The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About006-03 Stephenson Village - Stonewall - BackfileCASH rRECEIPT . 003079 Dat v WReceive ruj gilt Address 7U. 1 �c ,;� 1 i; �•1 G� �y rt�. iX t%r orACCOUNT Uo HOW PAID a Q AMT OF ACCOUNT CASH 1 ��{ %�. l'� 1 W ;+ AMT. PAID _ � CHEC BALANCE DUE MONEY ORDER CREDIT CARD H YNC- �- REZONING TRACKING SHEET Check List: Application Form V111- Proffer Statement Impact Analysis 1` Adjoiner List —�— 'TrafTIc Sh I-71I& DATE. 3 ",2,I - Q 3 Application received/file opened Fee & Sign Deposit Deed Plat/Survey - Taxes Paid Statement Impact Model Run L Reference manual updated/number assigned D-base updated Copy of adjoiner list given to staff member for verification Four sets of adjoiner labels ordered from data processing One 8'Y2" x I I" black and white location map ordered from Mapping 3 • �5 Q� File given to office man er to update Application Action Summary �PC- ��G�M �-�� A0P/9-a0A� 7 ao� PC pub is hearing date ACTION: D � a�1b3 - aos VPAV�� d� 3 BOS ublic hearing date ACTION: C Signed co of resolution for amendment of ordinance with conditions proffered g PY � [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.) 02 Action letter mailed to applicant /.,zC �� Reference manual and D-base updated ile given to office manager to update Application Action Summary (final action) q O-3 File given to Mapping/GIS to update zoning map o Zoning map amended U TarohCommonUracking sheets\RFZ_tracking.wpd Revised 05/09/02 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 September 3, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1. COMMUNITY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT 2 2. PHASING PLAN TO MINIMIZE SUDDEN IMPACTS ON COUNTY SERVICES 2 3. USES, DENSITY AND MIX OF HOUSING TYPES 3 4. APPLICANT TO PAY 100 % OF CAPITAL FACILITY IMPACTS 5 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM 7 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC. 7 7. MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS 8 8. SCHOOL AND BALLFIELD SITES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC USE AREAS 11 9. RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND LINEAR PARK 13 10. ACTIVE ADULT AGE -RESTRICTED HOUSING 14 11. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY 16 12. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 16 13. COMMERCIAL CENTER 16 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE 18 15. COMMUNITY DESIGN FOR A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE 18 16. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND HABITAT PRESERVATION 19 17. COMMUNITY CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION 22 18. WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STEPHENSON AREA 23 19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY 23 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION(S) 23 21. PROFFERED HOUSING TYPES 24 22. STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING 25 23. COMMUNITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM 26 September 3, 2003 Executive Summary Of the Proffer Statement for the Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community The proffers for Stephenson Village define the conditions for the construction and maintenance of a residential planned community based on Smart Growth principles. As envisioned, Stephenson Village will feature a school, public ball fields, recreation centers, trails and convenient shopping that will tie the neighborhoods of Stephenson together and serve as a vital center. Stephenson Village itself will have a distinctive look, a strong architectural theme, and a mixture of housing types to meet the needs of people of all ages, including an age -restricted active adult community and affordable housing for the elderly. The plan emphasizes walkable neighborhoods —with boulevards, sidewalks, bike paths and trails throughout. In addition to the 135.6 acres in the core battlefield area (which is not included in the rezoning request), 794.6±-acre parcel will have approximately 250 acres of open space. Build -out of Stephenson Village is anticipated to take 20 to 25 years. The proffers provide a balance of design and market flexibility and County control over uses and densities. Planned Community Design Stephenson Village will use compact building design with extensive architectural and landscaping standards to create distinctive streetscapes. The proffers specify six new housing types and illustrate floor plans for each. The housing types will be mixed within each neighborhood. To assure overall mixing while maintaining flexibility, the proffers establish maximum percentages for single-family detached, multi -family (townhouse and semi-detached) and age -restricted housing. The design will provide opportunities for people to live, work and shop in the same community. The school and public ball field sites will be located on the north side of the property, along Old Charles Town Road. The center of Stephenson Village will have affordable housing for the elderly and 250,000 square feet of commercial and office space (60,000 square feet guaranteed), including space for a rent-free Frederick County satellite office. Land will be set aside for a day care center in an appropriate location. The south side of Stephenson Village will include a large age -restricted (55 and over) "active adult" community. This will be a gated community with its own recreational facilities and private streets and alleys. In addition, the Applicant will provide a minimum of 144 units for the elderly after sufficient retail space has been occupied to qualify for Federal affordable -housing programs. September 3, 2003 i Stephenson Associates 030703 The proffers establish an overall density cap of 2,465 units exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly, an average of 3.1 units per acre. To avoid sudden impacts on County schools and other services, the proffers establish a cumulative yearly construction cap of 8% on all units that are not age -restricted. Since age -restricted housing has positive tax impact on County budgets and no impact on schools, these unit types will be exempt from the phasing plan. Covering 100% of Capital Facilities Impacts Economic analysis of Stephenson Village indicates that its proffer payments, taxes and fees will more than cover the cost of County services. The Applicant will cover 100% of the capital costs predicted by the County fiscal impact model for each housing type. These proffer fees will be adjusted every two years using the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Additional proffer fees may be assessed by Frederick County if school population from the project is higher than projected. If the cumulative total increase in students from Stephenson Village exceeds 60 students a year, the County may assess an additional proffer fee of $3,925 for each additional student. Transportation Improvements The Applicant will make transportation improvements to maintain acceptable levels of service on existing roads. These improvements will be triggered by actual traffic counts, with levels specified in the proffers, at permanently installed traffic counters at the entrance on Old Charles Town Road and the southwestern entrance. This will allow us to anticipate traffic increases rather than react to them. Design and construction will begin when traffic reaches 80 percent of the trigger point. A four -lane boulevard will serve the community as the major collector road. This road, identified in the County Comprehensive Policy Plan, runs from Old Charles Town Road in the north to Route 11 in the south. The sides and medians of this boulevard will be heavily landscaped outside of conservation and tree -save areas. The boulevard will have bicycle lanes on each side, and sidewalks or walking trails for the entire length in Stephenson Village. The road will be built first in a two-lane half section, beginning at Old Charles Town Road. The road will be extended to Route 11 and the second two-lane section constructed when traffic counts reach specified limits. This major collector road will be dedicated to VDOT. The Applicant has obtained rights -of -way and easements for off -site transportation improvements and will execute agreements with VDOT. Traffic improvements will include: completing the two-lane half -section of the major collector road, extending the major collector road to the Rutherford Farm intersection at Route 11, widening Old Charles Town Road to three lanes between the entrance and Route 11, signalizing (with turn lanes) the northern entrance, and signalizing (with turn lanes) of the September 3, 2003 ii Stephenson Associates 030703 intersection between Old Charles Town Road and Route 11. Stephenson Village will also contribute its share of regional improvements to I-81 interchange 317. School Site and Recreation Facilities As envisioned, Stephenson Village will have a public school and extensive public ball fields within walking distance of the community. The Applicant will dedicate 20 acres to the County for a school site, accessible from Old Charles Town road and Stephenson Village. Next to the school site, the Applicant will dedicate 24 acres, which when combined with the school playing fields will provide six soccer fields and six baseball fields for soccer and Little League teams. The recreation center at Stephenson Village will be fully bonded at the outset and constructed early in the project. This recreation center will include a bathhouse and a six - lane 25-meter competition swimming pool. The Applicant will dedicate a 20-foot linear park trail easement to the County within the Hiatt Run Corridor from one end of the property to the other, and will construct at no cost a six-foot wide asphalt trail. Additional recreation facilities (such as playgrounds, tot lots, multipurpose courts, basketball courts, picnic areas and volleyball courts) will be built to satisfy any remaining requirements of County zoning. The Applicant will also construct a recreation center for the private use of the active adult community. Environmental Improvements There is an opportunity to improve the quality of Hiatt Run and associated wetlands through better stormwater control. Most (over 90%) of the soils on the property will not support crops without heavy amendment. Much of the soil has low permeability, which has historically caused stormwater runoff problems in the streams, ditches and ravines. Approximately 250 acres of the property will be left in open space. The Applicant will identify and preserve all significant wildlife habitats and steep slopes. Streams will be protected by 100-foot buffers between the centerline of the stream and adjacent lots. The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel will be resource protection areas. To the maximum extent possible, intermittent streams and associated stands of mature trees will not be disturbed, and native plants and trees will be used in the forest management plan. Low impact development methods will be used as appropriate for stormwater management and road construction. These will include measures to direct runoff from steep slopes and use existing ponds where beneficial to the environment. Additional ponds, infiltration areas and bio-retention facilities will be developed to limit runoff to September 3, 2003 iii Stephenson Associates 030703 Hiatt Run. When conditions permit, vegetated open channels will be used along streets for storm water runoff. Utility Improvements Stephenson Village will use public water and sewer, and bring the opportunity for sewer connections to surrounding neighborhoods with access to gravity mains. Currently, the Northern Water Treatment plant provides 1.5 million gallons per day from the Global Chemstone Quarry, which is more than adequate to supply the 683,000 gallons per day demand of the completed community. None of the utility infrastructure associated with the project will cost the County taxpayers money. The Applicant will dedicate land to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, build a pump station, and build a force main and associated infrastructure. Low impact construction methods will be used where force mains and buried utility lines cross sensitive areas. Electric, broadband and telephone utilities will be buried throughout the project. Public lighting, as well as the exterior lighting of homes, will use fixtures that direct light down and minimize stray illumination. Trash collection will be provided by a commercial service and will not use Frederick County Citizen Convenience Centers. In lieu of land for a fire/rescue site, the Applicant has increased the cash proffers. The Applicant has proffered to contribute $200,000 to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. This contribution is not counted as part of the proffer fees to the County. Preservation of Historic and Cultural Resources The Byers House will be preserved and used as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. Significant archeological areas and cemeteries (if any) will be preserved. The Applicant is proffering $75,000 in matching funds to help the County develop transportation enhancements and/or heritage tourism. Smart Growth U.S. Environmental Protection Agency encourages smart growth communities like the proposed Stephenson Village. Cluster development controls sprawl and its associated environmental and fiscal impacts by making development more predictable and cost effective, and by directing resources toward existing communities. Stephenson Associates L.C. is committed to making Stephenson Village --the first smart growth community in Frederick County --a success and a model for development in the region. September 3, 2003 1V Stephenson Associates 030703 Page 1 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 September 3, 2003 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 The undersigned, Stephenson Associates, L.C., (hereinafter referred to as Applicant), its successors and/or assigns, hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict accordance with the following conditions and shall supersede all other proffers made prior hereto. In the event the above -referenced amendments are not granted as applied for by the Applicant, the below described proffers shall be withdrawn and null and void. The headings of the proffers set forth below, the Table of Contents and the Executive Summary have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the site adjacent to the improvement, unless otherwise specified herein. References made to the Master Development Plan, hereinafter referred to as the Generalized Development Plan, as required by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, are to be interpreted to be references to the specific Generalized Development Plan sheets prepared by Greenway Engineering and Land Planning and Design Group, dated September 3, 2003 attached as Exhibit A. The exact boundary and acreage of each land bay may be shifted to a reasonable degree at the time of site plan submission for each land bay in order to accommodate engineering or design considerations. The Applicant is submitting a Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) as a part of the rezoning application. The Generalized Development Plan is provided in lieu of a Master Development Plan, and contains all information deemed appropriate by the Frederick County Planning Department. The Generalized Development Plan does not eliminate the requirement for a Master Development Plan for the portion of the site to be developed, which will be provided following rezoning approval but prior to any development of any portion of the 794.6±-acre site (Property). Page 2 September 3, 2003 1. COMMUNITY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT: In order for the Applicant and Frederick County to implement the Residential Community, it will be important for the Applicant and Frederick County Planning Staff to have the opportunity to anticipate, incorporate and to develop new advanced housing types and configurations that may be suitable in a Residential Planned Community. These housing types will include many of the neo-traditional housing types which are proffered in this Proffer Statement which allow for the creation of a true community and for the maximization and preservation of natural corridors and open space for the use and enjoyment of the community at large. A. Pursuant to Article II, Amendments of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the approval of this Proffer statement constitutes an amendment to the zoning ordinance, which will allow the expansion of the R4 District. B. The Applicant has proffered a Community Design Modification Document that is attached and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit F, and which is accepted by Frederick County. In addition to the above, by approving this Proffer Statement, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors agrees without need of any further Board of Supervisors or Planning Department approval to any modifications for any matter which has been previously agreed to and therefore approved by Frederick County. Further still, any submitted revisions to the approved Generalized Development Plan, the approved Master Development Plan and/or any of its requirements for any development zoned R-4 which affect the perimeter of the development or which would increase the overall density of the development shall require the Board of Supervisors' approval. If, in the reasonable discretion of the Frederick County Planning Department, the Planning Department decides any requested modification should be reviewed by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, it may secure said approval by placing this matter before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at its next regularly scheduled meeting. However, and not withstanding what is stated above, once a modification has been approved administratively, the Applicant shall not be required to seek approval for any subsequent similar modification. 2. PHASING PLAN TO MINIMIZE SUDDEN IMPACTS ON COUNTY SERVICES: A. Additional Proffer Pam To minimize sudden increases in the Frederick County Public School population and sudden impacts on other county services, the Applicant shall implement the following phasing plan on all residential housing that is not age -restricted. To ensure that unanticipated increases in Frederick County Public School population do not burden the county with extra costs, Frederick County may assess the Applicant to effectively double school - related proffers for each student that exceeds a cumulative yearly total increase of 60 students per year. Page 3 September 3, 2003 The total number of new Frederick County Public School students generated by Stephenson Village will be determined from the September 30 report produced by Frederick County Public Schools. The Applicant proffers to reimburse Frederick County Public Schools for its cost of creating the September 30 report data related to Stephenson Village. This additional proffer payment will be provided to Frederick County by the Applicant within 30 days of receipt of the September 30 report produced by Frederick County Public Schools. If the reported number of Frederick County Public School students generated by Stephenson Village exceeds the cumulative total of 60 students per year (9/30/03=60, 9/30/04=120, etc.), the Applicant shall pay an additional proffer payment of $3,925 as assessed by Frederick County for each Frederick County Public School child that exceeds the cumulative total. The additional proffer payment will be adjusted every two years by the Consumer Price Index. B. Limitation on Permits (1) Calculation The active adult housing units and the affordable housing for the elderly have been removed from the restrictions imposed by the phasing plan and are not part of the following phasing plan formula nor will they be included in the yearly building permit tracking system. The overall density cap for Stephenson Village is 2,465 units, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly. Once the planned number of active adult housing units and the affordable housing for the elderly have been removed, the adjusted total number of units subject to phasing restriction is 1,665. The phasing allowed quantities shall be limited to 8% per year on a cumulative yearly basis beginning with the date of approval of this rezoning based on the following formula: (2,465 — 800 to 1,300 range of age restricted units) x 8% + unused permits from prior year(s) = maximum non -age restricted permits for current year Any units not used in a given year shall be carried forward. 3. USES DENSITY AND MIX OF HOUSING TYPES: A. (1) The Applicant shall develop a mix of housing unit types to include those single-family detached, townhouse and multifamily housing unit types described in the Land Bay Breakdown Table in §3A(2) and further described in §21of this proffer statement. Each of the housing unit types in the R4 District, Section 165-67 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, is either a single-family dwelling, townhouse or multifamily unit type. For purposes of this Proffer, all of the above housing types shall be referred to as Mixed Residential. The following list could be used as they currently exist within the R-4 portion of the zoning ordinance. Page 4 September 3, 2003 (2) The following list of Land Bays within the Land Bay Breakdown Table sets forth the development parameters on the Property and is consistent with the proffered Generalized Development Plan identified as Exhibit A: LAND BAY BREAKDOWN LAND LAND USE ACREAGE % OF TOTAL BAY HOUSING UNIT TYPES MIN. MAX. I ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 20 Ac. NA NA II COMMUNITY PARK 24 Ac. NA NA (6 baseball fields & 6 soccer fields) III MIXED RESIDENTIAL 475 Ac. CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL/DAYCARE 7 Ac.* NA NA SFD 30 53 (Housing Unit Type 1,2,4,5, RP District SFD & Active Adult) TOWNHOUSE 10 30 (Housing Unit Type 6 & RP District Townhouse) MULTIFAMILY 7 30 (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3 & RP District Duplex, Multiplex, Atrium & Active Adult) IV ACTIVE ADULT 126 Ac. 30 53 SFD (Housing Unit Type 1,2 &5) Multifamily (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3) V COMMERCIAL CENTER 26 Ac.* NA NA (Commercial Retail, Office & Public Service Satellite Facility) The actual acreage identified for each Land Bay is based on the bubble diagram calculated on the proffered Generalized Development Plan and may fluctuate within 5% of the total acreage based on final survey work. Page 5 September 3, 2003 Land Bay Breakdown Notes (1) The above table represents the ranges for the referenced housing types as proposed. The final mix will not exceed the 2,465-unit cap, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) and will be comprised of house type combinations representing a mixture identified in the table. The minimum and maximum percentages established apply to the general categories of single family, townhouses, multifamily and active adult units and are not intended to pertain to any one housing type in those categories. The housing unit type maximum percentage for the general categories of single family, townhouse, multifamily and active adult will not exceed the percentages identified in the table and will not exceed the total unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) based on any combination. *(2) The total commercial area will be a minimum of 4 % of the gross site area or 33 acres and will be located within Land Bays III and V. (3) The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel are approximately 125 acres. The remaining 113.5 acres of required open space will be provided within Land Bays I, II, III and IV. (4) The Applicant reserves the right to convert more of Land Bay III to active adult or affordable housing for the elderly. In no case shall the percentage of active adult or affordable housing for the elderly exceed 53% of the total unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11). B. For purposes of calculating density pursuant to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, all dedications and conveyances of land for public use and/or for the use of the development or any Homeowners Association shall be credited in said calculations. C. There shall be a unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) on the subject property. D. In order to preclude unwanted industrial and heavy commercial uses, all land uses within the B-3 District and the M-1 District shall be prohibited, unless otherwise permitted in the RP District, the B-1 District or the B-2 District. In no case shall truck stops be permitted within Stephenson Village. 4. APPLICANT TO PAY 100% OF CAPITAL FACILITY IMPACTS: The Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model was applied to the Stephenson Village rezoning on January 9, 2003. The results of this model run demonstrate a fiscal impact to capital facilities in the amount of $5,327 per residential unit. Z Page 6 September 3, 2003 The Applicant will pay 100% of these impacts through monetary contributions and land donations to Frederick County, unless otherwise specified by the proffer. The parties agree that the value used for the land donations of $30,000 per acre is appropriate and acceptable. These monetary contributions provide for the capital facilities impacts created by Stephenson Village and shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance for each unit. The monetary contribution will be adjusted every two years by the Consumer Price Index — All Urban Consumers (Current Series) See example at the end of this section. The Applicant will pay for active adult units a 50% premium on proffer fees for fire and rescue over and above the Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model to cover any increased service demand; similarly, the applicant will pay for affordable apartment units for the elderly a 100% premium. However, these age -restricted units will not include monetary proffers for various capital facilities, such as schools, that they do not impact. The per unit monetary proffer for single family, townhouse and multifamily provides for: $3,925.00 for Frederick County Public Schools ($4,135 per model less $210 for land donation) $635.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation ($889 per model less $254 for land donation) $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue $145.00 for Public Library $152.00 for Administration Building The per unit monetary proffer for active adult units provides for: $635.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation ($889 per model less $254 for land donation) $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue 200.00 50% Premium $600.00 Total for Frederick County Fire and Rescue $145.00 for Public Library $152.00 for Administration Building The per unit monetary proffer for the affordable housing for the elderly provides for: $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue 400.00 100% premium $800.00 Total for Frederick County Fire and Rescue Should the index as currently published by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics cease to be published then the most nearly comparable index shall be used. Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 Index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 225 183 X $5,327 = $6,550 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM: In consideration of the approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of $200,000.00 for its general fund. This is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Fire and Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 5001h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,0001h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. Page 8 September 3, 2003 7. MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS: A. The following are improvements the Applicant will make to roads within the Property: (1) Major Collector Road (a) Pursuant to Section 7F (2), 7F (4) and 7F(5) of this proffer statement, the Applicant shall dedicate an 80 foot right of way and construct the Major Collector Road from Old Charles Town Road through Stephenson Village, and the properties currently owned by McCann and Omps to U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) in accordance with existing agreements executed between all parties to insure conformance with the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The width and configuration of all travel lanes, medians and other elements of the major collector road shall be provided by the Applicant as determined by VDOT. (b) The Applicant shall provide landscaped areas along, within, and/or adjacent to each side of the Major Collector Road in accordance with § 22-A of this proffer. (c) When the Major Collector Road is finally completed as a four lane divided boulevard, the median will be naturally vegetated with a combination of both woodland conservation areas and grassed areas supplemented with landscape plantings. If approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), all plantings, other than those in woodland conservation areas, will be installed by the Applicant and will have a maintenance agreement between VDOT and the Applicant which will transfer to the Homeowners Association of Stephenson Village (HOA) to cover all mowing, weeding, pruning, plant replacements, and irrigation maintenance responsibilities. Irrigation systems within the right-of-way will be designed as a separate system to allow the portion of the irrigation system falling within the right-of-way to be terminated if necessary without affecting the overall system. (d) The Applicant shall provide bicycle lanes within the Major Collector Road right of way over the property to be rezoned that are four feet in width and are contiguous with the outside travel lanes of the Major Collector Road and are properly marked and signed. (e) The Applicant shall prohibit individual residential and commercial entrances from intersecting Milburn Road (Route 662) and further proffers that the Major Collector Road will be the only road crossing of Milburn Road. Page 9 (2) Inteiparcel Connections September 3, 2003 The Applicant agrees to provide interparcel connections between land bays within the Property at the time the respective land bays are developed and to the extent reasonably possible. (3) Private Streets, Alleys and Common Drives (a) The Applicant shall provide for a gated community entrance for the active adult portion of the overall community and shall serve the active adult community with a complete system of private streets. The cross sectional dimension of pavement thickness and compacted base thickness will meet or exceed the public street pavement section standards utilized by VDOT. (b) Where private alleys are utilized, the Applicant will provide one-way alleys within a sixteen -foot (16') wide easement having twelve feet (12') of pavement with a two foot (2') shoulder on both sides of the pavement throughout the entire community. All private alleys, which intersect other private alleys at 90 degree angles or have turns at 90 degree angles shall provide for a minimum turning radius of 25 feet. Private alleys, intersection, public or private streets, shall provide curb cuts extending two feet beyond the paved edge of the standard alley width. (c) Where private alleys are utilized to serve housing types that front on private streets the Applicant shall provide for a minimum travel aisle width of 24 feet for the private street. The 24 foot travel aisle shall be in addition to on street parking designed for the private street. (d) When Housing Unit Type 4 (courtyard cluster) is developed, the common drive shall meet the following standards: (i) A minimum width of 20 feet (ii) A minimum depth of pavement section shall be a four inch compacted stone base and six inches of concrete or equivalent material. (iii) A "No Parking" sign shall be posted at the entrance to the courtyard. (iv) A fire hydrant shall be provided at the entrance to each corner drive to the courtyard clusters. When common drives are adjacent to or across the street from other courtyard cluster common drives, only one hydrant shall be required. (v) Visitor parking areas will be provided outside of the courtyard cluster common drive area. Page 10 September 3, 2003 B. The applicant has acquired easements and/or rights of way over the properties currently owned by McCann and Omps for the purpose of dedicating and constructing the Major Collector Road and for improvements along the south side of Old Charles Town Road from Route 11 north to the CSX railroad. The Applicant will acquire any additional rights -of -way and/or easements for all off -site transportation improvements proffered hereinafter. In the event the Applicant is not able to acquire any of the said rights -of -way and/or easements, Frederick County agrees to attempt to acquire such rights -of -way and/or easements by appropriate eminent domain proceedings at the request of Applicant and Applicant shall be responsible for all payments made to property owners for rights -of -way and/or easements so acquired. In the event that neither the Applicant nor Frederick County successfully obtains the required rights -of -way or easements for the offsite transportation improvements as required by the traffic study, the Applicant shall be permitted to continue with the development as proposed without any further requirement of right-of-way or easement acquisition or improvement. C. The Applicant will install full size entrance improvements with right and left turn lanes, in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation design guidelines, at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road serving as the entrance to the Stephenson Village Community during the first phase of development. D. The Applicant will execute a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the intersection of U.S. Route 11 and Old Charles Town Road. Additionally, the Applicant will construct full size entrance improvements with both a right turn lane and left turn lane on Old Charles Town Road, and a right turn lane on U.S. Route 11 at said intersection. These improvements will be installed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation design guidelines when warranted by VDOT. E. The Applicant will execute a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road serving as the entrance to the Stephenson Village Community. The Applicant will provide for the signalization at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road based on the terms of this agreement when warranted by the Virginia Department of Transportation. F. The Applicant will design and construct a four -lane boulevard Major Collector Road for the Stephenson Village Community in substantial conformance with the proffered Generalized Development Plan. The Major Collector Road will be constructed in two phases. The first phase will be a two-lane half section that is constructed from Old Charles Town Road to the limits of the development as depicted on the approved Master Development Plan. This phase of the Major Collector Road will be constructed and bonded in segments in accordance with the approved Subdivision Design Plan for Stephenson Village. The second phase of the Major Collector Road will provide for the ultimate four -lane section with appropriate right and left turn lanes based on the following program: (1) The design of the transportation improvements identified in Sections 7(F)2- 7(F)5 of this proffer statement will begin when 80% of the actual traffic count volume is Page 11 September 3, 2003 realized as identified in each Section. The completion of the improvements specified in each Section will occur within 18 months of initial design. (2) Once actual traffic counts of 7,996 vehicle trips per day have been documented on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of the additional lanes to the existing Major Collector Road to its ultimate four -lane section from Old Charles Town Road to the limits of the Major Collector Road within the development. (3) Once the actual traffic count reaches 10,570 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of a three -lane section of Old Charles Town Road, from the Entrance to Stephenson Village to U.S. Route 11 using the existing bridge. (4) Once the actual traffic count reaches 17,699 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of a two lane half section of the Major Collector Road from the limits of the four -lane section to U.S. Route 11 at the Rutherford Farm Industrial Park intersection to include right and left turn lanes on the east side of U.S. Route 11 as determined by VDOT. The Applicant agrees to enter into a signalization agreement with VDOT at the U.S. Route I I/Rutherford Farm Industrial Park intersection if traffic signalization is not otherwise provided at that time. Traffic counters will be installed at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village on the property as part of this improvement. (5) Once the actual traffic count at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village near the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park intersection reaches 7,996 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of the remaining additional lanes to the existing Major Collector Road from the limits of the four -lane section to provide for the ultimate four -lane section ending at the east side of U.S. Route 11. G. The Applicant will provide $50,000 that shall be utilized as matching funds by VDOT and/or the County of Frederick for future improvements to the Interstate 8IIU.S. Route 11 interchange at Exit 317. This dollar amount is intended to assist VDOT and the County of Frederick with this regional improvement. The $50,000 will be made available to VDOT or to the County of Frederick, within 30 days of written request for said funds by the appropriate party. 8. SCHOOL AND BALLFIELD SITES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC USE AREAS: A. School Site: The Applicant shall dedicate 20 acres of land to the Frederick County School Board for use as a public school site which shall count towards the overall Page 12 September 3, 2003 open space requirement for the development. Said site will occur within the general location identified as Land Bay I on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), adjacent to Old Charles Town Road, which will allow direct access to the site for citizens living outside of Stephenson Village. The Applicant will allow access for Stephenson Village residents to the site from a local neighborhood street, and will provide access to water and sewer at a point reasonably acceptable to the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, along the property boundary, at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. The Applicant shall convey said school site not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing, at no cost. B. Soccer and Baseball Field Site: (1) The Applicant shall dedicate 24 acres of land to Frederick County or such other entity as Frederick County designates and as more specifically set forth below which, when combined with school ball fields, will be used for 6 soccer fields and 6 baseball fields as shown on the layout for School/Park Site (Exhibit C, graphic for illustrative purposes only), which shall count towards the overall open space requirement for the development. Said site will occur within the general location identified as Land Bay II on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), adjacent to Old Charles Town Road, which will allow direct access to the site for citizens living outside of Stephenson Village. The Applicant will allow access for Stephenson Village residents to the site from a local neighborhood street and will allow access to water and sewer at a point reasonably acceptable along the property boundary, at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. The Applicant shall convey said soccer and baseball field site, not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing, at no cost. (2) Frederick County at its sole discretion may convey or lease its ownership interest in the soccer and baseball field sites to a corporation, trust or other entity which incorporates the direction of both the public and private sectors to provide recreation opportunities for the public. C. At the time the school and soccer and baseball fields sites are deeded to the County, the Applicant shall provide, at the Applicant's expense, a boundary survey and shall stake the corners of each site. Before Frederick County assigns or conveys any ownership interest in the Property conveyed herein by the Applicant to any third party, including, but not limited to the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, the third party will execute an agreement in recordable form which is satisfactory to the applicant which will provide and confirm that said third party agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Proffer Statement, including, but not limited to, provisions governing the use of the Property to be conveyed and also the application of all restrictive covenants governing the use of the Property and the construction of improvements upon it. By executing this Proffer Statement, Frederick County also agrees to be bound to and comply with the same. Page 13 September 3, 2003 D. Notwithstanding the potential uses of the parcels referenced in subparagraphs A and B above, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors shall have flexibility to determine the specific use located within each land bay dedicated for public use purposes, provided that said uses are one of those listed in subparagraphs A and B. Any other similar types of public uses shall be permitted only with the consent of the Applicant and provided that the use is of an architectural style and uses construction materials that are consistent with the restrictive covenants recorded against the property conveyed. Furthermore, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors agrees that if the public purposes are not constructed or installed, completed and in use on the parcels which are identified in subparagraphs A and B above within ten years of the conveyance from the Applicant, said properties may be purchased by the Applicant for the land value specified in §4 of this proffer statement. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby instructs and empowers its County Administrator to execute such other deeds or documents, which shall be required to effect the terms of this provision. E. The Applicant reserves the right to retain temporary and permanent grading, slope, utility, drainage, storm water management and access easements on all public use parcels which are dedicated to the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, provided said easements do not preclude reasonable use and development of the property for the intended purpose. 9. RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND LINEAR PARK: A. Recreational Center The Applicant shall construct one (1) recreation center within the Land Bay identified as Land Bay III as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), for the use of the residents of the Property and as determined by the Home Owners Association. The Applicant shall have the sole and absolute right to determine within said land bay, where the facility shall be located. The Applicant shall designate the location of the above facility on the Master Development Plan. The recreational center shall include a bathhouse and a 6-lane, 25-meter competition swimming pool. The facility will be fully bonded prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Work on this facility shall commence prior to the issuance of the 250th non -age restricted building permit and be completed prior to issuance of the 8001h building permit for the non -age restricted housing products. B. Active Adult Recreational Center The Applicant shall construct one (1) recreation center within one of the Land Bays identified as shown on the Generalized Development Plan, for the private use of the residents of the Active Adult Community. This facility will be fully bonded prior to the issuance of the first building permit in the Active Adult Community. Work on this facility shall commence prior to the issuance of the 1501h building permit and be completed prior to issuance of the 3501h building permit in the Active Adult Community. Page 14 C. Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk System September 3, 2003 The Applicant shall construct a pedestrian trail or sidewalk system, which connects each recreation area to the surrounding neighborhood. The final location and the granting of any such easements and/or trails shall be at the subdivision design plan stage. Such trails or sidewalk system shall be constructed of stone dust or wood chips or such other materials selected by the Applicant provided they are not part of the sidewalk system within the public right-of-way. D. Linear Park Trail A twenty -foot (20') wide trail easement shall be dedicated to Frederick County Parks and Recreation. The location is to be determined by the Applicant and a trail system plan shall be submitted by the Applicant for evaluation by the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department. The trail shall be provided within the Hiatt Run Corridor and run the length of said corridor on the subject property for 3,800 +/- linear feet as shown on the proffered General Development Plan (Exhibit A). The Applicant shall convey said easement after development of adjoining parcels, or reasonable access is provided, and not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County Parks and Recreation in writing at no cost to Frederick County or Frederick County Parks and Recreation. Any area so dedicated shall be included in the calculation of required open space, and shall entitle the Applicant to recreational credit units for the value of the construction of the trail and dedicated land. The Applicant reserves the right to retain temporary and permanent grading, utility, sewer force main, slope, storm water management, construction and drainage easements within said dedicated area, although only temporary easements shall be retained as needed for the construction by the Applicant of the six-foot wide asphalt or concrete trail described herein. The asphalt or concrete trail at the discretion of the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department may be changed to other surface materials in an effort to promote low impact development techniques. Construction of said trail by the Applicant is contingent upon the proposed trail being allowed by all applicable County and State ordinances, and limitations due to terrain and constructability considerations. In the event that the public linear park trail is unable to be constructed due to County or State ordinances, the Applicant shall develop the linear park trail as a private trail system for the use of the residents of Stephenson Village. This private linear park trail shall count towards the open space and recreational amenities requirements for Stephenson Village and will be constructed of similar materials and standards identified in section 9C of this proffer statement. 10. ACTIVE ADULT AGE -RESTRICTED HOUSING A. Applicant agrees that the following language shall be included in the deeds conveying real property designated as age -restricted housing on that portion of the property. At least eighty percent (80%) of the occupied residential units shall be occupied by at least one person fifty-five (55) years of age or older and within such units the following conditions shall apply: Page 15 September 3, 2003 (1) All other residents must reside with a person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older, and be a spouse, a cohabitant, an occupant's child eighteen (18) years of age or older, or provide primary physical or economic support to the person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older. Notwithstanding this limitation, a person hired to provide live-in, long term or terminal health care of a person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older for compensation shall also occupy a dwelling during any time such person is actually providing such care. (2) Guests under the age of fifty-five (55) are permitted for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days total for each such guest in any calendar year. (3) If title to any lot or unit shall become vested in any person under the age of fifty-five (55) by reason of descent, distribution, foreclosure or operation of law, the age restriction covenants shall not work a forfeiture or reversion of title, but rather, such person thus taking title shall not be permitted to reside in such lot or unit until he/she shall have attained the age of fifty-five (55) or otherwise satisfies the requirements as set forth herein. Notwithstanding, a surviving spouse shall be allowed to continue to occupy a dwelling unit without regard to age. B. A maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the occupied age -restricted residential units shall be allowed to be occupied by at least one person fifty (50) years of age or older and within such units the following conditions shall apply: (1) All other residents must reside with a person who is fifty (50) years of age or older, be a spouse, a cohabitant, an occupant's child eighteen (18) years of age or older, or provide primary physical or economic support to the person who is fifty (50) years of age or older. Notwithstanding this limitation, a person hired to provide live-in, long term or terminal health care to a person who is fifty (50) years of age or older for compensation shall also occupy a dwelling during any time such person is actually providing such care. (2) Guests under the age of fifty (50) are permitted for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days total for each such guest in any calendar year. (3) If title to any lot or unit shall become vested in any person under the age of fifty (50) by reason of descent, distribution, foreclosure or operation of law, the age restriction covenant shall not work a forfeiture or reversion of title, but rather, such person thus taking title shall not be permitted to reside in such lot or unit until he/she shall have attained the age of fifty (50) or otherwise satisfied the requirements as set forth herein. Notwithstanding, a surviving spouse shall be allowed to continue to occupy a dwelling unit without regard to age. Page 16 September 3, 2003 (4) The above -described use restrictions shall be amended from time to time in accordance with applicable local and state regulations governing age restricted housing and the Federal Fair Housing Act so long as the substantive intent as set forth herein is maintained. In no event shall the minimum age of residents be less than the ages set forth hereinabove. C. Applicant agrees that the language in this Section or such other language as may be necessary to comply with the requirements to qualify as Housing for Older Persons under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Fair Housing Act of Virginia shall be included in the deeds conveying real property designated as age -restricted on that portion of the property. 11. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY: Subject to the provisions of this proffer statement, the Applicant will develop and build apartment units to provide much needed affordable housing for the elderly. The Applicant will comply with the necessary requirements to qualify these apartment units for the "Housing for Older Persons" exception to familial status discrimination as allowed under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Fair Housing Act of Virginia. The construction of these apartment units will begin after at least 50 percent of the retail space has been developed, provided that the approval of appropriate federal and state housing authorities is obtained, and the project qualifies for the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program or equivalent. In the event that funding for the affordable housing for the elderly is not obtained, the Applicant proffers to reapportion those units to the active adult community housing units. 12. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES: A. Byers house: The Byers house will be preserved as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. B. Cemeteries: Prior to commencement of any earth disturbing activity in any section of the Property, the applicant shall mark and identify any cemeteries which may be located there. In the event any onsite cemeteries are found, the applicant shall preserve those cemeteries in accordance with all County and State regulations. 13. COMMERCIAL CENTER: The Applicant has identified an area as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) for a commercial center that will be developed at a time to be determined by Applicant. Within the commercial center development, the following shall be provided: A. The Applicant shall provide for all turn lanes and traffic signalization on the Major Collector Road serving the commercial center as warranted by VDOT. The Page 17 September 3, 2003 Applicant shall conduct traffic impact analysis studies for each commercial site plan submitted to Frederick County that will be reviewed and approved by VDOT to determine when these improvements are warranted. A traffic signalization agreement will be executed with VDOT by the Applicant to ensure that commercial uses developed prior to the warrants for traffic signalization contribute their pro-rata share for this improvement. B. The Applicant shall record architectural and design restrictive covenants for the commercial center and shall submit a copy to the Frederick County Planning Director and the Frederick County Building Official with the first site plan within the commercial center. Said covenants shall provide for the establishment of an architectural review board for the purpose of review and approval of all architectural elevations and signage for all commercial uses to assure a continuity of overall architectural appearances within the entire commercial development. C. The Applicant shall ensure that all commercial site plans submitted to Frederick County for the commercial center are designed to implement best management practices (BMP) to promote storm water quality measures. A statement will be provided on each commercial site plan identifying the party or parties responsible for maintaining these BMP facilities as a condition of site plan approval. D. The areas within the commercial center that are not required to be graded or cleared for the implementation of all approved site plans will remain undisturbed. One-way travel aisles will be utilized where practical to reduce the impervious areas of parking lots within the commercial center. E. The Applicant shall provide for a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial land use in Stephenson Village. The majority of the commercial land use will be located within the commercial center identified on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit). The development of smaller areas of commercial land use will be allowed in other areas of Stephenson Village. These commercial land use areas will be provided on the detailed Master Development Plan associated with the development of Stephenson Village. F. The Applicant has identified an area as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) for a commercial center. The development of 60,000 square feet of commercial space will begin within the commercial center no later than the issuance of the 1,200`h non -age restricted residential building permit with completion of this commercial space within 18 months. The Applicant will be allowed to extend the commencement of commercial construction for an additional two year period if any one of the following circumstances has occurred: An elementary school has not been constructed on the Property; or a building permit is obtained for the development of a new grocery store within a three mile radius of commercial center within Stephenson Village. Page 18 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE: September 3, 2003 The Applicant shall provide up to 2,500 square feet of shell space for a 10 year period rent free exclusive of utility and common area maintenance (CAM) charges in the commercial center for the location of a Public Service Satellite Facility for Frederick County. The shell space shall be made available and commence upon the completion of the base building in which the space is located. Frederick County must complete build out and occupy the space within two (2) years of the completion of the base building. If Frederick County fails to build out and occupy the space within the two (2) year period then the space will revert to the Applicant. 15. COMMUNITY DESIGN FOR A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE: A. Design The Applicant agrees to provide an overall continuity of design within the community by means of selecting standards for the following elements, which will be uniformly specified and applied over the entire project: • Custom fixture street lighting program. • Custom mailbox design • Standardized common area fencing style and color • Standardized private residential fencing styles and color • Community color selections to create neighborhood theme • Uniform site furnishing selection (benches and trash receptacles) • Custom designed street signage and stop signage • Landscaping at the entrance monuments, along the collector road buffers and within the medians selected to provide for a repetition of the neighborhood flower color scheme and theme trees throughout the community The Applicant agrees to utilize innovative design techniques and quality design for the recreational center and bathhouse, common area landscaping, site design, and architectural design. B. Architecture (1) The architectural styling of Housing Unit Types 1 through 4 shall be constructed in accordance with the Housing Unit Types Exhibit(s) proffered herein. Housing Unit Types 5 and 6 shall be compatible with Housing Unit Types 1 through 4. (2) Access to garages by the use of alleys shall be allowed on Housing Unit Types 1 (Carriage House), 3 (Cottage House), 5 (Modified Single -Family Small Lot, and 6 (Modified Townhouse). Page 19 September 3, 2003 (3) Specific architectural elements that are allowed on Housing Unit Types, to include Housing Unit Types 5 and 6 shall include, but are not limited to, the use of peaked roofs, gables, chimneys, balconies or decks, porches and/or garages. C. Housing Unit Type 3 (Cottage House) and Unit Type 4 (Courtyard Cluster) (1) Decks and Patios All deck planks shall be Class I (A) fire rated composite lumber or approved equal of a standardized color to be selected by the Applicant. A maximum of two styles of deck railing shall be used on all decks and shall be made of the same composite lumber and the same matching color selection. (2) Fire Protection System Courtyard Cluster and Cottage houses will have a 13-D sprinkler system in the home and the garages. D. Lighting Any exterior lighting of individual homes or common use recreation areas shall be directed downward and inward on the site to reduce glare on adjacent properties, the public and/or private right-of-way, and upward stray illumination. E. Architectural and Design Covenants Stephenson Associates, L.C. shall develop architectural and design covenants for the overall community. Said covenants will establish an architectural review board for the purpose of review and approval of all architectural elevations, exterior architectural features (fences, railings, walls and decks) for all uses within Stephenson Village, as well as any publicly provided structures located on sites dedicated for public use. These covenants are intended to assure a continuity of overall architectural appearance, quality material selection, and a cohesive color palate for all structures within the entire development. 16. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND HABITAT PRESERVATION: A. Environmental Features and Easements: (1) Significant wildlife habitats shall be identified and preserved by the Applicant with technical assistance from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDG1F). Wildlife or bird habitats shall be further Page 20 September 3, 2003 enhanced by providing native plantings selected to encourage feeding areas while reestablishing forest in and around environmentally sensitive areas. (2) The Applicant shall limit the clearing and grading on each lot to the area needed for structures, utilities, access and fire protection to maximize tree save areas. (3) Unbuildable wetlands, unbuildable floodplains, and unbuildable steep slopes shall be designated and shall be subject to the following: (a) Grading: Protection of steeply sloped areas will be provided by the Applicant as follows: clearing and grading will not occur on any slopes of twenty five percent (25%) or greater, except for trails, road crossings, utilities, drainage and storm water management facilities. (b) Floodplain Areas: Development within floodplain areas shall be limited to the public Linear Park Trail system to include the trail, pedestrian bridges, benches and signage. (c) Buffers and Conservation Easements: (i) Buffer and Conservation Easements: A one -hundred foot (100) wide nondisturbance buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot immediately adjacent to Hiatt Run and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel. (ii) Conservation Easements/Floodplain: A twenty -foot (20) wide buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot immediately adjacent to the 100-year floodplain. The ten feet (10) adjacent to the floodplain shall be undisturbed. The ten feet (10) adjacent to the lots may be disturbed and, if disturbed, shall be re -vegetated by planting trees equal to the number of trees in excess of six inches (6") caliper removed by the disturbance, OR at the rate of 50 (2" caliper) trees per acre of disturbance, at the option of the Applicant. (iii) The above disturbed and undisturbed buffers as well as conservation easements not located within a platted lot and/or parcel shall be part of the common areas owned by the Homeowners Association(s). Covenants to be created as part of the Homeowners Association(s) documents shall provide for maintenance of said areas by the Homeowners Association(s). (4) Resource protection areas are identified for the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel that are further identified on the Generalized Development Plan. These resource protection areas contain various environmental features and provide different resource management plans for their treatment and protection by the Applicant. Page 21 September 3, 2003 B. Hiatt Run Corridor: (1) The Hiatt Run Corridor shall be considered a resource protection area. Clearing and grading by individual lot owners is prohibited within this zone. (2) A one -hundred foot (100') foot non -disturbance buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot adjacent to the Hiatt Run Corridor and shall serve as the clearing limit for all lots that border the Hiatt Run Corridor as measured from the center line of the stream. (3) A minimum buffer of twenty feet (20') shall border all wetland preservation areas. Clearing and grading by individual owners is prohibited within this buffer. (4) Native plants and cluster trees will be preserved and/or reforested in accordance with the Forest Management Plan along the south side of the Hiatt Run Corridor. (5) Wildlife or bird habitats will be further enhanced by providing native plantings selected to encourage feeding areas while reestablishing forest in and around environmentally sensitive areas including steep slopes, woodlands and flood plain areas along the north side of the Hiatt Run Corridor. The planting plan along the north side of the Hiatt Run Corridor will be created with technical assistance from VDGIF and the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. C. Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel: The Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel shall be considered a resource protection area. Restrictive covenants recorded against the property will provide that clearing and grading by individual lot owners is prohibited within this zone. The Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel will be further enhanced, by providing native plantings, to establish an upland buffer. The planting plan for this upland buffer will be created with technical assistance from VDGIF and the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. D. Forest Management Plan: (1) The Forest Stewardship and Management Plan will be created with technical assistance from the Department of Forestry. Native plants and cluster trees will be preserved and/or reforested in accordance with the Forest Management Plan. Page 22 September 3, 2003 (2) Existing ponds will be identified and, if beneficial and appropriate, shall be used as storm water management facilities. In addition, the Applicant shall establish additional ponds on the site wherever possible and in such locations as the Applicant directs. The ponds shall be located and designed to promote water infiltration on the site. A minimum area of twenty feet (20') wide surrounding each such pond shall be developed as a park setting. (3) The Forest Management Plan will be created with technical assistance from the Department of Forestry. E. Environmental Utility / Road Impacts: Construction of utilities, roads, trails, bio-retention areas, or wetlands creation shall be allowed within the environmental features listed in § 16A-§ 16D of this proffer statement. Any construction of the above listed items will use low impact construction methods such as 90-degree crossings, minimal soil, and tree disturbances. When linear utility impacts such as force mains or transmission lines are required low impact construction techniques will be utilized. F. Implementation of Enhancements and Amendments The Applicant shall provide the location of the resource protection areas as a component of the Master Development Plan. Information pertaining to proposed enhancements and amendments to the resource protection areas shall be included as narratives of the Master Development Plan to ensure that these treatment measures will be implemented. 17. COMMUNITY CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION: A. The Applicant shall see that the properties within Stephenson Village shall be serviced by a commercial trash pickup and waste removal service. Said service shall provide curbside trash removal unless otherwise provided by Frederick County, for all residential uses and dumpster disposal for all high -density residential uses and commercial uses. Waste and trash removal services shall not dispose of trash and waste at any Frederick County Citizen Convenience Center. The Applicant shall be relieved of its obligations to see to the performance of this Proffer by assigning all of its obligations to a Homeowners Association for any portion or all of the development. B. Notwithstanding the above, Applicant shall locate dumpster sites as unobtrusively as possible. The area immediately surrounding each dumpster site shall be planted with vegetation similar to or identical to that planted in the median open vegetated areas, including, but not limited to, deciduous trees and evergreen shrubbery in addition to the required fence and gate enclosure. Page 23 September 3, 2003 18. WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STEPHENSON AREA: A. The Applicant shall dedicate land to be utilized for the location of a regional pump station as determined by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) in an area that is mutually agreed upon by both parties. B. The Applicant shall construct a pump station in conformance with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan as required to serve the Property and shall dedicate the pump station to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) for operation and maintenance. The pump station shall be constructed and operational prior to the first occupancy permit in Stephenson Village. C. The Applicant shall construct water and sewer lines in conformance with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan as required to serve all private land uses within Stephenson Village and shall dedicate the applicable water and sewer lines to FCSA for operation and maintenance. Furthermore, the applicant shall provide water and sewer lines of adequate size to the property line for all publicly dedicated properties. 19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY: By accepting and approving this rezoning application, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors authorizes the location and provision of those public uses and facilities specifically referenced on the Generalized Development Plan, in this Proffer Statement, and the extension and construction of water and sewer lines and facilities and roads necessary to serve this Property pursuant to the Virginia Code Section 15.2-2232 and the Frederick County Code. The general area of location for these uses and facilities are as shown on the Generalized Development Plan with the exact locations to be determined based on final engineering and as approved by Frederick County. Acceptance of this Proffer Statement constitutes approval of the public uses and facilities and their general locations and thereby accepts said uses and facilities from further Comprehensive Plan conformity review. 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION(S): A. Creation of Association(s) A homeowners association or more than one homeowners association ("HOA") shall be created and shall be made responsible for the review and approval of all construction within the development to insure that all design standards for the Stephenson Village Development are satisfied and for the maintenance and repair of all common areas, together with such other responsibilities, duties and powers as are customary for such associations or as may shall be required for such HOA herein. Page 24 B. Additional Responsibility September 3, 2003 In addition to such other responsibilities and duties as shall be assigned; the HOA shall have title to and/or responsibility for: (1) All common open space including storm water facilities areas not otherwise dedicated to public use or maintained by commercial entities. (2) Common buffer areas located outside of residential lots. (3) Residential curbside trash collection. 21. PROFFERED HOUSING TYPES: The following plan(s), exhibit(s) and Housing Unit Types are proffered herein. Each may be altered at the time of final engineering and equivalent Housing Unit Types may be substituted with the approval of the Director of Planning or his/her designee. Any existing or future Housing Unit Type, which is permitted under the R4 Residential Planned Community District, may also be utilized. Housing Unit Types Exhibit(s) prepared by The Land Planning and Design Group, Inc. dated December 2002, listed below and attached hereto as Exhibit B (graphic for illustrative purposes only). The minimum design standards for the following housing types are summarized and listed on the attached chart prepared by Land Planning and Design Group, Inc., dated March 2003 and referred to as Exhibit E — Minimum Design Standards. "Housing Unit Type 1" (Carriage House): Carriage House Illustrative Carriage House Typical Carriage House Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 2" (Non -Alley Carriage House): Non -Alley Carriage House Illustrative Non -Alley Carriage House Typical Non -Alley Carriage House Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 3" (Cottage House): Cottage House Illustrative Cottage House Typical Cottage House Landscape Typical Page 25 September 3, 2003 "Housing Unit Type 4" (Courtyard Cluster): Courtyard Cluster Illustrative Courtyard Cluster Typical Courtyard Cluster Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 5" (Modified Single Family Detached Lot): Modified Single Family Detached Lot Typical "Housing Unit Type 6" (Modified "Townhouse" Attached Dwelling): Modified "Townhouse" Attached Dwelling Typical "Housing Unit Type 7" (Elderly Housing Dwelling): Elderly Housing Dwelling Specifications Elderly Housing Dwelling Illustrative Elderly Housing Dwelling Specifications and Illustrative Design provided in Community Design Modifications Document Other housing types shall be added, if approved, by Frederick County. 22. STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING: A. The Applicant shall provide landscaped areas on both sides of the Major Collector Road as illustrated on the attached Exhibit D (Typical Major Collector Road Section) dated March 2003 and in accordance with the following: (1) The landscaped area described above is designed to be a scenic urban linear park, which shall contain woodland conservation areas. (For purposes of this Proffer, a woodland conservation area shall be defined as an area designated for the purpose of retaining land areas predominantly in their natural, scenic, open or wooded condition.)The woodland conservation area shall have a varying width of no less than fifteen feet. Woodland conservation areas shall be provided where feasible based upon final engineering and design of the development. The Applicant shall provide, within the landscaped area, a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees, to include native types of trees originally found in this area and replacing any trees removed during development. Such trees shall be planted at the minimum rate of one tree every 40 linear feet along the roadway frontage and shall be planted in clusters rather than a linear pattern. Page 26 September 3, 2003 (2) The minimum planting standard for street landscaping or landscaped areas/woodland conservation areas shall be a mixture of deciduous trees, ornamental trees, evergreen trees, and shrubbery. At the Applicants option, trees and shrubs shall be planted in clusters and shall be planted at an equivalent rate of ten plant units per 40 linear feet of collector street roadway frontage. The plant unit credits are determined as follows: Shade Trees (2" min. caliper) = 10 plant units, Ornamental trees (1.5" minimum caliper) = 5 plant units, Evergreen trees (6' min. height) = 5 plant units, Shrubs (18" minimum height) = 2 plant units. B. The Applicant shall have the option of utilizing landscaped central islands within cul- de-sacs. When landscaped islands are utilized a twenty-eight foot (28') foot paved area shall be provided to accommodate on -street parking and travel aisles. C. Where conditions permit, vegetated open channels shall be used in street right-of- ways for storm water runoff, instead of curb and guttering. D. To the extent possible, stone fines or wood chip trails/paths shall be used instead of asphalt trails/paths. Where practical, such trails/paths shall be located on only one side of each interior road provided sidewalks are not required or practical within the adjacent road right-of-way. 23. COMMUNITY SIGNAGE PROG A. The Applicant reserves the right to construct community entry features including a monument style sign at the entrances to the development in accordance with the following parameters: Such signage shall not exceed two signs per intersection, one occurring on either side of the entrance. The sign panel area shall not exceed 65 square feet per sign, and shall be attached to a wall not to exceed 8 feet in height, excluding piers, which shall be 9.25 feet in height. The wall supporting the signage will not be included in the allowable square footage for the sign panel. B. The Applicant reserves the right to construct neighborhood entry features including a monument style sign at the entrance to each neighborhood in accordance with the following parameters: Such signage shall not exceed two signs per intersection one occurring on either side of the entrance. The sign panel area shall not exceed 40 square feet per sign, and shall be attached to a wall not to exceed 7 feet in height, excluding piers, which shall be 8.25 feet in height. The wall supporting the signage will not be included in the allowable square footage for the sign panel. C. Commercial freestanding business signs shall be monument style with similar design and materials as the community entry feature signs. These commercial freestanding business signs shall be no more than 20' in height measured from the base and shall be spaced a minimum of 100 feet apart. Page 27 SIGNATURE PAGE September 3, 2003 The conditions set forth herein are the proffers for Stephenson Village and supercede all previous proffer statements submitted for this Development. Respectfully submitted, Stephenson Asso iat , L.C. By: ame: J. Donald Shockey, Jr. Title: Manager Subscribed and sworn before me this 8th day of Sept . , 2003. Susan D. Stahl (Typed Name of Notary) My Commission Expires: 4-30- 2004 Notary Pub is Q,v-vu1aVNg0N VILLAGE New Tax Rate Old Tax Rate Exhibit 1 NET FISCAL BENEFIT STEPHENSON VILLAGE 23 Years (2003 - 2025) )0,000 $0 4U,000,Uv SOURCE: Robert Charles Lesser & Co., LLC Frederick County VA ModePRR 12 cents increase.xls-OGr 9pz 9x 1 -00 Printed: 4/24/2003 Page 1 of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 2 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ONINGN WITH NEW TAX RATE REZONING PROPOSED VILLAGE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 23 Years (2003 - 2025) 23-YEAR TOTAL % t WLiY! SPdi0mZ3 AtiUl�lK 'd: CATEGORY n 'ticwurewu uiacmirvuea�n _ ��mum i'mcem it+b'G CXID7 REVENUES $100,703,000 49% 1% Real Property Taxes $48,193,000 4% Personal Property Taxes $11,264,000 1% Sales Taxes $2,608,000 10% BPOL Taxes $25,948,000 26% Miscellaneous Revenues $64,741,000 10 Educational Revenues $Z53 000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $215,326,000 100% TOTAL $38,131,000 NET FISCAL IMPACT Frederick County VA ModePRR 12 cents increase.xls-Su 492 Ex 2 09.00 Printed: 4/24/2003 Page 1 of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC STEPHENSON VILLAGE $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,OOC $10,000,00( $5,000,00( Exhibit 3 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE CUMULATIVE NET FISCAL BENEFIT O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O N CV C4 C4 N N N N N N Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xts-cumu0grap 6Ex 3 9.00 Printed:4/24/2003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Page 1 of 1 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 4 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE ANNUAL NET FISCAL IMPACT NET FISCAL CUMULATIVE YEAR REVENUES EXPENDITURES IMPACT N.M... WYN ri LLIfLI '4Yde'Y NFI �. "'MLIeH'fA1V YAW L?diV. I $0 $178,611 $178,611 2003 $178,611 $0 $194,130 $372,742 2004 $194,130 $780,873 $549,448 $231,425 $604,167 2005 200 $1,861,105 $1,534,792 $326,313 $930,480 2007 $2,673,034 $2,426,963 $246,071 $1,176,551 2008 $3,831,270 $3,464,654 $448,027 67 $1,991,194 2009 $4,975,512 $4,527,485 $448,027 $1,621,132 $2,621,132 2010 $6,302,421 $5,672,483 $629,938 $969,581 $3,590,713 2011 $7,950,051 $9,027,539 $6,980,470 $8,048,592 $976,947 $4,569,660 2012 2013 $10,796,661 $9,246,504 $1,550,157 $6,119,817 2014 $12,286,946 $10,324,698 $1,962,248 $8,082,065 2015 $13,651,704 $11,482,337 $2,169,366 $10,251,431 $12,433,040 2016 $14,602,140 $12,420,531 $2,181,608 $2,197,056 $14,630,096 2017 $15,344,809 $13,147,752 $13,767,932 $2,224,983 $16,855,079 2018 $15,992,915 $17,035,864 $14,467,514 $2,568,350 $19,423,429 2019 2020 $17,748,046 $15,009,178 $2,738,866 $22,162,297 2021 $18,249,868 $15,459,453 $2,790,415 $24,952,712 2022 $16,792,098 $15,923,237 $2,868,861 $27,821,574 $30,775,076 2023 $19,354,436 $16,400,934 $2,953,502 $3,540,357 $34 315,433 2024 $20,521,239 $16,980,882 490 308 $3,815d807 $38,131,24Q 2025 $21 306 115 $17 Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xls-Ann Su0m49RZ 9Ex 0 Printed: 4/24/2003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Page 1 of 1 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 5 PUPIL GENERATIONRATES RCLCo RATESDON BASED OUNING TYPES U.S. CENSUS DATA ACTUAL ENROLLMENT DATA FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA OCCUPIED RCLCO ESTIMATE UNITS PUPILS PER PREDICTED AREA 2000 1/a UNIT PUPILS ,�w HOME TYPE yt IAhN i N...... dW' ` 43E lP 715A M eau FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Single -Family Detached 16,741 0.5442 9,110 Single -Family Attached 1, 2908872 0. 544 Multifamily 1, 309 0.1564 205 2,175 0.5442 1 184 Mobile Home 11,043 Predicted Pupils 10,676 Actual Pupils 3/ 103% Predicted as % of Actual 1/ 2000 US Census 2/ Frederick County 3/ Frederick County Public Schools SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo Page 7 0( 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. FREDERICK CO. ESTIMATE PUPILS PER PREDICTED UNIT 2/ PUPILS 0.7000 11,719 0.5400 1,011 0.2300 301 0.2300 500 13,531 ,10,676 127% Pupil Generation Frederick.xlslPupil Generation 04-9269.00 Prinled:4/24/2003 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 6 EVALUATION OF RCLCo AND COUNTY PUPIL GENERATION RATES (FROM EXHIBIT 5) BASED ON FREDERICK COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA AREA HOME TYPE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Single -Family Detached 3/ Single -Family Attached 3/ Multifamily Mobile Home Predicted Pupil Increase Actual Pupil Increase 2/ Predicted as % of Actual RCLCO FACTORS FREDERICK CO. FACTORS PERMITTED PUPILS PREDICTED PUPILS PER PREDICTED UNITS PER PUPIL PER PUPIL INCREASE UNIT 2/ 1996-2002 INCREASE 1996-20011/ UNIT - 21570 0.5442 1,399 0.7000 1,799 454 0.2908 132 0.5400 245 474 0.1564 74 0.2300 109 598 0.5442 325 0.2300 138 1,930 2,291 1,048 1,048 184% 219% 1/ Frederick County 2/ Frederick County Public Schools 3/ Assumes 85% of permitted single-family units are detached. SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo Pupil Generation Frederick.xisWupil Generation (Perinitl 04-9269.00 Printed:412412003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. Page 1 of 1 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 September 3, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1. COMMUNITY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT 2 2. PHASING PLAN TO MINIMIZE SUDDEN IMPACTS ON COUNTY SERVICES 2 3. USES, DENSITY AND MIX OF HOUSING TYPES 3 4. APPLICANT TO PAY 100 % OF CAPITAL FACILITY IMPACTS 5 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM 7 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC. 7 7. MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS 8 8. SCHOOL AND BALLFIELD SITES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC USE AREAS 11 9. RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND LINEAR PARK 13 10. ACTIVE ADULT AGE -RESTRICTED HOUSING 14 11. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY 16 12. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 16 13. COMMERCIAL CENTER 16 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE 18 15. COMMUNITY DESIGN FOR A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE 18 16. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND HABITAT PRESERVATION 19 17. COMMUNITY CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION 22 18. WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STEPHENSON AREA 23 19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY 23 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS) 23 21. PROFFERED HOUSING TYPES 24 22. STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING 25 23, COMMUNITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM 26 September 3, 2003 Executive Summary Of the Proffer Statement for the Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community The proffers for Stephenson Village define the conditions for the construction and maintenance of a residential planned community based on Smart Growth principles. As envisioned, Stephenson Village will feature a school, public ball fields, recreation centers, trails and convenient shopping that will tie the neighborhoods of Stephenson together and serve as a vital center. Stephenson Village itself will have a distinctive look, a strong architectural theme, and a mixture of housing types to meet the needs of people of all ages, including an age -restricted active adult community and affordable housing for the elderly. The plan emphasizes walkable neighborhoods —with boulevards, sidewalks, bike paths and trails throughout. In addition to the 135.6 acres in the core battlefield area (which is not included in the rezoning request), 794.6±-acre parcel will have approximately 250 acres of open space. Build -out of Stephenson Village is anticipated to take 20 to 25 years. The proffers provide a balance of design and market flexibility and County control over uses and densities. Planned Community Design Stephenson Village will use compact building design with extensive architectural and landscaping standards to create distinctive streetscapes. The proffers specify six new housing types and illustrate floor plans for each. The housing types will be mixed within each neighborhood. To assure overall mixing while maintaining flexibility, the proffers establish maximum percentages for single-family detached, multi -family (townhouse and semi-detached) and age -restricted housing. The design will provide opportunities for people to live, work and shop in the same community. The school and public ball field sites will be located on the north side of the property, along Old Charles Town Road. The center of Stephenson Village will have affordable housing for the elderly and 250,000 square feet of commercial and office space (60,000 square feet guaranteed), including space for a rent-free Frederick County satellite office. Land will be set aside for a day care center in an appropriate location. The south side of Stephenson Village will include a large age -restricted (55 and over) "active adult" community. This will be a gated community with its own recreational facilities and private streets and alleys. In addition, the Applicant will provide a minimum of 144 units for the elderly after sufficient retail space has been occupied to qualify for Federal affordable -housing programs. September 3, 2003 i Stephenson Associates 030703 The proffers establish an overall density cap of 2,465 units exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly, an average of 3.1 units per acre. To avoid sudden impacts on County schools and other services, the proffers establish a cumulative yearly construction cap of 8% on all units that are not age -restricted. Since age -restricted housing has positive tax impact on County budgets and no impact on schools, these unit types will be exempt from the phasing plan. Covering 100% of Capital Facilities Impacts Economic analysis of Stephenson Village indicates that its proffer payments, taxes and fees will more than cover the cost of County services. The Applicant will cover 100% of the capital costs predicted by the County fiscal impact model for each housing type. These proffer fees will be adjusted every two years using the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Additional proffer fees may be assessed by Frederick County if school population from the project is higher than projected. If the cumulative total increase in students from Stephenson Village exceeds 60 students a year, the County may assess an additional proffer fee of $3,925 for each additional student. Transportation Improvements The Applicant will make transportation improvements to maintain acceptable levels of service on existing roads. These improvements will be triggered by actual traffic counts, with levels specified in the proffers, at permanently installed traffic counters at the entrance on Old Charles Town Road and the southwestern entrance. This will allow us to anticipate traffic increases rather than react to them. Design and construction will begin when traffic reaches 80 percent of the trigger point. A four -lane boulevard will serve the community as the major collector road. This road, identified in the County Comprehensive Policy Plan, runs from Old Charles Town Road in the north to Route 11 in the south. The sides and medians of this boulevard will be heavily landscaped outside of conservation and tree -save areas. The boulevard will have bicycle lanes on each side, and sidewalks or walking trails for the entire length in Stephenson Village. The road will be built first in a two-lane half section, beginning at Old Charles Town Road. The road will be extended to Route 11 and the second two-lane section constructed when traffic counts reach specified limits. This major collector road will be dedicated to VDOT. The Applicant has obtained rights -of -way and easements for off -site transportation improvements and will execute agreements with VDOT. Traffic improvements will include: completing the two-lane half -section of the major collector road, extending the major collector road to the Rutherford Farm intersection at Route 11, widening Old Charles Town Road to three lanes between the entrance and Route 11, signalizing (with turn lanes) the northern entrance, and signalizing (with turn lanes) of the September 3, 2003 ii Stephenson Associates 030703 intersection between Old Charles Town Road and Route 11. Stephenson Village will also contribute its share of regional improvements to I-81 interchange 317. School Site and Recreation Facilities As envisioned, Stephenson Village will have a public school and extensive public ball fields within walking distance of the community. The Applicant will dedicate 20 acres to the County for a school site, accessible from Old Charles Town road and Stephenson Village. Next to the school site, the Applicant will dedicate 24 acres, which when combined with the school playing fields will provide six soccer fields and six baseball fields for soccer and Little League teams. The recreation center at Stephenson Village will be fully bonded at the outset and constructed early in the project. This recreation center will include a bathhouse and a six - lane 25-meter competition swimming pool. The Applicant will dedicate a 20-foot linear park trail easement to the County within the Hiatt Run Corridor from one end of the property to the other, and will construct at no cost a six-foot wide asphalt trail. Additional recreation facilities (such as playgrounds, tot lots, multipurpose courts, basketball courts, picnic areas and volleyball courts) will be built to satisfy any remaining requirements of County zoning. The Applicant will also construct a recreation center for the private use of the active adult community. Environmental Improvements There is an opportunity to improve the quality of Hiatt Run and associated wetlands through better stormwater control. Most (over 90%) of the soils on the property will not support crops without heavy amendment. Much of the soil has low permeability, which has historically caused stormwater runoff problems in the streams, ditches and ravines. Approximately 250 acres of the property will be left in open space. The Applicant will identify and preserve all significant wildlife habitats and steep slopes. Streams will be protected by 100-foot buffers between the centerline of the stream and adjacent lots. The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel will be resource protection areas. To the maximum extent possible, intermittent streams and associated stands of mature trees will not be disturbed, and native plants and trees will be used in the forest management plan. Low impact development methods will be used as appropriate for stormwater management and road construction. These will include measures to direct runoff from steep slopes and use existing ponds where beneficial to the environment. Additional ponds, infiltration areas and bio-retention facilities will be developed to limit runoff to September 3, 2003 Ill Stephenson Associates 030703 Hiatt Run. When conditions permit, vegetated open channels will be used along streets for storm water runoff. Utility Improvements Stephenson Village will use public water and sewer, and bring the opportunity for sewer connections to surrounding neighborhoods with access to gravity mains. Currently, the Northern Water Treatment plant provides 1.5 million gallons per day from the Global Chemstone Quarry, which is more than adequate to supply the 683,000 gallons per day demand of the completed community. None of the utility infrastructure associated with the project will cost the County taxpayers money. The Applicant will dedicate land to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, build a pump station, and build a force main and associated infrastructure. Low impact construction methods will be used where force mains and buried utility lines cross sensitive areas. Electric, broadband and telephone utilities will be buried throughout the project. Public lighting, as well as the exterior lighting of homes, will use fixtures that direct light down and minimize stray illumination. Trash collection will be provided by a commercial service and will not use Frederick County Citizen Convenience Centers. In lieu of land for a fire/rescue site, the Applicant has increased the cash proffers. The Applicant has proffered to contribute $200,000 to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. This contribution is not counted as part of the proffer fees to the County. Preservation of Historic and Cultural Resources The Byers House will be preserved and used as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. Significant archeological areas and cemeteries (if any) will be preserved. The Applicant is proffering $75,000 in matching funds to help the County develop transportation enhancements and/or heritage tourism. Smart Growth U.S. Environmental Protection Agency encourages smart growth communities like the proposed Stephenson Village. Cluster development controls sprawl and its associated environmental and fiscal impacts by making development more predictable and cost effective, and by directing resources toward existing communities. Stephenson Associates L.C. is committed to making Stephenson Village --the first smart growth community in Frederick County --a success and a model for development in the region. September 3, 2003 1V Stephenson Associates 030703 Page 1 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 September 3, 2003 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 The undersigned, Stephenson Associates, L.C., (hereinafter referred to as Applicant), its successors and/or assigns, hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict accordance with the following conditions and shall supersede all other proffers made prior hereto. In the event the above -referenced amendments are not granted as applied for by the Applicant, the below described proffers shall be withdrawn and null and void. The headings of the proffers set forth below, the Table of Contents and the Executive Summary have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the site adjacent to the improvement, unless otherwise specified herein. References made to the Master Development Plan, hereinafter referred to as the Generalized Development Plan, as required by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, are to be interpreted to be references to the specific Generalized Development Plan sheets prepared by Greenway Engineering and Land Planning and Design Group, dated September 3, 2003 attached as Exhibit A. The exact boundary and acreage of each land bay may be shifted to a reasonable degree at the time of site plan submission for each land bay in order to accommodate engineering or design considerations. The Applicant is submitting a Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) as a part of the rezoning application. The Generalized Development Plan is provided in lieu of a Master Development Plan, and contains all information deemed appropriate by the Frederick County Planning Department. The Generalized Development Plan does not eliminate the requirement for a Master Development Plan for the portion of the site to be developed, which will be provided following rezoning approval but prior to any development of any portion of the 794.6±-acre site (Property). Page 2 September 3, 2003 1. COMMUNITY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT: In order for the Applicant and Frederick County to implement the Residential Community, it will be important for the Applicant and Frederick County Planning Staff to have the opportunity to anticipate, incorporate and to develop new advanced housing types and configurations that may be suitable in a Residential Planned Community. These housing types will include many of the neo-traditional housing types which are proffered in this Proffer Statement which allow for the creation of a true community and for the maximization and preservation of natural corridors and open space for the use and enjoyment of the community at large. A. Pursuant to Article H, Amendments of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the approval of this Proffer statement constitutes an amendment to the zoning ordinance, which will allow the expansion of the R4 District. B. The Applicant has proffered a Community Design Modification Document that is attached and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit F, and which is accepted by Frederick County. In addition to the above, by approving this Proffer Statement, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors agrees without need of any further Board of Supervisors or Planning Department approval to any modifications for any matter which has been previously agreed to and therefore approved by Frederick County. Further still, any submitted revisions to the approved Generalized Development Plan, the approved Master Development Plan and/or any of its requirements for any development zoned R-4 which affect the perimeter of the development or which would increase the overall density of the development shall require the Board of Supervisors' approval. If, in the reasonable discretion of the Frederick County Planning Department, the Planning Department decides any requested modification should be reviewed by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, it may secure said approval by placing this matter before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at its next regularly scheduled meeting. However, and not withstanding what is stated above, once a modification has been approved administratively, the Applicant shall not be required to seek approval for any subsequent similar modification. 