Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
002-07 Eastgate Commercial - 10.65 RA to B2-8.23 B3 to B2 - Shawnee - Backfile
io REZONING TRACKING SET Check.Uft, Fee 8.S�gn Deppsit; "f s Ap ' I"' "tion dorm `'� Deedf ' Proffer„Statement / PIat/Survey ; E f�pact Ana�ysis 's ' 'i'axesPFaid Sta#emen`� `� r oiiier List ' f Impac# IVIodel�Run t i z Ad�z s t rs c4 j .6 DATE /17 o 17 Application received/file opened aJ�J o Reference manual updated/number assigned 0 D-base updated 7 o Copy of adjoiner list given to staff member for verification Four sets of adjoiner labels ordered from data processing ��LOrC a 2 location map ordered from Mapping o� otT C) Z d File given to office manager to update Application Action Summary b PC public hearing date ACTION: Z,4z 0 BOS public hearing date ACTION: p 0S 61 << G7tw 6d�rdinan�cewg ��k - ,S-igned-copyof resolution--for-amendment-oconditions 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.) (� Action letter mailed to applicant �6 o' Reference manual and D-base updated File given to office manager to update Application Action Summary (final action) File given to Mapping/GIS to update zoning map Zoning map amended U:\Carol\C om monUracki ng. rez Revised' 05/09/02 0 0 cr 0 RECEIVED FROM ADDRESS,;�& J FOR U FOR DATE -:);n 0 1 NO,5 8 f O i -bs , . L P AMT OF ACCOUNT CASH AMT. PAID CHECK BALANCE DUE MONEY ORDER 0-3 a �0�61RS -$ BY '1`IJRk�• COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 July 5, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly St., Ste.200 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: REZONING #02-07, EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Dear Patrick: This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of April 25, 2007. The above -referenced application was approved to rezone 10.65 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. The subject properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive, and are identified with Property Identification Numbers 87-A-34, 87-A-34B, 87-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The proffer that 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 proffer statement for your records. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding the approval of this rezoning application. This letter replaces letter dated April 26, 2007. Sincerely, Candice E. Perkins, AICP Planner II CEP/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Cf 'Br-cjMoi\ tQ e� e Tis + Nef, Y�"It ICK C®M Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 April 26, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly St., Ste.200 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: REZONING 402-07, EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Dear Patrick: This letter serves to confurn action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of April 25, 2007. The above -referenced application was approved to rezone 10.65 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. The subject properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), inimedialely north and south of Maranto Manor Drive, and are identified with Property Identification Number 84 A-34, 87-A-34B, 8 A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The proffer that 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 proffer 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, Candice E. Perkins, AICP Planner 11 CEP/bad Attachment cc: Gene Fisher, Shawnee Magisterial District Supervisor June Wilmot and Robert A. Morris, Shawnee Magisterial District Commissioners Jane Anderson, Real Estate Cornrnissioner of Revenue Wrights Run, LP, 2800 S. Shirlington Rd., Ste. 803, Arlington, VA 22206 Steven & Mary Ritter, 3022 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 • 0 REZONING APPLICATION -402-07 EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: April 19, 2007 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, Planner II 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: 03/21/07 Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 04/11/07 Public Hearing Held; Action postponed 14 days at applicant's request Board of Supervisors: 04/25/07 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for conunercial uses. LOCATION: The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 84-A-34, 87-A-34B, 84-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District and B3 (Industrial Transition) District PRESENT USE: Residential and Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant • 0 Rezoning #02-7 — Rastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 2 RA (Rural Areas) Residential/Vacant South: M1 (Industrial General) Use: Home Depot RA (Rural Areas) Residential/Agricultural East: B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential N/A Route 522 West: M1 (Industrial General) Use: Vacant B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential PROPOSED USES: Commercial uses REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virl4inia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 522 and 642. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Eastgate Commercial rezoning application dated November 13, 2006, revised February 21, 2007, addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance design, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip General 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 permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshal: Plan approval reconunended. Public Works Department: Refer to Site Suitability: Provide this office with a copy of the wetlands study referenced under environmental features at the time of the master development plan (MDP) submittal or prior to the subdivision of the detailed site plan if a master development plan is not required. Refer to F. Site Drainage: The method proposed for stornrwater management shall be defined in the MDP submission. Considering the layout of the proposed rezoning and previously rezoned B2 property, we suggest that regional stormwater management be evaluated for the proposed commercial development. Department of Inspections: No comment required at this time. Shall conument on site plans when submitted. Sanitation Authority: We will provide sewer and water service to this site. Frederick -Winchester Health Department: Health Department has no objection to the request as stated so long as existing or proposed drainfields and wells are not negatively impacted. Rezoning #02-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 3 Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided that states no residential units will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school population upon buildout. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for the Eastgate Commercial property should not impact operations of the Winchester Regional Airport; therefore we are not requesting any special conditions for consideration. Historic Resources Advisory Board: 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 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 identify a core battlefield within this area. Frederick County Attorney: 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, subject to the following comments: 1. The Proffer Statement should contain a specific proffer that the Transportation proffers will be made in conformity with the attached GDP. 2. Proffer 1.1 references No. 1 on the GDP. No. 1 is shown in two places on the GDP, one of which says "right -in, right -out." If this entrance is to be right -in, right -out, the proffer should so state specifically. It should be noted that I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Connnission. Planninjz Department: Please see attached letter dated Februa7y 2, 2007 fi-onz Candice E. Perkins, Planne7• H. PlanninjZ & ZoninI4: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephens City 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. On August 14, 1991 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #06-91 which rezoned parcel 76-A-53 to the B2, B3 and MI zoning districts. On August 13, 1997 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #02-97. This rezoning depicts the current zoning designations of 76-A-53. 0 • Rezoning #02-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 4 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] Land Use The subject properties are within the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Sewer and Water Service Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of plamled conunercial, and industrial development will occur. The properties are within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows this area with a cormmercial land use designation. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to the B2 (Business General) Zoning District and therefore this request is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. This rezoning application is for 18.88 acres and consists of six separate parcels and only the B3 portion of parcel 76-A-53 is being rezoned with this application; the remainder which is already zoned B2 will still be covered by Rezoning #02-97. Staff believes that parcel 76-A- 56 in its entirety should be covered under this new rezoning application so that multiple proffer statements don't pertain to the same parcel. Also, including the entire project under one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. Transportation The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector (UD4). This application does not address the need for four lanes on Tasker Road. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development; this application does not meet this requirement at all intersections. The Frederick County Bicycle Plan designates Route 522 as a short-term designated route. The applicant has proffered to provide a ten foot asphalt bicycle path along the frontage of their site for Route 522. Since the proffer says that the path will be provided along the property frontage, it will only apply to the portion being rezoned (PIN: 87-A-34, 34B, 35 and 37). Site Access This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive, as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto connects to Rainville Road, which has been proffered with this application. Rezoning #02-7 — Eastgate Conunercial April 19, 2007 Page 5 The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right-in/right-out onto Route 522. The remainder of parcel 76- A-53, which is not being rezoned with this application (covered by proffers from Rezoning #02-97), does not have any restrictions on the number or type of entrances on Route 522 or Tasker Road. The right-in/right-out labeled as future on the proffered GDP is located on the remainder of 76-A-53 and not subject to this rezoning request. Staff Note: As stated under Land Use, staff believes that the entire 76 A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and since these parcels have access to Tasker Road and Maranto Manor Drive, direct access to Route 522 should be completely prohibiter. Rezoning #02-97 did not restrict access to Tasker Road. Since the Tasker Road frontage of parcel 76A-53 is not part of this rezoning, access is still unrestricted 3) Site Suitability/Environment It does not appear that the site contains any enviromnental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes. A small area of wetlands has been identified on the southwest corner of the existing B-3 zoned property adjacent to the existing self storage facility and there is a small man-made pond situated on the RA tract north of Maranto Manor Drive. The General Soils Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Vir inia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall under the Weikel-t-Berks-Blairton soil association, and the site consists of Clearbrook channery silt loam and Weikert-Berks channery silt loams. This soil type is not considered prime farm land. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development. It is noted that even with the improvements that the applicant has proffered to provide, certain areas will still function below a Level of Service Category C (See discussion of TIA Conclusions for Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection and Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive Intersection). A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. The County's rezoning application requires applicants to model the worst possible scenario based on the use of the site. The worst case scenario for this site would be 428,074sf of retail uses. The TIA is based on 166,662sf of retail uses, 47,000sf of office uses and 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated in the applicant's impact analysis (Section D), the 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial could be generated from an adjacent land bay which is not part of this application. The potential 224,660sf should be included under the TIA's Rezoning #02-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 6 background traffic and not added in under the assumptions. Also, since the proffers for the rezoning do not proffer a particular use for this site, the worst case scenario should have been modeled; this application only accounted for 213,662sf of retail and office on this site instead of 428,074sf of retail which would be the worst case. The Conclusions from the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) state that the following are required: Route 522/Tasker Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization along with an additional eastbound and northbound left turn lane. Staff Note: The signalization of Route 522 and Tasker was proffered with Rezoning #02-97for Eastgate Commerce Center. Proffer 1.5 from this rezoning proffers the additional eastbouitd turn lane cntd northbound turn lane. Theproffer states that the applicant will also provide other improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT. While Proffer 1.5 provides for the improvements at the Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection as called for in the TIA Conclusions, it is noted that even with these improvements, this intersection will not function at a Level of Service C or better and therefore does not meet County requirements. Even with the installation of the two turn lanes, PM peak traffic will still function at a level of service D at the PM Peak Hour; the TIA has not offered a solution to achieve a LOS C • Tasker Road/Rainville Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization and two (2) northbound left turn lanes. Staff Note: These improvements have been proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.2) • Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require an additional eastbound left -turn lane. Staff Note: This improventertt is being proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.4) While Proffer 1.4 provides for the improvements at the Route 5221maranto Manor intersection as called for in the TIA Conclusions, it is noted that even with this improvement this intersection will not function at a Level of Service C or better and therefore does not meet County requirements. Maranto Manor will function with a LOS D at the PMPeak Hour; the TIA has not offered a solution to achieve a LOS C. • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new intersection. It will be an unsignalized intersection with westbound left/right shared lane, northbound thru/right shared lane and a southbound left/thru shared lane. 0 Site driveway #1/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new unsignalized intersection. It Rezoning #02-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 7 will require eastbound thru and right -turn lanes, westbound left and thru lanes and northbound left and right -turn lanes. Staff Note: This intersection is proffered to be a right- inlright-out only per proffer 1.1 • Site Driveway #2/Maranto Manor Drive: This intersection will require signalization along with eastbound separate left, and thru/right shared lanes; westbound separate left, thru, right turn lane; northbound separate left and thru/right shared lanes and southbound separate left, thru, right turn lanes. StaffNote: The signalization and the turn lanes underlined above have been proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.3); the remaining lanes have not been addressed. • Site Driveway 43/Route 522: This is a new right in/right out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. StaffNote: Site driveway #3 is located on parcel 76 A-53 but is not located within the area being requested for rezoning with this application. No proffers are associated with this entrance. • Site Driveway #4/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. StaffNote: These turn lanes have not been addressed by the applicant. Also, no levels of service have been identified for this intersection, so it is unclear how it will function. B. Sewer and Water Sewer and water service will be provided to the site by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority via a six inch force main and a 12 inch water line. Assuming a buildout of approximately 200,000sf, a standard rate of 200 gallons per day at 1,000sf of commercial space, it is anticipated that the proposed use will generate approximately 40,000 GPD of water consumption with equivalent sewer flows. C. Design Standards The proffers for the rezoning do not address any design features for this proposed development. Design standards should be incorporated into this development as they relate to access management, landscaping and signage. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that landscape buffers should be established between the road and parking lots to promote a more pleasant environment. The applicant should consider providing additional landscaping along Route 522 to create a more aesthetically pleasing development [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-15]; street trees should also be provided along all public and internal roads. Limitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that signage should be minimized along business Rezoning #02-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 8 corridors to reduce visual impacts and to ensure that the number of signs provided is not distracting. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-16] Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. 5) Proffer Statement — Dated November 13, 2006 (Revised February 9, 2007, February 10, 2007, February 21, 2007 and March 30, 2007) 1. Transportation 1.1 The applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Maranto Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. Staff Note: This does not restrict the portions of parcel 76 A-53 which are not part of this rezoning. 1.2 The applicant shall bond a traffic signal and two northbound left turn lanes and a westbound left turn lane at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.3 The applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Southbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound left turn lane. The applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.4 The applicant shall bond an eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.5 The applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane, as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. Staff Note: This does not restrict entrances on Route 522 for the portion of parcel 76 A-53 since the entire parcel is not part of this rezoning. Rezoning #02-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 9 1.6 The applicant shall locate a maximum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-in/right-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDO. 1.7 The applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the property. 1.8 Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. 2. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail 2.1 The applicant shall construct a ten foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the property frontage on Route 522. Staff Note: The proffer states that the path will be provided along the property frontage, it will only apply to the portion being rezoned (PIN: 87-A-34, 34B, 35 and 37). 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 The applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit. 3.2 The applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit. 4. Land Use 4.1 Development on the Property shall not exceed a Floor Area Ration (FAR) of .25. 4.2 No loading bays shall be visible from Route 522 or Tasker Road. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 03/21/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The land use proposed in this rezoning is consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range land Use Plan. The TIA as modeled does not represent the full impact of what could happen on the site. The applicant should consider including the entire parcel 76-A-53 in this rezoning application. All intersections should be modeled to reflect a LOS C or better and Tasker Road should be addressed. Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully Rezoning 802-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 10 evaluated to ensure that they fully address the goals of the County. The applicant should be prepared to address theses issues. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 03/21/07 MEETING: The applicants stated they modeled a .25 FAR in the TIA, rather than the worst -case scenario, because the .25 FAR more typically represented retail development in Frederick County. Regarding the Route 522/Tasker Road and the Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive intersections, the applicants explained that as a whole, these intersections will operate at a LOS "C" and only two single and individual movements within these intersections will operate at a p.m. peak hour LOS "D." The applicants offered that their transportation proffers address not only this rezoning, but all of the background trips at the identified intersections; they calculated their generated trips from the site to be rezoned to be about 15% of the total background trips coming into the area. The applicants said their proffers included three traffic signals and double left -turn lanes at three different intersections and will guarantee the improvements necessary to support the development of the entire southern portion of the Eastgate Commerce Center. Commission members recommended that the applicant proffer a .25 FAR, prohibit loading docks and outside storage for the areas with frontage along Route 522 and Tasker Road, and to possibly consider architectural standards or screening for those areas as well. The Commission also requested that the applicant provide a consolidated master development plan (MDP) showing the concept for the entire area and including not only the proffers, but the transportation improvements, with transition lanes highlighted, entrances, corridor appearance, buffering and screening, and trigger mechanisms indicating when transportation improvements will occur. The applicant was agreeable to providing the consolidated MDP. The VDOT representative was satisfied with the applicant's proffers, but agreed the consolidated MDP showing transportation improvements with transition lanes and entrances would be beneficial in working through the process. One adjoining property owner along Route 522 asked how his property would be affected by this rezoning. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning with a modification to the proffers to state a maximum FAR of .25 and the provision of a consolidated MDP for the entire area showing the transportation improvements, including transition lanes, traffic signals, entrances, and trigger mechanisms indicating when the improvements will occur, as well as corridor appearance, buffering, and screening. (Note: Commissioner Unger was absent from the meeting.) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 04/04/07 MEETING: Plamler II Candice E. Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised this was a request to rezone 10.65 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District and 0 • Rezoning 402-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 11 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for conunercial uses. The property is located in the Sewer and Water Service Area and the Eastern Land Use Plan. The proposed B2 zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Planner Il Perkins noted that parcel 76-A-53 should be covered in its entirety under this rezoning as it would help make the proffers consistent. She stated that the remainder of the property does not have restrictions on the number of entrances on Route 522 and Tasker Road. She went on to say that the proposed rezoning does not address the four-laning of Tasker Road and the traffic impact analysis estimates the level of service at the intersections of Route 522 and Tasker Road and Route 522 and Maranto Manor Drive at level C. The proposed land use is consistent with the land use plan. Planner II Perkins concluded by saying that the issues to be addressed by the Board were: a. the inclusion of the entire parcel 76-A-53; b. level of service C or better at all intersections; C. address Tasker Road improvements. Patrick Sowers, Patton, Harris, Rust, & Associates, appeared before the Board on behalf of this application. Mr. Sowers stated, in regard to the inclusion of the entire parcel 76-A-53, it was the applicant's desire to modify only a small portion of the entire acreage of this parcel. He went on to say that new impacts were not being created by the land use. With regard to addressing the traffic impacts, Mr. Sowers stated the improvements would be required whether or not this proposed development was coming forward. He went on to say that all intersections, as a whole, operate at a level C or better and he felt the development was benefiting the county and providing transportation improvements. Chairman Shickle asked if the rezoned portion of 76-A-53 would be legally subdivided or remain part of the parent tract. Mr. Sowers responded that it would remain part of the parent tract. Chairman Shickle asked about the number of lanes on Tasker Road. Mr. Sowers responded the applicant has proffered double left turn lanes at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522. He went on to say they were proffering what VDOT would require them to do. Supervisor DeHaven asked for clarification of the discussion regarding Tasker Road. Mr. Sowers responded there would be two west bound lanes and 1 east bound lane on Tasker Road. Vice -Chairman Fisher asked VDOT if the number of entrances allowed as part of the existing 1997 rezoning would be limited based on distance requirements. Lloyd Ingram, VDOT Engineer, responded that was correct. He went on to say that VDOT would evaluate the site plan for a spacing determination. He went on to say that with the number of turn lanes and transition lanes there would be at least five lanes (i.e. three through lanes and two turn lanes) on Tasker Road. He went on to say that VDOT would make the applicant install the required road improvements, but they were not opposed to the applicant proffering those improvements. He concluded by saying that he felt VDOT and the applicant could work through the issues. Chairman Shickle asked the applicant's representative if he agreed with what VDOT had said. Mr. Sowers responded yes. Chairman Shickle asked if the applicant had considered a proffer in that regard. Mr. Sowers responded that the applicant had proffered to provide improvements totaling $2 million. Rezoning #02-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 12 Chairman Shickle asked the applicant to ponder the Board's concerns during the public hearing. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Chuck Maddox, special consultant for the applicant, advised there was no attempt to avoid anything and the proffered improvements would meet the traffic impact analysis. He went on to say that other issues were governed by the State and VDOT was satisfied they could require the necessary improvements. He concluded by saying the applicant felt it was better to leave the proffers general in nature because any changes would require a proffer modification. Chairman Shickle stated that he was glad VDOT agrees with the Board, but he was not getting any comfort that the improvements would be done to address his concern. He went on to say there was no promise to the County unless VDOT makes the applicant do it. He concluded by saying that he felt this was too loose. Vice -Chairman Fisher stated it was a concern that the applicant would not proffer they would comply with VDOT. Engineer Ingram stated if the applicant would go with the desired method versus the minimum standard then VDOT would be satisfied. Mr. Maddox responded that the applicant would al4ree to use the preferred method. Mr. Maddox asked that this application be postponed for two weeks so that the applicant could modify the proffer statement to address the desires for clarification that they would implement VDOT's preferred methods. Upon a motion by Vice -Chairman Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Van Osten, the Board postponed Rezoning #02-07 for two weeks. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Barbara E. Van Osten Aye ACTION FOLLOWING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: At the April 4, 2007 Board of Supervisors meeting the applicant agreed to use the VDOT preferred design and requested that the application be postponed for two weeks. The applicant has revised the GDP to reflect land configuration but has not revised the proffer statement to reflect the use of the VDOT preferred design. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 04/25/07 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The land use proposed in this rezoning is consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range land Use Plan. The applicant should consider including the entire parcel 76-A-53 in this rezoning application. All intersections should be modeled to reflect a LOS C or better and Tasker Road should be addressed. The revisions to the GDP provided by the applicant do not reflect the commitment provided by the applicant at the Board of Supervisors meeting to construct improvements per the "preferred design" of VDOT. 0 0 Rezoning 402-7 — Eastgate Commercial April 19, 2007 Page 13 Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address the goals of the County. The applicant should be prepared to address theses issues. Following the required public bearing, a decision regarding this rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. vn m SHEN VALLEY 76 A 53H 17.57 ac. O HOME DEPOT 76 A 53G 60.67 ac. 4` h� NO 59 �� Q oti \51 76 1 A 55 �g l�RaF 25 ac Spg Sg� ec DILL 76 A 56 3.75 ac. P6 ysc / BAKER 76 A 59F 15.01 ac \ RABADI GHTS RUN �Al �QP51 7 25.31 ac. A 53 G Asa 83.01 ac. 16 9 Ssc' 01 RITTER 871 A' 34 47 ac. 2 BISHOP �)Q 87 A 31 10.03 ac. m °j U s Qns BREEDEN 4 x :rr,. m w 87 A 50 "• 9 �� Z25 dC. NtwCO m 87 A Aft N51 GIBSON lac. N:N 87 A 16B m 154.05 ac. NEWCOME 87 A 53 4 ac. Rezoning REZ # 02 - 07 Application Eastgate Commercial Parcel ID: 411 87 - A - 3413; 35; 36 Location in the County 87 - A - 37, 76 - A - 53 87-A-34 Map Features Q REZ0207_EastgateCommercial 0 Lakes/Ponds — Streams streets Vj, Pnmary Secondary ^. Terciary SWSA 5ryh�m ary. it o (OD Case Planner: Candice Ct� 0 0 76 A ouo sac P Z0 Q oti 16 ar �51A BAKER 76 A 59F A15.01 ac. A D1A76 \Task. 2.5 ac `�0 JB✓ a DILL 76 A S6 na¢c VS ac. eel," 0 16 5a RABADI 72533 WRIGHTSRI c. 6 A 53- at1��51 83,01 ac. 16 Apace 62 �' zoning �� P a,,�oM 61 ba°• 15 y e 9hj8 BISHOP p 87 A 11 10.03 ac. 01 Sao s ��y'y u i ,FQQ` a 5° Q w BREEDER 87 A 50 -V 225dC. J ONE � �t2jr m " 6 GIBBON 7 ac. 57 t P g1 A ao- 87 A 16B N 154.05 ac. NEWCOME 87 A 53 4 ac. ■ ■ VMV ■ ■ V■� ��i ��� � �� 7 r. Rezoning REZ#02-07 Application Eastgate Commercial Parcel ID: 87 - A - 346; 35; 36 Location in the County 87 - A - 37, 76 - A - 53 87-A-34 Map Features Q REZ0207_EastgateCommercial Zoning D Lakes/Ponds w B1 (Business, Neighborhood District) Streams B2 (Business, General District) Streets ED B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) *A, Primary ED EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) Secondary HE (Higher Education District) 1. Terciary M1 (Industrial, Light District) ll SWSA M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) 410 R4 (Residential, Planned Community District) • R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RAZ (Rural Area Zone) RP (Residential Performance District) Case Planner: Candice • 0 �A 1 a°' 1J a 01 hqh Pgt� 0 6 b� mac• e GIBSON 87 A 168 154.05 ac. 16 A ous• .� � NOR 69 Z� � o 'Ib Ppac• ,ro ,o' 151 'j6p1A 55 �6T�RjDP 15 at. 509 'f9✓ ak DILL 76 A 56 1 3.75 ac. .�o hay BAKER 76 A 59F 15.01 ac. RABADI S H 76 A 59G 25.33 ac. A 53 GOIbF'�6'1 )1 ac. 16 sec' 9 sc 6� 5 1• RIVER 87 Aj34 4.7 ac. 2 y� BISHOP (¢ 87 A 31 10.03 ac. m °j u h c BREEDE R m h 87 A SO .25ac. J 87E ACOS E 18, 7� C n�N N m NEWCOME 87 A 53 4 ac. Rezoning REZ # 02 - 07 Application Eastgate Commercial Parcel ID: 87 - A - 3413; 35; 36 Location in the county 87 - A - 37, 76 - A - 53 87-A-34 Map Features Q REZ0207_EastgateCommercial Long Range Land Use O Lakes/Ponds Rural Community Center �- Streams Residential Streets Business '11%, Primary n;.< Industrial Secondary Z,� Institutional ^. Tertiary Recreation SWSA Xk Historic ® Mixed -Use 4W Planned Unit Development 5rophms cnr ce © Case Planner: Candice 0 0 ChQ RZ #04-97 / rr_w��.�_r_ra � / r ----------- MIM 0 --------------- , a a —4 o IA-STGAFE- C01VIVEFCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc ZONING HISTORY 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 FROERICK COUNTY, VIROINIA REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff v Fee Azriount Paid' $ Zoning Amendment Number Date` Received f _ V- 2' y 7 PC Hearing Date` , s f') o 7 BOSHearing Date l! -o 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. Applicants: Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Telephone: (540) 667.2139 Address: 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: Wrights Run, LP Telephone: (703) 820-2500 Address: 2800 S Shirlington Road, Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 Name: Real Tech, LLC Telephone: (703) 820-2500 Address: 2800 S Shirlington Road, Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 Name: Ritter, Steven G & Mary M Telephone: Address: 3022 Front Royal Pike Winchester, VA 22602 3. Contact person(s) if other than above Name: Patrick Sowers Telephone: (540) 667.2139 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location Map X Plat X • Deed of property X Verification of taxes paid X Agency Comments X Fees X Impact Analysis Statement X Proffer Statement X 1 5. 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: Allan Hudson Steven & Mary Ritter 6. A) Current Use of the Property: B) Proposed Use of the Property: Residential/Vacant Commercial 7. Adjoining Property: SEE ATTACHED. 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers). The Property is west of Route 522 South (Front Royal Pike) immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density of intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number: 87-A-34, 3413, 35, 36, 37 and 76-A-53 Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service: Shawnee Millwood Millwood Districts High School: Middle School: Elementary School: Millbrook Admiral Byrd Armel 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 10.65 RA B2 8.23 B3 B2 18.88 Total acreage to be rezoned 2 • 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family Home Townhome Multi -Family Non -Residential Lots Mobile Home Hotel Rooms Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office 47,000 Service Station Retail 166,000 Manufacturing Restaurant Flex - Warehouse Other 12. Signature: 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. is 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. Applicant(s) " && Date Wrights Run, LP �Y1 Date - Y- 0 Real Tech, LLC 1 Date .