVING Prolect # : 2151-001 Location : WINCHESTER, VA Baia Sni f:nr ,c/ClarVn nccnr-iornc Intersection: NORTHWESTERN AVENUE (RTE.50) AT WARD AVE. AM PEAK Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Roadway: BOTANICAL RTE. 50 WARD AVE. RTE. 50 Movement: Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds . Right Thru Left Pods Right Thru Left Peds 11:00 AM to 11:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 211 6 0 3 0 4 0 10 227 0 0 11:15 AM to 11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 1 228 11 0 7 0 6 1 10 213 1 0 11:30 AM to 11:45 AM 0 0 3 0 0 267 4 0 2 1 6 0 12 204 2 0 11:45 AM to 12:00 PM 2 0 5 0 1 234 4 0 1 0 6 0 14 268 1 0 12:00 PM to 12:15 PM 1 0 2 0 1 227 6 0 6 0 3 0 13 238 1 0 12:15 PM to 12:30 PM 1 0 1 0 0 237 5 0 2 0 9 0 8 233 0 0 12:30 PM to 12:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 258 5 0 4 0 9 0 6 233 0 0 12:45 PM to 1:00 PM 5 1 12 0 0 254 4 0 0 0 2 0 12 217 0 0 1:00 PM to 1:15 PM 0 0 1 0 5 258 5 0 3 0 6 2 13 241 2 0 1:15 PM to 1:30 PM 0 0 1 0 7 274 4 0 3 1 6 0 5 211 2 0 1:30 PM to 1:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1 259 4 0 2 0 4 0 10 243 3 0 1:45 PM to 2:00 PM 2 0 2 0 2 241 10 0 2 1 6 0 8 201 0 0 PM PEAK Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Roadway: BOTANICAL RTE. 50 'WARD AVE. RTE. 50 Movement: Right Thru LeftPeds Right Thru .1-eft Pods Right Thru Left Pods Right Thru . Left Pods 4:00 PM to 4:15 PM 4:15 PM to 4:30 PM 4:30 PM to 4:45 PM 4:45 PM to 5:00 PM 5:00 PM to 5:15 PM 5:15 PM to 5:30 PM 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM 5:45 PM to 6:00 PM 6:00 PM to 6:15 PM 6:15 PM to 6:30 PM 6:30 PM to 6:45 PM 6:45-PM to 7:00 PM PEAK HOURS ' Direction: Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Roadway., BOTANICAL RTE. 50 ., WARD AVE. RTE. 50 Movement: Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds AM INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR 12:45 PM to 1:45 PM I 5 2 14 0 13 1045 17 0 . 8 1 18 2 40 912 7 0 PM INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM I 0 0 0- 0 - 0 0 0 0- 0 0' 0 0- 0 0 0 0 Alit SYSTEM PEAKHOUR 12:45 PM to 1:45 PM ( 5 2 14 0 13 1045 17 0 8 i 18 2 40 912 7 0 PMSYSTEMPEAKHOUR 4:00 Plvt to 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEAK HOUR Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound FACTORS BOTANICAL RTE. 50 - WARD AVE. RTE: 50 Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left. Peds Right -- Thru Left Peds Right Thru - Left Peds AMPEAKHOUR 0.25 0.50 -0.29 N/A 0.46 0.95 0.85 - N/A 0.67 0:25 0.75 N/A 0.77 0.94 0.58 N/A PMPEAKHOUR 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00- 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00' 0.00 0.00 N/A 0' vercnall AM PEAK HOUR FACTOR - 0.97 - Overall PM PEAK HOUR FACTOR - #### AM Period Intersoon Volume: ouwc PM Period Intersection Volume: Date of Counts: Saturday, January 12, 2008 AM Weather Conditions: 1 1 PM Weather Conditions: AM INTERSECTION PEAK VOLUMES AM SYSTEM PEAK VOLUMES lit lit RTE 50 1 I 1�2 o m lit PM INTERSECTION PEAK VOLUMES j j 13 v c¢i — 3045 Z I p 17 '—FI0687 RTE 50 1075 — ' 959 RTE 50 934 —+ 7 h1 I 912 � m m 40 m 1 I PM SYSTEM PEAK VOLUMES It O o 100 RTE 50 U O m RTE 50 HH Hunt Assisted Livi_Traffic Impact Analysis • APPENDIX B LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS • • HH Hunt Assisted LiviWraffic Impact Analysis APPENDIX B: LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS • All capacity analyses are based on the procedures specified by the Transportation Research Board, Special Report 209: Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 2000. Levels of service (LOS) range from A to F. A brief description of each level of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections is provided below. Signalized Intersections: Level of service is based upon the traffic volume present in each lane on the roadway, the capacity of each lane at the intersection and the delay associated with each directional movement. The levels of service for signalized intersections are defined below: • Level of Service A describes operations with very low average delay per vehicle, i.e., less than 10.0 seconds. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop. Short signal cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. • Level of Service B describes operations with average delay in the range of 10.1 to 20.0 seconds per vehicle. This generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. • Level of Service C describes operations with delay in the range of 20.1 to 35.0 seconds per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is • significant at this level although many still pass through the intersection without stopping. This is generally considered the lower end of the range of the acceptable level of service in rural areas. ' Level of Service D describes operations with delay in the range of 35.1 to 55.0 seconds per vehicle. At LOS D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, and/or high traffic volumes as compared to the roadway capacity. Many vehicles are required to stop and the number of vehicles that do not have to stop declines. hndividual signal cycle failures, where all waiting vehicles do not clear the intersection during a single green time, are noticeable. This is generally considered the lover end of the range of the acceptable level of service in urban areas. ' Level of Service E describes operations with delay in the range of 55.1 to 80.0 seconds per vehicle. These higher delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high traffic volumes. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. LOS E has been set as the limit of acceptable conditions. ' Level of Service F describes operations with average delay in excess of 80.0 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with over - saturation, i.e., when traffic arrives at a flow rate that exceeds the capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high volumes with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also contribute to such delays. • HH Hunt Assisted Livhwraffic Impact Analysis Llnsignalized Intersections: At an unsignalized intersection, the major street through traffic and right turns are assumed to operate unimpeded and therefore receive no level of service rating. The level of service for the minor street and the major street left turn traffic is dependent on the volume and capacity of the available lanes, and, the number and frequency of acceptable gaps in the major street traffic to make a conflicting turn. The level of service grade is provided for each conflicting movement at an unsignalized intersection and is based on the total average delay experienced by each vehicle. The delay includes the time it takes a vehicle to move from the back of a queue through the intersection. The unsignalized intersection level of service analysis does not account for variations in driver behavior or the effects of nearby traffic signals. Therefore, the results from this analysis usually indicates worse levels of service than may be experienced in the field. The unsignalized intersection level of service descriptions are provided below: ■ Level of Service A. Describes operations where there is very little to no conflicting traffic for a minor side street movement, i.e., an average total delay of less than 10.0 seconds per vehicle. ■ Level of Service B. Describes operations with average total delay in the range of 10.1 to 15.0 seconds per vehicle. ■ Level of Service C. Describes operations with average total delay in the range of 15.1 to 25.0 second per vehicle. . ' ■ Level of Service D. Describes operations with average total delay in the range of 25.1 to 35.0 seconds per vehicle. • Level of Service E. Describes operations with average total delay in the range of 35.1 to 50.0 seconds per vehicle. • Level of Service F. Describes operations with average total delay of 50 seconds per vehicle. LOS F exists when there are insufficient gaps of suitable size to allow a side street demand to cross safely through or enter a major street traffic stream. This level of service is generally evident from extremely long total delays experienced by side street traffic and by queuing on the minor approaches. It is important to note that LOS F may not always result in long queues but may result in adjustments to normal driver behavior. 17A HH Hunt Assisted Liviwraffic I ct Analysis • APPENDIX C • • TRAFFIC IMPACT ANAL PSIS SCOPING DOCUMENT 0 u ����Virgirtirt Dtpartrttertt •YOOT of Transporiatiort t, As PRE -SCOPE OF WORK MEETING FORM Information on the Project Traffic Impact Analysis Base Assumptions The applicant is responsible for having this form completed and returned to VDOT and the locality no less than three (3) business days prior to the meeting. If a completed form is not received by this deadline, the scope of work meeting may be postponed. Contact Information Consultant Name: Chad A. Baird, Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Tele: 703-787-9595 E-mail: cab@goroveslade.com Developer/Owner Name: HHHunt, Bo Cook Jr. Tele: 919-461-0587 E-mail: wrcook@hhhunt.com Project Information Project Name: HH Hunt Assisted Living Project Location: Frederick County, VA. Regional and site -specific location map attached. (Attach regional and site specific location map)g Please see Figures 1 and 2. Project Description: The property is currently zoned as RA. The size of the property is approx. Including type of application (rezoning, subdivision, site 9.9 acres. A rezoningof this property is being r p p ty g proposed to allow for an plan), acreage, business square assisted living development, comprising of up to approx. 84 beds. Access ft, number of dwelling units, points along Northwestern Pike and Ward Avenue will serve the proposed access location, etc. Attach development. additional sheet if necessary) Locality/County: Frederick County, VA Proposed Use: (Check all that apply; attach Residential Commercial ❑ Mixed Use ❑ Other ❑ additional pages as necessary) Residential: Commercial Use Sq Ft: Assisted Living: 84 Beds TRIP GENERATION ITE LU Code: 254 TABLEE ATTACHED. HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility — 0rick County, VA January 17, 2008 Page 2 Traffic Impact Analysis Assumptions Study Period Existing Year: 2008 Build -out Year: 2010 Design Year: NA North: Route 50 South: Study Area Boundaries East: Ward Avenue West: Echo Lane (Attach map) External Factors That Could Affect Project - Winchester Medical Center (Planned road improvements, - Retail Center along Crock Wells Mill Drive other nearby developments) Consistency With Yes Comprehensive Plan Available Traffic Data (Historical, forecasts) VDOT AADT Data, Existing Traffic Counts (2008) Trip Distribution (Attach sketch) Road Name: Route 50 N % S _% E 90% W 10 % Road Name: N % S % E W Road Name: N % S % E % W % — PLEASE SEE ATI-ACHED FIGURE 3. . Road Name: S E W N % Annual Vehicle Trip 2% on Route 50 Peak Period for Study AM PM SA Growth Rate: (circle all that apply) 1. Route 50 & Echo Ln 6. Study Intersections 2. Route 50 & Ward Ave. 7. 3. All future access points 8. and/or Road Segments (Attach additional sheets as necessary) 4. 9. 5. 