2. PHASING PLAN TO MINIMIZE SUDDEN IMPACTS ON COUNTY SERVICES: A. Additional Proffer Payment To minimize sudden increases in the Frederick County Public School population and sudden impacts on other county services, the Applicant shall implement the following phasing plan on all residential housing that is not age -restricted. To ensure that unanticipated increases in Frederick County Public School population do not burden the county with extra costs, Frederick County may assess the Applicant to effectively double school - related proffers for each student that exceeds a cumulative yearly total increase of 60 students per year. Page 3 September 3, 2003 The total number of new Frederick County Public School students generated by Stephenson Village will be determined from the September 30 report produced by Frederick County Public Schools. The Applicant proffers to reimburse Frederick County Public Schools for its cost of creating the September 30 report data related to Stephenson Village. This additional proffer payment will be provided to Frederick County by the Applicant within 30 days of receipt of the September 30 report produced by Frederick County Public Schools. If the reported number of Frederick County Public School students generated by Stephenson Village exceeds the cumulative total of 60 students per year (9/30/03=60, 9/30/04=120, etc.), the Applicant shall pay an additional proffer payment of $3,925 as assessed by Frederick County for each Frederick County Public School child that exceeds the cumulative total. The additional proffer payment will be adjusted every two years by the Consumer Price Index. B. Limitation on Permits (1) Calculation The active adult housing units and the affordable housing for the elderly have been removed from the restrictions imposed by the phasing plan and are not part of the following phasing plan formula nor will they be included in the yearly building permit tracking system. The overall density cap for Stephenson Village is 2,465 units, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly. Once the planned number of active adult housing units and the affordable housing for the elderly have been removed, the adjusted total number of units subject to phasing restriction is 1,665. The phasing allowed quantities shall be limited to 8% per year on a cumulative yearly basis beginning with the date of approval of this rezoning based on the following formula: (2,465 — 800 to 1,300 range of age restricted units) x 8% + unused permits from prior year(s) = maximum non -age restricted permits for current year Any units not used in a given year shall be carried forward. 3. USES DENSITY AND MIX OF HOUSING TYPES: A. (1) The Applicant shall develop a mix of housing unit types to include those single-family detached, townhouse and multifamily housing unit types described in the Land Bay Breakdown Table in §3A(2) and further described in §21of this proffer statement. Each of the housing unit types in the R4 District, Section 165-67 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, is either a single-family dwelling, townhouse or multifamily unit type. For purposes of this Proffer, all of the above housing types shall be referred to as Mixed Residential. The following list could be used as they currently exist within the R-4 portion of the zoning ordinance. Page 4 September 3, 2003 (2) The following list of Land Bays within the Land Bay Breakdown Table sets forth the development parameters on the Property and is consistent with the proffered Generalized Development Plan identified as Exhibit A: LAND BAY BREAKDOWN LAND LAND USE ACREAGE % OF TOTAL BAY HOUSING UNIT TYPES MIN. MAX. I ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 20 Ac. NA NA II COMMUNITY PARK 24 Ac. NA NA (6 baseball fields & 6 soccer fields) III MIXED RESIDENTIAL 475 Ac. CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL/DAYCARE 7 Ac.* NA NA SFD 30 53 (Housing Unit Type 1,2,4,5, RP District SFD & Active Adult) TOWNHOUSE 10 30 (Housing Unit Type 6 & RP District Townhouse) MULTIFAMILY 7 30 (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3 & RP District Duplex, Multiplex, Atrium & Active Adult) IV ACTIVE ADULT 126 Ac. 30 53 SFD (Housing Unit Type 1,2 &5) Multifamily (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3) V COMMERCIAL CENTER 26 Ac.* NA NA (Commercial Retail, Office & Public Service Satellite Facility) The actual acreage identified for each Land Bay is based on the bubble diagram calculated on the proffered Generalized Development Plan and may fluctuate within 5% of the total acreage based on final survey work. Page 5 September 3, 2003 Land Bay Breakdown Notes (1) The above table represents the ranges for the referenced housing types as proposed. The final mix will not exceed the 2,465-unit cap, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) and will be comprised of house type combinations representing a mixture identified in the table. The minimum and maximum percentages established apply to the general categories of single family, townhouses, multifamily and active adult units and are not intended to pertain to any one housing type in those categories. The housing unit type maximum percentage for the general categories of single family, townhouse, multifamily and active adult will not exceed the percentages identified in the table and will not exceed the total unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) based on any combination. *(2) The total commercial area will be a minimum of 4 % of the gross site area or 33 acres and will be located within Land Bays III and V. (3) The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel are approximately 125 acres. The remaining 113.5 acres of required open space will be provided within Land Bays I, II, III and IV. (4) The Applicant reserves the right to convert more of Land Bay III to active adult or affordable housing for the elderly. In no case shall the percentage of active adult or affordable housing for the elderly exceed 53% of the total unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11). B. For purposes of calculating density pursuant to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, all dedications and conveyances of land for public use and/or for the use of the development or any Homeowners Association shall be credited in said calculations. C. There shall be a unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) on the subject property. D. In order to preclude unwanted industrial and heavy commercial uses, all land uses within the B-3 District and the M-1 District shall be prohibited, unless otherwise permitted in the RP District, the B-1 District or the B-2 District. In no case shall truck stops be permitted within Stephenson Village. 4. APPLICANT TO PAY 100% OF CAPITAL FACILITY IMPACTS: The Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model was applied to the Stephenson Village rezoning on January 9, 2003. The results of this model run demonstrate a fiscal impact to capital facilities in the amount of $5,327 per residential unit. Page 6 September 3, 2003 The Applicant will pay 100% of these impacts through monetary contributions and land donations to Frederick County, unless otherwise specified by the proffer. The parties agree that the value used for the land donations of $30,000 per acre is appropriate and acceptable. These monetary contributions provide for the capital facilities impacts created by Stephenson Village and shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance for each unit. The monetary contribution will be adjusted every two years by the Consumer Price Index — All Urban Consumers (Current Series) See example at the end of this section. The Applicant will pay for active adult units a 50% premium on proffer fees for fire and rescue over and above the Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model to cover any increased service demand; similarly, the applicant will pay for affordable apartment units for the elderly a 100% premium. However, these age -restricted units will not include monetary proffers for various capital facilities, such as schools, that they do not impact. The per unit monetary proffer for single family, townhouse and multifamily provides for: $3,925.00 for Frederick County Public Schools ($4,135 per model less $210 for land donation) $635.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation ($889 per model less $254 for land donation) $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue $145.00 for Public Library $152.00 for Administration Building The per unit monetary proffer for active adult units provides for: $635.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation ($889 per model less $254 for land donation) $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue 200.00 50% Premium $600.00 Total for Frederick County Fire and Rescue $145.00 for Public Library $152.00 for Administration Building The per unit monetary proffer for the affordable housing for the elderly provides for: $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue 400.00 100% premium $800.00 Total for Frederick County Fire and Rescue Should the index as currently published by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics cease to be published then the most nearly comparable index shall be used. Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 Index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 185 X $5,327 = $6,550 MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TO TRTSM: In consideration of the approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of $200,000.00 for its general fund. This is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Firs and Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 500th building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,000`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,5001h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. Page 8 September 3, 2003 7. MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS: A. The following are improvements the Applicant will make to roads within the Property: (1) Major Collector Road (a) Pursuant to Section 7F (2), 7F (4) and 7F(5) of this proffer statement, the Applicant shall dedicate an 80 foot right of way and construct the Major Collector Road from Old Charles Town Road through Stephenson Village, and the properties currently owned by McCann and Omps to U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) in accordance with existing agreements executed between all parties to insure conformance with the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The width and configuration of all travel lanes, medians and other elements of the major collector road shall be provided by the Applicant as determined by VDOT. (b) The Applicant shall provide landscaped areas along, within, and/or adjacent to each side of the Major Collector Road in accordance with § 22-A of this proffer. (c) When the Major Collector Road is finally completed as a four lane divided boulevard, the median will be naturally vegetated with a combination of both woodland conservation areas and grassed areas supplemented with landscape plantings. If approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), all plantings, other than those in woodland conservation areas, will be installed by the Applicant and will have a maintenance agreement between VDOT and the Applicant which will transfer to the Homeowners Association of Stephenson Village (HOA) to cover all mowing, weeding, pruning, plant replacements, and irrigation maintenance responsibilities. Irrigation systems within the right-of-way will be designed as a separate system to allow the portion of the irrigation system falling within the right-of-way to be terminated if necessary without affecting the overall system. (d) The Applicant shall provide bicycle lanes within the Major Collector Road right of way over the property to be rezoned that are four feet in width and are contiguous with the outside travel lanes of the Major Collector Road and are properly marked and signed. (e) The Applicant shall prohibit individual residential and commercial entrances from intersecting Milburn Road (Route 662) and further proffers that the Major Collector Road will be the only road crossing of Milburn Road. Page 9 (2) Interparcel Connections September 3, 2003 The Applicant agrees to provide interparcel connections between land bays within the Property at the time the respective land bays are developed and to the extent reasonably possible. (3) Private Streets, Alleys and Common Drives (a) The Applicant shall provide for a gated community entrance for the active adult portion of the overall community and shall serve the active adult community with a complete system of private streets. The cross sectional dimension of pavement thickness and compacted base thickness will meet or exceed the public street pavement section standards utilized by VDOT. (b) Where private alleys are utilized, the Applicant will provide one-way alleys within a sixteen -foot (16') wide easement having twelve feet (12') of pavement with a two foot (2') shoulder on both sides of the pavement throughout the entire community. All private alleys, which intersect other private alleys at 90 degree angles or have turns at 90 degree angles shall provide for a minimum turning radius of 25 feet. Private alleys, intersection, public or private streets, shall provide curb cuts extending two feet beyond the paved edge of the standard alley width. (c) Where private alleys are utilized to serve housing types that front on private streets the Applicant shall provide for a minimum travel aisle width of 24 feet for the private street. The 24 foot travel aisle shall be in addition to on street parking designed for the private street. (d) When Housing Unit Type 4 (courtyard cluster) is developed, the common drive shall meet the following standards: (i) A minimum width of 20 feet (ii) A minimum depth of pavement section shall be a four inch compacted stone base and six inches of concrete or equivalent material. (iii) A "No Parking" sign shall be posted at the entrance to the courtyard. (iv) A fire hydrant shall be provided at the entrance to each corner drive to the courtyard clusters. When common drives are adjacent to or across the street from other courtyard cluster common drives, only one hydrant shall be required. (v) Visitor parking areas will be provided outside of the courtyard cluster common drive area. Page 10 September 3, 2003 B. The applicant has acquired easements and/or rights of way over the properties currently owned by McCann and Omps for the purpose of dedicating and constructing the Major Collector Road and for improvements along the south side of Old Charles Town Road from Route 11 north to the CSX railroad. The Applicant will acquire any additional rights -of -way and/or easements for all off -site transportation improvements proffered hereinafter. In the event the Applicant is not able to acquire any of the said rights -of -way and/or easements, Frederick County agrees to attempt to acquire such rights -of -way and/or easements by appropriate eminent domain proceedings at the request of Applicant and Applicant shall be responsible for all payments made to property owners for rights -of -way and/or easements so acquired. In the event that neither the Applicant nor Frederick County successfully obtains the required rights -of -way or easements for the offsite transportation improvements as required by the traffic study, the Applicant shall be permitted to continue with the development as proposed without any further requirement of right-of-way or easement acquisition or improvement. C. The Applicant will install full size entrance improvements with right and left turn lanes, in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation design guidelines, at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road serving as the entrance to the Stephenson Village Community during the first phase of development. D. The Applicant will execute a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the intersection of U.S. Route 11 and Old Charles Town Road. Additionally, the Applicant will construct full size entrance improvements with both a right turn lane and left turn lane on Old Charles Town Road, and a right turn lane on U.S. Route 11 at said intersection. These improvements will be installed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation design guidelines when warranted by VDOT. E. The Applicant will execute a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road serving as the entrance to the Stephenson Village Community. The Applicant will provide for the signalization at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road based on the terms of this agreement when warranted by the Virginia Department of Transportation. F. The Applicant will design and construct a four -lane boulevard Major Collector Road for the Stephenson Village Community in substantial conformance with the proffered Generalized Development Plan. The Major Collector Road will be constructed in two phases. The first phase will be a two-lane half section that is constructed from Old Charles Town Road to the limits of the development as depicted on the approved Master Development Plan. This phase of the Major Collector Road will be constructed and bonded in segments in accordance with the approved Subdivision Design Plan for Stephenson Village. The second phase of the Major Collector Road will provide for the ultimate four -lane section with appropriate right and left turn lanes based on the following program: (1) The design of the transportation improvements identified in Sections 7(F)2- 7(F)5 of this proffer statement will begin when 80% of the actual traffic count volume is Page 11 September 3, 2003 realized as identified in each Section. The completion of the improvements specified in each Section will occur within 18 months of initial design. (2) Once actual traffic counts of 7,996 vehicle trips per day have been documented on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of the additional lanes to the existing Major Collector Road to its ultimate four -lane section from Old Charles Town Road to the limits of the Major Collector Road within the development. (3) Once the actual traffic count reaches 10,570 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of a three -lane section of Old Charles Town Road, from the Entrance to Stephenson Village to U.S. Route 11 using the existing bridge. (4) Once the actual traffic count reaches 17,699 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of a two lane half section of the Major Collector Road from the limits of the four -lane section to U.S. Route 11 at the Rutherford Farm Industrial Park intersection to include right and left turn lanes on the east side of U.S. Route 11 as determined by VDOT. The Applicant agrees to enter into a signalization agreement with VDOT at the U.S. Route 11/Rutherford Farm Industrial Park intersection if traffic signalization is not otherwise provided at that time. Traffic counters will be installed at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village on the property as part of this improvement. (5) Once the actual traffic count at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village near the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park intersection reaches 7,996 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of the remaining additional lanes to the existing Major Collector Road from the limits of the four -lane section to provide for the ultimate four -lane section ending at the east side of U.S. Route 11. G. The Applicant will provide $50,000 that shall be utilized as matching funds by VDOT and/or the County of Frederick for future improvements to the Interstate 81/U.S. Route 11 interchange at Exit 317. This dollar amount is intended to assist VDOT and the County of Frederick with this regional improvement. The $50,000 will be made available to VDOT or to the County of Frederick, within 30 days of written request for said funds by the appropriate party. 8. SCHOOL AND BALLFIELD SITES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC USE AREAS: A. School Site: The Applicant shall dedicate 20 acres of land to the Frederick County School Board for use as a public school site which shall count towards the overall Page 12 September 3, 2003 open space requirement for the development. Said site will occur within the general location identified as Land Bay I on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), adjacent to Old Charles Town Road, which will allow direct access to the site for citizens living outside of Stephenson Village. The Applicant will allow access for Stephenson Village residents to the site from a local neighborhood street, and will provide access to water and sewer at a point reasonably acceptable to the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, along the property boundary, at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. The Applicant shall convey said school site not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing, at no cost. B. Soccer and Baseball Field Site: (1) The Applicant shall dedicate 24 acres of land to Frederick County or such other entity as Frederick County designates and as more specifically set forth below which, when combined with school ball fields, will be used for 6 soccer fields and 6 baseball fields as shown on the layout for School/Park Site (Exhibit C, graphic for illustrative purposes only), which shall count towards the overall open space requirement for the development. Said site will occur within the general location identified as Land Bay II on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), adjacent to Old Charles Town Road, which will allow direct access to the site for citizens living outside of Stephenson Village. The Applicant will allow access for Stephenson Village residents to the site from a local neighborhood street and will allow access to water and sewer at a point reasonably acceptable along the property boundary, at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. The Applicant shall convey said soccer and baseball field site, not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing, at no cost. (2) Frederick County at its sole discretion may convey or lease its ownership interest in the soccer and baseball field sites to a corporation, trust or other entity which incorporates the direction of both the public and private sectors to provide recreation opportunities for the public. C. At the time the school and soccer and baseball fields sites are deeded to the County, the Applicant shall provide, at the Applicant's expense, a boundary survey and shall stake the corners of each site. Before Frederick County assigns or conveys any ownership interest in the Property conveyed herein by the Applicant to any third party, including, but not limited to the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, the third party will execute an agreement in recordable form which is satisfactory to the applicant which will provide and confirm that said third party agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Proffer Statement, including, but not limited to, provisions governing the use of the Property to be conveyed and also the application of all restrictive covenants governing the use of the Property and the construction of improvements upon it. By executing this Proffer Statement, Frederick County also agrees to be bound to and comply with the same. Page 13 September 3, 2003 D. Notwithstanding the potential uses of the parcels referenced in subparagraphs A and B above, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors shall have flexibility to determine the specific use located within each land bay dedicated for public use purposes, provided that said uses are one of those listed in subparagraphs A and B. Any other similar types of public uses shall be permitted only with the consent of the Applicant and provided that the use is of an architectural style and uses construction materials that are consistent with the restrictive covenants recorded against the property conveyed. Furthermore, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors agrees that if the public purposes are not constructed or installed, completed and in use on the parcels which are identified in subparagraphs A and B above within ten years of the conveyance from the Applicant, said properties may be purchased by the Applicant for the land value specified in §4 of this proffer statement. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby instructs and empowers its County Administrator to execute such other deeds or documents, which shall be required to effect the terms of this provision. E. The Applicant reserves the right to retain temporary and permanent grading, slope, utility, drainage, storm water management and access easements on all public use parcels which are dedicated to the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, provided said easements do not preclude reasonable use and development of the property for the intended purpose. 9. RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND LINEAR PARK: A. Recreational Center The Applicant shall construct one (1) recreation center within the Land Bay identified as Land Bay III as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), for the use of the residents of the Property and as determined by the Home Owners Association. The Applicant shall have the sole and absolute right to determine within said land bay, where the facility shall be located. The Applicant shall designate the location of the above facility on the Master Development Plan. The recreational center shall include a bathhouse and a 6-lane, 25-meter competition swimming pool. The facility will be fully bonded prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Work on this facility shall commence prior to the issuance of the 250th non -age restricted building permit and be completed prior to issuance of the 800th building permit for the non -age restricted housing products. B. Active Adult Recreational Center The Applicant shall construct one (1) recreation center within one of the Land Bays identified as shown on the Generalized Development Plan, for the private use of the residents of the Active Adult Community. This facility will be fully bonded prior to the issuance of the first building permit in the Active Adult Community. Work on this facility shall commence prior to the issuance of the 1501h building permit and be completed prior to issuance of the 3501h building permit in the Active Adult Community. Page 14 C. Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk System September 3, 2003 The Applicant shall construct a pedestrian trail or sidewalk system, which connects each recreation area to the surrounding neighborhood. The final location and the granting of any such easements and/or trails shall be at the subdivision design plan stage. Such trails or sidewalk system shall be constructed of stone dust or wood chips or such other materials selected by the Applicant provided they are not part of the sidewalk system within the public right-of-way. D. Linear Park Trail A twenty -foot (20') wide trail easement shall be dedicated to Frederick County Parks and Recreation. The location is to be determined by the Applicant and a trail system plan shall be submitted by the Applicant for evaluation by the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department. The trail shall be provided within the Hiatt Run Corridor and run the length of said corridor on the subject property for 3,800 +/- linear feet as shown on the proffered General Development Plan (Exhibit A). The Applicant shall convey said easement after development of adjoining parcels, or reasonable access is provided, and not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County Parks and Recreation in writing at no cost to Frederick County or Frederick County Parks and Recreation. Any area so dedicated shall be included in the calculation of required open space, and shall entitle the Applicant to recreational credit units for the value of the construction of the trail and dedicated land. The Applicant reserves the right to retain temporary and permanent grading, utility, sewer force main, slope, storm water management, construction and drainage easements within said dedicated area, although only temporary easements shall be retained as needed for the construction by the Applicant of the six-foot wide asphalt or concrete trail described herein. The asphalt or concrete trail at the discretion of the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department may be changed to other surface materials in an effort to promote low impact development techniques. Construction of said trail by the Applicant is contingent upon the proposed trail being allowed by all applicable County and State ordinances, and limitations due to terrain and constructability considerations. In the event that the public linear park trail is unable to be constructed due to County or State ordinances, the Applicant shall develop the linear park trail as a private trail system for the use of the residents of Stephenson Village. This private linear park trail shall count towards the open space and recreational amenities requirements for Stephenson Village and will be constructed of similar materials and standards identified in section 9C of this proffer statement. 10. ACTIVE ADULT AGE -RESTRICTED HOUSING A. Applicant agrees that the following language shall be included in the deeds conveying real property designated as age -restricted housing on that portion of the property. At least eighty percent (80%) of the occupied residential units shall be occupied by at least one person fifty-five (55) years of age or older and within such units the following conditions shall apply: Page 15 September 3, 2003 (1) All other residents must reside with a person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older, and be a spouse, a cohabitant, an occupant's child eighteen (18) years of age or older, or provide primary physical or economic support to the person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older. Notwithstanding this limitation, a person hired to provide live-in, long term or terminal health care of a person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older for compensation shall also occupy a dwelling during any time such person is actually providing such care. (2) Guests under the age of fifty-five (55) are permitted for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days total for each such guest in any calendar year. (3) If title to any lot or unit shall become vested in any person under the age of fifty-five (55) by reason of descent, distribution, foreclosure or operation of law, the age restriction covenants shall not work a forfeiture or reversion of title, but rather, such person thus taking title shall not be permitted to reside in such lot or unit until he/she shall have attained the age of fifty-five (55) or otherwise satisfies the requirements as set forth herein. Notwithstanding, a surviving spouse shall be allowed to continue to occupy a dwelling unit without regard to age. B. A maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the occupied age -restricted residential units shall be allowed to be occupied by at least one person fifty (50) years of age or older and within such units the following conditions shall apply: (1) All other residents must reside with a person who is fifty (50) years of age or older, be a spouse, a cohabitant, an occupant's child eighteen (18) years of age or older, or provide primary physical or economic support to the person who is fifty (50) years of age or older. Notwithstanding this limitation, a person hired to provide live-in, long term or terminal health care to a person who is fifty (50) years of age or older for compensation shall also occupy a dwelling during any time such person is actually providing such care. (2) Guests under the age of fifty (50) are permitted for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days total for each such guest in any calendar year. (3) If title to any lot or unit shall become vested in any person under the age of fifty (50) by reason of descent, distribution, foreclosure or operation of law, the age restriction covenant shall not work a forfeiture or reversion of title, but rather, such person thus taking title shall not be permitted to reside in such lot or unit until he/she shall have attained the age of fifty (50) or otherwise satisfied the requirements as set forth herein. Notwithstanding, a surviving spouse shall be allowed to continue to occupy a dwelling unit without regard to age. Page 16 September 3, 2003 (4) The above -described use restrictions shall be amended from time to time in accordance with applicable local and state regulations governing age restricted housing and the Federal Fair Housing Act so long as the substantive intent as set forth herein is maintained. In no event shall the minimum age of residents be less than the ages set forth hereinabove. C. Applicant agrees that the language in this Section or such other language as may be necessary to comply with the requirements to qualify as Housing for Older Persons under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Fair Housing Act of Virginia shall be included in the deeds conveying real property designated as age -restricted on that portion of the property. 11. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY: Subject to the provisions of this proffer statement, the Applicant will develop and build apartment units to provide much needed affordable housing for the elderly. The Applicant will comply with the necessary requirements to qualify these apartment units for the "Housing for Older Persons" exception to familial status discrimination as allowed under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Fair Housing Act of Virginia. The construction of these apartment units will begin after at least 50 percent of the retail space has been developed, provided that the approval of appropriate federal and state housing authorities is obtained, and the project qualifies for the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program or equivalent. In the event that funding for the affordable housing for the elderly is not obtained, the Applicant proffers to reapportion those units to the active adult community housing units. 12. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES: A. Byers house: The Byers house will be preserved as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. B. Cemeteries: Prior to commencement of any earth disturbing activity in any section of the Property, the applicant shall mark and identify any cemeteries which may be located there. In the event any onsite cemeteries are found, the applicant shall preserve those cemeteries in accordance with all County and State regulations. 13. COMMERCIAL CENTER: The Applicant has identified an area as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) for a commercial center that will be developed at a time to be determined by Applicant. Within the commercial center development, the following shall be provided: A. The Applicant shall provide for all turn lanes and traffic signalization on the Major Collector Road serving the commercial center as warranted by VDOT. The Page 17 September 3, 2003 Applicant shall conduct traffic impact analysis studies for each commercial site plan submitted to Frederick County that will be reviewed and approved by VDOT to determine when these improvements are warranted. A traffic signalization agreement will be executed with VDOT by the Applicant to ensure that commercial uses developed prior to the warrants for traffic signalization contribute their pro-rata share for this improvement. B. The Applicant shall record architectural and design restrictive covenants for the commercial center and shall submit a copy to the Frederick County Planning Director and the Frederick County Building Official with the first site plan within the commercial center. Said covenants shall provide for the establishment of an architectural review board for the purpose of review and approval of all architectural elevations and signage for all commercial uses to assure a continuity of overall architectural appearances within the entire commercial development. C. The Applicant shall ensure that all commercial site plans submitted to Frederick County for the commercial center are designed to implement best management practices (BMP) to promote storm water quality measures. A statement will be provided on each commercial site plan identifying the party or parties responsible for maintaining these BMP facilities as a condition of site plan approval. D. The areas within the commercial center that are not required to be graded or cleared for the implementation of all approved site plans will remain undisturbed. One-way travel aisles will be utilized where practical to reduce the impervious areas of parking lots within the commercial center. E. The Applicant shall provide for a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial land use in Stephenson Village. The majority of the commercial land use will be located within the commercial center identified on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit). The development of smaller areas of commercial land use will be allowed in other areas of Stephenson Village. These commercial land use areas will be provided on the detailed Master Development Plan associated with the development of Stephenson Village. F. The Applicant has identified an area as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) for a commercial center. The development of 60,000 square feet of commercial space will begin within the commercial center no later than the issuance of the 1,200`h non -age restricted residential building permit with completion of this commercial space within 18 months. The Applicant will be allowed to extend the commencement of commercial construction for an additional two year period if any one of the following circumstances has occurred: An elementary school has not been constructed on the Property; or a building permit is obtained for the development of a new grocery store within a three mile radius of commercial center within Stephenson Village. Page 18 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE: September 3, 2003 The Applicant shall provide up to 2,500 square feet of shell space for a 10 year period rent free exclusive of utility and common area maintenance (CAM) charges in the commercial center for the location of a Public Service Satellite Facility for Frederick County. The shell space shall be made available and commence upon the completion of the base building in which the space is located. Frederick County must complete build out and occupy the space within two (2) years of the completion of the base building. If Frederick County fails to build out and occupy the space within the two (2) year period then the space will revert to the Applicant. 15. COMMUNITY DESIGN FOR A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE: A. Design The Applicant agrees to provide an overall continuity of design within the community by means of selecting standards for the following elements, which will be uniformly specified and applied over the entire project: • Custom fixture street lighting program. • Custom mailbox design • Standardized common area fencing style and color • Standardized private residential fencing styles and color • Community color selections to create neighborhood theme • Uniform site furnishing selection (benches and trash receptacles) • Custom designed street signage and stop signage • Landscaping at the entrance monuments, along the collector road buffers and within the medians selected to provide for a repetition of the neighborhood flower color scheme and theme trees throughout the community The Applicant agrees to utilize innovative design techniques and quality design for the recreational center and bathhouse, common area landscaping, site design, and architectural design. B. Architecture (1) The architectural styling of Housing Unit Types 1 through 4 shall be constructed in accordance with the Housing Unit Types Exhibit(s) proffered herein. Housing Unit Types 5 and 6 shall be compatible with Housing Unit Types 1 through 4. (2) Access to garages by the use of alleys shall be allowed on Housing Unit Types 1 (Carriage House), 3 (Cottage House), 5 (Modified Single -Family Small Lot, and 6 (Modified Townhouse). Page 19 September 3, 2003 (3) Specific architectural elements that are allowed on Housing Unit Types, to include Housing Unit Types 5 and 6 shall include, but are not limited to, the use of peaked roofs, gables, chimneys, balconies or decks, porches and/or garages. C. HousingUnit 3 (Cottage House) and Unit Type 4 (Courtyard Cluster) (1) Decks and Patios All deck planks shall be Class I (A) fire rated composite lumber or approved equal of a standardized color to be selected by the Applicant. A maximum of two styles of deck railing shall be used on all decks and shall be made of the same composite lumber and the same matching color selection. (2) Fire Protection System Courtyard Cluster and Cottage houses will have a 13-D sprinkler system in the home and the garages. D. Lighting Any exterior lighting of individual homes or common use recreation areas shall be directed downward and inward on the site to reduce glare on adjacent properties, the public and/or private right-of-way, and upward stray illumination. E. Architectural and Design Covenants Stephenson Associates, L.C. shall develop architectural and design covenants for the overall community. Said covenants will establish an architectural review board for the purpose of review and approval of all architectural elevations, exterior architectural features (fences, railings, walls and decks) for all uses within Stephenson Village, as well as any publicly provided structures located on sites dedicated for public use. These covenants are intended to assure a continuity of overall architectural appearance, quality material selection, and a cohesive color palate for all structures within the entire development. 16. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND HABITAT PRESERVATION: A. Environmental Features and Easements: (1) Significant wildlife habitats shall be identified and preserved by the Applicant with technical assistance from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). Wildlife or bird habitats shall be further Page 20 September 3, 2003 enhanced by providing native plantings selected to encourage feeding areas while reestablishing forest in and around environmentally sensitive areas. (2) The Applicant shall limit the clearing and grading on each lot to the area needed for structures, utilities, access and fire protection to maximize tree save areas. (3) Unbuildable wetlands, unbuildable floodplains, and unbuildable steep slopes shall be designated and shall be subject to the following: (a) Grading: Protection of steeply sloped areas will be provided by the Applicant as follows: clearing and grading will not occur on any slopes of twenty five percent (25%) or greater, except for trails, road crossings, utilities, drainage and storm water management facilities. (b) Floodplain Areas: Development within floodplain areas shall be limited to the public Linear Park Trail system to include the trail, pedestrian bridges, benches and signage. (c) Buffers and Conservation Easements: (1) Buffer and Conservation Easements: A one -hundred foot (100) wide nondisturbance buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot immediately adjacent to Hiatt Run and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel. (ii) Conservation Easements/Floodplain: A twenty -foot (20) wide buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot immediately adjacent to the 100-year floodplain. The ten feet (10� adjacent to the floodplain shall be undisturbed. The ten feet (10) adjacent to the lots may be disturbed and, if disturbed, shall be re -vegetated by planting trees equal to the number of trees in excess of six inches (6") caliper removed by the disturbance, OR at the rate of 50 (2" caliper) trees per acre of disturbance, at the option of the Applicant. (iii) The above disturbed and undisturbed buffers as well as conservation easements not located within a platted lot and/or parcel shall be part of the common areas owned by the Homeowners Association(s). Covenants to be created as part of the Homeowners Association(s) documents shall provide for maintenance of said areas by the Homeowners Association(s). (4) Resource protection areas are identified for the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel that are further identified on the Generalized Development Plan. These resource protection areas contain various environmental features and provide different resource management plans for their treatment and protection by the Applicant. Page 21 September 3, 2003 B. Hiatt Run Corridor: (1) The Hiatt Run Corridor shall be considered a resource protection area. Clearing and grading by individual lot owners is prohibited within this zone. (2) A one -hundred foot (100') foot non -disturbance buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot adjacent to the Hiatt Run Corridor and shall serve as the clearing limit for all lots that border the Hiatt Run Corridor as measured from the center line of the stream. (3) A minimum buffer of twenty feet (20') shall border all wetland preservation areas. Clearing and grading by individual owners is prohibited within this buffer. (4) Native plants and cluster trees will be preserved and/or reforested in accordance with the Forest Management Plan along the south side of the Hiatt Run Corridor. (5) Wildlife or bird habitats will be further enhanced by providing native plantings selected to encourage feeding areas while reestablishing forest in and around environmentally sensitive areas including steep slopes, woodlands and flood plain areas along the north side of the Hiatt Run Corridor. The planting plan along the north side of the Hiatt Run Corridor will be created with technical assistance from VDGIF and the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. C. Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel: The Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel shall be considered a resource protection area. Restrictive covenants recorded against the property will provide that clearing and grading by individual lot owners is prohibited within this zone. The Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel will be further enhanced, by providing native plantings, to establish an upland buffer. The planting plan for this upland buffer will be created with technical assistance from VDGIF and the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. D. Forest Management Plan: (1) The Forest Stewardship and Management Plan will be created with technical assistance from the Department of Forestry. Native plants and cluster trees will be preserved and/or reforested in accordance with the Forest Management Plan. Page 22 September 3, 2003 (2) Existing ponds will be identified and, if beneficial and appropriate, shall be used as storm water management facilities. In addition, the Applicant shall establish additional ponds on the site wherever possible and in such locations as the Applicant directs. The ponds shall be located and designed to promote water infiltration on the site. A minimum area of twenty feet (20') wide surrounding each such pond shall be developed as a park setting. (3) The Forest Management Plan will be created with technical assistance from the Department of Forestry. E. Environmental Utility / Road Impacts: Construction of utilities, roads, trails, bio-retention areas, or wetlands creation shall be allowed within the environmental features listed in § 16A-§ 16D of this proffer statement. Any construction of the above listed items will use low impact construction methods such as 90-degree crossings, minimal soil, and tree disturbances. When linear utility impacts such as force mains or transmission lines are required low impact construction techniques will be utilized. F. Implementation of Enhancements and Amendments The Applicant shall provide the location of the resource protection areas as a component of the Master Development Plan. Information pertaining to proposed enhancements and amendments to the resource protection areas shall be included as narratives of the Master Development Plan to ensure that these treatment measures will be implemented. 17. COMMUNITY CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION: A. The Applicant shall see that the properties within Stephenson Village shall be serviced by a commercial trash pickup and waste removal service. Said service shall provide curbside trash removal unless otherwise provided by Frederick County, for all residential uses and dumpster disposal for all high -density residential uses and commercial uses. Waste and trash removal services shall not dispose of trash and waste at any Frederick County Citizen Convenience Center. The Applicant shall be relieved of its obligations to see to the performance of this Proffer by assigning all of its obligations to a Homeowners Association for any portion or all of the development. B. Notwithstanding the above, Applicant shall locate dumpster sites as unobtrusively as possible. The area immediately surrounding each dumpster site shall be planted with vegetation similar to or identical to that planted in the median open vegetated areas, including, but not limited to, deciduous trees and evergreen shrubbery in addition to the required fence and gate enclosure. Page 23 September 3, 2003 18. WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STEPHENSON AREA: A. The Applicant shall dedicate land to be utilized for the location of a regional pump station as determined by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) in an area that is mutually agreed upon by both parties. B. The Applicant shall construct a pump station in conformance with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan as required to serve the Property and shall dedicate the pump station to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) for operation and maintenance. The pump station shall be constructed and operational prior to the first occupancy permit in Stephenson Village. C. The Applicant shall construct water and sewer lines in conformance with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan as required to serve all private land uses within Stephenson Village and shall dedicate the applicable water and sewer lines to FCSA for operation and maintenance. Furthermore, the applicant shall provide water and sewer lines of adequate size to the property line for all publicly dedicated properties. 19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY: By accepting and approving this rezoning application, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors authorizes the location and provision of those public uses and facilities specifically referenced on the Generalized Development Plan, in this Proffer Statement, and the extension and construction of water and sewer lines and facilities and roads necessary to serve this Property pursuant to the Virginia Code Section 15.2-2232 and the Frederick County Code. The general area of location for these uses and facilities are as shown on the Generalized Development Plan with the exact locations to be determined based on final engineering and as approved by Frederick County. Acceptance of this Proffer Statement constitutes approval of the public uses and facilities and their general locations and thereby accepts said uses and facilities from further Comprehensive Plan conformity review. 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION(S): A. Creation of Association(s) A homeowners association or more than one homeowners association ("HOA") shall be created and shall be made responsible for the review and approval of all construction within the development to insure that all design standards for the Stephenson Village Development are satisfied and for the maintenance and repair of all common areas, together with such other responsibilities, duties and powers as are customary for such associations or as may shall be required for such HOA herein. Page 24 B. Additional Responsibility September 3, 2003 In addition to such other responsibilities and duties as shall be assigned; the HOA shall have title to and/or responsibility for: (1) All common open space including storm water facilities areas not otherwise dedicated to public use or maintained by commercial entities. (2) Common buffer areas located outside of residential lots. (3) Residential curbside trash collection. 21. PROFFERED HOUSING TYPES: The following plan(s), exhibit(s) and Housing Unit Types are proffered herein. Each may be altered at the time of final engineering and equivalent Housing Unit Types may be substituted with the approval of the Director of Planning or his/her designee. Any existing or future Housing Unit Type, which is permitted under the R4 Residential Planned Community District, may also be utilized. Housing Unit Types Exhibit(s) prepared by The Land Planning and Design Group, Inc. dated December 2002, listed below and attached hereto as Exhibit B (graphic for illustrative purposes only). The minimum design standards for the following housing types are summarized and listed on the attached chart prepared by Land Planning and Design Group, Inc., dated March 2003 and referred to as Exhibit E — Minimum Design Standards. "Housing Unit Type 1" (Carriage House): Carriage House Illustrative Carriage House Typical Carriage House Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 2" (Non -Alley Carriage House): Non -Alley Carriage House Illustrative Non -Alley Carriage House Typical Non -Alley Carriage House Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 3" (Cottage House): Cottage House Illustrative Cottage House Typical Cottage House Landscape Typical Page 25 September 3, 2003 "Housing Unit Type 4" (Courtyard Cluster): Courtyard Cluster Illustrative Courtyard Cluster Typical Courtyard Cluster Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 5" (Modified Single Family Detached Lot): Modified Single Family Detached Lot Typical "Housing Unit Type 6" (Modified "Townhouse" Attached Dwelling): Modified "Townhouse" Attached Dwelling Typical "Housing Unit Type 7" (Elderly Housing Dwelling): Elderly Housing Dwelling Specifications Elderly Housing Dwelling Illustrative Elderly Housing Dwelling Specifications and Illustrative Design provided in Community Design Modifications Document Other housing types shall be added, if approved, by Frederick County. 22. STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING: A. The Applicant shall provide landscaped areas on both sides of the Major Collector Road as illustrated on the attached Exhibit D (Typical Major Collector Road Section) dated March 2003 and in accordance with the following: (1) The landscaped area described above is designed to be a scenic urban linear park, which shall contain woodland conservation areas. (For purposes of this Proffer, a woodland conservation area shall be defined as an area designated for the purpose of retaining land areas predominantly in their natural, scenic, open or wooded condition.)The woodland conservation area shall have a varying width of no less than fifteen feet. Woodland conservation areas shall be provided where feasible based upon final engineering and design of the development. The Applicant shall provide, within the landscaped area, a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees, to include native types of trees originally found in this area and replacing any trees removed during development. Such trees shall be planted at the minimum rate of one tree every 40 linear feet along the roadway frontage and shall be planted in clusters rather than a linear pattern. Page 26 September 3, 2003 (2) The minimum planting standard for street landscaping or landscaped areas/woodland conservation areas shall be a mixture of deciduous trees, ornamental trees, evergreen trees, and shrubbery. At the Applicants option, trees and shrubs shall be planted in clusters and shall be planted at an equivalent rate of ten plant units per 40 linear feet of collector street roadway frontage. The plant unit credits are determined as follows: Shade Trees (2" min. caliper) = 10 plant units, Ornamental trees (1.5" minimum caliper) = 5 plant units, Evergreen trees (6' min. height) = 5 plant units, Shrubs (18" minimum height) = 2 plant units. B. The Applicant shall have the option of utilizing landscaped central islands within cul- de-sacs. When landscaped islands are utilized a twenty-eight foot (28') foot paved area shall be provided to accommodate on -street parking and travel aisles. C. Where conditions permit, vegetated open channels shall be used in street right-of- ways for storm water runoff, instead of curb and guttering. D. To the extent possible, stone fines or wood chip trails/paths shall be used instead of asphalt trails/paths. Where practical, such trails/paths shall be located on only one side of each interior road provided sidewalks are not required or practical within the adjacent road right-of-way. 23. COMMUNITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM: A. The Applicant reserves the right to construct community entry features including a monument style sign at the entrances to the development in accordance with the following parameters: Such signage shall not exceed two signs per intersection, one occurring on either side of the entrance. The sign panel area shall not exceed 65 square feet per sign, and shall be attached to a wall not to exceed 8 feet in height, excluding piers, which shall be 9.25 feet in height. The wall supporting the signage will not be included in the allowable square footage for the sign panel. B. The Applicant reserves the right to construct neighborhood entry features including a monument style sign at the entrance to each neighborhood in accordance with the following parameters: Such signage shall not exceed two signs per intersection one occurring on either side of the entrance. The sign panel area shall not exceed 40 square feet per sign, and shall be attached to a wall not to exceed 7 feet in height, excluding piers, which shall be 8.25 feet in height. The wall supporting the signage will not be included in the allowable square footage for the sign panel. C. Commercial freestanding business signs shall be monument style with similar design and materials as the community entry feature signs. These commercial freestanding business signs shall be no more than 20' in height measured from the base and shall be spaced a minimum of 100 feet apart. Page 27 SIGNATURE PAGE September 3, 2003 The conditions set forth herein are the proffers for Stephenson Village and supercede all previous proffer statements submitted for this Development. Respectfully submitted, Step;ame: n Asso iat , L.C. By: J. Donald Shockey, Jr. Title: Manager Subscribed and sworn before me this 8th day of Sept. , 2003. Susan D. Stahl (Typed Name of Notary) My Commission Expires: 4-30-2004 Notary Pub is STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 1 NET FISCAL BENEFIT STEPHENSON VILLAGE 23 Years (2003 - 7025) $38,131,240 New Tax Rate Old Tax Rate $21,576,929 $80,000,000 $40,000,000 $0 SOURCE: Robert Charles Lesser & Co., LLC Frederick County VA Modei-RR 12 cents increase.xis-Ocr 9p� Ex 1 9-00 Printed:4/24/2003 Page 1 of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Crr> vmVN90N VILLAGE CATEGORY REVENUES Real Property Taxes Personal Property Taxes Sales Taxes BPOL Taxes Miscellaneous Revenues Educational Revenues TOTAL EXPENDITURES TOTAL NET FISCAL IMPACT ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Exhibit 2 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE TEPHENSON VILLAGE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 23 Years (2003 - 2025) $100,703,000 $48,193,000 $11,264,000 $2,608,000 $25,948,000 $64,741,000 $253,457,000 $215,326,000 $38,131,000 Page 1 of 1 23-YEAR TOTAL 40% 19% 4% 1% 10% 26% 1On 100% Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xis-Su0m4-92 EEx 2 Printed: 4/24/2003 STEPHENSON VILLAGE $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,OOC $10,000,00( $5,000,00( Exhibit 3 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE CUMULATIVE NET FISCAL BENEFIT n 00 Q) v — .. . . _ Y r- T' V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N Frederick County VA Mode! -RR 12 cents increase.xls-cumu graph -Ex 3 04-9269.00 Printed: 4/24/2003 Page 1 of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 4 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE ANNUAL NET FISCAL IMPACT NET FISCAL CUMULATIVE 1 R YEAR REVENUES EXPENDITURES IMPACT (NFI) NFI re u b uk uus xtva� _. n are rerun LMFS4Y l 3!'L4. i $0 $178,611 $178,611 2003 $178,611 $0 $194,130 $372,742 2004 $194,130 $780,873 $549,448 $231,425 $604,167 2005 2006 $1,861,105 $1,534,792 $326,313 $930,480 $1,176,551 2007 $2,673,034 $2,426,963 $246,071 $366,616 $1,543,167 2008 $3,831,270 $3,464,654 $4,527,485 $629,938 94 $1,621,132 2009 $4,975,512 $6,302,421 $5,672,483 $629,938 $3,59 ,713 2010 2011 $7,950,051 $6,980,470 $969,581 $3,590,713 2012 $9,027,539 $8,048,592 $978,947 $4,569,660 $6,119,817 2013 $10,796,661 $9,246,504 $1,550,157 $1,962,246 $8,082,065 2014 $12,286,946 $10,324,698 $11,482,337 $2,169,366 $10,251,431 2015 2016 $13,651,704 $14,602,140 $12,420,531 $2,181,608 $12,433,040 2017 $15,344,809 $13,147,752 $2,197,056 $14,630,096 2018 $15,992,915 $13,767,932 $2,224,983 $16,855,079 $19,423,429 2019 $17,035,864 $14,467,514 $15,009,178 $2,568,350 $2,738,866 $22,162,297 2020 $17,748,046 $18,249,868 $15,459,453 $2,790,415 $24,952,712 2021 2022 $18,792,098 $15,923,237 $2,868,861 $27,821,574 $30,775,076 2023 $19,354,436 $16,400,934 $2,953,502 $3,540,357 $34,315,433 2024 $2p 521,239 $16,980,882 $17,490 308 $3 fl15 807 $38,131 240 2025 $21,306 115 Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xfs-Ann Supm¢929 00 Printed: 4/24/2003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Page 1 of 1 !1�TFpuENSON VILLAGE AREA TYPE Exhibit 5 PUPIL GENERATION RATES BASED ON HOUSING TYPES AND ACTUAL ENROLLMENT RCLCo RATES BASED ON U.S. CENSUS DATA FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Single -Family Detached 5ingle-Family Attached Multifamily Mobile Home Predicted Pupils Actual Pupils 3/ Predicted as % of Actual FREDERICK CO. ESTIMATE OCCUPIED RCLCO ESTIMATE PREDICTED PUPILS PER PREDICTED UNITS PUPILS PER PUPILS UNIT 2/ PUPILS 1, 20001/ UNITr, &±ftY. ftiW.A1UYd1Y+''!M d@JlHf Vkll i ♦rtl ' " �&!YN?talR 'PTII'F�5 0 S!il16R 1 16,741 0.5442 9110 0.7000 11,719 1,872 0.2908 544 0.5400 1,011 1,309 0.1564 205 0.2300 301 2,175 0.5442 1,184 0.2300 500 11,043 13,531 10,676 10,676 127% 103% 1/ 2000 US Census 2/ Frederick County 3/ Frederick County Public Schools SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. Page I of 1 Pupil Generation Frederick.xisipupil Generation Printed:412412003 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 6 EVALUATION OF RCLCo AND COUNTY PUPIL GENERATION RATES (FROM EXHIBIT 5) BASED ON FREDERICK COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA HOME TYPE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Single -Family Detached 3/ Single -Family Attached 3/ Multifamily Mobile Home Predicted Pupil Increase Actual Pupil Increase 2/ Predicted as % of Actual RCLCO FACTORS PERMITTED PUPILS PREDICTED UNITS PER PUPIL 1996-20011/ UNIT INCREASE 2,570 0.5442 1,399 454 0.2908 132 474 0.1564 74 598 0.5442 325 1,930 1,048 184 % 1/ Frederick County 21 Frederick County Public Schools 3/ Assumes 85% of permitted single-family units are detached. SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. Page 1 of 1 FREDERICK CO. FACTORS PUPILS PER PREDICTED PER PUPIL INCREASE UNIT 2/ 1996-2002 0.7000 1,799 0.5400 245 0.2300 109 0.2300 138 2,291 1,048 219% Pupil Generation Frederick.xislPupii Generation (Perrnit) 04-9269.00 Printed:4124/2003 �o I rc- c n� Z m o= 3° o= 3 D p _ x o z `< N p N �. ; fN b Z 01 n a 0 o C x c b k a rt o 3 o a n �3C��ko c 1 3 mm F) n C m v m y x 0 3 ' x c rt m D O m n; b C 3 Cs I D w iv m .-. m D a k_ T. -� iv A 2 k Z n �. m k C D �:0 P < m rn 9 C O m m .� i v L. O x of X D -=1 b0 D C m x a v C k m o m O S CD O ? p b C X O m ;C O n a 0 0 -. a o - k f D f 0 °` N a b o v` D a G O N OI V N N N A O z D n D 9 9 1�1 + + ' D c C z D w p V J O w O z D z D z; D w Z= C 2 0 y u O O u D z D z D ; m D p r X 9 m Vl o d d Ox n v, m " v o CD III o p H W \ O f+ W X GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN STEPHENSON VILLAGE EXHIBIT A STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Hin 0 O GREENWAY ENGINEERING THE LAND PLANNING 5300 WESTVIEW DR. 151 Windy Hill Lane & DESIGN SUITE 103 Winchester, Virginia 22602 GROUP FREDERICK, MD 21703 Founded i� 1971 301-695-6172 Engineers Telephone 540-882-4185 INC. FAX301-6956219 Surveyors FAX 540-722-9528 LAND PLANNING • SITE PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE RTE. 761 _ OLD CHARLES _ �� ACCESS ROAD PAVED PARKING TYPICAL I SCHOOL i ACCESS ROAD --\ j JR. SOCCER FIELDS Jq. BA L F E DS SOCCER FIELDS , PA` UOVERFLOW PARKING TYPICAL SERVICEIEMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD a MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD 4,jCqc oze J10 K900L = ■Tt IS no 01191o�1iP{ PuRPQ4! Oldr. Q SOC / cFAF'F�os 4q(C F'fL0 v W F+ \ > U M Z � Z, a '7 w H x W A o w F04 E� DATE: MARCH 2003 SCALE: I'-125' DESIGNED RY: 11PR JOR N0. 2TBOC SHEET 1 OF I J/ ss1 00 st McCgN_N R TE. 838 aC T / 4 COMMUNITY MAJOR C RECREATION OLLECTO CENTER \ ~ gklA11}1'tI 71 Ra'W /-1 III SAMUEL BYERS .+ � //,/ /j/j//.[., /,a.[,.LJZ // U LANDMARKS 34-1124 V / V WETLANDS 3.5 +l- ACRES AREA NOT TO BE REZONED 100 0 ' GDPLEGEND sssl t>• AmEw MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD INTER PARCEL CONNECTIONS HDTE TNIF OENE6. 1ED DF VEIOMEM fFAM H CDN(FIIL.LL .vm roA KFusrswnVE ruwsEs orxY THE PpAL IocsTxw a asuN1LTKKI DE THE wdvmwu IwNosArs •Inns fMER n0.UTFD COEIOHFNR NAV YE EtYJIRY.LLTE11E0 TO 0.ETFFLT HpE ACLIMTF EW fApO. INTERMEDIATE ( RAVINE CIU NNEL �/ ♦ . III LINEAR PARK ) _/ / OPEN SPACE TI fiIATT RUN � 1 i F r HIATT RUN III CORRIDOR MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD ,- y ACTIVEADITT RECREATION . CENTER V RJ IIA77RUN LAND BAY 1 .No ulsEo utE AT ill-lim. IcHool. N COMMUNITY PARK 8 Dos"a RddA k 8 A- RHds III 1 D R DlNT VENIENCE COMMERCJAL/DAYCARE H-1, UIJt Type 1,2,a,5. RP DMtrkl SFD AI RNMWSE HOVAIn Unit T A 6 A RP Dlsukl Toi ULDFAMKY: CondominYuns, EIdMYY Hwadnq, HouslnE Unit Tp, -c.u.gA HOVAA A, lipDMUNI DYPIs%. MultlPIA%, tPMKn, Omdsn DE -k A, A01- Adull ry ACTIVE ADULT (H_AndomV g Unll T*A 1.2, A,5) Wilt-11: (Cink—. EIdMy H—I lq, H—inV 7 128 EFF TES •pD0.E55AIV ,)ROVE CIWlw P0.DfiE0.) VEES DflI311Y�M1%DE NOVSwV TYPES%IlE 11M)SwG TYPES All11��1 C7 U a Q Nusi1 Q mm O� un Q xG' rah W I.+LL-I F AI MAX. NA NA NA NA NA NA 30 53 7 30 VJ 30 53 DATE: SEPT S, 2003 SCALE: I"-I000' NA NA DESIGN® BY:1m9/JNT JOB NO. 2780C SHEET r 1 OP 1 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: SUBJECT: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 :l MEMORANDUM Frederick County Board of Supervisors Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Planning Directo September 18, 2003 Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village Executive Summary of Staff Report FAX: 540/ 665-6395 Attached with this memorandum is the staff report for Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, which is scheduled for its requisite public hearing at the September 24, 2003 meeting of the Board of Supervisors. The following summary is provided as a means of highlighting the proposed development program for Stephenson Village as well as the critical role of ordinance modification requests in the applicant's proposed proffer statement. The recommendations of the Planning Commission are also summarized for your reference. The attached staff report contains a complete analysis of the application and further includes cross- references to the applicant's impact analysis statement, proffer statement, and Generalized Development Plan to assist in navigating this extensive package of materials. The attached staff report is organized as follows: A. General Application and Parcel Information (p. 1 - 2) B. Agency Review Evaluations (p. 2 - 3) C. Comprehensive Policy Plan Conformance (p. 4 - 5) D. Environmental Features Analysis (p. 5 - 6) E. Potential Impacts of Proposed Rezoning (p. 6 - 10): 1. Transportation (p. 6 - 9) 2. Historic Resources (p. 9) 3. Sewer and Water Service (p. 10) F. Proffer Statement Overview and Analysis (p. 10 - 27) 1. General Overview of Proffer Statement (p. 10 - 11) 2. Ordinance Modification Analysis: Section 1 of Proffer Statement (p. 11 -19) 3. Proffer Summary and Review: Sections 2 - 23 of Proffer Statement (p.19-27) G. Summary and Action of Planning Commission - 07/16/03 Meeting (p. 27 - 28) H. Summary and Action of Planning Commission - 08/20/03 Meeting (p. 28 - 29) I. Staff Conclusion (p. 29) 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Rezoning Proposal - General Development Program Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village is a request to rezone 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to R4 (Planned Residential Community), to enable development of a residential planned community comprised of mixed housing types totaling 2,465 dwelling units (exclusive of proffered affordable elderly housing), with 250,000 square feet of commercial uses (of which 60,000 square feet is guaranteed by proffer) and 44 acres dedicated for public school and recreation uses. The proffer statement stipulates that the total number of dwelling units in Stephenson Village will not exceed 2,465. This dwelling unit limitation results in a gross residential density of 3.10 units per acre. It is noted that this limitation does not include affordable housing for the elderly, which, assuming that such housing does indeed develop, will result in a greater final project density. The applicant has not specified the minimum or maximum number of affordable elderly units that will be developed in Stephenson Village. Of the 2,465 dwelling units proffered by the applicant, a minimum of 30% will develop as active adult/age-restricted units. The development of all non -age restricted units will be phased at an annual rate of 8% per year. Active adult/age restricted and affordable elderly units are not included in the phasing program. The applicant has proposed to serve the development with a multi -modal transportation system consisting of a major collector road, a system of pedestrian and bicycle trails, and a linear park trail within the Hiatt Run Corridor. The major collector road will be developed in phases triggered by actual traffic counts within the project. Proffer Statement - Community Design Modification Document Pursuant to the provisions of Section 165-72.0. of the Zoning Ordinance, the applicant has submitted nine ordinance modification requests with the Proffer Statement. These modifications are being sought by the applicant to enable enhanced regulatory flexibility that they argue is necessary to achieve the design program proposed for Stephenson Village. These requests and the applicant's justification for each are delineated through the Community Design Modification Document, which is included as Exhibit F of the rezoning application. Staff has provided a detailed analysis of each modification request for your review, which can be found on pages 11 through 19 of the staff report. Ifis important to note that each of the nine modification requests is necessary to enable the proffered development program for Stephenson Village. Indeed, approval of this application in its current form is dependant upon the individual approval of all nine modification requests. Should one or more modification requests be denied by the Board, the application should either be denied outright or tabled to allow the applicant to respond with revisions to the Proffer Statement. Planning Commission Recommendations Of the nine modification requests, all received recommendations of approval from the Planning Commission except for Modification #3, which is a request for reduction of the minimum commercial and industrial area requirement of the R4 District. Specifically, the applicant has requested the ability to reserve only 4% of the project for commercial and industrial uses, rather than the 10% minimum land area required for such uses by the Zoning Ordinance. The negative recommendation was based upon the contention that the minimum ordinance requirement for commercial and industrial land areas was appropriate as a means of ensuring a "balance" of land uses within a planned community. This recommendation was endorsed by the majority of Commissioners despite acknowledgment that the applicant had proffered to exclude all industrial land uses from the proposed development. By majority vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, to include all ordinance modifications requested by the applicant with the exception of Modification #3, which received a negative recommendation. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions regarding this memorandum or the attached staff report. CMM/bad Attachment U:\Chris\Common\Rezoning\Slephenson Village\Comments\EOS_StephensonVillageExecSum.wpd REZONING APPLICATION #06-03 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Public Hearing Prepared: September 18, 2003 Staff Contact: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Director This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 07/16/03 - Public Hearing Tabled 30 Days per Applicant's Request. Planning Commission: 08/20/03 Recommended approval, to include all modification requests except Modification #3, which seeks a reduction in the minimum amount of commercial and industrial land area required in the R4 district. Board of Supervisors: 09/24/03 Pending. PROPOSAL: To rezone 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to R4 (Residential Planned Community). LOCATION: The property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 44-A-31 [portion]; 44-A-31A; 44-A-292; 44-A-293 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING AND PRESENT USE: North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) East: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) West: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 2 September 18, 2003 INTENDED USE: Residential Planned Community comprised of mixed housing types totaling 2,465 dwelling units, exclusive of the affordable elderly housing, with 250,000 square feet of commercial uses (190,000 square feet - retail; 60,000 square feet - office) and 44 acres dedicated for public school and recreation uses. The applicant has proposed to serve the development with a multi -modal transportation system consisting of amajor collector road, a system ofpedestrian and bicycle trails, and a linear park trail within the Hiatt Run Corridor. The gross residential density proposed for this development is 3.10 dwelling units per acre. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: All roads providing access to the site will experience "significant measurable impact" from proposed development. However, proffered transportation improvements appear to be adequate to address traffic impacts. Please see the attached letter dated 02/21/03 from Ben Lineberry, Jr. P.E., Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer, VDOT Edinburg Residency. Fire Marshal: Proposed standards for private streets, culs-de-sac, alleys, and common driveways will allow adequate fire protection access. Applicant's proposed use of home sprinkler systems in certain housing types is a "first" for Frederick County and is commended as a positive life safety measure. Please see the attached comment sheet dated 0310312003 from Timothy L. Welsh, Assistant Fire Marshal. Clearbrook Fire & Rescue Co.: No comment offered. Please see the attached letter dated 02/26/2003 from Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. on behlaf of Chief Tommy Price. County Engineer: Concerned that Homeowner's Association responsibility for private curbside trash collection will be ineffective without an enforceable guarantee. It is further noted that any such guarantee must be fully enforceable without County intervention. Please see attached letter dated 05/05/03 from H.E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: Adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility to accommodate the projected sewage flows of the proposed development. The conceptual plans for the sewer system for Stephenson Village include infrastructure capable of eliminating capacity concerns involving the Abrams Creek Interceptor. It is recommended that an adequately sized pumping station site be provided pursuant to Frederick County Sanitation Authority standards to enable ultimate expansion of the station to a regional facility. Moreover, the main sewage collector line should be adequately sized and appropriately routed to enable future extension of the collection system to off -site development. Please see the attached memorandum dated 02/12/2003 from Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director. Sanitation Authority: Capacity in the existing sewer lines, especially the Frederick -Winchester 0 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 3 September 18, 2003 Service Authority Abrams Creek Trunk Main, is limited. While the majority of the flow generated by the project may be within the capacity of the existing lines, it is prudent to have a pump station built sometime during this development to transmit sewage directly to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. Gravity lines will need to be sized to convey sewage from areas in the watershed outside the development and from the SWSA in the Clearbrook/Rest Church Road area. Please see the attached comment sheet with attachment dated 02/12/2003 from John G. Whitacre, Engineer, and W. H. Jones, P.E., Executive Director. Historic Resources Advisory Board: No adverse comments were offered regarding this application. However, the HRAB did offer the following suggestions to the applicant: (1) avoid bisecting the battlefield preservation tract with the proposed major collector road by locating the road on the northeast portion of the tract; (2) avoid creation of a "false sense of history" along the major collector road by limiting treatments to minimal landscaping comprised of indigenous plantings; (3) develop an interpretive plan for the preservation tract; (4) consider conducting archaeological studies of the property and ensure that artifacts are properly inventoried and preserved; and (5) consider preserving the Sam Byers House on a large parcel of land. Please see attached letter from Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I, dated 01/27/03. Parks & Recreation: Please see attached letter dated 08/19/03 from James M. Doran, Director of Parks & Recreation. Frederick County Public Schools: The proposed development is anticipated to generate a total of 1,156 students at project build -out. Pursuant to the outputs of the Frederick County Fiscal Irnpact Model, the combination of proffered land donations and monetary contributions will meet the recommended levels to mitigate projected capital facilities impacts. It is noted that continued residential growth in Frederick County, to include the proposed development, will necessitate the construction of new school facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. Please see attached letter dated 03/20/03 from Al Orndorff, Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent. County Attorney: Proffers appear to be in proper form. Please see attached comment sheet dated 0910812003 from Jay Cook, Assistant County Attorney. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed development will not have an impact on Winchester Regional Airport operations. Although the proposed development lies within the Regional Airport's airspace, it is located outside of the airport's Part 77 surface. Please see attached letter dated 02112103 from Serena R. Manuel, Executive Director. Planning & Zonin2: 1) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcels as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural 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 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 4 September 18, 2003 corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject properties and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Location The subject site is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The parcels comprising the site are located wholly within the Stonewall Magisterial District and are used primarily for agricultural purposes. Numerous parcels adj oin the 794.6-acre site, all of which are zoned RA (Rural Areas) and are either undeveloped or established with residential or agricultural land uses. 3) Comprehensive Polices The four parcels comprising this rezoning request are all located within the boundaries of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). The properties are located wholly within the Urban Development Area (UDA). The NELUP envisions the area comprised by the subject parcels as developing with planned unit development land use. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36, p. 6-39) The land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan governing planned communities stipulate that such development is to occur within the Urban Development Area (UDA). Such policies identify the planned community approach as a preferred method for establishing new neighborhoods within the UDA. It is expected that such communities consist of an appropriate balance between residential, service, and employment uses. Indeed, by providing an environment wherein people can live, work, and shop, the planned community approach promises to more effectively mitigate the impacts of new development on the County as a whole. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.1, 6-60, 6-61) The preservation of environmentally sensitive areas and significant historic resources is encouraged by the NELUP. The area proposed for rezoning is adjacent to core area battlefield land associated with Stephenson's Depot (Second Battle of Winchester) and the Third Battle of Winchester (Opequon), and further includes the Byers House (#34-1124), all of which are identified by the Developmentally Sensitive Area (DSA) designation. Resources identified as DSA constitute community and historical preservation areas that are to be protected from incompatible land uses through the use of adequate buffers and screening. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.1) Consistent with the transportation policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the NELUP specifies that proposed development should only occur if impacted road systems will function at Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better. The NELUP indicates that improvement of roads to maintain this level of service objective is the responsibility of the private property owner or developer. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.2, 6-36.3, 7-5) Planning Staff Comment The applicable land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan promote the establishment REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 5 September 18, 2003 of plamzed unit development land use on the subject parcels. The proposed rezoning of the site to accommodate a 2,465-unit planned residential community is, therefore, consistent with adopted policy. 4) Site Suitability/Environmental Features The subject site contains a variety of environmental features to include a perennial stream, flood plain, wetlands, steep slopes, and woodlands. The applicant proposes to incorporate the conservation of these sensitive environmental features into the overall development plan through a variety of proffered methods. (See applicant's Impact Analysis Statement, p. 2, 3, 4) The applicant has endeavored to accomplish resource conservation through the identification of two resource protection areas, which are identified as the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetland Inter-inittent Ravine Channel. The majority of the site's sensitive environmental features are captured within these two areas, the protection of which will occur through a combination of approaches, to include riparian buffers, easements, supplemental plantings, and development of resource management plans in collaboration with relevant state and non-profit environmental organizations. The proffered Generalized Development Plan delineates the location of the proposed resource protection areas. (See Proffer Statement, p. 19-21 and Generalized Development Plan, dated September 3, 2003) The environmental features present on the subject parcels do not represent an impediment to site development. Such features may be described as follows: A. Flood Plain: Flood plain data for the subject parcels is delineated on the Flood Insurance Study Map for Frederick County prepared by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Community Panel #510063-0110-B, effective date July 17, 1978. The majority of the site is located in Flood Zone C, which denotes areas of minimal flooding located outside of the 100-year flood plain. As reported by the applicant, 100-year flood plain, Flood Zone A, exists coincident with Hiatt Run, a perennial stream that traverses the subject site. The applicant has proffered to protect identified flood plain resources through a combination of easements and buffer areas adjacent to the 100-year flood plain comprising the Hiatt Run Corridor. Moreover, the applicant has proffered that disturbance within the flood plain will be limited to establishment of the proposed linear park trail system, to include the trail, pedestrian bridges, benches and signage. Any disturbance within the designated flood plain area will be subject to the Flood Plain (FP) District requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B.(1)] B. Wetlands: The National Wetland Inventory Map (Stephenson Quadrangle) produced by the U.S. Department of the Interior identifies seven wetland features on the subject site. The identified wetland features correspond with ponding areas adjacent to the stream system that drains to Hiatt Run. The applicant proposes to incorporate these REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 6 September 18, 2003 wetland resources into the stormwater management plan for Stephenson Village and further proffers to provide buffers adjacent to wetlands located within the Hiatt Run Corridor. Pursuant to the environmental standards of the Zoning Ordinance, disturbance of wetlands is only permitted in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or other qualified state or federal agency. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (3)] C. Soils and Steep Slopes: The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils on the site are consistent with the Weikert-Berks- Blairton soil association, which is the predominant association in Frederick County east of Interstate 81. It is noted that the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association presents some limitations to site development due to a seasonal high water table, depth to bedrock, and slope. The management of such soil characteristics will be addressed through subsequent site engineering activities. Steep slopes (land areas of 50% slope or greater) are located within the eastern and central portions of the site, generally coincident with the ravines and drainage ways associated with Hiatt Run and the Hiatt Run stream valley. The applicant has proffered the establishment of riparian buffers along the Hiatt Run Corridor, which will minimize disturbance of steep slope areas located on the site. The applicant has acknowledged that some disturbance of steep slopes will be necessary to accommodate planned stormwater management facilities, pedestrian trail systems, and the proffered transportation program. The Zoning Ordinance stipulates that no more than 25% of steep slopes shall be disturbed or regraded. The management of steep slopes pursuant to this disturbance limitation will be addressed through subsequent site engineering activities. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (6)] D. Woodlands: Areas of mature woodlands exist on the site, most of which are coincident with the Hiatt Run Corridor. Other woodland areas are dispersed throughout the site. The applicant has proffered to preserve those woodland areas located within the Hiatt Run Corridor through the employment of 100-foot riparian buffers. The applicant has further proffered to collaborate with the Virginia Department of Forestry to prepare a forest management plan to guide conservation ofwoodland resources within the project. 5) Potential Impacts A. Transportation The traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared for this application calculated transportation impacts based upon the following development program: • Residential: 2,800 dwelling units (mixed housing types) • Retail: 190,000 square feet REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 7 September 18, 2003 • Office: 60,000 square feet • Public: 550 pupil elementary school Using traffic generation figures from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, 6"' Edition, the applicant projects traffic impacts for the development in terms of three phases that correspond with years 2006, 2008, and 2015, respectively. For the purposes of the TIA, 2015 represents the year in which project build out will occur. The TIA indicates that at proj ect build out, the planned uses will result in the generation of 25,178 new average daily trips (ADT). (See applicant's Impact Analysis Statement, p. 4 - S) The total ADT generated by the development is projected by phase as follows: • Phase I (Year 2006): 10,570 ADT • Phase II (Year 2008): 17,699 ADT • Phase III (Year 2015): 25,178 ADT The new trips generated by the development will be absorbed by an external road network consisting of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), and the Exit 317 interchange of Interstate 81. This external network will be linked to the development via a proffered major collector, or "spine," road. The major collector road is the principal organizing component of the project's internal transportation system, and will ultimately consist of four travel lanes that will bisect the development and connect Old Charles Town Road and Martinsburg Pike. (See Generalized Development Plan, dated September 3, 2003) The applicant has proffered to phase construction of the major collector road pursuant to trip volume benchmarks that will be measured through actual traffic counts recorded at the entrance to the development. As enumerated by the proposed proffer, the major collector road and related improvements will be planned, designed, and implemented when the traffic counts reach 80% of specified trip volume benchmarks. Each benchmark triggers development of a particular section of the major collector road and/or associated improvements. Moreover, the proffer indicates that construction of said improvements will be completed within eighteen (18) months of attainment of the 80% volume figure. (See Proffer Statement, p. 10, Section F.) Based upon the proffered trip volume benchmarks, the incremental construction of the major collector road will occur in relation to the three overall transportation phases as follows: • Phase I (2006): Fully constructed within development boundaries - four (4) lane section extending from project entrance at Old Charles Town Road to limits of the project. REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 8 September 18, 2003 • Phase 11(2008): Extension of two (2) lane half -section from terminus of four (4) lane section at development limits to Martinsburg Pike; intersection with Martinsburg Pike will be aligned with entrance to Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. • Phase III (2015): Remaining additional lanes constructed between development limits and Martinsburg Pike; constriction completed. In addition to constriction of the major collector road, the transportation program proffered by the applicant includes signalization of off -site intersections, turn lane additions and lane widening on external roads, and the provision of pedestrian and bicycle lanes. The proffered traffic signalization agreements will involve the intersections of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road, Old Charles Town Road and the major collector road, and the entrance of Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park on Martinsburg Pike, which will ultimately align with the terminus of the major collector road. (See Proffer Statement, p. 7 - 11) The analysis anticipates that background traffic in the study area will increase by 5% annually through 2010 and by 3% between 2010 to 2015. Moreover, estimated background conditions assume development of 1,400,000 square feet of commercial and industrial land uses in the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park during the same time period. Background traffic is that which is not generated by the proposed development. The TIA concludes that the improvements proffered by the applicant will ensure Level of Service (LOS) Category "C" conditions or better on study area roads during peak traffic periods throughout Phase I and Phase II. However, with the conclusion of Phase Ill, at project build out, several study area intersections are projected to function at LOS Category "D" during peak traffic conditions. (See "A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village, " p. 11, 19, & 27). VDOT Comment All roads providing access to the site will experience "significant measurable impact" from proposed development. However, proffered transportation improvements appear to be adequate to address traffic impacts. (See attached letter dated 02121103 from Ben Lineberry, Jr. P.E., Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer, VDOT Edinburg Residency) Planning Staff Comment The infrastructure policies of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) stipulate that new development should only occur if impacted road systems will function at Level of Service (LOS) Category "C" or better. Indeed, this NELUP provision reinforces the general transportation policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan, which establish LOS Category "C" as the desired condition on roads adjacent to REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 9 September 18, 2003 and within new development. The transportation program proffered by the applicant achieves the functional standards established by policy until the latter stages of development, when the combined effect of background traffic growth and new vehicle trips originating from the proposed development yield diminished levels of service. Indeed, at project build out, peak hour LOS Category "D" conditions are shown at several study area intersections, most notably those intersections located at or near the Interstate 81 interchange. B. Historic Resources As reported by the applicant, the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey includes one structure located on the subject site, which is identified as the Samuel Byers House (# 34-1124). This structure is identified as potentially significant due to its architectural style. The applicant has proffered to preserve and adaptively reuse this resource as they deem appropriate. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey further includes several potentially significant resources that are located on properties adjoining the subject site. Specifically, the Helm McCann property (# 34-703) and the Milburn Chapel and Cemetery (# 34-950) are located to the west of the site and the Jordan Springs Hotel (# 34-110) is located to the southeast of the site. Also located near the project site is Milburn Road (Route 662), which is identified by the 1995 Frederick County - Winchester Battlefield Network Plan as a significant historic corridor as it provides a linkage between areas associated with the Second and Third Battles of Winchester. The Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) further identifies the Milburn Road corridor as a developmentally sensitive area (DSA). The applicant has suggested that development of the Stephenson Village planned community will not impact the viewsheds associated with these off site resources. The 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia identifies core area associated with both the Second Battle of Winchester (Stephenson's Depot) and Third Battle of Winchester (Opequon) battlefields on property located immediately adjacent to the subject site. The property containing these resources is not included in this rezoning application. However, as shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP), the major collector road planned with this project will traverse a portion of core battlefield land. Moreover, the GDP depicts the development of mixed residential land uses adjacent to the core battlefield area. (See applicant's Impact Analysis Statement, p. 8 - 9 and Generalized Development Plan, dated September 3, 2003) REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 10 September 18, 2003 C. Sewer and Water At full build -out, the planned residential community is projected to equally impact the public water and sewer system, consuming and conveying approximately 689,000 gallons per day (GPD) of water and wastewater, respectively. Water supply will originate from the Global Chemstone Quarry and be distributed from the Northern Water Treatment Plan via an existing 10-inch water main that will be supplemented by a planned 20-inch line, both of which extend along Martinsburg Pike. At present, this water source is yielding 1.5 million gallons per day (MGD). Sewage conveyance will occur through an 8-inch sewer force main that will flow to the Redbud Run Pump Station, which will convey the project's effluent to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. The Frederick - Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) reports that adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility to accommodate the projected sewage flows of the proposed development. It is noted that all water and sewer infrastructure will be provided by the applicant pursuant to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority's (FCSA) Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan, which was approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2002. Included with this plan is the development of the Lower Hiatt Run Pump Station, a regional facility that the applicant has proffered to construct. (See applicant's Impact Analysis Statement, p. 5 -6) 7) Proffer Statement (dated January 8. 2003, revised through September 3, 2003): A proffer analysis report, dated April 16, 2003, was prepared for the applicant delineating staff concerns regarding proffer language, implementation methods, and the structure of the proffer statement. The applicant responded to this report with a revised proffer statement that addressed staff concerns. The proffer statement included with this application is therefore acceptable to staff as a technical document. Should this application be approved, staff is comfortable that the proffer statement will result in the development program outlined by the applicant in the impact analysis statement. A copy of the proffer analysis report is included with the review agency comments attached with this staff report. It is noted that the proffer statement for Stephenson Village is extensive, involving twenty-three distinct sections. Arguably the most critical component of the proffer statement is the Community Design Modification Document, which includes a series of nine requests for modifications to certain provisions of the Frederick County Code. The remainder of the proffer statement is fundamentally dependant upon the regulatory flexibility sought through the modification document. Given the importance of these requests to the applicant's proffer statement and, therefore, the overall rezoning proposal, staff has provided a detailed discussion concerning each request. Following the modification discussion, the remainder of the proffer statement is briefly REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 11 September 18, 2003 summarized by section. A. Section 1: Community Design Modification Document (Proffer Statement, p. 2): Pursuant to the provisions of Section 165-72.0., the applicant has submitted nine modification requests with the Proffer Statement. These requests and the applicant's justification for each are delineated through the Community Design Modification Document, which is included as Exhibit F of this application. If approved, each alternative design standard specified in the proffered Community Design Modification Document will constitute a condition of rezoning approval, and will therefore be incorporated as a provision of the Zoning Ordinance uniquely applicable to Stephenson Village. As with any proffered condition, an adopted alternative design standard may only be changed pursuant to Board of Supervisors approval through the rezoning process delineated in Article II of the Zoning Ordinance. Indeed, unless amended in accord with said provisions, an alternative design standard will apply to development within Stephenson Village in perpetuity, regardless of action subsequent to application approval either amending or deleting the underlying Zoning Ordinance requirement. It is noted that the PlamZing Commission reviewed each modification request at its August 20, 2003 meeting and forwarded recommendations of approval for each request except Modification #3. Community Design Modification Document (Rezoning Exhibit F) Modification #1 - $ 165-71. Mixture of Housing Types Required Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Approval of Modification #1 YES (TO APPROVE): Kriz, Light, Morris, Ours, Rosenberry, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour, Straub ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher The R4 District requirements stipulate that no more than 40% of the residential land area in a planned residential community shall consist of duplexes, multiplexes, atrium houses, weak -link townhouses, townhouses, or garden apartments or any combination of said housing types. The applicant is requesting that this standard be modified to allow housing types identified under the townhouse, multi -family, and active adult categories included in the proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" to comprise a maximum of 70% of the residential land area in Stephenson Village. The proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" includes four categories of housing types: single family dwellings, townhouse dwellings, multi -family dwellings, and active adult dwellings. A minimum and maximum ratio is proposed for each category. The employment of such ranges REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 12 September 18, 2003 is intended to ensure a mix of housing types while allowing for variation in the ultimate composition of the overall housing mix. Specific housing types are identified under these categories, to include several that are permitted and defined by the current Zoning Ordinance as well as new housing types proposed in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement. The "Mixed Residential Matrix" addresses the land area of the project planned for identified housing types and complements the Land Bay Breakdown table included in Section 3 of the Proffer Statement and on the Generalized Development Plan. The Land Bay Breakdown table addresses the actual composition of the housing program for Stephenson Village, as it specifies the minimum and maximum ratio proposed for each category relative to the total number of housing units proffered. (See Proffer Statement, p. 3 - 4, 23 - 24, and Generalized Development Plan dated September 3, 2003) If Modification #1 is approved, the proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" will govern the categorization of housing types and the unit mix comprising the residential land area in Stephenson Village. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The current requirement of § 165-71. ensures that single family detached dwellings will comprise a minimum of 60% of the residential land area in a planned residential community. As proposed by the applicant, non -age restricted single family dwellings will comprise a minimum of 30% and a maximum of 53% of the residential land area of Stephenson Village. It is noted that the applicant has committed to developing a minimum of 30% of the project with active-adult/age-restricted units, which could be increased to a maximum of 53% of the overall mix. In the event the latter ratio develops, the predominant housing in Stephenson Village would be active-adult/age-restricted, which could develop with either single family or multi- family unit types. • Modification #2 - § 165-69. Permitted Uses, 165-72.B(2) - Alternative Dimensional Requirement Plan Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Approval of Modification #2 YES (TO APPROVE) NO: Gochenour Kriz, Light, Morris, Ours, Rosenberry, Straub, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher The R4 District requirements allow for all uses permitted in the RP District within the planned residential community. Moreover, the Zoning Ordinance permits the adoption of an alternative dimensional requirement plan for the residential uses planned for the development. The applicant is requesting a modification to the permitted uses section to allow the introduction of new housing types to complement those permitted by the RP District. The new housing unit REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 13 September 18, 2003 types are identified in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement, and include the following: carriage house, non -alley carriage house, cottage house, and courtyard cluster. This request also includes modified standards for single family small lot and townhouse units, which are permitted RP District housing types. (See Proffer Statement, p. 23, 24) If Modification #2 is approved, the new housing types identified in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement will be permitted in Stephenson Village pursuant to the dimensional standards delineated in "Rezoning Exhibit F." Moreover, through approval of this modification, alternative dimensional standards will be accepted for single family small lot and townhouse housing types in lieu of the current RP District requirements. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The proposed new housing types represent a notable departure from the typical suburban residential development experienced by Frederick Countyunder RP zoning. Indeed, these housing types and the accompanying alternative dimensional standards are the foundation for the distinctive residential form envisioned by the applicant for Stephenson Village. It is noted that all relevant review agencies have examined the proposed dimensional standards and determined that said standards satisfy all applicable technical requirements. • Modification #3 - § 165-72.D. Commercial and Industrial Areas; � 165-72.M. Non-residential Land Use Phasing Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Denial of Modification #3 YES (TO DENY): Gochenour, Light, Morris, Rosenberry, Straub, Watt NO: Kriz, Ours, Thomas, Triplett, Unger ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher The R4 District requirements stipulate that a minimum of 10% of the gross area of a planned residential community shall be used for business and industrial land uses, and that such uses shall not exceed 50% of the gross land area. Moreover, the Zoning Ordinance requires that each phase of a planned community development shall include a reasonable amount of non- residential land uses. The applicant is requesting that both of these standards be modified to (1) allow a minimum of 4% of the gross area of the proposed planned residential community to be used for business land uses and (2) eliminate the requirement that non-residential uses be integrated throughout the development in favor of centralizing business uses in a single commercial node. The applicant has proffered a development program that allocates approximately 4% of the gross land area for commercial land uses, the majority of which will form a 26-acre commercial center (Land Bay V). The remaining business land uses are planned within the mixed residential area (Land Bay III) and will comprise approximately 7 acres, which are likely to develop with a day care or other service -oriented use. The applicant has guaranteed that a minimum of 60,000 square feet of commercial uses will develop in Stephenson Village, with maximum REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 14 September 18, 2003 possible business development comprising 250,000 square feet (190,000 square feet of retail; 60,000 square feet of office). (See Proffer Statement, p. 4, S, 16, & 17 and Generalized Development Plan, dated September 3, 2003) If Modification #3 is approved, the applicant will be permitted to limit commercial development to 4% of the gross land area of the planned residential community, which equates to approximately 33 acres devoted to commercial land uses. Additionally, this modification will relieve the applicant of the requirement that each phase of development include non-residential land uses, thereby enabling commercial development to occur entirely within a centralized node. Approval of this modification is necessary for acceptance of both the applicant's proffered development program delineated in Section 3 of the Proffer Statement, and the proffered Generalized Development Plan dated March 2003. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Plann ink Sta ffComment: The non-residential component of a planned community development is necessary to achieve a dynamic mixed use land use pattern that facilitates efficiencies of form and function impossible through the one dimensional residential focus of RP zoning. The R4 District therefore requires a mix of retail, business/office, and light industrial land uses, which, when integrated with a mix of housing types, provides internal service and employment opportunities accessible via the community's multi -modal transportation system. The non- residential ratios required by the ordinance are intended to ensure that the advantages of planned community developments are maximized for both the residents of such communities and the County as a whole. Without a diverse array of non-residential uses that includes sufficient employment -oriented business and industry, the development program for Stephenson Village will fail to achieve a land use pattern that is distinguishable from other suburban residential areas of Frederick County. • Modification #4 - § 165-72.F. Recreational Facilities Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Approval of Modification #4 YES (TO APPROVE): Kriz, Light, Morris, Ours, Rosenberry, Straub, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher The R4 District requirements stipulate that one (1) recreational unit be provided for every thirty (30) units developed within a planned residential community. The applicant is requesting a modification to allow the monetary value of a "tot lot" facility to represent the equivalent of one recreational unit. This value figure would be applied to the recreational facilities being proffered by the applicant as a method to quantify ordinance compliance. The applicant is not seeking a modification of the recreational facility ratio required by the ordinance. Rather, the applicant is proposing a means for evaluating the value of the proffered recreational facilities vis-a-vis the required ratio. REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 15 September 18, 2003 If Modification #4 is approved, the monetary value of a tot lot facility will be the equivalent of one recreational unit for the purposes of determining the number of recreational units represented by the applicant's planned recreational facilities. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning? Staff Comment: It is noted that the RP District requirements of the Zoning Ordinance identify a tot lot as an example of a single recreational unit. The Department of Parks and Recreation has indicated that the monetary value of a tot lot facility is acceptable as a means of quantifying the recreational units represented by the applicant's proffered facilities. Modification #5 - 165-72.I. Road Access § 165-29.A.(14) Motor Vehicle Access 144-24.C., C.2(a), C.2(b) Lot Access Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Approval of Modification #5 YES TO APPROVE): Kriz, Light, Morris, Ours, Rosenberry, Straub, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher The R4 District requirements stipulate that a planned community development be developed with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Moreover, both the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance limit private road access only to those developments comprised exclusively of single family small lot and multi family housing. The applicant is requesting a modification of these road access standards to (1) allow for a complete system of private streets within the active -adult portion of the community (Land Bay IV), and (2) permit private access roads extending from public streets to serve a maximum of five dwelling units, or ten dwelling units if the private access road connects two public streets, within the mixed residential land bay (Land Bay III). Pursuant to this request, the applicant has proffered that all private roads will be constructed to meet or exceed VDOT public road standards. The remainder of the project will be served by public roads as required by ordinance. If Modification #5 is approved, the active adult portion of Stephenson Village will be allowed to develop with a complete system of private roads, regardless of the mix of housing types provided. Moreover, in the mixed residential portion of the community, private access roads will be permitted to serve no more than five (5) single family dwelling units, or a maximum of ten (10) units if the private access road connects two public streets. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The maintenance of private roads and access ways will be the exclusive responsibility of the property owners through the governing Homeowner's Association (HOA). The granting of this modification would enable the creation of "flag" or REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 16 September 18, 2003 "pipestem" lots, which can cause confusion for property owners and result in administrative challenges for staff. At present, private road access to single family lots is permitted only in the context of minor rural subdivisions in the RA (Rural Areas) District. A minor rural subdivision involves no more than three (3) lots. It is noted that the relevant review agencies have been consulted regarding the dimensional standards proposed for the private roads and access ways, and are satisfied that such standards will meet applicable technical requirements. • Modification #6 - 165-72.M. Phasing Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Approval of Modification #6 YES (TO APPROVE): Kriz, Light, Morris, Ours, Rosenberry, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour, Straub ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher The R4 District requirements stipulate that a phasing plan must be submitted that identifies the year in which each phase of development will be completed. The applicant is requesting modification of this requirement to eliminate the need to specify the concluding year for each phase and to instead enable phasing of land bay development to be determined at the time of master plan approval. The applicant has committed to completing phases in a specified sequence in those cases where a sequence or schedule is included with the Master Development Plan. However, the applicant is seeking greater flexibility to develop multiple phases simultaneously and to contract with a variety of builders who will operate on independent schedules. The phasing of development of non -age restricted dwelling units will occur at an annual rate of 8% pursuant to Section 2 of the Proffer Statement. (See Proffer Statement, p. 3) If Modification #6 is approved, land bay development within Stephenson Village will not follow a schedule or plan delineating the overall sequence of development or the concluding year of a given land bay's development. Phasing will be governed exclusively by the proffered limitation on permits for non -age restricted dwelling units specified in Section 2 of the Proffer Statement. Said provision stipulates that non -age restricted dwelling units will be developed at a rate not to exceed 8% annually. There is no phasing proposed for the active adult/age restricted housing component of the project. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicants justification) Planning Staff Comment: The applicant has proffered phasing mechanisms for development of the non -age restricted residential component of the project as well as the plamied transportation system. Thus, the overall pace of development is clearly defined, as is the timing and sequence of improvements comprising the proposed transportation system. However, pursuant to this modification request, the progression of development within each land bay and the coordination of improvements during "multi -phase" development will remain undetermined until Master Development Plan (MDP) approval. (See Proffer Statement, p. 3, 10, & 11) REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village Page 17 September 18, 2003 Modification #7 - § 165-72.G.(1) Buffers and Screening Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Approval of Modification #7 YES (TO APPROVE): Kriz, Light, Morris, Ours, Rosenberry, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour, Straub ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher Road efficiency buffers are utilized to lessen the impacts of interstate, arterial, primary, and major collector roads on adjoining residential land uses. The R4 District requirements stipulate that road efficiency buffers shall be provided in accordance with the specifications of § 165-37 of the Zoning Ordinance. As such the inactive portion of a road efficiency buffer must be a minimum of forty (40) feet in depth, measured from the edge of the right-of-way of a major collector road. The inactive buffer area must contain the screening elements defined by ordinance. A road efficiency buffer also requires an active buffer component comprised of forty (40) feet, for a total buffer distance of eighty (80) feet. The applicant is requesting modification of the road efficiency buffer requirements to allow variations in the width of the inactive buffer area required adjacent to the planned major collector road. Pursuant to the applicant's illustrative renderings, the inactive buffer width would be a minimum of twenty five (25) feet. The applicant has indicated that the screening requirements of the ordinance would be exceeded where buffer distance is reduced. If Modification #7 is approved, the road efficiency buffer required adjacent to the planned major collector road will include an inactive portion that varies in width from a maximum of forty (40) feet to a minimum of twenty (25) feet. Although the distance buffer would be reduced in size, the screening comprising the inactive buffer area would exceed standard ordinance requirements. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) PlanningSta ff Comment: The effective combination of distance and screening is critical to the mitigation of traffic impacts on adjoining residential uses. As proposed by the applicant, the significant enhancement of screening to off -set the reduction in size of the inactive buffer is essential to ensure the mitigative value of the road efficiency buffer. If approved, the applicant will design and construct the road efficiency buffer pursuant to the illustrative cross-section of the major collector road provided in the Proffer Statement. This modification would not impact the active portion of the buffer, which the applicant will be required to provide as specified by ordinance. • Modification #8 - 165-68. Rezoning Procedure Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Approval of Modification #8 YES (TO APPROVE): Kriz, Morris, Ours, Rosenberry, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour, Light, Straub ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 18 September 18, 2003 The R4 District requirements stipulate that a complete Master Development Plan (MDP) shall be submitted with an application for R4 zoning. The applicant is requesting modification of this request to allow submission of a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) at the time of rezoning instead of the complete MDP. The GDP would identify the relationship of the project site to the surrounding transportation network and adjoining land uses. Moreover, the GDP would provide a general layout for the proposed development, organizing the entire acreage into land bays identified for either residential or non-residential land uses. The GDP would further include a table delineating the approximate size of each land bay as well as housing types and ratios for residential land bays. The applicant would submit MDP applications for review subsequent to rezoning approval, at which time greater detail concerning land bay development would be provided. (See Generalized Development Plan, dated September 3, 2003) If Modification #8 is approved, a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) will be processed with this application instead of a detailed Master Development Plan (MDP). MDP submission would follow rezoning approval pursuant to the application sequence typical for development in other zoning districts as outlined by the Zoning Ordinance. Planning Sta, ff Comment: The applicant has include a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) with this application and is seeking the requested modification pursuant to discussions with staff. The level of detail required with a complete Master Development Plan (MDP) is difficult to provide with a rezoning application when considering a project of the scope and scale of Stephenson Village. A proffered GDP will effectively represent the overall development concept and can sufficiently guide the implementation of proffered conditions via subsequent development applications. • Modification #9 - 065-133.B. Master Development Plan, Contiguous Land S 165-141.A.(8) Master Development Plan, Contents §165-141.B.(2);(4),(8) Master Development Plan, R4 Contents Planning Commission Action of 08/20/03: Recommend Approval of Modification #9 YES (TO APPROVE): Kriz, Light, Morris, Ours, Rosenberry, Straub, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher The referenced provisions of the Zoning Ordinance govern the required scope and contents of a Master Development Plan (MDP). Collectively, these provisions stipulate that the entirety of a project site shall be included and planned under a single MDP. Citing the size and scope of the Stephenson Village project, the applicant is requesting modification of the referenced provisions to enable the submission of a series of MDP applications to accommodate the incremental development of Stephenson Village over time. Each successive MDP application REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 19 September 18, 2003 will provide aggregate development data for the project, effectively tabulating the status of the project relative to the proffered development program and other proffered conditions. The proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) will serve as the guide for all MDP submissions. If Modification #9 is approved, the applicant will be permitted to submit a series of Master Development Plan (MDP) applications to address the incremental development of the project. This process would occur in lieu of a singular MDP accommodating the "total development" of the planned community. Each MDP would provide aggregate development data thereby ensuring effective monitoring of project status and conformity with proffered conditions. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification). Planning Staff Comment: The proffering of a Generalized Development Plan (GDP) is appropriate for a project the size of Stephenson Village. A series of Master Development Plan (MDP) submissions will facilitate the incremental implementation of the development program that will be conceptually represented by the GDP and detailed by the proffer statement. Indeed, through such an approach, each MDP will serve as a "building block" toward completion of the overall development program. B. Section 2: Phasing Plan to Minimize Sudden Impacts on County Services (Proffer Statement, p. 2, 3) Additional Proffer Payment - The applicant has proffered to double the monetary contribution to Frederick County for public schools for each student that exceeds "a cumulative yearly total increase of 60 students per year." The additional monetary payment of $3,925 will be adjusted every two years to reflect the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Limitation on Permits - The applicant has proffered that no more than 2,465 residential units will be developed within Stephenson Village, excluding affordable elderly housing. It is noted that the applicant has not specified either a minimum or maximum number of affordable elderly housing units, which, regardless of the number, will be developed in addition to the 2,465 units delineated by proffer. The proffered unit limitation results in a gross residential density of 3.10 units per acre. Final project density may ultimately be greater assuming development of the affordable elderly housing. The applicant has further proffered to phase development of the non -age restricted units at a rate of 8% per year. Active adult/age restricted housing and elderly housing are excluded from the phasing program. C. Section 3: Uses, Density and Mix of Housing Types (Proffer Statement, p. 3, 4, 5) 0 Land Bay Breakdown Table - The applicant has proffered a Generalized REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 20 September 18, 2003 Development Plan (GDP) that includes five distinct land bays. The land uses planned for these land bays have been proffered through the Land Bay Breakdown Table, which sets the fundamental parameters for the development. The table may be summarized as follows: Land Bay I - Elementary School (land dedication); Land Bay II - Public Park (land dedication); Land Bay III - Mixed Residential (mix of single family detached, townhouse, and multi -family units); Land Bay IV - Active Adult (mix of unit types); Land Bay V - Commercial Center. The table further identifies the minimum and maximum ratios permitted for the housing categories proffered within each land bay. • The total commercial area is proffered to consist of 33 acres that will be located within Land Bays III and V, respectively. It is noted that the business uses planned for Land Bay III, which is the mixed residential area, are intended to be neighborhood -scale service -oriented uses. The planned 26-acre commercial center will serve as the principal commercial node for Stephenson Village and will be located within Land Bay V. • Open Space - The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel, both of which are proffered resource protection areas, total approximately 125 acres. The applicant has proffered to disperse the remaining 121.5 acres of required open space throughout the four residential land bays. • Active Adult and/or Affordable Housing for the Elderly - The applicant has proffered that active adult housing will comprise a minimum of 30% and as much as 53% of the total housing units in Stephenson Village, which, if developed to the maximum ratio, would involve development of active adult units in both Land Bay III and Land Bay IV. Regardless of the ratio of active adult units, in no case shall the total number of housing units exceed 2,465, excluding the affordable elderly housing. • Heavy Cormmercial and Light Industrial Land Uses - The applicant has proffered to exclude all uses permitted in the B3 (Industrial Transition) and M1 (Light Industry) Zoning Districts, unless such uses are otherwise permitted in the B 1 (Neighborhood Business), B2 (General Business), or RP (Residential Performance) Zoning Districts. Truck stops are expressly prohibited. D. Section 4: Applicant to Pay 100% of Capital Facilities (Proffer Statement, p. 5, 6) • Fiscal Impact Model - The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model demonstrated a fiscal impact to capital facilities in the amount of $5,327 per residential unit. The applicant has proffered to accommodate 100% of this figure through a combination of monetary contributions and land donations. It is noted that land donations are assigned a value of $30,000 per acre. • Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All proffered monetary contributions will be adjusted every two (2) years to reflect the Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All Urban Consumers (Current Series). • Active Adult Contributions & Premium - Capital facilities that are not directly REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 21 September 18, 2003 impacted by active adult housing, such as public schools, will not receive a monetary contribution for such housing. However, the applicant has proffered to pay a 50% premium on proffer contributions for fire and rescue per each active adult unit, in excess of the impact figure identified by the impact model. The applicant has also proffered to pay a 100% premium for fire and rescue per each elderly housing unit. These premiums are intended by the applicant to off -set the increased demand on fire and rescue services common with such populations. E. Section 5: Funds for Transportation Enhancements and/or Heritage Tourism (Proffer Statement, p. 7) • Matching Funds - The applicant has proffered to make a contribution to Frederick County for transportation enhancements and/or the promotion of heritage tourism in the amount of $75,000. This contribution will be made in the form of matching funds. F. Section 6: Monetary Contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. (Proffer Statement, p. 7) • Direct Contribution - The applicant has proffered to make a direct contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. in the amount of $200,000. The proffered funding will be dispersed in four installments pursuant to development thresholds identified by proffer. This contribution is intended to mitigate the impact of the development on volunteer fire and rescue services. • Implementation Note: The above -referenced contribution is not enforceable by Frederick County and will occur as a private transaction between the applicant and Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. G. Section 7: Multi -Modal Transportation Improvements (Proffer Statement, p. 7 - 11) • Major Collector Road - The applicant has proffered to dedicate an 80 foot right-of- way and construct a major collector road from the project entrance on Old Charles Town Road through Stephenson Village, and across properties currently owned by McCann and Omps to U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike). The major collector road will ultimately be completed as a four lane boulevard constructed pursuant to VDOT standards. The applicant has proffered to include landscaped medians and bicycle lanes with the major collector road. • Major Collector Road Construction - The major collector road will be constructed in phases, beginning with its development within Stephenson Village as a two lane half -section. The major collector road will be constructed to its ultimate four -lane configuration in increments, the development of which will be triggered by a series of traffic volume thresholds measured through trip counters located at the project entrance. The applicant has proffered that design of improvements will occur when REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 22 September 18, 2003 80% of a given volume threshold is reached and the completion of improvements will occur within 18 months of the date of the 80% measurement. • Active Adult Gated Community - The applicant has proffered that the entrance to the active adult section of the development will be gated. The applicant intends to serve the active adult community exclusively with private roads constructed to VDOT public road standards. • Old Charles Town Road Improvements - The applicant has proffered to complete all necessary entrance improvements at the intersection of the major collector road and Old Charles Town Road during the first phase of development. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to execute signalization agreements with VDOT for the intersections of Old Charles Town Road and Route 11 and the major collector road. Actual signalization will occur when warranted by VDOT. Pursuant to a specified traffic volume threshold, the applicant has proffered to bond and commence construction of a three -lane section of Old Charles Town Road from the Stephenson Village entrance to Route 11. • Interstate 81 Interchange Improvement Contribution - The applicant has proffered to contribute $50,000 in matching funds for use by either VDOT or Frederick County for improvements to the Interstate 81 - Route 11 interchange at Exit 317. H. Section 8: School and Ball Field Sites, Community Facilities and Public Use Areas (Proffer Statement, p. 11 - 12) • School Site - The applicant has proffered to dedicate 20 acres of land to the Frederick County School Board for use as a public school site. This site is shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) as Land Bay I. The applicant intends to apply this acreage to, the open space requirement for the development. • Soccer and Ballfield Site - The applicant has proffered to dedicate 24 acres of land to Frederick County or such other entity as Frederick County designates for public recreation sites. This site is shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) as Land Bay II. The applicant intends to apply this acreage to the open space requirement for the development. I. Section 9: Recreational Amenities and Linear Park (Proffer Statement, A 13 - 14) • Recreational Center - The applicant has proffered to construct a recreation center within the mixed residential area (Land Bay III). This facility may be located anywhere within said land bay at the discretion of the applicant. However, the location of the recreation center will be identified on the Master Development Plan (MDP) applicable to this portion of the development. The applicant has proffered that the recreation center will include a bathhouse and a 6-lane, 25 meter competition swimming pool. This facility is intended for use by residents of the development. The bonding and completion of this amenity will occur pursuant to REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 23 September 18, 2003 development thresholds specified by proffer. • Active Adult Recreation Center - The applicant has proffered to construct a recreation center within the active adult land bay (Land Bay IV) for use by residents of the active adult community. The bonding and completion of this amenity will occur pursuant to development thresholds specified by proffer. • Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk System - The applicant has proffered to construct a pedestrian trail or sidewalk system to link the recreation centers to the surrounding neighborhoods. • Linear Park Trail - The applicant has proffered to dedicate a twenty -foot wide trail easement to the Frederick CountyParks and Recreation Department for the purposes of a linear park trail. The trail will be located within the Hiatt Run Corridor and extend along the length of the corridor, a distance of approximately 3,800 linear feet, as depicted on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP). The applicant has proffered to construct a six-foot wide asphalt or concrete trail within the dedicated easement. The applicant intends to apply the area of the Hiatt Run Corridor, to include the trail, to the open space requirement of the development. J. Section 10: Active Adult Age -Restricted Housing (Proffer Statement, P. 14 - 15) • Deed Language - The applicant has included the language to be recorded with the deeds for designated active adult age -restricted properties. • Implementation Note - The provisions included in this section are not enforceable by Frederick County. Implementation of rules and regulations concerning the occupancy of designated active adult age -restricted units is the sole responsibility of the applicant and/or the governing Homeowner's Association. K. Section 11: Affordable Housing for the Elderly (Proffer Statement, P. 1 S) • Provision of Affordable Housing for the Elderly - The applicant has proffered to develop affordable housing for the elderly at such time that 50% of the proffered retail space (95,000 square feet) has been developed and pursuant to all necessary state and federal approvals. Moreover, such housing will only be constructed if the project qualifies for government funding dispersed through the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program or equivalent. The applicant has proffered that should such funding prove unattainable, any units planned for affordable elderly housing will be developed as active adult/age- restricted units. The total number of affordable elderly housing units to be developed in Stephenson Village is not specified by proffer. It is noted that affordable elderly housing is distinct from active adult/age-restricted housing, and is excluded from the overall density limitation proffered by the applicant. REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 24 September 18, 2003 L. Section 12: Preservation of Historical and Cultural Resources (Proffer Statement, p. 16) • Byers House - The applicant has proffered to preserve the potentially significant Samuel Byers House. The applicant has reserved the right to adaptively reuse the structure as they deem appropriate. • Cemeteries - The applicant has proffered to identify and preserve any cemeteries found on the project site. M. Section 13: Commercial Center (Proffer Statement, P. 16 - 17) • Commmercial Center Location and Development - The applicant has proffered to locate a commercial center on land identified as Land Bay V on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP). The applicant has proffered a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial land use in Stephenson Village, of which the majority will be located in the commercial center. Smaller commercial nodes may be located within the mixed residential land bay (Land Bay III). • Minimum Commercial Space Guaranteed - The applicant has proffered to constrict 60,000 square feet of commercial space within the commercial center no later than the issuance of the 1,2001h non -age restricted residential building permit. The applicant has further proffered to complete development of this space within 18 months of commencement of construction. The applicant has attached two caveats to the timing of construction of the proffered commercial space. Notably, the applicant reserves the right to delay commencement of commercial construction for a two year period beyond the date of issuance of the 1,2001' residential building permit should either of the following occur: (1) an elementary school has not been constructed within the community; or, (2) a building permit is obtained for development of a new grocery store within a three mile radius of the planned Stephenson Village commercial center location. N. Section 14: Rent Free County Office Space (Proffer Statement, P. 17) • Office Space - The applicant has proffered to provide up to 2,500 square feet of shell space for a ten (10) year period within the commercial center for the location of a public service satellite facility for Frederick County. Per the proffer, Frederick County must build out and occupy the space within two (2) years of completion of the base building. Should such occupancy fail to occur with the two year time period, the space will revert back to the applicant. O. Section 15: Community Design for a Strong Sense of Place (Proffer Statement, P. 17 - 19) E is REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 25 September 18, 2003 • Design - The applicant has proffered to coordinate design to ensure aesthetic continuity throughout the development. Such continuity will be achieved through the use of uniformly applied custom treatments, such as: custom street sign and fixtures, standardized fencing, and community color themes. Also, the applicant has proffered to employ decorative treatments at all entrance monuments. No illustratives detailing design features are provided with the proffer statement. • Architecture - The applicant has proffered to employ the architectural styling depicted on the housing unit type exhibits for the following housing unit types: carriage house, non -alley carriage house, cottage house, and courtyard cluster. It is further proffered that other housing types utilized in the development will incorporate compatible architectural treatments. • Fire Protection S ste - The applicant has proffered to install 13-D type sprinkler systems in all courtyard cluster and cottage houses as well as in the garages accompanying these housing types. P. Section 16: Environmental Features and Habitat Preservation (Proffer Statement, P. 19 - 21) • Buffer and Conservation Easements - The applicant has proffered a one -hundred (100) foot wide "non -disturbance" buffer adjacent to each side of Hiatt Run and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel. This buffer will be located wholly outside of platted lots. The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel are located as shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) and are designated by the applicant as resource protection areas. • Flood Plain Buffer - No platted lot will be located closer than twenty (20) feet to the limits of the 100-year flood plain. The ten (10) feet of this buffer located immediately adjacent to the flood plain will remain undisturbed. However, the ten (10) feet located adjacent to the platted lot may be disturbed. In the event such disturbance occurs, the buffer area will be replanted as specified by proffer. • Hiatt Run Corridor - As noted above, the Hiatt Run Corridor is identified as a resource protection area by the applicant. The applicant has proffered a minimum buffer of twenty (20) feet adjacent to all wetland preservation areas, which are generally coincident with or in close proximity to the Hiatt Run Corridor. The vegetation located on the south side of the corridor will be preserved and/or reforested pursuant to a Forest Management Plan that will be developed with input from the Virginia Department of Forestry. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to install native plantings on the north side of the corridor in an effort to protect riparian resources and enhance wildlife and bird habitats. • Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel - As noted above, the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel is identified as a resource protection area by the applicant. The applicant has proffered to provide native plantings within this area to form an upland buffer. Individual platted lots may be located within this zone; however, clearing and grading will be prohibited via restrictive covenants, with the Homeowner's Association bearing responsibility for enforcement of said restrictions. 0 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 26 September 18, 2003 • Forest Management Plan - The applicant has proffered to prepare a Forest Stewardship and Management Plan with technical assistance from the Virginia Department of Forestry. This plan will identify native vegetation and tree clusters to be preserved on the site and delineate resource management practices to ensure effective conservation. Q. Section 17: Community Curbside Trash Collection (Proffer Statement, p. 21 - 22) • Commercial Trash Collection - The applicant has proffered that the proposed development will be served by private trash removal contractors. The applicant intends to assign full responsibility for enforcement of this proffer to the Homeowners Association. R. Section 18: Water and Sewer Improvements in the Stephenson Area (Proffer Statement, p. 22) • Pump Station Construction - The applicant has proffered to dedicate land for a regional pump station pursuant to the selection of said property by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). The applicant has further proffered to construct the pump station prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit in Stephenson Village. • Infrastructure Construction - The applicant has proffered to construct all water and sewer lines required to serve private land uses within Stephenson Village in accordance with the provisions of the FCSA Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to extend adequately sized water and sewer lines to the property boundary of all land dedicated for public uses. S. Section 19: Comprehensive Plan Conformity (Proffer Statement, p. 22) • Public Facilities - Acceptance of the proffer statement will serve as the formal authorization for the provision and location of those public uses and facilities referenced in the proffer statement and on the Generalized Development Plan (GDP), to include the extension of water and sewer lines, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.2-2232 and the Frederick County Code. No further review for Comprehensive Plan conformance would be necessary. T. Section 20: Creation of Homeowners Association(s) (Proffer Statement, p. 23) • This proffer provision acknowledges the applicant's responsibility to establish one or more Homeowners Associations for Stephensons Village. REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 27 September 18, 2003 U. Section 21: Proffered Housing Types (Proffer Statement, p. 23 - 24) Unique Housing Types - The applicant has proffered the inclusion of several housing types that will be new to the Frederick County market. Specifically, the following unique housing types will be developed: Carriage House, Non -Alley Carriage House, Cottage House, Courtyard Cluster, and Elderly Housing. The applicant has also proffered alternative dimensional standards for single family detached and townhouse housing types, which the applicant refers to as "modified single family detached" and "modified townhouse attached dwelling. V. Section 22: Streetscape Design and Landscaping (Proffer Statement, p 24 - 25) Major Collector Road Landscaping - The applicant has proffered to provide landscaped areas on each side of the major collector road as detailed in Exhibit D. Such landscaping is proposed coincident with a request for modification of the road efficiency buffer required by ordinance. The applicant has proffered to install landscaping along the roadway as specified by proffer. W. Section 23: Community Signage Program (Proffer Statement, p. 25 - 26) Entrance Signage - The applicant has proffered dimensions for the monument style entrance signs to Stephenson Village. Moreover, entry features distinguishing the neighborhoods within the community will be provided. No illustratives have been provided for such signage. Freestanding Commercial Signs - The applicant has proffered that freestanding commercial signs shall be monument style and will be limited in height to twenty (20) feet. Such signs shall be spaced a minimum of one hundred (100) feet. Commercial signage will incorporate design elements comprising the entrance features of surrounding neighborhoods. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 07/16/03 MEETING: The required public hearing was conducted following presentations by Planning Department staff and the applicant. Numerous citizens addressed the Planning Commission, offering both support and opposition concerning the proposed rezoning. The public hearing was formally concluded following the Commission's receipt of citizen comments and the applicant was given an opportunity to respond. At the request of the applicant, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to table further consideration and final action regarding the proposed rezoning for thirty (30) days. The subject application was therefore scheduled as a public meeting item on the agenda of the Planning Commission's August 20, 2003 meeting. REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 28 September 18, 2003 It is noted that Planning Commission Chairman Charles DeHaven abstained from the Commission's deliberations and action regarding this application. Also, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner Robert Morris was absent from the meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 08/20/03 MEETING: Consideration of the subject application resumed with review of the nine ordinance modification requests submitted through the Community Design Modification Document (Exhibit "F") of the Proffer Statement. The Planning Commission held discussion and offered a recommendation concerning each request. Of the nine modification requests, all received recommendations of approval except for Modification #3, which is a request for reduction of the minimum commercial and industrial area requirement of the R4 District. Specifically, the applicant requested the ability to reserve only 4% of the proj ect for commercial and industrial uses, rather than the 10% minimum land are required for such uses by the Zoning Ordinance. The recommendation to deny Modification #3 was decided by a vote of 6 (in favor of denial) to 5 (opposed to denial), with one Commissioner abstaining and another absent. Commissioners who voiced opposition to Modification #3 cited concern that the requested reduction would lessen the potential for employment opportunities within Stephenson Village and thereby compromise attainment of the "balance" of land uses envisioned within planned communities by the Comprehensive Plan. However, other Commissioners acknowledged that the applicant had proffered to prohibit industrial land uses in the project in response to community objections to such uses, and therefore questioned whether the 10% ordinance minimum was attainable if only commercial uses were peimitted. Please note that an overview of the nine modification requests and the Commission's recommendation for each may be found on pages 11 through 18 of this staff report. At the conclusion of general discussion regarding the application, a motion was made and seconded to recommend denial of the rezoning request. This motion failed by the following majority vote: YES (TO DENY): Gochenour, Light, Straub, Rosenberry NO: Kriz, Morris, Ours, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher Upon failure of the initial motion, a new motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of the application, to include a negative recommendation concerning Modification #3. The motion to recommend approval of Rezoning Application #06-03 of Stephenson Village was passed by the following majority vote: YES (TO APPROVE): Kriz, Morris, Ours, Thomas, Triplett, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour, Light, Straub, Rosenberry REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 29 September 18, 2003 ABSTAIN: DeHaven ABSENT: Fisher STAFF CONCLUSION FOR 09/24/03 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUBLIC HEARING: This application is a request to rezone 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to R4 (Planned Residential Community) to permit development of a planned community consisting of 2,465 dwelling units (exclusive of affordable elderly housing), a 26-acre commercial center, land dedications for public uses, and a multi -modal transportation system. The gross residential density proposed for Stephenson Village, not including affordable elderly housing, is 3.10 dwelling units per acre. The site is located wholly within the Urban Development Area (UDA). The applicant's proposal is consistent with the applicable land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan, which envision planned unit development (PUD) land use on the subject parcels. The applicant has included a series of nine ordinance modification requests with the Proffer Statement, each of which is necessary to enable the proffered development program for Stephenson Village. Approval of this application in its current form is dependant upon the individual approval of each modification request. Should one or more modification requests be denied by the Board, the application must either be denied outright or tabled to allow the applicant to respond with revisions to the Proffer Statement. • JuLu'Di COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM i Gi:�i;:�iji'•:ieiiii}:::i::.rJiJ........r.rJJ..r..r..J.....eJ.rJ...e.....J.r..<......n...r... rJr.J.. rrr.J... r.J. TO: Frederick County Planning Commission, FROM: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Planning Director`s DATE: August 15, 2003 RE: Rezoning # 06-03 of Stephenson Village SUBJECT: Actions of the Board of Supervisors on August 13, 2003 At its August 13, 2003 meeting, the Board of Supervisors took action on two items germane to the Planning Commission's continued deliberations regarding the referenced rezoning application. These actions include the following: The Board adopted an amendment to the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) consistent with the Alternative 4 land use plan proposal that was endorsed by the Commission on May 21, 2003. As a result of this amendment, the planned land use designation of the parcels subject to the rezoning petition has been changed from industrial to planned unit development and the Urban Development Area (UDA) has been expanded to include said parcels. A copy of the policy text adopted with this amendment is attached for your reference. The Board adopted the proposed amendment to Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance that allows applicants for R4 zoning to request ordinance modifications to achieve enhanced design flexibility. The adopted amendment includes language clarifying the role ofthe Planning Commission in reviewing modification requests prior to Board consideration. A copy of the adopted ordinance text is attached for your reference. It is noted that the agenda for the August 20, 2003 Planning Commission meeting was distributed prior to the date of the aforementioned Board actions. These actions are therefore not reflected in either the Stephenson Village staff report or the accompanying cover memorandum. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly should you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter. CMM/rsa Attachments 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 11, ADOPTED AUGUST 13, 2003 Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan The northeastern portion of Frederick County has been studied on three occasions to ascertain the most appropriate land uses for its future. First in 1995, then in 1999. In 2002, the area was studied once again in an effort to discern if thisportion of the County contained an excess of industrial land use designations. 777rough the adoption of the 2002 land use planning efforts, the amount of land designated industrial was significantly reduce, and the planned unit development (PUD) land use designation was introduced. 1995 Land Use Study In 1995, the Board of Supervisors and the Economic Development Commission identified a shortage of available industrial sites with rail access, a vital element in recruiting potential industries. As a result, the County initiated a search for potential locations for such uses. Numerous areas were identified within the northeastern portion of the County along the Route 11 North corridor that could be attractive sites for industrial development with rail access. As a result, the Board of Supervisors directed the County's Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) to develop a land use plan for the Route 11 North corridor from Interstate 81 Exit 317 to Exit 321. In 1996, a land use plan for the Route 11 North corridor from Interstate 81 Exit 317 to Exit 321 was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Approximately 3,200 acres of land was included within the adopted study area boundary of the Route 11 North corridor which extended from Interstate 81 to the west and the Hot Run, Hiatt Run, and Redbud Run drainage basins to the east. Portions of the Stephenson Rural Community Center and the Clearbrook Rural Community Center were included within the study area boundary. The Route 11 North Land Use Plan recommended industrial and commercial development as the predominant land use within the study area boundary. New large- scale residential development was not proposed as a component of the land use plan. Finally, a Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) designation was established to preserve and protect existing residential land uses, historic features, and significant open space areas. The DSA was recommended along the Route 11 North corridor, the Milburn Road corridor, and along the western segment of the Old Charles Town Road corridor. 1999 Land Use Study Development activity and land use speculation has occurred along the Route 11 corridor between Interstate 81, Exit 321 and Exit 323 since the adoption of the north of the Route 11 North Land Use Plan. Concerns expressed by county officials and citizens regarding various land use activities and excerpt from the 2000 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan; amended to reflect adopted Plan • ADOPTED AUGUST 13, 2003 plans in this area led the Board of Supervisors to direct the CPPS to revisit the previously adopted land use plan. The Board of Supervisors directed the CPPS to develop a land use plan which expanded upon the Route 11 North Plan to incorporate all land east of Interstate 81 between Interstate 81 mile marker 316 and Interstate 81 Exit 323 to the Opequon Creek, as well as land on the west side of Interstate 81 at Exit 321 and Exit 323. Northeast Land Use Plan Objectives Policies ► Develop policies which provide for a balance of growth and preservation. ► Develop policies which prohibit higher density growth within defined portions of the study area. ► Ensure that public water and sewer service with adequate capacity accompanies future development proposals. ► Ensure that adequate Levels of Service for all road systems are maintained or are achieved as a result of future development proposals. ► Apply appropriate quality design standards for future development within the study area. Land Use ► Concentrate industrial uses near major road and railroad transportation systems. ► Encourage industrial uses to locate within master planned areas. ► Provide for interstate business development opportunities on the eastern and western sides of Interstate 81 interchanges. ► Concentrate business uses at strategic locations along the Route 11 North corridor. ► Discourage random business and industrial land uses along Route 11 that are incompatible with adjacent existing land uses. excerpt from the 2000 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan; amended to reflect adopted Plan • • ADOPTED AUGUST 13, 2003 Transportation ► Identify appropriate locations for signalized intersections to maintain or improve Levels of Service. ► Encourage central access points to industrial areas, minimizing new driveways and intersections with Route 11 North, Route 761, Route 664, Route 669, and Route 671. ► Encourage the expansion of Route 11 to a four -lane roadway. ► Determine appropriate locations for new connector roads within industrial and commercial areas to minimize traffic impacts on Route 11 North and existing secondary roads. ► Discourage new access points along the historic Milburn Road corridor (Route 662). Infrastructure ► Identify appropriate locations within the study area for inclusion in the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). ► Determine impacts of proposed future land uses on the Opequon Waste Water Treatment Plant. ► Determine appropriate types of water and sewer systems to serve existing and proposed land uses. Historical ► Ensure that recommendations of the Third Winchester Battlefield Preservation Plan are implemented to the extent possible. ► Determine appropriate methods to protect significant historic areas and corridors that are identified by the Battlefield Network Plan. ► Identify appropriate locations to implement Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) land use designations to protect potentially significant historic resources as identified by the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey. Ensure that the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) reviews all development proposals which impact identified DSA. excer pt from the 2000 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan; amended to reflect adopted Plan ADOPTED AUGUST 13, 2003 Environmental Identify environmentally sensitive areas such as flood plains and steep slopes, to ensure that future land use impacts to these areas are minimized or avoided. Identify areas for agricultural and open space preservation. Encourage land preservation programs such as conservation easements, agricultural and forestal districts, and public purchase of permanent easements. Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan The 2002 Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan is intended to expand upon and supercede elements of the 1995 and 1999 Land Use Plans which were adopted in 1996 and 2000, respectively. The 2002 Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan has been designed to provide for a balance of land uses which includes industrial and commercial growth along the major road and railroad corridors, the introduction of a planned unit development (PUD) land use, and the preservation of rural areas and significant historic features within the study area boundaries. Future land uses within the study area boundary should be sensitive to existing and planned land uses. The land use plan has been designed to provide the opportunity to develop industrial, business, and PUD uses in a well -planned, coordinated manner. Industrial land uses are proposed adjacent to the railroads in the southern and northern portions of the study area. Proposed industrial land uses should be developed within master planned areas which discourage individual lot access on the Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North) corridor. Industrial land uses should be adequately screened from adjoining land uses to mitigate visual and noise impacts. Furthermore, industrial land uses should be planned to provide greater setbacks and buffers and screening along Martinsburg Pike to enhance the appearance of the corridor. Business and commercial land uses are proposed along the Martinsburg Pike corridor, on the east and west side of Interstate 81 Exits 317, 321, and 323 within the southeastern portion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). It is envisioned that commercial land uses which cater to the interstate traveler will be developed along the three Interstate 81 interchange areas, while retail, service, and office land uses will occur along the Martinsburg Pike corridor, and complement the planned unit development (PUD) land use designation in the southeastern portion of the S W SA. The development of business and commercial land uses is encouraged at designated signalized road intersections. All business and commercial uses are encouraged to provide inter -parcel connectors to enhance accessibility between uses and reduce disruptions to primary and secondary road systems. excerpt from the 2000 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan; amended to reflect adopted Plan ADOPTED AUGUST 13, 2003 Additionally, business and commercial land uses which adjoin existing residential uses and. significant historic resources should be adequately screened to mitigate impacts. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) land use is proposed in the southeastern portion of the study area, immediately south of the Stephenson Rural Community Center. The PUD is envisioned to include residential, commercial, and office components, of which a maximum of 50% of the land area would be non-residential. The PUD is proposed as an alternative land use from the typical suburban residential development patterns that have occurred in the past. The PUD concept is intended to promote land use patterns that allow for internal service, employment, and intermodal transportation opportunities with public open space linkages between various developments. Public uses such as school, parks, and fire and rescue facilities should be provided for within the PUD. As with all development, it is vital that the PUD be provided with adequate transportation improvements that assure the transportation network serving the community function at a Level of Service (LOS) Category C or better. The planned unit development (PUD) land use concept would enable a large scale community. The associated residential aspect of a PUD would necessitate its inclusion within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA). Therefore, the UDA has been expanded to incorporate the land areas designated for the PUD. The preservation and protection of significant historic resources, environmentally -sensitive areas, and open space areas is encouraged by this land use plan. The majority of the acreage within the study area which comprises these features has been protected from industrial, commercial, and residential development through its exclusion from the SWSA and UDA expansion. This acreage includes the core area of the Opequon Battlefield (3`d Battle of Winchester); significant historic properties including Sulphur Spring Spa (34-110), Cleridge (34-111), and Hackwood (34-134); the majority of the steep slope and mature woodland areas; and all of the flood plain and wetland areas associated with Opequon Creek. Significant historic resources including the core area of Stephensons Depot (2"d Battle of Winchester), Kenilworth (34-113), the Branson House (34-137), Milburn (34-729), the Byers House (34-1124), and the Milburn Road corridor (Route 662), and minor areas of steep slope and mature woodlands fall within the expanded SWSA and UDA boundaries. The land use plan incorporates a Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) designation to ensure that these features, as well as existing residential clusters and public land uses are protected from future development proposals. The DSA is a community and historical preservation area; therefore, adjacent uses which may be incompatible should provide adequate buffers and screening. The DSA is intended to discourage any development along the Milburn Road corridor and to promote a higher standard of development along the Martinsburg Pike corridor where residential clusters and public land uses dominate. Development regulations should be reviewed to ensure that they protect and promote a cohesive excerpt from the 2000 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan; amended to reflect adopted Plan ADOPTED A UGUST 13, 2003 Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan The northeastern portion of Frederick County has been studied on three occasions to ascertain the most appropriate land uses for its future. First in 1995, then in 1999. In 2002, the area was studied once again in an effort to discern if thisportion of the County contained an excess of industrial land use designations. Through the adoption of the 2002 land use planning efforts, the amount of land designated industrial was significantly reduce, and the planned unit development (PUD) land use designation was introduced. 1995 Land Use Study In 1995, the Board of Supervisors and the Economic Development Commission identified a shortage of available industrial sites with rail access, a vital element in recruiting potential industries. As a result, the County initiated a search for potential locations for such uses. Numerous areas were identified within the northeastern portion of the County along the Route 11 North corridor that could be attractive sites for industrial development with rail access. As a result, the Board of Supervisors directed the County's Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) to develop a land use plan for the Route 11 North corridor from Interstate 81 Exit 317 to Exit 321. In 1996, a land use plan for the Route 11 North corridor from Interstate 81 Exit 317 to Exit 321 was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Approximately 3,200 acres of land was included within the adopted study area boundary of the Route 11 North corridor which extended from Interstate 81 to the west and the Hot Run, Hiatt Run, and Redbud Run drainage basins to the east. Portions of the Stephenson Rural Community Center and the Clearbrook Rural Community Center were included within the study area boundary. The Route 11 North Land Use Plan recommended industrial and commercial development as the predominant land use within the study area boundary. New large- scale residential development was not proposed as a component of the land use plan. Finally, a Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) designation was established to preserve and protect existing residential land uses, historic features, and significant open space areas. The DSA was recommended along the Route 11 North corridor, the Milburn Road corridor, and along the western segment of the Old Charles Town Road corridor. 1999 Land Use Study Development activity and land use speculation has occurred along the Route 11 corridor between Interstate 81, Exit 321 and Exit 323 since the adoption of the north of the Route 11 North Land Use Plan. Concerns expressed by county officials and citizens regarding various land use activities and excerpt from the 2000 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan; amended to reflect adopted Plan KEY Deleted Text New Text ADOPTED AUGUST 13, 2003 Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, R4 - Planned Residential Community District; Section 165-72.0., Other Regulations Modifications; applicability of other regulations. (1) An applicant may request as part of an application for rezoning to the R4 District that a modification to specific requirements of the subdivision ordinance, this chapter or other requirements of the Frederick County Code applicable to physical development be granted. The applicant shall demonstrate that the requested modification is necessary or justified in the particular case by a demonstration that the public purpose of these ordinances, as applied to the particular case, would be met to at least an equivalent degree by such modification. The Board of Supervisors may approve or disapprove such request, in whole or in part, following review by the Planning Commission. (2) The applicant shall provide sufficient information to enable evaluation of the request by the Board of Supervisors. Materials submitted should include or be supplemented by: (a) specification of the code section(s) to be modified and the proposed alternative standard; (b) exhibits demonstrating application of the modified standard such as a detailed plan and/or elevation drawing; and (c) identification of the relationship of the modification to the overall community concept. (3) The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article or modified by the Board of Supervisors through the rezoning process. UAChris\Common\R4 Modification Amendment.Adoptedwpd w REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be' completed by=Planning Stdff Amount, Paid Zoning Amendmerit,,Numbe- :Date'.Recezve'i PC'Hearin "Date " BOS Hearin Date g �. g The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: Greenway Ening eering Telephone: 540-662-4185 Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane, Winchester, VA 22602 2. Property Owner (if different from above) Name: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Telephone: 540-667-7700 Address: PO Box 2530, Winchester, VA 22604 3. Contact person if other than above Name: Evan Wyatt, AICP Telephone: 540-662-4185 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map X Agency Comments X Plat X Fees X Deed to Property X Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of taxes paid X Proffer Statement X 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: Stephenson Associates, L.C. - J. Donald Shockey, Manages 6. A) Current Use of the Property RA - Agricultural B) Proposed Use of the Property: R4 — Residential Planned Community 7. Adjoining Property: See attached list 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact located based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route number): The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 4 10 6 Information to be Submitted for Capital Facilities Impact Model In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density or intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number 44-((A))-31 (portion), 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293 Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service 10. 11. Districts Stonewall Clearbrook Fire & Rescue Dept. Clearbrook Fire & Rescue Dept. High School: James Wood HS Middle School: James Wood Middle Elementary School: Stonewall Elementary Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 794.6± RA R4 794.6± Total Acreage to be rezoned The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: Townhome: Multi -Family Non -Residential Lots: Mobile Home: Hotel Rooms: Note: 2,800 maximum residential units to conform with Housing Unit Type % Range specified in Article 3A(2) Exhibit A of the Proffer Statement. Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: 60,000 sq.ft. Service Station: Retail: 190,000 sq.ft. Manufacturing: Restaurant: 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. 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 bet of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s): L-u-oI • Date: 617 d b 3 Owner (s): Date: e PCj a / � � h STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY REZONING Owner Properties PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 44-((A))-31 Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-31A Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-292 Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-293 Agricultural RA District Adjoining property owners PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 44-((A))-25 Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-26 Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-28B Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-29 Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-32 Residential RA District 44-((A))-33 Residential RA District 44-((A))-34 Residential RA District 44-((A))-35 Residential RA District 44-((A))-36 Residential RA District 44-((A))-37 Residential RA District 44-((A))-38 Residential RA District 44-((A))-39 Residential RA District 44-((A))-40A Residential RA District 44-((A))-131 Residential RA District 44-((A))-132 Residential RA District 44-((A))-133 Residential RA District 44-((A))-134 Residential RA District 44-((A))-135 Residential RA District 44-((A))-136 Residential RA District 44-((A))-137 Residential RA District 44-((A))-138 Residential RA District 44-((A))-138A Residential RA District 44-((A))-138B Residential RA District 44-((A))-139 Residential RA District 44-((A))-140 Residential RA District 44-((A))-141 Residential RA District 44-((A))-142 Residential RA District 44-((A))-143 Residential RA District 44-((A))-144 Residential RA District 44-((A))-145 Residential RA District 44-((A))-146 Residential RA District 44-((A))-147 Residential RA District 44-((A))-148 Residential RA District 2760C/EAW Adjoining property owners PARCEL ID NUMBERUSEZONING 44-((A))-149 Residential RA District 44-((A))-150 Residential RA District 44-((A))-151 Residential RA District 44-((A))-153 Residential RA District 44-((A))-154 Residential RA District 44-((A))-155 Residential RA District 44-((A))-156 Residential RA District 44-((A))-157 Residential RA District 44-((A))-158 Residential RA District 44-((A))-161 Residential RA District 44-((A))-162 Residential RA District 44-((A))-163 Residential RA District 44-((A))-164 Residential RA District 44-((A))-165 Residential RA District 44-((A))-166 Residential RA District 44-((A))-167 Residential RA District 44-((A))-168 Residential RA District 44-((A))-169 Residential RA District 44-((A))-170C Residential RA District 44-((A))-202 Residential RA District 44-((A))-205 Residential RA District 44-((A))-206 Residential RA District 44-((A))-207 Residential RA District 44-((A))-208 Residential RA District 44-((A))-209 Residential RA District 44-((A))-210 Residential RA District 44-((A))-211 Residential RA District 44-((A))-212 Residential RA District 44-((A))-218 Residential RA District 44-((A))-219 Residential RA District 44-((A))-220 Residential RA District 44-((A))-221 Residential RA District 44-((A))-222 Residential RA District 44-((A))-223 Residential RA District 44-((A))-224 Residential RA District 44-((A))-225 Residential RA District 44-((A))-226 Residential RA District 44-((A))-228 Residential RA District 44-((A))-229 Residential RA District 44-((A))-230 Residential RA District 44-((A))-231 Residential RA District 44-((A))-231A Residential RA District 44-((A))-231 B Residential RA District 44-((A))-232 Residential RA District 2760C/EAW Adjoining property owners PARCEL ID NUMBERUSEZONING 44-((A))-233 Residential RA District 44-((A))-234 Residential RA District 44-((A))-235 Residential RA District 44-((A))-236 Residential RA District 44-((A))-237 Residential RA District 44-((A))-238 Residential RA District 44-((A))-283 Residential RA District 44-((A))-284 Residential RA District 44-((A))-285 Residential RA District 44-((A))-286 Residential RA District 44-((A))-287 Residential RA District 44-((A))-288 Residential RA District 44-((A))-289 Residential RA District 44-((A))-291 Residential RA District 44-((A))-294 Office/Agricultural B2 District/RA District 44C-((1))-A Residential RA District 44C-((1))-13 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-14 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-15 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-16 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-17 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-18 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-19 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-20 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-21 Residential RA District 44C-((1))-22 Residential RA District 44C-((2))-A Residential RA District 44C-((2))-B Residential RA District 44C-((2))-D Residential RA District . 45-((A))-25 Residential RA District 45-((9))-3-1 Residential RA District 45-((9))-3-2 Residential RA District 55-((A))-6 Agricultural RA District 55-((A))-7 Agricultural RA District 55-((A))-7A Agricultural RA District 55-((A))-8 Agricultural RA District 55-((A))-9 Agricultural RA District 55-((A))-10 Agricultural RA District 55-((7))-12 Residential RA District 55-((7))-13 Residential RA District 55-((7))-14 Residential RA District - 55-((7))-15 Residential RA District = MAR i 1 2003 2760C/EAW VE16PiHEi,)+` 0 • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Christopher M. Molui, AICP, Deputy Planning Director DATE: August 1, 2003 RE: Rezoning # 06-03 of Stephenson Village As you are aware, the public hearing for the subject rezoning application was held during the Planning Conunission's meeting on July 16, 2003. At that time, public input was received and the applicant was provided an opportunity to respond to questions and concerns raised by various speakers. The applicant subsequently requested that the Planning Commission delay further action regarding the application for a period of thirty (30) days. The public hearing was formally concluded and the Planning Commission voted to table the application as requested by the applicant. Continuation of the Planning Commission's consideration of the subject rezoning application has been scheduled as a public meeting item on the August 20, 2003 meeting agenda. As of the date of this memorandum, the applicant has not offered any changes to the application and the policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan applicable to the site remain umnodified. With the exception of a brief update regarding the action to table, the content of the staff report prepared for this application is unchanged from that which was originally provided for the public hearing. A copy of the staff report is attached for your reference. It is reiterated that the public hearing for the subject application was formally closed on July 16, 2003. As such, members of the general public seeking to address the Planning Commission regarding this application should be encouraged to speak during the time reserved for citizen comments. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly should you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter. XMF:Iino Attachment 0.\Agendas\COMMENTS\REZONING\Staff Report\2003\StepltcnsonVillagePCCoverMemo.wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 REZONING APPLICATION #06-03 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Staff Report for the Planning Commission Public Meeting Prepared: June 27, 2003 Updated: August 1, 2003 Staff Contact: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Director This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist thew in snaking 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. As this application proceeds through the legislative review process, the response or method of resolution for each issue offered by the applicant andlor recommended by the Planning Conrntission or Board of Supervisors will be stated in the text of this report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 07/16/03 - Public Hearing Tabled Planning Commission: 08/20/03 Pending Board of Supervisors: 09/10/03 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to R4 (Residential Planned Community). LOCATION: The property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 44-A-31 [portion]; 44-A-31A; 44-A-292; 44-A-293 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Unimproved ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING AND PRESENT USE: North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) East: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) West: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 2 August 1, 2003 INTENDED USE: Residential Planned Community comprised of mixed housing types totaling 2,800 dwelling units with 250,000 square feet of commercial uses (190,000 square feet - retail; 60,000 square feet - office) and 44 acres dedicated for public school and recreation uses. The applicant has proposed to serve the development with a multi -modal transportation system consisting of a major collector road, a system of pedestrian and bicycle trails, and a linear park trail within the Hiatt Run Corridor. The gross residential density proposed for this development is 3.40 dwelling units per acre. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: All roads providing access to the site will experience "significant measurable impact" from proposed development. However, proffered transportation improvements appear to be adequate to address traffic impacts. Please see the attached letter dated 02/21/03 from Ben Lineberry, Jr. P.E., Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer, VDOT Edinburg Residency. Fire Marshal: Proposed standards for private streets, culs-de-sac, alleys, and common driveways will allow adequate fire protection access. Applicant's proposed use of home sprinkler systems in certain housing types is a "first" for Frederick County and is commended as a positive life safety measure. Please see the attached comment sheet dated 0310312003 from Timothy L. Welsh, Assistant Fire Marshal. Clearbrook Fire & Rescue Co.: No comment offered. Please see the attached letter dated 02/26/2003 fi-ona Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. on behlaf of Chief Tommy Price. County Engineer: Concerned that Homeowner's Association responsibility for private curbside trash collection will be ineffective without an enforceable guarantee. It is further noted that any such guarantee must be fully enforceable without County intervention. Please see attached letter dated 05105103 fi•onz H.E. Straivsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: Adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility to accommodate the projected sewage flows of the proposed development. The conceptual plans for the sewer system for Stephenson Village include infrastructure capable of eliminating capacity concerns involving the Abrams Creek Interceptor. It is recommended that an adequately sized pumping station site be provided pursuant to Frederick County Sanitation Authority standards to enable ultimate expansion of the station to a regional facility. Moreover, the main sewage collector line should be adequately sized and appropriately routed to enable future extension of the collection system to off -site development. Please see the attached memorandum dated 02/12/2003 from Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director. Sanitation Authority: Capacity in the existing sewer lines, especially the Frederick -Winchester Service REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 3 August 1, 2003 Authority Abrams Creek Trunk Main, is limited. While the majority of the flow generated by the project may be within the capacity of the existing lines, it is prudent to have a pump station built sometime during this development to transmit sewage directly to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. Gravity lines will need to be sized to convey sewage from areas in the watershed outside the development and from the SWSA in the Clearbrook/Rest Church Road area. Please see the attached comment sheet with attachment dated 02/12/2003 from John G. Whitacre, Engineer, and W. H. Jones, P.E., Executive Director. Historic Resources Advisory Board: No adverse comments were offered regarding this application. However, the HRAB did offer the following suggestions to the applicant: (1) avoid bisecting the battlefield preservation tract with the proposed major collector road by locating the road on the northeast portion of the tract; (2) avoid creation of a "false sense of history" along the major collector road by limiting treatments to minimal landscaping comprised of indigenous plantings; (3) develop an interpretive plan for the preservation tract; (4) consider conducting archaeological studies ofthe property and ensure that artifacts are properly inventoried and preserved; and (5) consider preserving the Sam Byers House on a large parcel of land. Please see attached letter fi-oni Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I, dated 01127103. Parks & Recreation: Please see attached letter dated 02/04/03 from James M. Doran, Director of Parks & Recreation. Frederick County Public Schools: The proposed development is anticipated to generate a total of 1,156 students at project build -out. Pursuant to the outputs of the Frederick County Fiscal Impact Model, the combination of proffered land donations and monetary contributions will meet the recommended levels to mitigate projected capital facilities impacts. It is noted that continued residential growth in Frederick County, to include the proposed development, will necessitate the construction of new school facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. Please see attached letter dated 03/20/03 from Al Orndoiff, Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent. County Attorney: Proffers appear to be in proper form. Please see attached comment sheet dated 04/28/2003 ftoni Jay Cook, Assistant County Attorney. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed development will not have an impact on Winchester Regional Airport operations. Although the proposed development lies within the Regional Airport's airspace, it is located outside of the airport's Part 77 surface. Please see attached letter dated 02112103 from Serena R. Manuel, Executive Director. Planning & Zoning_ 1) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcels as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural 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 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 4 August 1, 2003 corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re -mapping of the subject properties and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Location The subject site is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The parcels comprising the site are located wholly within the Stonewall Magisterial District and are used primarily for agricultural purposes. Numerous parcels adjoin the 821.7-acre site, all of which are zoned RA (Rural Areas) and are either undeveloped or established with residential or agricultural land uses. 3) Comprehensive Policy Plan The four parcels comprising this rezoning request are all located within the boundaries of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). The properties are located wholly within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The NELUP envisions the area comprised by the subject parcels as developing with industrial land use. Indeed, this designation is consistent with the overarching purpose of the NELUP, which is the facilitation of business and industrial development in a well planned, coordinated manner. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36, p. 6-39) The policies of the Comprehensive Plan governing planned communities stipulate that such development is to occur within the Urban Development Area (UDA). The NELUP does not provide for the expansion of the UDA within the study area. Planned communities and other forms of suburban residential development are therefore not accommodated within the bounds of the study area. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.1, 6-60, 6-61) The preservation of environmentally sensitive areas and significant historic resources is encouraged by the NELUP. The area proposed for rezoning is adjacent to the core area of the Stephenson's Depot battlefield (Second Battle of Winchester) and includes the Byers House (#34-1124), both of which are identified by the Developmentally Sensitive Area (DSA) designation. Resources identified as DSA constitute community and historical preservation areas that are to be protected from incompatible land uses through the use of adequate buffers and screening. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.1) Consistent with the transportation policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the NELUP specifies that proposed development should only occur if impacted road systems will function at Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better. The NELUP indicates that improvement of roads to maintain this level of service objective is the responsibility of the private property owner or developer. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.2, 6-36.3, 7-5) The land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan identify the planned community approach as a preferred method for establishing new neighborhoods within the UDA. It is expected that such communities consist of an appropriate balance between residential, service, and employment uses. Indeed, by providing an environment wherein people can live, work, and shop, the planned community approach promises to more effectively mitigate the impacts of new development on REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 5 August 1, 2003 the County as a whole. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-60, 6-61) Planning Staff Comment The applicable land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan promote the establishment of non-residential land uses on the subject parcels. The proposed rezoning of the site to accommodate a 2,800-unit planned residential development is, therefore, inconsistent with adopted policy. It is noted that an extensive review of the NELUP was recently concluded, during which several alternative land use proposals were considered by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. One such alternative proposed that the subject parcels be designated for planned community land use. However, this alternative was not adopted, and the industrial land use designation applicable to the subject properties was ultimately retained. 4) Site Suitability/Environmental Features Impact Analysis Statement (p. 2, 3, 4): The subject site contains a variety of environmental features to include a perennial stream, flood plain, wetlands, steep slopes, and woodlands. The applicant proposes to incorporate the conservation of these sensitive environmental features into the overall development plan through a variety of proffered methods. The applicant has endeavored to accomplish resource conservation through the identification of two resource protection areas, which are identified as the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetland Intermittent Ravine Channel. The majority of the site's sensitive environmental features are captured within these two areas, the protection of which will occur through a combination of approaches, to include riparian buffers, easements, supplemental plantings, and development of resource management plans in collaboration with relevant state and non-profit environmental organizations. The proffered Generalized Development Plan delineates the location of the proposed resource protection areas. (See Proffer Statement, p. 19 - 21 and Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) The environmental features present on the subject parcels do not represent an impediment to site development. Such features may be described as follows: A. Flood Plain: Flood plain data for the subject parcels is delineated on the Flood Insurance Study Map for Frederick County prepared by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Community Panel #510063-0110-13, effective date July 17, 1978. The majority of the site is located in Flood Zone C, which denotes areas of minimal flooding located outside of the 100-year flood plain. As reported by the applicant, 100- year flood plain, Flood Zone A, exists coincident with Hiatt Run, a perennial stream that traverses the subject site. The applicant has proffered to protect identified flood plain resources through a combination of easements and buffer areas adjacent to the 100-year REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 6 August 1, 2003 flood plain comprising the Hiatt Run Corridor. Moreover, the applicant has proffered that disturbance within the flood plain will be limited to establishment of the proposed linear park trail system, to include the trail, pedestrian bridges, benches and signage. Any disturbance within the designated flood plain area will be subject to the Flood Plain (FP) District requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (1)] B. Wetlands: The National Wetland Inventory Map (Stephenson Quadrangle) produced by the U.S. Department of the Interior identifies seven wetland features on the subject site. The identified wetland features correspond with ponding areas adjacent to the stream system that drains to Hiatt Run. The applicant proposes to incorporate these wetland resources into the stormwater management plan for Stephenson Village and further proffers to provide buffers adjacent to wetlands located within the Hiatt Run Corridor. Pursuant to the environmental standards of the Zoning Ordinance, disturbance of wetlands is only permitted in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or other qualified state or federal agency. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (3)] C. Soils and Steep Slopes: The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils on the site are consistent with the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association, which is the predominant association in Frederick County east of Interstate 81. It is noted that the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association presents some limitations to site development due to a seasonal high water table, depth to bedrock, and slope. The management of such soil characteristics will be addressed through subsequent site engineering activities. Steep slopes (land areas of 50% slope or greater) are located within the eastern and central portions of the site, generally coincident with the ravines and drainage ways associated with Hiatt Run and the Hiatt Run stream valley. The applicant has proffered the establishment of riparian buffers along the Hiatt Run Corridor, which will minimize disturbance of steep slope areas located on the site. The applicant has acknowledged that some disturbance of steep slopes will be necessary to accommodate planned stormwater management facilities, pedestrian trail systems, and the proffered transportation program. The Zoning Ordinance stipulates that no more than 25% of steep slopes shall be disturbed or regraded. The management of steep slopes pursuant to this disturbance limitation will be addressed through subsequent site engineering activities. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (6)] D. Woodlands: Areas of mature woodlands exist on the site, most of which are coincident with the Hiatt Run Corridor. Other woodland areas are dispersed throughout the site. The applicant has proffered to preserve those woodland areas located within the Hiatt Run Corridor through the employment of 100-foot riparian buffers. The applicant has further proffered to collaborate with the Virginia Department of Forestry to prepare a REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 7 August 1, 2003 forest management plan to guide conservation of woodland resources within the project. 5) Potential Impacts A. Transportation Impact Analysis Statement (p. 4 - S) : The traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared for this application calculated transportation impacts based upon the following proffered development program: • Residential: 2,800 dwelling units (mixed housing types) • Retail: 190,000 square feet • Office: 60,000 square feet • Public: 550 pupil elementary school Using traffic generation figures from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, 60i Edition, the applicant projects traffic impacts for the development in terms of three phases that correspond with years 2006, 2008, and 2015, respectively. For the purposes of the TIA, 2015 represents the year in which project build out will occur. The TIA indicates that at project build out, the planned uses will result in the generation of 25,178 new average daily trips (ADT). The total ADT generated by the development is projected by phase as follows: • Phase I (Year 2006): 10,570 ADT • Phase II (Year 2008): 17,699 ADT • Phase III (Year 2015): 25,178 ADT The new trips generated by the development will be absorbed by an external road network consisting of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), and the Exit 317 interchange of Interstate 81. This external network will be linked to the development via a proffered major collector, or "spine," road. The major collector road is the principal organizing component of the project's internal transportation system, and will ultimately consist of four travel lanes that will bisect the development and connect Old Charles Town Road and Martinsburg Pike. (See Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) The applicant has proffered to phase construction of the major collector road pursuant to trip volume benchmarks that will be measured through actual traffic counts recorded at the entrance to the development. As enumerated by the proposed proffer, the major collector road and related improvements will be planned, designed, and implemented when the traffic counts reach 80% of specified trip volume benchmarks. Each benchmark triggers development of a particular section of the major collector road REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 8 August 1, 2003 and/or associated improvements. Moreover, the proffer indicates that construction of said improvements will be completed within eighteen (18) months of attainment of the 80% volume figure. (See Proffer Statement, p. 10, Section E) Based upon the proffered trip volume benchmarks, the incremental construction of the major collector road will occur in relation to the three overall transportation phases. as follows: • Phase I (2006): Fully constructed within development boundaries - four (4) lane section extending from project entrance at Old Charles Town Road to limits of the project. • Phase II (2008): Extension of two (2) lane half -section from terminus of four (4) lane section at development limits to Martinsburg Pike; intersection with Martinsburg Pike will be aligned with entrance to Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. • Phase III (2015): Remaining additional lanes constructed between development limits and Martinsburg Pike; construction completed. In addition to construction of the major collector road, the transportation program proffered by the applicant includes signalization of off -site intersections, turn lane additions and lane widening on external roads, and the provision of pedestrian and bicycle lanes. The proffered traffic signalization agreements will involve the intersections of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road, Old Charles Town Road and the major collector road, and the entrance of Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park on Martinsburg Pike, which will ultimately align with the terminus of the major collector road. (See Proffer Statement, p. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11) The analysis anticipates that background traffic in the study area will increase by 5% annually through 2010 and by 3% between 2010 to 2015. Moreover, estimated background conditions assume development of 1,400,000 square feet of commercial and industrial land uses in the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park during the same time period. Background traffic is that which is not generated by the proposed development. The TIA concludes that the improvements proffered by the applicant will ensure Level of Service (LOS) Category "C" conditions or better on study area roads during peak traffic periods throughout Phase I and Phase II. However, with the conclusion of Phase III, at project build out, several study area intersections are projected to function at LOS Category "D" during peak traffic conditions. (See "A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village, " p. 11, 19, & 27). REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 9 August 1, 2003 VDOT Comment All roads providing access to the site will experience "significant measurable impact" from proposed development. However, proffered transportation improvements appear to be adequate to address traffic impacts. (See attached letter dated 02121103 from Ben Lineberry, Jr. P.E., Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer, VDOT Edinburg Residency) Planning Staff Comment The infrastructure policies of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) stipulate that new development should only occur if impacted road systems will function at Level of Service (LOS) Category "C" or better. Indeed, this NELUP provision reinforces the general transportation policies ofthe Comprehensive Policy Plan, which establish LOS Category "C" as the desired condition on roads adjacent to and within new development. The transportation program proffered by the applicant achieves the functional standards established by policy until the latter stages of development, when the combined effect of background traffic growth and new vehicle trips originating from the proposed development yield diminished levels of service. Indeed, at project build out, peak hour LOS Category "D" conditions are shown at several study area intersections, most notably those intersections located at or near the Interstate 81 interchange. B. Historic Resources Impact Analysis Statement (p. 8 - 9): As reported by the applicant, the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey includes one structure located on the subject site, which is identified as the Samuel Byers House (# 34-1124). This structure is identified as potentially significant due to its architectural style. The applicant has proffered to preserve and adaptively reuse this resource as they deem appropriate. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey further includes several potentially significant resources that are located on properties adjoining the subject site. Specifically, the Helm McCann property (# 34-703) and the Milburn Chapel and Cemetery (# 34-950) are located to the west of the site and the Jordan Springs Hotel (# 34-110) is located to the southeast of the site. Also located near the project site is Milburn Road (Route 662), which is identified by the 1995 Frederick County - Winchester Battlefield Network Plan as a significant historic corridor as it provides a linkage between areas associated with the Second and Third Battles of Winchester. The Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) further identifies the Milburn Road corridor as a developmentally sensitive area (DSA). The applicant has suggested that development of the Stephenson Village planned community will not impact the viewsheds associated with these off site resources. The 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia identifies the core battlefield area of Stephenson's Depot on property located immediately adjacent to the subject site. The property containing this resource is not REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 10 August 1, 2003 included in this rezoning application. However, as shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP), the major collector road planned with this project will traverse a portion of core battlefield land. Moreover, the GDP depicts the development of mixed residential land uses adjacent to the core battlefield area. (See Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) C. Sewer and Water Impact Analysis Statement (p. S, 6): At full build -out, the planned residential community is projected to equally impact the public water and sewer system, consuming and conveying approximately 689,000 gallons per day (GPD) of water and wastewater, respectively. Water supply will originate from the Global Chemstone Quarry and be distributed from the Northern Water Treatment Plan via an existing 10-inch water main that will be supplemented by a planned 20-inch line, both of which extend along Martinsburg Pike. At present, this water source is yielding 1.5 million gallons per day (MGD). Sewage conveyance will occur through an 8-inch sewer force main that will flow to the Redbud Run Pump Station, which will convey the project's effluent to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. The Frederick - Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) reports that adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility to accommodate the projected sewage flows of the proposed development. It is noted that all water and sewer infrastructure will be provided by the applicant pursuant to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority's (FCSA) Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan, which was approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2002. Included with this plan is the development of the Lower Hiatt Run Pump Station, a regional facility that the applicant has proffered to construct. 7) Proffer Statement (dated January 8, 2003, revised throtTh April 24, 2003): A proffer analysis report, dated April 16, 2003, was prepared for the applicant delineating staff concerns regarding proffer language, implementation methods, and the structure of the proffer statement. The applicant responded to this report with a revised proffer statement that addressed staff concerns. The proffer statement included with this application is therefore acceptable to staff as a technical document. Should this application be approved, staff is comfortable that the proffer statement will result in the development program outlined by the applicant in the impact analysis statement. A copy of the proffer analysis report is included with the review agency comments attached with this staff report. It is noted that the proffer statement for Stephenson Village is extensive, involving twenty-three distinct sections. Arguably the most critical component of the proffer statement is the Community Design Modification Document, which includes a series of nine requests for modifications to certain provisions ofthe Frederick County Code. The viability of these requests REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village Page 11 August 1, 2003 is dependent upon the approval of an amendment to Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance to allow Code modifications with requests for R4 zoning. This proposed amendment is scheduled for public hearings on the same dates as the subject rezoning application. The remainder of the proffer statement is fundamentally dependant upon the regulatory flexibility sought through the modification document. Given the importance of these requests to the applicant's proffer statement and, therefore, the overall rezoning proposal, staff has provided an overview of the modification process as well as a detailed discussion concerning each request. Following the modification discussion, the remainder of the proffer statement is briefly summarized by section. A. Section 1: Community Design Modification Document (Proffer Statement, p. 2): Back -oho Modification Concept: The applicant initially included a series oftwenty- two requests for waivers from certain requirements of the Frederick County Code ("the Code") applicable to planned residential developments with the proffer statement. The majority of these waiver requests involved provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance and were proposed as a means of facilitating the design plan for Stephenson Village. Exemptions and/or waivers to the requirements of the Code applicable to planned residential developments are currently enabled pursuant to Section 165-72.0. of the Zoning Ordinance, which states: Other regulations. The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article. This provision plainly articulates that an exemption or waiver cannot be legally proposed or considered for a planned residential community except where said exemption is expressly permitted by Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance. The provisions of Article VII limit exemptions to proposals for alternative dimensional requirements and alternative landscaping and buffering plans. As such, the majority of the waiver requests originally sought by the applicant through the proffer statement were determined to not be permitted due to the absence of language in Article VII specifically enabling the desired exemptions. It was recognized that an alternative method would be required for the applicant to achieve the regulatory flexibility necessary for the Stephenson Village design concept. As an option, staff proposed an amendment to Article VII that would expand opportunities for modifications to ordinance provisions applicable to planned residential development. Through this approach, an applicant for R4 zoning would be allowed to seek modifications to any provision of the Code impacting physical development. The applicant would be required to provide justification for the request to include a proposed REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 12 August 1, 2003 alternative - or "modified" - standard in lieu of the ordinance requirement for which the modification was being sought. The applicant would further be expected to identify the need or role of the alternative standard in the overall design concept. A blanket waiver or exemption would not be permitted. As envisioned by staff, following Planning Commission review, the Board of Supervisors would consider and approve each modification request included with an R4 rezoning application on its merits pursuant to the applicant's justification. Moreover, modifications would be considered concurrent with the rezoning application and, if accepted with the proffer statement, the alternative or modified standards would be included as conditions of the rezoning approval. Such legislatively approved modifications would serve as an effective means of accommodating the unique vision expected with a planned residential community while simultaneously assuring the relevance of both the public process and the public purposes of the Code. The proposed amendment would replace the current language of Section 165-72.0. with the following: § 165-72.0. Modifications; applicability of other regulations. (1) An applicant may request as part of an application for rezoning to the R4 District that a modification to specific requirements of the subdivision ordinance, this chapter or other requirements of the Frederick County Code applicable to physical development be granted. The applicant shall demonstrate that the requested modification is necessary or justified in the particular case by a demonstration that the public purpose of these ordinances, as applied to the particular case, would be met to at least an equivalent degree by such modification. The Board of Supervisors may approve or disapprove such request, in whole or in part. (2) The applicant shall provide sufficient information to enable evaluation of the request by the Board of Supervisors. Materials submitted should include or be supplemented by: (a) specification of the code section(s) to be modified and the proposed alternative standard; (b) exhibits demonstrating application of the modified standard such as a detailed plan and/or elevation drawing; and (c) identification of the relationship of the modification to the overall community concept. (3) The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article or modified by the Board of Supervisors through the rezoning process. The applicant accepted this option and staff is processing the proposed ordinance amendment concurrently with this rezoning application. The applicant subsequently condensed the original waivers into nine modification requests. These requests and the REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 13 August 1, 2003 applicant's justification for each are delineated through the Community Design Modification Document, which is included as Exhibit F of this application. If approved, each alternative design standard specified in the proffered Community Design Modification Document will constitute a condition of rezoning approval, and will therefore be incorporated as a provision of the Zoning Ordinance uniquely applicable to Stephenson Village. As with any proffered condition, an adopted alternative design standard may only be changed pursuant to Board of Supervisors approval through the rezoning process delineated in Article II of the Zoning Ordinance. Indeed, unless amended in accord with said provisions, an alternative design standard will apply to development within Stephenson Village in perpetuity, regardless of action subsequent to application approval either amending or deleting the underlying Zoning Ordinance requirement. It is noted that approval of both the proposed ordinance amendment and modification document is critical to the viability of subsequent provisions of the applicant's proffer statement. Indeed, disapproval or alteration of the amendment or any of the proposed modifications will likely necessitate adjustments to the overall development program. Should either the proposed amendment or the requested modifications be disapproved, either in whole or in part, the remainder of the proffer statement and the proffered Generalized Development Plan must be altered to reflect such action prior to further consideration of this application. Community Design Modification Document (Rezoning Exhibit F) • Modification #1 - § 165-71. Mixture of Housing Types Required The R4 District requirements stipulate that no more than 40% of the residential uses in a planned residential community shall consist of duplexes, multiplexes, atrium houses, weak -link townhouses, townhouses, or garden apartments or any combination of said housing types. The applicant is requesting that this standard be modified to allow housing types identified under the townhouse, multi -family, and active adult categories included in the proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" to comprise a maximum of 60% of the residential uses in Stephenson Village. The proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" includes four categories of housing types: single family dwellings, townhouse dwellings, multi -family dwellings, and active adult dwellings. A minimum and maximum ratio is proposed for each category. The employment of such ranges is intended to ensure a mix of housing types while allowing for variation in the ultimate composition of the overall housing mix. Specific housing types are identified under these categories, to include several that are permitted and defined by the current Zoning Ordinance as well as new housing types proposed in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement. (See Proffer Statement, p. 23, 24) REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village Page 14 August 1, 2003 If Modification #1 is approved, the proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" will govern the categorization of housing types and the residential mix for Stephenson Village. (See `Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant 's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The current requirement of § 165-71. ensures that single family detached dwellings will comprise a minimum of 60% of the residential mix in a planned residential community. As proposed by the applicant, non -age restricted single family dwellings will comprise a minimum of 30% and a maximum of 64% of the residential mix of Stephenson Village. In contrast to the current ordinance requirement that yields a housing mix predominated by single family detached units, the applicant's modified standard could result in the opposite scenario, with 51% of the housing in Stephenson Village consisting of townhouse and multi -family unit types. It is noted that the applicant has committed to developing a minimum of 19% of the project with active-adult/age-restricted units, which could be increased to a maximum of 53% of the overall mix. In the event the latter ratio develops, the predominant housing in Stephenson Village would be active-adult/age-restricted, which could develop with either single family or multi -family unit types. • Modification #2 - § 165-69. Permitted Uses, § 165-72.B(2) - Alternative Dimensional Requirement Plan The R4 District requirements allow for all uses permitted in the RP District within the planned residential community. Moreover, the Zoning Ordinance permits the adoption of an alternative dimensional requirement plan for the residential uses planned for the development. The applicant is requesting a modification to the permitted uses section to allow the introduction of new housing types to complement those permitted by the RP District. The new housing unit types are identified in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement, and include the following: carriage house, non - alley carriage house, cottage house, and courtyard cluster. This request also includes modified standards for single family small lot and townhouse units, which are permitted RP District housing types. (See Proffer Statement, p. 23, 24) If Modification #2 is approved, the new housing types identified in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement will be permitted in Stephenson Village pursuant to the dimensional standards delineated in "Rezoning Exhibit F." Moreover, through approval of this modification, alternative dimensional standards will be accepted for single family small lot and townhouse housing types in lieu of the current RP District requirements. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The proposed new housing types represent a notable departure from the typical suburban residential development experienced by Frederick County under RP zoning. Indeed, these housing types and the REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 15 August 1, 2003 accompanying alternative dimensional standards are the foundation for the distinctive residential form envisioned by the applicant for Stephenson Village. It is noted that all relevant review agencies have examined the proposed dimensional standards and determined that said standards satisfy all applicable technical requirements. • Modification #3 - § 165-72.D. Commercial and Industrial Areas, § 165-72.M. Non-residential Land Use Phasing The R4 District requirements stipulate that a minimum of 10% of the gross area of a planned residential community shall be used for business and industrial land uses, and that such uses shall not exceed 50% of the gross land area. Moreover, the Zoning Ordinance requires that each phase of a planned community development shall include a reasonable amount of non-residential land uses. The applicant is requesting that both of these standards be modified to (1) allow a minimum of 4% of the gross area of the proposed planned residential community to be used for business land uses and (2) eliminate the requirement that non-residential uses be integrated throughout the development in favor of centralizing business uses in a single commercial node. The applicant has proffered a development program that allocates approximately 4% of the gross land area for commercial land uses, the majority of which will form a 26- acre commercial center (Land Bay V). The remaining business land uses are planned within the mixed residential area (Land Bay III) and will comprise approximately 7 acres, which are likely to develop with a day care or other service -oriented use. The applicant has guaranteed that a minimum of 60,000 square feet of commercial uses will develop in Stephenson Village, with maximum possible business development comprising 250,000 square feet (190,000 square feet of retail; 60,000 square feet of office). (See Proffer Statement, p. 4, 5, 16, & 17 and Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) If Modification #3 is approved, the applicant will be permitted to limit commercial development to 4% of the gross land area of the planned residential community, which equates to approximately 33 acres devoted to commercial land uses. Additionally, this modification will relieve the applicant of the requirement that each phase of development include non-residential land uses, thereby enabling commercial development to occur entirely within a centralized node. Approval of this modification is necessary for acceptance of both the applicant's proffered development program delineated in Section 3 of the Proffer Statement, and the proffered Generalized Development Plan dated March 2003. (See "RezoningExhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The non-residential component of a planned community development is necessary to achieve a dynamic mixed use land use pattern that facilitates efficiencies of form and function impossible through the one dimensional REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 16 August 1, 2003 residential focus of RP zoning. The R4 District therefore requires a mix of retail, business/office, and light industrial land uses, which, when integrated with a mix of housing types, provides internal service and employment opportunities accessible via the community's multi -modal transportation system. The non-residential ratios required by the ordinance are intended to ensure that the advantages of planned community developments are maximized for both the residents of such communities and the County as a whole. Without a diverse array of non-residential uses that includes sufficient employment -oriented business and industry, the development program for Stephenson Village will fail to achieve a land use pattern that is distinguishable from other suburban residential areas of Frederick County. • Modification #4 - § 165-72.F. Recreational Facilities The R4 District requirements stipulate that one (1) recreational unit be provided for every thirty (30) units developed within a planned residential community. The applicant is requesting a modification to allow the monetary value of a "tot lot" facility to represent the equivalent of one recreational unit. This value figure would be applied to the recreational facilities being proffered by the applicant as a method to quantify ordinance compliance. The applicant is not seeking a modification of the recreational facility ratio required by the ordinance. Rather, the applicant is proposing a means for evaluating the value of the proffered recreational facilities vis- a-vis the required ratio. If Mollification #4 is approi,ed, the monetary value of a tot lot facility will be the equivalent of one recreational unit for the purposes of determining the number of recreational units represented by the applicant's planned recreational facilities. (See `Rezoning Exhibit F"for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: It is noted that the RP District requirements of the Zoning Ordinance identify a tot lot as an example of a single recreational unit. No comment has been formally submitted by the Department of Parks and Recreation concerning the requested modification. • Modification #5 - § 165-72.I. Road Access § 165-29.A.(14) Motor Vehicle Access § 144-24.C., C.2(a), C.2.(b) Lot Access The R4 District requirements stipulate that a planned community development be developed with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Moreover, both the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance limit private road access only to those developments comprised exclusively of single family small lot and multi family housing. The applicant is requesting a modification of these road access standards to (1) allow for a complete system of private streets within the active -adult portion of the community REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 17 August 1, 2003 (Land Bay IV), and (2) permit private access roads extending from public streets to serve a maximum of five dwelling units, or ten dwelling units if the private access road connects two public streets, within the mixed residential land bay (Land Bay III). The applicant proposes that all private roads will be constructed to meet or exceed VDOT public road standards. The remainder of the project will be served by public roads as required by ordinance. If Modification #5 is approved, the active adult portion of Stephenson Village will be allowed to develop with a complete system of private roads, regardless of the mix of housing types provided. Moreover, in the mixed residential portion of the community, private access roads will be permitted to serve no more than five (5) single family dwelling units, or a maximum of ten (10) units if the private access road connects two public streets. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The maintenance of private roads and access ways will be the exclusive responsibility of the property owners through the governing Homeowner's Association (HOA). The granting of this modification would enable the creation of "flag" or "pipestem" lots, which can cause confusion for property owners and result in administrative challenges for staff. At present, private road access to single family lots is permitted only in the context of minor rural subdivisions in the RA (Rural Areas) District. A minor rural subdivision involves no more than three (3) lots. It is noted that the relevant review agencies have been consulted regarding the dimensional standards proposed for the private roads and access ways, and are satisfied that such standards will meet applicable technical requirements. • Modiflcation #6 - § 165-72.M. Phasing The R4 District requirements stipulate that a phasing plan must be submitted that identifies the year in which each phase of development will be completed. The applicant is requesting modification of this requirement to eliminate the need to specify the concluding year for each phase and to instead enable phasing of land bay development to be determined at the time of master plan approval. The applicant has committed to completing phases in a specified sequence in those cases where a sequence or schedule is included with the Master Development Plan. However, the applicant is seeking greater flexibility to develop multiple phases simultaneously and to contract with a variety of builders who will operate on independent schedules. The phasing of development of non -age restricted dwelling units will occur at an annual rate of 8% pursuant to Section 2 of the Proffer Statement. (See Proffer Statement, p. 3) If Modification #6 is approved, land bay development within Stephenson Village will not follow a schedule or plan delineating the overall sequence of development or the concluding year of a given land bay's development. Phasing will be governed REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 18 August 1, 2003 exclusively by the proffered limitation on permits for non -age restricted dwelling units specified in Section 2 of the Proffer Statement. Said provision stipulates that non -age restricted dwelling units will be developed at a rate not to exceed 8% annually. There is no phasing proposed for the active adult/age restricted housing component of the project. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicants justification) Planning Staff Comment: The applicant has proffered phasing mechanisms for development of the non -age restricted residential component of the project as well as the planned transportation system. Thus, the overall pace of development is clearly defined, as is the timing and sequence of improvements comprising the proposed transportation system. However, pursuant to this modification request, the progression of development within each land bay and the coordination of improvements during "multi -phase" development will remain undetermined until Master Development Plan (MDP) approval. (See Proffer Statement, p. 3, 10, & 11) • Modirication #7 - § 165-72.G.(1) Buffers and Screening Road efficiency buffers are utilized to lessen the impacts of interstate, arterial, primary, and major collector roads on adjoining residential land uses. The R4 District requirements stipulate that road efficiency buffers shall be provided in accordance with the specifications of § 165-37 of the Zoning Ordinance. As such the inactive portion of a road efficiency buffer must be a minimum of forty (40) feet in depth, measured from the edge of the right-of-way of a major collector road. The inactive buffer area must contain the screening elements of a full buffer as defined by ordinance. A road efficiency buffer also requires an active buffer component comprised of forty (40) feet, for a total buffer distance of eighty (80) feet. The applicant is requesting modification of the road efficiency buffer requirements to allow variations in the width of the inactive buffer area required adjacent to the planned major collector road. Pursuant to the applicant's illustrative renderings, the inactive buffer width would be a minimum of twenty five (25) feet. The applicant has indicated that the screening requirements of the ordinance would be exceeded where buffer distance is reduced. If Modification #7 is approi,erl, the road efficiency buffer required adjacent to the planned major collector road will include an inactive portion that varies in width from a maximum of forty (40) feet to a minimum of twenty (25) feet. Although the distance buffer would be reduced in size, the screening comprising the inactive buffer area would exceed standard ordinance requirements. (See `Rezoning Exhibit F"for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The effective combination of distance and screening is critical to the mitigation of traffic impacts on adjoining residential uses. As proposed by the applicant, the significant enhancement of screening to off -set the reduction in size of the inactive buffer is essential to ensure the mitigative value of the road REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 19 August 1, 2003 efficiency buffer. If granted, this modification would not impact the inactive portion of the buffer, which the applicant will be required to provide as specified by ordinance. • Modification #8 - § 165-68. Rezoning; Procedure The R4 District requirements stipulate that a complete Master Development Plan (MDP) shall be submitted with an application for R4 zoning. The applicant is requesting modification of this request to allow submission of a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) at the time of rezoning instead of the complete MDP. The GDP would identify the relationship of the project site to the surrounding transportation network and adjoining land uses. Moreover, the GDP would provide a general layout for the proposed development, organizing the entire acreage into land bays identified for either residential or non-residential land uses. The GDP would further include a table delineating the approximate size of each land bay as well as housing types and ratios for residential land bays. The applicant would submit MDP applications for review subsequent to rezoning approval, at which time greater detail concerning land bay development would be provided. (See Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) If Modification #8 is approved, a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) will be processed with this application instead of a detailed Master Development Plan (MDP). MDP submission would follow rezoning approval pursuant to the application sequence typical for development in other zoning districts as outlined by the Zoning Ordinance. Planning Staff Comment: The applicant has include a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) with this application and is seeking the requested modification pursuant to discussions with staff. The level of detail required with a complete Master Development Plan (MDP) is difficult to provide with a rezoning application when considering a project of the scope and scale of Stephenson Village. A proffered GDP will effectively represent the overall development concept and can sufficiently guide the implementation of proffered conditions via subsequent development applications. • Modification #9 - §165-133.B. Master Development Plan, Contiguous Land §165-141.A.(8) Master Development Plan, Contents § 165-141.B. Q,(4),(8) Master Development Plan, R4 Contents The referenced provisions of the Zoning Ordinance govern the required scope and contents of a Master Development Plan (MDP). Collectively, these provisions stipulate that the entirety of a project site shall be included and planned under a single MDP. Citing the size and scope of the Stephenson Village project, the applicant is requesting modification of the referenced provisions to enable the submission of a REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 20 August 1, 2003 series of MOP applications to accommodate the incremental development of Stephenson Village over time. Each successive MDP application will provide aggregate development data for the project, effectively tabulating the status of the project relative to the proffered development program and other proffered conditions. The proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) will serve as the guide for all MDP submissions. If Modification #9 is approved, the applicant will be permitted to submit a series of Master Development Plan (MDP) applications to address the incremental development of the project. This process would occur in lieu of a singular MDP accommodating the "total development" of the planned community. Each MDP would provide aggregate development data thereby ensuring effective monitoring of project status and conformity with proffered conditions. (See "Rezoning ExhibitF" for applicant's justification). Planning Staff Comment: The proffering of a Generalized Development Plan (GDP) is appropriate for a project the size of Stephenson Village. A series of Master Development Plan (MDP) submissions will facilitate the incremental implementation of the development program that will be conceptually represented by the GDP and detailed by the proffer statement. Indeed, through such an approach, each MDP will serve as a discernable "building block" toward completion ofthe overall development program. The modified process requested by the applicant would arguably not compromise the comprehensive orientation of the MDP program. B. Section 2: Phasing Plan to Minimize Sudden Impacts on County Services (Proffer Statement, p. 2, 3) Additional Proffer Payment - The applicant has proffered to double the monetary contribution to Frederick County for public schools for each student that exceeds "a cumulative yearly total increase of 60 students per year." The additional monetary payment of $3,925 will be adjusted every seven years to reflect the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Limitation on Permits - The applicant has proffered that no more than 2,800 residential units will be developed within Stephenson Village. This unit limitation results in a maximum gross residential density of 3.40 units per acre. The applicant has further proffered to phase development of the non -age restricted units at a rate of 8% per year. Active adult/age restricted housing and elderly housing are excluded from the phasing program. C. Section 3: Uses, Density and Mix of Housing Types (Proffer Statement, p. 3, 4, 5) Land Bay Breakdown Table - The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan (GDP) that includes five distinct land bays. The land uses planned REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 21 August 1, 2003 for these land bays have been proffered through the Land Bay Breakdown Table, which sets the fundamental parameters for the development. The table may be summarized as follows: Land Bay I - Elementary School (land dedication); Land Bay II - Public Park (land dedication); Land Bay III - Mixed Residential (mix of single family detached, townhouse, and multi -family units); Land Bay IV - Active Adult (mix of unit types); Land Bay V - Commercial Center. The table further identifies the minimum and maximum ratios permitted for the housing categories proffered within each land bay. • The total commercial area is proffered to consist of 33 acres that will be located within Land Bays III and V, respectively. It is noted that the business uses planned for Land Bay III, which is the mixed residential area, are intended to be neighborhood -scale service -oriented uses. The planned 26-acre commercial center will serve as the principal commercial node for Stephenson Village and will be located within Land Bay V. • Open Space - The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel, both of which are proffered resource protection areas, total approximately 125 acres. The applicant has proffered to disperse the remaining 121.5 acres of required open space throughout the four residential land bays. • Active Adult and/or Affordable Housing for the Elderly - The applicant has proffered that active adult housing may comprise up to 53% of the total housing units in Stephenson Village, which, if developed to this maximum ratio, would involve development of active adult units in both Land Bay III and Land Bay IV. Regardless of the ratio of active adult units, in no case shall the total number of housing units exceed 2,800. • Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial Land Uses - The applicant has proffered to exclude all uses permitted in the B3 (Industrial Transition) and M1 (Light Industry) Zoning Districts, unless such uses are otherwise permitted in the B 1 (Neighborhood Business), B2 (General Business), or RP (Residential Performance) Zoning Districts. Truck stops are expressly prohibited. D. Section 4: Applicant to Pay 100% of Capital Facilities (Proffer Statement, p. S, 6) • Fiscal Impact Model - The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model demonstrated a fiscal impact to capital facilities in the amount of $5,327 per residential unit. The applicant has proffered to accommodate 100% of this figure through a combination of monetary contributions and land donations. It is noted that land donations are assigned a value of $30,000 per acre. • Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All proffered monetary contributions will be adjusted every seven (7) years to reflect the Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All Urban Consumers (Current Series). • Active Adult Contributions & Premium - Capital facilities that are not directly impacted by active adult housing, such as public schools, will not receive a monetary contribution for such housing. However, the applicant has proffered to pay a 50% REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 22 August 1, 2003 premium on proffer contributions for fire and rescue per each active adult unit, in excess of the impact figure identified by the impact model. The applicant has also proffered to pay a 100% premium for fire and rescue per each elderly housing unit. These premiums are intended by the applicant to off -set the increased demand on fire and rescue services common with such populations. E. Section 5: Monetary Contribution to Develop Heritage Tourism (Proffer Statement, p. 7) Matching Funds - The applicant has proffered to make a direct contribution to Shenandoah University Historical and Tourism Center in the amount of $75,000. This contribution will be made in the form of matching funds intended to promote heritage tourism. Implementation Note: The above -referenced contribution is not enforceable by Frederick County and will occur as a private transaction between the applicant and Shenandoah University Historical and Tourism Center. F. Section 6: Monetary Contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. (Proffer Statement, p. 7) Direct Contribution - The applicant has proffered to make a direct contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. in the amount of $200,000. The proffered funding will be dispersed in four installments pursuant to development thresholds identified by proffer. This contribution is intended to mitigate the impact of the development on volunteer fire and rescue services. Implementation Note: The above -referenced contribution is not enforceable by Frederick County and will occur as a private transaction between the applicant and Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. G. Section 7: Multi -Modal Transportation Improvements (Proffer Statement, p. 7, 8, 9, 10, & 11) Major Collector Road - The applicant has proffered to dedicate an 80 foot right-of- way and construct a major collector road from the project entrance on Old Charles Town Road through Stephenson Village, and across properties currently owned by McCann and Omps to U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike). The major collector road will ultimately be completed as a four lane boulevard constructed pursuant to VDOT standards. The applicant has proffered to include landscaped medians and bicycle lanes with the major collector road. Major Collector Road Construction - The major collector road will be contructed in phases, beginning with its development within Stephenson Village as a two lane half - section. The major collector road will be constructed to its ultimate four -lane configuration in increments, the development of which will be triggered by a series of traffic volume thresholds measured through trip counters located at the project REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 23 August 1, 2003 entrance. The applicant has proffered that design of improvements will occur when 80% of a given volume threshold is reached and the completion of improvements will occur within 18 months of the date of the 80% measurement. • Active Adult Gated Community - The applicant has proffered that the entrance to the active adult section of the development will be gated. The applicant intends to serve the active adult community exclusively with private roads constructed to VDOT public road standards. • Old Charles Town Road Improvements - The applicant has proffered to complete all necessary entrance improvements at the intersection of the major collector road and Old Charles Town Road during the first phase of development. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to execute signalization agreements with VDOT for the intersections of Old Charles Town Road and Route 11 and the major collector road. Actual signalization will occur when warranted by VDOT. Pursuant to a specified traffic volume threshold, the applicant has proffered to bond and commence construction of a three -lane section of Old Charles Town Road from the Stephenson Village entrance to Route 11. • Interstate 81 Interchange Improvement Contribution - The applicant has proffered to contribute $50,000 in matching funds for use by either VDOT or Frederick County for improvements to the Interstate 81 - Route 11 interchange at Exit 317. H. Section 8: School and Ball Field Sites, Community Facilities and Public Use Areas (Proffer Statement, p. 11, 12) • School Site - The applicant has proffered to dedicate 20 acres of land to the Frederick County School Board for use as a public school site. This site is shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) as Land Bay I. The applicant intends to apply this acreage to the open space requirement for the development. • Soccer and Ballfield Site - The applicant has proffered to dedicate 24 acres of land to Frederick County or such other entity as Frederick County designates for public recreation sites. This site is shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) as Land Bay II. The applicant intends to apply this acreage to the open space requirement for the development. I. Section 9: Recreational Amenities and Linear Park (Proffer Statement, p. 13, 1 4) • Recreational Center - The applicant has proffered to construct a recreation center within the mixed residential area (Land Bay III). This facility may be located anywhere within said land bay at the discretion of the applicant. However, the location of the recreation center will be identified on the Master Development Plan (MDP) applicable to this portion of the development. The applicant has proffered that the recreation center will include a bathhouse and a 6-lane, 25 meter competition swimming pool. This facility is intended for use by residents of the development. The bonding and completion of this amenity will occur pursuant to development REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 24 August 1, 2003 thresholds specified by proffer. Active Adult Recreation Center - The applicant has proffered to construct a recreation center within the active adult land bay (Land Bay IV) for use by residents of the active adult community. The bonding and completion of this amenity will occur pursuant to development thresholds specified by proffer. Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk System - The applicant has proffered to construct a pedestrian trail or sidewalk system to link the recreation centers to the surrounding neighborhoods. Linear Park Trail - The applicant has proffered to dedicate a fifteen -foot wide trail easement to the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department for the purposes of a linear park trail. The trail will be located within the Hiatt Run Corridor and extend along the length of the corridor, a distance of approximately 3,800 linear feet, as depicted on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP). The applicant has proffered to construct a six-foot wide asphalt or concrete trail within the dedicated easement. The applicant intends to apply the area of the Hiatt Run Corridor, to include the trail, to the open space requirement of the development. J. Section 10: Active Adult Age -Restricted Housing (Proffer Statement, p. 14, 1 S) Deed Language - The applicant has included the language to be recorded with the deeds for designated active adult age -restricted properties. Implementation Note - The provisions included in this section are not enforceable by Frederick County. Implementation of rules and regulations concerning the occupancy of designated active adult age -restricted units is the sole responsibility of the applicant and/or the governing Homeowner's Association. K. Section 11: Affordable Housing for the Elderly (Proffer Statement, p. 15) Provision of Affordable Housing for the Elderly - The applicant has proffered to develop affordable housing for the elderly at such time that 50% of the proffered retail space (95,000 square feet) has been developed and pursuant to all necessary state and federal approvals. Moreover, such housing will only be constructed if the project qualifies for government funding dispersed through the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program or equivalent. The applicant has proffered that should such funding prove unattainable, any units planned for affordable elderly housing will be developed as active adult age -restricted units. L. Section 12: Preservation of Historical and Cultural Resources (Proffer Statement, p. 16) Byers House - The applicant has proffered to preserve the potentially significant Samuel Byers House. The applicant has reserved the right to adaptively reuse the REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 25 August 1, 2003 structure as they deem appropriate. • Cemeteries - The applicant has proffered to identify and preserve any cemeteries found on the project site. M. Section 13: Commercial Center (Proffer Statement, p. 16, 17) • Commercial Center Location and Development - The applicant has proffered to locate a commercial center on land identified as Land Bay V on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP). The applicant has proffered a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial land use in Stephenson Village, of which the majority will be located in the commercial center. Smaller commercial nodes maybe located within the mixed residential land bay (Land Bay III). • Minimum Commercial Space Guaranteed - The applicant has proffered to construct 60,000 square feet of commercial space within the commercial center no later than the issuance of the 1,500"' non -age restricted residential building permit. The applicant has further proffered to complete development of this space within 18 months of commencement of construction. The applicant has attached two caveats to the timing of construction of the proffered commercial space. Notably, the applicant reserves the right to delay commencement of commercial construction for a two year period beyond the date of issuance of the 1,5001h residential building permit should either of the following occur: (1) an elementary school has not been constructed within the community; or, (2) a building permit is obtained for development of a new grocery store within a three mile radius of the planned Stephenson Village commercial center location. N. Section 14: Rent Free County Office Space (Proffer Statement, p. 17) • Office Space - The applicant has proffered to provide up to 2,500 square feet of shell space for a ten (10) year period within the commercial center for the location of a public service satellite facility for Frederick County. Per the proffer, Frederick County must build out and occupy the space within two (2) years of completion of the base building. Should such occupancy fail to occur with the two year time period, the space will revert back to the applicant. O. Section 15: Community Design for a Strong Sense of Place (Proffer Statement, p. 17, 18, 19) Design - The applicant has proffered to coordinate design to ensure aesthetic continuity throughout the development. Such continuity will be achieved through the use of uniformly applied custom treatments, such as: custom street sign and fixtures, standardized fencing, and community color themes. Also, the applicant has proffered to employ decorative treatments at all entrance monuments. No illustratives detailing REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 26 August 1, 2003 design features are provided with the proffer statement. • Architecture - The applicant has proffered to employ the architectural styling depicted on the housing unit type exhibits for the following housing unit types: carriage house, non -alley carriage house, cottage house, and courtyard cluster. It is further proffered that other housing types utilized in the development will incorporate compatible architectural treatments. • Fire Protection System - The applicant has proffered to install 13-D type sprinkler systems in all courtyard cluster and cottage houses as well as in the garages accompanying these housing types. P. Section 16: Environmental Features and Habitat Preservation (Proffer Statement, P. 19, 20, 21) • Buffer and Conservation Easements - The applicant has proffered a one -hundred (100) foot wide "non -disturbance" buffer adjacent to each side of Hiatt Run and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel. This buffer will be located wholly outside of platted lots. The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel are located as shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) and are designated by the applicant as resource protection areas. • Flood Plain Buffer - No platted lot will be located closer than twenty (20) feet to the limits of the 100-year flood plain. The ten (10) feet of this buffer located immediately adjacent to the flood plain will remain undisturbed. Should this area be disturbed during development, it will be replanted as specified by proffer. • Hiatt Run Corridor - As noted above, the Hiatt Run Corridor is identified as a resource protection area by the applicant. The applicant has proffered a minimum buffer of twenty (20) feet adjacent to all wetland preservation areas, which are generally coincident with or in close proximity to the Hiatt Run Corridor. The vegetation located on the south side of the corridor will be preserved and/or reforested pursuant to a Forest Management Plan that will be developed with input from the Virginia Department of Forestry. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to install native plantings on the north side of the corridor in an effort to protect riparian resources and enhance wildlife and bird habitats. • Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel - As noted above, the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel is identified as a resource protection area by the applicant. The applicant has proffered to provide native plantings within this area to form an upland buffer. Individual platted lots may be located within this zone; however, clearing and grading will be prohibited via restrictive covenants, with the Homeowner's Association bearing responsibility for enforcement of said restrictions. • Forest Management Plan - The applicant has proffered to prepare a Forest Stewardship and Management Plan with technical assistance from the Virginia Department of Forestry. This plan will identify native vegetation and tree clusters to be preserved on the site and delineate resource management practices to ensure effective conservation. REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 27 August 1, 2003 Q. Section 17: Community Curbside Trash Collection (Proffer Statement, A 21, 22) • Commercial Trash Collection - The applicant has proffered that the proposed development will be served by private trash removal contractors. The applicant intends to assign full responsibility for enforcement of this proffer to the Homeowners Association. R. Section 18: Water and Sewer Improvements in the Stephenson Area (Proffer Statement, p. 22) • Pump Station Construction - The applicant has proffered to dedicate land for a regional pump station pursuant to the selection of said property by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). The applicant has further proffered to construct the pump station prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit in Stephenson Village. • Infrastructure Construction - The applicant has proffered to construct all water and sewer lines required to serve private land uses within Stephenson Village in accordance with the provisions of the FCSA Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to extend adequately sized water and sewer lines to the property boundary of all land dedicated for public uses. S. Section 19: Comprehensive Plan Conformity (Proffer Statement, A 22) • Public Facilities - Acceptance of the proffer statement will serve as the formal authorization for the provision and location of those public uses and facilities referenced in the proffer statement and on the Generalized Development Plan (GDP), to include the extension of water and sewer lines, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.2-2232 and the Frederick County Code. No further review for Comprehensive Plan conformance would be necessary. T. Section 20: Creation of Homeowners Association(s) (Proffer Statement, P. 23) • This proffer provision acknowledges the applicant's responsibility to establish one or more Homeowners Associations for Stephensons Village. U. Section 21: Proffered Housing Types (Proffer Statement, P. 23, 24) • Unique Housing Types - The applicant has proffered the inclusion of several housing types that will be new to the Frederick County market. Specifically, the following unique housing types will be developed: Carriage House, Non -Alley Carriage House, REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 28 August 1, 2003 Cottage House, Courtyard Cluster, and Elderly Housing. The applicant has also proffered alternative dimensional standards for single family detached and townhouse housing types, which the applicant refers to as "modified single family detached" and "modified townhouse attached dwelling." V. Section 22: Streetscape Design and Landscaping (Proffer Statement, p 24, 25) Major Collector Road Landscaping - The applicant has proffered to provide landscaped areas on each side of the major collector road as detailed in Exhibit D. Such landscaping is proposed coincident with a request for modification of the road efficiency buffer required by ordinance. The applicant has proffered to install landscaping along the roadway as specified by proffer. W. Section 23: Community Signage Program (Proffer Statement, P. 25, 26) • Entrance Signage - The applicant has proffered dimensions for the monument style entrance signs to Stephenson Village. Moreover, entry features distinguishing the neighborhoods within the community will be provided. No illustratives have been provided for such signage. • Freestanding Commercial Signs - The applicant has proffered that freestanding commercial signs shall be monument style and will be limited in height to twenty (20) feet. Such signs shall be spaced a minimum of one hundred (100) feet. Commercial signage will incorporate design elements comprising the entrance features of surrounding neighborhoods. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 07/16/03 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This application is a request to rezone approximately 821 acres of RA -zoned property to the R4 District to facilitate development of a planned residential community consisting of 2,800 dwelling units and 250,000 square feet of commercial uses with 44 acres dedicated for public uses. The Comprehensive Policy Plan specifically addresses the planned land use of the subject parcels through the policies adopted with the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). These policies recommend the establishment of industrial land use on the parcels. The requested rezoning is, therefore, inconsistent with the adopted land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. It is important to reiterate that the modifications requested by the applicant are essential to the viability of the proffered development program. Absent these modifications, the development parameters proposed for Stephenson Village will not comply with the requirements of the R4 District. REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 29 August 1, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 07/16/03 MEETING: The required public hearing was conducted following presentations by Planning Department staff and the applicant. Numerous citizens addressed the Planning Commission, offering both support and opposition concerning the proposed rezoning. The public hearing was formally concluded following the Commission's receipt of citizen comments and the applicant was given an opportunity to respond. At the request of the applicant, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to table further consideration and final action regarding the proposed rezoning for thirty (30) days. The subject application was therefore scheduled as a public meeting item on the agenda of the Planning Commission's August 20, 2003 meeting. It is noted that Planning Commission Chairman Charles DeHaven abstained from the Commission's deliberations and action regarding this application. Also, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner Robert Morris was absent from the meeting. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Planning Director DATE: June 11, 2003 RE: Public Hearing - Proposed Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, R4 - Plamied Residential Community District; Section 165-72.0., Other Regulations The recent effort by a landowner to prepare a rezoning application for R4 (Plamied Residential Community) zoning has revealed the important role of regulatory flexibility in the design of mixed use projects. The current R4 District standards provide latitude for applicants to employ innovative design techniques and maximize the benefits of planned development, to include the mixing of housing types and choices and the integration of land uses. Indeed, the current R4 ordinance establishes an appropriate framework for the development of sustainable communities wherein one may live, work, and play. It is acknowledged that additional latitude may be necessary for some applicants to realize their unique vision for a planned residential community. At present, exemptions and/or waivers to the requirements of the Frederick County Code applicable to plamled residential communities are enabled pursuant to Section 165-72.0. of the Zoning Ordinance, which states: Other regulations. The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article. This provision plainly articulates that an exemption of waiver cannot be legally proposed or considered for a planned residential community except where said exemption is expressly permitted by Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance. The provisions of Article VII limit exemptions to proposals for alternative dimensional requirements and alternative landscaping and buffering plans. An alternative method would therefore be required to provide an R4 applicant with additional flexibility to pursue design innovations not contemplated by the current ordinance. As an option, staff has proposed an amendment to Article VII that would provide opportunities for modifications to ordinance provisions applicable to planned residential communities. Through this approach, an 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 applicant for R4 zoning would be allowed to seek modifications to any provision of the Code impacting physical development. The applicant would be required to provide justification for the request to include a proposed alternative - or "modified" - standard in lieu of the ordinance requirement for which the modification is being sought. The applicant would fiirther be expected to identify the need or role of the alternative standard in the overall design concept. A blanket waiver or exemption would not be permitted. As envisioned by staff, following Planning Commission review, the Board of Supervisors would consider and approve each modification request included with an R4 rezoning application on its merits pursuant to the applicant's justification. Moreover, modifications would be considered concurrent with the rezoning application and, if accepted with the proffer statement, the alternative or modified standards would be included as conditions of the rezoning approval. The legislative approval of modifications would both accommodate and codify the innovation of the applicant while simultaneously assuring the relevance of both the public process and the public purposes of the Code. The proposed amendment should be considered on its own merit, as an independent measure intended to improve the R4 ordinance for future use. Indeed, regardless of the applicability of this proposal to the pending Stephenson Village application, staff contends that an enhanced modification process is appropriate in the limited context of planned residential community projects. Included with this memorandum is the current text of Section 165-72.0. as well as the proposed amendment, which, if approved, would replace the existing language in its entirety. Also attached for your reference is the complete text of Article VII. The proposed amendment is being presented as a public hearing item. Staff is seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter. CMM/bad Attaclunents Proposed Amendment to the Frederick County Code Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, R4 - Planned Residential Community District; Section 165-72.0., Other Regulations Section 165-72.0. - Current Text: 0. Other regulations. The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article. Section 165-72.0. - Amended Text (replaces current text in its entireo: 0. Modifications; applicability of other regulations. (1) An applicant may request as part of an application for rezoning to the R4 District that a modification to specific requirements of the subdivision ordinance, this chapter or other requirements of the Frederick County Code applicable to physical development be granted. The applicant shall demonstrate that the requested modification is necessary or justified in the particular case by a demonstration that the public purpose of these ordinances, as applied to the particular case, would be met to at least an equivalent degree by such modification. The Board of Supervisors may approve or disapprove such request, in whole or in part. (2) The applicant shall provide sufficient information to enable evaluation of the request by the Board of Supervisors. Materials submitted should include or be supplemented by: (a) specification of the code section(s) to be modified and the proposed alternative standard; (b) exhibits demonstrating application of the modified standard such as a detailed plan and/or elevation drawing; and (c) identification of the relationship of the modification to the overall community concept. (3) The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article or modified by the Board of Supervisors through the rezoning process. UAChds\Common\R4 Amendment.wpd § 165-66 ZONING § 165-68 (3) Provisions shall be made to incorporate all phases or sections of the planned development under one homeowners' association/corporation. B. In order to provide sufficient, safe access, the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors may require that the phases be arranged so that essential street entrances to the development are provided in the initial phases of the development. ARTICLE VII R4 Residential Planned Community District § 165-67. Intent. The intention of the Residential Planned Community District is to provide for a mixture of housing types and uses within a carefully planned setting. All land to be contained within the Residential Planned Community District shall be included within an approved master development plan. The layout, phasing, density and intensity of development is determined through the adoption of the master development plan by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Special care is taken in the approval of the master development plan to ensure that the uses on the land are arranged to provide for compatibility of uses, to provide environmental protection and to avoid adverse impacts on surrounding properties and facilities. The district is intended to create new neighborhoods with an appropriate balance between residential, employment and service uses. Innovative design is encouraged. Special care is taken in the approval of R4 developments to ensure that necessary facilities, roads and improvements are available or provided to support the R4 development. Planned community developments shall only be approved in conformance with the policies in the Comprehensive Plan. § 165-68. Rezoning procedure. In order to have land rezoned to the R4 District, a master development plan, meeting all requirements of Article XVII of this chapter, shall be submitted with the rezoning application. The rezoning shall be reviewed and approved following the rezoning procedures described by this chapter, including procedures for impact analysis and conditional zoning. In adopting the rezoning, the master development plan submitted will be accepted as a condition 16599 10 - 25 - 2001 • G § 165-68 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-70 proffered for the rezoning. The master development plan review procedures described by Article XVII must also be completed concurrently with or following the consideration of the rezoning. A. Impact analysis. Impact analysis, as required by this chapter, shall be used to evaluate all potential impacts, including impacts on surrounding lands, the environment and on public facilities and services. B. Land dedication. Land shall be dedicated in planned community developments for roads and facilities necessary to serve the development as described by the Comprehensive Plan, the Capital Improvements Program and adopted road improvement programs. C. Addition of land. The Board of Supervisors may approve the addition of land to an approved planned community through the procedures set forth in this chapter for the original approval of a planned community development. § 165-69. Permitted uses. All uses are allowed in the R4 Residential Planned Community District that are allowed in the following zoning districts: RP Residential Performance District B1 Neighborhood Business District B2 Business General District B3 Industrial Transition District M1 Light Industrial District § 165-70. Conditional uses. Uses listed as conditional uses shall not require a conditional use permit, but all uses shall meet the specific requirements set forth in this chapter for such uses. 16600 10 - 25 - 2001 § 165-71 ZONING § 165-72 § 165-71. Mixture of housing types required. Each planned community shall be expected to contain a mixture of housing types that is typical for existing and planned residential neighborhoods in Frederick County. No more than 40% of the area of portions of the planned community designated for residential uses shall be used for any of the following housing types: duplexes, multiplexes, atrium houses, weak -link townhouses, townhouses or garden apartments or any combination of those housing types. § 165-72. Design requirements. A. Minimum size. No planned community master development plan nor rezoning to the Residential Planned Community District shall be approved for less than 100 contiguous acres. B. Dimensional requirements. (1) Areas shall be specifically designated for each different use on the master development plan. Within those areas, the uses shall meet the applicable dimensional requirements set forth for those uses in the RP, B1, B2 and M1 Zoning Districts. (2) Alternative dimensional requirement plan. An alternative dimensional plan may be included with the master development plan for the development. This plan shall describe a system of dimensional requirements for all planned uses in the development. When these dimensional requirements are approved, they shall constitute enforceable amendments to this chapter, applying to the land included in the development, and shall replace other dimensional requirements contained in this chapter. Such alternative dimensional requirements shall be based on general concepts described by the plan submitted. The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors shall only approve an alternative plan if the plan meets all of the intentions of this chapter, conforms to policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and follows generally accepted good planning practices. [Added 6-9-19931 C. Residential density. The maximum allowed gross density for residences in the planned community development shall be four units per acre. 16601 10 - 25 - 2001 • • § 165-72 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-72 D. Commercial and industrial areas. The areas used for commercial or industrial uses shall not exceed 50% of the gross area of the total planned community. Sufficient commercial and industrial areas shall be provided to meet the needs of the planned community, to provide an appropriate balance of uses and to lessen the overall impact of the planned community on Frederick County. A minimum of 10% of the gross area of the project shall be used for business and industrial uses. E. Open space. A minimum of 30% of the gross area of any proposed development shall be designated as common open space. This open space shall be for purposes of environmental protection and for the common use of residents of the development. No more than 50% of the required open space shall be within the following environmental areas: lakes and ponds, wetlands or steep slopes. The Director of Planning, upon recommendation of the Planning Commission, may allow a larger amount of steep slopes to be utilized where the developer can demonstrate a viable plan for the use of these areas. Open space land shall be dedicated to the property owners' association or to Frederick County. Land shall only be dedicated to Frederick County with the approval of the Board of Supervisors. F. Recreational facilities. One recreational unit or equivalent recreational facilities shall be provided for each 30 dwelling units. The facilities shall be in a configuration and location that is easily accessible to the dwelling units that they are designed to serve. The design and amount of facilities shall be approved by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the Director of Planning and the Department of Parks and Recreation. A recreational unit is designed to meet the recreational needs of 30 dwelling units. The units may be broken into smaller units or added together to meet the needs of the planned community. G. Buffers and screening. (1) Buffers and screening shall be provided between various uses and housing types as if the uses were located in the RP, B1, B2 or M1 Zoning District according to the uses allowed in those districts. Buffers and screening shall be provided accordingly as specified in § 165-37 of this chapter. Road efficiency buffers shall be provided according to the requirements of that section. In addition, along the perimeter boundary of the Residential Planned 16602 10 - 25 - 2001 § 165-72 ZONING § 165-72 Community District, buffers and screens shall be provided in relation to adjoining properties as if the uses in the planned community were located in the RP, B1, B2 and M1 Zoning Districts. (2) Alternative buffer and screening plan. An alternative plan for buffers and screening and the separation of uses may be included with the master development plan for the development. This plan shall describe a specific system of buffers, screening and use separation for all planned uses in the development. When these dimensional requirements are approved, they shall constitute enforceable amendments to this chapter applying to the land included in the development and shall replace other buffer and screening requirements contained in this chapter. Such alternative requirements shall be based on general concepts described by the plan submitted. The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors shall only approve an alternative plan if the plan meets all of the intentions of this chapter, conforms to policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and follows generally accepted good planning practices. Buffer and screening requirements for the perimeter boundary of the planned community shall not be included in the alternative buffer and screening plans. [Added 6-9-19931 H. Sewer and water -facilities. All planned community developments shall be served by public sewer and water facilities owned by or dedicated to a public authority. I. Road access. All planned community developments shall have direct access to an arterial or collector road or to roads improved to arterial or collector standards. The planned community development shall be provided with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation. All roads in the development shall be provided with curbing and gutters. The Board of Supervisors may approve certain exceptions to the requirement for curbs and gutters, after review by the Planning Commission, in order to implement a particular stormwater management plan. The road system shall conform with the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan and with road improvement plans adopted by the county. J. Pedestrian access. A system of pedestrian access, in the form of paved sidewalks or paved interior walkways, shall be provided to allow 16603 10 - 25 - 2001 § 165-72 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-72 walking between every use, structure or recreational facility. Such walkways shall be connected with existing walkways adjacent to the planned community development. K. Stormwater management. The requirements of § 165-32 of this chapter shall apply to the total planned community development. L. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be in conformance with an overall landscaping plan or unifying concept for the development. M. Phasing. A schedule of phases shall be submitted with each proposed planned community. The schedule shall specify the year in which each phase will be completely developed. No subdivision or site plans shall be approved in the planned community unless they are in accordance with the approved schedule. (1) If a Residential Planned Community District is proposed to be developed in phases, over a period of time, common open space shall be provided with each phase in proportion to the fraction of the total area of the development in each phase. Recreational facilities shall be provided with each phase in proportion to the fraction of the total dwelling units in each phase. (2) Essential street entrances to the -planned residential community shall be provided with the initial phases of the development. (3) A reasonable balance shall be maintained between residential and nonresidential uses. The phasing plan for the development shall include a reasonable portion of the nonresidential uses in all phases of the development. [Amended 6-9-19931 N. Property owners' association. All phases of a planned community development shall be included under a single property owners' association according to the requirements of this chapter. 0. Other regulations. The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article. 16604 10 - 25 - 2001 REZONING APPLICATION #06-03 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Staff Report for the Planning Commission Public Hearing Prepared: June 27, 2003 Staff Contact: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Director This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. As this application proceeds through the legislative review process, the response or method of resolution for each issue offered by the applicant and/or recommended by the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors will be stated in the text of this report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 07/16/03 Pending Board of Supervisors: 08/13/03 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to R4 (Residential Planned Community). LOCATION: The property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 44-A-31 [portion]; 44-A-31A; 44-A-292; 44-A-293 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING AND PRESENT USE: North: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) South: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) East: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) West: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural/Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved Use: Agricultural/Residential/ Unimproved REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 2 June 27, 2003 INTENDED USE: Residential Planned Community comprised of mixed housing types totaling 2,800 dwelling units with 250,000 square feet of commercial uses (190,000 square feet - retail; 60,000 square feet - office) and 44 acres dedicated for public school and recreation uses. The applicant has proposed to serve the development with a multi -modal transportation system consisting of a major collector road, a system of pedestrian and bicycle trails, and a linear park trail within the Hiatt Run Corridor. The gross residential density proposed for this development is 3.40 dwelling units per acre. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: All roads providing access to the site will experience "significant measurable impact" from proposed development. However, proffered transportation improvements appear to be adequate to address traffic impacts. Please see the attached letter dated 02/21/03 from Ben Lineberry, Jr. P.E., Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer, VDOT Edinburg Residency. Fire Marshal: Proposed standards for private streets, culs-de-sac, alleys, and common driveways will allow adequate fire protection access. Applicant's proposed use of home sprinkler systems in certain housing types is a "first" for Frederick County and is commended as a positive life safety measure. Please see the attached comment sheet dated 0310312003 from Timothy L. Welsh, Assistant Fire Marshal. Clearbrook Fire & Rescue Co.: No comment offered. Please see the attached letter dated 02/26/2003 from Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. on behlaf of Chief Tommy Price. CountyEngineer: Concerned that Homeowner's Association responsibility for private curbside trash collection will be ineffective without an enforceable guarantee. It is further noted that any such guarantee must be fully enforceable without County intervention. Please see attached letter dated 05/05/03 from H.E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: Adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility to accommodate the projected sewage flows of the proposed development. The conceptual plans for the sewer system for Stephenson Village include infrastructure capable of eliminating capacity concerns involving the Abrams Creek Interceptor. It is recommended that an adequately sized pumping station site be provided pursuant to Frederick County Sanitation Authority standards to enable ultimate expansion of the station to a regional facility. Moreover, the main sewage collector line should be adequately sized and appropriately routed to enable future extension of the collection system to off -site development. Please seethe attached memorandum dated 02/12/2003 from Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director. Sanitation Authority: Capacity in the existing sewer lines, especially the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority Abrams Creek Trunk Main, is limited. While the majority of the flow generated by REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 3 June 27, 2003 the project may be within the capacity of the existing lines, it is prudent to have a pump station built sometime during this development to transmit sewage directly to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. Gravity lines will need to be sized to convey sewage from areas in the watershed outside the development and from the SWSA in the Clearbrook/Rest Church Road area. Please see the attached comment sheet with attachment dated 02/12/2003 from John G. Whitacre, Engineer, and W. H. Jones, P.E., Executive Director. Historic Resources Advisory Board: No adverse comments were offered regarding this application. However, the HRAB did offer the following suggestions to the applicant: (1) avoid bisecting the battlefield preservation tract with the proposed major collector road by locating the road on the northeast portion of the tract; (2) avoid creation of a "false sense of history" along the major collector road by limiting treatments to minimal landscaping comprised of indigenous plantings; (3) develop an interpretive plan for the preservation tract; (4) consider conducting archaeological studies of the property and ensure that artifacts are properly inventoried and preserved; and (5) consider preserving the Sam Byers House on a large parcel of land. Please see attached letter from Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I, dated 01127103. Parks & Recreation Parks & Recreation. Please see attached letter dated 02/04/03 from James M. Doran, Director of Frederick County Public Schools: The proposed development is anticipated to generate a total of 1,156 students at project build -out. Pursuant to the outputs of the Frederick County Fiscal Impact Model, the combination of proffered land donations and monetary contributions will meet the recommended levels to mitigate projected capital facilities impacts. It is noted that continued residential growth in Frederick County, to include the proposed development, will necessitate the constriction of new school facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. Please see attached letter dated 03/20/03 from Al Orndoiff, Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent. County Attorney: Proffers appear to be in proper form. Please see attached comment sheet dated 04/28/2003 from Jay Cook, Assistant County Attorney. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed development will not have an impact on Winchester Regional Airport operations. Although the proposed development lies within the Regional Airport's airspace, it is located outside of the airport's Part 77 surface. Please see attached letter dated 02112103 from Serena R. Manuel, Executive Director. Planning & Zonine: 1) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcels as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural 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 properties REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 4 June 27, 2003 and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Location The subject site is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The parcels comprising the site are located wholly within the Stonewall Magisterial District and are used primarily for agricultural purposes. Numerous parcels adjoin the 821.7-acre site, all ofwhich are zoned RA (Rural Areas) and are either undeveloped or established with residential or agricultural land uses. 3) Comprehensive Policy Plan The four parcels comprising this rezoning request are all located within the boundaries of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). The properties are located wholly within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The NELUP envisions the area comprised by the subj ect parcels as developing with industrial land use. Indeed, this designation is consistent with the overarching purpose of the NELUP, which is the facilitation of business and industrial development in a well planned, coordinated manner. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36, p. 6-39) The policies of the Comprehensive Plan governing planned communities stipulate that such development is to occur within the Urban Development Area (UDA). The NELUP does not provide for the expansion of the UDA within the study area. Planned communities and other forms of suburban residential development are therefore not accommodated within the bounds of the study area. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.1, 6-60, 6-61) The preservation of environmentally sensitive areas and significant historic resources is encouraged by the NELUP. The area proposed for rezoning is adjacent to the core area of the Stephenson's Depot battlefield (Second Battle of Winchester) and includes the Byers House (#34-1124), both of which are identified by the Developmentally Sensitive Area (DSA) designation. Resources identified as DSA constitute community and historical preservation areas that are to be protected from incompatible land uses through the use of adequate buffers and screening. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.1) Consistent with the transportation policies ofthe Comprehensive Plan, the NELUP specifies that proposed development should only occur if impacted road systems will function at Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better. The NELUP indicates that improvement of roads to maintain this level of service objective is the responsibility of the private property owner or developer. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-36.2, 6-36.3, 7-5) The land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan identify the planned community approach as a preferred method for establishing new neighborhoods within the UDA. It is expected that such communities consist of an appropriate balance between residential, service, and employment uses. Indeed, by providing an environment wherein people can live, work, and shop, the planned community approach promises to more effectively mitigate the impacts of new development on the County as a whole. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6-60, 6-61) REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 5 June 27, 2003 Planning Staff Comment The applicable land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan promote the establishment of non-residential land uses on the subject parcels. The proposed rezoning of the site to accommodate a 2,800-unit planned residential development is, therefore, inconsistent with adopted policy. It is noted that an extensive review of the NELUP was recently concluded, during which several alternative land use proposals were considered by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. One such alternative proposed that the subject parcels be designated for planned community land use. However, this alternative was not adopted, and the industrial land use designation applicable to the subject properties was ultimately retained. 4) Site Suitability/Environmental Features Impact Analysis Statement (p. 2, 3, 4): The subject site contains a variety of environmental features to include a perennial stream, flood plain, wetlands, steep slopes, and woodlands. The applicant proposes to incorporate the conservation of these sensitive environmental features into the overall development plan through a variety of proffered methods. The applicant has endeavored to accomplish resource conservation through the identification of two resource protection areas, which are identified as the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wctland Intermittent Ravine Channel. The majority of the site's sensitive enviromnental features are captured within these two areas, the protection of which will occur through a combination of approaches, to include riparian buffers, easements, supplemental plantings, and development of resource management plans in collaboration with relevant state and non-profit enviromnental organizations. The proffered Generalized Development Plan delineates the location of the proposed resource protection areas. (See Proffer Statement, p. 19 - 21 and Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) The environmental features present on the subject parcels do not represent an impediment to site development. Such features may be described as follows: A. Flood Plain: Flood plain data for the subject parcels is delineated on the Flood Insurance Study Map for Frederick County prepared by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Community Panel #510063-0110-13, effective date July 17, 1978. The majority of the site is located in Flood Zone C, which denotes areas of minimal flooding located outside of the 100-year flood plain. As reported by the applicant, 100-year flood plain, Flood Zone A, exists coincident with Hiatt Run, a perennial stream that traverses the subject site. The applicant has proffered to protect identified flood plain resources through a combination of easements and buffer areas adjacent to the 100-year flood plain comprising the Hiatt Run Corridor. Moreover, the 0 0 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 6 June 27, 2003 applicant has proffered that disturbance within the flood plain will be limited to establishment of the proposed linear park trail system, to include the trail, pedestrian bridges, benches and signage. Any disturbance within the designated flood plain area will be subject to the Flood Plain (FP) District requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (1)] B. Wetlands: The National Wetland Inventory Map (Stephenson Quadrangle) produced by the U.S. Department of the Interior identifies seven wetland features on the subject site. The identified wetland features correspond with ponding areas adjacent to the stream system that drains to Hiatt Run. The applicant proposes to incorporate these wetland resources into the stormwater management plan for Stephenson Village and further proffers to provide buffers adjacent to wetlands located within the Hiatt Run Corridor. Pursuant to the environmental standards of the Zoning Ordinance, disturbance of wetlands is only permitted in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or other qualified state or federal agency. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (3)J C. Soils and Steep Slopes: The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils on the site are consistent with the Weikert-Berks- Blairton soil association, which is the predominant association in Frederick County east of Interstate 81. It is noted that the Weikert-Berks-Blairton soil association presents some limitations to site development due to a seasonal high water table, depth to bedrock, and slope. The management of such soil characteristics will be addressed through subsequent site engineering activities. Steep slopes (land areas of 50% slope or greater) are located within the eastern and central portions of the site, generally coincident with the ravines and drainage ways associated with Hiatt Run and the Hiatt Run stream valley. The applicant has proffered the establishment of riparian buffers along the Hiatt Run Corridor, which will minimize disturbance of steep slope areas located on the site. The applicant has acknowledged that some disturbance of steep slopes will be necessary to accommodate planned stormwater management facilities, pedestrian trail systems, and the proffered transportation program. The Zoning Ordinance stipulates that no more than 25% of steep slopes shall be disturbed or regraded. The management of steep slopes pursuant to this disturbance limitation will be addressed through subsequent site engineering activities. [Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, § 165-31.B. (6)] D. Woodlands: Areas of mature woodlands exist on the site, most of which are coincident with the Hiatt Run Corridor. Other woodland areas are dispersed throughout the site. The applicant has proffered to preserve those woodland areas located within the Hiatt Run Corridor through the employment of 100-foot riparian buffers. The applicant has further proffered to collaborate with the Virginia Department of Forestry to prepare a forest management plan to guide conseivation of woodland resources within the project. i 0 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 7 June 27, 2003 5) Potential Impacts A. Transportation Impact Anaysis Statement (p. 4 - 5): The traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared for this application calculated transportation impacts based upon the following proffered development program: • Residential: 2,800 dwelling units (mixed housing types) • Retail: 190,000 square feet • Office: 60,000 square feet • Public: 550 pupil elementary school Using traffic generation figures from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, 6`h Edition, the applicant projects traffic impacts for the development in terms of three phases that correspond with years 2006, 2008, and 2015, respectively. For the purposes of the TIA, 2015 represents the year in which project build out will occur. The TIA indicates that at project build out, the planned uses will result in the generation of 25,178 new average daily trips (ADT). The total ADT generated by the development is projected by phase as follows: • Phase I (Year 2006): 10,570 ADT • Phase II (Year 2008): 17,699 ADT • Phase III (Year 2015): 25,178 ADT The new trips generated by the development will be absorbed by an external road network consisting of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), and the Exit 317 interchange of Interstate 81. This external network will be linked to the development via a proffered major collector, or "spine," road. The major collector road is the principal organizing component of the project's internal transportation system, and will ultimately consist of four travel lanes that will bisect the development and connect Old Charles Town Road and Martinsburg Pike. (See Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) The applicant has proffered to phase construction of the major collector road pursuant to trip volume benchmarks that will be measured through actual traffic counts recorded at the entrance to the development. As enumerated by the proposed proffer, the major collector road and related improvements will be planned, designed, and implemented when the traffic counts reach 80% of specified trip volume benchmarks. Each benchmark triggers development of a particular section of the major collector road and/or associated improvements. Moreover, the proffer indicates that construction of REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 8 June 27, 2003 said improvements will be completed within eighteen (18) months of attaimnent of the 80% volume figure. (See Proffer Statement, p. 10, Section F.) Based upon the proffered trip volume benclunarks, the incremental construction of the major collector road will occur in relation to the three overall transportation phases as follows: • Phase I (2006): Fully constructed within development boundaries - four (4) lane section extending from project entrance at Old Charles Town Road to limits of the project. • Phase 11(2008): Extension of two (2) lane half -section from terminus of four (4) lane section at development limits to Martinsburg Pike; intersection with Martinsburg Pike will be aligned with entrance to Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. • Phase 111 (2015): Remaining additional lanes constructed between development limits and Martinsburg Pike; construction completed. In addition to construction of the major collector road, the transportation program proffered by the applicant includes signalization of off -site intersections, turn lane additions and lane widening on external roads, and the provision of pedestrian and bicycle lanes. The proffered traffic signalization agreements will involve the intersections of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road, Old Charles Town Road and the major collector road, and the entrance of Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park on Martinsburg Pike, which will ultimately align with the terminus of the major collector road. (See Proffer Statement, p. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11) The analysis anticipates that background traffic in the study area will increase by 5% annually through 2010 and by 3% between 2010 to 2015. Moreover, estimated background conditions assume development of 1,400,000 square feet of commercial and industrial land uses in the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park during the same time period. Background traffic is that which is not generated by the proposed development. The TIA concludes that the improvements proffered by the applicant will ensure Level of Service (LOS) Category "C" conditions or better on study area roads during peak traffic periods throughout Phase I and Phase II. However, with the conclusion of Phase III, at project build out, several study area intersections are projected to function at LOS Category "D" during peak traffic conditions. (See "A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village, " p. 11, 19, & 27). • REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 9 June 27, 2003 VDOT Comment All roads providing access to the site will experience "significant measurable impact" from proposed development. However, proffered transportation improvements appear to be adequate to address traffic impacts. (See attached letter dated 02121103 from Ben Lineberry, Jr. P.E., Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer, VDOT Edinburg Residency) Planning Staff Comment The infrastructure policies of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) stipulate that new development should only occur if impacted road systems will function at Level of Service (LOS) Category "C" or better. Indeed, this NELUP provision reinforces the general transportation policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan, which establish LOS Category "C" as the desired condition on roads adjacent to and within new development. The transportation program proffered by the applicant achieves the fimctional standards established by policy until the latter stages of development, when the combined effect of background traffic growth and new vehicle trips originating from the proposed development yield diminished levels of service. Indeed, at project build out, peak hour LOS Category "D" conditions are shown at several study area intersections, most notably those intersections located at or near the Interstate 81 interchange. B. Historic Resources Impact Analysis Statement (p. 8 - 9): As reported by the applicant, the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey includes one structure located on the subject site, which is identified as the Samuel Byers House (# 34-1124). This structure is identified as potentially significant due to its architectural style. The applicant has proffered to preserve and adaptively reuse this resource as they deem appropriate. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey further includes several potentially significant resources that are located on properties adjoining the subject site. Specifically, the Helm McCann property (# 34-703) and the Milburn Chapel and Cemetery (# 34-950) are located to the west of the site and the Jordan Springs Hotel (# 34-110) is located to the southeast of the site. Also located near the project site is Milburn Road (Route 662), which is identified by the 1995 Frederick County - Winchester Battlefield Network Plan as a significant historic corridor as it provides a linkage between areas associated with the Second and Third Battles of Winchester. The Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) further identifies the Milburn Road corridor as a developmentally sensitive area (DSA). The applicant has suggested that development of the Stephenson Village planned community will not impact the viewsheds associated with these off site resources. The 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley Virginia identifies the core battlefield area of Stephenson's Depot on property located immediately adjacent to the subject site. The property containing this resource is not • 0 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 10 June 27, 2003 included in this rezoning application. However, as shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP), the major collector road planned with this project will traverse a portion of core battlefield land. Moreover, the GDP depicts the development of mixed residential land uses adjacent to the core battlefield area. (See Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) C. Sewer and Water ImpactAnalysis Statement (p. 5, 6): At full build -out, the planned residential community is projected to equally impact the public water and sewer system, consuming and conveying approximately 689,000 gallons per day (GPD) of water and wastewater, respectively. Water supply will originate from the Global Chemstone Quarry and be distributed from the Northern Water Treatment Plan via an existing 10-inch water main that will be supplemented by a planned 20-inch line, both of which extend along Martinsburg Pike. At present, this water source is yielding 1.5 million gallons per day (MGD). Sewage conveyance will occur through an 8-inch sewer force main that will flow to the Redbud Run Pump Station, which will convey the project's effluent to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. The Frederick - Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) reports that adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility to accommodate the projected sewage flows of the proposed development. It is noted that all water and sewer infrastructure will be provided by the applicant pursuant to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority's (FCSA) Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan, which was approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2002. Included with this plan is the development of the Lower Hiatt Run Pump Station, a regional facility that the applicant has proffered to construct. 7) Proffer Statement (dated January 8, 2003, revised through April 24, 2003): A proffer analysis report, dated April 16, 2003, was prepared for the applicant delineating staff concerns regarding proffer language, implementation methods, and the structure of the proffer statement. The applicant responded to this report with a revised proffer statement that addressed staff concerns. The proffer statement included with this application is therefore acceptable to staff as a technical document. Should this application be approved, staff is comfortable that the proffer statement will result in the development program outlined by the applicant in the impact analysis statement. A copy of the proffer analysis report is included with the review agency comments attached with this staff report. It is noted that the proffer statement for Stephenson Village is extensive, involving twenty-three distinct sections. Arguably the most critical component of the proffer statement is the Community Design Modification Document, which includes a series of nine requests for modifications to certain provisions of the Frederick County Code. The viability of these REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 11 June 27, 2003 requests is dependent upon the approval of an amendment to Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance to allow Code modifications with requests for R4 zoning. This proposed amendment is scheduled for public hearings on the same dates as the subject rezoning application. The remainder of the proffer statement is fundamentally dependant upon the regulatory flexibility sought through the modification document. Given the importance of these requests to the applicant's proffer statement and, therefore, the overall rezoning proposal, staff has provided an overview of the modification process as well as a detailed discussion concerning each request. Following the modification discussion, the remainder of the proffer statement is briefly summarized by section. A. Section 1: Community Design Modification Document (Proffer Statement, p. 2): Background of Modification Concept: The applicant initially included a series of twenty-two requests for waivers from certain requirements of the Frederick County Code ("the Code") applicable to planned residential developments with the proffer statement. The majority of these waiver requests involved provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance and were proposed as a means of facilitating the design plan for Stephenson Village. Exemptions and/or waivers to the requirements of the Code applicable to planned residential developments are currently enabled pursuant to Section 165-72.0. of the Zoning Ordinance, which states: Other regulations. The planned community development shall confoi-rn with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article. This provision plainly articulates that an exemption or waiver cannot be legally proposed or considered for a planned residential community except where said exemption is expressly permitted by Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance. The provisions of Article VII limit exemptions to proposals for alternative dimensional requirements and alternative landscaping and buffering plans. As such, the majority of the waiver requests originally sought by the applicant through the proffer statement were determined to not be permitted due to the absence of language in Article VII specifically enabling the desired exemptions. It was recognized that an alternative method would be required for the applicant to achieve the regulatory flexibility necessary for the Stephenson Village design concept. As an option, staff proposed an amendment to Article VII that would expand opportunities for modifications to ordinance provisions applicable to planned residential development. Through this approach, an applicant for R4 zoning would be allowed to seek modifications to any provision of the Code impacting physical development. The applicant would be required to provide justification for the request to include a proposed REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 12 June 27, 2003 alternative - or "modified" - standard in lieu of the ordinance requirement for which the modification was being sought. The applicant would further be expected to identify the need or role of the alternative standard in the overall design concept. A blanket waiver or exemption would not be permitted. As envisioned by staff, following Planning Commission review, the Board of Supervisors would consider and approve each modification request included with an R4 rezoning application on its merits pursuant to the applicant's justification. Moreover, modifications would be considered concurrent with the rezoning application and, if accepted with the proffer statement, the alternative or modified standards would be included as conditions of the rezoning approval. Such legislatively approved modifications would serve as an effective means of accommodating the unique vision expected with a planned residential community while simultaneously assuring the relevance of both the public process and the public purposes of the Code. The proposed amendment would replace the current language of Section 165-72.0. with the following: § 165-72.0. Modifications; applicability of other regulations. (1) An applicant may request as part of an application for rezoning to the R4 District that a modification to specific requirements of the subdivision ordinance, this chapter or other requirements of the Frederick County Code applicable to physical development be granted. The applicant shall demonstrate that the requested modification is necessary or justified in the particular case by a demonstration that the public purpose of these ordinances, as applied to the particular case, would be met to at least an equivalent degree by such modification. The Board of Supervisors may approve or disapprove such request, in whole or in part. (2) The applicant shall provide sufficient information to enable evaluation of the request by the Board of Supervisors. Materials submitted should include or be supplemented by: (a) specification of the code section(s) to be modified and the proposed alternative standard; (b) exhibits demonstrating application of the modified standard such as a detailed plan and/or elevation drawing; and (c) identification of the relationship of the modification to the overall community concept. (3) The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article or modified by the Board of Supervisors through the rezoning process. The applicant accepted this option and staff is processing the proposed ordinance amendment concurrently with this rezoning application. The applicant subsequently condensed the original waivers into nine modification requests. These requests and the 0 • REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 13 June 27, 2003 applicant's justification for each are delineated through the Community Design Modification Document, which is included as Exhibit F of this application. If approved, each alternative design standard specified in the proffered Community Design Modification Document will constitute a condition of rezoning approval, and will therefore be incorporated as a provision of the Zoning Ordinance uniquely applicable to Stephenson Village. As with any proffered condition, an adopted alternative design standard may only be changed pursuant to Board of Supervisors approval through the rezoning process delineated in Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance. Indeed, unless amended in accord with said provisions, an alternative design standard will apply to development within Stephenson Village in perpetuity, regardless of action subsequent to application approval either amending or deleting the underlying Zoning Ordinance requirement. It is noted that approval of both the proposed ordinance amendment and modification document is critical to the viability of subsequent provisions of the applicant's proffer statement. Indeed, disapproval or alteration of the amendment or any of the proposed modifications will likely necessitate adjustments to the overall development program. Should either the proposed amendment or the requested modifications be disapproved, either in whole or in part, the remainder of the proffer statement and the proffered Generalized Development Plan must be altered to reflect such action prior to further consideration of this application. Community Design Modification Document (Rezoning Exhibit F) • Modification #1 - & 165-71. Mixture of Housing Types Required The R4 District requirements stipulate that no more than 40% of the residential uses in a planned residential community shall consist of duplexes, multiplexes, atrium houses, weak -link townhouses, townhouses, or garden apartments or any combination of said housing types. The applicant is requesting that this standard be modified to allow housing types identified under the townhouse, multi -family, and active adult categories included in the proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" to comprise a maximum of 60% of the residential uses in Stephenson Village. The proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" includes four categories ofhousing types: single family dwellings, townhouse dwellings, multi -family dwellings, and active adult dwellings. A minimum and maximum ratio is proposed for each category. The employment of such ranges is intended to ensure a mix of housing types while allowing for variation in the ultimate composition of the overall housing mix. Specific housing types are identified under these categories, to include several that are permitted and defined by the current Zoning Ordinance as well as new housing types proposed in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement. (See Proffer Statement, p. 23, 24) REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 14 June 27, 2003 If Modification #1 is approved, the proposed "Mixed Residential Matrix" will govern the categorization of housing types and the residential mix for Stephenson Village. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The current requirement of § 165-71. ensures that single family detached dwellings will comprise a minimum of 60% of the residential mix in a planned residential community. As proposed by the applicant, non -age restricted single family dwellings will comprise a minimum of 30% and a maximum of 64% of the residential mix of Stephenson Village. In contrast to the current ordinance requirement that yields a housing mix predominated by single family detached units, the applicant's modified standard could result in the opposite scenario, with 5 1 % of the housing in Stephenson Village consisting of townhouse and multi -family unit types. It is noted that the applicant has committed to developing a minimum of 19% of the project with active-adult/age-restricted units, which could be increased to a maximum of 53% of the overall mix. In the event the latter ratio develops, the predominant housing in Stephenson Village would be active-adult/age-restricted, which could develop with either single family or multi -family unit types. • Modification #2 - 165-69. Permitted Uses, § 165-72.B(2) - Alternative Dimensional Requirement Plan The R4 District requirements allow for all uses permitted in the RP District within the planned residential community. Moreover, the Zoning Ordinance permits the adoption of an alternative dimensional requirement plan for the residential uses planned for the development. The applicant is requesting a modification to the permitted uses section to allow the introduction ofnew housing types to complement those permitted by the RP District. The new housing unit types are identified in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement, and include the following: carriage house, non - alley carriage house, cottage house, and courtyard cluster. This request also includes modified standards for single family small lot and townhouse units, which are permitted RP District housing types. (See Proffer Statement, p. 23, 24) If Modification #2 is approved, the new housing types identified in Section 21 of the Proffer Statement will be permitted in Stephenson Village pursuant to the dimensional standards delineated in "Rezoning Exhibit F." Moreover, through approval of this modification, alternative dimensional standards will be accepted for single family small lot and townhouse housing types in lieu of the current RP District requirements. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The proposed new housing types represent a notable departure from the typical suburban residential development experienced by Frederick County under RP zoning. Indeed, these housing types and the • REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 15 June 27, 2003 accompanying alternative dimensional standards are the foundation for the distinctive residential form envisioned by the applicant for Stephenson Village. It is noted that all relevant review agencies have examined the proposed dimensional standards and determined that said standards satisfy all applicable technical requirements. • Modification #3 - 165-72.D. Commercial and Industrial Areas; & 165-72.M. Non-residential Land Use Phasing The R4 District requirements stipulate that a minimum of 10% of the gross area of a planned residential community shall be used for business and industrial land uses, and that such uses shall not exceed 50% of the gross land area. Moreover, the Zoning Ordinance requires that each phase of a plamied community development shall include a reasonable amount of non-residential land uses. The applicant is requesting that both of these standards be modified to (1) allow a minimum of 4% of the gross area of the proposed planned residential community to be used for business land uses and (2) eliminate the requirement that non-residential uses be integrated throughout the development in favor of centralizing business uses in a single commercial node. The applicant has proffered a development program that allocates approximately 4% of the gross land area for commercial land uses, the majority of which will form a 26-acre commercial center (Land Bay V). The remaining business land uses are planned within the mixed residential area (Land Bay III) and will comprise approximately 7 acres, which are likely to develop with a day care or other service - oriented use. The applicant has guaranteed that a minimum of 60,000 square feet of commercial uses will develop in Stephenson Village, with maximum possible business development comprising 250,000 square feet (190,000 square feet of retail; 60,000 square feet of office). (See Proffer Statement, p. 4, 5, 16, & 17 and Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) If Modification #3 is approved, the applicant will be permitted to limit commercial development to 4% of the gross land area of the planned residential community, which equates to approximately 33 acres devoted to commercial land uses. Additionally, this modification will relieve the applicant of the requirement that each phase of development include non-residential land uses, thereby enabling commercial development to occur entirely within a centralized node. Approval of this modification is necessary for acceptance of both the applicant's proffered development program delineated in Section 3 of the Proffer Statement, and the proffered Generalized Development Plan dated March 2003. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The non-residential component of a planned community development is necessary to achieve a dynamic mixed use land use pattern that REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 16 June 27, 2003 facilitates efficiencies of form and function impossible through the one dimensional residential focus of RP zoning. The R4 District therefore requires a mix of retail, business/office, and light industrial land uses, which, when integrated with a mix of housing types, provides internal service and employment opportunities accessible via the community's multi -modal transportation system. The non-residential ratios required by the ordinance are intended to ensure that the advantages of plamied community developments are maximized for both the residents of such conununities and the County as a whole. Without a diverse array of non-residential uses that includes sufficient employment -oriented business and industry, the development program for Stephenson Village will fail to achieve a land use pattern that is distinguishable from other suburban residential areas of Frederick County. • Modification #4 - § 165-72.F. Recreational Facilities The R4 District requirements stipulate that one (1) recreational unit be provided for every thirty (30) units developed within a planned residential community. The applicant is requesting a modification to allow the monetary value of a "tot lot" facility to represent the equivalent of one recreational unit. This value figure would be applied to the recreational facilities being proffered by the applicant as a method to quantify ordinance compliance. The applicant is not seeking a modification of the recreational facility ratio required by the ordinance. Rather, the applicant is proposing a means for evaluating the value of the proffered recreational facilities vis-a-vis the required ratio. If Modification: #4 is approved, the monetary value of a tot lot facility will be the equivalent of one recreational unit for the purposes of determining the number of recreational units represented by the applicant's plamied recreational facilities. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: It is noted that the RP District requirements of the Zoning Ordinance identify a tot lot as an example of a single recreational unit. No comment has been formally submitted by the Department of Parks and Recreation concerning the requested modification. • Modification #5 - & 165-72.I. Road Access 165-29.A.(14) Motor Vehicle Access 144-24.C., C.2(a), C.2.(b) Lot Access The R4 District requirements stipulate that a planned community development be developed with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Moreover, both the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance limit private road access only to those developments comprised exclusively of single farnily small lot and multi family housing. The applicant is requesting a modification of these road access standards to (1) allow for REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 17 June 27, 2003 a complete system of private streets within the active -adult portion of the community (Land Bay IV), and (2) permit private access roads extending from public streets to serve a maximum of five dwelling units, or ten dwelling units if the private access road connects two public streets, within the mixed residential land bay (Land Bay III). The applicant proposes that all private roads will be constructed to meet or exceed VDOT public road standards. The remainder of the project will be served by public roads as required by ordinance. If Modification #S is approved, the active adult portion of Stephenson Village will be allowed to develop with a complete system of private roads, regardless of the mix of housing types provided. Moreover, in the mixed residential portion of the community, private access roads will be permitted to serve no more than five (5) single family dwelling units, or a maximum of ten (10) units if the private access road connects two public streets. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Sta, fEComment: The maintenance of private roads and access ways will be the exclusive responsibility of the property owners through the governing Homeowner's Association (HOA). The granting of this modification would enable the creation of "flag" or "pipestem" lots, which can cause confusion for property owners and result in administrative challenges for staff. At present, private road access to single family lots is permitted only in the context of minor rural subdivisions in the RA (Rural Areas) District. A minor rural subdivision involves no more than three (3) lots. It is noted that the relevant review agencies have been consulted regarding the dimensional standards proposed for the private roads and access ways, and are satisfied that such standards will meet applicable technical requirements. • Modification #6 - 165-72.M. Phasing The R4 District requirements stipulate that a phasing plan must be submitted that identifies the year in which each phase of development will be completed. The applicant is requesting modification of this requirement to eliminate the need to specify the concluding year for each phase and to instead enable phasing of land bay development to be determined at the time of master plan approval. The applicant has committed to completing phases in a specified sequence in those cases where a sequence or schedule is included with the Master Development Plan. However, the applicant is seeking greater flexibility to develop multiple phases simultaneously and to contract with a variety of builders who will operate on independent schedules. The phasing of development of non -age restricted dwelling units will occur at an annual rate of 8% pursuant to Section 2 of the Proffer Statement. (See Proffer Statement, p. 3) If Modification #6 is approved, land bay development within Stephenson Village REZ 906-03, Stephenson Village Page 18 June 27, 2003 will not follow a schedule or plan delineating the overall sequence of development or the concluding year of a given land bay's development. Phasing will be governed exclusively by the proffered limitation on permits for non -age restricted dwelling units specified in Section 2 of the Proffer Statement. Said provision stipulates that non -age restricted dwelling units will be developed at a rate not to exceed 8% annually. There is no phasing proposed for the active adult/age restricted housing component of the project. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicants justification) Planning Staff Comment: The applicant has proffered phasing mechanisms for development of the non -age restricted residential component of the project as well as the planned transportation system. Thus, the overall pace of development is clearly defined, as is the timing and sequence of improvements comprising the proposed transportation system. However, pursuant to this modification request, the progression of development within each land bay and the coordination of improvements during "multi -phase" development will remain undetermined until Master Development Plan (MDP) approval. (See Proffer Statement, p. 3, 10, & 11) • Modification #7 - § 165-72.G.(1) Buffers and Screening Road efficiency buffers are utilized to lessen the impacts of interstate, arterial, primary, and major collector roads on adjoining residential land uses. The R4 District requirements stipulate that road efficiency buffers shall be provided in accordance with the specifications of § 165-37 of the Zoning Ordinance. As such the inactive portion of a road efficiency buffer must be a minimum of forty (40) feet in depth, measured from the edge of the right-of-way of a major collector road. The inactive buffer area must contain the screening elements of a fiill buffer as defined by ordinance. A road efficiency buffer also requires an active buffer component comprised of forty (40) feet, for a total buffer distance of eighty (80) feet. The applicant is requesting modification of the road efficiency buffer requirements to allow variations in the width of the inactive buffer area required adjacent to the plamied major collector road. Pursuant to the applicant's illustrative renderings, the inactive buffer width would be a minimum of twenty five (25) feet. The applicant has indicated that the screening requirements of the ordinance would be exceeded where buffer distance is reduced. If Modification #7 is approved, the road efficiency buffer required adjacent to the planned major collector road will include an inactive portion that varies in width from a maximum of forty (40) feet to a minimum of twenty (25) feet. Although the distance buffer would be reduced in size, the screening comprising the inactive buffer area would exceed standard ordinance requirements. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification) Planning Staff Comment: The effective combination of distance and screening is critical to the mitigation of traffic impacts on adjoining residential uses. As 0 40 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 19 June 27, 2003 proposed by the applicant, the significant enhancement of screening to off -set the reduction in size of the inactive buffer is essential to ensure the mitigative value of the road efficiency buffer. If granted, this modification would not impact the inactive portion of the buffer, which the applicant will be required to provide as specified by ordinance. • Modification #8 - § 165-68. Rezoning Procedure The R4 District requirements stipulate that a complete Master Development Plan (MDP) shall be submitted with an application for R4 zoning. The applicant is requesting modification of this request to allow submission of a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) at the time of rezoning instead of the complete MDP. The GDP would identify the relationship of the project site to the surrounding transportation network and adjoining land uses. Moreover, the GDP would provide a general layout for the proposed development, organizing the entire acreage into land bays identified for either residential or non-residential land uses. The GDP would further include a table delineating the approximate size of each land bay as well as housing types and ratios for residential land bays. The applicant would submit MDP applications for review subsequent to rezoning approval, at which time greater detail concerning land bay development would be provided. (See Generalized Development Plan, dated March 2003) If Modification #8 is approved, a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) will be processed with this application instead of a detailed Master Development Plan (MDP). MDP submission would follow rezoning approval pursuant to the application sequence typical for development in other zoning districts as outlined by the Zoning Ordinance. Planning Staff Comment: The applicant has include a proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) with this application and is seeking the requested modification pursuant to discussions with staff. The level of detail required with a complete Master Development Plan (MDP) is difficult to provide with a rezoning application when considering a project of the scope and scale of Stephenson Village. A proffered GDP will effectively represent the overall development concept and can sufficiently guide the implementation of proffered conditions via subsequent development applications. • Modification #9 - §165-133.B. Master Development Plan, Contiguous Land §165-141.A.(8) Master Development Plan, Contents �165-141.B.(2);(4 A) Master Development Plan, R4 Contents The referenced provisions of the Zoning Ordinance govern the required scope and contents of a Master Development Plan (MDP). Collectively, these provisions stipulate that the entirety of a project site shall be included and plarmed under a 0 • REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 20 June 27, 2003 single MDP. Citing the size and scope of the Stephenson Village project, the applicant is requesting modification of the referenced provisions to enable the submission of a series of MDP applications to accommodate the incremental development of Stephenson Village over time. Each successive MDP application will provide aggregate development data for the project, effectively tabulating the status of the project relative to the proffered development program and other proffered conditions. The proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) will serve as the guide for all MDP submissions. If Modification #9 is approved, the applicant will be permitted to submit a series of Master Development Plan (MDP) applications to address the incremental development of the project. This process would occur in lieu of a singular MDP accommodating the "total development" of the planned community. Each MDP would provide aggregate development data thereby ensuring effective monitoring of project status and conformity with proffered conditions. (See "Rezoning Exhibit F" for applicant's justification). Planning Sta[f Comment: The proffering of a Generalized Development Plan (GDP) is appropriate for a project the size of Stephenson Village. A series of Master Development Plan (MDP) submissions will facilitate the incremental implementation of the development program that will be conceptually represented by the GDP and detailed by the proffer statement. Indeed, through such an approach, each MDP will serve as a discernable "building block" toward completion of the overall development program. The modified process requested by the applicant would arguably not compromise the comprehensive orientation of the MDP program. B. Section 2: Phasing Plan to Minimize Sudden Impacts on County Services (Proffer Statement, p. 2, 3) • Additional Proffer Payment - The applicant has proffered to double the monetary contribution to Frederick County for public schools for each student that exceeds "a cumulative yearly total increase of 60 students per year." The additional monetary payment of $3,925 will be adjusted every seven years to reflect the Consumer Price Index (CPI). • Limitation on Permits - The applicant has proffered that no more than 2,800 residential units will be developed within Stephenson Village. This unit limitation results in a maximum gross residential density of 3.40 units per acre. The applicant has further proffered to phase development of the non -age restricted units at a rate of 8% per year. Active adult/age restricted housing and elderly housing are excluded from the phasing program. C. Section 3: Uses, Density and Mix of Housing Types (Proffer Statement, p. 3, 4, 5) REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 21 June 27, 2003 • Land Bay Breakdown Table - The applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan (GDP) that includes five distinct land bays. The land uses planned for these land bays have been proffered through the Land Bay Breakdown Table, which sets the fundamental parameters for the development. The table may be summarized as follows: Land Bay I - Elementary School (land dedication); Land Bay II - Public Park (land dedication); Land Bay III - Mixed Residential (mix of single family detached, townhouse, and multi -family units); Land Bay IV - Active Adult (mix of unit types); Land Bay V - Commercial Center. The table further identifies the minimum and maximum ratios permitted for the housing categories proffered within each land bay. • The total commercial area is proffered to consist of 33 acres that will be located within Land Bays III and V, respectively. It is noted that the business uses planned for Land Bay III, which is the mixed residential area, are intended to be neighborhood -scale service -oriented uses. The planned 26-acre commercial center will serve as the principal commercial node for Stephenson Village and will be located within Land Bay V. • Open Space - The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel, both of which are proffered resource protection areas, total approximately 125 acres. The applicant has proffered to disperse the remaining 121.5 acres of required open space throughout the four residential land bays. • Active Adult and/or Affordable Housing for the Elderly - The applicant has proffered that active adult housing may comprise up to 53% of the total housing units in Stephenson Village, which, if developed to this maximum ratio, would involve development of active adult units in both Land Bay III and Land Bay IV. Regardless of the ratio of active adult units, in no case shall the total number of housing units exceed 2,800. • Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial Land Uses - The applicant has proffered to exclude all uses permitted in the B3 (Industrial Transition) and M1 (Light Industry) Zoning Districts, unless such uses are otherwise permitted in the B 1 (Neighborhood Business), B2 (General Business), or RP (Residential Performance) Zoning Districts. Truck stops are expressly prohibited. D. Section 4: Applicant to Pay 100% of Capital Facilities (Proffer Statement, p. 5, 6) • Fiscal Impact Model - The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model demonstrated a fiscal impact to capital facilities in the amount of $5,327 per residential unit. The applicant has proffered to accommodate 100% of this figure through a combination of monetary contributions and land donations. It is noted that land donations are assigned a value of $30,000 per acre. • Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All proffered monetary contributions will be adjusted every seven (7) years to reflect the Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All Urban Consumers (Current Series). • Active Adult Contributions & Premium - Capital facilities that are not directly REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 22 June 27, 2003 impacted by active adult housing, such as public schools, will not receive a monetary contribution for such housing. However, the applicant has proffered to pay a 50% premium on proffer contributions for fire and rescue per each active adult unit, in excess of the impact figure identified by the impact model. The applicant has also proffered to pay a 100% premium for fire and rescue per each elderly housing unit. These premiums are intended by the applicant to off -set the increased demand on fire and rescue services common with such populations. E. Section 5: Monetary Contribution to Develop Heritage Tourism (Proffer Statement, A 7) Matching Funds - The applicant has proffered to make a direct contribution to Shenandoah University Historical and Tourism Center in the amount of $75,000. This contribution will be made in the form of matching funds intended to promote heritage tourism. Implementation Note: The above -referenced contribution is not enforceable by Frederick County and will occur as a private transaction between the applicant and Shenandoah University Historical and Tourism Center. F. Section 6: Monetary Contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. (Proffer Statement, P. 7) Direct Contribution - The applicant has proffered to make a direct contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. in the amount of $200,000. The proffered funding will be dispersed in four installments pursuant to development thresholds identified by proffer. This contribution is intended to mitigate the impact of the development on volunteer fire and rescue services. Implementation Note: The above -referenced contribution is not enforceable by Frederick County and will occur as a private transaction between the applicant and Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. G. Section 7: Multi -Modal Transportation Improvements (Proffer Statement, A 7, 8, 9, 10, & 11) Major Collector Road - The applicant has proffered to dedicate an 80 foot right-of- way and construct a major collector road from the project entrance on Old Charles Town Road through Stephenson Village, and across properties currently owned by McCann and Omps to U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike). The major collector road will ultimatelybe completed as a four lane boulevard constructed pursuant to VDOT standards. The applicant has proffered to include landscaped medians and bicycle lanes with the major collector road. Major Collector Road Construction - The major collector road will be contructed in phases, beginning with its development within Stephenson Village as a two lane half -section. The major collector road will be constructed to its ultimate four -lane REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 23 June 27, 2003 configuration in increments, the development of which will be triggered by a series of traffic volume thresholds measured through trip counters located at the project entrance. The applicant has proffered that design of improvements will occur when 80% of a given volume threshold is reached and the completion of improvements will occur within 18 months of the date of the 80% measurement. • Active Adult Gated Community - The applicant has proffered that the entrance to the active adult section of the development will be gated. The applicant intends to serve the active adult community exclusively with private roads constructed to VDOT public road standards. • Old Charles Town Road Improvements - The applicant has proffered to complete all necessary entrance improvements at the intersection of the major collector road and Old Charles Town Road during the first phase of development. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to execute signalization agreements with VDOT for the intersections of Old Charles Town Road and Route I I and the major collector road. Actual signalization will occur when warranted by VDOT. Pursuant to a specified traffic volume threshold, the applicant has proffered to bond and commence construction of a three -lane section of Old Charles Town Road from the Stephenson Village entrance to Route 11. • Interstate 81 Interchange Improvement Contribution - The applicant has proffered to contribute $50,000 in matching funds for use by either VDOT or Frederick County for improvements to the Interstate 81 - Route 11 interchange at Exit 317. H. Section 8: School and Ball Field Sites, Community Facilities and Public Use Areas (Proffer Statement, P. 11, 12) • School Site - The applicant has proffered to dedicate 20 acres of land to the Frederick County School Board for use as a public school site. This site is shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) as Land Bay I. The applicant intends to apply this acreage to the open space requirement for the development. • Soccer and Ballfield Site - The applicant has proffered to dedicate 24 acres of land to Frederick County or such other entity as Frederick County designates for public recreation sites. This site is shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) as Land Bay H. The applicant intends to apply this acreage to the open space requirement for the development. I. Section 9: Recreational Amenities and Linear Park (Proffer Statement, p. 13, 14) • Recreational Center - The applicant has proffered to construct a recreation center within the mixed residential area (Land Bay III). This facility may be located anywhere within said land bay at the discretion of the applicant. However, the location of the recreation center will be identified on the Master Development Plan (MDP) applicable to this portion of the development. The applicant has proffered 0 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 24 June 27, 2003 that the recreation center will include a bathhouse and a 6-lane, 25 meter competition swimming pool. This facility is intended for use by residents of the development. The bonding and completion of this amenity will occur pursuant to development thresholds specified by proffer. • Active Adult Recreation Center - The applicant has proffered to construct a recreation center within the active adult land bay (Land Bay IV) for use by residents of the active adult community. The bonding and completion of this amenity will occur pursuant to development thresholds specified by proffer. • Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk System - The applicant has proffered to construct a pedestrian trail or sidewalk system to link the recreation centers to the surrounding neighborhoods. • Linear Park Trail - The applicant has proffered to dedicate a fifteen -foot wide trail easement to the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department for the purposes of a linear park trail. The trail will be located within the Hiatt Run Corridor and extend along the length of the corridor, a distance of approximately 3,800 linear feet, as depicted on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP). The applicant has proffered to construct a six-foot wide asphalt or concrete trail within the dedicated easement. The applicant intends to apply the area of the Hiatt Run Corridor, to include the trail, to the open space requirement of the development. J. Section 10: Active Adult Age -Restricted Housing (Proffer Statement, p. 14, 15) • Deed Language - The applicant has included the language to be recorded with the deeds for designated active adult age -restricted properties. • Implementation Note - The provisions included in this section are not enforceable by Frederick County. Implementation of rules and regulations concerning the occupancy of designated active adult age -restricted units is the sole responsibility of the applicant and/or the governing Homeowner's Association. K. Section 11: Affordable Housing for the Elderly (Proffer Statement, P. 15) • Provision of Affordable Housing for the Elderly - The applicant has proffered to develop affordable housing for the elderly at such time that 50% of the proffered retail space (95,000 square feet) has been developed and pursuant to all necessary state and federal approvals. Moreover, such housing will only be constructed if the project qualifies for government funding dispersed through the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program or equivalent. The applicant has proffered that should such funding prove unattainable, any units planned for affordable elderly housing will be developed as active adult age - restricted units. L. Section 12: Preservation of Historical and Cultural Resources (Proffer Statement, A 16) 0 9 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 25 June 27, 2003 • Byers House - The applicant has proffered to preserve the potentially significant Samuel Byers House. The applicant has reserved the right to adaptively reuse the structure as they deem appropriate. • Cemeteries - The applicant has proffered to identify and preserve any cemeteries found on the project site. M. Section 13: Commercial Center (Proffer Statement, p. 16, 17) • Commercial Center Location and Development - The applicant has proffered to locate a commercial center on land identified as Land Bay V on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP). The applicant has proffered a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial land use in Stephenson Village, of which the majority will be located in the commercial center. Smaller commercial nodes may be located within the mixed residential land bay (Land Bay III). • Minimum Commercial Space Guaranteed - The applicant has proffered to construct 60,000 square feet of commercial space within the commercial center no later- than the issuance of the 1,500th non -age restricted residential building permit. The applicant has further proffered to complete development of this space within 18 months of commencement of construction. The applicant has attached two caveats to the timing of construction of the proffered commercial space. Notably, the applicant reserves the right to delay commencement of commercial construction for a two year period beyond the date of issuance of the 1,5001h residential building permit should either of the following occur: (1) an elementary school has not been constructed within the carmnunity; or, (2) a building permit is obtained for development of a new grocery store within a three mile radius of the plarmed Stephenson Village commercial center location. N. Section 14: Rent Free County Office Space (Proffer Statement, p. 17) • Office Space - The applicant has proffered to provide up to 2,500 square feet of shell space for a ten (10) year period within the commercial center for the location of a public service satellite facility for Frederick County. Per the proffer, Frederick County must build out and occupy the space within two (2) years of completion of the base building. Should such occupancy fail to occur with the two year time period, the space will revert back to the applicant. O. Section 15: Community Design for a Strong Sense of Place (Proffer Statement, p. 17, 18, 19) • Design - The applicant has proffered to coordinate design to ensure aesthetic continuity throughout the development. Such continuity will be achieved through the use of uniformly applied custom treatments, such as: custom street sign and REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 26 June 27, 2003 fixtures, standardized fencing, and community color themes. Also, the applicant has proffered to employ decorative treatments at all entrance monuments. No illustratives detailing design features are provided with the proffer statement. • Architecture - The applicant has proffered to employ the architectural styling depicted on the housing unit type exhibits for the following housing unit types: carriage house, non -alley carriage house, cottage house, and courtyard cluster. It is further proffered that other housing types utilized in the development will incorporate compatible architectural treatments. • Fire Protection System - The applicant has proffered to install 13-D type sprinkler systems in all courtyard cluster and cottage houses as well as in the garages accompanying these housing types. P. Section 16: Environmental Features and Habitat Preservation (Proffer Statement, p. 19, 20, 21) • Buffer and Conservation Easements - The applicant has proffered a one -hundred (100) foot wide "non -disturbance" buffer adjacent to each side of Hiatt Run and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel. This buffer will be located wholly outside of platted lots. The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel are located as shown on the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) and are designated by the applicant as resource protection areas. • Flood Plain Buffer - No platted lot will be located closer than twenty (20) feet to the limits of the 100-year flood plain. The ten (10) feet of this buffer located immediately adjacent to the flood plain will remain undisturbed. Should this area be disturbed during development, it will be replanted as specified by proffer. • Hiatt Run Corridor - As noted above, the Hiatt Run Corridor is identified as a resource protection area by the applicant. The applicant has proffered a minimum buffer of twenty (20) feet adjacent to all wetland preservation areas, which are generally coincident with or in close proximity to the Hiatt Run Corridor. The vegetation located on the south side of the corridor will be preserved and/or reforested pursuant to a Forest Management Plan that will be developed with input fiom the Virginia Department of Forestry. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to install native plantings on the north side of the corridor in an effort to protect riparian resources and enhance wildlife and bird habitats. • Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel - As noted above, the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel is identified as a resource protection area by the applicant. The applicant has proffered to provide native plantings within this area to form an upland buffer. Individual platted lots may be located within this zone; however, clearing and grading will be prohibited via restrictive covenants, with the Homeowner's Association bearing responsibility for enforcement of said restrictions. • Forest Management Plan - The applicant has proffered to prepare a Forest Stewardship and Management Plan with technical assistance from the Virginia Department of Forestry. This plan will identify native vegetation and tree clusters to be preserved on the site and delineate resource management practices to ensure 0 0 REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 27 June 27, 2003 effective conservation. Q. Section 17: Community Curbside Trash Collection (Proffer Statement, p. 21, 22) • Commercial Trash Collection - The applicant has proffered that the proposed development will be served by private trash removal contractors. The applicant intends to assign full responsibility for enforcement of this proffer to the Homeowners Association. R. Section 18: Water and Sewer Improvements in the Stephenson Area (Proffer Statement, p. 22) • Pump Station Construction - The applicant has proffered to dedicate land for a regional pump station pursuant to the selection of said property by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). The applicant has further proffered to construct the pump station prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit in Stephenson Village. • Infrastructure Construction - The applicant has proffered to construct all water and sewer lines required to serve private land uses within Stephenson Village in accordance with the provisions of the FCSA Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan. Moreover, the applicant has proffered to extend adequately sized water and sewer lines to the property boundary of all land dedicated for public uses. S. Section 19: Comprehensive Plan Conformity (Proffer Statement, p. 22) • Public Facilities - Acceptance of the proffer statement will serve as the formal authorization for the provision and location of those public uses and facilities referenced in the proffer statement and on the Generalized Development Plan (GDP), to include the extension of water and sewer lines, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.2-2232 and the Frederick County Code. No further review for Comprehensive Plan conformance would be necessary. T. Section 20: Creation of Homeowners Association(s) (Proffer Statement, p. 23) • This proffer provision acknowledges the applicant's responsibility to establish one or more Homeowners Associations for Stephensons Village. U. Section 21: Proffered Housing Types (Proffer Statement, p. 23, 24) 0 Unique Housing Types - The applicant has proffered the inclusion of several 0 • REZ #06-03, Stephenson Village Page 28 June 27, 2003 housing types that will be new to the Frederick County market. Specifically, the following unique housing types will be developed: Carriage House, Non -Alley Carriage House, Cottage House, Courtyard Cluster, and Elderly Housing. The applicant has also proffered alternative dimensional standards for single family detached and townhouse housing types, which the applicant refers to as "modified single family detached" and "modified townhouse attached dwelling." V. Section 22: Streetscape Design and Landscaping (Proffer Statement, p 24, 25) • Major Collector Road Landscaping - The applicant has proffered to provide landscaped areas on each side of the major collector road as detailed in Exhibit D. Such landscaping is proposed coincident with a request for modification of the road efficiency buffer required by ordinance. The applicant has proffered to install landscaping along the roadway as specified by proffer. W. Section 23: Community Signage Program (Proffer Statement, p. 25, 26) • Entrance Signage - The applicant has proffered dimensions for the monument style entrance signs to Stephenson Village. Moreover, entry features distinguishing the neighborhoods within the community will be provided. No illustratives have been provided for such signage. • Freestanding Commercial Signs - The applicant has proffered that fieestanding commercial signs shall be monument style and will be limited in height to twenty (20) feet. Such signs shall be spaced a minimum of one hundred (100) feet. Commercial signage will incorporate design elements comprising the entrance features of surrounding neighborhoods. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 07/02/03 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This application is a request to rezone approximately 821 acres of RA -zoned property to the R4 District to facilitate development of a planned residential community consisting of 2,800 dwelling units and 250,000 square feet of commercial uses with 44 acres dedicated for public uses. The Comprehensive Policy Plan specifically addresses the planned land use of the subject parcels through the policies adopted with the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP). These policies recommend the establishment of industrial land use on the parcels. The requested rezoning is, therefore, inconsistent with the adopted land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. It is important to reiterate that the modifications requested by the applicant are essential to the viability of the proffered development program. Absent these modifications, the development parameters proposed for Stephenson Village will not comply with the requirements of the R4 District. CRT,, 0 0 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy I lill lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 June 12, 2003 Frederick County Planning Department 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Chris Moh n, Deputy Planning Director Dear Mr. Molnil: The purpose of this letter is to request continuation of the Stephenson Village rezoning application that has been scheduled for the July 2, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. Please reschedule this public hearing for consideration at the July 16, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. Thank you for your assistance regarding this matter. Sincerely, �'U Li Evan Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering Cc: Don Shockey JUIN J. 2i H03 Thomas Lawson Engineers Surveyors Telephone540-662-4185 pAX 540-722-9528 www.greenwayeng.com J� COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director^^ RE: Public Hearing Dates: NELUP and Stephenson Village Rezoning DATE: April 29, 2003 Based on discussions this morning, staff has drafted a tentative schedule for the public hearing dates for the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) and the Stephenson Village rezoning application. Please let me know if additional information is necessary. Northeast Land Use Plan public hearings: May 21 ,2003 at the Planning Commission June 11, 2003 at the Board of Supervisors Stephenson Village rezoning application public hearing: July 2, 2003 at the Planning Commission August 13, 2003 at the Board of Supervisors Staff would note that it would be our intent to provide the Planning Commission with their July 2, 2003 meeting agenda by Monday, June 16, 2003. Therefore, the applicant would be expected to provide staff all revisions to the rezoning application package by June 6, 2003. ERL/rsa cc: Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Planning Director Renee' S. Arlotta, Administrative Assistant, Planning Dept. Carol Bayliss, Executive Secretary, County Administration FILE: U:\Eric\Coiiuiioii\2003\Rczoniiig\StephensonVilla-0e\public hearing schedule. AI)d 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff Fee Amount Paid Zoning Amendment Number QG: 0Date Received PC Hearing Date 15 7 b3 BOS Hearing Date 5_ jQ_03 The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: 540-662-418 5 Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane, Winchester, VA 22602 2. Property Owner (if different from above) Name: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Telephone: 540-667-7700 Address: PO Box 2530. Winchester. VA 22604 3. Contact person if other than above Name: Evan Wyatt, AICP Telephone: 540-662-4185 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map X Agency Comments X Plat X Fees X Deed to Property X Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of taxes paid X Proffer Statement X 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: Stephenson Associates, L.C. - J. Donald Shockey, Manager 6. A) Current Use of the Property B) Proposed Use of the Property: 7. Adjoining Property: RA - Agricultural R4 — Residential Planned Commu PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING See attached list 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact located based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route number): The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south 'of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. • 0 Information to be Submitted for Capital Facilities Impact Model In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density or intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page 9 of the application package. 9. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number 44-((A))-31 (portion)44-((A))-31 A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293 Magisterial: Fire Service Rescue Service 10. 11. Districts Stonewall Clearbrook Fire & Rescue Dept. Clearbrook Fire & Rescue Dent. High School: Middle School: James Wood HS Jarnes Wood Middle Elementary School: Stonewall Elementary Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 821.7± RA R4 821.7± Total Acreage to be rezoned The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: Townhome: Multi -Family Non -Residential Lots: Mobile Home: Hotel Rooms: Note: 2,800 maximum residential units to conform with Housing Unit Type % Range specified in Article 3A(2) Exhibit A of the Proffer Statement. Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: 60,000 sq.ft. max. Service Station: Retail: 190,000 s .ft.max Manufacturing: Restaurant: 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. 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 bet of my (our) knowledge. ti Applicant(s): �,1 (� . (j�Date: 7 0 3 Owner (s): 710 k� 1� S y tj MAR 2 1 2003 1 Mike Ruddy From: Cheryl Shiffler Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 10:40 AM To: Mike Ruddy Cc: Sharon Kibler Subject: FW: Memo Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Proffer Attachments: ProffersClea rbrookFireandRescueMemotoFinance120915.pdf That works. Thanks From: Mike Ruddy Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 10:24 AM To: Cheryl Shiffler Subject: RE: Memo Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Proffer Please find the memo attached. Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks. Mike. From: Cheryl Shiffler Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:09 AM To: Mike Ruddy Subject: RE: That works From: Mike Ruddy Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:07 AM To: Cheryl Shiffler Subject: RE: Absolutely. Thanks. 1 hour ok? Mike. From: Cheryl Shiffler Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 8:24 AM To: Mike Ruddy Subject: Mike, Are you getting me a memo today for Clearbrook proffers? CBS o 0 �oA- c3c, i��cuw 'k 9 0 From: Mike Ruddy Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 10:24 AM To: Cheryl Shiffler Subject: RE: Memo Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Proffer Attachments: ProffersClearbrookFireandRescue MemotoFinance120915.pdf Please find the memo attached. Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks. Mike. From: Cheryl Shiffler Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:09 AM To: Mike Ruddy Subject: RE: That works From: Mike Ruddy Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:07 AM To: Cheryl Shiffler Subject: RE: Absolutely. Thanks. 