�, r5'� 0 Steven Ritter ) /iht 172-1 Date Mary Ritter 3 • 0 Adjoining Property Owners Rezoning Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public right-of-way, a private right-of-way, or a watercourse from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. The Commissioner of the Revenue is located on the 2" d floor of the Frederick County Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name Address Property Identification Number (PIN) Name: Orville Comer 2903 Front Royal Pike Property#: 76-A-57A Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Orville Comer 2903 Front Royal Pike Property#: 76-A-57 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Floyd & Kay Ritter 141 Bridgeport Ln Property#: 76-A-58 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Robert Price 307 Caroline Ave Property#: 87-A-38 Stephens City, VA 22655 Name: Bob & Louise Price 2997 Front Royal Pike Property#: 87-A-39 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Diana Heishman 3029 Front Royal Pike Property#: 87-A-40 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: John Bullock 3049 Front Royal Pike Property#: 87-A-41 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Samuel Plasters, Jr. 3046 Front Royal Pike Property M 87-A-33 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Julia Bishop 114 Orchard Dr Property M 87-A-31 Midwest City, OK 73110 Name: Home Depot USA, Inc. P.O. Box 105842 Property#: 76-A-53G Atlanta, GA 30348 Name: Cable Holdco Exchange V, LLC P.O. Box 173838 Property #: 76-A-53F Denver, CO 80217 Name: S & W, LLC 720 S Braddock St Pro ert #: 76-A-53E Winchester, VA 22601 • Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.va.us Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Wrights Run LP (Phone) 703.820.2500 (Address) 2800 S Shirlington Road Suite 803 Arlington VA 22206 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 Deed Boo on Page and is described as Tax Map Parcel 76-A-53; 87-A-35; 87-A-36; 87-A-37 Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139 0,Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester Virginia 22601 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 Permits X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) _ Subdivision Site Plan 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 (D ' day of G� , 200 , S ignature(s) State of Virginia, City/Countyof �e A-,,x `k c_Y_ To -wit: N V V_A S 610 ' —^nI, L a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this a� day of _V , 200 �. My Commission Expires: -- Notary Public ! r Et o Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.va.us Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Real Tech. LLC (Phone) 703.820.2500 (Address) 2800 S Shirlington Road Suite 803 Arlington VA 22206 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 Deed Book on Page and is described as Tax Map Parcel 87-A-34A; 87-A-34B Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139 Address) 117E Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester Virginia 22601 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 Permits X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) _ Subdivision Site Plan 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. s,(� In witness thereof, I (we) have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this LS day of re_VJ , 200 , Signature(s) 0-YAM AM dyo" State of Virginia, City/County of �C GCk,c —,C ,,c ,To -wit: AN �� (�c� 5,1 /1J " pA e�j .a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has acknowledged the ame before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this day of Fe h _, 200 My Commission Expires: �' 3Zyy7 •Notary Public 0 G CO Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.va.us ' Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395 Know All NVlen By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) Steven G. & Mary M. Ritter (Phone) (Address) 3022 Front Royal Pike Winchester VA 22602 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 Deed Book 501 on Page 255 and is described as Tax Map Parcel 87-A-34 Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139 W ddress) 117 E. Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester Virginia 22601 oact as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with frill 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 Permits X Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) _ Subdivision Site Plan 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�20V Signaturc(s) State of Virginia, City/Gounty{of To -wit: Ci�3.—�.oc- (�. ( ;i i 11ii'1!� P111t /<- I,_ _r ai✓, 'I r '� j� , 1,4"1 ii�l oi'� f ° a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has ackrimvledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this `i j�' day of t Z - , 200 . /� �r�'�c d'lo✓d.� AV� My Comnussion Expires: 1 r1112a 4.2�1. 2 612 4:; �otary Public EX. B3 �ZAyW �40 5\ 1 !Yt E7L PERMANENT SAFE ! G �. DRANAGE EASEMENT I D.B. 844. PG. 1037 Al H/ y u / J / l� EX. RA / R 1 /�1 N241p}� 17\ i9' �i•�1 EX. RA CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS DELTA I LENGTH TANGENT I BEARING CHORD Cl 40.00 61.30 3&50 55.41 C2 BMW 64652 341.83 629.28 G 201116 410.45 205.94 409.74 C4 39A00 290.34 151.97 253.95 CS 640.00 190.85 95.14 190.15 C6 525.00 236.05 50.29 100,12 C7 650.00 130.25 55.34 130.03 a 40.00 1102 40.19 56.70 C9 72500 272.41 137.&7 N 270.11 CIO 40.00 64.72 11.94 s7.B9 56.57 C11 40.00 62.53 110.DD C12 40.00 62.83 1 40.00 56.57 C13 40.00 1 111. 1 62.BJ I 40.00 36.S7 EXISTING RA - 10.65 ACRES EXISTING B3 - 8.23 ACRES TOTAL - 18.88 ACRES EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust &Associates ti I Cb' ZONING BOUNDARY 117 E. Picodilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 V a VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 FREDERICK COUNTY, ORG/NIA REZONING APPLICATION 902-07 EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: April 2, 2007 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, Planner II 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: 03/21/07 Reconunended Approval Board of Supervisors: 04/11/07 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for conunercial uses. LOCATION: The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive (Route 642). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 84-A-34, 87-A-34B, 84-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District and B3 (Industrial Transition) District PRESENT USE: Residential and Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential/Vacant South: M1 (Industrial General) Use: Home Depot RA (Rural Areas) Residential/Agricultural East: B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential N/A Route 522 West: M1 (Industrial General) Use: Vacant • Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 2 B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential PROPOSED USES: Commercial uses REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 522 and 642. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Eastgate Conunercial rezoning application dated November 13, 2006, revised February 21, 2007, addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance design, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip General 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 permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Public Works Department: Refer to Site Suitability: Provide this office with a copy of the wetlands study referenced under enviromnental features at the time of the master development plan (MDP) submittal or prior to the subdivision of the detailed site plan if a master development plan is not required. Refer to F. Site Drainage: The method proposed for stonnwater management shall be defined in the MDP submission. Considering the layout of the proposed rezoning and previously rezoned B2 property, we suggest that regional stormwater management be evaluated for the proposed conunercial development. Department of Inspections: No continent required at this time. Shall comment on site plans when submitted. Sanitation Authority: We will provide sewer and water service to this site. Frederick -Winchester Health Department: Health Department has no objection to the request as stated so long as existing or proposed drainfields and wells are not negatively impacted. Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided that states no residential units will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school population upon buildout. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for the Eastgate Commercial property should not impact operations of the Winchester Regional Airport; therefore we are not requesting any special conditions for consideration. Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the 0 • Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 3 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 identify a core battlefield within this area. Frederick County Attorney: 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, subject to the following comments: 1. The Proffer Statement should contain a specific proffer that the Transportation proffers will be made in conformity with the attached GDP. 2. Proffer 1.1 references No. 1 on the GDP. No. 1 is shown in two places on the GDP, one of which says "right -in, right -out." If this entrance is to be right -in, right -out, the proffer should so state specifically. It should be noted that I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Commission. Planning Department: Please see attached letter dated February 2, 2007 from Candice E. Perkins, Planner H. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephens City 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. On August 14, 1991 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #06-91 which rezoned parcel 76-A-53 to the B2, B3 and M 1 zoning districts. On August 13, 1997 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #02-97. This rezoning depicts the current zoning designations of 76-A-53. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for snaking 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] Land Use The subject properties are within the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Sewer and Water Service Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of planned commercial, and industrial development will occur. Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 4 The properties are within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows this area with a conuriercial land use designation. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to the B2 (Business General) Zoning District and therefore this request is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. This rezoning application is for 18.88 acres and consists of six separate parcels and only the B3 portion of parcel 76-A-53 is being rezoned with this application; the remainder which is already zoned B2 will still be covered by Rezoning #02-97. Staff believes that parcel 76-A-56 in its entirety should be covered under this new rezoning application so that multiple proffer statements don't pertain to the same parcel. Also, including the entire project wider one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. Transportation The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector (UD4). This application does not address the need for four lanes on Tasker Road. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development; this application does not meet this requirement at all intersections. The Frederick County Bicycle Plan designates Route 522 as a short-term designated route. The applicant has proffered to provide a ten foot asphalt bicycle path along the frontage of their site for Route 522. Since the proffer says that the path will be provided along the property frontage, it will only apply to the portion being rezoned (PIN: 87-A-34, 34B, 35 and 37). Site Access This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive, as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto connects to Rainville Road, which has been proffered with this application. The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right-in/right-out onto Route 522. The remainder of parcel 76-A-53, which is not being rezoned with this application (covered by proffers from Rezoning #02-97), does not have any restrictions on the number or type of entrances on Route 522 or Tasker Road. The right-in/right-out labeled as future on the proffered GDP is located on the remainder of 76-A-53 and not subject to this rezoning request. Staff Note: As stated under Land Use, staff believes that the entire 76 A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and since these parcels have access to TaskerRoad and Maranto Manor Drive, direct access to Route 522 should be completely prohibited. Rezoning #02-97 did not restrict access to Tasker Road. Since the Tasker Road frontage of parcel 76 A-53 is not part of this rezoning, access is still unrestricted. Site Suitability/Environment It does not appear that the site contains any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes. A small area of wetlands has been identified on the southwest corner of the existing B-3 zoned property 0 • Rezoning 902-07 — Gastgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 5 adjacent to the existing self storage facility and there is a small man-made pond situated on the RA tract north of Maranto Manor Drive. The General Soils Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall under the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association, and the site consists of Clearbrook charmery silt loam and Weikert-Berks channery silt loarns. This soil type is not considered prime farm land. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development. It is noted that even with the improvements that the applicant has proffered to provide, certain areas will still function below a Level of Service Category C (See discussion of TIA Conclusions for Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection and Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive Intersection). A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. The County's rezoning application requires applicants to model the worst possible scenario based on the use of the site. The worst case scenario for this site would be 428,074sf of retail uses. The TIA is based on 166,662sf of retail uses, 47,OOOsf of office uses and 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated in the applicant's impact analysis (Section D), the 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial could be generated from an adjacent land bay which is not part of this application. The potential 224,660sf should be included under the TIA's background traffic and not added in under the assumptions. Also, since the proffers for the rezoning do not proffer a particular use for this site, the worst case scenario should have been modeled; this application only accounted for 213,662sf of retail and office on this site instead of 428,074sf of retail which would be the worst case. The Conclusions from the Transportation hrrpact Analysis (TIA) state that the following are required: • Route 522/Tasker Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization along with an additional eastbound and northbound left turn lane. Staff Note: The signalization of Route 522 and Tasker was proffered with Rezoning #02- 97for Eastgate Commerce Center. Proffer 1.5from this rezoning proffers the additional eastbound turn lane and northbound turn lane. The proffer states that the applicant will also provide other improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT. While Proffer 1.5 provides for the improvements at the Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection as called for in the TIA Conclusions, it is noted that even with these improvements, this intersection will not function at a Level of Service C or better and therefore does not meet County requirements. Even with the installation of the two turn Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 6 lanes, PMpeak traffic will still function at a level of service D at the PMPeak Hour; the TM has not offered a solution to achieve a LOS C. • Tasker Road/Rainville Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization and two (2) northbound left turd lanes. Staff Note: These improvements have been proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.2) • Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require an additional eastbound left-tuin lane. StaffNote: Tliis inzprovenzent is being proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.4) While Proffer 1.4 provides for the improvements at the Route 522/Maranto Manor intersection as called for in the TM Conclusions, it is noted that even with this improvement this intersection will not function at a Level of Service C or better and therefore does not meet County requirements. Maranto Manor will function with a LOS D at the PM Peak Hour; the TM has not offered a solution to achieve a LOS C. Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new intersection. It will be an unsignalized intersection with westbound left/right shared lane, northbound thru/right shared lane and a southbound left/thru shared lane. • Site driveway #1/Maranto Manor Drive: This is anew unsignalized intersection. It will require eastbound thru and right -turn lanes, westbound left and thru lanes and northbound left and right -turn lanes. Staff Note: The applicant has not addressed these lanes. • Site Driveway #2/Maranto Manor Drive: This intersection will require signalization along with eastbound separate left, and thru/right shared lanes; westbound separate left, thru, right turn lane; northbound separate left and tbru/right shared lanes and southbound separate left, thru, right turn lanes. StaffNote: The signalization and the turn lanes underlined above have been proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.3); the remaining lanes have not been addressed. • Site Driveway #3/Route 522: This is a new right ii-dright out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. Staff Note: Site driveway #3 is located on parcel 76 A-53 but is not located within the area being requested for rezoning with this application. No proffers are associated with this entrance. • Site Driveway 44/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. StaffNote: These turn lanes have not been addressed by the applicant. Also, no levels of service have been identified for this intersection, so it is unclear how it will function. Rezoning #02-07 —1 astgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 7 B. Sewer and Water Sewer and water service will be provided to the site by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority via a six inch force main and a 12 inch water line. Assuming a buildout of approximately 200,OOOsf, a standard rate of 200 gallons per day at 1,000sf of commercial space, it is anticipated that the proposed use will generate approximately 40,000 GPD of water consumption with equivalent sewer flows. C. Design Standards The proffers for the rezoning do not address any design features for this proposed development. Design standards should be incorporated into this development as they relate to access management, landscaping and signage. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that landscape buffers should be established between the road and parking lots to promote a more pleasant enviromnent. The applicant should consider providing additional landscaping along Route 522 to create a more aesthetically pleasing development [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-15]; street trees should also be provided along all public and internal roads. Limitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that signage should be minimized along business corridors to reduce visual impacts and to ensure that the number of signs provided is not distracting. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-16] Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. 5) Proffer Statement — Dated November 13, 2006 (Revised February 9, 2007, February 10, 2007, February 21, 2007 and March 30, 2007) 1. Transportation 1.1 The applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Maranto Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. Staff Note: This does not restrict the portions of parcel 76 A-53 which are not part of this rezoning. 1.2 The applicant shall bond a traffic signal and two northbound left turn lanes at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.3 The applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Southbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound 0 0 Rezoning 902-07 — Eastgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 8 left turn lane. The applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance pen -nit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.4 The applicant shall bond an eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.5 The applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane, as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. Staff Note: This does not restrict entrances on Route 522 for the portion of parcel 76 A-53 since the entire parcel is not part of this rezoning. 1.6 The applicant shall locate a maximum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-in/right-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDO. 1.7 The applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the property. 1.8 Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. 2. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail 2.1 The applicant shall construct a ten foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the property frontage on Route 522. Staff Note: The proffer states that the path will be provided along the property frontage, it will only apply to the portion being rezoned (PIN: 87 A-34, 34B, 35 and 37). 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 The applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit. 3.2 The applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit. Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 9 4. Land Use 4.1 Development on the Property shall not exceed a Floor Area Ration (FAR) of .25. 4.2 No loading bays shall be visible from Route 522 or Tasker Road. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 03/21/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The land use proposed in this rezoning is consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range land Use Plan. The TIA as modeled does not represent the full impact of what could happen on the site. The applicant should consider including the entire parcel 76-A-53 in this rezoning application. All intersections should be modeled to reflect a LOS C or better and Tasker Road should be addressed. Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address the goals of the County. The applicant should be prepared to address theses issues. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 03/21/07 MEETING: The applicants stated they modeled a .25 FAR in the TIA, rather than the worst -case scenario, because the .25 FAR more typically represented retail development in Frederick County. Regarding the Route 522/Tasker Road and the Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive intersections, the applicants explained that as a whole, these intersections will operate at a LOS "C" and only two single and individual movements within these intersections will operate at a p.m. peak hour LOS "D." The applicants offered that their transportation proffers address not only this rezoning, but all of the background trips at the identified intersections; they calculated their generated trips from the site to be rezoned to be about 15% of the total background trips coming into the area. The applicants said their proffers included three traffic signals and double left -turn lanes at three different intersections and will guarantee the improvements necessary to support the development of the entire southern portion of the Eastgate Cormnerce Center. Conunission members recommended that the applicant proffer a .25 FAR, prohibit loading docks and outside storage for the areas with frontage along Route 522 and Tasker Road, and to possibly consider architectural standards or screening for those areas as well. The Commission also requested that the applicant provide a consolidated master development plan (MDP) showing the concept for the entire area and including not only the proffers, but the transportation improvements, with transition lanes highlighted, entrances, corridor appearance, buffering and screening, and trigger mechanisms indicating when transportation improvements will occur. The applicant was agreeable to providing the consolidated MDP. The VDOT representative was satisfied with the applicant's proffers, but agreed the consolidated MDP showing transportation improvements with transition lanes and entrances would be beneficial in working through the process. One adjoining property owner along Route 522 asked how his property would be affected by this rezoning. 0 0 Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial April 2, 2007 Page 10 The Plamling Commission unanimously reconnnended approval of the rezoning with a modification to the proffers to state a maximum FAR of .25 and the provision of a consolidated MDP for the entire area showing the transportation improvements, including transition lanes, traffic signals, entrances, and trigger mechanisms indicating when the improvements will occur, as well as corridor appearance, buffering, and screening. (Note: Commissioner Unger was absent from the meeting.) ACTION FOLLOWING THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The applicant revised the proffer statement to reflect commitments verbally agreed to at the Planning Commission meeting on March 21, 2007. The changes to the proffer statement are that the site is limited to a .25 floor to area ratio (ordinance allows 1.0) and that no loading bays will be visible from Route 522 or Tasker Road. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 04/11/07 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The land use proposed in this rezoning is consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range land Use Plan. The TIA as modeled does not represent the full impact of what could happen on the site. The applicant should consider including the entire parcel 76-A-53 in this rezoning application. All intersections should be modeled to reflect a LOS C or better and Tasker Road should be addressed. Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they frilly address the goals of the County. The applicant should be prepared to address theses issues. Following the required public hearing, a decision regarding this rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. REZONING APPLICATION #02-07 EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: March 5, 2007 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, Planner II 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: 03/21/07 Pending Board of Supervisors: 04/11/07 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. LOCATION: The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive (Route 642). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 84-A-34, 87-A-34B, 84-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53 PROPERTY ZONING: RA (Rural Areas) District and B3 (Industrial Transition) District PRESENT USE: Residential and Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: B2 (Business General) RA (Rural Areas) South: MI (Industrial General) RA (Rural Areas) East: B2 (Business General) RA (Rural Areas) N/A West: M1 (Industrial General) Use: Vacant Residential/Vacant Use: Home Depot Residential/Agricultural Use: Vacant Residential Route 522 Use: Vacant Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 2 B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant RA (Rural Areas) Residential PROPOSED USES: Commercial uses REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 522 and 642. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Eastgate Commercial rezoning application dated November 13, 2006, revised February 21, 2007, addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance design, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip General 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 Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Public Works Department: Refer to Site Suitability: Provide this office with a copy of the wetlands study referenced under environmental features at the time of the master development plan (MDP) submittal or prior to the subdivision of the detailed site plan if a master development plan is not required. Refer to F. Site Drainage: The method proposed for stormwater management shall be defined in the MDP submission. Considering the layout of the proposed rezoning and previously rezoned B2 property, we suggest that regional stormwater management be evaluated for the proposed commercial development. Department of Inspections: No comment required at this time. Shall comment on site plans when submitted. Sanitation Authority: We will provide sewer and water service to this site. Frederick -Winchester Health Department: Health Department has no objection to the request as stated so long as existing or proposed drainfields and wells are not negatively impacted. Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided that states no residential units will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school population upon buildout. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for the Eastgate Commercial property should not impact operations of the Winchester Regional Airport; therefore we are not requesting any special conditions for consideration. Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the Rezoning 902-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 3 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 identify a core battlefield within this area. Frederick County Attorney: 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, subject to the following comments: 1. The Proffer Statement should contain a specific proffer that the Transportation proffers will be made in conformity with the attached GDP. 2. Proffer 1.1 references No. 1 on the GDP. No. 1 is shown in two places on the GDP, one of which says "right -in, right -out." If this entrance is to be right -in, right -out, the proffer should so state specifically. It should be noted that I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Plarming Commission. PlanninL, Department: Please see attached letter dated February 2, 2007 from Candice E. Perkins, Planner H. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephens City 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. On August 14, 1991 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #06-91 which rezoned parcel 76-A-53 to the B2, B3 and M1 zoning districts. On August 13, 1997 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #02-97. This rezoning depicts the current zoning designations of 76-A-53. 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] Land Use The subject properties are within the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Sewer and Water Service Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of planned commercial, and industrial development will occur. Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 4 The properties are within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows this area with a commercial land use designation. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to the B2 (Business General) Zoning District and therefore this request is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. This rezoning application is for 18.88 acres and consists of six separate parcels and only the B3 portion of parcel 76-A-53 is being rezoned with this application; the remainder which is already zoned B2 will still be covered by Rezoning #02-97. Staff believes that parcel 76-A-56 in its entirety should be covered under this new rezoning application so that multiple proffer statements don't pertain to the same parcel. Also, including the entire project under one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. Transportation The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector (UD4). This application does not address the need for four lanes on Tasker Road. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development; this application does not meet this requirement at all intersections. The Frederick County Bicycle Plan designates Route 522 as a short-term designated route. The applicant has proffered to provide a ten foot asphalt bicycle path along the frontage of their site for Route 522. Since the proffer says that the path will be provided along the property frontage, it will only apply to the portion being rezoned (PIN: 87-A-34, 34B, 35 and 37). Vto Arroce This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive, as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto comiects to Rainville Road, which has been proffered with this application. The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right-in/right-out onto Route 522. The remainder of parcel 76-A-53, which is not being rezoned with this application (covered by proffers from Rezoning #02-97), does not have any restrictions on the number or type of entrances on Route 522 or Tasker Road. The . right-in/right-out labeled as future on the proffered GDP is located on the remainder of 76-A-53 and not subject to this rezoning request. Staff Note: As stated under Land Use, staff believes that the entire 76 A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and since these parcels have access to Tasker Road and Maranto Manor Drive, access to Route 522 should be completely prohibited Rezoning #02-97 did not restrict access to Tasker Road Since the Tasker Road frontage of parcel 76- A-53 is not part of this rezoning, access is still unrestricted. 3) Site Suitability/Environment It does not appear that the site contains any enviromnental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes. A small area of wetlands has been identified on the southwest corner of the existing B-3 zoned property Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 5 adjacent to the existing self storage facility and there is a small man-made pond situated on the RA tract north of Maranto Manor Drive. The General Soils Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Vir ig ilia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall under the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association, and the site consists of Clearbrook channery silt loam and Weikert-Becks channery silt loan -is. This soil type is not considered prime farm land. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development. It is noted that even with the improvements that the applicant has proffered to provide, certain areas will still function below a Level of Service Category C (See discussion of TIA Conclusions for Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection and Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive Intersection). A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. The County's rezoning application requires applicants to model the worst possible scenario based on the use of the site. The worst case scenario for this site would be 428,074sf of retail uses. The TIA is based on 166,662sf of retail uses, 47,OOOsf of office uses and 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated in the applicant's impact analysis (Section D), the 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial could be generated from an ad'acl ent land bay which is not part of this application. The potential 224,660sf should be included under the TIA's background traffic and not added in under the assumptions. Also, since the proffers for the rezoning do not proffer a particular use for this site, the worst case scenario should have been modeled; this application only accounted for 213,662sf of retail and office on this site instead of 428,074sf of retail which would be the worst case. The Conclusions from the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) state that the following are required: Route 522/Tasker Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization along with an additional eastbound and northbound left turn lane. Staff Note: The signalization of Route 522 and Tasker was proffered with Rezoning #02- 97for Eastgate Commerce Center. Proffer 1.5 from this rezoning proffers the additional eastbound turn lane and northbound turn lane. The proffer states that the applicant will also provide other improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT. While Proffer 1.5 provides for the improvements at the Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection as called for in the TIA Conclusions, it is noted that even with these improvements, this intersection will not function at a Level of Service C or better and therefore does not meet County requirements. Even with the installation of the two turn 0 • Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 6 lanes, PMpeak traffic will still function at a level of service D at the PMPeak Hour; the TIA has not offered a solution to achieve a LOS C. • Tasker Road/Rainville Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization and two (2) northbound left turn lanes. Staff Note: These improvements have been proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.2) • Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require an additional eastbound left -turn lane. Staff Note: This improvement is being proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.4) While Proffer 1.4 provides for the improvements at the Route 5221maranto Manor intersection as called for in the TIA Conclusions, it is noted that even with this improvement this intersection will not function at a Level of Service C or better and therefore does not meet County requirements. Maranto Manor will function with a LOS D at the PMPeak Hour, the TIA has not offered a solution to achieve a LOS C. Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new intersection. It will be an unsignalized intersection with westbound left/right shared lane, northbound thru/right shared lane and a southbound left/thru shared lane. • Site driveway # 1 /Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new unsignalized intersection. It will require eastbound thru and right -turn lanes, westbound left and thru lanes and northbound left and right -turn lanes. Staff Note: The applicant has not addressed these lanes. • Site Driveway #2/Maranto Manor Drive: This intersection will require signalization along with eastbound separate left, and thru/right shared lanes; westbound separate left, thru, right turn lane; northbound separate left and thru/right shared lanes and southbound separate left, thru, right turn lanes. Staff Note: The signalization and the turn lanes underlined above have been proffered by the applicant (Proffer 1.3); the remaining lanes have not been addressed. • Site Driveway #3/Route 522: This is a new right in/right out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. Staff Note: Site driveway #3 is located on parcel 76 A-53 but is not located within the area being requested for rezoning with this application. No proffers are associated with this entrance. • Site Driveway #4/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. Staff Note: These turn lanes have not been addressed by the applicant. Also, no levels of service have been identified for this intersection, so it is unclear how it will function. 0 Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 7 B. Sewer and Water Sewer and water service will be provided to the site by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority via a six inch force main and a 12 inch water line. Assuming a buildout of approximately 200,OOOsf, a standard rate of 200 gallons per day at I,000sf of commercial space, it is anticipated that the proposed use will generate approximately 40,000 GPD of water consumption with equivalent sewer flows. C. Design Standards The proffers for the rezoning do not address any design features for this proposed development. Design standards should be incorporated into this development as they relate to access management, landscaping and signage. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that landscape buffers should be established between the road and parking lots to promote a more pleasant enviromnent. The applicant should consider providing additional landscaping along Route 522 to create a more aesthetically pleasing development [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-15]; street trees should also be provided along all public and internal roads. Limitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. The Comprehensive Policy Plan states that signage should be minimized along business corridors to reduce visual impacts and to ensure that the number of signs provided is not distracting. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-16] Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. 5) Proffer Statement — Dated November 13, 2006 (Revised February 9, 2007, February 10, 2007 and February 21, 2007) 1. Transportation 1.1 The applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Maranto Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. Staff Note: This does not restrict the portions of parcel 76 A-53 which are not part of this rezoning. 1.2 The applicant shall bond a traffic signal and two northbound left turn lanes at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.3 The applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Southbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound • Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 8 left turn lane. The applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.4 The applicant shall bond an eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. 1.5 The applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane, as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessaiy by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the property. The applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. Staff Note: This does not restrict entrances on Route 522 for the portion of parcel 76 A-53 since the entire parcel is not part of this rezoning. 1.6 The applicant shall locate a maximum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-inhight-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDO. 1.7 The applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the property. 1.8 Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. 2. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail 2.1 The applicant shall construct a ten foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the property frontage on Route 522. Staff Note: The proffer states that the path will be provided along the property frontage, it will only apply to the portion being rezoned (PIN. 87-A-34, 34B, 35 and 37). 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 The applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit. 3.2 The applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit. Rezoning #02-07 — Eastgate Commercial March 5, 2007 Page 9 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 03/21/07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The land use proposed in this rezoning is consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range land Use Plan. The TIA as modeled does not represent the full impact of what could happen on the site. The applicant should consider including the entire parcel 76-A-53 in this rezoning application. All intersections should be modeled to reflect a LOS C or better and Tasker Road should be addressed. Elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address the goals of the County. The applicant should be prepared to address theses issues. 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. AMENDMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: March 21, 2007 - Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: April 25, 2007 RA APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #02-07 OF EASTGATE COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, Rezoning #02-07 of Eastgate Commercial, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses, was considered. The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 87-A-34, 87-A-34B, 87-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on March 21, 2007; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on April 25, 2007; 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 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, for commercial uses, with proffers, as described by the application and plat submitted, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. PDRes U&N 0 • This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 25th day of April, 2007 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Ave BarbaraE,V_anQsfen Aye Gary Dove Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Philip A. Lemieux PDRes #28-07 Aye A COPY ATTEST 16'4 John R. Rifey„ J . Frederick County Administrator PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ # O= --0`7 Rural Areas (RA) —10.65 acres and Industrial Transition (133) 8.23 acres to Business General (132) PROPERTY: 18.88 acre +/-; Tax Map Parcels 87-A-34, 34B, 35, 36, 37 and portion of 76- A-53 (the "Property") RECORD OWNER: Wrights Run, LP; Real Tech, LLC; Steven and Mary Ritter APPLICANT: Wrights Run, LP PROJECT NAME: Eastgate Commercial ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: November 13, 2006 REVISION DATE(S): 2/9/07; 2/10/07; 2/21/07; 2/30/07; 4/17/07 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property"), as described above, shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced B2 conditional 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 County Supervisors (the "Board") decision grantuig 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. The term "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors un interest. When used in these proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan," shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Eastgate Commercial" dated November 12, 2006 revised April 16, 2007 (the "GDP"), and shall include the following: 1. Transportation 1.1 The Applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Maranato Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. (See 1 on GDP) 1.2 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal, two northbound left turn lanes, and a westbound left turn lane at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 2 on GDP) 1.3 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Proffer Statement Easigate Commercial Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Soudnbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound left turn lane. The Applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 3 on GDP) The Applicant shall bond an Eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 4 on GDP) The Applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 5 on GDP) The Applicant shall locate a maximum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the Property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-in/right-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDP. (See 6 on GDP) The Applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the Property. Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail The Applicant shall construct a 10 foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the Property frontage on Route 522. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick Countv for Sheriff's Office tnumoses. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. Development on the Property shall not exceed a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of .25. No loading bays shall be visible from Route 522 or Tasker Road. Proffer Statement 0 ,✓astgate Commercial Respectfully submitted, Wrights Run, LP By: ►'1 �'t. ebl Date: 11 4"A STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing in t}-uinent was acknowledged before me dais �% day of 2007, by 14 % (✓. N /-41" S a N� My commission expires.- 0 9/ / J 1 /ZpU rf Notary Public ):—�� -z 14-7k„lw- Page 3 of 5 Proffer Statement 0 • Eastgate Commercial Respectfully submitted, Real Tech, LLCnn_ By: b Q� I "" Date: �'lI1J STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: -11 The foregoing instrument was acluiowledged before me this / 7 day of A J 2007, by My commission expires ( 8r/d '7 Notary Public � ���i � in_�C e� Page 4 of 5 , Riw f SKER AD SA ' G EX. ZONING, B3 \ WHITE'S STORAGE EX. ZONING B2 \ FUTURE r' EXIONNIINNG B3 RIGHT —IN PROPOSED B2 RIGHT —OUT A L \ � 4f,R�NTo \ Mq�OR EXISTING- B3 �o, EXISTING, RA PROPOSED B2 Raw \ PROPOSED B2 � EXISTING, B2 EXISTING RA — 10.65 AC 1 N EXISTING B3 — 8.23 AC �'J EXISTING 2 � �~ TOTAL - 18.88 AC C (DR HT —IN GHT—❑UT EXISTING, RA PROPOSED, B2 EXISTING HOME DEPOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER / EXISTING1 M-1 ' i 44EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc lbo GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 O p O a VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 v FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINA RZ #04-97 PER -aaa -as-rm1 .a +f �a �s ------------------ ;a -------------- ti RZ 1 •7 — Signalization of • '•••`: RZ 04-97 — TIA at Site Plan RZ 01-98 — TIA at Site Plan RZ 02-07 — Tasker/522: 2nd NB left, 2nd EB left Maranto Manor/522: 2nd EB left Rainville/Tasker: Signalization, Dual NB left Maranto Manor/Project Entrance: Signalization, NB Left, SB ft & Right, EB Left, WB Left and Rig Q EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc II' V y ZONING HISTORY 117 E. Picadily St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 V FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 0 r PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ # Rural Areas (RA) — 10.65 acres and Industrial Transition (B3) 8.23 acres to Business General (B2) PROPERTY: 18.88 acre +/-; Tax Map Parcels 87-A-34, 34B, 35, 36, 37 and portion of 76- A-53 (the "Property") RECORD OWNER: Wrights Run, LP; Real Tech, LLC; Steven and Mary Ritter APPLICANT: Wrights Run, LP PROJECT NAME: Eastgate Commercial ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: November 13, 2006 REVISION DATE(S): February 9, 2007 February 10, 2007 February 21, 2007 March 30, 2007 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property"), as described above, shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced B2 conditional 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 County 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 affirining the decision of the Board which has not been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed on appeal. The terin "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan," shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Eastgate Commercial" dated November 12, 2006 revised February 9, 2007 (the "GDP"), and shall include the following: 1. Transportation 1.1 The Applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Maranato Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. (See 1 on GDP) 1.2 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal and two northbound left turn lanes at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 2 on GDP) 1.3 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Southbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, • Proffer Staleniew Easlgale Conunercial Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound left turn lane. The Applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 3 on GDP) 1.4 The Applicant shall bond an Eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance perinit for the Property. The Applicant shall constrict said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 4 on GDP) 1.5 The Applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 5 on GDP) 1.6 The Applicant shall locate a maxiinum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the Property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-in/right-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDP. (See 6 on GDP) 1.7 The Applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the Property. 1.8 Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. 2. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail 2.1 The Applicant shall construct a 10 foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the Property frontage on Route 522. 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. 3.2 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. Land Use 4.1 Development on the Property shall not exceed a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of .25. 4.2 No loading bays shall be visible from Route 522 or Tasker Road. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 2 of 5 0 • Proffer Statement Respectfully submitted, Wrights Run, LP By: - L&n &'A—em Date: `� O 0-1 STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: Eastgate Commercial The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this iday of ) 0-i , 2007, by art. My coin�missio Ce fires Notary Public Page 3 of 5 • Proffer Statement Respectfully submitted, Real Tech, �%11� LLC��By: �1�(/�Jo Date: 2) 0 rL� 01 STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: Eastgale Commercial The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 3 day of 2007, by 4 11 h ttr /� Ucko'u My commission expires �ZC , o'o ? 'Notaty Public �- �-I i���! .,gin%� 0— yy. 7: Page 4 of 5 Proffer Statement Respectfully submitted, Steven Ritter By: Date: STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The forinstrument was acknowledged before me this 2007, by 5 4L)rii 6-1 sX My commission expires 13) Notary Public �� h 6cz:ps Mary Ritter By: Date: STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: Eastgate Conimercial ti �t day of 40C I , )V/ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this t> day of c 2007, by ln4, y r`1tl�r My commission expires Notary Public �, i Page 5 of 5 PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ # VA 0 ? Rural Areas (RA) — 10.65 acres and Industrial Transition (133) 8.23 acres to Business General (132) PROPERTY: 18.88 acre +/-; Tax Map Parcels 87-A-34, 34B, 35, 36, 37 and portion of 76- A-53 (the "Property") RECORD OWNER: Wrights Run, LP; Real Tech, LLC; Steven and Mary Ritter APPLICANT: Wrights Run, LP PROJECT NAME: Eastgate Commercial ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: November 13, 2006 REVISION DATE(S): February 9, 2007 February 10, 2007 February 21, 2007 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property"), as described above, shall be in strict conformance widi the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced B2 conditional 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" defused as that rezoning which is in effect on the day following the last day upon which the Frederick County Board of County 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 affrrin ing the decision of the Board which has not been appealed, or, if appealed, the day following which the decision has been affirmed on appeal. The term "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan," shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Eastgate Connnercial" dated November 12, 2006 revised February 9, 2007 (the "GDP"), and shall include the following: 1. Transportation 1.1 The Applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Mamnato Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. (See 1 on GDP) 1.2 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal and two northbound left turn lanes at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 2 on GDP) 1.3 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Southbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, 0 Proffer Stateinent Eastgale Connnercial Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound left turn lane. The Applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the Countyand/or VDOT. (See 3 on GDP) 1.4 The Applicant shall bond an Eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the Countyand/or VDOT. (See 4 on GDP) 1.5 The Applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct saidunprovernents within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 5 on GDP) 1.6 The Applicant shall locate a maximum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the Property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-in/right-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDP. (See 6 on GDP) 1.7 The Applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the Property. 1.8 Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. 2. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail 2.1 The Applicant shall construct a 10 foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the Property frontage on Route 522. 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. 3.2 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 2 of 5 Prq&r Statement • • Eastgate Commercial 0 • Respectfully submitted, Wrights Run, LP By: I &14 Date: --U7 STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDI3RICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foMI'A'j oing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2007, by My commission expires b Notary Public rZJ L,%A M Page 3 of 5 PrQ&f r Statement • • Eastgate Commercial • Respectfully submitted, Real Tech, LLC • By: �i.U4f A Date: STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foe oing instrument was acknowledged before me this C� �� day 2007, by � T) A "'�' %i'_ I S o tN My commission expires Notary Public Page 4 of 5 Proffer- Slatemew . Respectfully submitted, Steven Ritter Date: :f i1 _ C� STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FLiEDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: Eastgate Commercial l l.c foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of dEbR u, 1\Iy commission Tic,/ ites /=t_ jar t.,�}t � J-6 6 t Notary Public �-- � dL ," � 0 Mary Ritter • Date: STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoin instrument was acknowledged before me this ;7 day of i-z=�f<_U, 2007, by lr),� V /2t'1�t=2 NIy commission e -pites a u.-Iav f-WW1 L� otary Public Page 5 of 5 AMENDMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: March 21, 2007 - Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: April 25, 2007 10 APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #02-07 OF EASTGATE COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, Rezoning #02-07 of Eastgate Commercial, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses, was considered. The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 87-A-34, 87-A-34B, 87-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on March 21, 2007; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on April 25, 2007; 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 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, for commercial uses, with proffers, as described by the application and plat submitted, subject to the attached conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner. PDRes 428-07 Th vo( 5oe5 rez_�� ��2GSQ o, cxc�l G ��� 0 0 PROPOSED PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ # Oq =0Y7 Rural Areas (RA) —10.65 acres and Industrial Transition (B3) 8.23 acres to Business General (B2) PROPERTY: 18.88 acre +/-; Tax Map Parcels 87-A-34, 34B, 35, 36, 37 and portion of 76- A-53 (the "Property") RECORD OWNER: Wrights Run, LP; Real Tech, LLC; Steven and Mary Ritter APPLICANT: Wrights Run, LP PROJECT NAME: Eastgate Commercial ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: November 13, 2006 REVISION DATE(S): 2/9/07; 2/10/07; 2/21/07; 2/30/07; 4/17/07 The undersigned hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property ("Property"), as described above, shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced B2 conditional 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 County 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. The term "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Generalized Development Plan," shall refer to the plan entitled "Generalized Development Plan, Eastgate Commercial" dated November 12, 2006 revised April 16, 2007 (the "GDP"), and shall include the following: 1. Transportation 1.1 The Applicant shall locate a right in/right out entrance to access the site in the general location depicted on the GDP. No additional entrances shall be located along Maranto Manor Drive between the identified entrance and Maranato Manor Drive's terminus at Route 522. Said improvements shall be subject to VDOT review and approval during site plan review. (See 1 on GDP) 1.2 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal, two northbound left turn lanes, and a westbound left turn lane at the intersection of Rainville Road and Tasker Road prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 2 on GDP) 1.3 The Applicant shall bond a traffic signal and the following turn lanes at the intersection of the future project entrance and the existing entrance for the Home Depot Distribution Proffer Statement 0 • Eastgate Commercial Center on Maranto Manor Drive: Southbound left turn lane, Southbound right turn lane, Westbound right turn lane, Westbound left turn lane, Northbound left turn lane, Eastbound left turn lane. The Applicant shall bond said improvements prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit and shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 3 on GDP) 1.4 The Applicant shall bond an Eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Maranto Manor and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 4 on GDP) 1.5 The Applicant shall bond an additional northbound left turn lane, an additional eastbound left turn lane as well as any additional improvements as deemed necessary by VDOT at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit for the Property. The Applicant shall construct said improvements within 180 days of receiving written notice from the County and/or VDOT. (See 5 on GDP) 1.6 The Applicant shall locate a maximum of one right-in/right-out entrance along the Property's frontage with Route 522. Said entrance shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT during site plan review. In the event that VDOT finds the proposed entrance acceptable, the right-in/right-out shall be located as generally depicted on the GDP. (See 6 on GDP) 1.7 The Applicant shall construct the extension of Maranto Manor Drive to connect to existing Rainville Road. Said improvement shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the Property. 1.8 Transportation improvements shall be made in conformity with the GDP. 2. Pedestrian -Bicycle Trail 2.1 The Applicant shall construct a 10 foot public pedestrian -bicycle trail with an asphalt surface in lieu of sidewalks along the Property frontage on Route 522. 3. Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 3.1 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. 3.2 The Applicant shall contribute the amount of two thousand dollars ,($2,000.00) to Frederick County for Sheriff's Office purposes. Said contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the first building permit for the site. 4. Land Use 4.1 Development on the Property shall not exceed a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of .25. 4.2 No loading bays shall be visible from Route 522 or Tasker Road. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 2 of 5 Proffer Statement 0 0 Eastgate Commercial Respectfully submitted, Wrights Run, LP By: l9. �SPll') �It� Date: L 1 l l KA 01 STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FREDERICK COUNTY, To -wit: The foreggoing in ent was acknowledged before tne this _ day of � (1 L 2007, by A l (✓-� N� 5 c& My commission expires 09/��31 /zoU r1 Notary Public Page 3 of 5 0 This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 25th day of April, 2007 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman A e Barbara F. Van Osten Aye. Gary Dove Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye A COPY ATTEST John R. Ri fe , J . Frederick eounty Administrator PDRes #28-07 ARIFs _ R ?,ONO syE G �O �k \ (j) \EX. ZONIND B3 �G WHITE'S STORAGE EX. ZONING, B2 ZONING FUTURE EXIS B3 RIGHT —IN �\ PROPOSED B2 RIGHT —OUT P� L '9 \ y4NPO Q� . , \ Mq�OR EXISTING, B3 �o, EXISTING RA PROPOSED B2 Rom\ PROPOSED B2 T --<EXISTINGs B2/ EXISTING RA - 10.65 AC ' EXISTING B3 - 8.23 AC \'-J ' / EXISTINCr A2 TOTAL - 18.88 AC [\ EXISTING HOME DEPOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER / EXISTING, M-1 ' i ©VGFHT T—IN J�\ —OUTS \ ` EXISTING, RA PROPOSED B2 EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust &Associates, pc lI`� �lb o GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 O p O Q VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 v FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGIN14 /, RZ #04-97 M' RIM mmm mmmmmm. k%w F q ~Rq q vp PWR m MAMIq 0 111 1 !IWpq 11 gyp gyp A IMMMO—MMI Um .am==IM — ----------- MOH:EFED TRANSPORTATION IMFMR:v, RZ 02-97 Signalization of Tasker R a RZ 04-97 — TIA at Site Plan RZ 01-98 — TIA at Site Plan RZ 02-07 — Tasker/522: 2nd NB left, 2nd EB left Maranto Manor/522: 2nd EB left Rainville/Tasker: Signalization, Dual NB left Maranto Manor/Project Entrance: SignOliZOtiDn, NB Left, SB ft & Right, I EB Left, WB Left and Rig Q EASTGAFE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc ZONING HISTORY 117 E. Picadlily St Winchester, Virginia 22601 (b VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 FROISRICK COUNTY, KWIVIA Cuel'As1• • • • WAL-MART STORES, INC. 66-156 702 SW 8th Street Wa I ma rt I' ♦ 531 Bentonville, Arkansas 72716 Save money. Live better. PAY: FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS VENDOR NUMBER CHECK DATE CHECK NUMBER 340356 10/22/10 9822283 NET AMOUNT $*********4,000.00 WAL-MART STORES, INC. TO THE ORDER Treasurer of Frederick County t 'p�� OF Zoning Administrator Winchester VA 22601 Executive VP,, Finance and Treasurer II'9822213 311' 1:053L0L56L1:2079900L3E1151-- 0 m c v E fV ru + O Q N o ro a v E +� � O a, � n � O +-' 41 � N N +T+ � > L Q I�III j IIRI' O U c lD U t)LO ]z v L!1 N L ru n O C O > c * � d r-i > U1 DATE' RECEIVED FROM LJ 1 AgDRESS LO� V� 67A ❑ FOR Ll FOR I AMT. OF ACCOUNT I AMT. PAID 7ORDER7,�7 BALANCE DUE 0 NO. 207099 DOLLARS $ p �i1.�t��1. �tC cal J rl V), 0�-U7 �` 4 VU �`4, COUNTY of FREDERICK • � Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 "` R 171A FAX: 540/665-6395 February 2, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Proposed Rezoning of the Eastgate Commercial Property Dear Patrick: I have had the opportunity to review the draft rezoning application for the Eastgate Commercial Property. This' application seeks to rezone 11.81 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District and 8.23 acres from the B3 (Industrial Transition) District to the B2 (Business General) District. Staff s review comments are listed below for your • consideration. 1. Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The site is within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows a portion of this property with a commercial designation. The proposed B2 Zoning is a business use and is generally consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan as it relates this area. 2. Additional Property. There are two additional properties owned by Wrights Run LP which have not been included with this rezoning; PIN's 87-A-36 and 87-A-37 are central to this rezoning and currently zoned RA. These properties will need to be included in this rezoning. 3. Rezoning 402-97. Rezoning #02-97 currently covers PIN# 76-A-53. This proposed rezoning only covers the B3 portion of 76-A-53. Parcel 76-A-53, in its entirety, should be included with this rezoning application so that everything within the project is included under the same proffers. Including the entire project under one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. 4. Transportation Levels of Service. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial • development. This application clearly does not achieve a Level of Service C.' 107 North Dent Street, Suite 202 o Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 • Page 2 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 5. Rezoning Application — Proposed Uses. The application states the rezoning is for 47,OOOsf of office and 166,OOOsf of retail uses. The proffer statement does not call for a specific use. Unless a specific use and square footage is proffered, the County will assume the maximum possible development (retail) as per the County's application, combined with the maximum possible floor space. At the maximum possible use, there is the potential for 428,074sf of retail uses. A proffer to limit the square footage of this development to no more than what the TIA was based on would be appropriate (see issue on assumptions below). 6. Traffic Impact Analysis -Assumptions. The TIA is based upon 166,662sf of retail uses, 47000sf of office uses and 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated under section D of your impact analysis, the warehouse/industrial uses could be generated from the adjacent land bay (potential industrial). The potential industrial should be included under your background traffic, not your assumption, and your TIA should be based on what could actually be developed on the site (428,074sf of retail). • 7. Maranto Manor Drive. Maranto Manor Drive needs to connect to Rainville Road; this application does not provide any assurances for the required continuation of this road. 8. Tasker Road. The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector. Full implementation of the four -lane major collector road design would be appropriate along 76-A-53. 9. Site Access. This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto connects to Rainville Road. The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right-in/right-out onto Route 522 and Rezoning #02-97 does not place any restrictions on the number or type of entrances on the remainder of 76-A-53. As stated in comment 3, the entire 76-A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and access to Route 522 should be completely prohibited. Also, Section C (Location and Access) of your impact analysis states that access will be provided through the existing B2 zoned acreage by a northern entrance on Tasker Road and an eastern entrance on Route 522. The referenced Tasker entrance is not shown on the GDP and there is no mention of this access anywhere in the proffer statement. 10. TIA Background Development. On sheet 6 of the Background Development, • please clarify what project developments 9-11 consist of and on sheet 7 under the Artrip project, there is no soccer complex. • Page 3 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 11. Traffic Impact Analysis — Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection. The TIA calls for this intersection to be signalized and to have a new eastbound and northbound left turn -lane. While Rezoning #02-97 proffered the installation of the signalization, there is no commitment for the installation of the turn lanes. It is noted that even with the installation of the two turn lanes, PM peak traffic will still function at a level of service D. As this application is not proffering any of the needed turn lanes, it would be beneficial to see what the LOS would actually be with only the previously proffered signalization. 12. Transportation Proffer 1.2. Proffer 1.2 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of Tasker/Rainville but does not provide the two northbound left turn lanes called for in the TIA conclusions. These turn lanes are required to maintain a level of service C. 13. Transportation Proffer 1.3. Proffer 1.3 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of the project entrance and the Home Depot entrance on Maranto • Manor Drive but does not account for any of the turn lanes called for in the TIA conclusions. 14. Transportation Proffer 1.4. Proffer 1.4 provides for the eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Route 522/Maranto Manor as called for in the TIA conclusions. It is noted that even with this improvement, this intersection will not function at a level of service C or better and does not meet County requirements. 15. Other Traffic Improvements. As stated in the TIA conclusions, there are various transportation improvements which are necessary to maintain a LOS C or better. The following improvements (in addition to comments 11-13) have not been addressed: • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway 1/Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway 3/Route 522 turn lanes • Site Driveway 4/Route 522 turn lanes 16. Bike Path. Front Royal Pike is identified on the Frederick County Bicycle Plan as a short term destination. Provide a bike trail in this location. • • 17. Design Standards. The proffer statement includes nothing that relates to design standards (building facades, parking lot locations, landscaping, signage etc.). Buildings should be placed adjacent to the roads and the parking lots placed Page 4 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 behind the buildings, especially along Tasker Road and Route 522. Street trees should be provided along all public and internal roads and specific types of building materials should be utilized within the project. Limitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. 18. Agency Comments. Please provide appropriate agency comments from the following agencies: Historic Resources Advisory Board, Virginia Department of Transportation, Frederick County Department of Public Works, Frederick County Fire Marshall, Frederick County Department of Parks and Recreation, Frederick County Sanitation Authority, Frederick -Winchester Health Department, the local Fire and Rescue Company and the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority. The proposed proffers have been forwarded by staff to the Frederick County Attorney. Once attorney comments are received by the Planning Department, they will be forwarded to your office. Attorney comments are required for acceptance of the rezoning application. 