10. Trip Adjustment Internal allowance: ❑ Yes No Pass -by allowance: ❑ Yes No Factors Reduction: % trips Reduction: % trips Software Methodology Synchro ❑ HCS (v.2000/+) ❑ aaSIDRA ❑ CORSIM ❑ Other Traffic Signal Proposed or Affected 1. Northwestern Pike & Ward Ave. (Analysis software to be used, progression speed, cycle .length) HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility— Erick County, VA January 17, 2008 Page 3 Improvement(s) Assumed or to be N/A Considered Background Traffic N/A Studies Considered ❑ Master Development Plan (MDP) * Generalized Development Plan (GDP) Plan Submission ❑ Preliminary/Sketch Plan ❑ Other Plan type (Final Site, Subd, Plan) Queuing analysis ❑ Actuation/Coordination ElWeaving analysis Additional Issues to be addressed ❑ Merge analysis -* Bike/Ped Accommodations * Intersection(s) ❑ TDM Measures ❑ Other NOTES on ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Will analyze PM and Saturday peak period. AM peak period will not be analyzed. 2. TIA will include text regarding Ped and Bike accommodations. AGREED: e � X� DATE: 01 17 2008 Applicant or Consultant PRINT NAME: Chad A. Baird, Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Applicant or Consultant SIGNED: DATE: VDOT Representative PRINT NAME: SIGNED: • PRINT NAME: VDOT Representative Local Government Representative Local Government Representative DATE: HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility— 0rick County, VA January 17, 2008 Page 4 • HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility Trip Generation Table (Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic) ITE ------ Weekday ------ Land Use Code Size SAT Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Assisted Living 254 84 Occ 27 7 34 13 12 25 231 Beds TOTAL 27 7 34 13 12 25 231 HH Hunt Assisted Trip Generation Table (Peak Hour of Generator) ITE ------ Weekday ------ Land Use Code Size SAT Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Assisted Living 254 84 Occ 27 7 34 13 23 26 231 Beds TOTAL 27 7 34 13 23 26 231 is HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility - rick County, VA January 17, 2008 Page 5 • 0 • im Figure 1: Regional Map Rol SIT in szz Winchester P 522 i7l; ,50 • • 0 HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility - 19rick County, VA • January 17, 2008 Page 6 ./X 37 Pike Nrn Pike J d � O y SITE 3/ ock Harbor % 11110nT P/ Figure 2: Area Map and Site Location HH Hunt Assisted Living Facility— 0rick County, VA • January 17, 2008 Page 7 • Pike _ _ ♦— 90% :.50 ITo---rn Pike ^ a 10% _ - - F j6 9� C y SITE r } • k Harbor Figure 3: DOA 0 Cr r°�� U.of �'Pr�fiJns AI HH Hunt Assisted Livi_Traffic Impact Analysis • APPENDIX D INTERSECTION CAPACITYANAL PSIS RESUL TS - EXISTING CONDITION • 0 0 t� HCM Unsignalized Int9ection Capacity Analysis Exi* PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 3: Route 50 & Echo Lane 2/1/2008 EB' EBT EBR, SWL SWT SWRMovenenf Lane Configurations 0 ttt r �` r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 768 1 0 851 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 835 1 0 925 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 588 pX, platoon unblocked 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 vC, conflicting volume 925 836 1146 1760 418 1342 1761 308 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 840 836 1070 1710 418 1275 1710 198 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 760 794 168 86 584 119 86 778 Direction, Lane # ` EB 1 EB 2'. WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 WB 4 NE 1 SW 1 Volume Total 557 279 308 308 308 0 0 2 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 778 Volume to Capacity 0.33 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 1 HCM Signalized Inter*ion Capacity Analysis Exi'* PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5: Route 50 & Botanical Boulevard 2/1/2008 • • - # Movement EBL EBT: EBR ML.' _WBT_„ UVBR NBL ' NBT ` NBR SBL'`: SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r '� ttt r ' '� r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1770 1583 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1770 1583 1583 Volume (vph) 2 727 39 40 831 2 18 0 16 0 0 2 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 2 790 42 43 903 2 20 0 17 0 0 2 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 15 0 0 1 0 0 16 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2 790 27 43 903 1 0 20 1 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 1.1 60.2 60.2 3.9 63.0 63.0 3.4 3.4 1.0 Effective Green, g (s) 3.6 63.7 63.7 6.4 66.5 66.5 6.9 6.9 4.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.65 0.65 0.07 0.68 0.68 0.07 0.07 0.05 Clearance Time (s) 6.5 7.5 7.5 6.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 65 2312 1034 116 3468 1080 125 112 73 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.22 c0.02 c0.18 c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00 0.00 c0.00 v/c Ratio 0.03 0.34 0.03 0.37 0.26 0.00 0.16 0.01 0.00 Uniform Delay, d1 45.3 7.5 6.0 43.6 6.0 4.9 42.6 42.1 44.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 0.0 2.0 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 Delay (s) 45.5 7.6 6.0 45.6 6.2 4.9 43.2 42.2 44.4 Level of Service D A A D A A D D D Approach Delay (s) 7.6 8.0 42.7 44.4 Approach LOS A A D D ilntersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.32 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 97.5 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intgection Capacity Analysis Exist* SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 3: Route 50 & Echo Lane 2/1/2008 • Movement . EBl_ .EBT �EBR, . 1NBL 1NBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL. .SVI[T.. SWF Lane Configurations tT+ ttt r r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 966 1 0 1069 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1050 1 0 1162 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 588 pX, platoon unblocked 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 vC, conflicting volume 1162 1051 1441 2212 526 1687 2213 387 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1022 1051 1322 2152 526 1587 2153 188 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 •cM capacity (veh/h) 627 ' 658 106 44 497 67 44 764 Direction, Lane # EB 1 E8.2 WB 1 V1B-2 V1B 3 WB 4 NE 1 SW 1 i Volume Total 700 351 387 387 387 0 0 3 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 764 Volume to Capacity 0.41 0.21 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 • HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 1 • HCM Signalized Inter#ion Capacity Analysis Exist* SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5: Route 50 & Botanical Boulevard 2/1/2008 E?ment :EBL . EBT ' EBR . WBL INBT AVBR... NBL NBT .`:,NBR ' SBL SBT .: SBf Lane Configurations tt r '� ttt r +T r '� 4 r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1778 1583 1681 1703 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1778 1583 1681 1703 1583 Volume (vph) 7 919 40 17 1046 13 18 1 8 14 2 5 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 8 999 43 18 1137 14 20 1 9 15 2 5 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 14 0 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 8 999 29 18 1137 10 0 21 1 8 9 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 1.4 71.0 71.0 3.1 72.7 72.7 3.2 3.2 2.8 2.8 2.8 Effective Green, g (s) 3.9 74.5 74.5 5.6 76.2 76.2 6.7 6.7 6.3 6.3 6.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.68 0.68 0.05 0.70 0.70 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 Clearance Time (s) 6.5 7.5 7.5 6.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 63 2417 1081 91 3552 1106 109 97 97 98 91 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.28 c0.01 0.22 c0.01 0.00 c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.41 0.03 0.20 0.32 0.01 0.19 0.01 0.08 0.09 0.00 Uniform Delay, d1 51.0 7.6 5.6 49.6 6.4 5.0 48.6 48.1 48.7 48.7 48.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 0.5 0.0 1.1 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 Delay (s) 51.9 8.2 5.6 50.7 6.6 5.0 49.5 48.1 49.0 49.1 48.5 Level of Service D A A D A A D D D D D Approach Delay (s) 8.4 7.3 49.1 48.9 Approach LOS A A D D ;Intersection, Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.36 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 109.1 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.1 % ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group • HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 2 HH Hunt Assisted LiviMET raffic Impact Ana APPENDIX E 4 INTERSECT/ON CAPAC/TYANAL YS/S RESULTS -FUTURE COND/T/ONS WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT • • HCM Unsignalized Int0ection Capacity Analysis Backgco PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 3: Route 50 & Echo Lane 2/1/2008 .ter -■ � '''`- "- � � � ,� Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET, N.ER SWL. SWT SWR? Lane Configurations t'4 ttt r r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 1312 1 0 1105 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1426 1 0 1201 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 588 pX, platoon unblocked 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 vC, conflicting volume 1201 1427 1829 2628 714 1914 2628 400 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 968 1427 1677 2579 714 1773 2580 63 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 •cM capacity (veh/h) 626 ' 472 55 22 'SW 374 46 22 875 Dired I6n, Lane # EB -1 EB, 2' WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 WB 4 NE 1 1 Volume Total 951 476 400 400 400 0 0 2 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 875 Volume to Capacity 0.56 0.28 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 Approach LOS A A lintersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 • HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 1 HCM Signalized Inter0ion Capacity Analysis o PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5: Route 50 & Botanical BOUl8VGnd 2Y1/2008 ~�x � � ^� / ovemen Total Lost time /a\ 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utii Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 8.05 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 FIt Protected 0.05 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Satd.Flow (prot) 1770 3530 1583 1770 5085 1583 1770 1583 1681 1881 1583 At Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.05 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1770 1583 1681 1681 1583 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.02 0.92 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.92 0.02 0.02 0.02 Adj. Flow k/ph> 87 1314 45 46 1146 225 20 0 17 120 O 35 RTORReduction (vph) 0 0 14 O O 97 O 0 18 U O 31 Lane Group F| Turn Type Prot Pann Prot Perm Split Pann Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 G 8 8 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G (o) 7.4 58.6 58.8 5.3 58.5 68.5 4.5 4.5 8.3 8.3 8.3 Effective Green, g (e) 0.0 82.1 02.1 7.8 80.0 80.0 8.0 8.0 11.8 11.8 11.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 8.09 0.50 0.50 0.07 0.57 0.57 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.11 Clearance Time (e) 8.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Vehicle Extension Lane Grp Cap (vph) 166 2079 030 131 2886 899 134 120 188 188 177 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Penn o0.04 o0.37 0.02 0.03 0.23 0.08 00.01 0.00 o0.04 0.04 0.00 - v/uRatio 0.40 0.83 0.03 0.35 0.40 0.14 0.15 0.01 0.35 0.34 0.02 Uniform Delay, d1 45.1 14.3 9.2 40.5 12.8 107 457 45.2 43.4 43.4 41.