1 hour ok? Mike From: Cheryl Shiffler Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 8:24 AM To: Mike Ruddy Subject: Mike, Are you getting me a memo today for Clearbrook proffers? CBS i COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Cheryl Shiffler, Finance Director FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director RE: Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue/Stephenson Village Proffer DATE: December 9, 2015 Staff has been contacted by members of the Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department regarding the transfer of two (2) proffer payments in the amount of $50,000 each, $100,000 total, from the County to the Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company. The payments were made directly to Frederick County on 12/30/10 and 12/18/13 to satisfy proffer commitments associated with the Stephenson Village Planned Residential Community, Rezoning #06-03. Please move forward with the disbursement of these proffer payments through the appropriate methods. If you need anything fiu•ther from me, please let me know. mTwdnv 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Pam Deeter From: Eric Lawrence Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:44 AM To: 'whitwag@aol.com' Cc: Pam Deeter Subject: Clear brook Fire&Rescue Whit- Following upon our conversation yesterday regarding payments for Clear Brook Volunteer Fire & Rescue from the Snowden Bridge developer.... Our records indicate that the Snowden Bridge developer (aka Stephenson Associates) has paid 3 of their 4 $50,000 proffered payments. The first payment went straight from Stephenson Associates to the fire company. The 2"d and 3`d payments were submitted to the County; these 2 payments have not been disbursed to the Clear Brook F&R. The fourth and final payment is not due until December 2018. -Eric ('iv(Iv1 15 1r Er"'c's, f Yl , (vt (o Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Director Department of Planning and Development County of Frederick 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 540-665-5651 elawrenc@fcva.us www.FCVA.us/Planning 1 r(�.. 41y«,11(toIC GO t - $ Oc1C) i 0 n December 16, 2013 0 L- IR Bflan 00KFIErLO H O M E S Frederick County Department of Planning 107 North Kent Street Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Mr. Eric Lawrence Planning Director Dear Mr. Lawrence: DEC 18 Enclosed please find a check from Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC payable to the Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue in the amount of $50,000.00. This check is in regard to Proffer Commitment #6 of the Proffer Statement for Stephenson Village Planned Residential Community, Rezoning #06-03 which states that the applicant is to pay $50,000 within 30 days of the issuance of the 1,000th building permit in Stephenson Village, but no later than December 31, 2013. This is the third of four total anticipated payments. The next payment will be due December 31, 2018 or upon issuance of the 1,500th building permit (whichever comes first). Should you have any questions or concerns, please call me directly at (571) 581-4791. Sincerely, Scott Gookin, P.E. Development Director k7UR'l () Oa - 03 As--p r l -n A-n^ 1 V1Hait BROOKFIELD HOMES 6500 Executive Park Avenue • Suite 300 • Fairfax, Virginia 22031 Telephone: 703,270.1400. Facsimile: 703.270.1401 r �i Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 Index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 225 183 X $5,327 = $6,550 MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM: In consideration of the approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of_$200,000.00 for its general fund. This -is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Fir6-and Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. $5,0,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 500 th building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. ; $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,0001h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. Brookfield Management Washington, LLC 66-798/531 NC Brookfield Stephenson Village LLC 8500 Executive Park Ave., Suite 300 Fairfax, VA 22031 DATE CHECK NO. AMOUNT 11/29/2013 257754 $*****50,000.00 PAY Fifty Thousand and 00/100------------------------------• TO THE CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE ORDER OF Bank of America Ii'257751,11, 10w0531079891: 2370L73313B6[in NOTES RECEIPT 'jr6 `+ DATE r1� tI0 NO. i RECEIVED FROM t��OOK"J I 'V�^�yl O M: f AD D R f SS 86,00 �X �,c�—► �/ tZ P� �"K �Vf— . Q.i e— D FOR ACCOUNT HOW PAID AMT. OF ACCOUNT CASH AMT./j eO (j PAID jvV CHECK'( BALANCE MONEY DUE ORDER 85)5816 a r kx t Al2 iI ©2001 rFnlrorsrt, ® 81.818 .,AkA AAowjM 66dIC' � U 0, 0 o 0. Page 1 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 September 3, 2003 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 The undersigned, Stephenson Associates, L.C., (hereinafter referred to as Applicant), its successors and/or assigns, hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict accordance with the following conditions and shall supersede all other proffers made prior hereto. In the event the above -referenced amendments are not granted as applied for by the Applicant, the below described proffers shall be withdrawn and null and void. The headings of the proffers set forth below, the Table of Contents and the Executive Summary have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the site adjacent to the improvement, unless otherwise specified herein. References made to the Master Development Plan, hereinafter referred to as the Generalized Development Plan, as required by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, are to be interpreted to be references to the specific Generalized Development Plan sheets prepared by Greenway Engineering and Land Planning and Design Group, dated September 3, 2003 attached as Exhibit A. The exact boundary and acreage of each land bay may be shifted to a reasonable degree at the time of site plan submission for each land bay in order to accommodate engineering or design considerations. The Applicant is submitting a Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) as a part of the rezoning application. The Generalized Development Plan is provided in lieu of a Master Development Plan, and contains all information deemed appropriate by the Frederick County Planning Department. The Generalized Development Plan does not eliminate the requirement for a Master Development Plan for the portion of the site to be developed, which will be provided following rezoning approval but prior to any development of any portion of the 794.6±-acre site (Property). Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 Index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 225 183 X $5,327 = $6,550 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM: In consideration ofthe approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of_$200,000.00 for its general fund. This is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Fir6-and Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 500"' building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. ; $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,000`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. g« �V , • HOMES ► I_ DEC 30 2010 _J December 29, 2010 Frederick County Department of Planning 107 North Kent Street Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Attn: Mr. Eric Lawrence Planning Director Re: Stephenson Village Dear Eric: Enclosed please find a check from Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. in the amount of $50,000.00. This check is in regard to Proffer Commitment number 6 of the Proffer Statement for Stephenson Village Planned Residential Community, Rezoning #06-03, which states that the applicant is to pay $50,000.00 within 30 days of the issuance of the 500th building permit within the Stephenson Village (Snowden Bridge)Residential Community, but not later than December 31, 2008. As I am sure you are aware, we are not anywhere near the 500th building permit, however, are also well tardy of the December 2008 date. We apologize for our tardiness, however, in our system of following the proffers, we had entered the permit "tickler" and not the date. Again, please accept our apology for being late on this payment and please forward on the check to the Clear Brook Fire and Rescue Department. Sincerely, Dean Dubbe �?Wkj I BROOKFIELD HOMES 8500 Executive Park Avenue • Suite 300 • Fairfax, Virginia 22031 Telephone: 703.270.1400 • Facsimile: 703.270.1401 9 3rookfield.Stephenson Village t_LC 3500 Executive Park Ave., Suite 300 =airfax, VA 22031 )AYI Fifty Thousand and--.00/100----------- TO THE CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE ORDER •, of Bank of America Bank of America, N.A. ' 004 L 2703►,35311' - 11,00091311m 1:0 5 L0000 L i• a�i 5£NS,nF s ROES c v RECEIVED DATE N0. . 2, D 75 4 ® a) m E lV ac+ No FROM DRESS S , m cu E+°;o� �• 2 o ate, � >Z V) lD DOLLARS ��t Qd�� a� N CI FOR R ,`^y •. ----�- O > N < e i Q FOR / 1� �" �\ ��7,ao03 INN, II, �� v� Y N 41 V7 to AMT.OF -i�Lidf� 7ij'►l '' ,j�P' e� C Q V YCU L) ACCOUNT I CASH _0 = Z U AMT. PAID Q� T-- CHECK �Q• O^ _= p u [] > � BALANCE I MONEY DUE ORDER BYTZI _%�7�•A�S••is�tBN'1i�dihM'�'1 ^_......h;:itL".cL. •i•'Lu�_: tint nt ,L r -1-.7 �t=i:.: !:: rz. _ -ni.' — riliiyyyy.i�i�Slt. = e.%„'i..•..iva - �►� COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 5401665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Stephenson Village Rezoning File FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP.Qr- RE: Payment of 1st Fire and Rescue Monetary Contribution DATE: October 5, 2004 This memorandum confirms that the Shockey Companies have made their first $50,000 proffered monetary payment to the Volunteer Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Company. This payment was identified by the Stephenson Village proffer statement as being due within nine months of the approval of the rezoning application. As of this date, Don Shockey has advised the County Administrator that the payment was made. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 HH0HKIIIIO H O M E S i December 16, 2013 Frederick County Department of Planning 107 North Kent Street Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Mr. Eric Lawrence Planning Director Dear Mr. Lawrence: Enclosed please find a check from Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC payable to the Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue in the amount of $50,000.00. This check is in regard to Proffer Commitment #6 of the Proffer Statement for Stephenson Village Planned Residential Community, Rezoning #06-03 which states that the applicant is to pay $50,000 within 30 days of the issuance of the 1,000`h building permit in Stephenson Village, but no later than December 31, 2013. This is the third of four total anticipated payments. The next payment will be due December 31, 2018 or upon issuance of the 1,500`h building permit (whichever comes first). Should you have any questions or concerns, please call me directly at (571) 581-4791. Sincerely, Scott Gookin, P.E. Development Director BROOKFIELD HOMES 6500 Executive Park Avenue - Suite 300 - Fairfax, Virginia 22031 Telephone: 703.270,1400 - Facsimile: 703.270.1401 o_3 Vttiayt /r I J Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 Index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 225 183 X $5,327 = $6,550 MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM: In consideration of the approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of_$200,000.00 for its general fund. This is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Fireand Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. ; $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,000`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. Brookfield Management Washington, LLC Brookfield Stephenson Village LLC 8500 Executive Park Ave., Suite 300 Fairfax, VA 22031 66-798/531 NC DATE CHECK NO. AMOUNT 11/29/2013 257754 $*****50,000.00 PAY Fifty Thousand and 00/100 ------------------------------- TOTHE CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE ORDER OF Bank of America V257754Ile 1:0531079891: 2 3 ?0 1 ? 3 3 138 Pow NOTES I P DATE I �U -NO. 85 8 16 RECEIVED FROM COO' \� "u d TA ADDRFSS 'soo ,cam ✓ ! �� A V�.;d,f ��OD + r �X r/ 3t FOR �r 1 f 1� i-0 0 K �%Q A .� .Yl 't`y-u- _ ACCOUNT _ HO 0-)l e �o AMT. N ACCOUNT CASH _ t) -7 o L(' V f " - ©� tJ ' .t i ' ,3 _. . AMT. PAID CHECK BY lJt u BALANCE DUE MONEY ORDER 62 u (02001 R9!!FMM ® 81-818 J V-A- 14l 0old erg. 6r,d�C., Pam Deeter From: Eric Lawrence Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:44 AM To: 'whitwag@aol.com' Cc: Pam Deeter Subject: Clear brook Fire&Rescue Whit- Following up on our conversation yesterday regarding payments for Clear Brook Volunteer Fire & Rescue from the Snowden Bridge developer.... Our records indicate that the Snowden Bridge developer (aka Stephenson Associates) has paid 3 of their 4 $50,000 proffered payments. The first payment went straight from Stephenson Associates to the fire company. The 2"d and 3d payments were submitted to the County; these 2 payments have not been disbursed to the Clear Brook F&R. The fourth and final payment is not due until December 2018. -Eric Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Director Department of Planning and Development County of Frederick 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 540-665-5651 elawrenc@fcva.us www.FCVA.us/Planning 1 r 1 1 lam. ; �� lOi i� �� co � 1 C /-u!I pu r y lf +- s `� f,�, 000 , 1 0 R COUNTY of FREDE RICK Rodeiiek B. Willianis Comity Attorney 540%/22-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: rwillia @ co:frederick. va,us December 21; 2012 VIA E-MAIL AND REGULAR MAIL Thomas Moore Lawson, Esq. Lawson and Silek, P.L.C. P.O: Box 2744 Winchester,Virginia 22604 Re: Snowden Bridge = School and recreation parcels Dear Ty: Thank you for contacting the County regarding your client's interest in conveying the Snowden Bridge school and recreation. parcels to the County pursuant to the Proffer Statement for that development. Sections 8A and 8B 1 of the Proffer Statement provide; with respect to each parcel, that the Applicant shall convey the same "not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing" (emphasis added). As such, the plain language of the Proffer Statement requires that the County have, in writing; requested the conveyance, before the conveyance may occur. The County has not to date made such a written request and wishes to defer doing so until a later time, as the Proffer Statement allows it to do. Along siinilar lines, and of particular significance as Well, Virginia Code § 15.2-1803 in pertinent part in fact requires the affirmative acceptance of conveyances to a locality: "No such deed shall be valid unless accepted by the locality, which acceptance shall appear on the face thereof or on a separately recorded instrument and shall be executed by a person authorized to act on behalf of the locality." Again, there is no such acceptance by the County at the present time: I trust that your client might understand the County's reasons for its decision. Significantly, section 8D of the Proffer Statement requires the County to have, within ten years of a conveyance of a parcel, completed or installed facilities consistent with the public purposes described in the Proffer Statement.. The County (and the Schools) has not necessarily at the present time taken sufficient steps to ensure that such condition could be fulfilled. Furthermore,. because Section 8D of the Proffer Statement gives the Applicant the right to repurchase the land (at what would be a severely discounted price, I might add) should the condition not be fulfilled, 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601 0 M Thomas Moore Lawson, Esq. December 21, 2012 Page 2 the County cannot accept such risks as would be inherent in accepting the conveyance at this time. We appreciate the opportunity to consider your client's offer and look forward to the continuing development of Snowden Bridge and the eventual time when the County will be best positioned to complete the facilities contemplated for Snowden Bridge. SiricelelY Yours,. Roderick B. Williams County Attorney cc: John R. Riley, Jr. Eric R. Lawrence . Jason Robertson Matthew Hott David Sovine Wayne Lee I a-1 �'0'110 rJ0)060, o� Page 1 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 September 3, 2003 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 The undersigned, Stephenson Associates, L.C., (hereinafter referred to as Applicant), its successors and/or assigns, hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict accordance with the following conditions and shall supersede all other proffers made prior hereto. In the event the above -referenced amendments are not granted as applied for by the Applicant, the below described proffers shall be withdrawn and null and void. The headings of the proffers set forth below, the Table of Contents and the Executive Summary have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the site adjacent to the improvement, unless otherwise specified herein. References made to the Master Development Plan, hereinafter referred to as the Generalized Development Plan, as required by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, are to be interpreted to be references to the specific Generalized Development Plan sheets prepared by Greenway Engineering and Land Planning and Design Group, dated September 3, 2003 attached as Exhibit A. The exact boundary and acreage of each land bay may be shifted to a reasonable degree at the time of site plan submission for each land bay in order to accommodate engineering or design considerations. The Applicant is submitting a Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) as a part of the rezoning application. The Generalized Development Plan is provided in lieu of a Master Development Plan, and contains all information deemed appropriate by the Frederick County Planning Department. The Generalized Development Plan does not eliminate the requirement for a Master Development Plan for the portion of the site to be developed, which will be provided following rezoning approval but prior to any development of any portion of the 794.6±-acre site (Property). Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 Index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 225 183 X $5,327 = $6,550 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM: In consideration of;the approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of_$200,000.00 for its general fund. This is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Fire -and Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 500`h building permit in� Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,000`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. • �j R • HHOOKFIILn H O M E S December 29, 2010 Frederick County Department of Planning 107 North Kent Street Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Attn: Mr. Eric Lawrence Planning Director Re: Stephenson Village Dear Eric: DEC 302010; l.. J Enclosed please find a check from Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. in the amount of $50,000.00. This check is in regard to Proffer Commitment number 6 of the Proffer Statement for Stephenson Village Planned Residential Community, Rezoning #06-03, which states that the applicant is to pay $50,000.00 within 30 days of the issuance of the 5001h building permit within the Stephenson Village (Snowden Bridge)Residential Community, but not later than December 31, 2008. As I am sure you are aware, we are not anywhere near the 500`h building permit, however, are also well tardy of the December 2008 date. We apologize for our tardiness, however, in our system of following the proffers, we had entered the permit "tickler" and not the date. Again, please accept our apology for being late on this payment and please forward on the check to the Clear Brook Fire and Rescue Department. Sincerely, n Dean Dubbe BROOKFIELD HOMES 8500 Executive Park Avenue • Suite 300 • Fairfax, Virginia 22031 Telephone: 703.270.1400 • Facsimile: 703.270.1401 0 Brookfield Stephenson Village LLC 8500 Executive 203ark Ave., Suite 300 Fairfax, C PAY Fifty Thousand and 00/100-------- TO THE CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE ORDER OF Bank of America BN.A. ank of America, ' u'000 9L3„s r:05L0000L7r: 00L•L2703t,35311 sa 51�- AMOUNT DATE CHECK NO. 000913 *****50000.00 11/19/2010 0 v RECEIVE � DATE �� V � NO. � O 7 9 "�' °7 m m DRESS v E o - >- p N ❑FORK T DOLLARS Sy.OoL. v O 0 � + cWD j rH U, ❑FOR ��A ACCOUNT h►� Q -o3 -- II06 f�flf�l� If Y v QJ ]C +�- U'j ACCOUNT CASH C -0O C Z L V l�D AMT. PAID O� r CHECK �Q L.Ld C p Ln BALANCE 11 DUE MONEY ORDER B'(T COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Stephenson Village Rezoning File FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP,,,,� RE: Payment of 1" Fire and Rescue Monetary Contribution DATE: October 5, 2004 This memorandum confirms that the Shockey Companies have made their first $50,000 proffered monetary payment to the Volunteer Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Company. This payment was identified by the Stephenson Village proffer statement as being due within nine months of the approval of the rezoning application. As of this date, Don Shockey has advised the County Administrator that the payment was made. 107 North Dent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 Index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 225 183 X $5,327 = $6,550 MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM: In consideration of the approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of $200,000.00 for its general fund. This is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Fir6-and Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: ' $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. 10 § LP°�` $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 5001h buildiij permit in�� d i Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. 1 a ' �i'°i ��✓� $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,000`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. }��, 0 Cu, COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Stephenson Village Rezoning File FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP. -, Nj - RE: Payment of 1" Fire and Rescue Monetary Contribution DATE: October 5, 2004 This memorandum confirms that the Shockey Companies have made their first $50,000 proffered monetary payment to the Volunteer Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Company. This payment was identified by the Stephenson Village proffer statement as being due within nine months of the approval of the rezoning application. As of this date, Don Shockey has advised the County Administrator that the payment was made. t 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Pain teeter From: Eric Lawrence rent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:44 AM To: 'whitwag@aol.com' Cc: Pam Deeter Subject: Clear brook Fire&Rescue Whit- Following up on our conversation yesterday regarding payments for Clear Brook Volunteer Fire & Rescue from the Snowden Bridge developer.... Our records indicate that the Snowden Bridge developer (aka Stephenson Associates) has paid 3 of their 4 $50,000 proffered payments. The first payment went straight from Stephenson Associates to the fire company. The 2"d and 3rd payments were submitted to the County; these 2 payments have not been disbursed to the Clear Brook F&R. The fourth and final payment is not due until December 2018. -Eric Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Director Department of Planning and Development County of Frederick 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 540-665-5651 elawrenc@fcva.us www.FCVA.us/Planning 1 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 CERTIFIED MAIL, January 14, 2019 Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC 8500 Executive Park, Ave. Ste. 300 Fairfax, VA 22031 RI;: Stephenson Village Rezoning #06-03 Proffered Monetary Contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to the Proffers assigned of Stephenson Village Rezoning 1106- 03, approved by Frederick County on September 24, 2003. Specifically, in reference to Proffer # 6 Monetary Contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. I have enclosed a highlighted copy of Proffer# 6. Frederick County is requesting that the Proffer be executed within 90 days of receipt of this letter. - ' LL If you have any questions, please call me at (540) 665-5651. Sincerely, Mark R. Cheran Zoning Administrator MRC/kgs Enclosure em: Judy McCann -Slaughter (jslau h� ter@fcva.us) Gary R. Oates (Greywolfeinc@aol.com) William H. Cline (weline.fi•edco€,ovpc a,icloud,com) 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Cli 1:5 f -"5 c? wo q Pf &Q-0i �oo�„ ; � Wa�.�1e✓ Opp............. 0.00 O000...........0 0.00 64.00 + 89.00 + 104.00 + 15.00 + 23.00 + 31.00 + 22.00 + 56.00 + 47.00 + 23.00 + 44.00 + 58.00 + 48.00 + 35.00 + 4.00 + 015............. 4k �'r, , ' 0 663.00 * ' ■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. ■ Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC Attn: Kimberly S. Mackmin 3201 Jermantown Road Suite 150 Fairfax, VA 22030 A. Signature X IRT'Agent ❑ Addre B. Rec ' ed by rinted Name) C. Date of Del D. Is delivery address different from item 1?/ ❑ Ye! if YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No 3. Service Type ❑ Priority Mail Express® I'IIII III II I I I II I I If) I I I III I III ❑ Adult Signature ❑ Registered Mail"" II O Adult Signature Restricted Delivery ❑ Registered Mail Restricted 9590 9402 4340 8190 3408 91 A Certified Mail© O Certified Mail Restricted Delivery Delivery B Return Receipt for- 0 Collect on Delivery maA°W 2. Article Number (Transfer from service label) ❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery 0 Signature Confirmation*" r"I Sinnnfi— Cnnfir—tknn PS For First -Class Mail Postage & Fees Paid USPS Permit No. G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4® in this box• w'rct!ericic C'o(IntY i)cPart"r.n! ()i' an(! !)cvc!oj)nient 107 Forth Kent Street, Suitc ?02 Winchester, V,`t 22602 „ili1)11111111Jill, ill Mill dI11111,i1,1ii111'ill Jill, lbil1111 tx[ra Jervices & tees (check box, add fee as appropriate) ❑ Return Receipt (hardcopy) $ ❑ Return Receipt (electronic) $ Postmark ❑ Certified Mall Restricted Delivery $ Here ❑ Adult Signature Required $ ❑ Adult Signature Restricted Delivery $ Postage Total Postagr Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC Sent To 8500 Executive Park, Ave. Ste. 300 s«aerFairfax, VA 22031 Z/. Certified Mail service provides the following benefits: ■ A receipt (this portion of the Certified Mail label). for an electronic return receipt, see a retail ■ A unique identifier for your mailpiece. associate for assistance. To receive a duplicate ■ Electronic verification of delivery or attempted return receipt for no additional fee, present this delivery. USPS®-postmarked Certified Mail receipt to the ■ A record of delivery (including the reciplent's retail associate. signature) that is retained by the Postal Service - for a specified period. Important Reminders: ■ You may purchase Certified Mail service with First -Class Mail®, Rrst-Class Package Service®, or Priority Mail® service. ■ Certified Mail service is not available for international mail. ■ Insurance coverage is not available for purchase with Certified Mail service. However, the purchase of Certified Mail service does not change the insurance coverage automatically included with certain Priority Mail items. ■ For an additional fee, and with a proper endorsement on the mailpiece, you may request the following services: - Return receipt service, which provides a record of delivery (including the recipient's signature). You can request a hardcopy return receipt or an electronic version. For a hardcopy return receipt, complete PS Form 3811, Domestic Return Receipt; attach PS Form 3811 to your mailpiece; Restricted delivery service, which provides delivery to the addressee specified by name, or to the addressee's authorized agent. Adult signature service, which requires the signee to be at least 21 years of age (not available at retail). Adult signature restricted delivery service, which requires the signee to be at least 21 years of age and provides delivery to the addressee specified by name, or to the addressee's authorized agent (not available at retail). ■ To ensure that your Certified Mail receipt is accepted as legal proof of mailing, it should bear a USPS postmark. If you would like a postmark on this Certified Mail receipt, please present your Certified Mail item at a Post Office" for postmarking. If you don't need a postmark on this Certified Mail receipt, detach the barcoded portion of this label, affix it to the mailpiece, apply appropriate postage, and deposit the mailpiece. IMPORTANT: Save this receipt for your records. 0 E 9 0 1/17/2019 50,000,00 50,000.00 01 $50,000.00 Deposit Summary 1i171,2019 Clear Brook Volunteer Fire & Rescue, Inc Summary of Deposits to BB&T CKGS 2715 [Fire Program on O1 I T2019 Chk No. PmtMethod Red From Memo Amount 651559 Check Shockey Co. Brookfield%Snowden Proffer 50,000.00 Deposit Subtotal: 50,000.00 Less Cash Back: Deposit Total: 50,000,00 31-s00-BANK BBT 1-8007226-5225 TRANSACTION RECEIPT `, _ Alt items are credited subject to payment. BBT.com Learn more about Online Statements and Mobile Banking at BBT.com Location/Date/Transaction # Amount 2097002 C71507 O23 00276 16.30 01/17/19 IIXXXXXXXXXXXX2715 DUPLICATE DEPOSIT 50,000.00 Member FDIC DEPOSITS SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION AND MAY NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL. THE SHOCKEY COMPANIES JOB/ SUB JOB NO. P.t7.Box 2530 Winchester, Virginia 22604 INV NUMBER —INV DATE DESCRIPTION 1519 01/15/19 Contribution 1W R£ORDEp M5 • 1/.9. PA7 EN7 k0. R33d1M, R8�B506,.7deU8�, 3785Jy;{. Rpp,4kpA. S03a CO DIV VENDOR REFERENCE JAMOUNT 7917 515 GROSS AMOUNT DISCOUNT N 50,000.0 .0 .. _ _ DETACH AND RETAIN THIS STATEMENT THE ATTACHED CHECK IS IN PAY143NT OF IT$RS DESCRIBED AIMS TOTALS 50,000.00 .0 5 IP NOT CORRECT PLnASR NOTIFY US PROMPTLY- 140 RECEIPT DESIRED TCIhc CIIfi4tC lS Vi4{A aJSiFdOi/T A COLORED I30Pi2F ii 0@SA tDACKC4E3t7LrI8A �LHS A ttEiiCdF7 ilEud316ia rnP4T SIATEFIMAHR ON 18II- BAOX - HOLD AT ANGLE TO VIE I The Shocke Com anies BB&T y WINCHESTER,VIRGINIA 45 46 P,O.. Box 2530 Winchester, Virginia 22604 - PAY Fifty Thousand Dollars and 00 Cents CHECK DATE CHECK NO 01 /15/2019 651559 CHECK AMOUNT —50,000.00 VOID AFTER 00 DAYS TO Clear Brook Volunteer THE Fire & Rescue, Inc. ORDER 1256 Brucetown Road OF Clear Brook VA 22624 r 11'65155911' 1:05OX1,2601: 5L3?09?259n' 0 0 Pam Deeter From: Mark Cheran Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 10:54 AM To: Pam Deeter Subject: FW: Snowden Bridge From: Scott Gookin <Scott.Gookin@brookfieldrp.com> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 9:02 AM To: Wade Johnson <WJohnson@Shockeycompanies.com>; Mark Cheran <mcheran@fcva.us> Cc: Natalia Hozdevila <Natalia.Hozdevila@brookfieldrp.com>; Ty Lawson (tlawson@lsplc.com) <tlawson@lsplc.com>; Neil Patel <Neil.Patel@brookfieldrp.com> Subject: RE: Snowden Bridge Yes, that is the one. Mark — Please confirm receipt. Thank you. Scott From: Wade Johnson [mailto:WJohnson(a@Shociceycompanies.comj Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 8:44 AM To: Scott Gookin Cc: Natalia Hozdevila; mcheran@fcva.us; Ty Lawson (tlawson@lsplc.com); Neil Patel Subject: RE: Snowden Bridge Scott, To be clear....are you asking about the $50,000.00 proffer to Clearbrook Fire Hall ??? If so, we mailed the check on 1/15..... John Good confirmed with them they got it. Check # : 651559. Wade From: Scott Gookin<Scott.Gookin@brool<fieldrp.com> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 8:22 AM To: Wade Johnson <WJohnson@Shocl<eycompanies.com> Cc: Natalia Hozdevila <Natalia.Hozdevila@brookfieldrp.com>; mcheran@fcva.us; Ty Lawson (tlawson@lsplc.com) <tlawson@lsplc.com>; Neil Patel <Neil.Patel@brool<fieldrp.com> Subject: RE: Snowden Bridge Hi Wade - Brookfield received a letter dated 1/23/19 from Mark Cheran at Frederick County stating that the $50,000 proffer has not been paid. Per our internally executed agreement, this is a Shockey responsibility and needs to be completed ASAP. Please confirm when this will be completed. Thank you. Scott Gookin Sr. Development Director Brookfield Residential 3201 Jermantown Road, Suite 150, Fairfax, VA 22030 T 571.581.4791 IF 703,270.1401 scott.gookin brookfieldhomes.com www. brookfielddc. corn amm A member of Brookfield Re idenbal Properties Inc. �,F' n(,lr!dli c lir tsri .r .UH._.::rrr mt.Tid'7d . !m the Tim ,c.. nerred abc.'-3 n art, 1' %{te. ,3., #I _ srrt rq ir"f�4' t,r-r .'r) J I:-'..;.. 3! C^its r:::r:,r r �I ., E�'�€•. ..- .Ir,r �.,� (F �[ s : _,i ; :•rrri � �=�i pC�r r f�n:rrt�,c' ;. �.� th;_ �,nl<ri��i rr rr r M>rr3t: firs . i r£.:_-10P€, ". FI (iris <ntF . (^° fl"a iaq ,a T1�2= .; •ry,�u Scott From: Wade Johnson [mailto:WJohnson@Shocl<eycompanies.comj Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 4:37 PM To: Scott Gookin Cc: Natalia Hozdevila Subject: RE: Snowden Bridge Appreciated.... From: Scott Gookin <Scott.Gool<in@brool<fieldrp.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 10:57 AM To: Wade Johnson <WJohnson@Shocl<eycompanies.com> Cc: Natalia Hozdevila <Natalia.Hozdevila@brookfieldrp.com> Subject: Snowden Bridge Hi Wade - Just as a reminder, proffers and agreement state that Shockey is to provide $50,000 monetary contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue by 12/31/18. Scott Gookin Sr. Development Director Brookfield Residential 3201 Jermantown Road, Suite 150, Fairfax, VA 22030 T 571.581.4791 F 703.270.1401 scott.gookinpbrookfieldhomes. com www.brookfielddc.com amm A rnernber of Brookfield Residential Properties Inc. I.i. I".;ynII6. or"lulnut .i•ry ,(__ �'�rrrfd., rUo, ht .-teal r 4 rr 7.r rid. -irk—d . yfm the ,,rr,nr n�� br. u >r 1;r. Ali :, ttl a'J Pcr uwritr�� k .�r th+) uuIJ111,11 °t ,u 'r , slur ftrr- l e ,<��rf,I tr 0 Pam Deeter From: Jack Wampler Jr <wamplershomes@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2018 2:36 PM To: Pam Deeter Subject: Clear Brook Vol Fire & Rescue Hi Pam Just a note to let you know that the fire department hasn't received any checks from Shockey or Snowden Bridge. Thanks. Jack Wampler, Jr. Treasurer 540-539-6112 Kathy Smith From: Microsoft Outlook To: Judy McCann -Slaughter Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 2:14 PM Subject: Delivered: Proffer Stephenson Village -Rezoning #06-03 Your message has been delivered to the following recipients: Judy McCann -Slaughter (jslaughter0fcva.us� Subject: Proffer Stephenson Village -Rezoning #06-03 0 Kathy Smith From: Microsoft Outlook To: Gary Oates Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 2:17 PM Subject: Relayed: Proffer Letter -Stephenson Village Rezoning #06-03 Delivery to these recipients or groups is complete, but no delivery notification was sent by the destination server: Gary Oates (Gre)wolfeincOaol.com) Subject: Proffer Letter -Stephenson Village Rezoning #06-03 AMENDMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: August 20, 2003 - BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: September 24, 2003 Recommended Approval - ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #06-03 FOR STEPHENSON VILLAGE WHEREAS, Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, was submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Plamled Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on August 20, 2003; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on September 24, 2003;and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning, to include nine ordinance modification requests, 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 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District with revised 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 d 9 - 0 3 I 0 This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 24`" day of September 2003 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gina A. Forrester W. Harrington Smith, Jr Lynda J. Tyler Ave Sidney A. Reyes Nay_ Nay Margaret B. Douglas Aye Absent Robert M. Sager Aye lave A COPY ATTEST John R. W, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes. #117]_03 0:\Rcsolutions\2003 Rezoning Rcsolutions\Stephenson Village.wpd • M PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 September 3, 2003 • 0 M TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1. COMMUNITY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT 2 2. PHASING PLAN TO MINIMIZE SUDDEN IMPACTS ON COUNTY SERVICES 2 3. USES, DENSITY AND MIX OF HOUSING TYPES 3 4. APPLICANT TO PAY 100 % OF CAPITAL FACILITY IMPACTS 5 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM 7 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC. 7 7. MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS 8 8. SCHOOL AND BALLFIELD SITES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC USE AREAS 11 9. RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND LINEAR PARK 13 10. ACTIVE ADULT AGE -RESTRICTED HOUSING 14 11. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY 16 12. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 16 13. COMMERCIAL CENTER 16 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE 18 15. COMMUNITY DESIGN FOR A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE 18 16. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND HABITAT PRESERVATION 19 17. COMMUNITY CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION 22 18. WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STEPHENSON AREA 23 19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY 23 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION(S) 23 21. PROFFERED HOUSING TYPES 24 22. STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING 25 23. COMMUNITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM 26 September 3, 2003 Executive Summary Of the Proffer Statement for the Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community The proffers for Stephenson Village define the conditions for the construction and maintenance of a residential planned community based on Smart Growth principles. As envisioned, Stephenson Village will feature a school, public ball fields, recreation centers, trails and convenient shopping that will tie the neighborhoods of Stephenson together and serve as a vital center. Stephenson Village itself will have a distinctive look, a strong architectural theme, and a mixture of housing types to meet the needs of people of all ages, including an age -restricted active adult community and affordable housing for the elderly. The plan emphasizes walkable neighborhoods —with boulevards, sidewalks, bike paths and trails throughout. In addition to the 135.6 acres in the core battlefield area (which is not included in the rezoning request), 794.6±-acre parcel will have approximately 250 acres of open space. Build -out of Stephenson Village is anticipated to take 20 to 25 years. The proffers provide a balance of design and market flexibility and County control over uses and densities. Planned Community Design Stephenson Village will use compact building design with extensive architectural and landscaping standards to create distinctive streetscapes. The proffers specify six new housing types and illustrate floor plans for each. The housing types will be mixed within each neighborhood. To assure overall mixing while maintaining flexibility, the proffers establish maximum percentages for single-family detached, multi -family (townhouse and semi-detached) and age -restricted housing. The design will provide opportunities for people to live, work and shop in the same community. The school and public ball field sites will be located on the north side of the property, along Old Charles Town Road. The center of Stephenson Village will have affordable housing for the elderly and 250,000 square feet of commercial and office space (60,000 square feet guaranteed), including space for a rent-free Frederick County satellite office. Land will be set aside for a day care center in an appropriate location. The south side of Stephenson Village will include a large age -restricted (55 and over) "active adult" community. This will be a gated community with its own recreational facilities and private streets and alleys. In addition, the Applicant will provide a minimum of 144 units for the elderly after sufficient retail space has been occupied to qualify for Federal affordable -housing programs. September 3, 2003 1 Stephenson Associates 030703 ! 0 The proffers establish an overall density cap of 2,465 units exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly, an average of 3.1 units per acre. To avoid sudden impacts on County schools and other services, the proffers establish a cumulative yearly construction cap of 8% on all units that are not age -restricted. Since age -restricted housing has positive tax impact on County budgets and no impact on schools, these unit types will be exempt from the phasing plan. Covering 100 % of Capital Facilities Impacts Economic analysis of Stephenson Village indicates that its proffer payments, taxes and fees will more than cover the cost of County services. The Applicant will cover 100% of the capital costs predicted by the County fiscal impact model for each housing type. These proffer fees will be adjusted every two years using the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Additional proffer fees may be assessed by Frederick County if school population from the project is higher than projected. If the cumulative total increase in students from Stephenson Village exceeds 60 students a year, the County may assess an additional proffer fee of $3,925 for each additional student. Transportation Improvements The Applicant will make transportation improvements to maintain acceptable levels of service on existing roads. These improvements will be triggered by actual traffic counts, with levels specified in the proffers, at permanently installed traffic counters at the entrance on Old Charles Town Road and the southwestern entrance. This will allow us to anticipate traffic increases rather than react to them. Design and construction will begin when traffic reaches 80 percent of the trigger point. A four -lane boulevard will serve the community as the major collector road. This road, identified in the County Comprehensive Policy Plan, runs from Old Charles Town Road in the north to Route 11 in the south. The sides and medians of this boulevard will be heavily landscaped outside of conservation and tree -save areas. The boulevard will have bicycle lanes on each side, and sidewalks or walking trails for the entire length in Stephenson Village. The road will be built first in a two-lane half section, beginning at Old Charles Town Road. The road will be extended to Route 11 and the second two-lane section constructed when traffic counts reach specified limits. This major collector road will be dedicated to VDOT. The Applicant has obtained rights -of -way and easements for off -site transportation improvements and will execute agreements with VDOT. Traffic improvements will include: completing the two-lane half -section of the major collector road, extending the major collector road to the Rutherford Farm intersection at Route 11, widening Old Charles Town Road to three lanes between the entrance and Route 11, signalizing (with turn lanes) the northern entrance, and signalizing (with turn lanes) of the September 3, 2003 11 Stephenson Associates 030703 0 9 Page 1 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 September 3, 2003 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 The undersigned, Stephenson Associates, L.C., (hereinafter referred to as Applicant), its successors and/or assigns, hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict accordance with the following conditions and shall supersede all other proffers made prior hereto. In the event the above -referenced amendments are not granted as applied for by the Applicant, the below described proffers shall be withdrawn and null and void. The headings of the proffers set forth below, the Table of Contents and the Executive Summary have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the site adjacent to the improvement, unless otherwise specified herein. References made to the Master Development Plan, hereinafter referred to as the Generalized Development Plan, as required by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, are to be interpreted to be references to the specific Generalized Development Plan sheets prepared by Greenway Engineering and Land Planning and Design Group, dated September 3, 2003 attached as Exhibit A. The exact boundary and acreage of each land bay may be shifted to a reasonable degree at the time of site plan submission for each land bay in order to accommodate engineering or design considerations. The Applicant is submitting a Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) as a part of the rezoning application. The Generalized Development Plan is provided in lieu of a Master Development Plan, and contains all information deemed appropriate by the Frederick County Planning Department. The Generalized Development Plan does not eliminate the requirement for a Master Development Plan for the portion of the site to be developed, which will be provided following rezoning approval but prior to any development of any portion of the 794.6±-acre site (Property). ! 0 Page 2 September 3, 2003 1. COMMUNITY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT: In order for the Applicant and Frederick County to implement the Residential Community, it will be important for the Applicant and Frederick County Planning Staff to have the opportunity to anticipate, incorporate and to develop new advanced housing types and configurations that may be suitable in a Residential Planned Community. These housing types will include many of the neo-traditional housing types which are proffered in this Proffer Statement which allow for the creation of a true community and for the maximization and preservation of natural corridors and open space for the use and enjoyment of the community at large. A. Pursuant to Article II, Amendments of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the approval of this Proffer statement constitutes an amendment to the zoning ordinance, which will allow the expansion of the R4 District. B. The Applicant has proffered a Community Design Modification Document that is attached and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit F, and which is accepted by Frederick County. In addition to the above, by approving this Proffer Statement, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors agrees without need of any further Board of Supervisors or Planning Department approval to any modifications for any matter which has been previously agreed to and therefore approved by Frederick County. Further still, any submitted revisions to the approved Generalized Development Plan, the approved Master Development Plan and/or any of its requirements for any development zoned R-4 which affect the perimeter of the development or which would increase the overall density of the development shall require the Board of Supervisors' approval. If, in the reasonable discretion of the Frederick County Planning Department, the Planning Department decides any requested modification should be reviewed by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, it may secure said approval by placing this matter before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at its next regularly scheduled meeting. However, and not withstanding what is stated above, once a modification has been approved administratively, the Applicant shall not be required to seek approval for any subsequent similar modification. 2. PHASING PLAN TO MINIMIZE SUDDEN IMPACTS ON COUNTY SERVICES: A. Additional Proffer Pa_ ment To minimize sudden increases in the Frederick County Public School population and sudden impacts on other county services, the Applicant shall implement the following phasing plan on all residential housing that is not age -restricted. To ensure that unanticipated increases in Frederick County Public School population do not burden the county with extra costs, Frederick County may assess the Applicant to effectively double school - related proffers for each student that exceeds a cumulative yearly total increase of 60 students per year. • Page 3 September 3, 2003 The total number of new Frederick County Public School students generated by Stephenson Village will be determined from the September 30 report produced by Frederick County Public Schools. The Applicant proffers to reimburse Frederick County Public Schools for its cost of creating the September 30 report data related to Stephenson Village. This additional proffer payment will be provided to Frederick County by the Applicant within 30 days of receipt of the September 30 report produced by Frederick County Public Schools. If the reported number of Frederick County Public School students generated by Stephenson Village exceeds the cumulative total of 60 students per year (9/30/03=60, 9/30/04=120, etc.), the Applicant shall pay an additional proffer payment of $3,925 as assessed by Frederick County for each Frederick County Public School child that exceeds the cumulative total. The additional proffer payment will be adjusted every two years by the Consumer Price Index. B. Limitation on Permits (1) Calculation The active adult housing units and the affordable housing for the elderly have been removed from the restrictions imposed by the phasing plan and are not part of the following phasing plan formula nor will they be included in the yearly building permit tracking system. The overall density cap for Stephenson Village is 2,465 units, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly. Once the planned number of active adult housing units and the affordable housing for the elderly have been removed, the adjusted total number of units subject to phasing restriction is 1,665. The phasing allowed quantities shall be limited to 8% per year on a cumulative yearly basis beginning with the date of approval of this rezoning based on the following formula: (2,465 — 800 to 1,300 range of age restricted units) x 8% + unused permits from prior year(s) = maximum non -age restricted permits for current year Any units not used in a given year shall be carried forward. USES DENSITY AND MIX OF HOUSING TYPES: A. (1) The Applicant shall develop a mix of housing unit types to include those single-family detached, townhouse and multifamily housing unit types described in the Land Bay Breakdown Table in §3A(2) and further described in §21 of this proffer statement. Each of the housing unit types in the R4 District, Section 165-67 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, is either a single-family dwelling, townhouse or multifamily unit type. For purposes of this Proffer, all of the above housing types shall be referred to as Mixed Residential. The following list could be used as they currently exist within the R-4 portion of the zoning ordinance. • Page 4 September 3, 2003 (2) The following list of Land Bays within the Land Bay Breakdown Table sets forth the development parameters on the Property and is consistent with the proffered Generalized Development Plan identified as Exhibit A: LAND BAY BREAKDOWN LAND LAND USE ACREAGE % OF TOTAL BAY HOUSING UNIT TYPES MIN. MAX. I ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 20 Ac. NA NA II COMMUNITY PARK 24 Ac. NA NA (6 baseball fields & 6 soccer fields) IlI MIXED RESIDENTIAL 475 Ac. CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL/DAYCARE 7 Ac.* NA NA SFD 30 53 (Housing Unit Type 1,2,4,5, RP District SFD & Active Adult) TOWNHOUSE 10 30 (Housing Unit Type 6 & RP District Townhouse) MULTIFAMILY 7 30 (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3 & RP District Duplex, Multiplex, Atrium & Active Adult) IV ACTIVE ADULT 126 Ac. 30 53 SFD (Housing Unit Type 1,2 &5) Multifamily (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3) V COMMERCIAL CENTER 26 Ac.* NA NA (Commercial Retail, Office & Public Service Satellite Facility) The actual acreage identified for each Land Bay is based on the bubble diagram calculated on the proffered Generalized Development Plan and may fluctuate within 5% of the total acreage based on final survey work. 0 i Page 5 Land Bav Breakdown Notes September 3, 2003 (1) The above table represents the ranges for the referenced housing types as proposed. The final mix will not exceed the 2,465-unit cap, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) and will be comprised of house type combinations representing a mixture identified in the table. The minimum and maximum percentages established apply to the general categories of single family, townhouses, multifamily and active adult units and are not intended to pertain to any one housing type in those categories. The housing unit type maximum percentage for the general categories of single family, townhouse, multifamily and active adult will not exceed the percentages identified in the table and will not exceed the total unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) based on any combination. *(2) The total commercial area will be a minimum of 4 % of the gross site area or 33 acres and will be located within Land Bays III and V. (3) The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel are approximately 125 acres. The remaining 113.5 acres of required open space will be provided within Land Bays I, II, III and IV. (4) The Applicant reserves the right to convert more of Land Bay III to active adult or affordable housing for the elderly. In no case shall the percentage of active adult or affordable housing for the elderly exceed 53% of the total unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11). B. For purposes of calculating density pursuant to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, all dedications and conveyances of land for public use and/or for the use of the development or any Homeowners Association shall be credited in said calculations. C. There shall be a unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) on the subject property. D. In order to preclude unwanted industrial and heavy commercial uses, all land uses within the B-3 District and the M-1 District shall be prohibited, unless otherwise permitted in the RP District, the B-1 District or the B-2 District. In no case shall truck stops be permitted within Stephenson Village. 4. APPLICANT TO PAY 100% OF CAPITAL FACILITY IMPACTS: The Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model was applied to the Stephenson Village rezoning on January 9, 2003. The results of this model run demonstrate a fiscal impact to capital facilities in the amount of $5,327 per residential unit. Page 6 September 3, 2003 The Applicant will pay 100% of these impacts through monetary contributions and land donations to Frederick County, unless otherwise specified by the proffer. The parties agree that the value used for the land donations of $30,000 per acre is appropriate and acceptable. These monetary contributions provide for the capital facilities impacts created by Stephenson Village and shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance for each unit. The monetary contribution will be adjusted every two years by the Consumer Price Index — All Urban Consumers (Current Series) See example at the end of this section. The Applicant will pay for active adult units a 50% premium on proffer fees for fire and rescue over and above the Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model to cover any increased service demand; similarly, the applicant will pay for affordable apartment units for the elderly a 100% premium. However, these age -restricted units will not include monetary proffers for various capital facilities, such as schools, that they do not impact. The per unit monetary proffer for single family, townhouse and multifamily provides for: $3,925.00 for Frederick County Public Schools ($4,135 per model less $210 for land donation) $635.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation ($889 per model less $254 for land donation) $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue $145.00 for Public Library $152.00 for Administration Building The per unit monetary proffer for active adult units provides for: $635.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation ($889 per model less $254 for land donation) $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue 200.00 50% Premium $600.00 Total for Frederick County Fire and Rescue $145.00 for Public Library $152.00 for Administration Building The per unit monetary proffer for the affordable housing for the elderly provides for: $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue 400.00 100% premium $800.00 Total for Frederick County Fire and Rescue Should the index as currently published by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics cease to be published then the most nearly comparable index shall be used. 0 • Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 Index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 225 183 X $5,327 = $6,550 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM: In consideration of the approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of $200,000.00 for its general fund. This is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Fire and Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,000`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,5001h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. Page 8 September 3, 2003 7. MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS: A. The following are improvements the Applicant will make to roads within the Property: (1) Major Collector Road (a) Pursuant to Section 7F (2), 7F (4) and 7F(5) of this proffer statement, the Applicant shall dedicate an 80 foot right of way and construct the Major Collector Road from Old Charles Town Road through Stephenson Village, and the properties currently owned by McCann and Omps to U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) in accordance with existing agreements executed between all parties to insure conformance with the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The width and configuration of all travel lanes, medians and other elements of the major collector road shall be provided by the Applicant as determined by VDOT. (b) The Applicant shall provide landscaped areas along, within, and/or adjacent to each side of the Major Collector Road in accordance with § 22-A of this proffer. (c) When the Major Collector Road is finally completed as a four lane divided boulevard, the median will be naturally vegetated with a combination of both woodland conservation areas and grassed areas supplemented with landscape plantings. If approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), all plantings, other than those in woodland conservation areas, will be installed by the Applicant and will have a maintenance agreement between VDOT and the Applicant which will transfer to the Homeowners Association of Stephenson Village (HOA) to cover all mowing, weeding, pruning, plant replacements, and irrigation maintenance responsibilities. Irrigation systems within the right-of-way will be designed as a separate system to allow the portion of the irrigation system falling within the right-of-way to be terminated if necessary without affecting the overall system. (d) The Applicant shall provide bicycle lanes within the Major Collector Road right of way over the property to be rezoned that are four feet in width and are contiguous with the outside travel lanes of the Major Collector Road and are properly marked and signed. (e) The Applicant shall prohibit individual residential and commercial entrances from intersecting Milburn Road (Route 662) and further proffers that the Major Collector Road will be the only road crossing of Milburn Road. 0 Page 9 (2) Interparcel Connections September 3, 2003 The Applicant agrees to provide interparcel connections between land bays within the Property at the time the respective land bays are developed and to the extent reasonably possible. (3) Private Streets, Alleys and Common Drives (a) The Applicant shall provide for a gated community entrance for the active adult portion of the overall community and shall serve the active adult community with a complete system of private streets. The cross sectional dimension of pavement thickness and compacted base thickness will meet or exceed the public street pavement section standards utilized by VDOT. (b) Where private alleys are utilized, the Applicant will provide one-way alleys within a sixteen -foot (16') wide easement having twelve feet (12') of pavement with a two foot (2') shoulder on both sides of the pavement throughout the entire community. All private alleys, which intersect other private alleys at 90 degree angles or have turns at 90 degree angles shall provide for a minimum turning radius of 25 feet. Private alleys, intersection, public or private streets, shall provide curb cuts extending two feet beyond the paved edge of the standard alley width. (c) Where private alleys are utilized to serve housing types that front on private streets the Applicant shall provide for a minimum travel aisle width of 24 feet for the private street. The 24 foot travel aisle shall be in addition to on street parking designed for the private street. (d) When Housing Unit Type 4 (courtyard cluster) is developed, the common drive shall meet the following standards: (i) A minimum width of 20 feet (ii) A minimum depth of pavement section shall be a four inch compacted stone base and six inches of concrete or equivalent material. (ill) A "No Parking" sign shall be posted at the entrance to the courtyard. (iv) A fire hydrant shall be provided at the entrance to each corner drive to the courtyard clusters. When common drives are adjacent to or across the street from other courtyard cluster common drives, only one hydrant shall be required. (v) Visitor parking areas will be provided outside of the courtyard cluster common drive area. Page 10 September 3, 2003 B. The applicant has acquired easements and/or rights of way over the properties currently owned by McCann and Omps for the purpose of dedicating and constructing the Major Collector Road and for improvements along the south side of Old Charles Town Road from Route 11 north to the CSX railroad. The Applicant will acquire any additional rights -of -way and/or easements for all off -site transportation improvements proffered hereinafter. In the event the Applicant is not able to acquire any of the said rights -of -way and/or easements, Frederick County agrees to attempt to acquire such rights -of -way and/or easements by appropriate eminent domain proceedings at the request of Applicant and Applicant shall be responsible for all payments made to property owners for rights -of -way and/or easements so acquired. In the event that neither the Applicant nor Frederick County successfully obtains the required rights -of -way or easements for the offsite transportation improvements as required by the traffic study, the Applicant shall be permitted to continue with the development as proposed without any further requirement of right-of-way or easement acquisition or improvement. C. The Applicant will install full size entrance improvements with right and left turn lanes, in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation design guidelines, at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road serving as the entrance to the Stephenson Village Community during the first phase of development. D. The Applicant will execute a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the intersection of U.S. Route 11 and Old Charles Town Road. Additionally, the Applicant will construct full size entrance improvements with both a right turn lane and left turn lane on Old Charles Town Road, and a right turn lane on U.S. Route 11 at said intersection. These improvements will be installed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation design guidelines when warranted by VDOT. E. The Applicant will execute a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road serving as the entrance to the Stephenson Village Community. The Applicant will provide for the signalization at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road based on the terms of this agreement when warranted by the Virginia Department of Transportation. F. The Applicant will design and construct a four -lane boulevard Major Collector Road for the Stephenson Village Community in substantial conformance with the proffered Generalized Development Plan. The Major Collector Road will be constructed in two phases. The first phase will be a two-lane half section that is constructed from Old Charles Town Road to the limits of the development as depicted on the approved Master Development Plan. This phase of the Major Collector Road will be constructed and bonded in segments in accordance with the approved Subdivision Design Plan for Stephenson Village. The second phase of the Major Collector Road will provide for the ultimate four -lane section with appropriate right and left turn lanes based on the following program: (1) The design of the transportation improvements identified in Sections 7(F)2- 7(F)5 of this proffer statement will begin when 80% of the actual traffic count volume is Page 11 September 3, 2003 realized as identified in each Section. The completion of the improvements specified in each Section will occur within 18 months of initial design. (2) Once actual traffic counts of 7,996 vehicle trips per day have been documented on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of the additional lanes to the existing Major Collector Road to its ultimate four -lane section from Old Charles Town Road to the limits of the Major Collector Road within the development. (3) Once the actual traffic count reaches 10,570 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of a three -lane section of Old Charles Town Road, from the Entrance to Stephenson Village to U.S. Route 11 using the existing bridge. (4) Once the actual traffic count reaches 17,699 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of a two lane half section of the Major Collector Road from the limits of the four -lane section to U.S. Route 11 at the Rutherford Farm Industrial Park intersection to include right and left turn lanes on the east side of U.S. Route 11 as determined by VDOT. The Applicant agrees to enter into a signalization agreement with VDOT at the U.S. Route 11/Rutherford Farm Industrial Park intersection if traffic signalization is not otherwise provided at that time. Traffic counters will be installed at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village on the property as part of this improvement. (5) Once the actual traffic count at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village near the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park intersection reaches 7,996 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of the remaining additional lanes to the existing Major Collector Road from the limits of the four -lane section to provide for the ultimate four -lane section ending at the east side of U.S. Route 11. G. The Applicant will provide $50,000 that shall be utilized as matching funds by VDOT and/or the County of Frederick for future improvements to the Interstate 81/U.S. Route 11 interchange at Exit 317. This dollar amount is intended to assist VDOT and the County of Frederick with this regional improvement. The $50,000 will be made available to VDOT or to the County of Frederick, within 30 days of written request for said funds by the appropriate party. 8. SCHOOL AND BALLFIELD SITES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC USE ARFA.q- A. School Site: The Applicant shall dedicate 20 acres of land to the Frederick County School Board for use as a public school site which shall count towards the overall • 9 Page 12 September 3, 2003 open space requirement for the development. Said site will occur within the general location identified as Land Bay I on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), adjacent to Old Charles Town Road, which will allow direct access to the site for citizens living outside of Stephenson Village. The Applicant will allow access for Stephenson Village residents to the site from a local neighborhood street, and will provide access to water and sewer at a point reasonably acceptable to the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, along the property boundary, at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. The Applicant shall convey said school site not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing, at no cost. B. Soccer and Baseball Field Site: (1) The Applicant shall dedicate 24 acres of land to Frederick County or such other entity as Frederick County designates and as more specifically set forth below which, when combined with school ball fields, will be used for 6 soccer fields and 6 baseball fields as shown on the layout for School/Park Site (Exhibit C, graphic for illustrative purposes only), which shall count towards the overall open space requirement for the development. Said site will occur within the general location identified as Land Bay II on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), adjacent to Old Charles Town Road, which will allow direct access to the site for citizens living outside of Stephenson Village. The Applicant will allow access for Stephenson Village residents to the site from a local neighborhood street and will allow access to water and sewer at a point reasonably acceptable along the property boundary, at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. The Applicant shall convey said soccer and baseball field site, not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing, at no cost. (2) Frederick County at its sole discretion may convey or lease its ownership interest in the soccer and baseball field sites to a corporation, trust or other entity which incorporates the direction of both the public and private sectors to provide recreation opportunities for the public. C. At the time the school and soccer and baseball fields sites are deeded to the County, the Applicant shall provide, at the Applicant's expense, a boundary survey and shall stake the corners of each site. Before Frederick County assigns or conveys any ownership interest in the Property conveyed herein by the Applicant to any third party, including, but not limited to the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, the third party will execute an agreement in recordable form which is satisfactory to the applicant which will provide and confirm that said third party agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Proffer Statement, including, but not limited to, provisions governing the use of the Property to be conveyed and also the application of all restrictive covenants governing the use of the Property and the construction of improvements upon it. By executing this Proffer Statement, Frederick County also agrees to be bound to and comply with the same. Page 13 September 3, 2003 D. Notwithstanding the potential uses of the parcels referenced in subparagraphs A and B above, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors shall have flexibility to determine the specific use located within each land bay dedicated for public use purposes, provided that said uses are one of those listed in subparagraphs A and B. Any other similar types of public uses shall be permitted only with the consent of the Applicant and provided that the use is of an architectural style and uses construction materials that are consistent with the restrictive covenants recorded against the property conveyed. Furthermore, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors agrees that if the public purposes are not constructed or installed, completed and in use on the parcels which are identified in subparagraphs A and B above within ten years of the conveyance from the Applicant, said properties may be purchased by the Applicant for the land value specified in §4 of this proffer statement. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby instructs and empowers its County Administrator to execute such other deeds or documents, which shall be required to effect the terms of this provision. E. The Applicant reserves the right to retain temporary and permanent grading, slope, utility, drainage, storm water management and access easements on all public use parcels which are dedicated to the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, provided said easements do not preclude reasonable use and development of the property for the intended purpose. 9. RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND LINEAR PARK: A. Recreational Center The Applicant shall construct one (1) recreation center within the Land Bay identified as Land Bay III as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), for the use of the residents of the Property and as determined by the Home Owners Association. The Applicant shall have the sole and absolute right to determine within said land bay, where the facility shall be located. The Applicant shall designate the location of the above facility on the Master Development Plan. The recreational center shall include a bathhouse and a 6-lane, 25-meter competition swimming pool. The facility will be fully bonded prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Work on this facility shall commence prior to the issuance of the 250`h non -age restricted building permit and be completed prior to issuance of the 800`h building permit for the non -age restricted housing products. B. Active Adult Recreational Center The Applicant shall construct one (1) recreation center within one of the Land Bays identified as shown on the Generalized Development Plan, for the private use of the residents of the Active Adult Community. This facility will be fully bonded prior to the issuance of the first building permit in the Active Adult Community. Work on this facility shall commence prior to the issuance of the 1501h building permit and be completed prior to issuance of the 350`h building permit in the Active Adult Community. 0 Page 14 C. Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk S stem September 3, 2003 The Applicant shall construct a pedestrian trail or sidewalk system, which connects each recreation area to the surrounding neighborhood. The final location and the granting of any such easements and/or trails shall be at the subdivision design plan stage. Such trails or sidewalk system shall be constructed of stone dust or wood chips or such other materials selected by the Applicant provided they are not part of the sidewalk system within the public right-of-way. D. Linear Park Trail A twenty -foot (20') wide trail easement shall be dedicated to Frederick County Parks and Recreation. The location is to be determined by the Applicant and a trail system plan shall be submitted by the Applicant for evaluation by the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department. The trail shall be provided within the Hiatt Run Corridor and run the length of said corridor on the subject property for 3,800 +/- linear feet as shown on the proffered General Development Plan (Exhibit A). The Applicant shall convey said easement after development of adjoining parcels, or reasonable access is provided, and not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County Parks and Recreation in writing at no cost to Frederick County or Frederick County Parks and Recreation. Any area so dedicated shall be included in the calculation of required open space, and shall entitle the Applicant to recreational credit units for the value of the construction of the trail and dedicated land. The Applicant reserves the right to retain temporary and permanent grading, utility, sewer force main, slope, storm water management, construction and drainage easements within said dedicated area, although only temporary easements shall be retained as needed for the construction by the Applicant of the six-foot wide asphalt or concrete trail described herein. The asphalt or concrete trail at the discretion of the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department may be changed to other surface materials in an effort to promote low impact development techniques. Construction of said trail by the Applicant is contingent upon the proposed trail being allowed by all applicable County and State ordinances, and limitations due to terrain and constructability considerations. In the event that the public linear park trail is unable to be constructed due to County or State ordinances, the Applicant shall develop the linear park trail as a private trail system for the use of the residents of Stephenson Village. This private linear park trail shall count towards the open space and recreational amenities requirements for Stephenson Village and will be constructed of similar materials and standards identified in section 9C of this proffer statement. 10. ACTIVE ADULT AGE -RESTRICTED HOUSING A. Applicant agrees that the following language shall be included in the deeds conveying real property designated as age -restricted housing on that portion of the property. At least eighty percent (80%) of the occupied residential units shall be occupied by at least one person fifty-five (55) years of age or older and within such units the following conditions shall apply: Page 15 September 3, 2003 (1) All other residents must reside with a person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older, and be a spouse, a cohabitant, an occupant's child eighteen (18) years of age or older, or provide primary physical or economic support to the person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older. Notwithstanding this limitation, a person hired to provide live-in, long term or terminal health care of a person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older for compensation shall also occupy a dwelling during any time such person is actually providing such care. (2) Guests under the age of fifty-five (55) are permitted for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days total for each such guest in any calendar year. (3) If title to any lot or unit shall become vested in any person under the age of fifty-five (55) by reason of descent, distribution, foreclosure or operation of law, the age restriction covenants shall not work a forfeiture or reversion of title, but rather, such person thus taking title shall not be permitted to reside in such lot or unit until he/she shall have attained the age of fifty-five (55) or otherwise satisfies the requirements as set forth herein. Notwithstanding, a surviving spouse shall be allowed to continue to occupy a dwelling unit without regard to age. B. A maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the occupied age -restricted residential units shall be allowed to be occupied by at least one person fifty (50) years of age or older and within such units the following conditions shall apply: (1) All other residents must reside with a person who is fifty (50) years of age or older, be a spouse, a cohabitant, an occupant's child eighteen (18) years of age or older, or provide primary physical or economic support to the person who is fifty (50) years of age or older. Notwithstanding this limitation, a person hired to provide live-in, long term or terminal health care to a person who is fifty (50) years of age or older for compensation shall also occupy a dwelling during any time such person is actually providing such care. (2) Guests under the age of fifty (50) are permitted for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days total for each such guest in any calendar year. (3) If title to any lot or unit shall become vested in any person under the age of fifty (50) by reason of descent, distribution, foreclosure or operation of law, the age restriction covenant shall not work a forfeiture or reversion of title, but rather, such person thus taking title shall not be permitted to reside in such lot or unit until he/she shall have attained the age of fifty (50) or otherwise satisfied the requirements as set forth herein. Notwithstanding, a surviving spouse shall be allowed to continue to occupy a dwelling unit without regard to age. 0 Page 16 September 3, 2003 (4) The above -described use restrictions shall be amended from time to time in accordance with applicable local and state regulations governing age restricted housing and the Federal Fair Housing Act so long as the substantive intent as set forth herein is maintained. In no event shall the minimum age of residents be less than the ages set forth hereinabove. C. Applicant agrees that the language in this Section or such other language as may be necessary to comply with the requirements to qualify as Housing for Older Persons under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Fair Housing Act of Virginia shall be included in the deeds conveying real property designated as age -restricted on that portion of the property. 11. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY: Subject to the provisions of this proffer statement, the Applicant will develop and build apartment units to provide much needed affordable housing for the elderly. The Applicant will comply with the necessary requirements to qualify these apartment units for the "Housing for Older Persons" exception to familial status discrimination as allowed under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Fair Housing Act of Virginia. The construction of these apartment units will begin after at least 50 percent of the retail space has been developed, provided that the approval of appropriate federal and state housing authorities is obtained, and the project qualifies for the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program or equivalent. In the event that funding for the affordable housing for the elderly is not obtained, the Applicant proffers to reapportion those units to the active adult community housing units. 12. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES: A. Byers house: The Byers house will be preserved as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. B. Cemeteries: Prior to commencement of any earth disturbing activity in any section of the Property, the applicant shall mark and identify any cemeteries which may be located there. In the event any onsite cemeteries are found, the applicant shall preserve those cemeteries in accordance with all County and State regulations. 13. COMMERCIAL CENTER: The Applicant has identified an area as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) for a commercial center that will be developed at a time to be determined by Applicant. Within the commercial center development, the following shall be provided: A. The Applicant shall provide for all turn lanes and traffic signalization on the Major Collector Road serving the commercial center as warranted by VDOT. The September 3, 2003 Applicant shall conduct traffic impact analysis studies for each commercial site plan submitted to Frederick County that will be reviewed and approved by VDOT to determine when these improvements are warranted. A traffic signalization agreement will be executed with VDOT by the Applicant to ensure that commercial uses developed prior to the warrants for traffic signalization contribute their pro-rata share for this improvement. The Applicant shall record architectural and design restrictive covenants for the commercial center and shall submit a copy to the Frederick County Planning Director and the Frederick County Building Official with the first site plan within the commercial center. Said covenants shall provide for the establishment of an architectural review board for the purpose of review and approval of all architectural elevations and signage for all commercial uses to assure a continuity of overall architectural appearances within the entire commercial development. The Applicant shall ensure that all commercial site plans submitted to Frederick County for the commercial center are designed to implement best management practices (BMP) to promote storm water quality measures. A statement will be provided on each commercial site plan identifying the party or parties responsible for maintaining these BMP facilities as a condition of site plan approval. The areas within the commercial center that are not required to be graded or cleared for the implementation of all approved site plans will remain undisturbed. One-way travel aisles will be utilized where practical to reduce the impervious areas of parking lots within the commercial center. The Applicant shall provide for a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial land use in Stephenson Village. The majority of the commercial land use will be located within the commercial center identified on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit). The development of smaller areas of commercial land use will be allowed in other areas of Stephenson Village. These commercial land use areas will be provided on the detailed Master Development Plan associated with the development of Stephenson Village. The Applicant has identified an area as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) for a commercial center. The development of 60,000 square feet of commercial space will begin within the commercial center no later than the issuance of the 1,200`h non -age restricted residential building permit with completion of this commercial space within 18 months. The Applicant will be allowed to extend the commencement of commercial construction for an additional two year period if any one of the following circumstances has occurred: An elementary school has not been constructed on the Property; or a building permit is obtained for the development of a new grocery store within a three mile radius of commercial center within Stephenson Village. Page 18 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE: September 3, 2003 The Applicant shall provide up to 2,500 square feet of shell space for a 10 year period rent free exclusive of utility and common area maintenance (CAM) charges in the commercial center for the location of a Public Service Satellite Facility for Frederick County. The shell space shall be made available and commence upon the completion of the base building in which the space is located. Frederick County must complete build out and occupy the space within two (2) years of the completion of the base building. If Frederick County fails to build out and occupy the space within the two (2) year period then the space will revert to the Applicant. 15. COMMUNITY DESIGN FOR A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE: A. Design The Applicant agrees to provide an overall continuity of design within the community by means of selecting standards for the following elements, which will be uniformly specified and applied over the entire project: • Custom fixture street lighting program. • Custom mailbox design • Standardized common area fencing style and color • Standardized private residential fencing styles and color • Community color selections to create neighborhood theme • Uniform site furnishing selection (benches and trash receptacles) • Custom designed street signage and stop signage • Landscaping at the entrance monuments, along the collector road buffers and within the medians selected to provide for a repetition of the neighborhood flower color scheme and theme trees throughout the community The Applicant agrees to utilize innovative design techniques and quality design for the recreational center and bathhouse, common area landscaping, site design, and architectural design. B. Architecture (1) The architectural styling of Housing Unit Types 1 through 4 shall be constructed in accordance with the Housing Unit Types Exhibit(s) proffered herein. Housing Unit Types 5 and 6 shall be compatible with Housing Unit Types 1 through 4. (2) Access to garages by the use of alleys shall be allowed on Housing Unit Types 1 (Carriage House), 3 (Cottage House), 5 (Modified Single -Family Small Lot, and 6 (Modified Townhouse). 0 E Page 19 September 3, 2003 (3) Specific architectural elements that are allowed on Housing Unit Types, to include Housing Unit Types 5 and 6 shall include, but are not limited to, the use of peaked roofs, gables, chimneys, balconies or decks, porches and/or garages. C. HousingUnit nit Type 3 (Cottage House) and Unit Type 4 (Courtyard Cluster) (1) Decks and Patios All deck planks shall be Class I (A) fire rated composite lumber or approved equal of a standardized color to be selected by the Applicant. A maximum of two styles of deck railing shall be used on all decks and shall be made of the same composite lumber and the same matching color selection. (2) Fire Protection System Courtyard Cluster and Cottage houses will have a 13-D sprinkler system in the home and the garages. D. Lighting Any exterior lighting of individual homes or common use recreation areas shall be directed downward and inward on the site to reduce glare on adjacent properties, the public and/or private right-of-way, and upward stray illumination. E. Architectural and Design Covenants Stephenson Associates, L.C. shall develop architectural and design covenants for the overall community. Said covenants will establish an architectural review board for the purpose of review and approval of all architectural elevations, exterior architectural features (fences, railings, walls and decks) for all uses within Stephenson Village, as well as any publicly provided structures located on sites dedicated for public use. These covenants are intended to assure a continuity of overall architectural appearance, quality material selection, and a cohesive color palate for all structures within the entire development. 16. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND HABITAT PRESERVATION: A. Environmental Features and Easements: (1) Significant wildlife habitats shall be identified and preserved by the Applicant with technical assistance from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). Wildlife or bird habitats shall be further 0 0 Page 20 September 3, 2003 enhanced by providing native plantings selected to encourage feeding areas while reestablishing forest in and around environmentally sensitive areas. (2) The Applicant shall limit the clearing and grading on each lot to the area needed for structures, utilities, access and fire protection to maximize tree save areas. (3) Unbuildable wetlands, unbuildable floodplains, and unbuildable steep slopes shall be designated and shall be subject to the following: (a) Grading: Protection of steeply sloped areas will be provided by the Applicant as follows: clearing and grading will not occur on any slopes of twenty five percent (25%) or greater, except for trails, road crossings, utilities, drainage and storm water management facilities. (b) Floodplain Areas: Development within floodplain areas shall be limited to the public Linear Park Trail system to include the trail, pedestrian bridges, benches and signage. (c) Buffers and Conservation Easements: (i) Buffer and Conservation Easements: A one -hundred foot (100) wide nondisturbance buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot immediately adjacent to Hiatt Run and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel. (ii) Conservation Easements/Floodplain: A twenty -foot (20) wide buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot immediately adjacent to the 100-year floodplain. The ten feet (10) adjacent to the floodplain shall be undisturbed. The ten feet (10) adjacent to the lots may be disturbed and, if disturbed, shall be re -vegetated by planting trees equal to the number of trees in excess of six inches (6") caliper removed by the disturbance, OR at the rate of 50 (2" caliper) trees per acre of disturbance, at the option of the Applicant. (iii) The above disturbed and undisturbed buffers as well as conservation easements not located within a platted lot and/or parcel shall be part of the common areas owned by the Homeowners Association(s). Covenants to be created as part of the Homeowners Association(s) documents shall provide for maintenance of said areas by the Homeowners Association(s). (4) Resource protection areas are identified for the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel that are further identified on the Generalized Development Plan. These resource protection areas contain various environmental features and provide different resource management plans for their treatment and protection by the Applicant. CJ Page 21 B. Hiatt Run Corridor: September 3, 2003 (1) The Hiatt Run Corridor shall be considered a resource protection area. Clearing and grading by individual lot owners is prohibited within this zone. (2) A one -hundred foot (100') foot non -disturbance buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot adjacent to the Hiatt Run Corridor and shall serve as the clearing limit for all lots that border the Hiatt Run Corridor as measured from the center line of the stream. (3) A minimum buffer of twenty feet (20') shall border all wetland preservation areas. Clearing and grading by individual owners is prohibited within this buffer. (4) Native plants and cluster trees will be preserved and/or reforested in accordance with the Forest Management Plan along the south side of the Hiatt Run Corridor. (5) Wildlife or bird habitats will be further enhanced by providing native plantings selected to encourage feeding areas while reestablishing forest in and around environmentally sensitive areas including steep slopes, woodlands and flood plain areas along the north side of the Hiatt Run Corridor. The planting plan along the north side of the Hiatt Run Corridor will be created with technical assistance from VDGIF and the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. C. Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel: The Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel shall be considered a resource protection area. Restrictive covenants recorded against the property will provide that clearing and grading by individual lot owners is prohibited within this zone. The Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel will be further enhanced, by providing native plantings, to establish an upland buffer. The planting plan for this upland buffer will be created with technical assistance from VDGIF and the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. D. Forest Management Plan: (1) The Forest Stewardship and Management Plan will be created with technical assistance from the Department of Forestry. Native plants and cluster trees will be preserved and/or reforested in accordance with the Forest Management Plan. 0 1 J Page 22 September 3, 2003 (2) Existing ponds will be identified and, if beneficial and appropriate, shall be used as storm water management facilities. In addition, the Applicant shall establish additional ponds on the site wherever possible and in such locations as the Applicant directs. The ponds shall be located and designed to promote water infiltration on the site. A minimum area of twenty feet (20') wide surrounding each such pond shall be developed as a park setting. (3) The Forest Management Plan will be created with technical assistance from the Department of Forestry. E. Environmental Utility / Road Impacts: Construction of utilities, roads, trails, bio-retention areas, or wetlands creation shall be allowed within the environmental features listed in § 16A-§ 16D of this proffer statement. Any construction of the above listed items will use low impact construction methods such as 90-degree crossings, minimal soil, and tree disturbances. When linear utility impacts such as force mains or transmission lines are required low impact construction techniques will be utilized. F. Implementation of Enhancements and Amendments The Applicant shall provide the location of the resource protection areas as a component of the Master Development Plan. Information pertaining to proposed enhancements and amendments to the resource protection areas shall be included as narratives of the Master Development Plan to ensure that these treatment measures will be implemented. 17. COMMUNITY CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION: A. The Applicant shall see that the properties within Stephenson Village shall be serviced by a commercial trash pickup and waste removal service. Said service shall provide curbside trash removal unless otherwise provided by Frederick County, for all residential uses and dumpster disposal for all high -density residential uses and commercial uses. Waste and trash removal services shall not dispose of trash and waste at any Frederick County Citizen Convenience Center. The Applicant shall be relieved of its obligations to see to the performance of this Proffer by assigning all of its obligations to a Homeowners Association for any portion or all of the development. B. Notwithstanding the above, Applicant shall locate dumpster sites as unobtrusively as possible. The area immediately surrounding each dumpster site shall be planted with vegetation similar to or identical to that planted in the median open vegetated areas, including, but not limited to, deciduous trees and evergreen shrubbery in addition to the required fence and gate enclosure. 0 • Page 23 September 3, 2003 18. WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STEPHENSON AREA: A. The Applicant shall dedicate land to be utilized for the location of a regional pump station as determined by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) in an area that is mutually agreed upon by both parties. B. The Applicant shall construct a pump station in conformance with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan as required to serve the Property and shall dedicate the pump station to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) for operation and maintenance. The pump station shall be constructed and operational prior to the first occupancy permit in Stephenson Village. C. The Applicant shall construct water and sewer lines in conformance with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route I North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan as required to serve all private land uses within Stephenson Village and shall dedicate the applicable water and sewer lines to FCSA for operation and maintenance. Furthermore, the applicant shall provide water and sewer lines of adequate size to the property line for all publicly dedicated properties. 19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY: By accepting and approving this rezoning application, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors authorizes the location and provision of those public uses and facilities specifically referenced on the Generalized Development Plan, in this Proffer Statement, and the extension and construction of water and sewer lines and facilities and roads necessary to serve this Property pursuant to the Virginia Code Section 15.2-2232 and the Frederick County Code. The general area of location for these uses and facilities are as shown on the Generalized Development Plan with the exact locations to be determined based on final engineering and as approved by Frederick County. Acceptance of this Proffer Statement constitutes approval of the public uses and facilities and their general locations and thereby accepts said uses and facilities from further Comprehensive Plan conformity review. 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION(S): A. Creation of Association(s) A homeowners association or more than one homeowners association ("HOA") shall be created and shall be made responsible for the review and approval of all construction within the development to insure that all design standards for the Stephenson Village Development are satisfied and for the maintenance and repair of all common areas, together with such other responsibilities, duties and powers as are customary for such associations or as may shall be required for such HOA herein. • 9 Page 24 B. Additional Responsibility September 3, 2003 In addition to such other responsibilities and duties as shall be assigned; the HOA shall have title to and/or responsibility for: (1) All common open space including storm water facilities areas not otherwise dedicated to public use or maintained by commercial entities. (2) Common buffer areas located outside of residential lots. (3) Residential curbside trash collection. 21. PROFFERED HOUSING TYPES: The following plan(s), exhibit(s) and Housing Unit Types are proffered herein. Each may be altered at the time of final engineering and equivalent Housing Unit Types may be substituted with the approval of the Director of Planning or his/her designee. Any existing or future Housing Unit Type, which is permitted under the R4 Residential Planned Community District, may also be utilized. Housing Unit Types Exhibit(s) prepared by The Land Planning and Design Group, Inc. dated December 2002, listed below and attached hereto as Exhibit B (graphic for illustrative purposes only). The minimum design standards for the following housing types are summarized and listed on the attached chart prepared by Land Planning and Design Group, Inc., dated March 2003 and referred to as Exhibit E — Minimum Design Standards. "Housing Unit Type 1" (Carriage House): Carriage House Illustrative Carriage House Typical Carriage House Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 2" (Non -Alley Carriage House): Non -Alley Carriage House Illustrative Non -Alley Carriage House Typical Non -Alley Carriage House Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 3" (Cottage House): Cottage House Illustrative Cottage House Typical Cottage House Landscape Typical 0 Page 25 September 3, 2003 "Housing Unit Type 4" (Courtyard Cluster): Courtyard Cluster Illustrative Courtyard Cluster Typical Courtyard Cluster Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 5" (Modified Single Family Detached Lot): Modified Single Family Detached Lot Typical "Housing Unit Type 6" (Modified "Townhouse" Attached Dwelling): Modified "Townhouse" Attached Dwelling Typical "Housing Unit Type 7" (Elderly Housing Dwelling): Elderly Housing Dwelling Specifications Elderly Housing Dwelling Illustrative Elderly Housing Dwelling Specifications and Illustrative Design provided in Community Design Modifications Document Other housing types shall be added, if approved, by Frederick County. 22. STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING: A. The Applicant shall provide landscaped areas on both sides of the Major Collector Road as illustrated on the attached Exhibit D (Typical Major Collector Road Section) dated March 2003 and in accordance with the following: (1) The landscaped area described above is designed to be a scenic urban linear park, which shall contain woodland conservation areas. (For purposes of this Proffer, a woodland conservation area shall be defined as an area designated for the purpose of retaining land areas predominantly in their natural, scenic, open or wooded condition.)The woodland conservation area shall have a varying width of no less than fifteen feet. Woodland conservation areas shall be provided where feasible based upon final engineering and design of the development. The Applicant shall provide, within the landscaped area, a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees, to include native types of trees originally found in this area and replacing any trees removed during development. Such trees shall be planted at the minimum rate of one tree every 40 linear feet along the roadway frontage and shall be planted in clusters rather than a linear pattern. 0 1 J Page 26 September 3, 2003 (2) The minimum planting standard for street landscaping or landscaped areas/woodland conservation areas shall be a mixture of deciduous trees, ornamental trees, evergreen trees, and shrubbery. At the Applicants option, trees and shrubs shall be planted in clusters and shall be planted at an equivalent rate of ten plant units per 40 linear feet of collector street roadway frontage. The plant unit credits are determined as follows: Shade Trees (2" min. caliper) = 10 plant units, Ornamental trees (1.5" minimum caliper) = 5 plant units, Evergreen trees (6' min. height) = 5 plant units, Shrubs (18" minimum height) = 2 plant units. B. The Applicant shall have the option of utilizing landscaped central islands within cul- de-sacs. When landscaped islands are utilized a twenty-eight foot (28') foot paved area shall be provided to accommodate on -street parking and travel aisles. C. Where conditions permit, vegetated open channels shall be used in street right-of- ways for storm water runoff, instead of curb and guttering. D. To the extent possible, stone fines or wood chip trails/paths shall be used instead of asphalt trails/paths. Where practical, such trails/paths shall be located on only one side of each interior road provided sidewalks are not required or practical within the adjacent road right-of-way. 23. COMMUNITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM: A. The Applicant reserves the right to construct community entry features including a monument style sign at the entrances to the development in accordance with the following parameters: Such signage shall not exceed two signs per intersection, one occurring on either side of the entrance. The sign panel area shall not exceed 65 square feet per sign, and shall be attached to a wall not to exceed 8 feet in height, excluding piers, which shall be 9.25 feet in height. The wall supporting the signage will not be included in the allowable square footage for the sign panel. B. The Applicant reserves the right to construct neighborhood entry features including a monument style sign at the entrance to each neighborhood in accordance with the following parameters: Such signage shall not exceed two signs per intersection one occurring on either side of the entrance. The sign panel area shall not exceed 40 square feet per sign, and shall be attached to a wall not to exceed 7 feet in height, excluding piers, which shall be 8.25 feet in height. The wall supporting the signage will not be included in the allowable square footage for the sign panel. C. Commercial freestanding business signs shall be monument style with similar design and materials as the community entry feature signs. These commercial freestanding business signs shall be no more than 20' in height measured from the base and shall be spaced a minimum of 100 feet apart. C� J Page 27 SIGNATURE PAGE September 3, 2003 The conditions set forth herein are the proffers for Stephenson Village and supercede all previous proffer statements submitted for this Development. Respectfully submitted, Stephenson Asso iat , L.C. By: ea.J. Donald Shockey, Jr. Title: Manager Subscribed and sworn before me this 8th day of Sept. , 2003. Susan D. Stahl (Typed Name of Notary) I A I 2 My Commission Expires: 4-30-2004 Notary Pub is Page 28 September 3, 2003 SIGNATURE PAGE ACCEPTED BY THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK M. Name: Title: Subscribed and sworn before me this day of , 2003. Notary Public (Typed Name of Notary) My Commission Expires: REVIEWED AND ACCEPTED BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY ATTORNEY Name: Title: Subscribed and sworn before me this day of , 2003. Notary Public (Typed Name of Notary) My Commission Expires: Ct�p�l.Es T� `"ty '�C .. A/IcCANN RTE 838 D. 3.5 +/- ACRES AREA NOT TO BE REZONED unMw 1111111wo r MAJOR / CpLLE TpR +- - HIATT RUN MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD GDP LEGEND MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD INTER PARCEL CONNECTIONS NOTE: THIS GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL L k argu s ourt AND FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY. THE FINAL LOCATION OR ORIENTATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL LANDBAYS AND/OR THEIR �U/7 .ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS MAY BE SLIGHTLY ALTERED TO RFFLF.CT MORE ACCURATE ENGINEERING. AI COMMUNITY RECREATION r CENTER 'I SAMUEL BYERS LANDMARK # 34-1124 %:� V WETLANDS INTERMEDIATE RAVINE CHANNEL OPEN SPACE HIATT RUN ,» CORRIDOR ACTIVE ADULT RECREATION CENTER IV LINEAR PARK C10 . ss%n HIATT RUN O • . LAND BAY BREAKDOWN LAND BAY LAND USE ACREAGE % RANGE OF HOUSING UNIT TYPES MIN. MAX. 1 ELEM. SCHOOL 20 Ac. +/— NA NA 11 COMMUNITY PARK (6 baseball fields & 6 soccer fields) 24 Ac. t/— NA NA III MIXED RESIDENTIAL: 475 Ac. +/— ONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL/DAYCARE 7 Ac.+/— NA NA FD (Housing Unit Type 1.2.4.5. RP District SFD 4c Active Adult) 30 53 TOWNHOUSE (Housing Unit Type 6 & RP District Townhouses) 10 30 ULTIFAMILY: V_on.dtonniniums,Elderly Housing, Housing Unit TyTe tage House & RP District Duplex, Multiplex, rium, Garden Apartment & Active Adult 7 30 IV ACTIVE ADULT: FD (Housing Unit Type 1,2, & 5) Multifamily (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3—Cottage House) 126 Ac.+/— 30 53 V COMMERCIAL CENTER (Retail, Office & Public Service Satellite Facility) C. t — NA NA SEE NO"I'ES ADDRESSING ABOVE CHAR I IN PROFFER 3. USES. DENSII"Y & MIX OF HOUSING -TYPES A.(2)(14) z a O 0 W cmv 2 W dt Z qm C12m (� m N Z_ o0 co N CV W O « 00 u ° W n � m m L, 0 GO m W V2 C) (3 Z Z <z�� WQO0 U Pa-Cb(3? z I rw �J � U XQ a E-z Q� w o 9 U)�D U N F w Q Q� W ^ za z W Ow V1 DATE: SEPT 3, 2003 SCALE: 1"=1000' DESIGNED BY:MDS/JNT JOB NO. 2760C SHEET 1 OF 1 EXHIBIT B HOUSING UNIT TYPES STEPHENSON VILLAGE New Tax Rate Old Tax Rate Exhibit 1 NET FISCAL BENEFIT STEPHENSON VILLAGE 23 Years (2003 - 2025) 10,000 $0 $4U,UUv,Uvv SOURCE: Robert Charles Lesser & Co., LLC Frederick County VA Model RR 12 cents increase.xls-Cra9p� Ex 1 9-00 Printed: 4/24/2003 Page 1 of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC 0 0 u STEPHENSON VILLAGE CATEGORY REVENUES Real Property Taxes Personal Property Taxes Sales Taxes BPOL Taxes Miscellaneous Revenues Educational Revenues TOTAL EXPENDITURES TOTAL NET FISCAL IMPACT ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Exhibit 2 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 23 Years (2003 - 2025) $100,703,000 $48,193,000 $11,264,000 $2,608,000 $25,948,000 $64_ ,741,000 $253,457,000 $ 215, 326,000 $38,131,000 Page 1 of I 23-YEAR TOTAL 100% Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xls-Su0m4-9RZ EEx 2 9.00 Printed: 4/24/2003 • • • STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 3 $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,00C $5,000,OOC �c SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE CUMULATIVE NET FISCAL BENEFIT rn c in p N 0 0 0 — `4 r - Y o 0 CN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 N N N ON N N N N N N N N N N N N N Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xis-cumu0grr-a zh--Ex 3 69.00 Printed: 4/24/2003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Page 1 of 1 • 174 • STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 4 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE ANNUAL NET FISCAL IMPACT r NET FISCAL CUMULATIVE IMPACT (NFI) NFI YEAR REVENUES EXPENDITURES i e u '"" '- au s : wba nrawazw m aatuu rnw c oa wao a rnn vn c aH avow a �r ivu»e sw ll 2003 $178,611 $0 $178,611 $178,611 2004 $194,130 $0 $194,130 $372,742 2005 $780,873 $549,448 $231,425 $604,167 2006 $1,861,105 $1,534,792 $326,313 $930,480 2007 $2,673,034 $2,426,963 $246,071 $1,176,551 2008 $3,831,270 $3,464,654 $366,616 $1,543,167 2009 $4,975,512 $4,527,485 $448,027 $1,991,194 2010 $6,302,421 $5,672,483 $629,938 $2,621,132 2011 $7,950,051 $6,980,470 $969,581 $3,590,713 2012 $9,027,539 $8,048,592 $978,947 $4,569,660 2013 $10,796,661 $9,246,504 $1,550,157 $6,119,817 2014 $12,286,946 $10,324,698 $1,962,248 $8,082,065 2015 $13,651,704 $11,462,337 $2,169,366 $10,251,431 2016 $14,602,140 $12,420,531 $2,181,608 $12,433,040 2017 $15,344,809 $13,147,752 $2,197,056 $14,630,096 2018 $15,992,915 $13,767,932 $2,224,983 $16,855,079 2019 $17,035,864 $14,467,514 $2,568,350 $19,423,429 2020 $17,748,046 $15,009,178 $2,738,868 $22,162,297 2021 $18,249,868 $15,459,453 $2,790,415 $24,952,712 2022 $18,792,098 $15,923,237 $2,868,861 $27,821,574 2023 $19,354,436 $16,400,934 $2,953,502 $30,775,076 2024 $20,521,239 $16,980,882 - _ $3,540,357 -- --- --- $34,315,433 &9O 17l ')An Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xls-Ann Sum-RZ-Ex 4 04-9269.00 Page 1 of 1 Printed: 4/24/2003 • • • STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit S PUPIL GENERATION RATES BASED ON HOUSING TYPES AND ACTUAL ENROLLMENT RCLCo RATES BASED ON U.S. CENSUS DATA FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA OCCUPIED RCLCO ESTIMATE FREDERICK CO. ESTIMATE i UNITS PUPILS PER PREDICTED PUPILS PER PREDICTED AREA TYPE 2000 7/ UNIT PUPILS s'�usnexm�aurns�urwr�vunwr_�ar�rr�r:�irwEarc ' UNIT 2/ PUPILS vnirnnuur�res:°-;a e�r�rsrurr'at�sasmarmv�a�muusem�runseu. v�usia�.�rcz bIHOME _ AINS1Mi5tutBtCaC 1lldf6'NF.c1k tlub'S3?Hlt.'ila �i5cv64lkdi?b'ttl` ,,. e�xx+ivr �rrw�c. FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 0.7000 11,719 Single -Family Detached 9 16741 0.5442 ,110 , 1,011 Single -Family Attached 1,872 0.2908 544 0.5400 Multifamily 1,309 0.1564 205 0.2300 301 Mobile Home 2,175 0.5442 1,184 0.2300 500 11,043 13,531 Predicted Pupils 10,676 10,676 Actual Pupils 3/ 127% Predicted as % of Actual 103% 1/ 2000 US Census 2/ Frederick County 3/ Frederick County Public Schools SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo Pupil Generation Frederick.xisipupil Generation 04-9269.00 Printed:4/24/2003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. Page I of t • STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 6 EVALUATION OF RCLCo AND COUNTY PUPIL GENERATION RATES (FROM EXHIBIT 5) BASED ON FREDERICK COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA • RCLCO FACTORS FREDERICK CO. FACTORS PERMITTED PUPILS PREDICTED PUPILS PER PREDICTED p UNITS PER PUPIL PER PUPIL INCREASE j AREA HOME TYPE 1996-2001 1/ UNIT INCREASE UNIT 2/ ffii,�'.'LTz�CP1L".PJ."K3flR'ttttUd3-'Mt•SSEU YY ^^w r•`^'>L'CFSbNA'rs+_"+1:LKtl: ^ w dlYFl"tY N1 C:tY. •w"•�WY 6�1'ila[Li�' � Ft:ttBL�tt3ii311!(+kEbt`Je':LtiYtJdf1! tt7�.tld`.'tlEL'LM1EEt�'+J5'A t,L'Liit:4 u4 1996-2002 " LWY' i8Po1N.°.ia'+^teocn FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Single -Family Detached 3/ 2,570 0.5442 1,399 0.7000 ,799 1245 Single -Family Attached 3/ 454 0.2908 132 0.5400 Multifamily 474 0.1564 74 0.2300 109 109 Mobile Home 598 0.5442 325 0.2300 138 Predicted Pupil Increase 1,930 2,291 Actual Pupil Increase 2/ 1,048 1,048 Predicted as % of Actual 184% 219% 1 / Frederick County 2/ Frederick County Public Schools 3/ Assumes 85% of permitted single-family units are detached. SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. Page i of i Pupil Generation Frederick.xlsWupil Generation (Perini() 04-9269.00 Printed:4/24/2003 HOUSING UNIT TYPE I CARRIAGE HOUSE (3 sheets) NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY OPTIONAL PORCH SHOWN STEPHENSON VILLAGE CARRIAGE HOUSE ILLUSTRATIVE Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. 0 S "f IZ-EE T I STANDARDS: Living Space (min.) Decks (min.) 1400 square feet Side yard setback: 5'-0" interior lot line Side yard setback: 10'-0" corner lot perimeter lot line Rear yard setback: 15'-0" *decks must be located in rear yards and shall not be erected forward of the rear plane of a dwelling unit STEPHENSON VILLAGE CARRIAGE HOUSE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. Front Facade *porches, stoops, and steps may extend 6'-0" into front yard setback STREET NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY OPTIONAL FENCE SHOWN STEPHENSON VILLAGE CARRIAGE HOUSE LANDSCAPE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. • HOUSING NON -ALLEY CARRIAGE (3 NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY OPTIONAL PORCH SHOWN STEPHENSON VILLAGE NON —ALLEY CARRIAGE HOUSE ILLUSTRATIVE Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. 97 � N IPj. 7 i STr-EET STANDARDS: Living Space (min.) Decks (min.) 414. z r N 1400 square feet Side yard setback: 5'-0" interior lot lines Side yard setback: 10'-0" corner lot perimeter lot line Rear yard setback: 3'-0" *decks must be located in rear yards and shall not be erected forward of the rear plane of a dwelling unit STEPHENSON VILLAGE NON —ALLEY CARRIAGE HOUSE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. Front Facade *porches, stoops, and steps may extend 6'-0" into front yard setbacks 0 A J..v✓-rac.F. NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY OPTIONAL PORCH SHOWN OPTIONAL FENCE SHOWN STEPHENSON VILLAGE NON -ALLEY CARRIAGE HOUSE LANDSCAPE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. HOUSING UNIT TYPE 3 COTTAGE HOUSE (3 sheets) NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY OPTIONAL PORCH SHOWN OPTIONAL FENCE SHOWN STEPHENSON VILLAGE COTTAGE HOUSE ILLUSTRATIVE Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. • 0 STFfltT" � stvF,i,It.L� F N. nor- CogNE2 4hiit�• j' Mt�1. tors F71 I I I I I t ALUY STANDARDS: Lot Width(min.) Living Space (min.) Decks (min.) Front Facade 34'-0" 1400 square feet Side yard: 5'-0" interior unit *porches, stoops, Side yard: 10'-0" end/corner unit and steps may Rear yard: 5'4' extend 6'4' into *decks must be located in rear yards front yard setback and shall not be erected forward of the rear plane of a dwelling unit STEPHENSON VILLAGE COTTAGE HOUSE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. srr-EET NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY STEPHENSON VILLAGE COTTAGE HOUSE LANDSCAPE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. HOUSING UNIT TYPE 4 COURTYARD CLUSTER (3 sheets) 0 is NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY STEPHENSON VILLAGE COURTYARD CLUSTER ILLUSTRATIVE Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. Courtyard Clusters Typical This housing type consists of single-family dwellings combined to form a multi -family cluster of units. The cluster creates a private parking court, therefore removing garages from the main travel ways. No fewer than two and no more than seven units shall be combined in any courtyard cluster. Each unit has direct access to a private yard. A fence or fence and wall combination shall be located between units to enclose the courtyard. Each unit shall have at least one 3' gate providing access to the rear yard from the courtyard. The following table specifies the minimum standards for this Courtyard Cluster house type. Minimum Area Per Unit: 2,000 sq. 8./dwelling unit Minimum Setbacks: To garage from street or common driveway: 19 ft. To dwelling from street: 18 ft. Distance between units: 10 ft. To dwelling from common driveway: 3 ft. To dwelling from interior lot line: 3 ft. To dwelling from perimeter property line: 10 ft. To deck and/or patio from interior lot line: 5 ft. To deck and/or patio from perimeter property line: 6 ft. Maximum Building Height: 35 ft. 138' 10' Minimum 10' Minimum 44' Mimimun Mimmum 5' M iinimum 5' M 5' Minimum—3' M LOT 2 I J I LOT 3 LOT 4 Minimum uoo� Ii 10' Mytiururn I I 10' STEPHENSON VILLAGE COURTYARD CLUSTER TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. LOT 5 Minimum Minimum 10, 0' Minimum I --Perimeter Property Line Typical Interior Lot Line Typical Fence Typical Gate I Typical Deck or Patio Nhlmum Common Driveway Street 2V or 21. �;_. �aut/un■ri MUMUNNEII I snl i ur.r.r • 1.■..r.�a �� .■rr..' ■■■■■■ Mason_ r!' A 1� } i 4 1 0 HOUSING UNIT TYPE 5 MODIFIED SINGLE-FAMILY SMALL LOT (1 sheet) Modified single-family small lot. Single-family small lot housing shall be a single-family detached or attached residence on an individual lot. No more than two units may be attached together. (1) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows: (a) Minimum lot size: 3,750 square feet (b) Off-street parking spaces: 2 (c) Setback from state road: 20 feet (d) Setback from private road: 20 feet (e) Rear yard: 15 feet (f) Side yard: Zero lot line option may be used with this housing type. If chosen, the minimum side yard shall be 10 feet for that yard opposite the zero lot line side. If not chosen, the minimum side yard shall be five feet on both sides. (g) When the attached option for the single-family small lot housing unit is chosen, the minimum building spacing requirement shall be 10 feet. (h) Supplementary setbacks: [1] With the single-family small lot housing type, decks may extend five feet into rear yard setback areas. [2] Where single-family small lot housing abuts open space, decks may extend up to 12 feet into rear yard setback areas. [3] Front porches, stoops and steps may extend 12 feet into front yard setback areas. (2) Maximum building heights shall not exceed 35 feet in height. (3) Detached accessory buildings may be permitted, not to exceed 20 feet in height, will adhere to the same side yard setbacks as the house, and will have the same rear yard setback as a deck. • HOUSING UNIT TYPE 6 MODIFIED TOWNHOUSE (1 sheet) • • Modified townhouse. The "townhouse" is a single-family attached dwelling with one dwelling unit from ground to roof, having individual outside access. Rows of attached dwellings shall not exceed 10 units and shall average no more than eight dwellings per structure. (1) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Average Off -Street Minimum Lot Area Lot Area Parldng Lot Width (square feet) (square feet) Spaces (feet) 1200 1300 2.00 16 1400 1500 2.25 18 1600 1700 2.50 20 or larger (2) Minimum yards shall be as follows: (a) Front setbacks: [1] 20 feet from road right-of-way for front loaded garage townhouses [2] 20 feet from parking area, private street, or driveway for front loaded townhouses [3] 10 feet for rear loaded or rear loaded detached garage townhouses [4] 10 feet for non garage townhouses with offstreet parking (b) Side: 10 feet from lot line (end unit) (c) Rear: 20 feet from lot line (3) Minimum on -site building spacing: (a) Side: 25' between adjacent end units (b) Rear: 50' from rear building plane to adjacent rear building plane (4) Maximum building height shall be as follows: (a) Principle building: 35 feet (b) Accessory buildings: 20 feet (5) Minimum yard setbacks for garages (a) Side: 10 feet from lot line (end unit) for detached garage option (b) Side: 0 feet from interior lot line for detached garage option (c) Rear: 5 feet from lot line for detached garage option (6) Supplementary setbacks: (a) With the modified townhouse housing type, decks may extend 15 feet into rear yard setback areas. (b) Where modified townhouse abuts open space, decks may extend up to 15 feet into rear yard setback areas. (c) Front porches, stoops and steps may extend 6 feet into a 10 foot front yard setback and 12 feet into a 20 foot front yard setback. STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Community Design Modifications Document Prepared By: Greenway Engineering & The Land Planning and Design Group, Inc. April 2003 Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 • (Exhibit F) MODIFICATION #1 § 165-71 Mixture of housing types required Ordinance Requirement: No more than 40% of the area of portions of the planned community designated for residential uses shall be used for any of the following housing types: duplexes, multiplexes, atrium houses, weak -link townhouses, townhouses or garden apartments or any combination of those housing types. Alternative Design Standard: No more than 60% of the area of portions of the planned community for residential uses shall be used for the housing types identified in the townhouse, multifamily and active adult. MIXED RESIDENTIAL MATRIX Housing Unit Type Minimum % Maximum % Single Family Dwellings 30 53 (Hosing Unit Type 1,2,4,5, RP District SFD and Active Adult) Townhouse Dwellings 10 30 (Housing Unit Type 6 & RP District Townhouse) Multifamily Dwellings 7 30 (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3 & RP District Duplex, Multiplex, Atrium, Garden Apartments and Active Adult) Active Adult Dwellings 30 53 Single Family Dwelling (Housing Unit Type 1,2 & 5) Multifamily (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3) Justification for Modification: The proffered Generalized Development Plan identifies that residential land uses will be located within Land Bays III and IV. The Generalized Development Plan does not account for the approximate 125 acres within the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermediate Ravine Channel that is contiguous to Land Bays III and IV. Therefore, the Generalized Development Plan accounts for approximately 594 acres to be utilized for residential land use within Stephenson Village. The required calculation of 40% of the approximate 594-acre area of portions of the planned community designated for residential use in this case amounts to approximately 237.6 acres that can be utilized for duplexes, multiplexes, atrium houses, weak -link townhouses, townhouses or garden apartments. The residential program that has been developed for Stephenson Village is designed to provide for housing opportunities for all age groups in the community. Stephenson Village will also provide for an active adult community that may develop beyond the designated 126-acre land bay identified on the Generalized Development Plan. The success of the active adult community and housing for young professionals may expand beyond the program limits identified in the program; therefore, a modification of the 40% of residential land area is appropriate. Stephenson Village requests a modification to allow a maximum of 60%, or approximately 356.4 acres of the residential land area to provide for the development of housing types identified in the mixed residential matrix table. Stephenson Village further commits to the provision of a mixture of housing types by establishing minimum and maximum percentages for the variety of housing types identified in the mixed residential matrix table. This commitment exceeds the current ordinance requirement by ensuring that a residential mix will be provided in lieu of one housing type (i.e. garden apartments) occupying 40% of the residential land area. • • MODIFICATION #2 § 165-69 Permitted uses § 165-72B(2) Alternative dimensional requirement plan Ordinance Requirement: All uses are allowed in the R4 Residential Planned Community District that are allowed in the RP Residential Performance District. An alternative dimensional plan may be included with the master development plan for the development, which shall describe a system of dimensional requirements for all residential uses planned for the development. Alternative Design Standard: Residential housing types other than those permitted in the RP Residential Performance District may be allowed in the R4 Residential Planned Community District. The Board of Supervisors may allow new housing types only if information describing the minimum lot area, minimum lot width, minimum yard setbacks, maximum building heights for primary and accessory structures, and minimum off street parking spaces is determined to be acceptable. Justification for Modification: Stephenson Village desires to provide for a mixture of housing types that allow for a community including a range of economic and demographic levels from young professionals, family households, empty nesters and elderly affordable dwellings. In order to create this type of community, it is necessary to provide for housing types that are currently allowed by ordinance and to introduce housing types that are successful in the current housing market. With the exception of the single-family small lot, the remaining housing types allowed by current ordinance were established over ten years ago. The introduction of new housing types, or modifications to the design standards for existing housing types is necessary to accomplish this goal. The R4 District allow for a residential planned community to develop only one type of multifamily housing unit to achieve the goal of a housing mix. Stephenson Village is committed to provide for a variety of housing types as evident by the minimum percentages specified in the mixed residential matrix table; therefore, it is justified to allow for new housing types, as well as alternative dimensional requirements for existing housing types in the RP District as described in this Community Design Modification Document to achieve this purpose. a as • • EXHIBIT B HOUSING UNIT TYPES STEPHENSON VILLAGE CARRIAGE HOUSE ILLUSTRATIVE • Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. M a 0 419. STr-EET STANDARDS: Living; Space (min.) Decks (min.) 1400 square feet Side yard setback: 5'-0" interior lot lines Side yard setback: 10'-0" corner lot perimeter lot line Rear vard setback: 3'-0" *decks mist be located in rear yards and shall not be erected forward of the rear plane of a d«elling urrit STEPHENSON VILLAGE • NON —ALLEY CARRIAGE HOUSE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. Front Facade *porches, stoops, and steps may, extend 6'-0" into front yard setbacks M a • Ll S -T F-EE T I STANDARDS: Living Space (min.) Decks (min.) 1400 square feet Side yard setback: 5'-0" interior lot line Side yarn setback: 10'-0" corner lot perimeter lot line Rear yard setback: 15'-0" *decks must be located in rear yards and sliall not be erected fon%ard of the rear plane of a dwelling unit STEPHENSON VILLAGE CARRIAGE 1-10USE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. Front Facade *porches, stoops, and steps may extend 6'-0" into front yard setback M ril • • STFfILT to, MIN. rod CoeNE2 9� I�Itt�• 5' HItJ. (,oTS I I 8 AU.Li STANDARDS: Lot Width(min.) Living Space (min.) Decks (min.) Front Facade 34'-0" 1400 square feet Side yard: 5'-0" interior unit *porches, stoops, Side yard: 10'-0" end/corner unit and steps may Rear yard: 9-0" extend 6'-0" into *decks must be located in rear yards front yard setback and shall not be erected forward of the rear plane of a dwelling unit • STEPHENSON VILLAGE COTTAGE HOUSE TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. so do • Courtyard Clusters Typical This housing type consists of single-family dwellings combined to form a multi -family cluster of units. The cluster creates a privatc parking court, therefore removing garages from the main travel ways. No fewer than two and no more than seven units shall be combined in any courtyard cluster. Each unit has direct access to a private yard. A fence or fence and wall combination shall be located between units to enclose the courtyard. Each unit shall have at !cast one 3' gatc providing access to the rear yard from the courtyard. The following table specifies the minimum standards for this Courtyard Cluster house type. Minimum Area Per Unit: 2.000 sq. fUdwelling unit Minimum Setbacks: To garage frum street or common driveway: 19 fl. To dwelling from street: 18 ft. Distance between units: 10 ft. To dwelling from common driveway: 3 ft. To dwclling from interior lot line: 3 ft. To dwelling from perimeter property line: 10 R To deck and/or patio from interior lot line: 5 ft. To deck and/or patio from perimeter property line: 6 ft. Maximum Building Height: 35 ft. 44' Minimum Minimum 5• hrinimum ' Minimum 5: minimum 3' Minimum ]-----6'Mirdmum Minimum — 10' Milnimiao LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 • 10'Minimum 101 Minims 3' 3' 3' Minimum 5' Minimum 13T hLnitnum Perimeter Property line _ _ Typical Interior Lot line Typical Fence Typical Gme I Typical Deck or Pttio LOT 1 LOT 5 10' Minimum 0' Minimum Mi 1�k 10 NMIimam 10 imam I 4' CONC. SIDEWALK 4' ID ALIZ Common Driveway Street 26' r 28' STEPHENSON VILLAGE • COURTYARD CLUSTER TYPICAL Scale: NTS December 2002 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. M . Modified single-family small lot Single-family shall lothousing shall be a single-family &tached or attached residence on an individual lot. No more than two units may be attached together. (1) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows: (a) Minimumlot size: 3,750 square feet (b) Off-street parking spaces: 2 (c) Setback from state road: 20 feet (d) Setback from private road: 20 feet (e) Rear yard: 15 feet (f) Side yard: Zero lot line option may be used with this housing type. If chosen, the minimum ade yard shall be 10 feet for that yard opposite the zero lot line side. If not chosen, the minimum side yard shall be fire feet on both sides. (g) When the attached option for the single-family anall lot housing unit is chosen, the minimum building spacing requirement shall be 10 feet. (h) Supplementary setbacks: [1] With the single-family shall lot housing type, decks may extend five feet into rear yard setback areas. [2] Where single-family mall lothousing abuts open space, decks may extend up to 12 feet into rear yard setback areas. [3] Front porches, stoops and steps may extend 12 feet into front yard • setback areas. (2) Maximum buildingheights shall not exceed 35 feet in height. (3) Detached accessory builcdings maybe permitted, not to exceed 20 feet in height, will adhere to the same side yard setbacks as the house, and will have the same rear yard setback as a deck. 0 • a • Modified townhouse. The "townhouse" is a single-family atached dwelling with one dwelling unit from ground to roof, having individual outside access. Rows of attached dwellings shall not exceed 10 units and shall average no more than eight dwellings per structure. (1) Dimensional requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Average Off -Street Minimum Lot Area Lot Area Parking Lot Width (square feet) (square feet) Spaces (feet) 1200 1300 2.00 16 1400 1500 2.25 18 1600 1700 2.50 20 or larger (2) Minimumyards shall be as follows: (a) Front setbacks: [1] 20 feet from road right-of-way for front loaded garage townhouses [2] 20 feet from parking area, private street, or driveway for front loaded townhouses [3] 10 feet for rear loaded or rear loaded detached garage townhouses [4] 10 feet for non garage townhouses with offstreet parking • (b) Side: 10 feet from lot line (end unit) (c) Rear: 20 feet from lot line (3) Minimumon-site building spacing: (a) Side: 25' between adjacent end units (b) Rear: 50' from rear building plane to adjacent rear building plane (4) Maximum building shall be as follows: (a) Principle building: 35 feet (b) Accessory buildings: 20 feet (5) Minimumyard setbacks for garages (a) Side: 10 feet from lot line (end unit) for detached garage option (b) Side: 0 feet from interior lot line fcr detached garage option (c) Rear: 5 feet from lot line for detached garage option (6) Supplementary setbacks: (a) With the modified townhouse housing type, decks may extend 15 feet into rear yard setback areas. (b) Where modified townhouse abuts open space, decks may extend up to 15 feet into rear yard setback areas. (c) Front porches, stoops and steps may extend 6 feet into a 10 foot front yard is setback and 12 feet into a 20 foot front yard setback. a a • Elderly housing. Elderly housing are multifamily buildings where individual dwelling units share a common outside access. They also share a common yard area, which is the sum of the required lot areas of all dwelling units within the building. Elderly housing shall contain six or more dwellings in a single structure. Required open space shall not be included as minimum lot area. (1) Maximum gross density shall be 45 units per acre. (2) Development requirements shall be as follows: • 0 Number of Bedrooms Off -Street Parking Spaces Efficiency 1.50 1 2.00 2 2.25 3 plus 2.50 (3) Maximum site impervious surface ratio (on lot) shall be sixty -hundredths (0.60). (4) Minimum lot size shall be one (1) acre. (5) Minimum yards shall be as follows: a. Front setback: i. Twenty-five (25) feet from road right-of-way. ii. Ten (10) feet from parking area or driveway. b. Side setback: i. Twenty-five (25) feet from perimeter boundary. c. Rear setback: i. Fifty (50) feet from perimeter boundary. (6) Minimum on -site building spacing shall be twenty five (25) feet. (7) Maximum number of dwellings units per building shall be (125) (8) Maximum building height shall be as follows: a. Principal building height: forty five (45) feet. b. Accessory buildings: twenty (20) feet. 40 a • • NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY STEPHENSON VILLAGE ELDERLY HOUSING ILLUSTRATIVE Scale: NTS April 2002 • THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. a MODIFICATION #3 § 165-72D Commercial and industrial areas § 165-72M(3) Nonresidential land use phasing Ordinance Requirement: A minimum of 10% of the gross area of the project shall be used for business and industrial uses. The phasing plan for the development shall include a reasonable portion of the nonresidential uses in all phases of the development. Alternative Design Standard: Elimination of the requirement for both business and industrial land uses in Stephenson Village; establish a minimum of 4% of the gross area of the project to be used for commercial land use; allow for the majority of the commercial land uses to be located in a defined commercial center instead of all phases of Stephenson Village. Justification for Modification: A minimum lot size of 100 acres is required for a residential planned community development. The provision of 10% of the gross area of the project for business and industrial land use would equate to a minimum of 10 acres to meet the ordinance requirement. A conservative FAR of 0.2 would equate to 60,000 square feet of industrial development on 7 acres of land and 26,000 square feet of commercial on 3 acres of land. This ratio would be reasonable if both industrial and commercial land use were proposed for the residential planned community. An industrial component is not planned for Stephenson Village, nor is an industrial component desired by the immediate outlying community. The required 10% minimum of the gross area of the project for business and industrial land use would account for approximately 82.2 acres within Stephenson Village to meet the ordinance requirement. This amount of acreage is not feasible for commercial land use alone; therefore, a sufficient amount of commercial land use to meet the needs of the residential planned community is important to determine. The market and economic analysis for Stephenson Village suggests that the maximum amount of commercial land use that can be sustained is 250,000 square feet. A developed FAR of 0.2 would require less than 29 acres (3.5%) to meet the 250,000 square feet of commercial development n Stephenson Village. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect a minimum of 4% of the gross area of the project to be utilized for commercial land use when industrial land use is not part of the residential planned community design. Furthermore, it is reasonable to plan for the majority of the commercial land use to occur within a defined commercial center within the community in lieu of many smaller undefined commercial pods located within each phase of the a w residential planned community. Stephenson Village has been designed to provide for a defined commercial center that will accommodate a variety of commercial land uses and serve the residents of this community, as well as the outlying community. The request to eliminate industrial land use; to establish a minimum of 4% of the gross area for commercial land use; and to establish a defined commercial center in lieu of requiring commercial land use in all phases of the residential planned community is reasonable. Stephenson Village would be required to provide for a minimum of 33 acres for commercial land use. This acreage would allow for the provision of a variety of commercial land uses that would provide convenient shopping, services and employment opportunities for the residents within Stephenson Village and the outlying community. The 33 acres would accommodate a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial land use, which is reasonable for a community of this size. �i] • MINIMUM REQUIRED GROSS AREA OF COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL USES WITHIN PLANNED COMMUNITY GROSS AREA OF COMMERCIAL USES 3% *STEPHENSON VILLAGE WAIVER #3a SUPPORT GRAPHIC Scale: NTS April 2003 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. GROSS AREA OF INDUSTRIAL USES 7% • w PROPOSED GROSS AREA OF BUSINESS USES WITHIN PLANNED COMMUNITY ...� GROSS AREA OF BUSINESS • *STEPHENSON VILLAGE WAIVER #3b SUPPORT GRAPHIC Scale: NTS April 2003 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC, MODIFICATION #4 § 165-72F Recreational facilities Ordinance Requirement: A recreational unit is designed to meet the recreational needs of 30 dwelling units. The units may be broken into smaller units or added together to meet the needs of the planned community. Alternative Design Standard: A recreational unit is designed to meet the recreational needs of 30 dwelling units. The units may be broken into smaller units or added together to meet the needs of the planned community. The value of one recreational unit shall be equivalent to the value of one recreational tot lot unit described in § 165-64B(1) of the Zoning Ordinance. Justification for Modification: Stephenson Village will provide the equivalent of one recreational unit for every 30 dwelling units developed in the entire community. The recreational facilities will include two recreational centers, a competition swimming pool, a linear park trail and pedestrian trail systems. The Applicant should be given credit for the value of these planned recreational facilities based on a formula that is the value of one recreational tot lot x the number of required recreational units to serve the entire community. The planned recreational facilities for the overall community and for the active adult community provides for year-round recreational opportunities for the Stephenson Village community that traditional outdoor recreational units do not. Therefore, it is reasonable to utilize the recreational unit value formula to meet the recreational needs of this community. • E RECREATION VALUE EQUIVALANCY COMPARISON A single recreational unit is designed to meet the recreational needs of 30 dwelling units, which has a monetary value of approximately 17,000 dollars which may by adjusted to reflect the current value of a tot lot. The items listed below illustrate a methodology used to achieve the required overall recreational needs by assigning recreational units to the actual costs of the recreational facilities provided. The units may be broken into smaller units or added together to meet the needs of the total development. Following is a list of possible recreational facilities which may be proposed at Stephenson Village and their associated monetary value. The actual cost of the items listed below may indeed differ± from these estimates at time of construction, but should compare similarly. 1 Tot Lot Unit Linear Park Trail (approx. 3,800 linear feet) Community Pool (6 lane 25 Meter Lap Pool) Clubhouse / Bath House Half -court Basketball Court Tennis Court (1 Court) STEPHENSON VILLAGE • WAIVER #4 SUPPORT GRAPHIC Scale: NTS April 2003 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. = ± $ 17,000 (1 Rec. Unit) = ± $ 42,000 (2.45 Rec. Units) = ± $ 266,300 (15.66 Rec. Units) = ± $ 375,000 (22.06 Rec. Units) = ± $ 19,500 (1.15 Rec. Units) = ± $ 21,750 (1.28 Rec. Units) MODIFICATION #5 § 165-72I Road access Ordinance Requirement: The planned community development shall be provided with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation. Alternative Design Standard: The planned community development shall be provided with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation, excluding the street system serving the active adult community and private access drives serving no more than five single family dwelling units or ten single family dwelling units if the private access drive connects to two public streets. The minimum distance from a public street shall not apply in the active adult community provided that the lots are served by a road system that provides for multiple street intersections to enhance looping and provide for safe and efficient emergency access. The cross sectional base and pavement standard for private streets shall meet or exceed VDOT requirements, with the allowance of using a decorative cap on the private street to promote enhanced design. The cross sectional standard for private access drives serving limited single family dwellings shall include an 8" aggregate type I 21-B compacted base and a 2" SM-12.5A surface. Justification for Modification: The active adult community in Stephenson Village is planned to be a gated community. Market analysis of active adult communities has identified a gated community as being very desirable for residents due to security and safety concerns. Creating a gated community necessitates the planning of a complete system of private streets, which has also been determined to be very desirable for the residents of this type of community. The Applicant has met with the Office of the Fire Marshal to review private street design standards and private alley design standards for emergency access and has implemented those standards in the proffer statement. Furthermore, the Applicant has included a cross sectional base and pavement width standard that will meet or exceed VDOT standards. The alternative design standard also requires the design of the private street system to provide for multiple street intersections and looping to ensure that vehicular access is not limited and that good circulation patterns are provided. Therefore, it is reasonable to allow for a complete system of private streets within the active adult community that do not need to be a minimum distance from a public street as traffic circulation, appropriate construction standards and emergency service access have been considered. Instances will occur in the design of Stephenson Village where it is desirable to preserve stands of trees or other environmental features, maintain open views at the end of cul-de- sacs, and front houses towards main road systems. To accomplish these goals during design, it will be necessary to utilize private access drives to serve small numbers of M Cil single family dwellings. Current ordinance requirements do not provide for this design flexibility; therefore, residential lots are designed to maximize public street frontage due to construction costs and density yields. Stephenson Village will be planned to account for the measures described in this paragraph, which will be beneficial in achieving these design goals and will serve as a model for other developments to follow. The cross sectional base and surface standards are consistent with VDOT standards for a subdivision street serving 450 vehicle trips per day. w • goo - .• fU I� L I STIzEEr .. 'PoTP 4TIA L- TEE c.AvE 4o' FAse.rlErl "i I iSPD L.oT s • STEPHENSON VILLAGE WAIVER #5a SUPPORT GRAPHIC Scale: April 2003 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. TYr1e-,,AL e-FP PL.4 , LaT so M 0 0 C -4�4_rffi ?L14AR-170t4 ALTIVE ADULT Cot-lt-dHITY rp-I vATE JF+ T SYsTE rl VISTAHIF- plzorl poldT A -ro ?o HT 15 A5 HtASd F-F-P ALor (q -fflt STET c+HT-tp-+- HE tQLIALS 3300 FEET. STEPHENSON VILLAGE • WAIVER #5b SUPPORT GRAPHIC Scale: April 2003 THE I.AND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. fo' I dT A flit -IT 8 w C7 --.------ j vez vwri vt I Gohl�f�E'(6 t' N STEPHENSON VILLAGE WAIVER #5c SUPPORT GRAPHIC Scale: April 2003 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. STY-M-1- so w MODIFICATION #6 § 165-72M Phasing Ordinance Requirement: A schedule of phases shall be submitted with each proposed planned community. The schedule shall specify the year in which each phase will be completely developed. Alternative Design Standard: A detailed master development plan will be required to be approved by Frederick County for each development phase of Stephenson Village. If applicable, each development phase will be designed as a phase plan to ensure that a logical sequence of development occurs for the provision of roads, other infrastructure, and applicable open space and recreational facilities. It will be appropriate for multiple development phases to be under construction at any given time; however, development phases that are designed as a phase plan must be completed in sequence. Justification for Modification: Stephenson Village is planned to contain a mixture of housing types that will be developed by multiple builders. Some development phases within Stephenson Village will contain only one type of housing, while other development phases will contain multiple housing products. The market will dictate the type of housing and the rate at which housing is completed within Stephenson Village; therefore, it is impossible to provide a schedule that identifies the year when each phase will be complete. However, it is reasonable to require a phase plan for larger development phases within Stephenson Village to ensure that larger phases in the community are developed accordingly so that road systems and other improvements are provided in a timely fashion. Frederick County will require each development phase, large or small, to provide a surety guarantee for all improvements identified on the final development plans. Therefore, the County has the ability to ensure that all development phases that are permitted are developed accordingly. �J MODIFICATION #7 § 165-72G(1) Buffers and screening Ordinance Requirement: Buffers and screening shall be provided accordingly as specified in § 165-37 of this chapter. Road efficiency buffers shall be provided according to the requirements of that section. Alternative Design Standard: The distances required for the road efficiency buffer along the major collector road serving Stephenson Village may be reduced in accordance with the attached matrix, provided that the described screening and landscaping measures are met or exceeded throughout the community. Justification for Modification: The ordinance currently requires the first 40 feet of the road efficiency buffer to be inactive and contain an opaque element that is six feet in height with three trees per 10 linear feet. It may be appropriate to reduce the inactive distance for the road efficiency buffer to some degree, provided that enhanced screening measures are provided including higher opaque elements such as decorative walls or a combination earth berm and wall and a planting scheme that enhances the attractiveness of the major collector road corridor. Stephenson Village desires to have the flexibility to utilize a variety of road efficiency buffer standards including those currently provided by ordinance and those in accordance with the attached matrix. EXHIBIT D TYPICAL MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD SECTION (1 sheet) • L • • • 8 F-T-etIT1AL, 15' r11bU(, LITIUTY F-As-e izdi- L11 n riATE iTRef T r,.s4 POTHTIAL 1s, YI Mle- L}ni.ITY F-A&FtlLr4T IirI,TE TUEt^rlvccrPe A e- WIL-L AT A ri,MJirW11 fr 25- N OJPTFl1 pr<VIM I— pVr�r UrI-TS FLP- 100 u,4W- FIGT �pMCIMI.05 PIAOT *TE[IAt. r{oT To EXcMP MT So/ aF QI.�IJ+K) FLAHT MATEFMAL. Fog- LAHDSf-AP6 AREA To 6E DET$Wi1r er) AT FIHA1L PL%41a0- PRovID6 A six FeeT 111141�Qrl MiE16NT 5-FECH LITIL4V41, AI4Y (&tl MWtC I of E1TIea, A StIFUK HEM61 FerkEl "ALt-I HovliD vr- r1. -MiiS exHibrr l5 PcMDW Foe- ILLIISrRATIJE pUZP.SEi orl LY, I STEPHENSON VILLAGE "EXHIBIT D" TYPICAL MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD SECTION Scale: NTS March 2003 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. • L tAHP c.^ AREA (y�rrl�Te s7Rttf t.�N. _ lhlvsu►Pt ALGA f NOTE: For illustrative purposes only • STEPHENSON VILLAGE "EXHIBIT W TYPICAL MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD SECTION Scale: NTS March 2003 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. w a MODIFICATION #8 § 165-68 Rezoning procedure Ordinance Requirement: In order to have land rezoned to the R4 District, a master development plan meeting all requirements of this chapter, shall be submitted with rezoning application. Alternative Design Standard: The provision of a proffered Generalized Development Plan for Stephenson Village to identify the concept of the overall acreage and its relationship to adjoining properties and adjoining roadways. The Generalized Development Plan for Stephenson Village will provide Land Bays to demonstrate the proposed general land use plan layout for the entire acreage. The Generalized Development Plan for Stephenson Village will also provide a matrix identifying the residential and non-residential land uses within each Land Bay, the projected acreage of each Land Bay and the percentage of housing unit types that are proposed to ensure that a mixture of housing types is provided. Justification for Modification: A residential planned community on 794.6± acres of land cannot be completely master planned as a condition of rezoning approval. These communities are dynamic due to the market; therefore, the exact location of residential units, internal roads, neighborhood commercial, recreational amenities, open space and significant environmental features are difficult to identify at this stage in the process. The Applicant should be prepared to identify basic information pertaining to the overall development of the residential planned community to inform decision makers and interested citizens how the general land use patterns and major road systems will be developed should a rezoning be approved. The use of a Generalized Development Plan as a tool for this purpose is reasonable, as it contains illustrative and general development information that can assist in understanding the basic concepts of a residential planned community and guide the more formalized Master Development Plan process following rezoning approval. Therefore, it is requested that a Generalized Development Plan be permitted to function in the place of a detailed Master Development Plan during the rezoning process. ! • Z02 o� W � m W c d Z d �m RTE.761 OLD CH ARLE T S Q �r- AV `' 1 J y Lu u �� LLB v d ACCESS ROAD ACCESS ROAD AC F w JR. SOCCER FIELDS /?O A ,Q PAVED PARKING TYPICAL a r�� S o o a (9L ooCF / ' 1}}i4I14IH�!H ' JR. BA L F ELDS :;OCCER FIELDS R�'��DS ' __ .�.... w Y 0 0 U �: U m m IL co o a / SCHOOL Z • rr g 0 ` � • PAVILLEON —� `` OVERFLOW PARKING TYPICAL \ -i Z �j g n U o i-- a- 'b (3 z g SERVICEIEMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD • `---. .,� OR COLLECTOR U OAD w W E- H �019 �A `�° w x Z w U' o C/' W x Z o W �w E a' o w • ` DATE: MARCH 2O03 SCALE: 1 "=125' NOTE THIS LAYOUT FOR THE SCHOOL/PARK SITE IS CONCEPTUAL AND FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY. THE FINAL LOCATION OR ORIENTATION OF THE DESIGNED BY: MPR JOB NO. 2760C INDIVIDUAL LANDBAYS AND/OR THEIR ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS MAY BE SLIGHTLY ALTERED TO REFLECT MORE ACCURATE ENGINEERING. SHEET 1 OF 1 0 0 0 C • C7 0 HOUSING HOUSING NAME MINIMUM AVERAGE MIN. LOT MIN. MIN. FRONT YARD MIN. REAR MIN. SETBACK MIN. SETBACK MIN. SIDE YARD SETBACK MIN. MIN. SETBACK FROM DECK MIN. SETBACK DECK MIN. FRONT DETACHED MAXIMUM OFF UNIT TYPE LOT WIDTH LOT AREA AREA SQUARE SETBACK FROM YARD TO DWELLING DISTANCE BETWEEN ON INTERIOR LOT LINE SETBACK TO GARAGE TO INTERIOR INTERIOR LOT LINE SETBACK PORCHES, ACCESSORY BUILDING STREET SQUARE SQUARE FOOTAGE R/W OR PRIVATE SETBACK FROM DWELLING UNITS SIDE I COMBINED TOTAL GARAGE LOT LINE SIDE YARD SIDE YARD (CORNER REAR YARD/ STOOPS, AND BUILDING HEIGHT PARKING FEET FEET LIVING STREET TO TO COMMON SIDE YARD SETBACK I FROM /CORNER LOT (OR LOT (OR END UNIT REAR YARD STEPS MAY MAX. HEIGHT SPACES SPACE DWELLING DWELLING DRIVEWAY CORNER LOT (OR END STREET/ END UNIT TOWNHOUSE) SIDE ABUTTING EXTEND INTO UNIT TOWNHOUSE) SIDE ALLEY TOWNHOUSE) SIDE YARD OPEN SPACE FRONT YARD YARD YARD SETBACK 1 CARRIAGE 40' NA 4,000 1.400 15' 25' NA 10, 51/101/10, NA120' Y/10' 5V10' 15'/NA 6' 2Y 35' 2 NON -ALLEY 2 47' NA 4,700 1,400 15' 25' NA 10' 5'115'I10' 20'INA 3'110' 51110' 3'13' 6' 20' 35' 2 CARRIAGE 3 COTTAGE 34' NA 3.264 1.400 15' 20' NA 10' ON NON 0'/5'110' NAI20' O'INA 51I10' 5VNA 6' NA 35' 2 ATTACHED SIDE 3'INAINA (10' FROM NA/NA NA/NA NA/NA (6' FROM 4 COURTYARD NA 3.300 NA 2,000 10, NA 3' 10, DWELLING TO (19' FROM 3'/NA (5' FROM INTERIOR PERIMETER 6' NA 35' 2 PERIMETER PROPERTY COMMON LOT LINE) PROPERTY LINE) DRIVEWAY) LINE 5'110'I10' MODIFIED 10' (0' FOR THE (0' FOR ZERO LOTLINE 5'110' (0' FOR ZERO 5'110' (0- FOR ZERO 5 SINGLE FAMILY 38' NA 3,750 NA 20' 15, NA ATTACHED OPTION) SIDE WITH A COMBINED 20'115' LOT LINE OR LOT LINE OR 10'/3' 12' 20' HT. 35' 2 TOTAL OF 10') ATTACHED SIDE) ATTACHED SIDE) 20' (10' FOR NON 0' (25' FROM NON 12' FOR A 20' MODIFIED GARAGE OR REAR ATTACHED SIDE SETBACK, 5' 6 TOWNHOUSE 16' 1.300 1.200 NA LOADED GARAGE 20' NA WALL OF END UNIT 0110'110' 20'I5' 01110' 0'110' 5'15' FORA 10' 20' HT. 35' 2 UNITS) TO ANY OTHER SETBACK HOME) 20' (10' FOR NON 0' (25' FROM NON 12' FOR A 20' MODIFIED GARAGE OR REAR ATTACHED SIDE SETBACK, 5' 6 TOWNHOUSE 18 1,500 1,400 NA LOADED GARAGE 20' NA WALL OF END UNIT 0'101110' 20'I5' O'I10' O'110' S'IS' FOR A 10' 20' HT, 35' 2.25 UNITS) TO ANY OTHER SETBACK HOME 20' (10' FOR NON 0' (25' FROM NON 12' FOR A 20' MODIFIED GARAGE OR REAR ATTACHED SIDE SETBACK, 5' 6 TOWNHOUSE 20' OR > 1,700 1,600 NA LOADED GARAGE 20' NA WALL OF END UNIT O'!0,110' 20'IS' O'I10' 0'!10' 5,/5' FOR A 10 pO' HT. 35' 2.5 UNITS) TO ANY OTHER HOME)SETBACK STEPHENSON VILLAGE "EXHIBIT E" MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS Scale: NTS March 2003 THE LAND PLANNING & DESIGN GROUP, INC. RT �ES T0� CK 3.5 +/- ACRES AREA NOT TO BE REZONED OPEN SPACE i �00 0 , o ' ' IBM gglg IBA ' o GDPLEGEND C MINE! WINE MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD 4 INTER PARCEL CONNECTIONS NOTE: THIS GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL AND FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY. THE FINAL LOCATION OR ORIENTATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL LANDBAYS AND/OR THEIR ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS MAY BE SLIGHTLY ALTERED TO O REFLECT MORE ACCURATE ENGINEERING. ft rIATT RUN III � MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD�� lJ HIATT RUN CORRIDOR ACTIVE ADULT RECREATION CENTER IV +4-f II COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER 1011, 7ZLI VERS �:/ ,4 WETLANDS INTERMEDIATE RAVINE CHANNEL «-16mmbbk III LINEAR PARK 0 HIATTRUN iA, WON LAND BAY BREAKDOWN LAND BAY/ LAND USE ACREAGE % RANGE OF HOUSING UNIT TYPES MIN. MAX. 1 _ ELEM.SCHOOL 20 Ac. +/— NA NA II COMMUNITY PARK (6 baseball fields & 6 soccer fields) 24 Ac. +/— NA NA III MIXED RESIDENTIAL: 475 Ac. +/— ONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL/DAYCARE 7 Ac.+/— NA NA FD (Housing Unit Type 1,2,4,5, RP District SFD f Active Adult) 30 53 ONNHOUSE (Housing Unit Type 6 & RP District Townhouses) 10 30 ULTIFAMILY: Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type —Cottage House & RP District Duplex, Multiplex, trium, Gorden Apartment & Active Adult) 7 30 IV ACTIVE ADULT: FD (Housing Unit Type 1,2, & 5) ultifamiiy (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing nit Type 3—Cottage House) 126 Ac.+/— 30 53 COMMERCIAL CENTER (Retail, Office & Public Service Satellite Facility) c• + — NA NA SEE NOTES ADDRESSING ABOVE CHART IN PROFFER 3. USES. DENSITY & .MIX OF HOUSING TYPES A. (2) (1-4) co 2M N O 'D W n`O'ai W N � Z 4)o �m m N Z .0 m � kn N UA I N 3 It q n ZW c E W u ai or F n � e m I. 0 ,i w m W� M M N rn w o O ¢ 3❑ ❑ m m w u❑i f '4 t0 � 3 u 0 0x L) 0 0 0 a �It w w Z Z Z 5 °0z Qzz_r�/I11 I; Z Cn D Z Z a z Q LLJ° U Z f- a- Z_ 5 z ��W1-� H a `J U Fz W ►� Q a o � 0 Qi W Zj W �U W zX w W � 44 V1 DATE: SEPT 3, 2003 SCALE: I "=1000, DESIGNED BY:I®S/JW JOB NO. 2760C SHEET 1 OF 1 do MODIFICATION #9 § 165-133B Master development plan, contiguous land § 165-141A(8) Master development plan; contents § 165-141B(2);(4);(8) Master develop. plan, R4 contents Ordinance Requirement: The Master Development Plan shall include all contiguous land under single or common ownership in the R4 District. The Master Development Plan shall provide for a schedule of phases, with the appropriate location of phase boundaries and the order in which the phases are to be developed. The Master Development Plan shall provide for the acreage of common open space, each use, each housing type and streets for the total development; the number of dwelling units of each type in each phase for the total development, and the approximate boundaries and location of common open space for the total acreage of the site. Alternative Design Standard: The provision of a detailed Master Development Plan for Stephenson Village that is designed to reflect the acreage within the community that is planned for development by specific phase and provides an aggregate tabulation of all required development percentages to ensure that the requirements of the R4 District and the proffered Generalized Development Plan are met throughout the development of the Stephenson Village community. Justification for Modification: A residential planned community on 794.6± acres of land cannot be completely master planned at the onset due to the complexities associated with planning and design of the community and the uncertainties of what land uses will ultimately be developed in later years of the community's development. Each developed phase of a residential planned community is a "building block process" that will have an impact on the type and rate of development in ensuing phases of the community. Stephenson Village will be planned, designed and engineered continuously over the life of the development; therefore, the ability to meet the design requirements for the "total development" as specified by the County Code cannot be accomplished. A series of Master Development Plans will be prepared for Stephenson Village over the years that will provide aggregates to account for the community's growth and to ensure that all totals are either met or not exceeded. All required information, reviews and processes will be achieved for each Master Development Plan submitted for Stephenson Village; however, information for the total community will not be available until the project is much further along. The proffered Generalized Development Plan will serve as a guide to ensure consistency in the land planning process, as well as that the desired housing unit mixes and percentages are achieved for this community. COUNTY of F REDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 April 16, 2003 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 RE: Stephenson Village Rezoning Application SUBJECT: Analysis of Proffer Statement Dear Evan: Attached with this letter is a proffer analysis report concerning the proposed proffer statement for the Stephenson Village rezoning application, dated January 8, 2003, and revised through March 7, 2003. This report is in follow-up to preliminary comments issued by staff on February 5, 2003, and several meetings held between staff and the applicant in recent months during which proffer content and structure were discussed. The goal of this analysis is to facilitate the proactive resolution of proffer - related issues in advance of the requisite public hearing process. The attached report focuses first on issues involving the proposed waiver requests and follows with general analysis of the remainder of the proffer statement. As per a discussion between representatives of Stephenson Associates, L.C. and staff on April 8, 2003, resolution of the waiver issues is proposed through an amendment to Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance to allow enhanced opportunities for ordinance modifications with R-4 zoning petitions. In the absence of this amendment, staff contends that the Zoning Ordinance would not enable the majority of the exemptions sought through the application. The proposed language for this amendment and the envisioned modification process are explained in the report. It is noted that staff analysis of the waiver requests merely identifies scenarios that would require modification approval and does not offer comment on either the impacts or appropriateness of these requests. Indeed, identification of modification opportunities by staff should not be interpreted as an endorsement of either the intent or content of the proposed waivers. Complete analysis of all modification proposals will occur subsequent to submission of the requisite justification and supplemental review materials. 107 North lent ;street v Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Page 2 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Stephenson Village Rezoning Application - Proffer Analysis April 16, 2003 The general analysis section of the report is the result of a systematic review of the proposed proffer statement by staff. All issues identified in the report are considered relevant to the ultimate viability of the proffer statement as a means to achieving the articulated vision for the Stephenson Village planned community. Staff looks forward to meeting with representatives of Stephenson Associates, L.C. on Wednesday, April 23, 2003, to discuss these issues and develop a mutually acceptable strategy for their resolution. Through the general analysis section, staff provides comment on a range of issues from language ambiguity to the actual content and intent of certain proffered conditions. Although all issues included in the report are important, certain concerns involve fundamental components of the development and therefore merit specific reference in this letter. These primary issues may be summarized as follows: • Major Collector Road - Completion of this critical transportation improvement relies upon right-of-way across land owned by others who are not party to this application. The proffer statement provides for development to proceed unabated should off -site rights -of -way required for transportation improvements prove unattainable. This provision would therefore enable the pace and quantity of development to continue without consequence should off -site improvements essential to maintaining acceptable level of service conditions on area roads remain incomplete. The proffer statement should address this contingency and its likely impacts should it be concluded that off -site rights -of -way will remain unsecured at the time of this application's public hearing. • Commercial Development - This application proposes the inclusion of commercial areas comprising 4% of the project's gross area, which, if enabled by a requested exemption, would be less than the minimum commercial allotment of 10% required by ordinance. Moreover, the development of commercial uses is not phased with the residential component of the project, thereby enabling full residential build -out prior to the commencement of any commercial activity within Stephenson Village. However, although 4% of the project's land area will be reserved for commercial use, the applicant has not guaranteed that this land will actually develop as no mininnim amount of commercial development has been specified by proffer, only a maximum. The lack of any assurances regarding the timing and quantity of commercial development poses the risk that commercial uses may either trail residential development indefinitely or fail to materialize all together. The timely development of sufficient quantities of commercial development is essential to realization of the advantages of mixed -use development. Page 3 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Stephenson Village Rezoning Application - Proffer Analysis April 16, 2003 School and Public Park Land Dedications - The proffer statement provides for the reversion of land dedicated to the County for school and public park uses to the applicant's ownership should such uses not be established within 10 years of conveyance. It is noted that this provision fails to acknowledge that the value of the dedicated land has been credited toward the per unit monetary proffer included with this application. Moreover, the evolving fiscal and programmatic realities that govern completion of capital improvement projects are not effectively accommodated by this proffer. It is important to reiterate that the analysis included in the attached report is limited to the proffer statement only. The issue of this proposal's inconsistency with the existing land use policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan is not discussed. Moreover, analysis of the impact statement for this project is not included in the report. Please note that this application will not be scheduled for the requisite Planning Commission public hearing until all issues of significance concerning the proffer statement are resolved. As always, please feel free to contact me should you have any questions or concerns regarding this correspondence. Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/rsa Attachments cc: J. Donald Shockey, Jr., Stephenson Associates, L.C. John Goode, Stephenson Associates, L.C. Thomas Moore Lawson, Esquire, Lawson and Silek, P.L.C. John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator Kris C. Tierney, Assistant County Administrator Lawrence R. Ambrogi, County Attorney Jay Cook, Assistant County Attorney Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director Stephenson Village Rezoning Application Proffer Analysis April 15, 2003 Proffer Statement for Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community Dated January 8, 2003, Revised Through March 7, 2003 Submitted by Stephenson Associates, L.C. I. Waivers 1. Proposed Waivers to Enable Design Flexibility (p. 2 - 4) A. Overview - Ordinance Limitations and Recommended Resolution The proffer statement includes twenty-two requests for waivers fiom certain requirements of the Frederick County Code ("the Code") applicable to planned community development. These waivers primarily involve provisions of Chapter 165 ("Zoning Ordinance") and Chapter 144 ("Subdivision Ordinance"). The requested waivers are proposed as a means of facilitating the design plan for Stephenson Village and constitute the foundation for subsequent sections of the proffer statement. Exemptions and/or waivers to the requirements of the Code applicable to planned community developments are enabled pursuant to § 165-72.0. of the Zoning Ordinance, which states: Other regulations. The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article. This provision plainly articulates that an exemption or waiver cannot be legally proposed or considered for a planned community development except where said exemption is expressly permitted pursuant to Article VII of Chapter 165 of the Code. It is noted that this provision is exclusive in nature and is not amendable through approval of proffered conditions allowed with conditional rezoning approval. Indeed, by expressly defining the scope of allowable exemptions, § 165-72.0. establishes the preeminence of the Code vis-a-vis rezoning petitions for planned cornrnunity development, effectively limiting the degree of flexibility attainable through proffered conditions. Accordingly, the majority of the waiver requests included with the proffer statement are not permitted due to the absence of language in Article VII specifically enabling the desired exemptions. Therefore, an alternative method is required to achieve the regulatory flexibility necessary to facilitate implementation of the Stephenson Village design concept. Staff has proposed an amendment to Article VII intended to expand opportunities for modifications to ordinance provisions applicable to planned community development. It is noted that staff perceives the existing provisions of Article VII to be generally appropriate as the County's Page 1 of 26 regulatory template for mixed -use communities. Therefore, the scope of the proposed amendment is limited to § 165-72.0., which would be enhanced to provide individual applicants for R-4 zoning with broad latitude to pursue modifications to any provision of the Code impacting physical development, assuming modifications are not otherwise enabled by ordinance through established processes (i.e. Master Development Plan, Subdivision). In seeking modification approval, an applicant would be expected to address the following: 1) Specify the alternative design or development standard proposed in lieu of the relevant ordinance requirement; 2) Provide elevation and/or cross-section plans or drawings demonstrating the implementation and effect of the modified standard; 3) Identify the need or role for the alternative standard in the overall design plan for the community; and 4) Articulate how the proposed standard will meet the public purpose(s) of the relevant ordinance provision to an equivalent degree. It is envisioned that the Board of Supervisors would consider and approve each modification request on its merits pursuant to the applicant's justification. Moreover, modifications would be considered concurrent with the rezoning application and, if approved, the alternative standards and accompanying cross-section and elevation plans would be included as conditions of the rezoning approval. In essence, this amendment approach would codify a rational method enabling consideration and adoption of alternative standards to enable design flexibility with planned community development. Staff contends that Board approved modifications are the most effective means of accommodating the unique vision expected with any planned community development while simultaneously assuring the relevance of both the public process and the Code. Staff proposes replacement of the current language of § 165-72.0. with the following: § 165-72.0. Modifications; applicability of other regulations. (1) An applicant may request as part of an application for rezoning to the R-4 District that a modification to specific requirements of the subdivision ordinance, this chapter or other requirements of the Frederick County Code applicable to physical development be granted. The applicant shall demonstrate that the requested modification is necessary or justified in the particular case by a demonstration that the public purpose of these ordinances, as applied to the particular case, would be met to at least an equivalent degree by such modification. The Board of Supervisors may approve or disapprove such request, in whole or in part. (2) The applicant shall provide sufficient information to enable evaluation of the request by the Board of Supervisors. Materials submitted should include or be supplemented by: (a) specification of the code section(s) to be modified Page 2 of 26 and the proposed alternative standard; (b) exhibits demonstrating application of the modified standard such as a detailed plan and/or elevation drawing; and, (c) identification of the relationship of the modification to the overall community concept. (3) The planned community development shall conform with all regulations of this chapter and the Frederick County Code unless specifically exempted by this article or modified by the Board of Supervisors through the rezoning process. B. Analysis of Waivers to Enable Design Flexibility Staff has prepared a cursory analysis of each waiver request pursuant to the limitations of § 165-72.0. In accordance with this provision, many of the waivers are not enabled by Article VII and therefore cannot be approved as requested through this application. As noted above, staff has proposed an amendment to Article VII to allow applicants requesting R-4 zoning to seek modifications of the Code for the purposes of facilitating regulatory flexibility and innovative community design. This analysis identifies those waiver requests that would be appropriate as modification proposals under the amended ordinance. Moreover, staff identifies those requests that are already enabled by ordinance and the appropriate means of seeking permitted waivers is enumerated. In the context of an amended § 165-72.0., all of the proposed waivers could conceivably be pursued as modifications, assuming submission of adequate justification and sufficient supporting materials. Therefore, the successful amendment of Article VII is a prerequisite of approval of the design concept currently proposed through the Stephenson Village application. Waiver B.(1) (p. 2) Issue: The proposed waiver seeks exemption from the housing type mix required via §165-71. of Article VII, Mixture of Housing Types Required. This provision does not allow alternative housing unit mixtures or general exemptions from the mix required by ordinance. Pursuant to §165-72.0., the requirements of § 165-71. cannot be modified or waived as such exemptions are not specifically allowed by ordinance. Recommended Resolution: A modification of the requirements of § 165-71 may be sought pending amendment of § 165-72.0. To facilitate the modification, the applicant is encouraged to provide an alternative housing mix for Stephenson Village as well as justification regarding the necessity of the modification to include demonstration that the proposed mix will meet the public purpose of the existing standards to an equivalent degree. Waiver B.(2) (p. 2) Issue: Pursuant to §165-72.B.(2) of Article VII, Dimensional Requirements, an alternative dimensional plan may be submitted with a planned community development proposal. However, Page 3 of 26 the ordinance stipulates that the alternative plan be approved by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors with no provision for administrative approval. Pursuant to § 165-72.0., the requirement that an alternative dimensional plan receive Plarming Commission and Board of Supervisors approval cannot be modified or waived as such exemptions are not specifically allowed by ordinance. Recommended Resolution: The applicant has included alternative dimensional plans with the proffer statement for several proposed housing types that will be unique to Stephenson Village. The inclusion of additional alternative plans for future housing types not envisioned either by ordinance or this application would require approval by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. In general, staff perceives the current process for such approval to be reasonable. However, the applicant may pursue a procedural modification that would allow subsequent alternative plans to be reviewed and approved administratively pending amendment of § 165-72.0. The applicant would be required to demonstrate that administrative approval of changes to the dimensional plan would meet the public purpose of a public review process to an equivalent degree. Waiver B.(3) (p. 2) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.D. of Article VII, Commercial and Industrial Areas, a minimum of 10% of the gross area of the project shall be used for business and industrial uses. This requirement further limits the maximum amount of commercial and industrial development to no more than 50% of the planned community's gross area. The ordinance does not provide for the modifications to either the minimum or maximum limitations applicable to commercial and industrial development in the planned community. Pursuant to § 165-72.0., the requirement that business land uses comprise a minimum of 10% of the project's gross area cannot be modified or waived as such exemptions are not specifically allowed by ordinance. Recommended Resolution: A modification of the requirements of §165-72.D. may be sought pending amendment of § 165-72.0. To facilitate the modification, the applicant is encouraged to provide alternative land use ratios for Stephenson Village as well as justification regarding the necessity of the modification to include demonstration that the proposed ratios will meet the public purpose of the existing standards to an equivalent degree. Waiver B.(4) (p. 2) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.F. of Article VII, Recreational facilities, the equivalent of one recreational unit shall be provided per thirty dwellings. This provision provides for flexibility in the design and configuration of these facilities pursuant to Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Department approval. For instance, this provision allows for the combination or fragmentation of required facilities to meet the unique demands of the planned community, provided the total required units are ultimately developed. However, an outright exemption from the standard is not enabled by ordinance. Therefore, pursuant to § 165-72.0., the requirement that a planned community shall include the equivalent of one recreational unit per thirty dwellings cannot be Page 4 of 26 modified or waived as such exemptions are not allowed by ordinance. Recommended Resolution: As noted in the preceding paragraph, the current language of § 165-72.F. provides flexibility in the design and configuration of recreational facilities. If flexibility in the delivery of required recreational units is of principal interest to the applicant, then no further modification would arguably be necessary and issues concerning the method(s) employed to satisfy recreational unit requirement can be resolved through subsequent development applications. However, a modification of the requirements of § 165-72.F. may be sought pending amendment of § 165-72.0. should the applicant desire an alternative recreational unit standard in lieu of that which is required by ordinance. The applicant should clarify the purpose of the requested waiver so that the appropriate course of action can be determined. Waiver B.(5) (p. 2) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.G.(2) of Article VII, Buffers and screening, an alternative plan for buffers and screening and the separation of uses within the planned community may be proposed with the required Master Development Plan. Approval of the alternative plan is granted by the Board of Supervisors following the evaluation and recommendation of the Planning Commission. Given the availability of this option for internal buffers and screening, the requested waiver may not be necessary. Indeed, as per the referenced ordinance section, an alternative plan must be developed and submitted for approval with the Master Development Plan if buffering and screening is planned within the community that differs from standard ordinance requirements. Thus, although flexibility is provided through this provision of Article VII, an outright waiver of applicable buffering and screening requirements is not permitted as the applicant must submit an alternative program as a means to the desired exemption. Recommended Resolution: The applicant should prepare and submit an alternative buffer and screening plan for inclusion with the proffer statement. No modification is necessary to facilitate this course of action. Waiver B.(6) (p. 3) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.G.(1) and (2) of Article VII, Buffering and screening, perimeter buffers and screens shall be provided in accordance with applicable ordinance requirements and said buffers and screens shall not be included in an alternative buffering and screening plan. Asper §165-72.0., the proposed modification or waiver of the perimeter buffer requirement is not permitted as the provisions of Article VII do not enable such exemptions. Indeed, the provisions of §165-72.G.(2) do not provide for the inclusion of perimeter buffers in alternative buffering and screening plans. Recommended Resolution: A modification of the requirements of §165-72.G.(1) and (2) may be sought pending amendment of § 165-72.0. The purpose of these modifications is twofold; first, to enable perimeter buffers that differ from those required by §165-37 of the Zoning Ordinance and second, to allow the inclusion of an alternative perimeter buffer(s) with the alternative buffer and Page 5 of 26 screening plan enabled by § 165-72.G.(2). The alternative perimeter buffer(s) envisioned by the applicant should be delineated in the alternative buffer and screening plan for Stephenson Village. Waiver B.(7) (p. 3) Issue: Pursuant to §165-72.I. of Article VII, Road access, a planned community shall be provided with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation. This provision does not enable any modification or waiver of this standard under any circumstance. Thus, as per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver of the public road requirement for a planned community development is not permitted as the provisions of Article VII do not enable such exemptions. It is noted, however, that § 144-24.C.(2) of Article V, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the Frederick County Code permits access to multi -family and single family small lot housing via private roads. Such standards would be applicable in areas of the proposed development involving the specified housing types thereby allowing the use of private roads in limited circumstances. However, no provision exists enabling waiver of the public road requirement applicable to other housing types within a planned community. Recommended Resolution: A modification of § 165-721 would be required to allow private road access should the applicant intend to serve housing types other than multi -family and single-family small lot with such access. Moreover, the applicant would need to modify the public street frontage requirements of § 144-24.C. to broaden the use of private streets in Stephenson Village. As noted in the preceding paragraph, at present only multi -family units and single-family small lot housing are allowed frontage on private streets. The applicant should include and commit to a set of minimum specifications for private roads as a means of demonstrating that the expanded use of private streets would meet the public purpose of the public street access requirement to an equivalent degree. The current proffer statement does not include any such specifications. Waiver B.(8) (p. 3) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.I. of Article VII, Road access, exemptions may be granted to the requirement that all roads shall be provided with curb and gutter. Specifically, such exemptions are permitted to allow for alternative storm water management techniques, such as those associated with low impact development. However, the ordinance specifies that such exemptions are to be granted by the Board of Supervisors following review by the Planning Commission. Administrative approval of curb and gutter exemptions by the Director of Public Works is not enabled by the referenced code provision. Thus, per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver of the requirement that the Board of Supervisors approve curb and gutter exemptions is not permitted as an exemption to this approval process is not permitted by ordinance. Recommended Resolution: The requested waiver is arguably not necessary to facilitate exemption from the curb and gutter requirements of § 165-721 The opportunity for such exemptions would exist at the Master Development Plan stage of development review, which necessarily involves Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approval. At that time, the Commission and Board Page 6 of 26 can evaluate the appropriateness of such exemptions pursuant to the applicant's presentation of specific proposals for low impact development and identification of those areas to be developed using such techniques. However, the applicant may propose modification of the procedural requirements of § 165-72.I. pending amendment of § 165-72.0. Waiver B.