19. Special Limited Power of Attorney. Provide a power of attorney for the property owners. 20. Fees. The fee for this application includes a $3,000.00 base fee plus $100.00 per acre, and a $50.00 public hearing sign fee. This is based on fees as of January 27, 2005. Fees may change. All of the above comments and reviewing agency comments should be appropriately addressed before staff can accept this rezoning application. Please feel free to contact me with questions regarding this application. Sincerely, U,t 'u c Candice E. Perkins, AICP Planner 11 Attachments cc: Wrights Run, LP, 2800 S. Shirlington Road, Suite 803, Arlington VA 22206 Steven & Mary Ritter, 3022 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 CEP/bad 0 0 Patrick R. Sowers From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov] on behalf of Ingram, Lloyd [Lloyd.ingram@VDOT.Virginia.gov] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 7:51 AM To: Patrick Sowers; Ronald A. Mislowsky Cc: Ingram, Lloyd; Copp, Jerry; cperkins@co.frederick.va.us Subject: Eastgate Commercial - Rezoning - Route 522, Frederick County The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 522 and 642. These routes are the VDOT roadways which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Eastgate Commercial Rezoning Application dated November 13, 2006, revised February 21, 2007, addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. 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. Lloyd A. Ingram, Transportation Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Edinburg Residency -- Land Development 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, Virginia 22824 Phone #(540) 984-5611 Fax #(540) 984-5607 0 1 Control number RZ07-0001 Project Name Eastgate Commercial Property Address 117 E. Piccadilly St. Type Application Rezoning Current Zoning RA, B3 Automatic Sprinkler System Yes Other recommendation Emergency Vehicle Access Not Identified Siamese Location Emergency Vehicle Access Comments Access Comments Additional Comments 0'101ce, of the Fire Wiarshal Frederick County Fire and Rescue irepiarhraent Plan Review and Golrnrrllen'�-.S) Date received Date reviewed Date Revised 12/21 /2006 1 /5/2007 Applicant Patton Harris Rust & Associates City State Zip Applicant Phone Winchester VA 22601 540-667-2139 Tax ID Number Fire District Rescue District 87-A-34, etc. 11 11 Recommendations Automatic Fire Alarm System Yes G e,gjui °( i-nen s Hydrant Location Not Identified Roadway/Aisleway Width Not Identified Election District Shawnee Residential Sprinkler System No Fire Lane Required Yes Special Hazards No Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Signature Yes J. Neal Title __ _S�'.h,' `" 0 0 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Public Works • ® 540/665-5643 UX: 540/ 678-0682 January 19, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton, Harris, Rust, and Associates 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Eastgate Rezoning Dear Patrick: We have completed our review of the proposed Eastgate rezoning from B-3/RA to B-2 and offer the following comments: 1. Refer to Site Suitability: Provide this office with a copy of the wetlands study referenced • under environmental features at the time of the master development plan (MDP) submittal or prior to the subdivision of the detailed site plan if a master development plan is not required. • 2. Refer to F. Site Drainage: The method proposed for stormwater management shall be defined in the MDP submission. Considering the layout of the proposed rezoning and previously rezoned B-2 property, we suggest that regional stormwater management be evaluated for the proposed commercial development. I can be reached at 722-8214 if you should have any questions regarding the above comments. Sincerely, I kG�w �— Harvey . Strawsnyder, Jr„ P.E. Directo 'Public Works 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 0 i 00 Rezoning Comments Eastyate Properties Frederick County Department of Inspections Mail to: Frederick Co. Dept. of Inspections Attn: Director of Inspections 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5650 Hand deliver to: Frederick Co. Dept. of Inspections Attn: Director of Inspections Co. Administration Bldg., 4"' Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Applicant Please` fill ort the; information_ as accurately as: -possible m: order`:. to assist t11e' Department of Pubhc;Works witlitheir review Attiaeh a :copy of your:application form,aocatiori rmap, proffer statement, impact_ analysis, and any other pertinent information Applicant's Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Phone: (540) 667.2139 c/o Patrick Sowers Mailing Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 4p) Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: The Property is west of Route 522 South (Front Royal Pike) immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive. Current Zoning Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: 20.04 Department of Inspections Comments: �D �r�rnrne�l� re u�✓� C6 �5 :2& -P . , h Q, _ C o -n , vn v1 Fl YL 5 V ,5 Ins- � e. t1 Inspections Signature & Date: Notice to Dept. ovf`I spections — Please Re 1 n This orm t6tlx '��, ; i can�jUT _' 9,�, P���o,�4' 10 i t mom Comments e'bii6De Frederick County Sanitation Authority Mail to: Hand deliver to: Frederick Co. Sanitation Authority Frederick Co. Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer Attn: Engineer P.O. Box 1877 315 Tasker Road Winchester, VA 22604 Stephens City, VA (540) 868-1061 Applicant's Name: Patton Ham's Rust & Associates Phone: (540) 667.2139 c/o Patrick Sowers Mailing Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: The Property is west of Route 522 South (Front Royal Pike) immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive. Current Zoning: RA/B3 Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: 20.04 Sanitation Authority Comments: WI-C I1i//1-Z /'/-1 0 V/f>,(F r 0 7e// t5 51 72E Sanitation Authority Signature & Date: Notice to Sanitation Authority [-Please Return This Form to the Applicant 14 �I 4�1 BY:-------------------- Rezoning Comments Eastl4ate Properties Frederick — Winchester Health Department Mail to: Frederick -Winchester Health Dept. Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 722-3480 Hand deliver to: Frederick -Winchester Health Dept. Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent St., Suite 201 Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 722-3480 Applicant's Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Phone: (540) 667.2139 c/o Patrick Sowers Mailing Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: The Property is west of Route 522 South (Front Royal Pike) irninediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive. Current Zoning: RA/B3 Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: 20.04 Frederick — Winchester Health Department's Comments: -1 a�rVl nr1- has nO4ce,I'to a,- ,,V'Ir=j- ,s S.F-I-d Sel &AY P•-;I.A'A ✓•n-�nar�-P e�/'•Jn�'j�l�is �,n P Health Signature & Date: Notice to Health Department — Please Return This Form to the Applicant 15 C00dents M ice---, O mF c G WV N E; E O Frederick County Public Schools Coordinator of Construction Visit us at www.frederick.kl2.va.us and Facilities Use January 15, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Sowers: e-mail: kapocsis@frederick.k12.va.us RE: Rezoning comments for Eastgate Commercial Center . This letter is in response to your request for comments concerning the rezoning application for the proposed Eastgate Commercial Center project. Based on the information provided that states no residential units will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school population upon build -out. • Respectfully yours, Stephen Kapoesi Coordinator of Construction and Facilities Use SMK/dkr cc: Patricia Taylor, Superintendent of Schools Al Orndorff, Assistant Superintendent of Administration 540-662-3889 Ext 112 1415 Amherst Street, Post Office Box 3508, Winchester, VA 22604-2546 FAX 540-662-3890 Winchester Airport • 5406622936 02/09/07 02:12pm P. 002 • • • Rezoning Comments Fastgate Properties Winchester Regional Airport Mail to: Tland-&liver to: Winchester Regional Airport Winchester Regional Airport. Attn: Executive Director Attn: Executive Director 491 Airport Road 491 Airport Road Winchester, VA 22602 Winchester, VA (540) 662-2422 Applicant's Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates kPhouc: C54Q) 6( -2139 c/o Patrick Sowers Mailing Address: 117 P. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchcster, VA 22601 Location of Property: The Property is west of Route 522 South (Front Royal Pike immcdiately notch and south of Maranto Manor Drive. Current Zoning: RA)B3 Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: 20.04 I Winchester Regional Airport's Comments • Winchester Regional Airport Signature & Datec Notice to Winchester Regional Airport — Please Rehirn This Form to the Applicant 0 E 0 Wincr _T-,T;_,_1T 640002293E 02/09/07 02:12pm P. 001 .. 0 WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT :tevrt+� nrt ~ 491 AIRPORT ROAD \TO, OFvwrwlik WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 R (540) 662 2422 February 9, 2007 Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Re: Rezoning Comment — RA/B3 to 82 Eastgate Commercial Property Shawnee Magisterial District Dear Mr. Sowers: The proposed rezoning request for the Eastgate Commercial Property should not impact business operations of the Winchester Regional Airport, therefore we are not requesting any special conditions for consideration. Thank you for the opportunity to review this request. Sincerely, n D.Q11QN,c.. c Y \V^lv,:.. , Serena R. Manuel Executive Director 0 • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 January 24, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Request Ior 1l:stor is Resources "Vuvisory Board (HRAB) Comments Eastgate Commercial Rezoning; PINS # 87-A-34, 3413, 35, 76-A-53 Dear Mr. Sowers: 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 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 identify a core battlefield within this area. Thank you for the chance to comment on this application. Please call if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Kevin T. Henry Planning Technician KTH/bad • 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 • HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL A PARTNERSHIP OF PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 0 0 ATTORNEYS AT LAW WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972) THOMAS V. MONAHAN (1924 1999) 7 S 307 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST B05CAWEN STREET SAMUEL D. ENGLE LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA O. LELAND MAHAN TELEPHONE 703-777-1050 TELEPHONE 540-652-3200 ROBERT T. MITCHELL, JR. FAX 540-662-4304 JAMES A. KLENKAR E-MAIL lawyers@hallmonahan.com STEVEN F. JACKSON January 29, 2007 DENNIS J. MCLOUGHLIN, JR. HAND -DELIVERED Candice E. Perkins Plaiuler II Frederick County Department of Plamiing & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Eastgate Commercial (Wrights Run, LP) Proposed Proffer Statement Dear Candice: PLEASE REPLY TO: P. 0. BOX 848 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604-0848 I have reviewed the above -referenced Proposed Proffer Statement. It is my opinion that the Proposed Proffer Statement is generally in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, subject to the following coinments: 1. The Proffer Statement should contain a specific proffer that the Transportation proffers will be made in conformity with the attached GDP. 2. Proffer 1.1 references No. 1 on the GDP. No. 1 is shown in two places on the GDP, one of which says "right-iri, right -out." If this entrance is to be right -in, right -out, the proffer should so state specifically. • HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL Candice E. Perkins January 29, 2007 Page 3 It should be noted that I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Commission. If there are any questions concerning the foregoing comments, please contact me. Very truly yours, Robert T. Miteit, ell, Jr RTM/ks 0 0 0 • IV. AGENCY COMMENTS E • Px QP EX. ZONING, B3 \ WHITE'S STORAGE SIGNAL _TASK�R6 AD \ .. ... EX. ZONING: B2 l3`a zllNING FUTURE EXISTING, B3 RIGHT -IN PROPOSED, B2 RIGHT —❑UT EXISTING, 33 B2 MqR gtiro ©FUTU I 4f, q'I'oq•SIGNAL EXISTINGv B2 PROPOSED / EXISTING RA — 10.65 AC r` EXISTING B3 — 8.23 AC EXISTING-A2 TOTAL — 18.88 AC EXISTING HOME DEPOT / DISTRIBUTION CENTER EXISTING, M-1 j , v EASTGATE COMMERCIAL GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN O O MMERICK COUNTY, WRGIN14 EXISTING, RA PROPOSED, B2 SIT (g)VGFHT T—IN —❑UT EXISTING, RA PROPOSED, B2 Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 Eastgate Commercial Impact Analysis Statement • EASTGATE COMMECIAL PROPERTY REZONING - IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT NOVEMBER 2006 A. INTRODUCTION The 20.04 acre Eastgate Commercial site is comprised of 6 parcels located North and South of Maranto Manor Drive in close proximity to the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522 — Front Royal Pike (See figure 1). A 8.23 acre portion of the site was zoned B3 as part of Eastgate Commerce Center in 1997. The remaining 11.81 acres of dle property is zoned RA (Rural Areas) (See Figure 2). This analysis seeks to identify any uiipacts to Frederick County associated with rezoning the Property to the B-2 (General Business) zoning district. Combining these two areas with the large adjacent tract of B-2 would create a more unified development that is in accordance with the vision set forth in Frederick County's Comprehensive Plan. Figure 3 depicts the envisioned zoning designation for the property. Development of this site as a commercial center would serve as a transitional area between the more intensive uses located in the Eastgate Industrial Park and the residential development pattern prevalent along Tasker Road. Additionally, the subject rezoning would help to provide an increasingly viable commercial node at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522. 40 The property is located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) boundary but wholly within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The applicant is confident that the proposed rezoning includes a proffer program that will appropriately and effectively mitigate any impacts of this development. The commercial land use envisioned for the site is consistent with the land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and would serve as a valuable amenity to the residential development that prevails in the vicinity of Tasker Road. B. COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan is the sole plan indicating the future land use designation of the subject site. Through this document, the Comprehensive Policy Plan envisions coininetcial uses along the eastern end of Tasker Road (See Figure 4). Areas outside of die UDA but within the SWSA are intended for commercial and/or industrial use per the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. As the subject acreage is located within the SWSA boundary, is has the right to public sewer and water for non- residential purposes. The proposed rezoning of the subject acreage from B-3 (Industrial Transition) and RA (Rural Areas) to B-2 (General Business) is consistent with dle land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. 0 1� � f • F _ .y � �, .••'r�. ,.ors -, n . • � � Icy �' t i� 1� a •. �, A 40 OME DEPO i a e a i i , CASTCA TE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc LOCATION MAP 117 E. Picadilly St, Winchester, Virginia 22601 O Q VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRCINIA FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 R K, ddL ,. �gRies _ S Po G e° �P �0 C)"� SUBJECT SITE 9� F S SUBJECT ,,qR SUBJECT SITE 4, SITE SUBJECT SITE F-1 B-2 0 B — 3 ElM-1 l� EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc PROPOSED ZONING 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 O Q VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 FREDER/CK COUNTY, KRGINA FIGURE 3 IN I r' 33 fr. .ti '- •ter ..., J Proposed Rt 37 8y -Pass UDA s Rural CQmtnunity Center f Romderdial s Bus,�ss —.�� I nC u5tr �a I � : Institutional Recreation H*tonc l DSA — Planned Urvt Developme-t � � T v Eastern Frederick r County Long Range Land Use Plan J N {7ae^a1 t)v Fro*ertCkCou Cj W ti' L" ainWrry XCri 1 / s EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc ti l LONG RANGE LAND USE PLAN 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 VOICE. (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 Qy) FREDERICK COUNTY, KRGINM FIGURE 4 • LJ Eastgate Commercial C. SUITABILITY OF THE SITE Site Background and History Impact Aalysis Statement A portion of the site is part of the Eastgate Cornrnerce Center that was originally rezoned in August of 1991 to allow both cornrnercial and light industrial uses. In 1997, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors approved a new rezoning application resulting in the subject site's current land use designations. In 2004, Frederick County amended the Comprehensive Policy Plan, expanding die Sewer and Water Service Area to the south of the original Eastgate Commerce Center to envelop the Home Depot Distribution Center in addition to several RA zoned parcels along Front Royal Pike. This expansion brought the RA zoned area of the Eastgate Cornmercial site into the SWSA. Location and Access The property is located soudi of die terminus of Tasker Road (VA Route 642) at Front Royal Pike (VA Route 522 Soudl) within the Shawnee Magisterial District. The site is located on either side of Maranto Manor Drive with Route 522 bordering the site to the East, an existing self -storage facility and Adelphia facility to die West, and The Home Depot Distribution Center to the South. Access will be provided dirough the existing B2 zoned acreage by a northern entrance on Tasker Road and an eastern entrance on Route 522. The properties located South of Maranto Manor Drive will access Maranto Manor with a right- in/right-out access located on die Property Frontage with Route 522 (See Figure 5). Currently, Maranto Manor provides a connection from Route 522 to the Home Depot entrance before ending at a temporaty cul-de-sac. In accordance with the currently approved Master Plan for the Property, the connection of Maranto Manor to Rainville Road will be provided as Eastgate Commerce Center continues to develop. Site Suitability The Eastgate Cornrnercial site represents a unique opportunity to create a more cohesive commercial development. The property is bound by roadways on dhree sides, which, in effect, presents die subject area as a single site despite its multiple parcels and different zoning designations. This rezoning seeks to solidify that notion and ensure that development at the site is performed in a unified manner that best serves tie cornmunity. It is important to note that this application seeks a conditional rezoning of the RA portion of the property concurrent with a down -zoning of the B-3 acreage. The site does not contain conditions that would preclude or substantially hinder development activities. The following table provides an area summary of environmental features: Environmental Features Total Project Area 20.04 Acres Area in Flood Plain 0.00 Acres 0.0% Area in Steep Slopes 0.00 Acres 0.0% Area in Wetlands TBD Acres 0.0% Lakes & Ponds 0.24 Acres 1.2% ® 'FUTURE SIGNAL \� V ✓w EW T _ZASKE_ ' AD Po , \\R EX. ZONING, B3WHITE'S STORAGE EX. ZONING, B2 FUTEXIS�TIiN�G a3 RIGHPROPOSED, B2 RIGH EXISTING, B3 PROPOSED, B2 4,q gtiro FUTU \ �o IGNAL EXISTING, B2/ EXISTING RA — 10,65 AC EXISTING B3 — 8,23 AC \' J ' / EXISTING /B2 TOTAL — 18,88 AC /\ EXISTING HOME DEPOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER EXISTINGo RA PROPOSED, B2 SITE AN SR HT —IN RIGHT —OUT EXISTING, RA PROPOSED, B2 EXISTING, M-1 i i ti EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust &Associates, pc Cb GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 O \ v VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 Qr) FREDERICK COUNTY, KRGINIA FIGURE 5 Eastgate Connnercial Mipact Analysis Statement Data from the National Wetlands Inventory indicates that there are no identified wetlands or waterways located on the site. A field analysis, however, revealed the location of a possible wetlands area on the southwest corner of the existing B-3 area adjacent to the existing self storage facility. The very limited size of this environmental feature and its unobtrusive location would not deter development activity. A small, man-made pond is situated on the RA tract north of Maranto Manor Drive. Without any natural inflow or outflow, this feature will likely not fall under federal or state regulations (See Figure 6). The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall under the Weikert-Berks-Blanton soil association. The predominant soil types on the site are Clearbrook channery silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes (map symbol 913) and Weikert-Berks channery silt loams, 7 to 15 percent slopes (map symbol 41C) as shown on map sheet number 48 of the survey. This soil type is not considered prime farmland. The characteristics of this soil type and any implications for site development are manageable through the site engineering process. D. TRANSPORTATION A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected from other studies in d1e area as well as actual traffic counts. Using traffic generation figures from die I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, 7`h Edition, the TIA projects that die proposed development will produce 13,957 vehicle trips per day (VPD). The TIA further indicates teat study area roads and intersections have the capacity to accommodate die trips generated by this project at acceptable and manageable level of service conditions. It is important to note that die TIA does not take into account the existing traffic generation potential of the 8.23 acres of die site are currently zoned B3. Additionally, the TIA includes potential traffic generation from a potential industrial land bay located south of the property that could use die Maranto Manor access point in die future. This land bay is not part of this rezoning and represents only about 1,500 of the total trips, but was included as part of die study to facilitate good planning practices for a potential future rezoning. As such, the proposed development plan would produce fewer trips than the 13,957 trips projected by the TIA. Nevertheless, the applicant has proffered to address die transportation improvements indicated by the TIA as being necessary in order to accommodate a level of service (LOS) C or higher for die affected intersections. These proffered 'improvements include: - Signalization at the intersection of Tasker Road and Rainville Road. - Signalization of the future project entrance and the existing entrance to the Home Depot Distribution Center on Maranto Manor Drive. - Installation of an Eastbound left turn lane at die existing signalized intersection of • Maranto Manor Drive and Route 522. 0 • _ RiEs � SKE�RO A G � 1 i EASTGA TE COMMERCIAL lb ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES 0 o Q (5' CONTOUR DATA) Qy� FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGIN/A Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 FIGURE 6 Gastgate Commercial Impact Analysis Statement The TIA also indicated the need for signalization at the intersection of Tasker Road and Route 522. This signal was proffered as part of the earlier Eastgate Commerce Center rezoning. E. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND WATER SUPPLY Sewage and water service will be provided to the site by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority via a 6" force main and a 12" water line. Assunhing a build out of approximately 200,000 square feet a standard rate of 200 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of commercial space, it is anticipated that the proposed use will generate approximately 40,000 GDP of water consumption with equivalent sewer flows. F. SITE DRAINAGE Site drainage collects and leaves the site to the south, as it drains to Wrights Run. It is anticipated that high quality erosion control practice will mitigate adverse stormwater discharge impacts. Actual specification of temporaiy and permanent facilities will be provided with final engineering and will comply with all County, State and Federal regulations. G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL Solid waste will be transferred' to the Frederick County landfill by coimimetcial carrier. Assurnmi g 25 lbs/1,000 square feet of floor area, solid waste generation is projected to be approximately 5,000 pounds per day. H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey does not identify any potentially significant structures on the subject acreage or withal close proximity of the properties. The subject properties are not located withi i the study boundaiy or core area of any identified Civil War battlefield. I. IMPACT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES The Frederick County Fiscal Impact Model was run to assess the likely impact of die proposed project on capital facilities. The output module generated by this analysis indicated that the proposed land uses would result in a net positive fiscal impact. Nevertheless, die applicant has proffered to contribute a total of $4,000 to Frederick County for Fite and Rescue Department and Sheriff's Office purposes, respectively. This contribution is offered in recognition of the unique demands on public safety services commonly associated with commmercial development. 0 • • 0 A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Located in: Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: Wrights Run, L.P. 2800 S. Shirlington Road Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc End neers. Surveyors, Planners. Landscape Architects. P][,300 Foxcroft Avenue, Suite 200 Martinsburg, West Virginia 25401 H'+ T 304.264.2711 F 304.264.3671 October 25, 2006 0 0 OVERVIEW • Report Summary Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR+A) has prepared this document to present the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Eastgate Rezoning development located along the west side of Route 522 (Front Royal Pike), south of Tasker Road, in Frederick County, Virginia. The proposed development is comprised of 166,662 square feet of retail/commercial, 47,000 square feet of office and 224,600 square feet of warehouse/industrial development. Access to the proposed development will be provided via two (2) site -driveways to be located along Moranto Manor Drive (planned future roadway) and two (2) right in/out only site -driveways to be located along Route 522. Build -out will occur over a single transportation phase by the year 2010. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of the proposed Eastgate Rezoning development with respect to the surrounding roadway network. Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying the Eastgate Rezoning development were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: • Assessment of background traffic including growth rates and other planned projects in the area of impact, • Calculation of trip generation for the proposed Eastgate Rezoning development, • Distribution and assignment of the Eastgate Rezoning development generated trips onto the completed study area road network, • Analysis of capacity and level of service using the latest version of the highway capacity software, HCS-2000, for existing and future conditions. EXISTING CONDITIONS Patton Harris Rust & Associates (PHR+A) conducted AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersections of Route 522/Tasker Road, Tasker Road/Rainville Road and Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive. PHR+A established the ADT (Average Daily Traffic) along each of the study area roadway links using an average "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24-hour traffic volumes) of 8% as determined from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) traffic count data Figure 2 shows the existing ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area network. Figure 3 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data and HCS-2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. PHR+A A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 1 E 0 0 0 r---1 L--.A i No Scale A n:.i Rf,.; rr-.il A rpol L L 37 AZI Ifv V J 522 F Stephens,City SITE 4- Figure I Vicinity Map: Eastgate Rezoning, in Frederick County, Virginia A Traffic Impact Analysis of EastRate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 2 A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 0 0 • • 0 No Scale Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 3 Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service PHIZ/� A Traffic Impact AnalVsis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 4 0 • E • 0 2010 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS PHR+A applied a conservative annual growth rate of five percent (5%) to the existing traffic volumes (shown in Figure 2) to obtain 2010 base conditions. In order to incorporate trips associated with the specific future "other developments" located within the vicinity of the proposed site, PHR+A utilized the following reports: 1) Tra is Impact Analysis for the Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate Rezoning, by Vettra Company, dated October 2002; 2) A Phased Tra is Impact Analysis of Crosspointe Center, by PHR+A, dated September 2003; 3) A Traffic Impact Analysis of Freedom Manor, by PHR+A, dated July 2004; 4) A Phased Tra is Impact Analysis of the Villages at Artr•in, by PHR+A, dated December 2004 and 5) A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows, by PHR+A, dated April 2005. Based upon the 7"' Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR+A has provided Table 1 to summarize the trip generation for the "other developments" surrounding the site. Figure 4 shows the 2010 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area network. Figure 5 shows the corresponding 2010 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS-2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. PHTZ/� A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 5 • • • • Table 1 2010 "Other Developments " Trip Generation Summary Code Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour In Out Total In PM Peak Hour Out Total ADT Background Development # 1 Home Depot Distribution Center - Phase 2' 150 Warehousing 252,000 SF 65 14 79 21 62 82 927 Background Development # 2 The Shenandoah - Phase 22 --- Mixed Land Use ---- 478 336 814 704 773 1,477 17,094 Background Development # 3 Development West of Site on Tasker Road 210 Single -Family Detached 300 Units 55 165 219 182 107 288 3,000 Background Development # 4 Wakeland Property 820 Retail 80,000 SF 84 53 137 259 281 540 5,874 Background Development # 5 #11 Elementary School and Admiral Byrd Middle School 520 Elementary School 640 stud. 110 76 186 2 5 6 826 522 Middle School 850 stud. 223 168 391 66 61 128 1,377 Total Trips 332 244 577 68 66 134 2,203 Background Development # 6 Freedom Manor 210 Single -Family Detached 120 units 23 70 93 80 47 126 1,200 Background Development # 7 Tasker Woods 210 Single -Family Detached 120 units 23 70 93 80 47 126 1,200 230 Townhouse/Condo 199 units 15 74 90 71 35 106 1,731 710 Office 179,000 SF 263 36 299 47 232 279 2,089 Total Trips 302 180 482 198 313 511 5,020 Background Development # 8 Cedar Meadows 251 Elderly Housing - Detach 140 units 14 23 37 38 24 63 721 Background Development # 9 820 Retail 191,665 SF 141 90 231 462 500 962 10,365 Background Development #10 710 Office 35,990 SF 73 10 83 20 99 119 607 Background Development #11 710 Office 22,216 SF 1 50 7 56 1 18 86 104 419 Note 1: The existing Home Depot Distribution Center will be expanded by 252,000 SF Note 2: Trip generation values are taken directly from the report: Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate PHR�A A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastaate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 6 0 • • • Table 1(cont.) 2010 "Other Developments " Trip Generation Summary Code Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ADT In Out Total In Out Total Background Development # 12 Artrip (Phase 2) Land Bay A 210 Single -Family Detached 102 units 20 60 81 69 40 109 1,017 230 Townhouse/Condo 438 units 29 140 168 135 67 202 3,811 820 Retail 10,000 SF 24 15 39 66 71 137 1,520 Land Bay B 210 Single -Family Detached 37 units 9 27 36 28 16 44 373 Land Bay C 488 Soccer Complex 3 field 2 2 4 43 19 62 214 Total Trips 1 84 244 328 340 214 554 6,935 Total Internal 1 1 2 16 16 31 107 Total "New Trips" 83 243 326 325 198 523 6 828 Background Development # 13 Crosspointe Center (Phase 2) 210 Single -Family Detached 775 units 138 414 552 435 245 679 7,750 230 Townhouse/Condo 200 units 15 74 89 73 36 109 1,740 253 Elderly Housing - Attach 100 units 4 3 7 6 4 10 348 710 Office 90,000 SF 151 21 171 31 150 180 1,224 820 Retail 440,000 SF 236 151 386 801 868 1,669 17,673 Total Trips 544 661 1,205 1,346 1,302 2,648 28,735 Total Internal 80 80 159 330 330 660 6,954 Total Pass -by 29 29 58 125 125 250 2,651 Total "New Trips" 435 553 988 890 847 1,737 19,130 PH1Z/� A Traffic hizpact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 7 0 u LI Q • No Scale AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) I Figure 4 2010 Background Traffic Conditions PR+AH A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 8 • 9 • Signalized "Suggested Intersection Improvements" LOS=C(C) Signalization NB - 1 Left No Scale Signalized "Suggested Intersection Improvements" nSkev 010L LOS=QQ Signalization S Teske NB - 1 Left 0 fc 522 1� 3� 522 roc �G, o a s�ef d� Unsignalized �Oo� Intersection Internalized' , Intersection �J Signalized 522 r Intersection C> LOS=QQ Internalized Intersection SITE •ro Div Manor Mar, to N•, Signalized "Suggested r 1 ntersection Improvements" d �a•1 LOS=QQ New Intersection 7e G<Cl SITE M �g Maranto Manor Drive u•� C1 (C)B Denotes stop sign control ' Denotes traffic signal control T T T I 1 T A * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement J+ / \ AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 5 2010 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service HPFUA A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastoate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 9 0 • TRIP GENERATION PHR+A determined the number of trips entering and exiting the site using equations and rates provided in the 7°i Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report. Table 2 was prepared to summarize the total trip generation associated with the Eastgate Rezoning development. Table 2 Proposed Development: Eastgate Rezoning Trin Generatinn Rnmmary Land Bay Code Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour In Out Total In PM Peak Hour Out Total ADT A 820 Retail 124,146 SF 109 69 178 347 375 722 7,816 B 820 Retail 42,516 SF 57 37 94 171 185 356 3,895 C 710 Office 47,000 SF 90 12 103 22 109 131 746 D 110 Light Industrial 112,300 SF 91 12 103 13 97 110 737 D 150 Warehousing 112,300 SF 74 16 90 18 54 72 764 Total 421 147 568 571 820 1,391 13,957 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENTS The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the roadway network surrounding the Eastgate Rezoning development. PHR+A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in Figure 6 to assign the proposed Eastgate Rezoning trips (Table 2) throughout the study area. Figure 7 shows the respective development -generated ADT and AM/PM peak hour trip assignments. 2010 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Eastgate Rezoning assigned trips (Figure 7) were then added to the 2010 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2010 build -out conditions. Figure 8 shows the 2010 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 9 shows the respective 2010 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS-2000 levels of service worksheets are provided in the Appendix section of the report. PHI2A A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 10 0 0 • No Scale Figure 6 PHIU� Trip Distribution Percentages A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 11 • 0 • • 10 No Scale 522 r✓O Jc` D oTa a (j3sJTV i, O�� 46(9l� j � �� � ��✓ 1 •�A�55'L19�~ Ada• e "orabJ S�teOr`v 522 LAND BAY LAND BAY "B" A, Ma, nor �nV MlrantoM` N LAND BAY nCn N w N %...23(69) LAND BAY w j\ �.