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Da|ey. d2 1.8 1.5 0.1 1.0 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.1 Delay (u) 487 15.8 0.2 48.2 13.2 11.1 46.2 452 44.5 444 41.0 Level ofService O 8 A D B B D D D D D Approach Da|ay(o) 17.0 14.0 457 43.0 /\pproaohLOS B 8 O D 0 - .- ;nooreecxmn�unnnary HCK4Average Control Delay 17.4 HC[WLevel ofService B HCMVolume toCapacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length (a) 1057 Sum oflost time /a> 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.7% ICU Level ofService 8 Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HHHunt AusdodLiving Synohro8Report Gorova/S|adoAssociates, Inc. Page HCM Unsignalized Int ection Capacity Analysis Backgoo SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 3: Route 50 & Echo Lane 2/1/2008 -* -. -;� X- '4-- 1'-' 1 r* / Moveme.nf 'EBL . , E.BT EBR:. WBL 8T- WBR NEL NET NER '.SWL . SWT. SWR Lane Configurations, ttt r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 1512 0 0 1608 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1643 0 0 1748 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 588 pX, platoon unblocked 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 vC, conflicting volume 1748 1643 2229 3391 822 2570 3391 583 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1317 1643 1964 3526 822 2421 3526 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 387 390 28 4 317 12 4 807 ,Direction, Lane 1 EB 2 'WB 1 'WA2' `WB 3 WB 4 NE 1 SW 1 Volume Total 1096 548 583 583 583 0 0 3 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 807 Volume to Capacity 0.64 0.32 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 Approach LOS A A ;Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.1 % ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 1 �� ��(�K� Signalized IOt8[����|0O <�8DaCih//\O8lVSi8 �� �]@cknO����S/\T Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5: Route 50&Botanical Boulevard 2/1/2008 *�N � � �� � \. � | � '��/ Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphp|) 1900 1900 1000 1900 1800 1900 1900 1000 1900 1900 1900 1000 Total Lost time (a) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utii Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.05 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.85 0.05 1.00 Satd. F|mw(prod) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1778 1583 1081 1688 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.05 1.00 Vu|uma(vph) 7 1354 42 18 1487 14 18 1 18 508 2 102 Peak'hourfaotor. PHF 0.92 0.02 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.02 0.02 0.02 Adj. Flow (vph) 8 1472 40 20 1616 15 20 1 20 562 2 111 RT(]RReduction (vph) U O 16 O O 7 0 O 18 0 U 83 Lane Group F| Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 6 2 1 8 8 8 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 Actuated Green, 8 (a) 1.0 35.0 35.0 2.0 36.0 30.9 3.8 3.8 187 18.7 18.7 Effective Green, g (o) 3.5 30.4 39.4 4.5 40.4 40.4 7.3 7.3 22.2 22.2 22.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.44 0.44 0.05 0.45 0.45 0.08 0.08 0.25 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time (s) 8.5 7.5 7.5 6.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 VehicleExtension Lane Grp Cap (vph) 80 1580 898 89 2208 715 145 120 417 410 383 v/uRatio Prot v/o Ratio Perm 0.00 o0.42 0.02 oO.01 0.32 0.01 o0.01 0.00 0.18 oO.10 0.02 v/o Ratio 0.12 0.04 0.04 0.22 0.70 0.01 0.14 0.01 0.86 0.88 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 41.5 23.0 14.3 40.8 19.7 13.5 38.1 37.7 38.2 302 25.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 12.8 0.1 1.3 1.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.9 3.9 0.1 Da|ey/a> 42.2 38.8 14.4 42.1 20.7 13.5 38.6 37.8 34.1 342 25.8 Level ofService D D B D C B D D C C C Approach De|ay/o> 38.1 20.9 38.2 32.8 ApproaohLOS D C D C HCK4Average Control Delay 291 HCK4Level of Service C HCk4Volume toCapacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.4 Sum oflost time (o) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.9% ICU Level ofService C Analysis Period (min) 15 o Critical Lana Group HHHunt AasitedLiving Synohm8Report HH Hunt Assisted Livid Impact Analysis APPENDIX F-1 is TRIP GENERA T/ON FOR BACKGROUND DEVEL OPMENTS J HH Hunt Assited Livin • • Future Background Lane Configuration and Traffic Control m � c .J Route 50 Northwestern Pike LEGEND Existing Conditions ---� +— Lane Connguration W Traffic Signal i Stop Sign ti G a 3 Background Site Trip Distributions a m 40% Route 50 Northwestern Pike 15 D/0 —� J O U W LEGEND (--00/00 Peak HourTraffic > Volumes f-00/00 `m 3 Background Site Generated Traffic Volumes m 205183 —30/97 Route 50 Northwestern Pike -i l- 60/109 -- 60/109 -J a W LEGEND 00/00Site Traffic Volumes ¢> --00/00 r 00/00 3 Valley Health Systems Property and Degrange Property Background Developments Site Generated PM/SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes February 1, 2008 HH Hunt Assisted LivimTraffic Impact Analysis APPENDIX F-2 . TRIP DISTRIBUTIONFOR BACKGROUND DEVELOPMENTS • HH Hunt Assited Living Dement • • Future Background Lane Configuration and Traffic Control m � Route 50 Northwestern Pike LEGEND Existing Conditions —. �— Lane Configuration fo w Traffic Signal -�- Stop Sign ti a m` 3 Background Site Trip Distributions a m m ' 40% Route 50 Northwestern Pike 15 % —� J Lu LEGEND �00/00 Peak HourTraffic --00/00 Volumes a 00/00 a 3 Background Site Generated Traffic Volumes m m -- 186/399 Route 50 Northwestern Pike -- 188/399 453/398 -- 453/398 — m J O W LEGEND �00100 00 Site Traffic a Volumes 00/00 Y 3 WWW Property Background Developments Site Generated PM/SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes February 1, 2008 HH Hunt Assisted Livir Impact Analysis APPENDIX G 0 INTERSECT/ON CAPAC/TYANAL YSIS RESUL TS - FUTURE CONDITIONS W/TH DEVELOPMENT • • HCM Unsignalized Int*ction Capacity Analysis 3: Route 50 & Echo Lane Fu& PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 2/1 /2008 0 e L._... Move � � ent EB. EBT EBR', 1NBL VUBT.. • WB.R N`EL NET- ' NER, SWL , 8 '- ,SWR Lane Configurations 0 ttt r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 1312 2 0 1105 0 0 0 7 0 0 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1426 2 0 1201 0 0 0 8 0 0 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 588 pX, platoon unblocked 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 vC, conflicting volume 1201 1428 1830 2628 714 1922 2629 400 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 968 1428 1678 2580 714 1782 2581 64 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 98 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 626 472 55 22 374 45 22 874 Direction, Lane # EB 1. EB 2 WB 1 WB 2:- WB 3 WB 4 'NE 1 SW 1 Volume Total 951 478 400 400 400 0 8 2 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 2 0 0 0 0 8 2 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 374 874 Volume to Capacity. 0.56 0.28 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.02 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.8 9.1 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 14.8 9.1 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 1 0 0 �� ��(�����iQOGliz8d IOt8rn���0O(�8D@Cih//\D8lVGi8 �� FU���\PMP9ak Hour Traffic Volumes 5: R0Uf8 50 & Botanical Boulevard 2/1/2008 ��N � � /� � Ideal Flow (vphp|) 1000 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1000 1800 1000 1900 1908 Total Lost time (a) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utii Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.08 8.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.05 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.86 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.05 0.05 1.00 Satd.Flow (prod) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1770 1583 1881 1881 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 8.95 1.00 Vo|umek/ph> 82 1218 41 54 1053 207 10 0 20 118 O 32 Paak'hourhaotor. PHF 0.02 0.92 0.02 0.92 0.92 0.02 0.02 0.92 0.92 0.82 0.92 0.02 Adj. Flow k/ph\ 67 1322 45 50 1145 225 21 0 22 120 O 35 RTOF|Reduction (vph) U U 14 O 0 97 0 0 20 0 U 31 Lane Group Flow1 2 65 04 4 Turn Type Prot Penn Prot Perm Split Perm Split Penn Protected Phases 5 2 1 8 8 8 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G (a) 7.8 58.5 59.5 5.8 57.6 57.5 4.5 4.5 8.3 8.3 8.3 Effective 8raan. g (a) 10.3 83.0 83.0 8.3 81.0 61.0 8.0 8.0 11.8 11.8 11.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.59 0.59 0.08 0.57 0.57 0.07 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.11 Clearance Time (a) 8.5 7.5 7.5 6.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Vehicle30 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 170 2082 031 137 2898 002 132 118 185 185 174 v/nRatio Prot c0.04 o0.37 0.03 0.23 o0.01 oU.04 0.04 v/o Ratio Perm 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.00 v/o Ratio 0.30 0.83 0.03 0.43 040 0.14 0.18 0.81 0.35 0.35 0.02 Uniform Delay, d1 45.5 14.5 9.3 47.1 12.8 10.8 48.4 45.9 44.1 44.1 42.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 1.5 0.1 2.2 04 0.3 0.8 0.0 1.2 1.1 0.1 De|ay(a) 47.0 18.0 9.3 40.3 13.2 11.1 47.0 45.9 45.3 45.2 42.6 Level ofService O 8 A O B B D D D D O Approach Oa|ay(a) 17.2 14.4 48.4 447 ApproaohLOG 8 8 D D Intersection Summary HCMAverage Control Delay 17.8 HCMLevel cfService 8 HCK4Volume toCapacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length (a) 1071 Sum oflost time (o) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.0% ICU Level ofService B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HHHunt AaaitodLiving Synohm8Report Goruva/S|adaAssociates, Inc. Page HCM Unsignalized Ints�ction Capacity Analysis Fu& PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 9: Site Access & Ward Avenue 2/1/2008 • • 0 ... NBL NBsT SBT .. SBR Lane Configurations '` t t r Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 0 0 34 79 12 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 0 0 37 86 13 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 333 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 123 86 99 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 123 86 99 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 872 973 1494 Direction, Lane # . EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 5 0 37 86 13 Volume Left 5 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 13 cSH 872 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 9.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 9.2 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A ;Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 14.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intoection Capacity Analysis FutSSAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 3: Route 50 & Echo Lane 2/1/2008 E • • ' ovemenf _ EBL _ .:EBT_ EBRW,BL. WBT WBR' N.EL NET NER S1NL7 SWT SWR, Lane Configurations t'4 ttt r r r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 1512 2 0 1609 0 0 0 10 0 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1643 2 0 1749 0 0 0 11 0 0 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 588 pX, platoon unblocked 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 vC, conflicting volume 1749 1646 2231 3393 823 2582 3395 583 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1325 1646 1970 3527 823 2440 3528 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 97 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 386 389 28 4 317 12 4 810 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 WB 4 NE 1 SW 1 Volume Total 1096 550 583 583 583 0 11 3 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 2 0 0 . 