�3(19) "A""A"1 imm 64(55) LAND BAY (129)41 �� "D"(52)16 Now* o (44)52—y ';� ' ✓,A-,l ✓� 522Average T T T I -T A Daily J1 + / \ AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Figure 7 Development -Generated Trip Assignments PHIS A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 12 • 0 0 A No Scale 522 W✓ O 16 J f �a A ~-1a✓� 4 o `I40 rQo 1 0IN p^r14' r�(09(6s9 S �e Dpv 522 LAND BAY LAND BAY ) o "B" A� 0 0 � fx M�ranto MaAor LAND BAY woo %..86(276) N LAND BAY "A" 440(127) LAND BAY (383)I I A�gl D r�r J✓' (52)16 �� c N 5lf'l T J✓� r,` (65)119y $ 000,,A1`� ✓1 c i k,b J Average Daily Trips T A 1 _ TQ+ / \ AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Figure 8 2010 Build -out Traffic Conditions PHIZl� A Traffic Impact Analysis of EastQate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 13 0 • No Scale Signalized "Suggested Intersection Improvements" LOS=QQ Signalization NB - 2 Left <c, �Oaa Unsignalized Intersection Unsignalized 14 Intersection Signalized "Suggested Intersection Improvements" LOS=QQ Signalization NB - 1 Left EB - 1 Left f� Vi 0 Cl''�a Ot•,�� I J Signalized 522 Jnsignalized Intersection Intersection LOS=C(N) ct i ik ' 1� 3 �y `'1 LAND BAY LAND BAY T "A" G RS Marant°J Signalized 'Suggested ested d ntersectimt Improvements LOS=QQ New Intersection LAND BAY d C(C) LAND BAY BAY lvtaranto Manor ;� LAND nrive a 1A ' D1 Signalized "Suggested a t e, scct'on Improvements" LOS=QQ EB - 1 Left rn J 00~ "Suggested Improvements" New Intersection l signalized ersectionanto Ma°� Dr � (c)$'qq . n Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement A AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) +A Figure 9 2010 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service PHR1� A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastpate Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 14 • • CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the Eastgate Rezoning development, assuming suggested improvements, are acceptable and manageable. Based upon HCS-2000 results, each of the study area intersections will operate with overall levels of service "C" or better during 2010 build -out conditions. The following reiterates the suggested roadway configuration required for each of the study area roadway intersections during 2010 build - out conditions: • Route 522/Tasker Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization along with an additional eastbound and northbound left -turn lane. • Tasker Road/Rainville Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization and two (2) northbound left - turn lane. • Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive: In order to maintain acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require an additional eastbound left -turn lane. • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new intersection. It will be an unsignalized intersection with westbound left/right shared lane, northbound thru/right shared lane and a southbound left/thru shared lane. • Site Driveway #1/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new unsignalized intersection. It will require eastbound thru and right -turn lane, westbound left and thru lane and northbound left and right -turn lane. • Site Driveway #2/Maranto Manor Drive: This intersection will require signalization along with eastbound separate left, and thru/right shared lane; westbound separate left, thru, right turn lane; northbound separate left and thru/right shared lane and southbound separate left, thru, right turn lane. • Site Driveway #3/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. • Site Driveway #4/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. A Traffic Impact Analysis of EastRate Rezoning PH J� Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 15 • • APPENDIX 0 0 HCS-2000 Worksheets • 0 r-1 rI 0 • HCS2000' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 14 6 9 480 580 9 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 10 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 23.0 G= G= G= G= 55.0 G= G= G= Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= IY= 6 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH FIT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 15 6 9 505 611 9 Lane group capacity, c 448 401 461 1939 1939 1568 v/c ratio, X 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.26 0.32 0.01 Total green ratio, g/C 0.26 0.26 0.61 0.61 0.61 1.00 Uniform delay, d1 25.2 25.0 6.9 8.1 8.4 0.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.950 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Initial queue delay, d3 - • • • Control delay 25.2 1 25.0 6.9 8.2 8.5 1 0.0 Lane group LOS C I I C A I A A A Approach delay 25.1 8.1 8.4 Approach LOS C A A Intersection delay 8.6 X� = 0.23 Intersection LOS A HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e • - 0 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 9 5 4 657 617 6 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 23.0 G= G= G= G= 55.0 G= G= G= Y= 6 Y= Y= I Y= IY= 6 Y= I Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB I NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 9 5 4 692 649 6 Lane group capacity, c 448 401 439 1939 1939 1568 v/c ratio, X 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.36 0.33 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.26 0.26 0.61 10.61 0.61 1.00 Uniform delay, d1 25.1 25.0 6.8 8.7 8.6 0.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.950 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Initial queue delay, d3 • 11, • Control delay 25.1 25.0 6.9 8.8 1 8.7 1 0.0 Lane group LOS C C A I A A A Approach delay 25.1 8.8 8.6 Approach LOS C A A Intersection delay 8.9 X� = 0.26 Intersection LOS A HCS2000t'M Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e General Information i TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0212812006 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description 522 Ventures East/West Street: Tasker Road Intersection Orientation: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Movement 1 2 L T Volume veh/h 0 345 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.87 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 396 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 Median type RT Channelized? Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year Existing Conditions South Street: Rainville Road Period (hrs): 0.25 3 4 R L 13 15 0.87 0.91 14 16 -- 3 Undivided 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 Configuration T R L Upstream Signal 0 Minor Street Northbound Movement 7 8 9 10 L T R L Volume veh/h 7 0 18 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.78 0.95 0.78 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 8 0 23 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 3 0 3 0 Percent grade (%) 0 Flared approach N Storage 0 RT Channelized? 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 Lane Configuration L LR Volume, v (vph) 16 31 Capacity, cm (vph) 1143 595 /c ratio 0.01 0.05 Queue length (95%) 0.04 0.16 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.2 11.4 LOS A 8 • Approach delay (s/veh) -- -- 11.4 Approach LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Westbound 5 6 T R 126 0 0.91 0.95 138 0 Southbound 10 1 11 1 12 Version 4.1 d I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0212812006 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description 522 Ventures East/West Street: Tasker Road Intersection Orientation: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 L Volume veh/h 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 Median type RT Channelized? Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year Existing Conditions orth/South Street: Rainville Road tudv Period (hrs): 0.25 Undivided Lanes 0 1 Configuration T R L Upstream Signal 0 Minor Street Northbound Movement 7 8 9 10 L T R L i Volume veh/h 9 0 16 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.69 0.95 0.69 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 13 0 1 23 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 3 0 3 0 Percent grade (%) 0 Flared approach N Storage 0 RT Channelized? 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 Lane Configuration L LR Volume, v (vph) 20 36 Capacity, cm (vph) 1311 590 /c ratio 0.02 0.06 Queue length (95%) 0.05 0.19 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.8 11.5 LOS A 8 • Approach delay (s/veh) -- -- 11.5 Approach LOS B HCS200(T'M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Southbound 10 1 11 1 12 Version 4.1d l� TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0212812006 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker & Rt 522 Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project Description 522 Ventures East/West Street: Tasker Road North/South Street: Route 522 Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 82 446 0 0 518 60 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 92 501 0 0 539 62 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 - - 3 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 79 0 286 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 1 0 92 1 0 1 336 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration I L I R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R (vph) 92 92 336 C (m) (vph) 965 354 725 lc 0.10 0.26 0.46 95% queue length 0.32 1.02 2.47 Control Delay 9.1 18.7 14.2 LOS A C B Approach Delay -- -- 15.2 Approach LOS -- -- C Rights Reserved • HCS2000Tt t Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4, ld Version 4.1 d r-1 • • TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0212812006 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker & Rt 522 Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project Description 522 Ventures East/West Street: Tasker Road North/South Street: Route 522 Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 297 660 0 0 571 99 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 315 702 0 0 620 107 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- -- 3 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 64 0 172 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.93 0.95 0.93 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 0 0 68 0 184 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R (vph) 315 68 184 C (m) (vph) 866 154 683 /c 0.36 0.44 0.27 95% queue length 1.67 2.00 1.09 Control Delay 11.5 45.7 12.2 LOS B E 8 Approach Delay -- 21.2 Approach LOS - -- C Rights Reserved . HCS200d M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d - a • HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Site Dr #2 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA 2010 Background Analysis Year Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 Lane group LTR LTR LT R LT R Volume, V (vph) 78 0 67 376 0 63 9 0 245 41 0 50 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A I A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 13.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 1 02 03 04 1 NB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 45.0 G= G= G= G= 8.0 G= 25.0 G= G= IY= Y= 6 1 Y= Y= Y= IY= 0 Y= 6 Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 161 488 10 272 46 56 Lane group capacity, c 583 593 574 575 388 436 v/c ratio, X 0.28 0.82 0.02 0.47 0.12 0.13 Total green ratio, g/C 0.50 0.50 0.37 0.37 0.28 0.28 Uniform delay, d1 13.1 19.1 18.2 21.8 24.3 24.3 Progression factor, PF 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.36 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.3 9.2 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 • r • Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 13.3 28.3 18.2 22.5 24.4 24.5 Lane group LOS B C B C C C Approach delay 13.3 28.3 22.3 24.4 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection delay 23.9 X� = 0.67 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e • 0 r-1 0 L_J 1� HCS2000"' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Site Dr #2 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 Lane group LTR LTR LT R LT R Volume, V (vph) 254 0 21 72 0 208 102 0 613 225 0 275 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 1 12.0 112.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 1 02 03 04 1 NB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 37.0 G= G= G= G= 11.0 G= 30.0 G= G= Y= 6 1 Y= Y= Y= IY= 0 Y= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 305 311 113 570 250 306 Lane group capacity, c 388 579 448 714 396 523 v/c ratio, X 0.79 0.54 0.25 0.80 0.63 0.59 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.41 0.46 0.46 0.33 10.33 Uniform delay, d1 23.1 20.0 15.1 21.0 25.3 24.8 I Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.33 0.14 0.11 0.34 0.21 0.18 Incremental delay, d2 10.3 1.0 0.3 6.4 3.2 1.7 r n • • Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 33.3 21.0 15.4 27.4 28.6 26.5 Lane group LOS C C 8 C C C Approach delay 33.3 21.0 25.4 27.5 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection delay 26.6 Xc = 0.79 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 0 C] • HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 97 188 291 1040 1522 149 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1 12.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 1 02 03 04 NB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 15.0 G= G= G= G= 18.0 G= 55.0 G= G= Y= 6 1 Y= Y= Y= IY= 0 Y= 6 Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 102 198 306 1095 1602 157 Lane group capacity, c 263 612 389 2316 1745 1192 v/c ratio, X 0.39 0.32 0.79 0.47 0.92 0.13 Total green ratio, g/C 0.15 0.39 0.73 0.73 0.55 10.76 Uniform delay, d1 38.4 21.3 28.8 5.6 20.5 3.2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.33 0.11 0.44 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 1.0 0.3 10.3 0.2 8.2 0.1 C] Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 39.3 21.6 39.1 5.7 28.7 3.3 Lane group LOS D C D A C A Approach delay 27.6 13.0 26.4 Approach LOS C 8 C Intersection delay 21.1 X� = 0.90 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e C] • rI r-1 C J HCS2000'M DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA 2010 Background Analysis Year Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 329 510 113 1862 1493 167 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 10.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 150 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 26.5 G= G= G= G= 11.0 G= 55.5 G= G= Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= IY= 0 Y= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 105.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and, LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 346 379 119 1960 1572 176 Lane group capacity, c 442 650 254 2010 1677 1314 v/c ratio, X 0.78 0.58 1 10.47 0.98 0.94 0.13 Total green ratio, g/C 0.25 0.41 0.63 0.63 0.53 0.84 Uniform delay, di 36.6 23.7 18.3 18.5 23.1 1.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.33 10.17 .11 0.48 0.45 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 8.9 1.3 4 fl. 14.6 10.5 0.0 ri a • Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 45.5 25.1 19.7 33.1 33.7 1.6 Lane group LOS D C 8 C C A Approach delay 34.8 32.3 30.4 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 32.0 X� = 0.92 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e II ft • TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker & Rt 522 Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project Description East ate Rezoning East/West Street: Tasker Road North/South Street: Route 522 Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 313 824 0 0 957 172 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 351 925 0 0 996 179 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- -- 3 -- - Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 206 0 714 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 0 1 0 242 D 839 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R (vph) 351 242 839 C (m) (vph) 585 76 515 lc 0.60 3.18 1.63 95% queue length 3.96 24.46 47.17 Control Delay 20.0 1100 312.2 LOS C F F Approach Delay -- 488.5 Approach LOS - -- F Rights Reserved • HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Version 4.1 d n �1 • • TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker & Rt 522 Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA nalysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project Description East ate Rezoning East/West Street: Tasker Road North/South Street: Route 522 Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 838 1353 0 0 1074 364 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 891 1439 0 0 1167 395 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- - 3 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration L T T R 'Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 330 0 587 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.93 0.95 0.93 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 0 1 0 354 0 631 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration I I L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R (vph) 891 354 631 C (m) (vph) 414 452 v/c 2.15 1.40 95% queue length 64.78 30.21 Control Delay 547.9 215.8 LOS F F Approach Delay -- -- Approach LOS -- - Rights Reserved • HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d r-1 C7 C HCS2000'M DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID Eastgate Rezoning - Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 206 714 313 824 957 172 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 1 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.89 0.89 0.96 0.96 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 50 0 10 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G= 25.0 G= G= G= G= 24.0 G= 39.0 G= G= Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= Y= 0 Y= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 242 10.91 781 352 926 997 179 Lane group capacity, c 438 862 817 1999 1237 1098 v/c ratio, X 0.55 0.43 0.46 0.81 0.16 Total green ratio, g/C 0.25 0.55 0.24 0.63 10.39 0.70 Uniform delay, di 32.6 20.2 32.2 9.7 27.1 5.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.15 0.43 0.11 0.11 0.35 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 1.5 13.1 0.4 0.2 4.0 0.1 r a • Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 34.2 33.3 32.6 9.8 31.2 5.1 Lane group LOS C C C A C A Approach delay 33.5 16.1 27.2 Approach LOS C B C Intersection delay 25.0 XC = 0.86 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ie 0 HCS2000'M DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID Eastgate Rezoning - Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 330 587 838 1353 1074 364 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.94 10.94 10.92 0.92 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A I A A A Start-up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 50 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 1 0 0 H 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 1 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G= 20.5 G= G= G= G= 23.0 IY= G= 34.5 G= G= IY= Y= 6 1Y= Y= Y= 0 Y= 6 Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 355 577 891 1439 1167 396 Lane group capacity, c 399 862 870 2027 1216 1063 v/c ratio, X 0.89 0.67 11.02 0.71 0.96 0.37 Total green ratio, g/C 0.23 0.55 0.26 0.64 0.38 10.68 Uniform delay, d1 33.7 14.4 33.5 10.7 27.1 1 6.3 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.41 0.24 0.50 0.27 0.47 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 21.1 2.0 36.8 1.2 17.0 0.2 • • • Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 54.8 16.4 70.3 11.9 44.1 6.5 Lane group LOS D 8 E 8 D A Approach delay 31.0 34.2 34.6 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 33.7 X� = 0.96 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright (D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e General Information TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour ?roi.ect Description Eastgate Rezoning East/West Street: Tasker Road Intersection Orientation: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Movement 1 2 L T Volume veh/h 0 865 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.87 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 994 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 Median type RT Channelized? Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions South Street: Rair Period (hrs): 0.25 3 4 R L 116 94 0.87 0.91 133 103 -- 3 Undivided 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 Configuration T R L Upstream Signal 1 0 Minor Street Northbound Movement 7 8 9 10 L T R L Volume veh/h 54 0 50 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.78 0.95 0.78 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 69 0 64 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 3 0 3 0 Percent grade (%) 0 Flared approach N Storage 0 RT Channelized? 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 0 0 Configuration I LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 Lane Configuration L LR Volume, v (vph) 103 133 Capacity, cm (vph) 616 139 /c ratio 0.17 0.96 Queue length (95%) 0.60 6.70 Control Delay (s/veh) 12.0 127.2 LOS B F Approach delay (s/veh) -- -- 127.2 Approach LOS -- -- F HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Westbound 5 6 T R 387 0 0.91 0.95 425 0 Southbound 10 1 11 1 12 Version 4.1d 0 I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour 'roject Description Eastgate Rezoning ast/West Street: Tasker Road ntersection Orientation: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbou Movement 1 2 L T Volume veh/h 0 692 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.91 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 760 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 Median type RT Channelized? Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd. - Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions orth/South Street: Rainville Road tudv Period (hrs): 0.25 3 4 R L 140 169 0.91 0.92 153 183 -- 3 Undivided 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 Configuration T R L Upstream Signal 0 Minor Street Northbound Movement 7 8 9 10 L T R L Volume veh/h 234 0 222 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.69 0.95 0.69 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 339 0 321 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 3 0 3 0 Percent grade (%) 0 Flared approach N Storage 0 RT Channelized? 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 Lane Configuration L LR Volume, v (vph) 183 660 Capacity, cm (vph) 742 63 v/c ratio 0.25 10.48 Queue length (95%) 0.97 77.81 Control Delay (s/veh) 11.4 4389 B F •LOS Approach delay (s/veh) -- -- 4389 Approach LOS -- - F HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Westbound 5 6 T R 1028 0 0.92 0.95 1117 0 Southbound 10 1 11 1 12 Version 4.1 d a • HCS2000r' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 07110106 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA 2010 Background Analysis Year Conditions Project ID Eastgate Rezoning - Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T R L T L R Volume, V (vph) 865 116 94 387 54 50 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.78 0.78 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 9.0 IY= G= 57.0 G= G= G= 22.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 6 Y= Y= IY= 6 Y= Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 994 133 103 425 69 64 Lane group capacity, c 1052 1333 232 1218 385 580 v/c ratio, X 0.94 0.10 0.44 0.35 0.18 0.11 Total green ratio, g/C 0.57 0.85 0.66 0.66 10.22 0.37 Uniform delay, di 20.0 1.2 21.0 7.5 31.7 20.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.46 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 16.2 0.0 1.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 L� Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 1.3 22.4 31.9 20.8 Lane group LOS 136.2 D A C ::H C C Approach delay 32.1 10.5 26.5 Approach LOS C 8 C Intersection delay 25.3 X� = 0.78 Intersection LOS C HCS20007M Copyright C 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e I- I • HCS2000'M DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 07110106 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID Eastgate Rezoning - Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T R L T L R Volume, V (vph) 692 140 169 1028 234 222 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.69 0.69 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 12.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 hasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 IC G= 17.0 G= 40.0 G= G= G= 21.0 G= G= Giming Y= 0 Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= uration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 760 154 184 1117 339 322 Lane group capacity, c 820 1167 413 1168 409 767 v/c ratio, X 0.93 0.13 0.45 0.96 0.83 0.42 Total green ratio, g/C 0.44 0.74 0.63 0.63 0.23 0.49 Uniform delay, di 23.6 3.3 14.8 15.3 32.8 14.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.44 0.11 0.11 0.47 0.37 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 16.4 0.1 0.8 16.9 13.3 0.4 - • • Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 40.0 3.3 15.5 32.2 46.1 15.2 Lane group LOS D A 8 C D 8 Approach delay 33.9 29.9 31.0 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 31.4 X� = 0.92 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e • 0 �_l r-1 • C� TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor & Rainville Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description East ate Rezoning East/West Street: Maranto Manor Drive North/South Street: Rainville Rd Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 19 0 255 34 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 20 1 0 268 35 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 1 -- 3 -- -- Median Type Undivided TT_ Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT U stream Signal 0 1 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 109 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 114 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 3 0 3 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 268 114 C (m) (vph) 1590 1055 /c 0.17 0.11 95% queue length 0.61 0.36 Control Delay 7.7 8.8 LOS A A Approach Delay -- -- 8.8 Approach LOS -- -- A Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1 d r-7 • i TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor & Rainville Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA nalysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description East ate Rezoning East/West Street: Maranto Manor Drive North/South Street: Rainville Rd Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 50 0 500 4 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 52 0 526 4 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- - 3 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 659 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 693 0 1 0 1 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 3 0 3 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 526 693 C (m) (vph) 1548 1013 /c 0.34 0.68 95% queue length 1.53 5.69 Control Delay 8.5 15.9 LOS A C Approach Delay -- 15.9 Approach LOS -- -- C Rights Reserved . HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Version 4.Id General Information •Analyst TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information R+A Intersection R+AJurisdiction 1 2006 Analvsis Year PH Agency/Co. PH Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour 'roject Description Eastgate Rezoning ast/West Street: Maranto Manor Drive ntersection Orientation: East-West ✓ehicle Volumes and Adjustments dajor Street Eastbound Oovement 1 2 L T Jolume veh/h 0 292 :leak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 -fourl Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 307 'roportion of heavy 3 -- 3hicles, PHv ledian type T Channelized? anes onfiguration pstream Signal linor Street Volume veh/h Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade (%) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Control Dela Queue Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, cm (vph) /c ratio Queue length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS Approach delay (s/veh) Approach LOS HCS2000TM iranto Manor & Site Dr # �derick County, VA 10 Build -out Conditions orth/South Street: Site Drive #1 tudv Period (hrs): 0.25 3 4 R L 29 35 0.95 0.95 30 36 - 3 Raised curb 0 0 1 1 1 T R L 0 Northbound 7 8 9 10 L T R L 3 0 49 0 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 0 51 0 3 0 3 3 0 N 0 0 1 0 1 0 L R n th Level of Service EB WB Northbound 1 4 7 8 9 L L R 36 3 51 1217 422 731 0.03 0.01 0.07 0.09 0.02 0.22 8.0 13.6 10.3 A B B -- 10.5 -- -- B Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved I• I• Southbound 7-T- 0 11 12 Version 4.Id TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Intersection Maranto Manor & Site Dr#1 Agency/Co. PHR+A Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description East ate Rezoning East/West Street: Maranto Manor Drive North/South Street: Site Drive #1 Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 0 1056 52 57 403 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 1 1111 54 60 424 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 3 -- - 3 -- - Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 19 0 248 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 20 0 261 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 3 0 3 3 0 0 Percent grade (%) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 TT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Control DelaV, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R Volume, v (vph) 60 20 261 Capacity, cm (vph) 596 219 253 v/c ratio 0.10 0.09 1.03 Queue length (95%) 0.33 0.30 10.41 Control Delay (s/veh) 11.7 23.1 107.9 LOS B C F ( Approach delay (s/veh) -- -- 101.9 Approach LOS -- -- F HCS2006TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d HCS2000' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Site Dr #2 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 Lane group L TR L T R L TR L T R Volume, V (vph) 119 16 119 440 3 86 22 0 260 62 0 83 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N I N 0 N N 0 N I N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 42.0 G= G= G= G= 36.0 G= G= G= Y= 6 1Y= Y= Y= IY= 6 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 132 150 489 3 96 1 24 289 69 0 92 Lane group capacity, c 651 747 569 861 732 82 627 378 738 627 v/c ratio, X 0.20 0.20 0.86 0.00 0.13 0.29 0.46 0.18 0.00 0.15 Total green ratio, g/C 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 Uniform delay, d1 14.1 14.1 21.4 12.8 13.6 18.3 19.9 17.5 16.2 17.2 ( Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.2 0.1 12.6 0.0 0.1 2.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.1 Initial queue delay, d3 a a • 0 Control delay 14.3 14.3 34.0 12.8 13.7 20.3 20.4 17.7 16.2 17.3 Lane group LOS B B C I B B C C 8 I B B Approach delay 14.3 30.5 20.4 17.5 Approach LOS B C C B Intersection delay 23.2 Xc = 0.68 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e C, • - • HCS2000'M DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 07/1 Time Period PM Peakeak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Site Dr Area Type A2 other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 Lane group L TR L T R LT R L T R Volume, V (vph) 383 52 65 127 19 276 188 0 720 337 0 453 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, P H F 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A I A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 13 3 1 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 13.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N I N 0 N N I 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 1 NB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 8.0 G= 26.0 G= G= G= 8.0 G= 30.0 G= G= Y= 6 IY= 6 Y= Y= IY= 0 Y= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 403 123 134 20 291 1 198 495 355 0 477 Lane group capacity, c 553 489 517 533 453 238 906 389 615 767 v/c ratio, X 0.73 0.25 0.26 0.04 0.64 0.83 0.55 0.91 0.00 0.62 Total green ratio, g/C 0.44 0.29 0.44 0.29 0.29 0.42 0.58 0.33 0.33 0.49 Uniform delay, d1 22.3 24.5 15.3 23.0 27.9 23.2 11.7 28.7 20.0 16.9 I Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.37 0.15 0.43 0.11 0.21 Incremental delay, d2 14.9 0.3 1 1 0.3 1 0.0 13.1 21.5 0.7 25.4 0.0 1 1.6 Initial queue delay, d3 l i l 1 FA Control delay 27.1 124.8 15.5 23.0 31.0 44.7 12.4 54.1 20.0 18.5 Lane group LOS C I C B C C I D B D B B Approach delay 26.6 26.0 21.6 33.7 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection delay 27.5 Xc = 0.88 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e - �1 0 HCS2000r" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 172 197 354 1040 1677 213 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 13.0 G= G= G= G= 18.0 G= 57.0 G= G= Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= Y= 0 Y= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 181 207 373 1095 1765 224 Lane group capacity, c 228 580 389 2380 1809 1192 v/c ratio, X 0.79 0.36 0.96 0.46 0.98 0.19 Total green ratio, g/C 0.13 0.37 0.75 0.75 0.57 0.76 Uniform delay, d1 42.2 22.9 32.8 4.8 20.8 1 3.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 I Delay calibration, k 0.34 0.11 0.47 0.11 0.48 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 17.4 0.4 35.0 0.1 15.7 0.1 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 59.6 23.2 1 1 67.8 T4.9 36.6 3.4 Lane group LOS E I I C E I A D A Approach delay 40.2 20.9 32.8 Approach LOS D C C Intersection delay 29.0 c = 1.02 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e r__1 r 0 1� mqw HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID East ate Rezoning Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 743 561 199 1862 1573 261 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 j 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 1 175 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EB Only 1 02 03 04 1 NB Only NS Perm 07 a a • Control delay 264.0 20.7 1 1 48.7 61.8 76.7 1.6 Lane group LOS F C D I E E A Approach delay 180.9 60.6 66.0 Approach LOS F E E Intersection delay 89.6 XC = 1.30 Intersection LOS F HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 0 0 I HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 07/10/2006 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Eastgate Rezoning - Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 172 197 354 1040 1677 213 %Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2,0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 •P Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 13.0 G= G= G= G= 18.0 G= 57.0 G= G= Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= Y= 0 Y= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 181 207 373 1095 1765 224 Lane group capacity, c 442 580 389 2380 1809 1192 v/c ratio, X 0.41 0.36 0.96 0.46 0.98 0.19 Total green ratio, g/C 0.13 0.37 0.75 0.75 0.57 0.76 Uniform delay, d1 40.0 22.9 32.8 4.8 20.8 3.