0 0 11 3 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 317 810 Volume to Capacity 0.64 0.32 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.03 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.8 9.5 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 16.8 9.5 Approach LOS C A Intersection Summary Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 0.1 51.9% ICU Level of Service 15 0 HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 1 HCM Signalized Inter*ion Capacity Analysis Fut*SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5: Route 50 & Botanical Boulevard 2/1/2008 Move ment . EBL`.. EB , EBR WBL WBT. V11BR N'BL NBT ` NBR SBL, SBT ,..SB:R Lane Configurations ' ft r ) ttt r +T r +T r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1778 1583 1681 1686 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3539 1583 1770 5085 1583 1778 1583 1681 1686 1583 Volume (vph) 116 1364 42 34 1487 97 20 1 13 508 2 102 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 126 1483 46 37 1616 105 22 1 14 552 2 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 16 0 0 52 0 0 13 0 0 89 Lane Group Flow (vph) 126 1483 30 37 1616 53 0 23 1 276 278 22 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.8 52.4 52.4 5.0 46.6 46.6 4.3 4.3 18.4 18.4 18.4 Effective Green, g (s) 13.3 55.9 55.9 7.5 50.1 50.1 7.8 7.8 21.9 21.9 21.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.51 0.51 0.07 0.46 0.46 0.07 0.07 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 6.5 7.5 7.5 6.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 216 1813 811 122 2335 727 127 113 337 338 318 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.42 0.02 0.32 c0.01 0.16 c0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.82 0.04 0.30 0.69 0.07 0.18 0.01 0.82 0.82 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 45.3 22.3 13.2 48.3 23.4 16.5 47.6 47.1 41.7 41.7 35.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.0 4.2 0.1 1.4 1.7 0.2 0.7 0.0 14.3 14.8 0.1 Delay (s) 49.3 26.6 13.3 49.7 25.1 16.7 48.3 47.1 56.0 56.6 35.4 Level of Service D C B D C B D D E E D Approach Delay (s) 27.9 25.1 47.9 52.8 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 109.1 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group • HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Inteection Capacity Analysis Fute SAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 9: Site Access & Ward Avenue 2/1/2008 1Vloyement, ..EBL��.; EBR`: .NBL�„ NB�T� Lane Configurations Y I T t r Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 6 0 0 27 57 16 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 7 0 0 29 62 17 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 333 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 91 62 79 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 91 62 79 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 909 1003 1519 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2. SB '1 SB 2 Volume Total 7 0 29 62 17 Volume Left 7 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 17 cSH 909 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 9.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 9.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 • HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 3 HH Hunt Assisted Livin_raffic Impact Analysis APPENDIX H • QUEUING ANALYSIS • • HH Hunt Assisted Living Olopment - Traffic Impact Analysis Table: Future with Development (2013) Queuing Analysis PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour • Intersection (Lane Group) 50th% 95th% 50th% 95th % Route 50 and Ward Avenue/Botanical Boulevard Eastbound Left 39 84 85 150 Eastbound Through 337 494 499 715 Eastbound Right 3 24 5 28 Westbound Left 34 77 25 58 Westbound Through 166 235 351 425 Westbound Right 0 42 4 37 Northbound Through 17 37 15 41 Northbound Right 0 23 0 20 Southbound Left 38 84 197 344 Southbound Through 37 82 198 348 Southbound Right 0 28 0 47 0 0 January 31, 2008 Queues 0 Fute PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5: Route 50 & Botanical Boulevard 2/1/2008 t ane-Group. WBL,..NBT SBL SBT. Lane Group Flow (vph) 67 1322 45 59 1145 225 21 22 65 64 35 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.59 0.04 0.32 0.38 0.22 0.12 0.12 0.31 0.30 0.15 Control Delay 44.4 18.0 7.0 45.0 14.7 2.8 42.5 18.3 41.7 41.5 14.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 44.4 18.0 7.0 45.0 14.7 2.8 42.5 18.3 41.7 41.5 14.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 39 337 3 34 166 0 12 0 38 37 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 84 494 24 77 235 42 37 23 84 82 28 Internal Link Dist (ft) 508 788 253 1247 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 250 150 75 Base Capacity(vph) 226 2244 1017 217 3042 1037 348 329 324 324 334 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.59 0.04 0.27 0.38 0.22 0.06 0.07 0.20 0.20 0.10 f *ntersection Summary • is HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 1 Queues 0 FutuWAT Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5: Route 50 & Botanical Boulevard 2/1/2008 Lane. GroupT. V1/BR. NBR' SBL .SBT : SBR' . Lane Group Flow (vph) 126 1483 46 37 1616 105 23 14 276 278 111 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.77 0.05 0.22 0.70 0.14 0.13 0.08 0.77 0.77 0.26 Control Delay 53.6 26.4 8.9 49.4 26.0 5.6 47.7 21.8 55.5 55.7 8.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 53.6 26.4 8.9 49.4 26.0 5.6 47.7 21.8 55.5 55.7 8.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 85 499 5 25 351 4 15 0 197 198 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 150 #715 28 58 425 37 41 20 #344 #348 47 Internal Link Dist (ft) 508 788 253 1247 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 250 150 75 Base Capacity (vph) 256 1921 874 222 2325 776 296 275 375 376 439 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.77 0.05 0.17 0.70 0.14 0.08 0.05 0.74 0.74 0.25 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. • HH Hunt Assited Living Synchro 6 Report Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. Page 1 • Background Vehicle Trip Generation •. • ITE Trip Generation Land Use LUse and Size PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour Weekday (24 hour) Code In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Valley Health Systems Property Warehousing 150 5 Acres 35% 25 65% 48 73 50% 33 5o% 33 66 50% 192 50% 192 383 Office 710 50,000 Sqaure Feet 17% 23 83% 112 135 5o% 63 50% 62 125 5o% 390 50% 390 779 Office Park 750 5 Acres 15% 34 85% 194 228 50% 74 50% 73 147 50% 1,121 50% 1,121 2,241 Nursing Home 620 24,000 Sqaure Feet 47% 4 53% 6 10 50% - 50% - 50% 82 50r 82 164 Elderly Housing -Attached 253 80 Units 61% 5 39% 3 8 50% 101 50% 100 201 50% 139 50% 139 278 Subtotal 91 363 454 271 268 201 1,924 1,922 3,845 Degrange Property Business Hotel 312 50 Rooms 60% 19 40% 12 31 50% - 50% - 50% 182 50% 182 364 Research & Development Park 760 5 Acres 12% 9 88% 68 77 5o% 106 50% 105 211 50% 199 50% 199 398 Shopping Center 820 25,000 Sqaure Feet 48% 121 52% 131 252 50% 177 50% 177 354 50% 1,398 50% 1,398 2,795 Drive-in Bank 912 2,400 Square Feet 50% 66 50% 65 131 50% 55 5or 55 110 50% 403 50% 403 805 H-T Restaurant 832 7,600 Sqaure Feet 60% 50 40% 33 83 50% 602 5o% 602 1,204 50% 496 50% 496 991 Subtotal 265 309 574 940 939 1,879 2,678 2,676 5,353 WWW Property Office Park 750 35 Acres 15% 136 85% 769 905 50% 514 50% 513 1,027 50% 3,152 50% 3,152 6,304 Shopping Center 820 150,000 Sqaure Feet 48% 394 52% 427 821 50% 568 50% 568 1,136 50% 4,424 50% 4,424 8,847 Subtotal 530 1,196 1,726 1,082 1,081 2,163 7,576 7,575 15,151 Totals 827 1,804 2,631 2,208 2,203 4,073 11,514 11,508 23,022 Source: Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition. Institute of transportation Engineers. 2003. Note: Data for AM Peak Hour and PM Peak Hour show data for Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic between, respectively, 7 - 9 am and 4 - 6 pm, when provided. 9 0 11 *4t N ' O TO WALMART DEVELOPMENT WALMART SUPERCENTE R ROUTE 50EXISTING WATER LINE NoRr H WESTERN VDOT P1K moo. ROPOSED- WATER LINE OJ PROPOSED Q`- SAN. SEWS S ITE �sy SEWER & WATER EXHIBIT ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FREDERICK COUNTY, VA 5132-01-003 SCALE:NTS DATE: JANUARY 2008 SEWER TO BE TREATED • AT THE OPEQUON WATER/ RECLAMATION FACILITY SOURCE OF WATER IS FROM 4�' THE JAMES T. ANDERSON 20" WATER TREATMENT PLANT JO 20" 20"/ TO COURTYARD MARRiOTT EXISTING SAN. SEWE;e 20'T 2'1 20 A2" Jai 4 Or WINCH ESTER MEDICAL CENTER " 2 8„_�'� t HERS � AM CONNECTION Q� TO EXISTING I ' UTILITY LINES • a J � • C5 � G V S,T I F(.FNn �■■� UDA SWSA CJ EXISTING PUMP STATION EXISTING MANHOLE • EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING WATER - - EXISTING SANITARY SEWER -'h - UNDER CONSTRUCTION WATER - - UNDER CONSTRUCTION SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN -W- PROPOSEDWATER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER Bowman C O N S U L T I N G r, COUNT' of FREDERICK I December 20, 2011 Mr. James Michael Marr Northern Virginia Regional Outdoor Advertising Agent Department of Transportation, Fredericksburg District 87 Deacon Road Fredericksburg, VA 22605 RE: Silver Spring Veterinary Hospital Sign Route 522 South Dear Mike: Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 This letter is in regards to the above referenced sign located on VDOT property fronting Route 522 South. You sent the owner of the sign a Notice of Violation (NOV). Your letter, dated September 17, 2010, notified the owner that the sign was located in the state-owned right-of-way and would be removed within thirty (30) days. The owner of the sign sent you a letter, dated October 22, 2010, requesting to extend the NOV to get an approval and a building permit from the County of Frederick to move the sign to property located at 241 Garber Lane. The County of Frederick Zoning Ordinance will not allow or permit this sign to be placed on the property located at 241 Garber Lane. The property owner has not applied to Frederick County for a building permit. The Frederick County Building Official has had the owner of the sign remove the electrical connections for the lights on the sign. I am requesting that your department remove this sign from the Commonwealth of Virginia property. I will meet with you on site regarding this issue. If you have any questions, please call me at (540) 665-5651. Sincerely, arkChe Zoning Administrator MRC/bad bc: Gene Fisher, Shawnee District 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 u Real Estate Public Inquiry Results for Name - IPHTH PROPERTIES LLC I'irk ,,.? ,'hFb'�1_'1 -�{{� al .'iVL".ItP,4 �1+e Details RE2006 28000 1. 14175 6/5/2006 PHTH PROPERTIES LLC 53B 3 25 $0.00 Det:ai.ls RE2006 28000 2 14175 1.2/5/2006 PHTH PROPERTIES LLC 53B 3 25 $0.00 Details ViewBill .RE2007 28849 1 14175 6/5/2007 PHTH PROPERTIES LLC 53B 3 25 $0.00 Details RE2007 28849 2 14175 12/5/2007 PHTH PROPERTIES LLC 53B 3 25 $0.00 1. Show Description t Show Map# Total Due No(c that iI payment has hCCf1 rcccivcd within the Iasi 10 business days, anv ret:urnul items Previous may not. he posted at this ume. Please check the wehsite agam. 9 0 0 Real Estate Public Inquiry -F .N- . - - .._ -- -- ...._. --- Results for Name - ;(FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE ia`;_;i' i�uCL?;C iii ww.l�',1 L'��PQ� aiSli: L SrC l�iR.