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.47 0.11 0.48 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.6 0.4 35.0 0.1 15.7 0.1 Initial queue delay, d3 • L is Control delay 40.6 23.2 67.8 T4.9 1 36.6 3.4 Lane group LOS D I I C E J A D I A Approach delay 31.3 20.9 32.8 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 28.1 X� = 0.96 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright (D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 0 0 a r 0 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711012006 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Maranto Manor Dr. & Rt. 522 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Eastgate Rezoning - Suggested Improvements Volume and Timi7n_q Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 Lane group L R L T T R Volume, V (vph) 743 561 199 1862 1573 261 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 14 14 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 175 0 1 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 1 NB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 21.0 G= G= G= G= 8.0 G= 49.0 G= G= Y= 6 Y= Y= I Y= 1Y= 0 Y= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 782 406 209 1960 1656 275 Lane group capacity, c 794 610 238 2010 1728 10.96 1324 v/c ratio, X 0.98 0.67 0.88 0.98 0.21 Total green ratio, g/C 0.23 0.39 0.63 0.63 0.54 0.84 Uniform delay, d1 34.3 22.7 23.9 15.8 19.5 1.3 I Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.49 0.24 0.40 0.48 0.47 0.11 delay, d2 28.1 2.8 28.9 14.6 13.2 0.1 [Incremental itial queue delay, d3 Control delay 62.4 25.4 52.8 30.4 32.7 1 1.4 Lane group LOS E I C D I C C A is Approach delay 49.8 32.6 28.2 Approach LOS D C C Intersection delay 34.9 X� = 0.98 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e • a • Ewo TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker & Rt 522 Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description East ate Rezoning East/West Street: Tasker Road North/South Street: Route 522 Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 320 892 0 0 1164 218 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 359 1002 0 0 1212 227 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- - 3 -- -- Median Type Raised curb FT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration L T T R Up stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 226 0 755 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 0 0 265 0 888 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R (vph) 359 265 888 C (m) (vph) 462 42 438 We 0.78 6.31 2.03 95% queue length 6.83 31.07 61.65 Control Delay 35.0 2578 491.2 LOS E F F Approach Delay - -- 970.8 Approach LOS - -- F Rights Reserved • HCS200JM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Version 4.1d r_1 • TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker & Rt 522 Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description East ate Rezoning East/West Street: Tasker Road North/South Street: Route 522 Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 875 1730 0 0 1325 455 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 930 1840 0 0 1440 494 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- -- 3 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 445 0 595 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.93 0.95 0.93 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 0 0 478 0 1 639 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration I I I L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R (vph) 930 478 639 C (m) (vph) 296 368 v/c 3.14 1.74 95% queue length 83.43 39.88 Control Delay 998.5 367.8 LOS F F Approach Delay -- -- Approach LOS -- -- Rights Reserved • HCS200d M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d • 0 a TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR+A Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd. Agency/Co. PHR+A Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Date Performed 0711112006 Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description East ate Rezoning East/West Street: Tasker Road North/South Street: Rainville Road Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 0 906 180 140 395 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.87 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 1041 206 153 434 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 -- - 3 -- Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 D Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 83 0 70 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.78 0.95 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 106 0 1 89 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent grade (%) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR Volume, v (vph) 153 195 Capacity, cm (vph) 555 100 v/c ratio 0.28 1.95 Queue length (95%) 1.12 16.35 Control Delay (s/veh) 13.9 532.7 LOS B F ' Approach delay (s/veh) -- -- 532.7 Approach LOS -- -- F HCS2000TM Copyright© 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.ld • General Information TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency/Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0711112006 nal sis Time Period PM Peak Hour Proiect Description Eastaate Rezonin Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions East/West Street: Tasker Road North/South Street: Rainville Road Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 0 700 275 259 1065 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 769 302 281 1157 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 -- -- 3 -- -- Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 1 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 • L T R L T R Volume veh/h 402 0 337 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.69 0.95 0.69 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 582 0 488 0 0 1 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent grade (%) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR Volume, v (vph) 281 1070 Capacity, cm (vph) 647 32 /c ratio 0.43 33.44 Queue length (95%) 2.20 132.77 Control Delay (s/veh) 14.8 14829 LOS B F • Approach delay (s/veh) -- -- 14829 Approach LOS -- -- F HCS20007'M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d HCS2000' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information .Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 07110106 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Eastgate Rezoning - Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T R L T L R Volume, V (vph) 906 180 140 395 83 70 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.78 0.78 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 • Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 1 N I N D N I N IN Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 Timing G= 6.0 1 G= 55.0 G= G= Y= D IY= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB LT TH RT LT TH Adjusted flow rate, v 1041 207 154 434 Lane group capacity, c 1127 1359 199 1250 v/c ratio, X 0.92 0.15 0.77 0.35 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.87 0.68 0.68 Uniform delay, d1 15.6 0.9 22.6 6.1 • Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.44 0.11 0.32 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 12.5 0.1 17.1 0.2 Initial queue delay, d3 0 1 1 0 I 3.2 NB Only 06 G= 17.0 G= Y= 6 Y= I 3.2 07 08 G= G= Y= Y= C = 90.0 ■ ��� III SB LT I TH I RT Control delay 128.1 1.0 39.8 6.3 1. 30.7 22.1 Lane group LOS I C A D A C C Approach delay 23.6 15.0 26.7 Approach LOS C 8 C Intersection delay 21.4 X� = 0.83 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e • I HCS2000"w DETAILED REPORT U L.. General Information Site Information Analyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 07110106 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Rd. & Rainville Rd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Eastgate Rezoning - Su ested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Lane group T R L T L R Volume, V (vph) 700 275 259 1065 402 337 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.69 0.69 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, NM Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 1 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 18.0 G= 40.0 G= G= G= 20.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 IY= 6 Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH FIT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 769 302 282 1158 583 488 Lane group capacity, c 820 1150 432 1189 756 767 v/c ratio, X 0.94 0.26 0.65 10.97 0.77 0.64 Total green ratio, g/C 0.44 0.73 0.64 0.64 0.22 0.49 Uniform delay, d1 23.8 1 4.0 21.2 15.3 32.9 17.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 1 1.000 1 11.000 C� -Incremental delay, d2 r� • Control delay T42.0 4.1 24.7 35.3 1 37.8 18.8 Lane group LOS I D A C D D 8 Approach delay 31.3 33.2 29.1 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 31.4 X� = 0.92 Intersection LOS C HCS2000Tre Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e r: • • • • 0 Traffic Counts 0 • nterseclion: E-W: Maranto Manor Drive Weather Dry File Name N-S: ROUTE 522 Count B SLS In u[ B SLS Location Frederick County VA Count Date 9/26/2006 15 Minute EB: Maranto Manor Drive WB: NB: ROUTE 522 SB: ROUTE 522 15 Min. Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E & W Begining 7:00 7 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 80 0 81 0 133 2 135 223 7:00 7:15 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 5 126 0 131 0 138 2 140 275 7:15 7:30 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 1 131 0 132 0 172 1 173 309 7:30 7:45 4 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 2 143 0 145 0 137 4 141 291 7:45 8:00 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 3 99 0 102 0 104 4 108 214 8:00 8:15 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 3 104 0 107 0 98 1 99 209 8:15 8:30 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 150 0 151 0 120 1 121 273 8:30 8:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 127 0 131 0 89 2 91 222 8:45 A.M. Total 14 0 14 28 0 0 0 0 20 960 0 980 0 991 17 1008 A.M. Total 16:00 3 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 153 0 153 0 0 0 0 I6:00 16:15 6 0 4 10 0 0 0 0 1 194 0 195 0 145 1 146 d06 16:15 16:30 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 171 0 173 0 130 2 132 16:30 16:45 6 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 1 174 0 175 0 134 5 139 16:45 17:00 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 132 0 132 0 177 1 178 17:00 17:15 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 2 164 0 166 0 172 0 172 3 17:15 17:30 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 187 0 188 0 134 0 134 323 17:30 17:45 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 153 0 153 0 158 3 161 317 17:45 P.M. Total 20 0 13 33 0 0 0 0 7 1328 0 1335 0 1050 12 1062 2430 P.M. Total 1 Hour EB: Maranto Manor Drive WB: NB: ROUTE 522 SB: ROUTE 522 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E & W Begining �7:00 14 0 6 20 0 0 0 0 9 480 0 489 0 580 9 589 1098 7:00 7:15 7 0 10 17 0 0 0 0 11 499 0 510 0 551 11 562 1089 7:15 7:30 4 0 12 16 0 0 0 0 9 477 0 486 0 511 10 521 1023 7:30 7:45 4 0 9 13 0 0 0 0 9 496 0 505 0 459 10 469 987 7:45 8:00 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 11 480 0 491 0 411 8 419 918 8:00 16:00 16 0 8 24 0 0 0 0 4 692 0 696 0 409 8 417 1137 16:00 16:15 13 0 7 20 0 0 0 0 4 671 0 675 0 586 9 595 1290 16:15 16:30 10 0 4 14 0 0 0 0 5 641 0 646 0 613 8 621 1281 16:30 16:45 9 0 5 14 0 0 0 0 4 657 0 661 0 617 6 623 1298 16:45 17:00 4 0 5 9 0 0 0 0 3 636 0 639 0 641 4 645 1293 17:00 I Hour EB: Maranto Manor Drive WB: NB: ROUTE 522 SB: ROUTE 522 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E & W Begining 7:00 14 0 6 20 0 0 0 0 9 480 0 489 0 580 9 589 1098 7:00 A.M. Peak PHF = 0.71 PHF = PHF = 0.84 PHF = 0.85 0.89 A.M. Peak 16:45 9 0 5 l4 0 0 0 0 4 657 0 661 0 617 6 623 1298 16:45 P.M. Peak PHF = 0.44 PHF = PHF = 0.88 PHF = 0.88 0.95 P.M. Peak 0 • 0 U �lersection: E-W: TASKER RD Weather Da File Name N-S: RAINVILLE Count B JJP Input ByjJJP Location WINC HESTER,VA Count Date 5/11/2005 15 Minute EB: TASKER RD WB: TASKER RD NB: RAINVILLE SB: 15 Min. Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E & W Begining 7:00 0 69 1 70 4 14 0 18 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 92 7:00 7:15 0 77 3 80 2 17 0 19 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 100 7:15 7:30 0 96 2 98 3 24 0 27 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 129 7:30 7:45 0 89 3 92 7 28 0 35 2 0 4 6 0 0 0 0 133 7:45 8:00 0 76 5 81 4 33 0 37 1 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 125 8:00 8:15 0 68 3 71 1 35 0 36 3 0 5 8 0 0 0 0 115 8:15 8:30 0 57 4 61 3 31 0 34 2 0 6 8 0 0 0 0 103 8:30 8:45 0 54 4 58 4 28 0 32 3 0 5 8 0 0 0 0 98 8:45 A.M. Total 0 .586 25 611 28 210 0 238 13 0 33 46 0 0 0 0 895 A.M. Total 16:00 0 35 1 36 2 67 0 69 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 109 16:00 16:15 0 39 3 42 2 67 0 69 4 0 3 7 0 0 0 0 118 16:15 16:30 0 45 0 45 3 77 0 80 1 0 5 6 0 0 0 0 131 16:30 16:45 0 47 1 48 5 86 0 91 3 0 6 9 0 0 0 0 148 16:45 17:00 0 55 4 59 6 97 0 103 3 0 4 7 0 0 0 0 169 17:00 17:15 0 57 3 60 5 93 0 98 2 0 5 7 0 0 0 0 165 17:15 17:30 0 50 1 51 3 82 0 85 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 138 17:30 17:45 0 43 2 45 5 71 0 76 2 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 126 1 17:45 P.M. Total 0 371 15 386 31 640 0 671 17 0 30 47 0 0 0 0 1104 P.M. Total 1 Hour EB: TASKER RD WB: TASKER RD NB: RAINVILLE SB: 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E & W Begining �7:00 0 331 9 340 16 83 0 99 4 0 11 15 0 0 0 0 454 7:00 7:15 0 338 13 351 16 102 0 118 4 0 14 18 0 0 0 0 487 7:15 7:30 0 329 13 342 15 120 0 135 7 0 18 25 0 0 0 0 502 7:30 7:45 0 290 15 305 15 127 0 142 8 0 21 29 0 0 0 0 476 7:45 9:00 0 255 16 271 12 127 0 139 9 0 22 31 0 0 0 0 441 8:00 16:00 0 166 5 171 12 297 0 309 9 0 17 26 0 0 0 0 506 16:00 16:15 0 186 8 194 16 327 0 343 11 0 18 29 0 0 0 0 566 16:15 16:30 0 204 8 212 19 353 0 372 9 0 20 29 0 0 0 0 613 16:30 16:45 0 209 9 218 19 358 0 377 9 0 16 25 0 0 0 0 620 16:45 17:00 0 205 10 215 19 343 0 362 8 0 13 21 0 0 0 0 598 17:00 1 Hour EB: TASKER RD TASKER RD NB: RAINVILLE SB: 1 Hour Period FWB. N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E & W Begining 7:30 0 329 13 342 15 120 0 135 7 0 18 25 0 0 0 0 502 7:30 A.M. Peak PHF = 0.87 PHF = 0.91 PHF = 0.78 PHF = 0.94 A.M. Peak 16:45 0 209 9 218 19 358 0 377 9 0 16 25 0 0 0 0 620 16:45 P.M. Peak PHF = 0.91 PHF = 0.92 PHF = 0.69 PHF = 0.92 P.M. Peak Ah Wterseclion: E-W: TASKER RD Weather Dry File Name N-S: ROUTE 522 Count ByjJJP Input Byljjp Location WINCHESTER,VA Count Date 5/12/2005 15 Minute EB: TASKER RD WB: NB: ROUTE 522 SB: ROUTE 522 15 Min. Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E & W Begining 7:00 8 0 70 78 0 0 0 0 11 68 0 79 0 90 6 96 253 7:00 7:15 5 0 79 84 0 0 0 0 14 67 0 81 0 98 8 106 271 7:15 7:30 11 0 83 94 0 0 0 0 17 82 0 99 0 107 8 115 308 7:30 7:45 8 0 67 75 0 0 0 0 15 89 0 104 0 121 11 132 311 7:45 8:00 7 0 66 73 0 0 0 0 17 90 0 107 0 117 13 130 310 8:00 8:15 9 0 59 68 0 0 0 0 21 101 0 122 0 123 13 136 326 8:15 8:30 12 0 47 59 0 0 0 0 15 112 0 127 0 126 17 143 329 8:30 8:45 7 0 42 49 0 0 0 0 16 122 0 138 0 127 14 141 328 8:45 A.M. Total 67 0 513 580 0 0 0 0 126 731 0 857 0 909 90 999 2436 A.M. Total 16:00 14 0 28 42 0 0 0 0 49 138 0 187 0 114 17 131 360 16:00 16:15 17 0 30 47 0 0 0 0 51 147 0 198 0 111 15 126 371 16:15 16:30 16 0 36 52 0 0 0 0 64 161 0 225 0 119 19 138 415 16:30 16:45 17 0 30 47 0 0 0 0 70 157 0 227 0 137 22 159 433 16:45 17:00 18 0 37 55 0 0 0 0 77 164 0 241 0 142 31 173 469 17:00 17:15 14 0 40 54 0 0 0 0 69 148 0 217 0 136 22 158 429 17:15 17:30 12 0 36 48 0 0 0 0 63 160 0 223 0 129 19 148 419 17:30 17:45 9 0 31 40 1 0 0 0 0 50 152 0 202 0 123 15 138 380 17:45 P.M. Total 117 0 268 385 0 0 0 0 493 1227 0 1720 0 1011 160 1 171 3276 P.M. Total I Hour EB: TASKER RD WB: NB: ROUTE 522 SB: ROUTE 522 1 Hour Period Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Vk Begining �7:00 32 0 299 331 0 0 0 0 57 306 0 363 0 416 33 449 7:00 7:15 31 0 295 326 0 0 0 0 63 328 0 391 0 443 40 483 1200 7:15 7:30 35 0 275 310 0 0 0 0 70 362 0 432 0 468 45 513 1255 7:30 7:45 36 0 239 275 0 0 0 0 68 392 0 460 0 487 54 541 1276 7:45 8:00 35 0 214 249 0 0 0 0 69 425 0 494 0 493 57 550 1293 8:00 16:00 64 0 124 188 0 0 0 0 234 603 0 837 0 481 73 554 1579 16:00 16:15 68 0 133 201 0 0 0 0 262 629 0 891 0 509 87 596 1688 16:15 16:30 65 0 143 208 0 0 0 0 280 630 0 910 0 534 94 628 1746 16:30 16:45 61 0 143 204 0 0 0 0 279 629 0 908 0 544 94 638 1750 16:45 17:00 53 0 144 197 0 0 0 0 259 624 0 883 0 530 87 617 1697 17:00 1 Hour EB: TASKER RD WB: NB: ROUTE 522 SB: ROUTE 522 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E & W Begining 8:00 35 0 214 249 0 0 0 0 69 425 0 494 0 493 57 550 1293 8:00 A.M. Peak PHF = 0.85 1 PHF = PHF = 0.89 PHF = 0.96 0.98 A.M. Peak 16:45 61 0 143 204 0 0 0 0 279 629 0 908 0 544 94 638 1750 16:45 P.M. Peak PHF = 0.93 1 PHF = I PHF = 0.94 PHF = 0.92 0.93 P.M. Peak C II. IMPACT ANALYSIS • • C� C] DK893�G068�+ PRSPARBD °V VOOi C UNDER SUPERVISION Or TEE % \ OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THIS DEED, Made this loth day of November, 1997, by and between the COMMCNWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, acting by and through the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner, Grantor, and WRIGHTS RUN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Grantee; • WITNESSETH: THAT WHEREAS, the hereinafter described residue property was acquired in connection with the construction, reconstruction, alteration, maintenance and repair of the State Highway System, and WHEREAS, accordingly, this conveyance is authorized in accordance with the provisions of Section 33.1-93 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($15,000.00), receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and the affidavit of the Grantee that it is the owner of the adjacent property and that the adjacent property if free from liens and/or deeds of trust, the Grantor does hereby grant and convey without warranty unto the Grantee the hereinafter described lot or parcel of land, all of which lies in Opequon Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia; Being as shown on Sheets 8 and 9 of the plans for Route 522, State Highway Project 0522-034-110, RW-201, and lying southwest of and adjacent to the southwest right of way line of Route 522, from a point approximately 40 feet opposite approximate Station 536+80 (SBL construction baseline) to a point approximately 40 feet opposite approximate Station 540+65 (SBL construction baseline), containing 4.36 acres, more or less, land, and being a portion of the lands acquired from Jerry Elwood Orndorff and Brenda Leigh Orndorff by deed dated September 28, 1993, recorded in Deed Book 807, Page 1043, and from Stanley L. Paskel and Jean A. Paskel by deed dated - 1 - a 40 • B��ag3;G0685 September 28, 1993, recorded in Deed Book 606, Page 1700. These deeds are recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County. For a more particular description of the land herein conveyed, reference is made to the photocopies of said Sheets 8 and 9, showing outlined in RED the said land, which photocopies are hereto attached as a part of this conveyance and are to be recorded siy It ously herewith in the State Highway Plat Book./0 '!5P(o0*(O/- It is understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto, that this conveyance is subject to any right, privilege, or easement encumbering the herein described land, whether located above, upon, or under the surface, either presently in use or of record. IN WITNESS WHSREOP, the Commonwealth of Virginia, acting by and through David R. Gehr, Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner, has caused this deed to be executed in her name as of the day, month, and year first above written. COWONRBALTH OF VIRGINIA BY �C�]D t� (SEAL) Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner �+ I I i I orm • 40 CCWONWMTH GP VIRGINIA 3K893PC0686 City of Richmond, To -wit: I TnA C bQ/7 A. a Notary Public in and for the State of Virginia at Large, do certify that David R. Gehr, Commonwealth Transportation commissioner, whose name is signed to the foregoing writing bearing date on the loth day of November, 1997, has acknowledged the same before me. ply commission expires Given under my hand this /3 day of �t/ouem6e� 1997. Notary Public Grantee Address as Required by Virginia Coda 17-59 MW4WFREDERICKCDATt WE � me ort the ibis Lvlrument Of wrltln was produ and with cenificats of acktwwledt Saa `gthgmta wmaxed was sdmttted to rewd. Tex Mnpcsad and 58.1.801 trfc been paid, d assessable. Clerk 3 - o 20013'zb:; 0 DEED ' THIS DEED, made and dated this % day of August, 2002, by and between FRANK J. RITTER, JR. and JOYCE A. RITTER, husband and wife, parties of the first part, hereinafter called the Grantors, and REALTECH, LLC, party of the second part, hereinafter called Grantee. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantors do hereby grant and convey with General Warranty and English Covenants of title unto the Grantee herein, in fee simple, all of the following described parcels of real estate: PARCEL ONE: All that certain lot or parcel of land, together with all easements, improvements and appurtenances thereunto belonging, lying on the West side of U.S. Route 522 in Opequon District, Frederick County, Virginia, containing 2.020 acres as per plat and survey of Greenway Engineering and Surveying Co., Inc., dated July 11, 1980, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 525, at Page 111. And being the same real estate conveyed to the Grantors herein by Deed dated the 22nd day of December, 1980, from Floyd Leslie Ritter, Sr., et ux, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 635, at page 078. LESS AND EXCEPT THEREFROM, 0.19 acres, conveyed to the Commonwealth of Virginia by Deed dated the 22nd day September, 1993, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 809, at Page 60, to which reference is hereby made to the aforesaid instruments and the references therein contained for a further and more particular description of the realty herein conveyed. 0 0 0 CD • • W fV PARCEL TWO: M All that certain tract or parcel of real estate, with all easements, improvements and appurtenances thereunto belonging, being shown on Sheet 8 of the plans for Route 522, State Highway Project 0522-034-V10, and lying southwest of an adjacent to the southwest proposed right of way line of Route 522, from a point approximately 40 feet left of approximate Station 534+75 (SBL construction baseline) to a point approximately 40 feet left of approximate Station 536+30 (SBL construction baseline), containing 0.83 acres, more or less. And being the same real estate conveyed to the Grantors herein by Deed dated the 20th day of August, 1997, from the Commonwealth of Virginia of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 890, at Page 0651. For a more particular description of the land herein conveyed, reference is hereby made to the photocopy of said Sheet 8, showing outlined in RED the said land, which is of record in the State Highway Plat Book #10, Page 50. Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid instruments and the references therein contained for a further and more particular description of the realty herein conveyed. Said parcels having been combined and known as Tax ID# 87 A 34B, containing 2.66 acres, more or less. This conveyance is made subject to any right, privilege, or easement encumbering the herein described land, whether located above, upon, or under the surface either presently in use or of record. WITNESS the following signature(s) and seal(s): l (SEAL) FRANK J. R ER, Grantor I . (SEAL) JOPIC-EtA. RITTER, Grantor i • STATE OF VIRGINIA to —wit: The foregoing Deed bearing the date of the / 4 day of August, 2002, was acknowledged before me by Frank J. Ritter and Joyce A. Ritter, this '�I day of August, 2002. My Commission expires: c9 /a�� �0 I Y Notary Public This instrument was prepared by Clinton R. Ritter, Esq., 205 E. Boscawen St.,Winchester, VA 22601 without the opportunity of a title examination. VIRGINIA. FREDERICK COUNTY, SCT. This nstrument ofwrritiq was produced to me on '? vo � at and m9th certificate of acknowledgement therefo annexed was admitted to record. Ta imposed by Sec. 58.1-802 of F c&,oq , and 58.1.801 have been paid, if assessable 4!Gt.[ X �cr_ . Clerk SK7I9PG642 ` THIS DEED made end dated this P day of —;S'>``1 _ 1989. from R. J. TURNER and MARY M. a � TURNER, his wife, parties of the first part, hereinafter N referred to as the Grantors, to WRIGHT'S RUN L, P., a v �o a° c Virginia limited partnership, party of the second part, a, Q N hereinafter referred to as the Grantee. m ° WITNESSETH: That in consideration of the sum of Ten r Dollars, (j10.00), and other valuable considerations paid the L. o v ' Grantors by the Grantee on or before the delivery of this 00 c o Dead, the receipt of all of which is hereby acknowledged, the O M V Grantors hereby grant, sell and convey, with general warranty W v, and with English covenants of title, unto the Grantee in fee c v 41 A simple, the following real estate, together with all m v v improvements and appurtenances thereto belonging but subject c v to all easements and legally enforceable restrictions and • U reservations of record affecting such realty: All that certain parcel of land, located in the Opequon Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, located on U. S. Route 522, 5.4 miles south of U. S. Route 50 at Winchester, Virginia, containing 240,8940 acres, more or less, as described in that certain plat and survey of Louis J. Matacia, C.L.S., dated June 16, 1989, attached hereto for a more t particular description of the property herein conveyed; and being the same property which was conveyed to the Grantors herein by deed of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 700, Page 922; and further the same property which was conveyed to the Grantors herein by deed from Margie S. Cornwell intended to be recorded immediately prior hereto in the same Clerk's Office, LESS AND EXCEPT HOWEVER, that certain lot or parcel designated as Lot 17 on said survey and shown thereon as containing 5.1451 acres, which was conveyed to Rockland A. See, et ux, by deed from George A. Cornwell, et ux, of record in Deed Book 490, Page 25, among the same land records, WITNESS the following signatures and seals: "AMR. V=AJA1U%W • Rocr«oob .no"IT& At u9 a�cM[rtw ♦„n,�u • B Z1 STATE OF VIRGINIA k_ OF 111urtho& , to —wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before ■e this 1 Id,µ' day of �)It 1_1r 1989. by R. J. Turner and Nary N. Turner, his wife. Grantors. My commission expires Sypror 6 1' ` a I ' Notary Public 10 MMIL "Ce"W" ' 1 O OOCKYOOO 1 J1mMIN Y YO � i /jJ I 10001q Too"1 t BOUK 5V na 256 (2) record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office ii Dead Book 166, at Page 523. Tho aforesaid real estate is the identical real estate which was conveyed to the Grantors herein by deed dated the 19th day of June, 1978, from the Farrr.ars and Merchants National Bank of Winchester, Virginia, Executor of the estate Of George Wood Fleury, deceased, and recorded in the aforec rc's Office in Deed Book 493, Page 807, LESS AND EXCEPT NOWHvdR, that certain out -conveyance of one (1) acre made by the said George N. Ritter I and Elizabeth Belle Ritter (also known as E. Belle Ritter) by deed gated the llth day of September, 1978, to Elizabeth Belle Ritter.(also known as E. Belle Ritter) as a feme sole, and of record in said Clerk's Office in Deed Book 501, Page 52, leaving to pass under this conveyance nine (9) acres, more or less. Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid deeds and records for a more complete description and further derivation o of title. This conveyance is made Pubject to all restrictions, easements and rights of way of record, if any, affecting the a said real estate. WITNESS the following signatures and sealsr GLUK:yN. RITTER M. nL LLZ RITTER STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OR CITY OF �Yi}a�uLA�i , TO -WIT: The foregoing instrume.Lt was acknowledged befc Iffine t -L .day of 1979, by George N..• ad E. Belle Ritter, (also known as Elizabeth Bell, Ri J Notary Pugl*i My Coauaission Expires Jdl CmUnL89- des Voo. 27 lydj ... ✓/RGIN(A FREMNICK COUNTY, SC-,. This instrument of writing was produced to me o the do of_ Y 19� ,at 19m. and with certificate of acknowledgment thereto annexed was admitted to rucard. Tax unposed oy Sec. 58-j4.1 of $__ sZ+3 , and 53-34 have been paid, J asse,sable j'�� Lt __ Clerk 1 255 ��. t3879 A ILI, GEORGE N. RITTER, ET AL * DEED STEVEG. RITTER, ET UX I Sy.. . Dweue C. Awiwaw �ocK 517 ou 255 D E E D THIS DEED, made and entered into this 27th day of Augus 1979, by and between GEORGE N. RITTER and E. BELLE RITTER (also known as Elisabeth Belle Ritter), herein cdlled the Grantors, and STEVE G. RITTER and MARY M. RITTER, husband and wife, Route 1, Box 339-E, Winchester, Virginia, 22601. WITNESSETH: That for cnrl in consideration of the sum of TEN DOL:..�RS ($10.00). cash in hand paid to the Grantors, and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt of which is hereby acknow- lodged. the Grantors do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey with General warranty and English Covenants of Title unto the Grantees, as Tenants by the Entireties and not as Tenants in CO=Wn' with the Express Right of Survivorship as at Common Law, all of the following described real estate, together with all imprOvefents and appurtenances thereto belonging and subject to all easements and legally enforceable restrictions and reservation of r000rd affecting such realty: All Of land with the buildingsat nandait or parcel of thereon, containing ten (10) acres, morn or less, situated near the Village of Armel in Frederick County, Virginia on the South side Of the Winchester and Front Royal Turnpike, being the same property which was conveyed to Earl P. Irey by Francis A. Cow, by deed dated September 8, 1927, of record in the Clark's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book .156, at Page 221, and being the same property which was conveyed to the said Farmers and Merchants National Bank and Trust Company by M. M. Lynch and J. M. Steck, Trustias, by deed dated March 23, 1933, o: record in the aforesai,: Clerk's Office in Deed Book 166, at Page 33. This is the same realty that was conveyed to George w. Fleury, being one and the same person as George Wood Fleury by deed from the Farmers and Merchants National Bank and Trust Company. a Corporation of Winchester, Virginia, dated August 26, 1933, and of 9 • Ll V. SURVEY PLAT & DEED r� 0 • 0 vie TAX TICKET • • ViewDetail 0 • Page 1 of 1 Real Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Detail • 2006 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2006 Ticket #: 302460002 FRQ: 2 Sup#: 0 Name: RITTER, STEVEN G & MARY M Account#: 25980 Name 2: Map#: 87 A 34 Address: Description: 4.70 ACRES 3022 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602 Bill Date: 12/05/2006 Due Date: 12/05/2006 • • Land: $78,200 Improve: $265,700 Use: Original Bill: $902.74 Payments: $902.74- Acres: 4.70 Penalty Paid:, Int Paid: Discount: Amount Owed: Other: Last Date: 11/03/2006 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: Note that if payinent has been received within the last 10 business days. any returned items may not be posted at this time. Please check the website again. Date Type Transaction # Amount Balance 12/5/2006 Charge 0 $902.74 $902.74 11/3/2006 Payment 9651 ($902.74) $0.00 1 Use the print key for your browser to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search Previous https://www.co. frederick.va.us/applications/REPublicInquiry/ViewDetail. aspx 2/9/2007 ViewDetail 0 • Page I of I Real Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Detail . 2006 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2006 Ticket #: 293120002 FRQ: 2 Sup#: 0 Name: REALTECH, LLC Account#: 25979 Name 2: Map#: 87 A 34B Address: Description: 2.66 ACRES 2800 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 ARLINGTON, VA 22206 Bill Date: 12/05/2006 Due Date: 12/05/2006 • • Land: $66,000 Improve: $190,800 Use: Original Bill: $674.10 Payments: $674.10- Acres: 2.66 Penalty Paid: Int Paid: Discount: Amount Owed: Other: Last Date: 11/21/2006 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: :Vote that it'payment has been received within the last 10 business days. any returned items may not be posted at this time. Please check the website again. Date Type Transaction # Amount Balance 12/5/2006 Charge 0 $674.10 $674.10 11/21/2006 Payment 15003 ($674.10) $0.00 1 Use the print key for your browser to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search Previous https://www.co.ftederick.va.us/applications/REPublicInquiryNiewDetail. aspx 2/9/2007 ViewDetail 0 0 Page 1 of 1 Real Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Detail is 2006 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2006 Ticket #: 402050002 FRQ: 2 Sup#: 0 Name: WRIGHTS RUN, LP Account#: 24287 Name 2: Map#: 76 A 53 Address: Description: 83.01 ACRES 2800 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 ARLINGTON, VA 22206 Bill Date: 12/05/2006 Due Date: 1210512006 • • Land: $1,051,200 Improve: $99,700 Use: Original Bill: $3,021.11 Payments: $3,021.11- Acres: 83.1 Penalty Paid: Int Paid: Discount: Amount Owed: Other: Last Date: 11/21/2006 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: Note that if payment has been received within the last 10 business days. any returned items may not be posted at this time. Please check the website again. Date Type Transaction # Amount Balance 12/5/2006 Charge 0 $3,021.11 $3,021.11 11/21/2006 Payment 24202 ($3,021.11) $0.00 1 Use the print key for your browser to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search Previous https://www.co.frederick.va.us/applications/REPublicInquiry/ViewDetail. aspx 2/9/2007 ViewDetail 0 Page 1 of 1 L.J • Real Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Detail 2006 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2006 Ticket #: 402020002 FRQ: 2 Sup#: 0 Name: WRIGHTS RUN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Account#: 25981 Name 2: Map#: 87 A 35 Address: Description: 4.36 ACRES 2800 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 ARLINGTON, VA 22206 Bill Date: 12/05/2006 Due Date: 12/05/2006 Land: $19,600 Improve: Use: Original Bill: $51.45 Payments: $51.45- Acres: 4.36 Penalty Paid: Int Paid: Discount: Amount Owed: Other: Last Date: 11/21/2006 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: Note that ii'payinent has been received within the last 10 business days. any returned items may not be posted at this time. Please check the website again. Date Type Transaction # Amount Balance 12/5/2006 Charge 0 $51.45 $51.45 11/21/2006 Payment 24205 ($51.45) $0.00 1 Use the print key for your browser to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search Previous https://www. co. frederick.va.us/applications/REPubliclnquiryNiewD etail. aspx 2/9/2007 ViewDetail 0 Page 1 of 1 Real Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Detail . 2006 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2006 Ticket #: 402030002 FRQ: 2 Sup#: 0 Name: WRIGHTS RUN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Account#: 25982 Name 2: Map#: 87 A 36 Address: Description: .57 ACRE 2800 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 ARLINGTON, VA 22206 Bill Date: 12/05/2006 Due Date: 12/05/2006 • is Land: $45,000 Improve: Use: Original Bill: $118.12 Payments: $118.12- Acres: 0.57 Penalty Paid: Int Paid: Discount: Amount Owed: Other: Last Date: 11/21/2006 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: Note that if payment has been received within the last 10 business days. any returned items may not be posted at this time. Please check the website again. Date Type Transaction # Amount Balance 12/5/2006 Charge 0 $118.12 $118.12 11/21/2006 Payment 24204 ($118.12) $0.00 1 Use the print key for your browser to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search Previous https://www. co. frederick.va.us/applications/REPublicInquiryNiewDetail. aspx 2/9/2007 ViewDetail 0 Page 1 of 1 r� C. Real Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Detail 2006 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2006 Ticket #: 402040002 FRQ: 2 Sup#: 0 Name: WRIGHTS RUN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Account#: 25983 Name 2: Map#: 87 A 37 Address: Description: .06 ACRE 2800 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 ARLINGTON, VA 22206 Bill Date: 12/05/2006 Due Date: 12/05/2006 Land: $500 Improve: Use: Original Bill: $1.31 Payments: $1.31- Acres: 0.6 Penalty Paid: Int Paid: Discount: Amount Owed: Other: Last Date: 09/19/2006 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: :dote that if payment has been received within the last 10 business days. any returned items may not be posted at this time. Please check the -%vebsite again. Date Type Transaction # Amount Balance 12/5/2006 Charge 0 $1.31 $1.31 9/19/2006 Abated 0 ($1.31) $0.00 1 Use the print key for your browser to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search Previous https://www.co. frederick.va.us/applications/REPublicInquiryNiewDetail. aspx 2/9/2007 40 HLE COH 0 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: October 24, 2007 The amount of $50.00 was deposited in line item #3-010-019110-0008 for the company named below had a deposit for one sign for Rezoning 402-07 for Eastgate Commercial. 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 $50.00 to: Wright's Run 2800 S. Shirlington Road Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 RSA/pd W 1alaL410 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 I DATE NO. 5870 RECEIVED FROM 2 ADDREssc�?)00 N5- P1 Lt, '410UA 44,�t 1C OLRS $ C) FOR RENT, A OU CIFOR --- m Cl -t A AMT. PAID CAH CHECK J7 -�- ,8 7 3 41A 0�ra K rill 17 *- I Nov. I Street Light _._. Dec. 5 Second go on sale Half Taxes DUe Personal Property Real Estate Sanitary District Other du Street Light e dates abilled bthe Revenue's Office.. y Commissioner of the Mailin Address Frederick Coun ty Treasurer P.O. Box 225 Winchester, VA 22604-0225 (540)665-5607 E-mail Address BOmdO'rPco kedcrick.va.us For Tax Information & Online Pa meats W CO FRFDERICK. V A.US Treasurer's Office Monday through Frida Hours Extended hours y 8:30 am to 5:00 may be offered Burin I m for details in local d peak times, watch .. media. ldeclare • ' • ................. . OR VEHICLE statement EN dE�REGIST correct to the REGISTRATION best of mr knowledgeg es hereon are true, full and I ised 50% for Business and belief. T A X Si Yes NPJERICK COUNTY Qnature WILLIAM ORNDOFF, signature P.O. BOX 225 R E C E I P T JR WINCHESTER VA 22604-0225 SIGN DEPOSITS PLANNING PLANNING Ticket #:00005670001 Date 2/28/2007 Register: BCC/BC Trans. #: 66568 Dept # 1095 Acct# Previous Balance $ 50.00 Principal Being Paid $ 50.00 Penalty $ .00 Interest $ .00 Amount Paid $ 50.00 *Balance Due $ .00 Pd by PLANNING Check 37161.30 # VARIOUS BALANCE DUE INCLUDES PENALTY/INTEREST THRU THE MONTH 2/2007 O 40 0 -,),I 0 Alk February 2, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Ah RE: Proposed Rezoning of the Eastgate Commercial Property Dear Patrick: I have had the opportunity to review the draft rezoning application for the Eastgate Commercial Property. This application seeks to rezone 11.81 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District and 8.23 acres from the B3 (Industrial Transition) District to the B2 (Business General) District. Staff s review comments are listed below for your consideration. 1. Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The site is within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows a portion of this property with a commercial designation. The proposed B2 Zoning is a business use and is generally consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan as it relates this area. 2. Additional Property. There are two additional properties owned by Wrights Run LP which have not been included with this rezoning; PIN's 87-A-36 and 87-A-37 are central to this rezoning and currently zoned RA. These properties will need to be included in this rezoning. 3. Rezoning #02-97. Rezoning #02-97 currently covers PIN# 76-A-53. This proposed rezoning only covers the B3 portion of 76-A-53. Parcel 76-A-53, in its entirety, should be included with this rezoning application so that everything within the project is included under the same proffers. Including the entire project under one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. 4. Transportation Levels of Service. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development. This application clearly does not achieve a Level of Service C. 107 North gent Street, Suite 202 o Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 • Page 2 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 5. Rezoning Application — Proposed Uses. The application states the rezoning is for 47,OOOsf of office and 166,OOOsf of retail uses. The proffer statement does not call for a specific use. Unless a specific use and square footage is proffered, the County will assume the maximum possible development (retail) as per the County's application, combined with the maximum possible floor space. At the maximum possible use, there is the potential for 428,074sf of retail uses. A proffer to limit the square footage of this development to no more than what the TIA was based on would be appropriate (see issue on assumptions below). Traffic Impact Analysis -Assumptions. The TIA is based upon 166,662sf of retail uses, 47000sf of office uses and 224,660sf of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated under section D of your impact analysis, the warehouse/industrial uses could be generated from the adjacent land bay (potential industrial). The potential industrial should be included under your background traffic, not your assumption, and your TIA should be based on what could actually be developed on the site (428,074sf of retail). 7. Maranto Manor Drive. Maranto Manor Drive needs to connect to Rainville Road; this application does not provide any assurances for the required continuation of this road. 8. Tasker Road. The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector. Full implementation of the four -lane major collector road design would be appropriate along 76-A-53. 9. Site Access. This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto connects to Rainville Road. The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right-in/right-out onto Route 522 and Rezoning #02-97 does not place any restrictions on the number or type of entrances on the remainder of 76-A-53. As stated in comment 3, the entire 76-A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and access to Route 522 should be completely prohibited. Also, Section C (Location and Access) of your impact analysis states that access will be provided through the existing B2 zoned acreage by a northern entrance on Tasker Road and an eastern entrance on Route 522. The referenced Tasker entrance is not shown on the GDP and there is no mention of this access anywhere in the proffer statement. 10. TIA Background Development. On sheet 6 of the Background Development, please clarify what project developments 9-11 consist of and on sheet 7 under the Artrip project, there is no soccer complex. 1( Page 3 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 11. Traffic Impact Analysis — Route 522/Tasker Road Intersection. The TIA calls for this intersection to be signalized and to have a new eastbound and northbound left turn -lane. While Rezoning #02-97 proffered the installation of the signalization, there is no commitment for the installation of the turn lanes. It is noted that even with the installation of the two turn lanes, PM peak traffic will still function at a level of service D. As this application is not proffering any of the needed turn lanes, it would be beneficial to see what the LOS would actually be with only the previously proffered signalization. 12. Transportation Proffer 1.2. Proffer 1.2 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of Tasker/Rainville but does not provide the two northbound left turn lanes called for in the TIA conclusions. These turn lanes are required to maintain a level of service C. 13. Transportation Proffer 1.3. Proffer 1.3 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of the project entrance and the Home Depot entrance on Maranto Manor Drive but does not account for any of the turn lanes called for in the TIA conclusions. 14. Transportation Proffer 1.4. Proffer 1.4 provides for the eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Route 522/Maranto Manor as called for in the TIA conclusions. It is noted that even with this improvement, this intersection will not function at a level of service C or better and does not meet County requirements. 15. Other Traffic Improvements. As stated in the TIA conclusions, there are various transportation improvements which are necessary to maintain a LOS C or better. The following improvements (in addition to comments 11-13) have not been addressed: • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway I/Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway 3/Route 522 turn lanes • Site Driveway 4/Route 522 turn lanes 16. Bike Path. Front Royal Pike is identified on the Frederick County Bicycle Plan as a short term destination. Provide a bike trail in this location. 17. Design Standards. The proffer statement includes nothing that relates to design standards (building facades, parking lot locations, landscaping, signage etc.). Buildings should be placed adjacent to the roads and the parking lots placed • 0 Page 4 Mr. Patrick Sowers RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property February 2, 2007 behind the buildings, especially along Tasker Road and Route 522. Street trees should be provided along all public and internal roads and specific types of building materials should be utilized within the project. Limitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. 18. Agency Comments. Please provide appropriate agency comments from the following agencies: Historic Resources Advisory Board, Virginia Department of Transportation, Frederick County Department of Public Works, Frederick County Fire Marshall, Frederick County Department of Parks and Recreation, Frederick County Sanitation Authority, Frederick -Winchester Health Department, the local Fire and Rescue Company and the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority. The proposed proffers have been forwarded by staff to the Frederick County Attorney. Once attorney comments are received by the Planning Department, they will be forwarded to your office. Attorney comments are required for acceptance of the rezoning application. 19. Special Limited Power of Attorney. Provide a power of attorney for the property owners. 20. Fees. The fee for this application includes a $3,000.00 base fee plus $100.00 per acre, and a $50.00 public hearing sign fee. This is based on fees as of January 27, 2005. Fees may change. All of the above comments and reviewing agency comments should be appropriately addressed before staff can accept this rezoning application. Please feel free to contact me with questions regarding this application. Sin9erely, Candice E. Perkins, AICP Planner II Attachments cc: Wrights Run, LP, 2800 S. Shirlington Road, Suite 803, Arlington VA 22206 Steven & Mary Ritter, 3022 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 CEP/bad l y 0 0 HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL A PARTNERSHIP OF PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972) THOMAS V. MONAHAN (1924-1999) 7 s 307 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST BOSCAWEN STREET SAMUEL D. ENGLE LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA O. LELAND MAHAN TELEPHONE 703-777-1050 TELEPHONE 540-662-3200 ROBERT T. MITCHELL, JR. FAX 540-662-4304 JAMES A. KLENKAR E-MAIL lawyers@hallmonahan.com STEVEN F. JACKSON January 29, 2007 DENNIS J. MCLOUGHLIN, JR. HAND -DELIVERED Candice E. Perkins Planner II Frederick County Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Eastgate Commercial (Wrights Run, LP) Proposed Proffer Statement Dear Candice: PLEASE REPLY TO: P. O. Box 848 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604-0848 I have reviewed the above -referenced Proposed Proffer Statement. It is my opinion that the Proposed Proffer Statement is generally in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, subject to the following comments: 1. The Proffer Statement should contain a specific proffer that the Transportation proffers will be made in conformity with the attached GDP. 2. Proffer 1.1 references No. 1 on the GDP. No. 1 is shown in two places on the GDP, one of which says "right -in, right -out." If this entrance is to be right -in, right -out, the proffer should so state specifically. HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL Candice E. Perkins January 29, 2007 Page 3 It should be noted that I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Commission. If there are any questions concerning the foregoing comn-ients, please contact me. Very truly yours, j Robert T. Mudell, Jr RTM/lcs r ERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 February 12, 2007 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Proposed Rezoning of Eastgate Commercial Property Dear Patrick: I am in receipt of your rezoning application for Eastgate Commercial Property formally submitted on February 9, 2007. The application is incomplete and so is being returned to you. I would specifically point out that the application is missing a review comment from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT); the correspondence submitted from VDOT was simply asking for additional clarification on the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Once you have obtained a review comment from VDOT regarding the complete application, we will welcome a submission of the rezoning package. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Candice E. Perkins, AICP Plaimer II CEP/bad Attachment cc: Wrights Run, LP, 2800 S. Shirlington Road, Suite 803, Arlington VA 22206 Steven & Mary Ritter, 3022 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 Lloyd Ingram, VDOT 107 North Dent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 - � � :ems',.. ;�� �� � 'A , ♦•► � �� � � ti ii' �?' �. t , !' �i ��;f'.. �• � - u� 44. �� , • Key ..y�4' ,� ~� � ;�Ifj,;,,r � 04.05.2007 Patton Harris Rust As'sociates 40 Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. R+A 117 East Piccadilly Street APR 2 5 2001 Winchester, Virginia 22601 PH T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 To: Candice Perkins Organ izationlCompany: Frederick County Planning From: Patrick Sowers Date: April 25, 2007 Project Name/Subject: Eastgate Rezoning Application Please find attached a finalized signature page for Steve and Mary Ritter for the Eastgate proffer statement. Feel free to call if you have any questions. Thanks, Patrick Patton Harris Rust JARSociates Engineers. Surveyors. Planners, Landscape Architects. RA1 17 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 PH T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 To: Candice Perkins Organization/Company: Frederick County Planning From: Patrick Sowers Date: April 19, 2007 Project Name/Subject: Eastgate Rezoning Please find attached a revised proffer statement dated April 17, 2007 for the Eastgate Commercial rezoning application. The modifications are as follows: 1) Proffer heading has been amended to reference the revised GDP dated 4/16/07. 2) Proffer 1.2 includes now includes the provision for a Westbound turn lane at the intersection of Tasker Road and Rainville Road. The TIA assumed this as an existing condition but it has yet to be constructed. We've included this provision to be certain that we are in keeping with the TIA. 3) The GDP has been revised to depict the minimum number of lanes provided by the proffer statement at the subject intersections. Please feel free to call with any questions. Thanks, Patrick APR 1 9 2007 Patton Harris Rust Associates Engineers. Surveyors, Planners. Landscape Architects. R+A 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 PH T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 To: Candice Perkins Organization/Company: Frederick County Planning From: Patrick Sowers Date: March 9, 2007 Project Name/Subject: Eastgate Commercial Proffer Signatures Please find attached die submitted proffer stateinent for the Eastgate Commercial rezoning with new signattue pages which are dated after d1e latest proffer revision. Thanks, Patrick Patton Harr pust & Associates Engineers Surveyors- Planners landscape Architects. 0 P iRn CORPORATE: Chantilly VIRGINIA OFFICE: Bridgewater Chantilly Charlottesville Fredericksburg Leesburg Newport News Virginia Beach Winchester Woodbridge LABORATORIES: Chantilly Fredericksburg MARYLAND OFFICES: Baltimore Cr;lumbia Frederick Germantown Hollywood PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE'. Allentown WEST VIRGINIA OFFICE'. Martinsburg T 540.667 21 39 F 540 065 0493 1 17 East Plccodllly Stteet Suite 200 Min( ho9l,r. VA 22601 February 9, 2007 Candice Perkins Frederick County Planning 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Eastgate Commercial Rezoning Dear Candice, F E B 1 2 2007 I have provided response to your comments dated February 2, 2007 regarding the Eastgate Commercial Rezoning Application as follows. 1. Eastern Frederick County Lang Range Land Use Plan. The site is within the limits of the Eastern Frederick county Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows a portion of this property with a commercial designation. The proposed B2 Zoning is a business use and is generally consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan as it relates this area. Agreed. 2. Additional Property. There are two additional properties owned by Wrights Run LP which have not been included with this rezoning; PIN's 87-A-36 and 87-A-37 are central to this rezoning and currently zoned RA. These properties will need to be included in this rezoning. These properties are now listed in the rezoning application as well as the proffer heading. 3. Rezoning #02-97. Rezoning #02-97 currently covers PIN# 76-A-53. This proposed rezoning only covers the B3 portion of 76-A-53. Parcel 76-A-53, in its entirety, should be included with this rezoning application so that everything within the project is included under the same proffers. Including the entire project under one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. This application is simply an attempt to create a more viable node of B2 development by incorporating the existing B3 portions of 76-A-93 into that parcel's existing B2 acreage while adding an additional 10.9 acres of B2 that are currently RA. As the B2 zoning rights for the remainder of parcel 76-A-93 were established by conditional rezoning #02-97, the Applicant should not need to include this portion of the Property as part of this application. Additionally, any entrances to the Property will be governed by the regulations found in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as well as any VDOT requirements at the entrance permit phase of development to ensure safe and adequate access to the Property. 0 0 4. Transportation Levels of Service. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development. This application clearly does not achieve a Level of Service C. The revised proffer statement dated February 9, 2007 includes provisions for every transportation needed to achieve a LOS C for every intersection identified in the TIA. I would note that while Westbound Maranto Manor Drive and Westbound Tasker Road at Route 522 have PM Peak Hour Level of Service D, these intersections work at a LOS C as a whole. When taking into account background traffic and the positive fiscal impacts of the application, the proffered transportation improvements are appropriate. 5. Rezoning Application — Proposed Uses. The application states die rezoning PP+A is for 47,000 s.f. of office and 166,000 s.f. of retail uses. The proffer statement does not call for a specific use. Unless a specific use and square footage is proffered, die County will assume the maximum possible development (retail) as per die County's application, combined with the maxitnum possible floor space. At the maximum possible use, there is die potential for 428, 074 s.f. retail uses. A proffer to limit the square footage of this development to no more dean what the TIA was based on would be appropriate (see issue on assumptions below). Using a "worst case" scenario of a .50 FAR suggests a square footage that more than doubles what a commercial developer could expect to build on a given property. The square footage provided in the application package and TIA represent an aggressive .25 FAR. With required setbacks, maximum building heights, parking standards, and stortnwater management obtaining an FAR of greater than .20 is difficult. Thus, the areas provided by the TIA and application are much more indicative of the potential build -out for the Property than the "worst case" scenario you identify above. 6. Traffic Impact Analysis -Assumptions. The TIA is based upon 166,662 s.f. of retail uses, 47,000 s.f. of office uses 224,660 s.f. of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated under section D of your impact analysis, die warehouse/industrial uses could be generated from the adjacent land bay (potential industrial). The potential industrial should be included under your background traffic, not your assumption, and your TIA should be based on what could actually be developed on the site (428,074 s.f. of retail). Again I would reference my response to comment 5 above that using a .5 FAR suggests an unrealistic potential build -out for the Property. In fact, a study completed by Greenrvay Engineering in 2004 found that the average commercial project develops at a FAR of .192 despite the 1.0 Ordinance maximum and .5 "worst case" scenario used by staff. 7. Maranto Manor Drive. Maranto Manor Drive needs to connect to Rainville Road; this application does not provide any assurances for the required continuation of this road. The Applicant is now in the process of bonding Maranto Manor Drive which guarantees the funding of this connection. 8. Tasker Road. The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an unproved major collector. Tull implementation of the four -lane major collector road design would be appropriate along 76-A- 53. While I don't necessarily agree that a 8.23 acre B3 to B2 and 10.65 acre RA to B2 rezoning should be responsible for implementing a full four lane road design when the TIA indicates that a LOS C is attainable �( using a two lane section with additional turn lanes, I would note that 1l 1L additional road improvements may be necessary during the site plan review process. These improvements would be determined by the specific use for the property during the commercial entrance permitting process. 9. Site Access. This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto connects to Rainville Road. The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right -in right -out onto Route 522 and Rezotung retnaulder of 76-A 53. As stated in comment 3, the entire 76- A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and access to Route 522 should be completely prohibited. Also, Section C (Location and Access) of your impact analysis states that access will be provided through the existing B2 zoned acreage by a northern entrance on Tasker Road and an eastern entrance on Route 522. The referenced Tasker entrance is not shown on the GDP and there is no mention of this access anywhere on the proffer statement. The Tasker Road entrance would be located across the existing B2 portion ofparcel 76--A-53. A specific location for this entrance has yet to be determined but any entrance on Tasker would have to meet Ordinance specifications and VDOT requirements. Additionally, the proffer has been amended so that the right in/right out entrance on the subject property would be subject to approval by VDOT during the site plan review phase. If this entrance is not deemed to be safe or appropriate, then traffic would use other means of ingress/egress. The scenario would be the same for any right in/right out entrances on the existing B2 portion o1parce176-A-53. 10. TIA Background Development. On sheet 6 of the Background Development, please clarify what project development 9-11 consist of and on sheet 7 under the Artrip project, there is no soccer complex. Background developments #9, 10, and 11 are indicative of potential development on the existing B2 zoned portion ofparcel 76-A-93. 11. Traffic Impact Analysis — route 522/Tasker Road Intersection. The TIA calls for this intersection to be signalized and to have a new eastbound and northbound left turn -lane. While Rezoning #02-97 proffered the installation of the signalization, there is no commitment for the installation of the turn lanes. It is noted that even with the installation of the two turn lanes, PM peak traffic will still function at a level of service D. As this application is not proffering any of the needed turn lanes, it would be beneficial to see what the LOS would actually be with only the previously proffered signalization. The turn lanes identified by the TIA that were not proffered as part of PH Rezoning #02-97 are included as part of the revised Proffer Statement dated February 9, 2007. 12. Transportation Proffer 1.2. Proffer 1.2 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of Tasker/Rainville but does not provide the two northbound left turn lanes called for in the TLA conclusions. "These turn lanes ate required to maintain a level of service C. These lanes are included as part of the revised Proffer Statement. 13. Transportation Proffer 1.3. Proffer 1.3 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of the project entrance and the Home Depot entrance on Maranto Manor Drive but does not account of any of the turn lanes called for in the TIA conclusions. These lanes are included as part of the revised Proffer Statement. 14. Transportation Proffer 1.4. Proffer 1.4 provides for the eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Route 522/Maranto Manor as called for in the TIA conclusions. It is noted that even with this unprovement, this intersection will not function at a level of service C or better and does not meet County requirements. While the PM Peak Hour LOS for the westbound movement of Maranto Manor Drive will operate at a LOS D with the additional left turn lane in place, I would note that the intersection as a whole will operate at a LOS C. Again I would suggest that the positive fiscal impacts of this type of economic development use would offset a single movement at LOS D within an intersection that operates at a LOS C. 0 0 15. Other Traffic Improvements. As stated in the TIA conclusions, there are various transportation irnprovements which are necessary to maintain a LOS C or better. The following irnprovements (in additional to cornments 11-13_ have not been addressed: • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway 1 /Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway 3/Route 522 turn lanes • Site Driveway 4/Route 522 turn lanes Per the previous responses, all turn lanes needed have been Included in the revised Proffer Statement. If the right in/right out entrances (Site Driveway 3 and 4) are permitted, turn lanes would be provided as required during the entrance permitting phase. PR+A 16. Bike Path. Front Royal Pike is identified on dle Frederick County Bicycle Plan as a short term destination. Provide a hike trail in this location. The Applicant has proffered a bike path in lieu of sidewalks along Front Royal Pike. 17. Design Standards. The proffer statement includes nothing that relates to design standards (building facades, parking lot location, landscaping, signage, etc). Buildings should be placed adjacent to the roads and the parking lots placed behind the buildings, especially along Tasker Road and Route 522. Street trees should be provided along all public and internal roads and specific types of building materials should be utilized within the project. Lilnitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. As any proffered design materials would not be applicable to the existing B2 zoned portions ofparcel 76-A-53, a design palette would not necessarily be of use for the Property. This same notion is applicable to signage as well. Any development on the property would be subject to Ordinance requirements. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Patton Harris Rust & Associates Patrick R. Sowers 4111- 0 Patton Harris Rust & Associates Engineers- Surveyors- Plarrnels- Landscape Arc hit- ts. PHR+1� CORPORATE Chantilly VIRGINIA OFFICES Fred ericksbLir,1 Leesburg Inchesre• Woodbridge LABORATORIES: Chantilly Fredericksburg MARYLAND OFFICES: BaIt,more Columbia Frederick Germantown Hollywood Hunt Valley Williamsport PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE: Allentown WEST VIRGINIA OFFICE: Martinsburg T 540.667,2139 F 540 665 0493 117 East Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 February 23, 2007 Candice Perkins Frederick County Planning 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Eastgate Commercial Rezoning Dear Candice, I have provided response to your comments dated February 2, 2007 regarding the Eastgate Commercial Rezoning Application as follows. Eastern Frederick County Lang Range Land Use Plan. The site is within the limits of the Eastern Frederick county Long Range Land Use Plan. The plan shows a portion of this property with a commercial designation. The proposed B2 Zoning is a business use and is generally consistent with the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan as it relates this area. Agreed. 2. Additional Property. There are two additional properties owned by Wrights Run LP which have not been included with this rezoning; PIN's 87-A 36 and 87-A 37 are central to this rezoning and currently zoned RA. These properties will need to be included in this rezoning. These properties are no w hsted in the rezoning application as well as theprofferheading. 3. Rezoning # 02-97. Rezoning # 02-97 currently covers PIN# 76-A 53. This proposed rezoning only covers the B3 portion of 76-A 53. Parcel 76-A 53, in its entirety, should be included with this rezoning application so that everything within the project is included under the same proffers. Including the entire project under one proffer statement will ensure consistent entrances and improvements throughout the entire development. Thrs application is simply azz attempt to create a more ziable node of B2 lew1opment by incorporating the existing B3 portions of 7l A-S.3 into that parcel's existing B2 acreage while adding ay additiona110. S acres of B2 that are currently RA As the R2 zoning rights for the remainder ofparcel76--A-S3 were establshed by conditional rezoning *02--97, the Applicant should not need to include this portion of the Property as part ofthzs application. Additionally, awy entrances to the Property will be gozerned by the regulations found in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as well as any VDOT requirements at the entrance permit phase of development to ensure say and adegwate access to the Property. Transportation Levels of Service. The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed industrial and commercial development. This application clearly does not achieve a Level of Service C. The levised p>offer statement dated Fehrztaly 21, 2007 i>zclzzdes p> o vlsklls fol- ezely twlispoltaM zi needed to achieze a L OS Cfor ezely intersection zdentfed in the TIA. I wotlld note that while Me'stbonnd Mamllto Afanor 1)17ze and stbozlnd F<tsker Road at Route S22 haze PWPeakIlozzrLezelofServkeD, thesehltersections work ataLOSC as a whole. When takizzg into accolrrzt background tl4ic and the positize fiscal impacts of the applicatlolz, the p'Iaffeled t1W1IspO1tm iozz irnprozerzzezzts ale appzopni ze. 5. Rezoning Application - Proposed Uses. The application states the rezoning jj�( is for 47,000 s.f. of office and 166,000 s.f. of retail uses. The proffer PH J1 statement does not call for a specific use. Unless a specific use and square footage is proffered, the County will assume the maximum possible development (retail) as per the County's application, combined with the maximum possible floor space. At the maximum possible use, there is the potential for 428, 074 s.f. retail uses. A proffer to limit the square footage of this development to no more than what the TIA was based on would be appropriate (see issue on assumptions below). Using a "worst case" scezlar7o of a . SO FAR slrggests a square footage that rzzole than doubles what a comzllelrial deveoopez- could expect to build on a gizen popezty. The sVuare footage provzded in the applcatio> package and TIA lep,,eseilt an aTglesslie .2f FAR TrIth re�,ui>ed setbacks, >ncrriznunz bzrilding heights, pazkzng standazds., azzd storVnwatel- management obtrhihzg an FAR of gpeater than .20 is d�cult. Fhus, the azeas pzo sided by the 7I1 and apphicatio. a>e much zzzoze indicatize of the potential bui7el--out fol- the Plopezty than the "worst case"scena>io you ident fy abo ze. 6. Traffic Impact Analysis -Assumptions. The TIA is based upon 166,662 s.f. of retail uses, 47,000 s.f. of office uses 224,660 s.f. of warehouse/industrial uses. As stated under section D of your impact analysis, the warehouse/industrial uses could be generated from the adjacent land bay (potential industrial). The potential industrial should be included under your background traffic, not your assumption, and your TIA should be based on what could actually be developed on the site (428,074 s.f. of retail). Again I wortld zefezence my zesponse to cozmnelzt Saboze that using a SFAR szrggests an uzmealstic potential build' -out for the Plopelty. Iv fact, astudycompletedbyOeezlwayLnginee>zzzgin200Vfouzzdthatthe azerwge coznznezcial project dezelops at a FAR of. -1,92 despite the 1.0 Oldlzzazlce m6lrtnlrtm a>Zd.S "worstcase "scezlalzo Ilsedbystaff 7. Maranto Manor Drive, Maranto Manor Drive needs to connect to Rainville Road; this application does not provide any assurances for the required continuation of this road. Pmjffer 1.7 has been added to povide fo.,- this connectzo>a p>7o1- to zssara>ace of a ce>tific<rte of occupancy fo>- any building const>7acted on the P>ope>ty. 8. Tasker Road. The Eastern Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan designates Tasker Road as an improved major collector. Full implementation of the four -lane major collector road design would be appropriate along 76-A- 53. While I do>r t >aecessa>zl" ag,ee that a 823 ac>e 83 to S2 and 10. GS ac>e RA to B2 >ezo>ri>lg shor>Ad be >espo>asible fo> i»aple»ze>rti>ag a fr>ll four Aa>ae >oad desig>a when the TIA indicates that a IO.S C is mtaanable Using a two lane section with additional tn>7a Aanes, I zwoaald note that addtio>aal >oad imp>ozements »lay be necessary during the site plan >eview process. These i>np>ozenaents would be dete>711ined by the spec f c use fo r the property dilmig the comme>cial ent><t>ace pe>7nitti>ag p>ocess. Site Access. This development has access on Maranto Manor Drive as well as access onto Tasker Road once Maranto connects to Rainville Road. The proffers/GDP for this development state that this project will have two entrances on Maranto Manor Drive and a right- ui/night- out onto Route 522 and Rezoning remainder of 76-A 53. As stated u-i comment 3, the entire 76- A-53 should be included under one rezoning application and access to Route 522 should be completely prohibited. Also, Section C (Location and Access) of your impact analysis states that access will be provided through the existing B2 zoned acreage by a northern entrance on Tasker Road and an eastern entrance on Route 522. The referenced Tasker entrance is not shown on the GDP and there is no mention of this access anywhere on the proffer statement. The Taslee>- Road ent>a.,Ice would be located across the eiistzng B2 potion ofpa>ce176-A-S3 Aspec fc location forth;& entrance has yet to be dete>7nzned bait any entrance on Tasker wonAd haze to weet O>dinance specifications and VD07'>ea1a1ements. Additionally, the p>offer has been amended so that the right in/>zght out e>atm>ace on the strbjectp>ope>ty woaaldbe snbjectto app>ozxrAby VDOTduring the site PAW >eviezv phase. If this ent>mrme as not deemed to be safe or appmp>iate, then t1affac would lase othe>- »weans of ing>ess/eg>ess. The scena>7o wotdd he the same fo>- any a7ght in/>zght otlt ent>crnces on the existingB2po>tion ofpa>ce176-A-S3. s �r 10. TIA Background Development. On sheet 6 of the Background Development, please clarify what project development 9-11 consist of and on sheet 7 under the Artrip project, there is no soccer complex. Backg>ound dezelop"nents #9, 10, a>ad 11 ale andacatize of potential dezelop>nent on the existing B2zonedpo>zion ofparcel76-A-5.3. 11. Traffic Impact Analysis - route 522/Tasker Road Intersection. The TIA calls for this intersection to be signalized and to have a new eastbound and northbound left turn -lane. While Rezoning # 02-97 proffered the installation of the signalization, there is no commitment for the installation of the turn lanes. It is noted that even with the installation of the two turn lanes, PM peak traffic will still function at a level of service D. As this application is not proffering any of the needed turn lanes, it would be beneficial to see what the LOS would actually be with only the previously proffered signalization. PH The tutu lalaes identfed by the TIA that we>e szotp>offe>ed as part of Rezoni>lg #02--97 ale incbrded as pa>t ofthe >evised P>offer State>nent datedFeb111a1y 9, 2007 12. Transportation Proffer 1.2. Proffer 1.2 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of Tasker/Rainville but does not provide the two northbound left turn lanes called for ui the TIA conclusions. These turn lanes are required to maintain a level of service C. These lawes ve inclydedas pa>t ofthe �ev�sedP>offerStateme>rt. 13. Transportation Proffer 1.3. Proffer 1.3 provides for the traffic signal at the intersection of the project entrance and the Home Depot entrance on Maranto Manor Drive but does not account of any of the turn lanes called for in the TIA conclusions. These lanes ve i>acbtdedas pa>t ofthe �evisedP>offerState»rent. 14. Transportation Proffer 1.4. Proffer 1.4 provides for the eastbound left turn lane for Maranto Manor Drive at the intersection of Route 522/Maranto Manor as called for in the TIA conclusions. It is noted that even with this improvement, this intersection will not function at a level of service C or better and does not meet County requirements. Whale the PlWleak Ilour,LOSforthe westbound>noze>nent ofMam"Ito ffavorlDaize will operate at a OSD with the additionalleft tu»a lane in place, I would note that the hmeasection as a whole will opeawte at a OS C. Again I zoould suggest that the positize fiscal impacts of this type of economic dezelopmeart use would oet a single mozeanent at LOS D within an inteasectioar that operates ataLOS C. 0 0 15. Other Traffic Improvements. As stated in the TIA conclusions, there are various transportation improvements which are necessary to maintain a LOS C or better. The following improvements (in additional to comments 11-13_ have not been addressed: • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway 1/Maranto Manor Drive turn lanes • Site Driveway3/Route 522 turn lanes • Site Driveway 4/Route 522 turn lanes Per the pzevious ,espouses, all tzi»z lanes needed haze beezz included in the >evised P>offer State>ne>zt. If the zzght in/zzght ont entrazzces [ISite Dri way 3 and �/ a>e pe»nitte�t; t1l>71 lanes would be p>ovided as zegzzized dnzzng the ezztzrznce pe»zzitting phase. PRA 16. Bike Path. Front Royal Pike is identified on the Frederick County Bicycle Plan as a short term destination. Provide a bike trail in this location. The flppl cant has pzaffered a bike path in liens ofsidewalks alo>zg Front RoyalAke. 17. Design Standards. The proffer statement includes nothing that relates to design standards (building facades, parking lot location, landscaping, signage, etc). Buildings should be placed adjacent to the roads and the parking lots placed behind the buildings, especially along Tasker Road and Route 522. Street trees should be provided along all public and internal roads and specific types of building materials should be utilized within the project. Limitations on the number and size of freestanding signs should be considered as well. Route 522 signage should be limited (number and size) and only monument style signage should be utilized. As any p>offered design znate.=ls wozrld not be applicable to the exzsting BZzonedportio>zs ofpa>cel7G-�4-S3, a design palette wozrld not necessarily be ofzzse forthe Pzopezty. 7"his same notioza is applcable to sigzzage as well, fizzy lezelopmvent on the propezty wozzld be subject to Ordinance re�uireznents. Please feel free to call if you have anyquestions. Sincerely, Patton aiYYs Rust & Associat s Patrick R. Sowers le. if, \ /'00TOransportation nia Department`Y • Staunton Staunton District Planning comments on: Eastgate Commercial Property TIA (dated 1 /19/07) Frederick County, Virginia Staunton District Planning has completed our review of the subject TIA and offers the following comments for the Edinburg Residency's consideration: TIA - General • We recall an agreement to study the Rt. 522 and Rt. 277 intersection. Please explain why this has been omitted from the study. • We recall an agreement that the study was to be performed using Synchro v.6. Please explain. • Referencing page 1, it states "...conducted AM and PM peak hour ... counts at the intersections of Rt. 522/Tasker Road, Tasker Road/Rainville Rd. and Route 522/1\4aranto Manor Drive.". The supporting count data indicates that counts along Rt. 522 were conducted in May 2005. While we understand that a growth factor was applied to this data, it is important that the reviewer understand the analyst's methodology. Please explain and revise. • Several development plan illustrations are provided in the submittal, and numerous references to 4 land bays that will generate uniquely different traffic volumes, and yet no illustration appears to accurately define where the land bays are situated. Figure 6 thru 9 do not correspond to the Land Bay Trip Generation Table 2, page 10. Please explain. • Referencing Table 1, page 6, errors exist in the Background Development # 5: o The Elementary School AM Peak Hour In and Out Volumes should be 127 and 104, not 110 and 76 o The Middle School AM Peak Hour In and Out Volumes should be 246 and 206, not 223 and 168. • We are unable to determine the potential impacts to Rt. 522 as a result of the two proposed additional right-in/out site drives. We are concerned that the arterial level of service along this corridor could be compromised should these entrances be approved without further study. • Referencing Table 1, page 7, errors exist in the Background Development # 13: The code for Elderly Housing — Attach should be 252, not 253. • We question some of the Background Conditions traffic assignments. For example: o Why does the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive / Site Drive #2 have almost the same amount southbound left -turn and right -turn traffic? Please explain your assumptions. o It seems illogical that right turn traffic from Land Bays' A&B would exit, make a right turn at Rainville, and then make another right to arrive Rt. 522. Please explain your assumptions. 2/6/2007 Page 1 of 2 `-° V:� iniaDepartment 0001 transportation • Staunton • The HCS report for the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive / Site Drive #1 has different traffic volumes then those illustrated in Figure 8: 2010 Build -out Traffic Conditions on page 13. Please revise. • We are concerned about the operation and safety allowing full (or even partial) access at Site Drive #1 and Maranto Manor Drive. The analysis as presented during 2010 build -out conditions assumes an unsignalized condition with NB left and right movements. The HCS analysis assumes a raised median storage area for left turning vehicles with an opposing WB thru volume of 403 vehicles. The only reason that this NB left turning movement operates at LOS C is the raised median, without it the LOS is F. As presented in the study, the right turn movement is already expected to operate at LOS F. Please explain. • Numerous movements both internal and external to the proposed site operate at levels of service of D or worse, even with the "Suggested Improvements". All movements are to perform at a LOS of C or better. • There is no analysis of Site Drive #3 and Rt. 522. Please explain. • There are numerous "Suggested Improvements" that appear in the study with no corresponding text as to what the applicant is willing to participate in funding. Many of the improvements will require right-of-way for which the applicant does not control. Please explain. • Please explain why the analyst choose to use a PHF of 0.90 for 2010 AM build - out conditions at Maranto Manor Dr. and Site Dr 92, and yet choose to use a PHF of .95 for 2010 PM build -out conditions? • The AM signal timing for the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive / Site Drive # 2 has two phases, while the PM signal timing has four phases. AM and PM signal timings can have different splits, but the phases should be the same. Please explain. END 2/6/2007 Page 2 of 2 0 Patton Harris Rust & Associates Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. 10212 Governor Lane Blvd., Suite 1007 PT-4RAT Williamsport, MD 21795 301.223.4010 Memorandum 1 F 301.223.6831 To: Candice Perkins Organization/Company: Frederick County Planning Department From: Michael Glickman, P.E. Date: February 9, 2007 Response to January 19, 2007 VDOT comments regarding the Project Name/Subject: report titled: A Traffic Inat)ac/ flea/ysis ofEartQate ReZogMg PHR+A Project file Number: 13612-1-3 cc: Jerry Copp; Lloyd Ingram; Eric Lawrence; Patrick Sowers In addition to the modified proffer statement submitted on February 9, 2007 as part of the rezoning application for the Eastgate Commercial Property, we have provided the following responses for comments provided via e-mail by the Virginia Department of Transportation on February 8, 2007 with regards to the submitted Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA): VDOT Comment # 1: We recall an agreement to study the Rt. 522 and Rt. 277 intersection. Please explain why this has been omitted from the study. PHR+A Response: Based upon a scoping session attended by PHR+A, VDOT and Frederick County, this intersection was not included as a part of the TIA scope of study. However, it is important to note that the major intersections affected by the proposed development have been included in the study. VDOT Continent # 2: We recall an agreement that the study was to be performed using Synchro v.6. Please explain. PHR+A Response: Based upon a scoping session attended by PHR+A, VDOT and Frederick County, Synchro v.6. was not a requirement for the TIA. VDOT Comment # 3: Referencing page 1, it states "...conducted AM and PM peak hour... counts at the intersections of Rt. 522/Tasker Road, Tasker Road/Rainville Rd. and Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive.". The supporting count data indicates that counts along Rt. 522 were conducted in May 2005. While we understand that a growth factor was applied to this data, it is important that the reviewer understand the analyst's methodology. Please explain and revise. PHR+A Response: Counts for this study area were begun in 2005 and, as such, were included as data for the TIA. As you have indicated, a growth factor was used in the TIA to accommodate the original date of the traffic counts. VDOT Continent # 4: Several development plan illustrations are provided in the submittal, and numerous references to 4 land bays that will generate uniquely different traffic volumes, and yet no illustration appears to accurately define where the land bays are situated. Figure 6 thru 9 do not correspond to the Land Bay Trip Generation Table 2, page 10. Please explain. 0 • Patton Harris Rust & Associates Memorandum A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning: Response Page 2 to VDOT Comments PI IR+A Response: Figures 6-9 depict four land bays labeled A, B, C, and D. Land Bay A is shown twice on the figures as it is bisected by Maranto Manor Drive. The remaining labels are located with the locations that correspond to the actual land bay locations. I would reference the Generalized Development Plan which was included as part of the submission package which clearly shows the boundaries of land bays A, B, and C. Land Bay D is included as part of the TIA as a potential future use but is not formally included in the rezoning application. VDOT Continent # 5: Referencing Table 1, page 6, errors exist in the Background Development # 5:- The Elementary School AM Peak Hour In and Out Volumes should be 127 and 104, not 110 and 76 - The Middle School AM Peak Hour In and Out Volumes should be 246 and 206, not 223 and 168. PHR+A Response: The trip generation results associated with Background Development # 5 were copied verbatim from an approved traffic study for a project located within the vicinity of the Eastgate development. The minor increase in trip generation would cause a negligible impact to the study area intersections and would not alter the conclusions derived in the TIA. VDOT Conunent # 6: We are unable to determine the potential impacts to Rt. 522 as a result of the two proposed additional right-in/out site drives. We are concerned that the arterial level of service along this corridor could be compromised should these entrances be approved without further study. PHR+A Response: The location of the two (2) proposed right-in/right-out site -driveways, with respect to the adjacent planned signalized intersections of Tasker Road/Route 522 and Maranto Manor Drive/Route 522, present an opportunity to accommodate commercial traffic and facilitate conunercial ingress and egress from the site without burdening other area intersections. VDOT Conunent # 7: Referencing Table 1, page 7, errors exist in the Background Development # 13: The code for Elderly Housing — Attach should be 252, not 253. PHR+A Response: This is a typographical error and will not impact the conclusions derived in the TIA. VDOT Continent # 8: We question some of the Background Conditions traffic assignments. For example: - Why does the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive / Site Drive # 2 have almost the same amount southbound left -turn and right -turn traffic? Please explain your assumptions. It seems illogical that right tarn traffic from Land Bays' A&B would exit, make a right turn at Rainville, and then make another right to arrive Rt. 522. Please explain your assumptions. PI IR+A Response: We believe that with the new retail developments occurring to the south in Warren County, trips to and from the proposed development will be from the north and west. Traffic desiring to go west on Tasker Road may find it easier to use Maranto Manor and Rainville. Traffic heading north may use Maranto Manor Drive to Route 522. • P Patton Harris Rust & Associates A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning: Response to VDOT Comments Memorandum Page 3 VDOT Continent # 9: The HCS report for the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive / Site Drive # 1 has different traffic volumes then those illustrated in Figure 8: 2010 Build -out Traffic Conditions on page 13. Please revise. PHR+A Response: There is typographical error in entering volume for 2010 AM build -out conditions in HCS file. However, with the correct volumes shown in Figure 8, the levels of service results will remain same for each movement and approach LOS as shown in TIA. VDOT Continent # 10: We are concerned about the operation and safety allowing full (or even partial) access at Site Drive # 1 and Maranto Manor Drive. The analysis as presented during 2010 build -out conditions assumes an unsignalized condition with NB left and right movements. The HCS analysis assumes a raised median storage area for left turning vehicles with an opposing WB thru volume of 403 vehicles. The only reason that this NB left turning movement operates at LOS C is the raised median, without it the LOS is F. As presented in the study, the right turn movement is already expected to operate at LOS F. Please explain. PHR+A Response: A concrete median has been included as a proffered condition in order to obtain a LOS C for the PM Peak Hour. With the installation of this median, the referenced intersection, as a whole, will accommodate a minimum LOS C which meets the guidelines of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. VDOT Continent # 11: Numerous movements both internal and external to the proposed site operate at levels of service of D or worse, even with the "Suggested Improvements". All movements are to perform at a LOS of C or better. PHR+A Response: Each intersection, as a whole, will operate at a LOS C or better with the proffered transportation improvements in place. While the use of the word "numerous" in your comment would indicate a great deal of movements will operate at a LOS D or worse, only two movements u1 fact operate below a LOS C. These two movements are identified as westbound Maranto Manor Drive and westbound Tasker Road. Both of these movements operate at a LOS D. I would note that background traffic alone would place these movements at a LOS C and, furthermore, that the positive fiscal impacts that this type of economic development use poses for Frederick County should more than offset a one tier discrepancy for two movements within the entire development area. VDOT Comment # 12: There is no analysis of Site Drive # 3 and Rt. 522. Please explain. PI IR+A Response: This movement would use the internal site for required stacking distance and, as such, would not pose any detrimental impacts to the public traffic network. Patton Harris Rust & Associates Memorandum A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning: Response Page 4 to VDOT Con-iments VDOT Continent # 13: There are numerous "Suggested Improvements" that appear ii the study with no corresponding text as to what the applicant is willing to participate in funding. Many of the improvements will require night -of -way for which the applicant does not control. Please explain. PI-IR+A Response: Every necessary improvement identified by the TIA has been proffered by this rezoning request or a previous application. For each transportation improvement, appropriate right of way either already exists or can be provided by the Applicant as the applicant owns property adjacent to each of the subject intersections. VDOT Continent # 14: Please explain why the analyst choose to use a PI -IF of 0.90 for 2010 AM build -out conditions at Maranto Manor Dr. and Site Dr # 2, and yet choose to use a PIT of .95 for 2010 PM build -out conditions? PHR+A Response: Overall PI -IF value of 0.95 was calculated from the PM peak hour counts conducted at the intersection of Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive. This value was applied to the analysis of the Maranto Manor Drive/Site-Driveway # 2 intersection since existing counts do not exist at this location. However, as a test, PHR+A re -analyzed this intersection using a 0.90 PI -IF during PM peak hour conditions and determined levels of service (overall, approach and lane group) will remain consistent with those represented in the TIA. VDOT Continent # 15: The AM signal timing for the intersection of Maranto Manor Drive / Site Drive # 2 has two phases, while the PM signal timing has four phases. AM and PM signal timings can have different splits, but the phases should be the same. Please explain. PHR+A Response: It is our understanding that it is acceptable to have multiple phase combinations throughout the day since the controllers can be programmed to accommodate daily variations in traffic patterns.. However, as test, PHR+A verified that assuming four (4) phases during the AM and PM peak hour conditions, respectively, would result in levels of service (overall, approach and lane group) consistent with those represented in the TIA. • Signalized "Suggested Intersection Improvements" LOS=QQ Signalization NB - I Left No Scale �� EB - l Left Signalized "ted 11i Intersectioni LOS=QQ ISugges Signalization Sasker�oad ���� j NB .2 Left asker (9�C✓ 522 a `, 522 Signalized "Suggested Cntersedion Improvements" LOS--QQ EB -I Left T G o s a t�atapoJO O r ./ �o (1 Signalized 522 Unsignalize Intersection InterseMion`` LOS=C(F) 522 Unsignalized Intersection • ��� Unsignalized �1 Intersection JCq? Suggested " Improvements" Qr LAND BAY LAND BAY New Intersection B"A"Unsignalized c Owe Intersection No or .� Mara to Maw Ma Tito M n Signalized "Suggested P Dr OWN*�' ntersection improvements" p LAND BAY d 7 LOS=C(Q New Intersection01, d *410- C(C) LAND BAY lgarentoManor LAND BAY Drive n` t� D (C)B'41t ° Denotes stop sign control ' ® Denotes traffic signal control T + / \ A * Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement �T T I 1 AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 9 2010 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service PH" A Traffic /moact Analysis of umber:te Rezoning Project Number: 13612-1-3 October 25, 2006 Page 14 CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the Eastgate Rezoning development, assuming suggested improvements, are acceptable and manageable. Based upon HCS-2000 results, each of the study area intersections will operate with overall levels of service "C" or better during 2010 build -out conditions. The following reiterates the suggested roadway configuration required for each of the study area roadway intersections during 2010 build - out conditions: • Route 522/Tasker Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require traffic signalization along with an additional eastbound and northbound left -turn lane. • Tasker Road/Rainville Road: In order to achieve acceptable levels of service, this ' ite sec ion will require traffic signalization and two (2) northbound left- tul lanes • Route 522/Maranto Manor Drive: In order to maintain acceptable levels of service, this intersection will require an additional eastbound left -turn lane. • Rainville Road/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new intersection. It will be an unsignalized intersection with westbound left/right shared lane, northbound thru/right shared lane and a southbound left/thru shared lane. • Site Driveway #1/Maranto Manor Drive: This is a new unsignalized intersection. It will require eastbound thru and right -turn lan(westbound left and thru lane and northbound left and right -turn lane. • Site Driveway #2/Maranto Manor Drive: This intersection will require signalization along with eastbound separate left, and thru/right shared lane; westbound separate left, thru, right turn lane; northbound separate left and thru/right shared lane and southbound separate left, thru, right turn lane. • Site Driveway #3/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. • Site Driveway #4/Route 522: This is a new right in/out only intersection. It will require an eastbound right turn lane and a southbound right turn lane. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Eastgate Rezoning PHR+ Project Number: r 25,2006October 25, 2015 Page 15 7 (� f UTURE SIGNAL U R EW T ANE ✓w R0 A0 �S O QP EX. ZONING, B3 G WHITE'S STORAGE EX. ZONING B2 \ lS NG FUTURE q�EXISTING, B3 RIGHT —IN .\ PROPOSED- B2 RIGHT —❑UT \ 5 3 EXISTING, B3 EXISTING, RA PROPOSED, 32 © PROPOSED, B2 RgNro FUTU 63 >o ��%,� o.SIGNAL EXISTING, B2/ EXISTING RA - 10.65 AC EXISTING B3 - 8,23 AC 'J EXISTING,/2 TOTAL - 18.88 AC L EXISTING HOME DEPOT / DISTRIBUTION CENTER i EXISTING, M-1 j \ �-7 (g)VGFHT—OUTX�� T—IN �'VqOA i)L-f EXISTINGI RA PROPOSED- B2 a ti EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, pc o ti Cl) GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 p \O v Q VOICE: (540) 667-2139 FAX: (540) 665-0493 cy� FREDERICK COUNTY, NRGINIA MUHL 5 �. Frederick County, Virginia REZONING APPLICATION MATERIALS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE EASTGATE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY Shawnee Magisterial District October 2006 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust &Associates, pc 117 E. Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone:540-667-2139 Fax:540-665-0493 PHl • TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Application II. Impact Analysis III. Proffer Statement IV. Agency Comments V. Survey Plat and Deed . VI. Tax Ticket • 0 • I. APPLICATION 11 • PattonJ-larris Rust & AsIciates Eng*meers, Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects. PD , A 117 East Piccadilly Street H Winchester, VA 22601 T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 Transmittal To: Candice Perkins Organization/Company: Frederick County Planning Address: Telephone Number: Date: February 9, 2007 From: Patrick Sowers Project Name/Subject: Eastgate Rezoning Application Via: Internal Project File #: Quantity File # Date Description Transmitted ® Herewith 1 Rezoning Application ❑ Under separate cover 1 Notes: Application Fee-$4,938 Received by: Date: Material ❑ Originals ® Photocopies ❑ Diskette ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Mylar ❑ Ozalid Prints ❑ Invoice ❑ Sepia Purpose ® Your Use ❑ Your Files ❑ Approval ❑ Please Return: Corrected Prints ❑ Please Submit: Revised Prints Document Approval Form PLEASE REVIEW THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT. IF THIS DOCUMENT MEETS YOUR APPROVAL PLEASE INITIAL AND PROVIDE THE DATE AND TINE OF YOUR APPROVAL. IF THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT MEET YOUR APPROVAL PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS AS TO WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE COMPLETED. INITIALS DATE & TIME _vCandice��� Bernie Mark Susan Eric Mike Kevin John Lauren COMMENTS: Received by Clerical Staff (Date & Time): V Z i O-7 U:\Pam\Common\Document Approval Form.wpd N w S Ah REQUESTING AGENT: DEPT. OF GEOGRAPHIC r4RMATION SYSTEMS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGWU GIS, MAPPVIG, GEtAPE ICS ; �- WORK REQUEST"-` DATE RECEIVED: 02 A ? 1v REQUESTED COrAPLETION DATE: Department, Agency, or Company: - Mailing and/or Billing Address: Telephone: E-mail Address: ESTIMATED COST OF PROTECT: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: (Write additional 3VE)35 DIGITAL: PAPER: FAX: SIZES: COLOR-. BLACKIWHITE: . . NUMBER OF COPIES: FAX: STAFF MEMBER COMPLETION DATE: MATERIALS: DATE OF PICK-UP/DELIVERY: AMOUNT DUE: AMOUNT BILLED: METHOD OF PAYMENT: .. G���� V�. g7-/q-3��,-��- E-I� HOURS REQUIRED: AMOUNT PAID: CHECK NO.# Frederick County GIS, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA 22601, (540)665-5651) :., a COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC MEETING April 12, 2007 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: REZONING APPLICATION #02-07 FOR EASTGATE COMMERCIAL On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public meeting being held on Wednesday, April 25, 2007, 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 #02-07 of Eastgate Commercial, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General. Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 87-A-34, 87-A-34B, 87-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53. 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, Candice E. Perkins Planner II CEP/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 'Y This is to certif y teat the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on -////u- 0 from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: 1 - 87 - A- - 34- RITTER, STEVEN G & MARY M 3022 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4906 76 - A- - 53- WRIGHTS RUN, LP 2800 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 ARLINGTON, VA 22206.3612 Realtech, LLC 2800 S. Shirlington Rd., Ste. 803 Arlington, VA 22206 Patton Harris Rust Associates, PC Attn: Charles Maddox H 7 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 76 - A- - 57-A COMER, ORVILLE LEE 2903 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4915 76 - A- - 58- RITTER, FLOYD L & KAY C 141 BRIDGEPORTLN WINCHESTER, VA. 22602.4819 87 - A- - 38- PRICE, ROBERT F 307 CAROLINE AVE STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655.5924 87 - A- - 39- PRICE, ROBERT R & LOUISE W 2997 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4915 87 - A. - 40. HEISHMAN, DIANA L 3029 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4916 87-A--41. BULLOCK, JOHN BULLOCK, MARGARET 3049 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4916 87 - A- - 33. PLASTERS, SAMUEL E JR 3046 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4906 "Elrkr ins, Planner II Frederick County Planning Dept. STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK z I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, doiereby certify that Can ice E. Perkins, Planner II for the De artnt of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated �/- d , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid. 7 Given under my hand this day of �007 My commission expires on NOTAR UBLIC Y' A 31 BISHOP, 40 4R BISHOP, JULIA L 114 ORCHARD DR MIDWEST CITY, OK 73110.3838 76 - A- - 53-G HOME DEPOT, USA, INC ATTN: PROPERTY TAX DEPT #5362 P.O. BOX 105842 ATLANTA, GA 30348-5842 76 - A- - 53-f CABLE HOLDCO EXCHANGE V, LLC PO BOX 173838 ATTN:PROPERTY TA DENVER, CO 80217-3838 76 - A- - 53-E S&W,LLC 720 S BRADDOCK ST WINCHESTER, VA 22601.4053 76 - A- - 55- DILL, DAVID R & MARY M 1135 SULPHUR SPRINGS RD WINCHESTER VA 22602 ICr2- zO-'- Da 7 Ott Adjoining Property Owners Rezoning -PRARRARA-DATA PROCESSING TO:BARBARA-DATA PROCESSING ! FROW BEV - Planning Dept. Please rin® sets of labels by THANKS! Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public right-of-way, a private right-of-way, or a watercourse from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. The Commissioner of the Revenue is located on the 2" d floor of the Frederick County Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name Address Property Identification Number (PIN) ame: Orville Comer 2903 Front Royal Pike Property#: 76-A-57A Winchester, VA 22602 ame: Orville Comer 2903 Front Royal Pike Property #: 76-A-57 Winchester, VA 22602 me: _ Floyd & Kay Ritter 141 Bridgeport Ln Property#: 76-A-58 ✓ Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Robert Price 307 Caroline Ave Property #: 87-A-38 Stephens City, VA 22655 ,Name: Bob & Louise Price 2997 Front Royal Pike Property #: 87-A-39 Winchester, VA 22602 Diana Heishman 3029 Front Royal Pike ,Dlame: Property #: 87-A-40 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: John Bullock ✓ 3049 Front Royal Pike Property #: 87-A-41 Winchester, VA 22602 /Flame: Samuel Plasters, Jr. 3046 Front Royal Pike Property #: 87-A-33 '_X Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Julia Bishop 114 Orchard Dr Property#: 87-A-31 ✓ Midwest City, OK 73110 Name: Home Depot USA, Inc. P.O. Box 105842 Property #: 76-A-53G ✓ Atlanta, GA 30348 Name: Cable Holdco Exchange V, LLC P.O. Box 173838 Property#: 76-A-53F Denver, CO 80217 Name: S & W, LLC 720 S Braddock St Property#: 76-A-53E ✓ Winchester, VA 22601 1 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX:540/665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING March 28, 2007 TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: REZONING APPLICATION #02-07 FOR EASTGATE COMMERCIAL On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 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 402-07 of Eastgate Commercial, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 87-A-34, 87-A-34B, 87-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53. 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, Candice E. Perkins Planner II CEP/bad 107 North bent Street, Suite 202 ® Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on g 4 `, from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: 87 - A- - 38- 87 - A- - 34- PRICE, ROBERT F RITTER, STEVEN G & MARY M '07 CAROLINE AVE 3022 FRONT ROYAL PIKE , ^ STEP I~E!�S CITY, VA e"?.655 592� WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4906 / Q.J 87 - A- - 39- 87 - A- - 3443 PRICE, ROBERT R & LOUISF W REALTECH,LLC 2997 FRONT ROYA1 ''PIKE ; 900 S SHIRLINGTON IRD STE 803 WINCHESTF n, �'t1 226C:_ CJ I6 ARLINGTON, VA 22'706.3612 1 87 - A- - 40- 87 - A- - 35- HEISHMAN, DIANA L WRIGHTS RUN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 3029 FRONT ROYAL PIKE 28G0 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4916 A,"sk: uGTON, VA 22206.3612 87 - A- - 41- BULLOCK,JOHN Patton Harris Rust Associates, PC BULLOCK, MARGARET Attn: Charles Maddox 3049 FRONT ROYAL PIKE 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Q t/l WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4916 Winchester, VA 22601 87 - A- - 33- PLASTERS, SAMUEL E JR 76 - A- - 57-A 3046 FRONT ROYAL PIKE COMER, ORVILLE LEE WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4906 2903 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4915 76 - A- - 58- RITTER, FLOYD L & KAY C 141 BRIDGEPORT LN Candice E. Perkins, Planner II WINCHESTER, VA. 22602-4819 Frederick County Planning Dept. STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do I reby certify that dice E. Perkins, Planner II for the De art ent of Plam�ing and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated � � , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State an County aforesaid. Given under my hand this a � day of77W,�--eoC`7,007 My commission expires on L NOTARY BLIC D Vf'4 87 -A- - 31- BISHOP, JULIA L ' r� 114 ORCHARD UR ;IAMVJEST CITY, OK 73110.3836 76 - A- - 53-G HOME DEPOT, I,"SA, INC A T TN: PgUAv RTY TAX DEPT #5?;,21 P.O. PW� 105842 P' I.;,NTA, GA 30348.5842 76 - A- - 53-F CABLE HOLDCO EXCHA�?SE V, LLC PO BOX 173838 ATTN:PR0ERTY TA DENVER, CO 802'i 7.3838 76 - A- - 53-E S&W,LLC 720 S BRADDOCK ST WINCHESTER, VA 22601.4053 76 -A- - 55- DILL, DAVID R & MARY M 1135 SULPHUR SPRINGS RD MIDDLETOWN, VA 22645.3601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING March 9, 2007 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: REZONING APPLICATION 402-07 FOR EASTGATE COMMERCIAL On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, March 21, 2007, 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 #02-07 of Eastgate Commercial, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive (Route 642), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 87-A-34, 87-A-34B, 87-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53. 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.fi-ederick.va.us. Sincerely, Candice E. Perkins Planner II CEP/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on 3 / 9 01 from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: 87 - A- - 38- 87 - A- - 34- PRICE, ROBERT F RITTER, STEVEN G & MARY M 307 CAROLINE AVE 3022 FRONT ROYAL PIKE STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655.5924 WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4906 ( _ `1 87 - A- - 39- PRICE, ROBERT R & LOWL:: ,1, 87 - A- - 34-B REALTECH, LLC \ 2997 FRONT ROYAL PIKE 2800 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4915 ARLINGTON, VA 22206.3612 87 - A- - 40. HEISHMAN, L 87 - A- - 29- 3029 FRONT ROYAL 'PIKE WRIGHTS RUN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4916 2800 S SHIRLINGTON RD STE 803 ARLINGTON, VA 22206-3612 87 - A- - 41. PYI-1 C-,K, JOHN :;JLLOCK, MARGARET Patton Harris Rust Associates, PC, 3049 FRONT ROYAL PIKE Attn: Charles Maddox V WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4916 87 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 - A- - 33. Winchester VA 22601 PLASTERS, SAMUEL E JR 3046 FRONT ROYAL PIKE 76 - A- - 57-A WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4906 COMFR. CRVILLE LEE 2903 FRONT ROYAL PIKE WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4915 iJ 76 - A- - 58- RITTER, FLOYD L & KAY C Candice E. Perkins, Planner II 141 BRIDGEPORT LN WINCHESTER, VA. 22602-4819 Frederick County Planning Dept. STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK I, Y�yyl�u U� , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Candice E. Perkins, Planner II for the epartment of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated ,.� 0.7 , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my St to hnd County aforesaid. Given under my hand this _ day of `, %�Q�t C �,- -�) 0 U ~% My commission expires on L� �'W� 6-e-( j l QOO 8 ?&� �. �), a�- -CukNOTARY PUBLIC 0 V6'c— 87 - A- - 31- � • BISHOP, JULIA L ` 114 ORCHARD DR MIDWEST CITY, OK 73110.3838 76 - A- - 53-G HOME DEPOT, U09, INC ATTN: PROPERTY TAX DEPT #5362 P.O. BOX 105842 ATLANTA, GA 30348.5842 76 -A- 53-E CAp:c HOLDCO EXCHANGE V, LLC s=0 BO1. X 173838 Al,(N:PROr-ERTY TA, DEsdVER, CO 8021 %-3838 76 - A- - 53-E S&W,LLC 720 S BRADDOCK ST WINCHESTER,VA 22601.4053 76 - A- - 55- DILL, DAVID R & MARY M 1135 SULPHUR SPRINGS RD MIDDLETOWN, VA 22645-3601 Adjoining Property Owners Rezoning TOARBARA-DATA PROCESSING FROM:BEV - Pia ning Dept. Please print sets of loDb ls. by ��KSI> Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public right-of-way, a private right-of-way, or a watercourse from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. The Commissioner of the Revenue is located on the 2" d floor of the Frederick County Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name Address Property Identification Number (PIN) .-Name: Orville Comer 2903 Front Royal Pike Property#: 76-A-57A Winchester, VA 22602 ame: Orville Comer 2903 Front Royal Pike Property#: 76-A-57 Winchester, VA 22602 ame: Floyd & Kay Ritter 141 Bridgeport Ln Property #: 76-A-58 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Robert Price 307 Caroline Ave Property#: 87-A-38 Stephens City, VA 22655 Bob & Louise Price 2997 Front Royal Pike .,Name: Property #: 87-A-39 Winchester, VA 22602 Diana Heishman 3029 Front Royal Pike ,Dlame: Property #: 87-A-40 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: John Bullock 3049 Front Royal Pike Property#: 87-A-41 Winchester, VA 22602 /Name: Samuel Plasters, Jr. 3046 Front Royal Pike Property #: 87-A-33 Winchester, VA 22602 Name: Julia Bishop 114 Orchard Dr Property #: 87-A-31 Midwest City, OK 73110 Name: Home Depot USA, Inc. P.O. Box 105842 Property #: 76-A-53G Atlanta, GA 30348 Name: Cable Holdco Exchange V, LLC P.O. Box 173838 Property #: 76-A-53F Denver, CO 80217 Name: S & W, LLC 720 S Braddock St Property #: 76-A-53E Winchester, VA 22601 ZQo—p.-�S -7c0—ti—S7-(-V ;;PR 2 7 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 76 - A - 55- DILL, DAVID R & MARY M 1135 SULPHUR SPRINGS RD WINCHESTER VA 22602 2250105039 226J23•6' ` ; RU 6 016H26508243 $ 00.390 04/ 12/2007 Mailed From 22601 US POSTAGE NIXIE 201 1 U(S G+4./:'.�6✓ a' RETURN TO SENDER NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD SIC: 22SOIS03907 *2192-03243--24-27 Illl�llll�l�ll��lil�ll��llll�l�ll�l��lll�llilllill�l���l�llill COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning .and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC MEETING April 12, 2007 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: REZONING APPLICATION 402-07 FOR EASTGATE COMMERCIAL On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public meeting being held on Wednesday, April 25, 2007, 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 1402-07 of Eastgate Commercial, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 10.65 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District and 8.23 acres from B3 (Industrial Transition) District to B2 District, with proffers, for commercial uses. The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), immediately north and south of Maranto Manor Drive, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 87-A-34, 87-A-34B, 87-A-35, 87-A-36, 87-A-37 and 76-A-53. 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 Plamiing 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, Candice E. Perkins Planner 11 CEP/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000