� 1° i h 1�{l2t eL'?iMB��C' Details RE2006 11769 1 39130 6/5/2006 FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE 53 A 82 $0.00 Details RE2006 11769 2 39130 12/5/2006 FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE 53 A 82 $0.00 Details ViewBill RE2007 1.2160 1 39130 6/5/2007 FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE 53 A 82 $0.00 Details ViewBill RE2007 1.2.160 F2 39130 12/5/2007 FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE 53 A 82 $0.00 l " Show Description is Show Map# NOW that d haymcm has been received within the last. 10 bIISmess days. any returned items may 1101 he I-sted at tilts umc. Pleasc check the wehsite a(�am. Total Due Previous 0 Real Estate Public Inquiry Results for Name - ?FNK-HO-USER -DARLA -POE-- Due 'Djiatc' Nanne Details RE, 2 0 0 6 '11.768 1 1.4317 6/5/2006 FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE 53 A 81 $0.00 Details RE 2006 11768 2 1431.7 1.2/5/2006 FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE 53 A 81 $0.00 Details ViewBill RE2007 12159 1 143171 6/5/2007 1 FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE 53 A 81 $0.00 .Details I View'BW I RE2007 — 12.159 1 2 1.4317112/5/2007 1 FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE 1 53 A 81 $0.00 r— Show Description Co' Show Map# NOVC 111al 11 paymcm has OCCII I-CCCIVCd W1111111 UIC ILIS1 10 hWS111CSS &Y.S. any I-C11.11-11Cd 11C111", "lav no, he 1-msted al this tinic. Please chuck the website a,am. Total Due Previous I J • W 9 r a July 8, 2009 Thomas Moore Lawson Lawson and Silek, P.L.C. 120 Exeter Drive, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22602 RE: HHHunt Assisted Living Facility Dear Ty: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 I am in receipt of your two letters, dated July 6 and 7, 2009, regarding the HHHunt assisted living facility within Frederick County. Your letters seek to utilize proffered funds to implement required road improvements associated with your client's construction of an assisted living facility. The County does not support the use of the rezoning applications' proffered contributions to offset required improvements associated with the site's development. It is expected that your client will implement the road improvements deemed necessary by VDOT as a result of your site development plans, as reflected by Proffer 2.1. Proffer 2.1 discusses site entrances, and defers final designs and engineering to VDOT specifications and approval. Therefore, if VDOT is requiring improvements as a result of your site development plans, such site development generated improvements will not be credited towards the proffered sh contribution of Proffer 3.4. i Sincerely %I i Eric . LR' awrence, AICP Director, Department of Planning and Development cc: Matthew Smith, VDOT-Edinburg Residency ERL/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 7� LAWSON AND SILEK, P.L.C. 120 EXETER DRIVE, SUITE 200 POST OFFICE BOX 2740 WINCHESTER, VA 22604 TELEPHONE: (540) 665-0050 FACSIMILE: (540) 722-4051 July 9, 2009 Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Deputy Director The Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street, 2nd Floor Winchester, VA 22601 VIA E-MAIL Dear Eric: THOMAS MOORE LAWSON • TLAWSON(R,LSPLC.COM Re: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Our File No. 877.002 Thank you for your timely response to my letters of July 6 and 7, 2009. While we agree that our proffer agreed to defer final VDOT specifications that related to our site entrances, we do not agree that the signal head that is being required at the intersection of Route 50 and Ward Avenue has anything to do with our site entrances. In fact, as you know, the lack of a signal head is a condition that exists today and certainly predates our project. Further still, you will recall that the County required the developer to have a right -in only entrance on Route 50. The net of all of this is that the proffer design of the entrances for the HHHunt development will not put any vehicles to the intersection of Route 50 and Ward Avenue where the signal head is being requested, and, if anything, the right -in feature into the HHHunt site will take trips away from the existing intersection where the signal head is being requested. The simple fact is that the HHHunt proffer providing for a $25,000.00 payment was to be used for improvements in the Route 50 corridor area. The good news is that those funds are available, and apparently the County and VDOT would like to have improvements made to the corridor in the form of this signal head. HHHunt certainly has no objection to the proffered funds being used in this manner, but we must receive a credit against the proffer payment for this expenditure. If we do not, then we will be in a position where we are being required to pay more than the amount required under the proffers. 0 40 Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Deputy Director July 9, 2009 Page 2 I ask that you review your prior correspondence, and if you like take into account VDOT's position on the same, and get back to me as soon as possible. We very much would like to see this matter resolved as expeditiously as possible. Thank you for your continued assistance and cooperation. I look forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours, /s/ Thomas Moore Lawson Thomas Moore Lawson TML: j k cc: HHHunt Corporation Matthew B. Smith, P.E. Mr. Eric Meske LAWSON AND SILEK, P.L.C. 120 EXETER DRIVE, SUITE 200 POST OFFICE BOX 2740 WINCHESTER, VA 22604 TELEPHONE: (540) 665-0050 FACSIMILE: (540) 7224051 Michael T. Ruddy, AICP VT 2 1 2008 THOMAS MOORE LAWSON - TLAWSONna LSPLC.00%1 October 21, 2008 Deputy Director The Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street, 2nd Floor Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Our File No. 877.002 VIA HAND DELIVERY Dear Mike: Enclosed please find the redlined and original signed version of the revised proffers for the above -referenced rezoning, which are being hand -delivered to the Board of Supervisors today to supplement their packet for tomorrow night's meeting. The biggest revisions include the updated proffer date and, in paragraph 4.1, the amount of the contribution to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes has been increased from $25,000.00 to $100,000.00. We have also made revisions to reflect the County Attorney's comments dated yesterday. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. Very t ours, Thom M ore Lawson TML:atd Enclosures FRONT ROYAL ADDRESS: POST OFFICE BOX 602, FRONT ROYAL, VIRGINIA 22636, TELEPHONE: (540) 635-9415, FACSIMILE: (540) 635-9421, E-MAIL: SILEKJ(�,LYNXCONNECT.COM FAIRFAX ADDRESS: 10805 MAIN STREET, SUITE 200, FAIRFAX. VIRGINIA 22030, TELEPHONE: (703) 352-2615, FACSIMILE: (703) 3524190, E-MAIL: TRoMAsO.LAw5ON*VERIZON.NET i' 1 r i' COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Finance Department FROM: Pam Deeter, Office Assistant II SUBJECT: Return Of Sign Deposit DATE: November 19, 2008 The amount of 100.00 was deposited in line item #3-010-019110-0008 for Bowman Consulting Group. The company had a deposit for two signs for Rezoning 906-08 for Rt 50 Assisted Living Facility. The company has returned the sign and is therefore entitled to the return of the deposit. You may pay this through the regular bill cycle. Please send a check in the amount of $100.00 to: RSA/pd Bowman Consulting Group 124 E. Cork Street Winchester, VA 22601 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 - -' -1 - - , LL - - - .-L b lob u u u I L/2008 liosi )569 �p ...00 ..00 .00 .00 00 Pd by DEPT OF PLANNING Check 2800.00 # CKS BALANCE DUE INCLUDES PENALTY/INTEREST THRU THE MONTH 7/2008 -V aa410 rdXO UOdn MaUaa opQ [P)!Uus I Ivan OS.rod r 'Was )oils S 'aaQ rues Poo rod rig lg S aunp ,v I 'rdd MGM ON � p T RE CE aZ x� 9 1 T A X �DgRICY- C O01 �OFy Lot JR 25 FR VdISI 25 604102 f3Q� Y O BOX VA 22 - V�INCxBSTgR FL�IWG SITS SIGN DBpO 0060�OOOa Date . 30IC3D C 59569 rer Regis #_ 1p95 Tzars A p t 100 ' 00 pxeVti C s $ ti00 ' 00 ' 00 Ba-�an aid � p � 00 eing .00 paid 00 oun� � � nee �u e �Ba1a A p IWG 2ap0 �200a DEpT OF TKE MO�Ti1 G MEREST TxRt7 pT OF PENAj,TY 1 pd by D I�CT' �CE BA . 4P Ocrw 4r Rm- V1 Mr VOW, JR, Ago 727.520.8181 timmuLi mamnhnfn re-im Spring Arbor of Daniel Island W E; Negative# 80220 2187 Date02.20.08 -a ate'..• NOS All A IV wr , i� r ... a _dr. r F „f r lob, Bowman • LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: Frederick Co. Planning Dept. Date: October 14, 2008 107 N. Kent Street Project Name: Rt. 50 Assisted Living Facility Winchester, VA 22601 Project Number: 5132-01-003 Re: Exhibits for BOS Agenda Packet Attn: Mike Ruddy WE ARE FORWARDING THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: ❑ ORIGINALS X PRINTS VIA: Hand -Delivery ❑ REPRODUCIBLES ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER ❑ DISKETTE ❑ OTHER UANTITY DESCRIPTION 30 Rezoning exhibit sets for Board of Supervisors agenda packet (10/22/08 meeting). Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. expressly reserves its common law copyright and other property rights in plans transmitted herewith. Plans are not to be reproduced, changed or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to any third party, without first obtaining the express written permission of Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. Comments: Transmitted by: BOWMAN CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. Michael P. Pointer, ASLA Principal/Winchester Branch Manager Rec'd By: (Signature) ,�J. Zo (Printed Name) (Date) 07 1 4 2008 124 East Cork Street, Winchester, VA 22601 Phone: (540) 722-2343 • Fax: (540) 722-5080 • www.bowmanconsulting.com RV44 pitmT 0-oopq September 22, 2008 Ms. June Wilmot, Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission 412 Westside Station Drive Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Rezoning Application #06-08 BCG Project #5132-01-003 Dear Madam Chairman: This correspondence is offered to ensure your awareness of the efforts undertaken to address outstanding issues associated with the subject rezoning application subsequent to its tabling by the Plamling Commission at its August 20`h meeting. The applicant and project team have worked diligently to address concerns raised by members of the Planning Commission, staff, and adjoining property owners, and the application has been revised accordingly. As you are aware, the amended application will be included on the Planning Commission's October 15t meeting agenda. Attached is a letter to Mr. Michael Ruddy, AICP, dated September 5, 2008, that details our response to each issue raised during the August 20"' public hearing, and was submitted with the amended application. Moreover, copies of the revised proffer statement and generalized development plan (GDP) are provided for your reference. The substantive revisions to the application may be summarized as follows: • Ward Avenue Entrance — The adjoining United Bank parcel (PIN 5313-3-24) was added to the application to ensure provision of the required setback for the Ward Avenue entrance/travelway. • Permitted Uses: The use of the subject property will be limited exclusively to an assisted living facility. All other 132 uses will be prohibited on the site. • Monetary Contribution for Transportation: The restrictions on use of the $25,000.00 contribution as well as the five (5) year sunset clause have been eliminated from the proffer. As revised, the $25,000.00 contribution may be used for any transportation improvement deemed appropriate by VDOT and Frederick County. • Monetary Contribution for Fire and Rescue Services: The monetary contribution for fire and rescue services has been increased from $2,000.00 to $10,000.00. • Future Round Hill Road Extension — Right-of-way for the future Round Hill Road extension will be dedicated upon request by VDOT and/or Frederick County. The original proffer statement provided only for reservation of this right-of-way. Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. 124 East Cork Street \A/inchester,VA 22601 Phone: 54-0.722.2343 Fax: 540.722.5080:. www.bowmanconsulting.com Ms. June Wilmot, Chairml'1' September 22, 2008 Page 2 of 2 I hope that this letter and the attached information are helpful as you prepare for the October 1st meeting, and your consideration of the amended application is greatly appreciated. Of course, we will be prepared to address any questions that you or other members of the Planning Commission might have during the public hearing. Should you require any additional information regarding this matter in the interim, please do not hesitate to contact me by phone at (540) 722-2343, ext. 201, or by email at mpointergbowmanc .com. Sincerely, BOWMAN CONSTJ, `I' NG GROUP IV ---�� Michael P. Pointer, ASLA Principal Attachments cc: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman, Opequon District Commissioner Cordell Watt, Back Creek District Commissioner Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District Commissioner Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District Commissioner George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District Commissioner Rick C. Ours, Opequon District Commissioner Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District Commissioner Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District Commissioner Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District Commissioner H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District Commissioner Richard A. Ruclanan, Stonewall District Commissioner Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District Commissioner Gary A. Lofton, Board of Supervisors Liaison Mr. Bo Cook, Jr. — HHHunt Mr. Thomas M. Lawson — Lawson & Silek Mr. Michael Ruddy — County of Frederick P:\5132 - Ronte 50 Assisted Living\5132-01-003 (PLN)\Admin\Correspondence\Sent\September 22, 2008 to June Wilmot.docx 0 Bowman C O N S U L T I N G • LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: Frederick County Planning Commission Date: September 22, 2008 412 Westside Station Drive Project Name: Rte 50 Assisted Living Facility Winchester, VA 22601 Project Number: 5132-01-003 Re: Letters, Proffer Statement, and Generalized Development Plan Attn: Ms. June Wilmot, Chairman WE ARE FORWARDING THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: ❑ ORIGINALS ❑ PRINTS VIA: USPS ❑ REPRODUCIBLES ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER ❑ DISKETTE ❑ OTHER UANTITY DESCRIPTION 1 Letter to June Wilmot, Chairman, dated September 22, 2008 1 Letter to Michael Ruddy, AICP, dated September 5, 2008 1 Copy of Revised Proffer Statement 1 Copy of Generalized Development Plan (GDP) Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. expressly reserves its common law copyright and other property rights in plans transmitted herewith. Plans are not to be reproduced, changed or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to any third party, without first obtaining the express written permission of Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. Comments: cc: Roger Thomas, Vice Chairman; Cordell Watt; Greg L. Unger; Charles E. Triplett; George J. Kriz; Rick C. Ours; Gregory 5. Kerr; Christopher Mohn; Lawrence R. Ambrogi; H. Paige Manuel; Richard A. Ruckman; Gary R. Oates; Gary A. Lofton; Winchester City Planning Department; Rockerick B. Williams; Eric R. Lawrence; Michael Ruddy, County of Frederick; Ty Lawson, Lawson & Silek, PLC; Bo Cook, HHHunt Corporation Transmitted by: BOWMAN CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. Michael P. Pointer, ASLA///&7�� Principal W N Rec'd By: - (Signature) (Printed Name) SEP t I(Date) I ►- 124 East Cork Street, Winchester, VA 22601 Phone: (540) 722-2343 • Fax: (540) 722-5080 • www.bowmanconsulting.com ..#Bow an C t0 N S U La it J Ni C September 5, 2008 Mr. Matthew B. Smith, PE VDOT - Edinburg Residency 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 RE: Rte. 50 Assisted Living Facility Rezoning Application #06-08 BCG Project # 5132-01-003 Dear Mr. Smith: We have received your comments dated August 26, 2008 and we offer the following in response. "In regards to the right in/right out entrance on Route 50 as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (GDP); we have concerns that the right out turn movement may create potential weaving problems at the intersection for drivers exiting the entrance and then entering the left turn lane. We question the need for the right out at this secondary entrance and would prefer it be limited to a right in only entrance as was done for the adjacent bank parcel. " Response: We acknowledge VDOT's concern with right out movements and potential weave problems at our secondary access to the Assisted Living Facility; however this property is encumbered with an ingress/egress easement for Allegheny Power access to and from their existing power sub -station on the property south of the subject property. We have ►net with representatives of Allegheny Power and their position is that they will accept a revised entrance from Route 50 as proposed along with a revised ingress/egress easement alignment, but only if it still provides direct access to and from Rte. 50 as currently possessed. The need for such access is due to the nature of the equipment that is occasionally brought to and from the sub -station, and access requirements for urgent responses to power outages. With that said, since you last reviewed this application we have shifted the proposed right-in/right-out slightly east to avoid utility conflicts and the need for off -site easements to our west. Additionally, we have consulted with our traffic engineers and offer the attached weave analysis to support our position that the relatively low traffic volumes associated with this use should not present a problem. All Assisted Living Facility traffic will be directed to the proposed primary access to and from Ward Avenue. 2. "Proffer 3.3 - Whatever monetary transportation contribution that is agreed upon should not be limited to a specific improvement, but rather be able to be used for transportation improvements in the general area of the development at the County's discretion. VDOT also has concerns with limiting the funding to only S years from the date of'the zoning approval. " Response: We acknowledge the need for this contribution to be made to the County for transportation improvements in the general area of the development. The Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. 124 East Cork Street , WinchesterNA 22601 Phone: 540.722.2343 - Fax: 540.722.5080 - www.bowmanconsulting.com Mr. Matthew B. Smith, PE • • September 5, 2008 Page 2 of 2 attached revised proffer statement removes the specific improvement and the limiting of funding to 5 years from the date of zoning approval as requested. Attached is a revised executed proffer statement for further consideration. "The primary entrance off Ward Avenue needs to continue the existing 3 lane curb and gutter section established in front of the United Bank to the southern property line of the Assisted Living Facility. Additional right-of-way dedication needs to be provided to acconnnodate all roadway improvements. The 50.50' lot frontage width forces the commercial entrance off the right-of-way and onto parcel 53B-3-24. Additional right-of-way, agreements, and easement will need to be obtained from parcel 53B-3-24 to allow proposed improvements as shown on the GDP. " Response: Our rezoning application has been revised to include Parcel 53B-3-24 in order to better facilitate our proposed entrance improvements along Ward Avenue. All improvements have been designed to match what United Bank has constructed. We have met with the United Bank representatives and we are providing right-of- way dedication along this parcel consistent with what is proposed for Parcel 53B- 3-25. All utility easements and off -site grading/sight distance easements have been identified and are agreeable to United Bank. 4. "Traffic signals along this stretch of Route 50 are coordinated to work together. The TIA's recommendation of adjusting the signal timings and cycle length at the Route 50/Ward Avenue Intersection may have negative impacts on the overall function of the signals along this corridor. " Response: We acknowledge your comment regarding signal timings and cycle length adjustments. We feel that the improvements proposed to Route 50 and Ward Avenue along with the proffered regional transportation contribution and dedication of right-of-way for the future extension of Round Hill Road will adequately mitigate the impacts associated with this project. Please feel free to contact me at the office if you have any further questions. Sincerely, BOWMAN CONSULTING GROUP Michael P. Pointer, ASLA Principal Attachments cc: Mr. Bo Cook, HHHunt Co. Mr. Thomas M. Lawson, Lawson & Silek Mr. Mike Ruddy, Frederick County Planning & Development Ms. Candace Perkins, Frederick County Planning & Development Mr. Tushar Awar, Gorove Slade Associates P:\5132 - Route 50 Assisted Living\5132-01-003 (PLN)\Admin\Comment-Response\September 5, 2008 to Matthew Smith.doc • • Bdwman C O N S U L T I N G September 5, 2008 Mr. Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director County of Frederick Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Rezoning Application #06-08 BCG Project #5132-01-003 Dear Mr. Ruddy: This correspondence is in follow-up to the Planning Commission public hearing for the subject rezoning application held on August 20, 2008. In particular, I am writing to share the progress made to date in resolving the issues raised during the public hearing by staff, neighboring property owners, and members of the Commission. The key issues that required attention and our response to each are as follows: (1) Primary site entrance on Ward Avenue — As originally proposed, the travelway of the primary entrance on Ward Avenue did not meet the setback of five (5) feet required from the boundary of the adjoining United (Marathon) Bank parcel (PIN 5313-3-24). Given the constrained width of the area traversed by the travelway, it is necessary to obtain additional acreage from the United Bank parcel through a boundary line adjustment (BLA) plat. As you are aware, this RA -zoned parcel is also narrow in width, and is controlled by United Bank exclusively as a buffer for the existing bank facility. The need for the additional acreage for the travelway setback has been discussed with Mr. Don Unger, President of United Bank, who has agreed to include the parcel with this rezoning application to enable the necessary BLA. The rezoning application and all associated exhihits have been amended to include this additional parcel. Assuming rezoning approval, the BLA will be completed to add the requisite five (5) feet to the HHHunt property for the setback, and the balance will remain in the ownership of United Bank for continued use in support of the existing bank facility. Right of way will be dedicated along the Ward Avenue frontage of the United Bank parcel consistent with what is proposed by HHHunt, and is shown on the revised GDP accordingly. All other easements needed across the United Bank parcel for utility connections and grading have also been discussed and are agreeable to United Bank. (2) Right in/right out entrance on Route 50 — The necessity of the proposed right in/right out entrance on Route 50 was discussed at length during the public hearing. It was explained that Allegheny Power holds an ingress/egress easement across the property to enable direct access from Route 50 to the sub -station located on an adjoining parcel, and two adjoining property owners also have access rights across the site. Due to the existence of these easements, HHHunt was deemed to have a legal obligation to maintain direct access to and from Route 50 for both Allegheny Power and the adjoining owners. Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. 124 East Cork Street • Winchester,VA 22601 Phone: 540.722.2343 • Fax: 540.722.5080 9 www.bowmanconsulting.com MY. 'Michdel T. Ruddy, AI0 September 5, 2008 Page 2 of 3 A meeting was held to discuss the proposed development program with adjoining property owners and Allegheny Power representatives on September 4, 2008, during which the topic of the access easements was discussed. The adjoining property owners agreed to terminate their easement rights, as primary access to their respective properties occurred via Stonewall Drive and Ward Avenue. However, the representatives of Allegheny Power stated that the easement and its direct link to Route 50 are essential to sub -station maintenance, and must therefore be preserved as components of the proposed assisted living facility. Indeed, the nature of the equipment and vehicles involved in routine sub -station maintenance, as well as the access requirements for urgent responses to power outages, were primary reasons offered by Allegheny Power for preservation of the existing access arrangement. Bottom line, while Allegheny Power is willing to allow adjustment of the easement and its improvement to accommodate the proposed development of the property, it will not relinquish the right to unimpeded access to the sub -station across the site frorn Route 50. To accommodate Allegheny Power's access rights, the proposed right in/right out entrance on Route 50 remains on the proffered GDP. The legal necessity to provide this entrance is an admittedly beneficial obligation for HHHunt, as the right in/right out entrance is certainly desired as a secondary access for the facility. While it is acknowledged that adopted policy discourages direct access to Route 50, the proposed right in/right out entrance arguably constitutes a reasonable exception, particularly given the unique easement situation. Moreover, the provision of primary access via Ward Avenue coupled with the low traffic generation associated with the proposed use suggest that the right in/right out entrance will have a negligible impact on actual traffic conditions. Since the public hearing, the on -going engineering design process has resulted in modification to the location of the right in/right out entrance. Specifically, the entrance has been shifted east to avoid substantial Allegheny Power infrastructure consisting of both underground and overhead power lines, as well as related equipment (i.e. transformer boxes). The shift of the entrance will also preclude the need to secure off -site easements from adjoining property owners. These design changes have been submitted to VDOT along with responses to their review comments dated August 26, 2008 (originally received by e- mail August 20, 2008). A copy of the revised proffer statement and GDP have also been included with the resubmission to VDOT. (3) Communication with adjoining property owners — The public hearing revealed the need to hold additional discussions with adjoining property owners. The first step in this process involved meeting with Ms. Patricia Smith to address access concerns. A meeting was held with Ms. Smith on her property, and Bowman Consulting staff proceeded to field locate her property corners to improve mutual understanding of easement locations (power and access) relative to her parcel. It is noted that Ms. Smith currently has frontage and driveway access on Stonewall Drive. The twenty (20) foot right-of-way granted to Ms. Smith across the subject property followed establishment of the Allegheny Power easement(s), and it was clarified that Mrs. Smith does not rely on said right-of-way for access. As noted above, a meeting was held with adjoining property owners and Allegheny Power representatives on September 4, 2008. Meeting participants included Mr. Ralph Poe, Ms. Darla Poe Funkhouser, Ms. Smith, Ms. Nancy Johnson, and Mr. Lee Ruffner and Ms. Patti Sowers representing Allegheny Power. As a result of this meeting, Ms. Smith has agreed to vacate the right of way she possesses across the subject property, and will maintain direct access to her property via Stonewall Drive. Mr. Poe and Ms. Funkhouser also agreed that access to their surrounding property via the subject property was unnecessary, with Ward Avenue providing suitable alternative access. Allegheny Power will allow its access easement to be integrated with development of the site, but requires that direct access to Route 50 be maintained. Moreover, it will be necessary for HHHunt to W. Michael T. Ruddy, A10 • September 5, 2008 Page 3 of 3 construct the travelways within the easement using heavy duty pavement to support Allegheny Power vehicles and associated loads. A modified ingress/egress easement plat maintaining right in/right out access from Route 50 has been submitted to Allegheny Power for consideration, the approval and recordation of which is anticipated at the time of site plan approval. (4) Other proffer -related items — The proffer statement has been revised to address comments received from VDOT as well as those received from the County Attorney's office. Revisions were also made to reflect Planning Commission input from the public hearing. The notable content changes include the following: Permitted Uses: The use of the subject property will be limited exclusively to an assisted living facility. All other B2 uses are prohibited on the site. Monetary Contribution for Transportation: The restriction on use of the $25,000.00 contribution as well as the five (5) year sunset clause have been eliminated from the proffer. As revised, the $25,000.00 contribution may be used for any transportation improvement deemed appropriate by VDOT and Frederick County. Monetary Contribution for Fire and Rescue Services: The monetary contribution for fire and rescue services has been increased to $10,000.00. It is noted that the proposed rezoning is for a commercial use that will result in a positive fiscal impact to Frederick County. Moreover, the unique operational requirements of an assisted living facility include on -site medical care, which will arguably lessen impacts on local fire and rescue companies. However, it is acknowledged that the CIP includes construction of a new facility for Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company, and the proposed contribution is offered by HHHunt to facilitate realization of this important community improvement. On behalf of HHHunt and the entire project team, I would like to thank you for your continued assistance with this proposal, and request that the attached amended rezoning application be included on the agenda of the October 1, 2008 Planning Commission meeting for further consideration. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, BOW N CON TING GROUP IN Michael P. Pointer, A LA Principal Attachments cc: Mr. Bo Cook, Jr. — HHHunt Mr. Thomas M. Lawson — Lawson & Silek P:\5132 - Route 50 Assisted Living\5132-01-003 (PLN)\Admin\Correspondence\Sent\September 5, 2008 to Michael Ruddy - Rezone.doc M Bow i 0 an C 0 H ED U Q- T 0 H 6 June 26, 2008 Mr. Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Director Frederick County Dept, of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Rezoning Application BCG Project #5132-01-003 Dear Mr. Ruddy, Attached please find our formal submission of the Route 50 Assisted Living Facility Rezoning Application for further review and placement on the Planning Commission agenda for consideration. All required submission materials have been provided including: A letter responding to all agency referral comments; a revised Generalized Development Plan (GDP), which provides a much greater level of detail as requested; and a revised Proffer Statement executed by Mr. Bo Cook representing the contract purchaser, and Mr. Thomas Lawson, who has Power of Attorney for the Owners previously executed and on file with the County. In addition to the rezoning submission, we have included a copy of the Master Development Plan Application submitted to Ms. Candice Perkins as previously discussed. As discussed, our intention is to be able to have both applications reviewed together by the Planning Commission and Board. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions and thank you for your continued assistance with this project. Sincerely, BOWM CO ULT GROUP Michael P. Pointer, ASLA Principal cc: Mr. Bo Cook, HHHunt Corporation Mr. Thomas Lawson, Lawson & Silek Attachments R\5132 - Route 50 Assisted Living\5132-01-003 (PLN)\Adniin\Correspondence\SentUwie 26, 2008 to Mike Ruddy.doc Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. 124 East Cork Street o Winchester,VA 22601 Phone: 540.722.2343 o Fax: 540.722.5080 o www.bowmanconsulting.com • Bowman C O N S U L T I N G 124 East Cork Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone (540) 722-2343 Fax (540) 722-5080 www.bowmanconsultin5z.com To: Frederick County Dept of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Mike Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Direct • LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: 6/26/2008 Project Name: Rte 50 Assisted Living Facility Project No: 5132-01-003 Re: Rezoning Application Via: Hand -Delivery We are forwarding: Documents QUANTITY DESCRIPTION I Master Development Plan (for your review) I Rezoning Application Fee Check #1448029 in the Amount of $1 1,023.00 (%%"Cfat COMMENTS Urgency: Rush Transmitted by: BOWMAN CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. Christopher T. Oldham, C.A, C.L.A. Confirmation of Receipt Required: Yes Received by: (Signature) SUN 2 6 boos (Print Name) (Date) Recipient Copy 612612008 0 0. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING October 8, 2008 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: REZONING APPLICATION 406-08 FOR ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, October 22, 2008, at 7:15 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia to consider the following application: Rezoning 906-08 of Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting, to rezone 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers. The properties are located on the south side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50), west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50, in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 5313-3-24 and 5313-3-25. Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this public hearing. A copy of the application will be available for review at the Handley Library and the Bowman Library the week of the meeting, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia, or by calling (540) 665-5651. You can also visit us on the web at: www.co.frederick.va.us. Sincerely, e �J Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director MTR/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 4 This is to certify t at the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: 53 -A- - 81- FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE & POE SHARON S 272 HILDA DR CLEARBROOK VA 22624.1475 53B - 3- - 25. PHTH PROPERTIES LLC 1151 CEDAR CREEK GRADE WINCHESTER VA 22602-2359 Bo,vman Consulting 124 Fast Cork St. Winchester, VA 22601 53B - 3. - 5. THE MARATHON BANK C/O UNITED BANK ATTN ANGIE BOA 514 MARKET ST PARKERSBURG WV 26101 53B - 2- - 24. PUFFINBERGER JUDY N. PO BOX 113 WINCHESTER VA. 22604.0113 53B - 1- - 1- HAHN BARBARA A 2117 NORTHWESTERN PIKE WINCHESTER VA 22603.3954 �ilAJLt yr TJ_X -- COUNTY OF FREDERICK 53B - 2- - 29- BUTCHER TIMOTHY S. 113 STONEWALL DR WINCHESTER VA. 22602-2277 53B - 3- - 26- WOLFORD GUY W. & ARMITHA 108 WARD AVE WINCHESTER VA. 22602.2248 53B - 3- - 29- RITTER CALVIN LEE 152 LINDEN DR WINCHESTER VA. 22601-2818 53B - 3- - 35- SCRUGGS JOSEPH I. CIO SCRUGGS JOSEPH I. PO BOX 243 WINCHESTER VA 9gsna.n,)na 53B - 3- - 36- NANBODAN PROPERTIES LLC 2054 NORTHWESTERN PIKE WINCHESTER VA. 22603.3947 Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director Frederick County Planning Department 1, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do ereby certify that Mich461 T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director for the Department of Planning d Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State d Itounty aforesaid. Given under my hand this ry, — day of ICA My commission expires on1�� BEVERLY DELL GERM NOTARY ID # 331878 NOTARY PUBLIC COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA NOTARY LIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 31, 2011 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING September 19, 2008 TO: TIIE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: REZONING APPLICATION 406-08 FOR ROUTE 50 ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, October 1, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia to consider the following application: Rezoning 906-08 of Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting, to rezone 10.47 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers. The properties are located at the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50 to the east and Round Hill Road and Route 50 to the west in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 53-A-81, 53-A-82, 53B-3-24 and 53B-3-25. Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this public hearing. A copy of the application will be available for review at the Handley Library and the Bowman Library the week of the meeting, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia, or by calling (540) 665-5651. You can also visit us on the web at: www.co.frederick.va.us. Sincerely, ' Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director li fI tlelih1 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 This is to cert'fy eat the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virg a: 53B - 2- - 29- 53 - A- - 81- FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE & POE SHARON S 272 HILDA DR CLEARBROOK VA 22624-1475 53B - 3- - 25- PHTH PROPERTIES LLC 1151 CEDAR CREEK GRADE WINCHESTER VA 22602-2359 Bowman Consulting 124 East Cork St. Winchester, VA 22601 53B - 3- - 5- THE MARATHON BANK CIO UNITED BANK ATTN ANGIE BOA 514 MARKET ST PARKERSBURG WV 25101 53B - 2- - 24- PUFFINBERGER JUDY N. PO BOX 113 WINCHESTER VA, 22604-0113 53B - 1- - 1- HAHN BARBARA A 2117 NORTHWESTERN PIKE WINCHESTER VA 22603-3954 BUTCHER TIMOTHY S. 113 STONEWALL DR WINCHESTER VA. 22602-2277 53B - 3- - 26- WOLFORD GUY W. & ARMITHA 108 WARD AVE WINCHESTER VA. 22602-2248 53B - 3- - 29- RITTER CALVIN LEE 152 LINDEN DR WINCHESTER VA. 22601.2818 53B - 3- - 35- SCRUGGSJOSEPHI. CIO SCRUGGS JOSEPH I. PO BOX 243 WINCHESTER VA 22604-0243 53B - 3- - 36- NANBODAN PROPERTIES LLC 2054 NORTHWESTERN PIKE WINCHESTER VA. 22603.3947 Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning D' ector Frederick County Planning Department STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do reby certify that Mic el T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director for the Department of Planning d Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and ounty aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of o©�Y My commission expires on C® i �5 (1 BEVERLY H. DELLINGER w� NOTARY(PUBLIC (� NOTARY ID # 331878 NOTARY PUBLIC COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 31, 2011 53 - A- - 86- • O'DONNELL TRUDY POE 200 WARD AVE WINCHESTER VA 2.2602.2249 53 - A- - 76- JOHNSON ROBERT B. 2054 NORTHWESTERN PIKE WINCHESTER VA. 22603-3947 52 - A. - L- FIRST BANK 112 W KING ST STRASBURG VA 22657-2220 Patricia Smith 116 Stonewall Dr. Winchester, VA 22602 Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING August 8, 2008 THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, August 20, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia to consider the following Rezoning 906-08 of Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting, to rezone 10.24 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers. The properties are located at the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50 to the east and Round Iill Road and Route 50 to the west in the Back Creek Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 53-A-81, 53-A-82 and 53B-3-25. A copy of the application will be available for review at the Handley Library and the Bowman Library the week of the meeting, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia, or by calling (540) 665-5651. You can also visit us on the web at: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 ' Tlus is to certify}' th t the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on 0,�( from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virginia 53B - 2 - 29- BUTCHER TIMOTHY S. 53 -A- - 81- 113 STONEWALL DR FUNKHOUSER DARLA POE WINCHESTER VA. 22602.2277 & POE SHARON S 272 HILDA DR 53B - 3- - 26- CLEARBROOK VA 22624-1475 WOLFORD GUY W. & ARMITHA 53B - 3- - 25- 108 WARD AVE PHTH PROPERTIES LLC WINCHESTER VA. 22602.2248 1151 CEDAR CREEK GRADE WINCHESTER VA 22602.2359 53B - 3- - 29- RITTER CALVIN LEE 152 LINDEN DR WINCHESTER VA. 22601-2818 1301i'Man Consulting 124 East Cork St. 53B - 3- - 35- Winchester, VA 22601 SCRUGGS JOSEPH I. CIO SCRUGGS JOSEPH I. 53B - 3- - 5- PO BOX 243 THE MARATHON BANK WINCHESTER VA 22604.0243 CIO UNITED BANK ATTN ANGIE BOA 514 MARKET ST PARKERSBURG WV 26101 53B - 2- - 24- PUFFINBF_RGER JUDY N. PO BOX 113 WINCHESTER VA. 22604-0113 53B 1 1 HAHN BARBARA A Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Dir ctor Frederick County Planning Department 2117 NORTHWESTERN PIKE WINCHESTER VA 22603-3954 COUNTY OF FREDERICK a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do he y certify that Michad T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director for the Department of Planning ' d Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State d ounty aforesaid. Given under my hand this C day of My commission expires on -- 4EVERLY H. DELLI G RR NOTARY ID * 331878 NOTARY PUBLIC t r';,MM!INWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MY COMMISSI,)N EXPIRES JULY S1, 2i111 NOTARY OJBLIC 53B - 3- - 36- NANBODAN PROPERTIES LLC 2054 NORTHWESTERN PIKE WINCHESTER VA. 22603-3947 53 - A- - 86- O'DONNELL TRUDY POE 200 WARD AVE WINCHESTER VA 22602-2249 83 - A- - 81-A REZIN JEFFERY L & SHARON K 382 CHAPEL RD MIDDLETOWN VA 22645.2164 53 - A- - 76- JOHNSON ROBERT B. 2054 NORTHWESTERN PIKE. WINCHESTER VA. 22603-3947 52 - A- - L- FIRST BANK 112 W KING ST STRASBURG VA 22657-2220 RT- S� iS i f� L�✓� r . Adiacent Owners/ Parcel Numbers Route 50 A55i5tecl Living Facility Parcel ID #(5): 53B-3-5,`55B-3-24 Zoned: RA Owner: The Marathon Bank PO Box 189 Dunbar, WV 250G4 Parcel ID #: 538-2-24 Zoned: RA Owner: Judy N. Puff inbercger PO Box 1 13 Wmche5ter, VA 22GO4 Parcel ID #: 538- 1 - 1 ✓ Zoned: RA Owner: Barbara A. Hahn 2 1 17 Northwestern Pike Wmche5ter, VA 22GO3 Parcel ID #: 535-2-29 k " Zoned: RA Owner: Timothy 5. Butcher 1 13 Stonewall Drive Wmche5ter, VA 22G02 Parcel ID #(5): 53B-3-2r�-e538-3-27, 53B-3-28 Zoned: RA Owner: Guy W. * Armitha Wolford 108 Ward Avenue Wmche5ter, VA 22GO2 WBARBARA-DATA PROCESSING FROM:BEV - Planning Dept. Please print sets of labels by THANKSI Parcel ID #: 538-3-29,,,538-3-30, 538-3-3 1, 53B-3-32 Zoned: RA Owner: Calvin Lee Ritter 152 Linden Drive Wmche5ter, VA 22GOI ParcellD #: Zoned: Owner: 53B-3-351-53B-3-33, 53B-3-34 RA Joseph I. Scruggs PO Box 243 Wmche5ter, VA 22GO4 AV, P Parcel ID #: 538-3-3GK3B-3-37, 538-3-38 Zoned: RA Owner: Nanbodan Properties LLC 2054 Northwestern Pike Winchester, VA 22GO3 Parcel ID #: 53-A-8G Zoned: RA Owner: Trudy Poe O'Donnell 200 Ward Avenue Winchester, VA 22GO2 On -Site Easement The Potomac Edison Company DB 783, PG 94 1 Allegheny Power Service Corp. West Winchester Substation Address: 882 Baker Lane Winchester, VA 22GO3 Location: Echo Lane off of Route 50w Parcel ID #: 53-A-8 I A Zoned: RA Owner: Patricia M. Smith I I G Stonewall Drive Winchester, VA 22G02 S3 _ A - `76� C XN DY Hl, CAMPGROU NEXT RIGHT 1 DIEN CO STEAKHOI AVAILABLE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BETTY LEARNED FRIANT CONRAD KONECZNY, CCIM 540.0535*0808 r 5 MILES A HE4Q ME AND 114 MIL rry Van Ness REZONING f; ). R�akEstate Advisor PUBLIC HEARING '�.� wwwsvn.com' Y Board Room Frederick County Administration Building 665m5651 { rCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT �• �` •�tBETTY LEARNED FRIANT 540-535-08 .- ON . . Y W� Av 0 08.-14.2 "A - 7. 79 T7 po PUBLIC HEARING F Ad rederick Co��,v '4rf at -4r 5 N. 4- tj..# 08. 14-2008 w S REQUESTING AGENT: L 7F12) v DEPT. OF GEOGRAPHIC IN -FORMATION SYSTEMS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA GIS, MAPPING, GRAPHICS WORKREQUEST 13 0 f DATE RECEIVED: o REQUESTED COMPLETION DATE Department, Agency, or Company: - Mailing and/or Billing Address: Telephone,: * E-mail Address: ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECT: P� FAX: Aff DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: (Write add-iti--Ri-infor-mat-ion-on-back -of request) 8� J41 -3 DIGITAL:— PAPER:— F ------- QT7�Q CO . LOR: — BLACK/WHITE:_ NUMBER OF COPIES: STAFF MEMBER: COMPLETION DATE: MATERIALS: DATE OF PICK-UP/DELIVERY: AMOUNT DUE: AMOUNT BILLED: METHOD OF PAYN�T' HOURS REQUIRED: AMOUNT PAID: CHECKNO.A. Frederick County GIS, 107 North Kant Street, Winchester, VA 22601, (540)665-565 1) JUN 2 6.2008 Document Approval Form - PLEASE REVIEW THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT. IF THIS DOCUMENT MEETS YOUR APPROVAL PLEASE INTTIAL AND PROVIDE THE DATE AND TDAE OF YOUR APPROVAL. IF THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT MEET YOUR APPROVAL PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS AS TO WHAT YOU WOULD LIME TO RAVE COMPLETED. INITIALS DATE & TIME Candice Angie Mark Dana Eric j Mike John Amber COMMENTS: 1 Received by Clerical Staff (Date & Time): U:\Pam\Common\Document Approval Form.wpd.