(9) (p. 3) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.M. of Article VII, Phasing, a schedule of phases shall be submitted with each planned community proposal to include specification of the calendar year during which each phase will be completed. The modification or waiver of this requirement is not enabled by this provision. Thus, per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver of the phasing schedule requirement is not permitted as such an exemption is not specifically allowed by ordinance. Recommended Resolution: A modification of the phasing requirements of § 165-72.M. may be sought pending amendment of § 165-72.0. Waiver B.(10) (p. 3) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.M.(3) of Article VII, Phasing, the phasing plan for a planned community shall include a reasonable portion of planned non-residential uses in all phases of development. This provision is intended to achieve a balance between residential and non-residential land uses throughout project development. The modification or waiver of this requirement is not enabled by this provision. Thus, per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver of the requirement to include non- residential land uses with each phase of development is not allowed as such an exemption is not specifically permitted by ordinance. Recommended Resolution: The phased introduction of non-residential land uses with residential development is consistent with accepted planning practice involving mixed -use communities. Such phasing is not purely an economic concern, but rather an integral method for ensuring that the efficiencies possible with mixed -use development evolve from its earliest stages. This approach ensures that commercial and employment uses develop in an integrated mamzer with residential uses, not merely as a functional and aesthetic post -script to years of residential development. However, should the applicant deem such phasing to be unacceptable in the context of Stephenson Village, a modification of this standard may be sought pending amendment of §165-72.0. To demonstrate satisfaction of the public purpose of §165-72.M.(3), the applicant should provide an alternative phasing program for non-residential land uses. Waiver B.(11) (p. 3) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.I. of Article VII, Road access, a planned community shall be provided with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation. This provision does not enable any modification or waiver of this standard under any circumstance. Page 7 of 26 By extension, no provision is made for modification of the associated requirement that all lots abut and have access to a public road, which is specified in §144-24.C. of Article V, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the Frederick County Code. Thus, as per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver of the public road requirement for a planned community development is not allowed as the provisions of Article VII do not enable such exemptions. It is noted, however, that §144-24.C.(2) of Chapter 144 permits access and therefore frontage for multi -family and single family small lot housing via private roads. Such standards would be applicable in areas of the proposed development involving the specified housing types thereby allowing the use of private roads in limited circumstances. However, no provision exists enabling waiver of the public road frontage requirement applicable to other housing types within a planned community. Recommended Resolution: Pursuant to amendment of § 165-72.0., a modification to the public street frontage requirements of § 144-24.C. may be sought to broaden the use of private streets in Stephenson Village. At present only multi -family units and single-family small lot housing are allowed frontage on private streets. The applicant should include and commit to a set of minimum specifications for private roads as a means of demonstrating that the expanded use of private streets would meet the public purpose of the public street access requirement to an equivalent degree. The current proffer statement does not include any such specifications. (See discussion of Waiver B. (7) above) Waiver B.(12) (p. 3) Issue: Pursuant to § 122-5 of Chapter 122, Nuisances, of the Frederick County Code, a property owner shall not allow grass, weeds, or foreign growth to exceed 18 inches in height within 100 feet of any dwelling or building. Article VII does not provide for a waiver of this code requirement. Thus, as per §165-72.0., the proposed waiver of this nuisance standard is not valid as such an exemption is not specifically enabled by the provisions of Article VII. Recommended Resolution: As proposed, the amendment of § 165-72.0. would enable modification of any section of the Code involving physical development. Thus, the applicant could pursue a modification to this requirement pending adoption of the amendment. Staff is uncertain of the applicant's intent concerning this waiver request. The homeowner's association required for the development would ultimately bear responsibility for maintaining undeveloped common or grassy areas that are not controlled by a private property owner, to include those located within the rights - of -way of private roads and adjacent to storm water management facilities. Individual property owners would also be exempted from this code section through the proposed modification thereby precluding County response to future complaints concerning undeveloped properties that are overgrown and/or unkept within the community. The applicant should therefore clarify the purpose(s) of this exemption and further specify the maintenance methods proposed as well as the enforcement provisions of said methods. Page 8 of 26 Waiver B.(13) (p. 3) Issue: Street classifications and associated design and construction standards are defined using daily traffic count figures specified via §144-17 of Article V, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the Frederick County Code. Neither Article VII of Chapter 165 nor Article V of Chapter 144 provide for the waiver or modification of the road classification criteria. This, as per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver of the average daily trip count figures used to determine street classifications is not permitted as such an exemption is not specifically enabled by the provisions of Article VII. Recommended Resolution: Pending amendment of § 165-72.0., the applicant may pursue modification of the standards and classifications specified under § 144-17. An alternative method for defining street classifications should be included with the proposal. Waiver B.(14) (p. 3) Issue: Pursuant to §144-17.(M) of Article V, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the Frederick County Code, street signs using alternative designs may be permitted with Planning Commission approval. However, no provision is included for the administrative approval of such designs, as requested by the applicant. Moreover, the waiver of this approval process is not permitted by ordinance. The proposed waiver to allow the Director of Public Works to approve alternative street sign designs in lieu of Planning Commission approval is not valid as such exemptions are not permitted by ordinance. The applicant may achieve the desired flexibility in street sign design by requesting Planning Commission approval during the subdivision review process. Recommended Resolution: Pending approval of the amendment to § 165-72.0., the applicant may pursue a modification of the procedural requirements of § 144-17.(M) concerning alternative street sign designs. The applicant should provide a set of design guidelines for approval by the Commission and Board, which would guide any subsequent administrative approval process. As with all modification proposals, the applicant must demonstrate that the alternative approval process would satisfy the public purpose of Commission review and approval to an equivalent degree. Waiver B.(15) (p. 4) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.B.(2) of Article VII, Dimensional requirements, an alternative dimensional requirement plan is allowed for a plamied community with Board of Supervisors approval. The applicant has submitted a series of alternative dimensional plans for many of the housing types envisioned for Stephenson Village; in other cases, a housing type allowed by the RP Zoning District would be regulated pursuant to existing ordinance standards. Thus, the requested waiver is not necessary as Article VII provides for a defined program enabling flexibility and innovation with dimensional requirements. As previously noted, the applicant has proposed such alternative plans with the proffers proposed with the Stephenson Village application. Recommended Resolution: Neither a waiver nor modification is required for the County to accept Page 9 of 26 the alternative dimensional requirement plans proffered by the applicant. As noted in the preceding paragraph, such alternative plans are specifically allowed via §165-72.B.(2). Alternative dimensional requirements may be accepted for housing types permitted by ordinance assuming the Commission and Board deem such requirements to be consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and sound planning practice. Waiver B.(16) (p. 4) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-72.I. of Article VII, Road access, a planned community shall be provided with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation. This provision does not enable any modification or waiver of this standard under any circumstance. By extension, no provision is made for modification of the associated requirement that all lots abut and have access to a public road, which is specified in §144-24.C. of Article V, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the Frederick County Code. Thus, as per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver of the public road requirement for a planned community development is not allowed as the provisions of Article VII do not enable such exemptions. It is noted, however, that §144-24.C.(2) of Chapter 144 permits access and therefore frontage for multi -family and single family small lot housing via private roads. Such standards would be applicable in areas of the proposed development involving the specified housing types thereby allowing the use of private roads in limited circumstances. However, no provision exists enabling waiver of the public road frontage requirement applicable to other housing types within a planned community. Recommended Resolution: A modification of §165-721 would be required to allow private road access should the applicant intend to serve housing types other than multi -family and single-family small lot with such access. Moreover, the applicant would need to modify the public street frontage requirements of § 144-24.C. to broaden the use of private streets in Stephenson Village. As noted in the preceding paragraph, at present only multi -family units and single-family small lot housing are allowed frontage on private streets. The applicant should include and commit to a set of minimum specifications for private roads as a means of demonstrating that the expanded use of private streets would meet the public purpose of the public street access requirement to an equivalent degree. The current proffer statement does not include any such specifications. (See discicssion of Waiver B. (7) above) Waiver B.(17) (p. 4) Issue: Pursuant to § 144-24.C.(2)(b) of Article V, Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the Frederick County Code, single family small lot and multi -family housing that abuts a private road shall not be more than 500 feet from a state -maintained road. This provision allows the Planning Commission to waive this requirement to enable lots containing such housing to be as much as 800 feet from a public road. However, this provision is explicit in the maximum distance ultimately allowable for specified housing types from a state road and in the role of the Planning Commission in granting an Page 10 of 26 exemption to achieve said distance. No provision for the modification or waiver of this standard is provided via either Chapter 165 or Chapter 144. Thus, per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver is not valid as it is not specifically enabled by the provisions of Article VII. Recommended Resolution: Pending approval of the amendment to § 165-72.0., the applicant may pursue a modification of the requirements of § 144-24.C.(2)(b) concerning the maximum distance permitted for single-family small lot and multi -family housing from a state -maintained road. This modification proposal should specify the maximum distance from a state road proposed for lots comprising "active adult" components of the community and establish that the alternative standard meets the public purpose of the existing requirement(s) to an equivalent degree. Waiver B.(18) (p. 4) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-27.13. of Article IV, Supplementary Regulations - Off-street Parking, uses may engage in shared parking agreements to enable flexibility in meeting parking requirements. No provisions are provided for waivers of the requirements governing shared parking or the design of parking lots and spaces. Thus, per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver is not valid as it is not specifically enabled by the provisions of Article VII. Recommended Resolution: Pending approval of the amendment to § 165-72.0., the applicant may pursue a modification of the requirements of § 165-27.13. concerning shared parking arrangements. The applicant should clarify the purpose of the requested modification as staff is unclear as to the intended role of shared parking in the development. Moreover, should the design of shared parking areas be an issue of concern for the applicant, modifications to other provision of § 165-27 may be necessary, such as §165-27.C. and §165-27.E., which govern parking space size and parking lot design, respectively. Waiver B.(19) (p. 4) Issue: All parking areas are subject to the design requirements of §165-27.B. In many cases, the Zoning Administrator is permitted to allow modifications or alternatives to specified design criteria under certain circumstances. Thus, a means of achieving administrative approval for parking lot design is provided by ordinance. Article VII does not provide for the outright waiver of parking requirements, to include design standards, which therefore precludes the proposed waiver(s) pursuant to § 165-72.0. Recommended Resolution: As per the preceding paragraph, the Zoning Administrator is provided some administrative discretion concerning implementation of parking lot design standards. However, as noted in the discussion of Waiver B.(18) above, if unique design standards are sought that differ from those required by ordinance, the applicant may pursue modifications of § 165-27.E., which governs parking lot design. Such modifications may be sought pursuant to the criteria of § 165-72.0., pending its amendment as previously discussed. Page 11 of 26 Waiver B.(20) (p. 4) Issue: Pursuant to § 165-29.A.(14), private roads must be paved with a 165 No. psy asphalt concrete, Type SM-2A surface treatment. No provision for the waiver or modification of this surfacing standard is allowed by ordinance. However, the requirements of the ordinance do not preclude the stamping of requisite asphalt surfaces for decorative purposes. Nevertheless, as per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver of the surface treatment requirements for private roads is not permitted as the provisions of Article VII do not specifically allow for such exemptions. Recommended Resolution: Pending amendment of §165-72.0., the applicant may pursue modification of the surface requirements for private roads as required by §165-29.A.(14). The applicant should provide alternative treatment standards as a means of demonstrating that the proposed modification will meet the public purpose of the ordinance standard to an equivalent degree. As noted in the preceding paragraph, nothing in the ordinance precludes the stamping and/or painting of asphalt surfaces for decorative purposes. Waiver B.(21) (p. 4) Issue: Pursuant to §165-31.B.(5), wetlands are not permitted to be disturbed for the purpose of forming natural storm water retention areas. No provision for the waiver or modification of this limitation is enabled by ordinance. As per § 165-72.0., the proposed waiver to enable disturbance of wetland areas for storm water management purposes is not permitted as the provisions of Article VII do not specifically allow for such exemptions. Recommended Resolution: Pending amendment of § 165-72.0., the applicant may pursue modification of the disturbance limitations of § 165-31.B.(5). The applicant should provide details concerning the role of wetlands in the storm water management system and the extent to which such features would require disturbance. Specific low impact development techniques involving wetland areas should also be provided. The applicant must demonstrate that the goals and public purpose of the wetlands provisions of the Code are equally satisfied by the modified disturbance standard. Waiver B.(22) (p. 4) Issue: Pursuant to §165-72.G.(2) of Article VII, Buffers and screening, an alternative plan for buffers and screening and the separation of uses within the planned community may be proposed with the required Master Development Plan. Approval of the alternative plan is granted by the Board of Supervisors following the evaluation and recommendation of the Planning Commission. Given the availability of this option for internal buffers and screening, to include road efficiency buffers adjacent to internal roads, the requested waiver is neither necessary nor appropriate. Indeed, as per the referenced ordinance section, an alternative plan must be developed and submitted for approval with the Master Development Plan if buffering and screening is planned within the community that differs from standard ordinance requirements. Thus, although flexibility is provided through this provision of Article VII, an outright waiver of the road efficiency buffer requirements Page 12 of 26 is not permitted as the applicant must submit an alternative program as a means to the desired exemption. Recommended Resolution: The applicant must include the proposed alternative road efficiency buffer applicable within Stephenson Village with the alternative buffer and screening plan permitted by §165-72.G.(2). At present, an alternative buffer and screening plan is not included with the proffer statement. (See discussion of Waivers B. (S) and B. (6) above) II. General Proffer Analysis 2. Phasing Plan to Minimize Sudden Impacts on County Services (p. 5) A. Additional Proffer Pa ent Issues: Staff recognizes the value of the additional proffer to offset impacts to schools and respects the effort and generosity of the applicant. However, the structure of the proffer is confusing and its ultimate implementation may be problematic. a) The "applicant" should be better defined in the context of project development. Without specification, it is uncertain whether Stephenson Associates, L.C. retains this obligation or if it is passed along to the individual builder who would pay the additional proffer at the time of building permit issuance. Also, if individual builders are responsible, it is necessary to ensure that those applying for permits in August or September do not bear the burden of the additional proffer in cases where the additional students were, in reality, generated by development that occurred earlier in the cycle via other builder(s). In essence, the proposed language should be clarified to ensure that responsibility for the additional proffer is equitable and not debatable. b) Per the proposed proffer, the report regarding pupil generation in Stephenson Village will be prepared by the Public Schools at the applicant's expense. The proposed language does not provide an estimate of this cost nor does it include a mechanism to enforce reimbursement of this cost to the Public Schools. Again, as the project proceeds through build -out, it is unclear who bears this responsibility, especially if sections of the project are sold to individual builders thereby relieving Stephenson Associates, L.C. of direct control and accountability. Moreover, acknowledgment should be provided by the Public Schools that the reporting structure included in the proffer is appropriate and manageable. c) The assumed route for proffer payment is the building permit process. If the applicant envisions an alternative method of payment, the approach should be specified in the proposed language. Indeed, staff concerns about implementation of Page 13 of 26 the additional monetary contribution for public schools reflect uncertainty as to how the applicant intends for this contribution to be paid - by whom and at what point in the process. Clarification in the proposed language will likely resolve these issues. B. Limitation on Permits (1) Calculation Issues: The proposed language establishing the phasing program for residential development is difficult to interpret. In particular, the actual number of units per year intended by this proffer appears reasonably debatable - i.e. 8% of the total per year until build -out (170 units/year) v. 8% of units remaining to build -out (8% of total less previously built units = 170 units/year #1, 156 units/year #2, and so on to build -out). To ensure clarity in evaluation and implementation, it is recommended that the phasing plan be further defined through a table delineating the number of building permits to be issued each year through proj ect built -out. The table would effectively articulate the proffered development rate of 8% in terms of units per year and therefore diminish the potential for future confusion or disagreement. It is noted that a development rate of 170 units per year through project build -out could yield completion of the residential portion of Stephenson Village in 12.5 years. It is noted that the planned commercial component of the development is not included in the phasing program. As proposed, there is no link established between commercial development and residential growth thereby allowing the possibility that residential build -out will occur prior to the availability of any commercial uses within the community. Staff is concerned that the minimal amount of commercial development proposed for Stephenson Village will be slow to materialize without a phasing commitment. In the absence of commercial uses, the benefits of a mixed -use community will be sharply minimized for both future residents and the County as a whole. (2) Monitoring Issues: The proposed semi-annual report is welcomed as an additional tool to assist in permit tracking. However, Frederick County will ultimately bear full responsibility for permit monitoring and retain authority for enforcing conformance with the proffered phasing plan. 3. Uses, Density and Mix of Housing Types (p. 6 - 7) A. (Housing Unit Types with Land Bay Breakdown, p. 6) Issues: Paragraph (1), the language concerning the proffered mix of housing types should be Page 14 of 26 more affirmatively phrased as "the Applicant shall" rather than "the Applicant reserves the right." Indeed, if the applicant is proffering to develop a mixed -housing type residential community, this commitment should be clearly stated in the proposed language. It appears that the applicant is attempting to state that all housing types allowed for the development will be referred to as "mixed residential," to include those allowed by ordinance and those proffered in the alternative dimensional requirements plan. Unfortunately, the language used to convey this categorization is unclear. Moreover, the final sentence in Paragraph (1) requires additional clarity. This sentence seems to suggest that housing may be developed pursuant either to the proffered alternative dimensional plan or to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. If this is the intent of the applicant, staff encourages revision of the paragraph to more directly state these objectives. Paragraph (2), the opening sentence refers to Exhibit A as "a graphic for illustrative purposes only." However, Exhibit A is the proffered Generalized Development Plan (GDP) that will be used to control the general layout of land uses in Stephenson Village. Staff suggests that this statement should be corrected to eliminate the reference to the GDP as a mere illustrative document. Staff is pleased that the applicant has employed the table of land bays to identify land use development within the project. However, the Land Bay Breakdown requires additional clarification to ensure ease of evaluation and implementation. The acreage of each land bay should be more definite, as opposed to stating an acreage and following with a plus or minus sign (+/-). While staff does not expect the applicant to precisely identify the sizes of land bays, it would be more effective to state the size in terms of an acreage range - such as, Elementary School: 20-25 acres, Convenience Commercial: 7-10 acres, etc. The title of the column for the percent range of housing types allowable within Stephenson Village should be clarified. Specifically, a title such as "% of Total Housing Units" would more clearly articulate the meaning of the minimum and maximum percentages that follow. Staff is concerned that future interpretation of this information would be problematic as it is currently presented. It is noted that the proposed percent ranges appropriately combine so that all housing type minimums will be achieved should a given type develop to the maximum percentage allowed by proffer. Land BE Breakdown Notes (p. 6 - 7) TQQI I PQ' (1) First sentence, staff recommends replacing the term "potential" with "allowable." The conclusion of the final sentence should be clarified to state "...and the total Page 15 of 26 000 000 number of units for the project shall not exceed 2800, regardless of the combination or mix of housing types." (2) Staff suggests that this note be clarified to explain that this 33 acres is divided between Land Bays III and V for neighborhood commercial and commercial center uses, respectively. (3) Staff recommends including the open space acreage in the Land Bay Breakdown table so that the total project size can be derived from its contents. Moreover, the applicant should state the quantity of open space as a percentage of the total project acreage. Staff notes that the Executive Summary submitted with the proffer statement indicates open space comprising "200-250" acres, whereas this note indicates a total of 125 acres of open space for the project, inclusive of the Hiatt Run Corridor and the wetlands intermittent ravine channel. The open space requirement for the R-4 Zoning District is 30% of the gross project acreage. The open space specified in this note accounts for merely 15% of the gross project area. Unless modified through the Board of Supervisors, this application would not meet the minimum open space requirement. The applicant should clarify the total open space to be provided as well as its components and resolve any inconsistencies between the summary and the proffer statement. (4) This note allows for an unspecified increase in the total amount of Land Bay III (Mixed Residential) that can be developed as active adult, affordable housing for the elderly, or commercial. While all of these uses may be considered low -impact from a fiscal perspective, each involves other impacts that would require consideration through the associated impact analysis statement. In particular, traffic generation may be substantially different if a larger percentage of the site develops commercially. If not accommodated by the Traffic Impact Analysis, it is likely that increased amounts of commmercial traffic may be difficult or impossible to absorb by the proffered transportation system, thereby resulting in the degradation of level of service conditions to unacceptable levels. The applicant should specify the maximum percentages possible for these land uses and model accordingly. It is noted, however, that staff supports the inclusion of commercial development that satisfies at least the minimum quantity called for by ordinance, or 10% of the gross project area. Moreover, if the percentage of either affordable housing for the elderly (multi- family) or active adult units increases above that specified as its maximum in the breakdown table, minimum amounts of other housing types specified by proffer would be unattainable. Such deviation from the minimum provisions of the proffered housing mix would compromise realization of a community within Frederick County providing diverse housing opportunities. Page 16 of 26 D. Staff recommends deleting this statement as acreage for neighborhood commercial uses is already provided in the Land Bay Breakdown table, to include day care use(s). E. Staff recommends clarifying the language of this statement to simply exclude all B3 and MI land uses from the development, unless otherwise permitted in the RP, B-1, or B-2 Zoning Districts. This provision is confusing as it is currently worded and may result in future implementation challenges. 4. Applicant to Pay 100% of Capital Facility Impacts (p. 7 - 8) Issues: Second paragraph, conclude first sentence by specifying that monetary contributions and land donations are made "to Frederick County, unless otherwise specified by proffer." It is unclear who comprised the "parties" who determined the value of donated land, which is proposed to be $30,000. Staff would encourage the applicant to clarify who established this value and on what basis. Staff welcomes the proposed adjustment of monetary contributions pursuant to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). However, staff would note that communities with comparable planned developments generally have agreed to CPI adjustments at intervals of every 18 to 24 months, as opposed to every seven years as proposed by this proffer. Clarification concerning the basis for the proposed adjustment interval would be beneficial. The paragraph concerning the escalation of proffer contributions for fire and rescue services at a set premium when elderly and active adult housing is developed may pose future confusion at the implementation stage. In particular, a process for specifying the housing types being developed must be provided in the proffer so that the premium is appropriately paid at building permit issuance. Moreover, it may be beneficial to identify the base amount of these premiums in dollar terms within the proffer. It is noted that the term "impact fees" is not appropriate in the proffer as such monetary requirements are not permitted by State Code. Clarification is required concerning the credits cited for land donation in the various proffer scenarios for each housing type. It is noted that this is a fixed amount, although the acreage figures referenced elsewhere in the proffer statement are approximations. Staff is therefore interested in the assumptions used to arrive at these figures and their relationship to other proffered development conditions. S. Monetary Contributions to Develop Heritage Tourism (p. 8) Issues: Frederick County cannot accept monetary contributions for items other than those included in the adopted Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). Therefore, the County is not able to accept the proposed finding to promote heritage tourism. It is Page 17 of 26 recommended that the proffer specify an agency, organization, or foundation engaged in such activities as the recipient of the monetary contribution. It is noted, however, that Frederick County will not be able to enforce conformity with this proffer. 6. Monetary Contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Fescue, Inc. (p. 9) Issues: It is noted that this is not a proffer to Frederick County and therefore is unnecessary in this proffer statement. However, if the applicant chooses to include this proffer, Frederick County will not be able to enforce conformity with the identified triggers and corresponding monetary amounts. 7. Multi -Modal Transportation Improvements (p. 9 - 14) A. (1) Major Collector Road (p. 9 - 10) Issues: (a) The applicant proposes to dedicate right-of-way for the proposed major collector road from Old Charles Town Road through the development and across the adjoining Omps and McCann properties to Route 11. According to the applicant, the extension of the road across the Omps and McCann properties will occur "in accordance with existing agreements executed between all parties." It is noted that these agreements have yet to be presented for County review and it is unclear whether the applicant will secure the necessary right-of-way across these parcels should this rezoning receive approval. Indeed, the ultimate connection of the major collector road with Route 11 is critical to achieving and maintaining acceptable level of service conditions for Stephenson Village and, by extension, the entire Stephenson Community. The applicant should demonstrate that agreements for the dedication of off -site right-of-way are currently in place and execute said agreements to secure such right-of-way prior to rezoning approval. (b) Unless a modification is obtained through the Board of Supervisors, the applicant will be required to meet the sidewalk standards of §144-18A(2). Pursuant to a modification proposal, the applicant may propose an alternative system of trails and/or sidewalks within the right-of-way comprised of a surface treatment and width that meet the public purpose of the current standard to an equivalent degree. Staff would encourage the applicant to separate the trails from the actual vehicular travel way, so as not to be a part of the major collector road itself. (c) The reference to the proffer section detailing the alternative landscaping plan for the major collector road should be changed from 21-A to 22-A. (d) The composition of the proposed median landscaping should be specified. Page 18 of 26 Moreover, the commitment to median landscaping should be made with dimensions and features that will satisfy VDOT requirements. If VDOT approval of such landscaping is not possible, it should not be proffered. (e) The surface treatment of the planned bicycle lanes should be specified in the proffer statement. It is noted that no commitment is offered for bicycle lanes extending the length of the major collector road to Route 11. To facilitate true multi -modal transportation in the Stephenson area, complete bicycle facilities along the major collector road would be beneficial. Additionally, clarification regarding maintenance of the bicycle lanes should be provided. (2) Inter -parcel Connections (p. 10) Issues: The use of the phrase "to the extent reasonably possible" at the conclusion of this proffer effectively diminishes its value as a development commitment. (3) Private Streets, Alleys and Common Drives (p. 10) Issues: (a) The applicant should clarify whether private streets are planned with housing types other than the active adult/single-family small lot type. As noted previously, private streets are pennitted by ordinance for multi -family and single-family small lot housing. All other housing types must be served by public streets unless a modification is approved by the Board of Supervisors for an alternative street system. (c) Again, it is unclear whether the applicant intends to use private streets with alleys for housing types other than multi -family and single-family small lot housing. B. (easement and right-of-way acquisition, p. 11) Issues: As noted in the discussion of the proffered major collector road, the applicant should demonstrate that all necessary off -site rights -of -way and easements have been secured to facilitate those improvements included in the TIA. The proffer states that the County will be expected to facilitate right-of-way acquisition in the event the applicant is unable to secure easements deemed necessary, and if the County is unsuccessful in securing the right-of-way, then the applicant would be permitted to continue the development without the associated road improvements. Staff has concerns with this language, specifically based on the fact that a significant section of the proposed major collector road actually crosses land owned by others. Continuation of the major collector road across the McCann and Omps property plays a significant role in the TIA, and the maintenance of an appropriate LOS for the development. Failure to implement and complete the connection of Route 11 and Page 19 of 26 the proposed major collector road will significantly impact Old Charles Town Road and the broader transportation network of the Stephenson Community. If transportation improvements necessary for acceptable LOS conditions fail to materialize, the unabated continuance ofproj ect development would severely impact both internal and external roads serving Stephenson Village. The applicant is encouraged to consider this contingency and establish alternative measures for modifying the proffered transportation plan and/or altering the overall development program should it occur. E. (signalization at intersection of Old Charles Town Road and major collector, p. 11) Issues: The proffer stipulates that a signalization agreement will be executed with VDOT for the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the proffered major collector, which will serve as the project's main entrance. The timing of this improvement is not specified by the applicant. F. (phased construction of major collector road, p. 12) Issues: First paragraph, it would be beneficial for the applicant to clarify that the major collector road will be constructed from Old Charles Town Road to Route 11 pursuant to the proffered Generalized Development Plan. As written, the GDP is not referenced as a general guide to the implementation of this proffered improvement. Staff recognizes construction of the major collector road pursuant to real-time traffic counts as a sound approach to the phasing of such a substantial transportation improvement. (1) The applicant should clarify that the 80% benchmark for design and completion of identified improvements applies to the "actual traffic count volume" specified in subsequent paragraphs 7F(2) - 7F(5). Staff has noted some confusion in the interpretation of this provision. 8. School and Ballfield Sites, Community Facilities and Public Use Areas (p. 14 - 15) A. School Site (p. 14) Issues: Conveyance of the school site should occur at such time the Frederick County School Board requests the land, as opposed to when funding is allocated for construction. B. Soccer and Baseball Field Site (p. 14) Issuues: (1) The applicant identifies the intended use of this dedicated acreage but does not specify whether they will construct or contribute to the construction of the facilities on the site. The entity responsible for constructing the facilities Page 20 of 26 should be identified to prevent confusion. (8) The purpose of this provision is unclear. If the applicant is not responsible for constructing facilities on the site, it is understood that the County could pursue whatever means available to provide recreation opportunities, to include public - private partnerships. This proffer may be unnecessary. D. (use of school and recreation sites, commencement of uses by County, p. 15) Issues: Staff is concerned with the language stipulating that ownership of the proffered school and public recreation sites would revert back to the applicant should the intended public uses not be "constructed or installed, completed and in use" within ten years of the date of conveyance to the County. In essence, this provision suggests that the County must "use it or lose it" with regard to proffered public lands. This caveat is arguably inappropriate in the context of a proffered land dedication and clearly does not serve the best interest of the County. Indeed, land that is donated for public use should not be accompanied by timetables imposed by the proffering party that dictate certain actions as precedent to the community's continued possession of said land. If given in good faith, the proffered land should remain available for public use to be developed by the County as fiscal realities and program priorities dictate, regardless of the passage of time. 9. Recreational Amenities and Linear Park (p. 15 - 17) C. Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk System (p. 16) Issues: Staff encourages the use of asphalt as the principal surface treatment for all trail systems. Such treatments are better suited to the myriad uses of trail systems and are less likely to degrade or become fragmented by use, which results in the enhanced safety and enjoyment of trail users. The identification of primary trail segments should be included on the GDP. E. Additional Recreational Facilities (p. 17) Issues: The applicant references the applicability of the recreational unit requirements of the Zoning Ordinance in the proffer statement. Such a statement is unnecessary and is not appropriate as a proffered condition. 10. Active Adult Age -Restricted Housing (p. 17 - 18) Issues: The applicant proffers to include a set of restrictions with the deeds for all lots subdivided for active adult age -restricted housing. The County will not be able to enforce the content of these restrictions as such enforcement would be a civil matter Page 21 of 26 between property owners and/or their representative interests. 11. Affordable Housing for the Elderly (p. 18) Issues: The development of affordable apartment units for the elderly is not proffered to occur until 50% of the retail component of the project has developed. As noted previously in this report, the timing of commercial development is uncertain as it has not been included in the proffered phasing plan. Moreover, the applicant has not specified a minimum amount of affordable housing for the elderly in the Land Bay Breakdown; it is included as one of several sub -types of multi -family housing possible within either Land Bay III or IV. Therefore, staff is uncertain as to the timing of construction and ultimate availability of the proffered elderly housing. This uncertainty is magnified by the fact that development of these units is contingent upon the applicant receiving approval from federal and state housing agencies and qualifying for the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. In essence, this proffered condition stipulates that affordable housing for the elderly will not be provided without secured government financing. The applicant appears to be proffering their intent to develop affordable housing for the elderly, but is seemingly unable to guarantee when, if, or how much of such housing will be developed. Staff encourages the applicant to provide more specific assurances regarding the affordable housing for the elderly component of Stephenson Village. 12. Preservation of Historical and Cultural Resources (p. 18) No comment. 13. Commercial Center (p. 18 - 19) Issues: As has been noted previously, the commercial center is not included in the phasing plan for the development and may therefore develop after residential build -out. As proposed, there is no link established between commercial development and residential growth thereby allowing the possibility that residential build -out will occur prior to the availability of any commercial uses within the community. Staff is concerned that the minimal amount of commercial development proposed for Stephenson Village will be slow to materialize without a phasing commitment. B./C. (architectural and design standards) Issues: The applicant is encouraged to include the architectural and design standards Page 22 of 26 applicable to the commercial center as an attachment to the proffer statement. Although the County would not enforce such treatments, it would be valuable as an assurance of the high -quality design pledged through the proffer statement. Also, the applicant indicates that they will have the ultimate authority concerning the design of individual commercial uses on the site. It may be beneficial to establish Stephenson Associates, L.C. as the perpetual head of an architectural review board (ARB) responsible for review and approval of building and site designs throughout the development - to include signage. F. (maximum square footage for commercial development, p. 19) Issues: The applicant does not proffer a minimum floor area amount for commercial and office uses, merely a maximum. Although the applicant has proffered to set aside 4% of the project's land area for commercial activities, no assurance has been provided that any commercial development will occur on that land. Of course, it is unlikely that this acreage would remain vacant, however, it is possible - if not probable - that the actual commercial development within Stephenson Village will fall well below the established maximum. The applicant should consider establishing a minimum amount of commercial floor area through the proffer to complement the maximum allowable floor area. Much like the percent ranges applicable to the various housing types, providing a floor area range for commercial uses will ensure that the development evolves into a legitimate mixed use community. 14. Rent Free County Office Space (p. 19) No comment. 15. Community Design for a Strong Sense of Place (p. 20 - 21) A. Design (p.20) Issues: As noted previously, the applicant should consider establishing an ARB that they will perpetually control by proffer. The applicant would therefore be able to effect the influence over design themes and features suggested by the proffered design language. Of course, the County will be unable to enforce the architectural standards included in the proffer statement. E. Architectural and Design Covenants (p. 21) Issues: Consistent with previous statements, staff supports the applicant's proposed control over design review and approval throughout the development. Again, it would be beneficial for a copy of the proposed architectural restrictions and covenants to be attached to the proffer statement by reference. The inclusion of these standards Page 23 of 26 would qualify and reiterate the applicant's personal commitment to high quality design in Stephenson Village regardless of changes in ownership and time. 8. Environmental Features and Habitat Preservation (p. 21 - 23) A. Environmental Features and Easements (p. 21 - 22) Issues: (1) It is unclear who will bear the responsibility for surveying the site and identifying "significant" wildlife habits. The applicant should specify such responsibility and identify any natural resource professionals or organizations who will be utilized to conduct such studies. The process of habitat identification should be completed prior to the commencement of development activities. (2) The applicant does not identify the methods to be employed to minimize clearing and grading on each building lot. This provision is arguably unenforceable without clear performance standards governing land disturbance and utility installation. (3) It is noted that all wetland areas are considered unbuildable pursuant to the environmental standards of the Zoning Ordinance. B. Hiatt Run Corridor (p. 22 - 23) Issues: (5) The applicant should define the meaning and/or composition of "environmentally sensitive areas" and how such areas differ from "primary conservation areas." Assuming a distinction exists, both of these features should be clearly identified on the GDP or a companion resource inventory map. C. Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel (p. 23) Issues: This environmental feature is identified as a "resource protection area," as opposed to a "primary conservation area" or "environmentally sensitive area." As noted above, the applicant should define these terms and clarify their distinctions. Moreover, all such areas should be clearly identified on the GDP or a companion resource inventory map. The proffer indicates that native plantings will be provided within the channel to establish an upland buffer. Identification of the native plantings to be used and responsibility for ensuring their installation should be specified in the proffer. Page 24 of 26 17. Community Curbside Trash Collection (p. 23 - 24) A. Issues: This proffer stipulates that waste and trash removal services shall not dispose of waste collected in Stephenson Village at any citizen convenience center. It is assumed that such services would dump collected refuse at the landfill and be precluded from unloading at convenience sites by Public Works personnel. Clarification of the intent of this stipulation would be beneficial. 18. Water and Sewer Improvements in the Stephenson Area (p. 24) B./C. Issues: The meaning of the phrase "reasonably determined" is unclear in the context of this proffer. It would seem that the applicant would construct those facilities deemed necessary by FCSA to facilitate required sewer and water service delivery to Stephenson Village. The applicant should clarify what constitutes a reasonable determination by FCSA. 19. Comprehensive Plan Conformity (p. 24) No comment. 20. Creation of Homeowners Association(s) (p. 24 - 25) \M C111IC1_ 21. Proffered Housing Types (p. 25 - 26) Issues: The proposed housing types with attached dimensional standards and illustrative drawings comprise the alternative dimensional requirements plan allowed by Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors must approve all such plans, and, by interpretation, any changes to such plans following rezoning approval. Therefore, as noted previously, a modification of this procedural standard would be necessary to enable the administrative approval of additional or replacement housing types as proposed by this proffer. 22. Streetscape Design and Landscaping (p. 26 - 27) A. Issues: A road efficiency buffer is required by ordinance adjacent to major collector roads. The applicant has proffered an alternative buffer comprised of a twenty-five foot landscaped area on either side of the roadway. The predominant portion of this buffer area is proposed to include a woodland conservation area, which the applicant is utilizing in lieu of the standard distance and landscaping requirements of the ordinance. Greater detail is necessary for the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to determine whether this alternative approach forms an adequate buffer Page 25 of 26 0 0* along the major collector road. The of additional justification for this alternative. Community Signage Program (p U:\Chris\Common\Rezoning\Prelim Comments\Stephenson Village Proffers.wpd of* oaf '� '!.. ", I✓OUNT Y ,of FREDERICK Department of Planning and DeveiopmenI 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 February 5, 2003 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 RE: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal Dear Evan: This correspondence is in follow-up to the preliminary rezoning information received in this office January 15, 2003, and our meeting on January 24, 2003, concerning the Stephenson Village rezoning proposal. The following issues were identified for your consideration as the application is finalized for submission: A. Application Form and Relevant Review Agencies Please ensure that a certified plat is provided that identifies the boundary coordinates of each tract subject to the proposed rezoning, as well as the coordinates delineating the limits of the requested R4 Zoning District. Moreover, a copy of the deed for each property and verification of tax payment must be submitted. Please ensure that the application and proposed proffer statement are signed by all ownership interests party to the rezoning request. Please provide a master development plan (Conceptual Development Plan) that contains the information identified in a letter from me to you, dated January 22, 2003 (attached). 4. The fee for this application will be calculated pursuant to the revised fee schedule adopted by the Board of Supervisors on December 12, 2002. The revised application fee for a rezoning petition consists of abase fee of $1,000.00 plus $50.00 per acre, resulting in a total fee of $42,250.00 for this application. Moreover, a refundable deposit of $50.00 must be submitted for the public hearing sign required to be posted on site. Please submit review continents from the following departments and agencies with this application: Virginia Department of Transportation, Frederick County Public Schools, Winchester Regional Airport, Frederick County Sanitation Authority, Winchester - Frederick Service Authority, Department of Public Works, Frederick County Building Official, Fire and Rescue Services, First Responder - Clcarbrook, Parks and Recreation Department, County Attorney, and the Historic Resources Advisory Board. 107 North Kent Stres,Y - Y'/inchester, Vir inia 22601-5000 r Page 2 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 B. Impact Statement (dated January 8, 2003) Comprehensive Policy Plan (p. 1): Tlie Comprehensive Policy Plan designates the subject site for planned industrial land use. Staff is concerned with the applicant's assumption that proceeding with a proffer to modify the Comprehensive Policy Plan's Urban Development Area (UDA) resolves the Comprehensive Policy Plan's policy statement. Such a proffered condition does not necessarily bring the rezoning application into conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan's industrial land use designation. Furthermore, staff would question the appropriateness of proffering modifications to a County policy document such as the Comprehensive Policy Plan. 2. Site Suitability (p. 2): The provisions of an internal system of streets, bicycle trails and pedestrian walkways, and trail system should be illustrated on the Master Development Plan, as submitted with this application. Traffic Impact (p. 4): In reviewing the traffic impact analysis (TIA) submitted with this rezoning petition, it is noted that on Page 27 of the TIA, a number of intersections achieve a Level of Service (LOS) of a " D. " As you are aware, a Level of Service "C" is expected to be maintained on roads adjacent to and within new development in Frederick County (2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan for Frederick County, Virginia, p. 7-5). Staff suggests that you explain what measures would be necessary to achieve a LOS of "C" or better. The TIA should also indicate what improvements are necessary, and are being implemented by the proffer, to maintain the existing and future road networks at a level of "C" or better. Furthermore, the TIA recognizes improvements to the transportation systems, but does nc< edit the source of improvements which are identified. Page 5 of the rezoning application package irdicates that the traffic impact analysis (TIA) should provide the "resulting road improvement cost that would be the result of the rezoning;" such an improvement cost has not been included in the analysis. The analysis states that the developer has entered into an agreement with adjoining property owners to facilitate the construction of the planned major collector road over property owned by others. It might be appropriate to make this agreement part of this rezoning application as it would significantly impact the County, if the road segments, as proposed, were not constructed across property owned by others. Staff would also seek clarification as to when the entire proposed major collector road would be established. As presented, it appears that Phase III would trigger a four -lane section through to Route 11, but the information provided does not address when the two-lane section would be constructed. 4. Savage Conveyance and Treatment (p. 5): The submitted impact analysis indicates that the proposed development would generate a projected sewage conveyance of 683,000 GPD. It is staffs understanding that the FCSA only has approximately 250,000 GPI) available for this *so *so Page 3 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 portion of the County. Additionally, the recently approved rezoning for Rutherford Farm Industrial Park projected their demand for discharge at 77,200 GPD. Therefore, it would appear that the estimated available sewage capacity would be less then 175,000 GPD. Please provide details regarding how this proposed development would handle its necessary sewage conveyance, and who would burden the costs associated. Historic Sites and Structures (p. 8): The analysis states that, "monumental entrances may include fence styles and stacked stone walls that were from the Civil War Era." If it is the developer's intent to construct such entrance features, it would be appropriate to clarify the feature's location and architectural details. Community Facilities (p. 9): The location of provisions for lands to accommodate a future school and park site are addressed in the proffer statement, but the location of a proposed fire and rescue station is unclear. Please clarify such location. C. Proposed Proffer Statement (dated January 8, 2003) Introduction (p. 1): The proffer statement makes reference to the "Generalized Development Plan, as required by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance." The document you are referencing in the Zoning Ordinance is actually the Master Development Plan requirement. The prui r statement makes reference to land bay boundaries and their potential change:. -� ::ng site plan submission. Note that, most often, site plans would not be required for single family dwellings. Therefore, this statement appears to be inaccurate. Proffered Housing Types (p. 2): In this section of the proffer statement, the applicant has proposed a number of additional housing unit types for inclusion in the proposed development. The proffer states that, "future housing unit types may be approved at the discretion of the Director of Planning." Staff does not support this approach, as it removes the decision to allow alternative housing types from the more appropriate authority, being the Board of Supervisors. Additionally, staff suggests that greater dimensional details should be provided for each of the proposed Housing Unit Types. Such information should address: minimal lot sizes, road frontage, and structural setbacks. Staff also notes that, based on some of the proposed lots sizes, as provided, the potential house footprint is minimized significantly. It is appropriate to indicate the size of home that you intend to place within the footprint of the proposed lots. Without this essential dimensional information, it is difficult to determine if such housing unit types would be appropriate within the County. 040 *so Page 4 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 Based on rough calculations, it appears the Modified Townhouse unit type being proposed would only be able to accommodate a townhouse with a footprint of approximately 560 square feet, significantly smaller than current zoning ordinance requirements that would provide for a minimal townhouse footprint of approximately 720 square feet. It would be appropriate to address whether the deck on these housing units would be accommodated within the revised lot dimensions or if decks would protrude into the setback areas, further minimizing lot areas, and, therefore, placing the rear of homes closer to one another. Transportation- Major Collector Road (p. 3): In this section of the proffer statement, it is stated that the applicant will construct the major collector road. Please clarify the right-of-way width, lane configuration, and median width proposed. Additionally, the proffer states that the applicant will construct the road across land owned by others, but there is no agreement provided between the applicant and others. The proffer statement indicates the intent of constructing sidewalks and/or trails within the major collector road right-of-way. Staff would encourage that the sidewalks/trail be separated from the actual vehicular travel way, so as to not be a part of the road itself. There would be a significant safety concern if children on bicycles had to share the same asphalt as vehicular traffic. The proffer states that, "any proposed irrigation within the right-of-way..." Staff would look for clarification regarding this statement. If it is the applicant's intent to provide irrigation, then it should be so stated. 4. Transportation - Interparcel Connections (p. 3): Please identify the locatio:, ": the proposed inter parcel connections on the Generalized Development Plan. Transportation - Private Streets and Alleys (p. 4): The applicant proffers that, "The applicant reserves the right to provide private streets with a gated community entrance for the active adult portion of the overall community." It is unclear if a gated community will be provided. Please clarify. Additionally, please clarify if the private street would only be utilized within the adult communities, or if it is envisioned that the entire Stephenson Village development would be built on private streets. Without clarification, staff is unable to analyze the impacts such a proffer might place on the County. "The Applicant has the right to provide one-way alleys with a sixteen -foot (16') wide easement having twelve feet (12') of pavement." This does not appear adequate to accommodate fire and rescue equipment. Please clarify. Transportation - Right -of -Way Acquisition (p. 4): The proffer states that the County will be expected to facilitate right-of-way acquisition in the event the applicant is unable to secure easements deemed of* 040 Page 5 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 necessary, and if the County is unsuccessful in securing the right-of-way, then the applicant would be permitted to continue the development without the associated road improvements. Staff has concerns with this language, specifically based on the fact that a significant section of the proposed major collector road actually crosses land owned by others. Continuation of the major collector road across the McCann and Omps property plays a significant role in the TIA, and the maintenance of an appropriate LOS for the development. Failure to implement and complete the connection of Route 11 and the proposed major collector road will significantly impact Old Charles Town Road. 7. Transportation - Old Charles Town Road and Route l l (p. 4): The proffer states that the applicant will install turn lanes and a traffic signal at the intersection. The improvements would be installed "when the signal is installed." Please clarify why the turn lane improvements should not be installed prior to a warranted traffic signal. Transportation - Traffic Counters (p. 4): The applicant proffers to construct the proposed major collector road in two phases based on real-time vehicle counts. The first phase being a two-lane half section; the second phase being the completion of the road to a four -lane section. The proffer states that when the traffic count reaches 17,699 trips per day, the applicant "will bond and commence construction" of the four -lane major collector road. Staff is concerned as there is no completion requirement, only a commencement trigger. Please clarify. Staff seeks clarification if the entire length of the proposed road, from Old Charles Town Road to Route 11, in a two-lane half section, would be available immediately to accommodate the development's generated traffic. Staff questions the use of the vehicle counters proposed for use at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village; without the conrtc 'ion to Route 11, there would be no traffic at the southwestern entrance to the development. 9. Uses and Density (p. 5): Per our previous discussions, it is expected that additional details be provided regarding the various land bay acreage and densities. Furthermore, it would be appropriate to more clearly identify locations for non-residential uses (commercial and fire station) within a particular land bay. Staff would note that the R4 Zoning District allows those uses permitted in the RP, B1, B2, B3, and M 1 Districts. Accordingly, there are numerous uses within these four districts which may not be appropriate within this planned community. Additionally, it may be appropriate to establish minimum and maximum acreage that could accommodate the numerous non-residential land uses. The proffer provides for ultimate build -out percentages for each category. Attention is drawn to the proffer which enables as much as 50 percent of the total dwelling units to be townhouses (i.e., 1,400 townhouses) and 65 percent multi -family units (i.e., 1,320 multi -family). As written, the proffer could enable the entire development to be townhouses and multi -family dwelling units. The Zoning •M 040 Page 6 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 Ordinance establishes a mixture of housing types and requires that no more than 40% of the development consists of townhouses and multi -family units. As proposed by proffer, the townhouses and multi -family dwelling units could account for 100% of the residential dwellings in the 2,800 residential unit project --which violates the zoning ordinance. This far exceeds the mixtures common to other planned residential developments, and does not create an appropriate balance between single-family and multi -family dwellings. 10. Affordable Housing For The Elderly (p. 7): The applicant proffers to provide affordable housing provided, "the project qualifies for the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program." This proffered condition indicates that the affordable housing would not be provided without secured government financing. Please clarify what results if the appropriate loans are not available. 11. Community Desian (p. 8): The applicant proffers various community appearance features. As presented, the proffer language provides no tangible features that could be enforced, thereby allowing the applicant to implement all or no community design features, as the applicant so chooses. Please illustrate and detail the various design and architectural standards eluded to by the proffer, thereby providing assurances that such features will become reality, if that is the intent of the proffer. Staff would note that the applicant, during various community presentations, stated an intent to provide such design standards and consistency throughout the development. The applicant proffers to utilize sprinkler systems in the Courtyard and Cottage houses in order to promote fire protection. Staff concurs with this safety provision to protect the interior of the dwelling units. Has any thought been given to protecting the x; erior of similar units with an exterior sprinkler system, considering the close priority this housing type is to one another? 12. Environmental - Identification of Open Space Areas and View Lots (p. 9): The applicant proffers to identify all open space areas and "maximize the number of view lots." Staff is unclear how the open space has been identified within this rezoning petition package. Furthermore, please clarify the intent of "maximize the number view lots.," Please clarify what is meant by "useable open space" as well as provide clarification as to what type of distance is intended "within walking distance of home sites." Overall, staff is concerned that the environmental section of the proffer provides for features that are not quantifyable. Clarification and additional details regarding the intent of the various provisions within the Environmental Section may be appropriate. - The provisions for establishing a buffer and conservation casements adjacent to any stream outside of any platted lots is acknowledged, but it might also be appropriate to clarify if platted lots are to be *so *so Page 7 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 void of such conservation areas. For example, could platted lots be located within 100 feet of any stream? Based on a review of the Conservation Easements/Floodplain Subsection(p. 9), it appears that platted lots could be located within the previously established 100-foot conservation easement and, in such case, only a 20-foot buffer area would exist. Please clarify. Furthermore, these provisions apply to "streams," not necessarily Hiatt Run. It may be appropriate to apply the same standards to all natural water features, whether it be a stream or Hiatt Run. Why the difference? 13. Community Facilities/Public Use Areas (p. 11): The applicant proffers to establish school, park, and ,fire and rescue sites. The school site would be conveyed to the county within six months of its request, and would provide access to water and sewer at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. Staff would note that in the event the school site is programmed to go on-line prior development occurring on the adjacent land, water and sewer may not be available. While the proffer clearly states that 2.5 acres would be provided to the County for use as a fire and rescue site or other public use, it is not clear where within the 825-acre development the site would be located. 14. Recreational Amenities (p. 12): The applicant proffers to provide a recreation center (swimming pool and bath house) within the development; location not identified. This location should be clarified as well as when the facility would be available to the residents of the development. Currently, the proffer states that such facility would be constructed or bonded prior to the issuance of the 500'}' building permit. It may be more appropriate to have such a facility operational prior to the issuance of the 500ffi building permit. The applicant also proffers that it, "may construct" a recreation center for use solely by the Active Adult Community; to be "constructed or fully bonded" prior to the issuance of the 250`' building permit for the active adult community. Again, it would be more appropriate to provide clarification that such a facility would be constructed, not merely bonded, at a pre -determined time. Additionally, staff notes that the language of the proffer does not provide assurance that such a facility would be provided, as the language states that the applicant "may" construct a recreation center. The applicant proffers to provide a pedestrian trail system, constructed of stone, dust, or wood chips. Most often the trail systems provided within planned communities are utilized by children on bicycles. Therefore, it would be more appropriate to construct an asphalt trail system that links the various neighborhoods and public facilities. Such a trail network could be depicted on the Generalized Development Plan. Ownership and maintenance of the recreation center is unclear. of* *so Page 8 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 15. Streetscape/LandscapingBufFer/Environmental (p. 14): The applicant proffers to provide a 25-foot- wide landscaped area along the length of the major collector road. Staff notes that this 25-foot landscaped area is significantly less than currently required by the road efficiency buffers section of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. The road efficiency buffers establish buffer areas from 80 to 100 feet, based on the landscaping and screening provided. The Zoning Ordinance requires the implementation of the road efficiency buffer along the planned major collector road. Additionally, staff notes that a landscape area has been proffered along Old Charles Town Road, but not along Jordan Springs Road. The applicant proffers to utilize stone fines or wood chip trails rather than asphalt trails. This concerns staff based on a previous statement about children enjoying riding their bicycles on the trails. Additionally, as the current zoning ordinance requires concrete sidewalks on both sides of the community's neighborhood streets, it may not be necessary to proffer to provide wood chip trails along the same streets. Staff would support efforts to utilize wood chip surfaces in natural areas, but staff believes the zoning ordinance requirements for concrete sidewalks within right-of-ways are appropriate, as well as asphalt trails linking neighborhoods and community amenities. 16. Signage Program (p. 15): The applicant proffers the establishment of two freestanding signs for the commercial land use. Each sign would be "no more than 20 feet in height" and have "a maximum of two hundred (200) square feet of face area." Staff is concerned that such signs are significantly larger than current zoning ordinance standards. Additionally, the proposed sign structures are not consistent in size to those proffered for the development's main entrances [8-foot high, 65-square-feet face area] and neighborhood [7-feet high, 40-square-feet face area] signage. Staff also notes that a limit on the number of commercial use. gns was not addressed. 17. Historical and Cultural Resources (p. 16): The applicant proffers that the Byers House will be preserved "to be used as deemed appropriate by the Applicant." Staff is unclear of the intent of such a proffer, as well as how the historic structure would be preserved. 18. Commercial Development (p. 17): The applicant proffers to reserve a site for possible commercial development. The location of such a commercial site should be more clearly identified on the Generalized Development Plan. Additionally, it may be appropriate to address the design standards applicable to the commercial area. 19. Monetary Contributions (p. 17) : The applicant proffers a monetary contribution to offset the additional costs to Frederick County for capital facilities. Staff would note that the monetary contributions are based on projected impact on the County based on the 2003 dollar value. As the project has proffered a phased development schedule, it is implied that the development would be built- *so 000 Page 9 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 out over an estimated 20+ year period. Accordingly, the monetary contribution established in 2003 dollars, without the benefits of an escalator, may not adequately address the impacts placed on the County in the future years, when the dwelling unit actually comes on-line. Additionally, the monetary contribution is projected under the assumption that a commercial center will be contributing to the community's positive tax base; yet there are no assurances that the commercial center will actually be constructed, nor when. 20. Monetary Contribution to Economic Development (p. 18): It appears this section of the proffer statement is incomplete as there is no narrative. 21. Phasing Plan (p. 18): The applicant proffers to implement a phasing schedule to limit the number of dwelling units constructed each year to a maximum of 8%. It is also important to note that as proposed, the 675 adult dwellings (Active Adult and Affordable Adult housing) are not included in the phasing schedule. This phasing plan would be monitored based on the issuance of building permits. This phasing plan is difficult to interpret; Please clarify intent. It may be more appropriate to establish a table depicting the number of building permits that would be issued for each year until built -out is achieved. Staff also suggests that if it is the applicant's intent to manage the phasing plan, a more appropriate management method may be through the accounting of residential lot creation, rather than building permits. Failure of providing a fixed/hard number within a phasing plan may lead to future disagreements over the intent of the phasing proposal. 22. Waivers (p. 19): The applicant proffers that a number of waivers from County policy and code would be granted, i f :lie rezoning petition is approved by the County. Staff has concerns with this app i c! h as it exempts the development from a significant number of County regulations that have been adopted and implemented by the County in an effort to manage and promote high -quality development within the County. The applicant proffers that acceptance of the proffer statement will constitute an amendment to the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan to expand the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the planned land use designation. Staff believes this approach, aside from the legal aspects, is inappropriate as it circumvents the public participation and hearing process associated with land use planning and the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. The applicant proffers that acceptance of the proffer statement would waive the 40% cap of multi- family and town homes allowed within a planned residential development. Staff addressed this cap previously under Itcm 10, above. The foundation for the R4 Zoning District was to enable a well - planned residential development with a variety of housing choice. This 40% requirement provides assurance that an appropriate mix of housing would be provided. Elimination of such a requirement would impact the County significantly as it could indirectly eliminate the various detached single- family housing options from the mixed -use community. *so 000 Page 10 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Continents - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 The applicant proffers to exclude the Board of Supervisors from future participation and their decision -making authority in reference to alternative dimensional requirements that the applicant may wish to implement in the future. Staff is concerned that this waiver would jeopardize the actual rezoning petition that the Board of Supervisors would ultimately consider. If revisions to the dimensional requirements is sought, as proposed, staff would be placed in a position to usurp the Board of Supervisors' decision on the various housing types included in the proffer statement. This appears to be inappropriate. The applicant proffers to waive the ordinance requirement that at least 10 percent of the community be for the development of business and industrial uses. This 10 percent provision was placed in the zoning ordinance to assure that the planned residential community development had commercial uses to meet the needs of the community. As staff noted previously, the proffers are unclear as to when the commercial element of the development would come on-line. With the elimination of the minimal 10 percent requirement, any assurances that commercial use will be included in the development are minimized. Under the current zoning ordinance requirement, there would be a requirement for at least 82 acres of commercial use. This non-residential use could be utilized for services for the community, which could include retail and office uses. Staff encourages the applicant to consider other concepts that would provide assurances that a commercial element would be assured within the development. Additionally, if the applicant feels that a 10%commercial element is too much, it would be appropriate to justify a reduction and provide for anew minimum. Flat out removal of the commercial percentage is inappropriate. The applicant proffers a waiver of the requirement for a minimum of 30 percent common open space within the development. The zoning ordinance currently would enable open space to be utilized for dedication to the County. Therefore, staff is unclear as to why the waiver is be;-g sought. The applicant should clarify intent. The applicant proffers a waiver from the recreational amenities requirements of the zoning ordinance. The ordinance enables the recreational units to be "broken into smaller units or added together" to meet the needs of the planned community. Staff believes the ordinance would enable neighborhood parks, as well as, a larger, centrally -located community facility, such as a recreation center. The basis for waiver of this requirement is unclear. Please provide clarification and intent. The applicant proffers a waiver of the internal buffer and screening requirements. Staff believes such requirements are designed to protect the various uses within the community, as well as enable flexibility, as various buffer and screening alternatives are already permitted by ordinance. Staff would strongly discourage a reduction in the Road Efficiency Buffer requirements that would be applicable to the planned major collector road, as noted in Item 16, above. Please provide clarification as to why the waiver is essential to the development. The applicant proffers a waiver to the County's public street requirements for a complete public street system. Please clarify the intention of waiving the public street requirements. Currently, die ordinance would enable the use of private streets within small lot subdivisions. Similarly, if it is the applicant's *so 000 Page 1 I Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Rc: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 intention to utilize the private streets within the active adult community, through the implementation of an alley system, it could be so stated in the proffer. However, staff does not believe adequate justification has been made to waive the requirements of public streets throughout the entire project. The applicant proffers a waiver of the Board of Supervisors' review and approval for exceptions to the curb and gutter requirements. Staff believes that a provision should be considered that enables staff to take such requests to the Board in situations where staff believes additional guidance from the Board may be appropriate. The applicant proffers a waiver of the requirement to include a non-residential land use in all phases of development. Staff believes that maintaining this requirement is essential to creating a well- balanced community. The non-residential land uses might include not only traditional non-residential uses, but also common open space that should be provided for higher density neighborhoods, such as multi -family developments. The applicant proffers a waiver to the requirements that residential lots front on public streets. As noted above, there are certainly housing types that necessitate exception to the public street requirements, but staff does not believe a waiver of all such public streets and road frontage requirements is appropriate without justification. Please provide additional justification as to why these waivers are necessary and appropriate for the development proposal to be implemented. Understanding that the development is merely in the initial planning stages, the applicant may be hard pressed to raise specific examples of how the waivers would be applied. Conversely, it will be difficult to waive existing county requirements that have been implemented throughout the County, and have been credited for the improvements in function and appearance of our County's more recent development. The applicant has failed to provide justification as to why existing Comprehensive Policy Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements are inappropriate. Finally, the applicant proffers that future revisions to the development, and any of its associated land use planning documents, would be excepted from addtional review and approval by the Board of Supervisors and, therefore, would be processed administratively. Staff believes, aside from the legal aspects, that it would be inappropriate to remove such broad -based authority from the Board of Supervisors. Such a request would also remove public participation from the development and planning process for a significant portion of the County's future residents and land owners. Staff also has concern with the assertion that once a waiver is administratively granted, then any similar waiver requests would not be necessary. D. Additional Concerns Comprehensive Policy Plan: The Frederick County 2000 Comprehensive Policy Plan designates the subject properties for fiiturc industrial land use. Additionally, the properties are located outside of the • so 000 Page 12 Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Re: Preliminary Comments - Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal February 5, 2003 Urban Development Area (UDA). While this County document contains many issues and guidelines for planning for the County's future, the two most commonly discussed policies are the land use plan and the UDA management tool. The rezoning petition that is being circulated for preliminary review does not comply with either of these policies. The initial stage in reviewing a development proposal is to determine if the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The subject proposal does not conform to the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Staff encourages the applicant to seek conformance to the Comprehensive Policy Plan prior to seeking the approval of a rezoning petition. The proffers submitted with this preliminary petition address a wide range of development standards, but do not provide much in the arena of detailed community design features and architectural standards. At various public presentations and meetings attended by staff, the applicant stated the intent to provide consistent signage, light standards, and extensive landscaping throughout the planned community. Staff notes that such features are not provided for in an enforceable manner within the proffer statement. Therefore, there are limited assurances and guarantees that the community will contain such characteristics. The output from the County's Capital Facility Fiscal Impact Model is based on the applicant's proposal to include approximately 250,000 square feet of retail and office uses. Provision of such non-residential uses certainly provides additional benefits to the County, and assists to offset the impacts the proposed residence would place on the County. Yet, there are no assurances that such non-residential land uses would be constructed. 4. The proposal does not clearly provide for assurances that if the development were subdivided by land bays and sold to others, that the various land dedications for public uses and community amenities would be realized. Furthermore, provisions for establishing monetary guarantees as assurances that the major collector road, recreation center, and various ommunity-wide trail systems have not been addressed. I appreciate the opportunity to provide comment on the preliminary rezoning petition. As always, please feel free 1to�// ontact me, should you have any questions or concerns regarding this correspondence. Sinceyely, Eri�'Lawce, AICP Planning Director ERL/rsa/Attachment - Master Development Plan Expectations cc: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator Lawrence R. Ambrogi, County Attorney Ben Lineberry, Virginia Department of Transportation Rezoning Commenl Frederick County Attorney Mail to Frederick County Attorney Co. Administration Bldg., Suite 202 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia, 22601 (540)665-6383 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Attorney Co. Administration Bldg., Suite 202 107 North Kent Street Second Floor Winchester, Virginia (540) 665-6383 Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the County Attorney's office with their review. Attach a copy of your application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent information. Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: 540-662-4185 Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester. VA 22602 Location of property: The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Acreage: 821.7± County Attorney's Comments: ., s v� Assistant County Attorney's Signature & Date: _ / S Notice to County Attorney — leas. Return This Form to the Applicant APR � 8 2003 Rezoning Comments Virginia Department of Transportation Mail to: Virginia Department of Transportation Attn: Resident Engineer 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, Virginia 22824 (540) 984-5600 Hand deliver to: Virginia Department of Transportation Attn: Resident Engineer 1550 Commerce Street Winchester, Virginia Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Virginia Department of Transportation with their review. Attach 3 copies of your application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent information. Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: 540-662-4185 Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Location of property: The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of MartinsburgPike US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Acreage: 825± Acres Virginia Department of Transportation Comments: See attached VDOT comments dated February 21, 2003. VDOT Signature & Date: 02 / 21 / 03 Transportation sistant Resident Engineer Notice to VDOT — Please Return This Form to the Applicant COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 February 21, 2003 VDOT Comments to Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal Applicant: Greenway Engineering JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a significant measurable impact on Route 11, Martinsburg Pike; Route 761, Old Charles Town Road; and Route 664, Jordan Springs Road. Routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. The proposed proffers dated January 8, 2003, revised February 14, 2003, and as proposed in phone conversations and email dated February 20, 2003 adequately address transportation concerns on Route 11 and Route 761, Old Charles Town Road. In addition, Milburn Road should be reviewed to confirm the current configuration should remain the same or be cut off to prevent cut through traffic. The revised proffer does not fully address this issue. This issue can be addressed at site plan review. 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, Sixth 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. Ben H. Lineberry, Jr., P. . Transportation Assistant Resident Engineer MARS VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Rezoning Comments Frederick County Fire Marshal Mail to: Frederick County Fire Marshall Attn: County Planner 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia, 22601 (540) 665-6350 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Fire & Rescue Dept. Attn: Fire Marshal County Administration Bldg., lst Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia Applicant: Please fill out the,information as accurately as possible in order,foussist,the Frederick County;Fire MarshalFwith their review." Attach a copyof your _application form, location map, profferstatement, impact analysis, -arid any other pertinent.infor""oration Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: 540-662-4185 Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Location of property: The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Acreage: 821.7 +/- Acres Fire Marshal's Comments: �� Fire Marshal's Signature &Date: �._ \ c - ao Notice to Fire Marshal — Please Return This Form to the Applicant MAR 2 � 2003 MAR 2003 "d 12A ------------ 6 % Frederick County Fire and Rescue *]GIN Department Office of the Fire Marshal Plan Review and Comments V Control number RZ03-0001 R Project Name Stephenson Village Address 151 Windy Hill Lane Type Application Rezoning Current Zoning RA Automatic Sprinkler System Yes Other recommendation Emergency Vehicle Access Adequate Siamese Location Not Identified Date received Date reviewed Date Revised 3/7/2003 3/13/2003 3/5/2003 Applicant Greenway Engineering City State Zip Winchester VA 22602 Tax ID Number Fire District 44-A-31,31A,292 13 Recommendations Automatic Fire Alarm System Yes Requirements Hydrant Location Adequate Roadway/Aisleway Width Adequate Applicant Phone 540-662-4185 Rescue District 13 Election District Stonewall Residential Sprinkler System Yes Fire Lane Required Yes Special Hazards No Emergency Vehicle Access Comments ....c,-.s _.:,ui-de-sacs. and common drives nave been addressed tc n c., adequate fire protection access Curb cuts are ^tc : d where alleys intersect with pubic or pr!va:e streets. Access Comments Street widths are to be designed to accommadate parked vehicles and maintain emergency vehicle access even where on street parking is prohibited. In areas where open shoulder or exceptions to curb and gutter are proposed emergency vehicles are likely to have more freedom of movement. Additional Comments Fire protection systems A growing number of communities promote home fire sprinklers and some have adopted residential sprinkler ordinances. These systems offer both safety and financial advantages to home buyers, as well as reduce the risk of injury or life loss to the occupants and firefighters. This proffer is the first of it's kind in Frederick County and demonstrates the Developer's focus on life safety. for which he is commended. Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Signature~_��, Yes Timothy L. Welsh ~� Title ItGREENWAY EINEERING 151 Windy Hill lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Founders in 1971 February 26, 2003 Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Chris Mohn, Deputy Planning Director Re: Stephenson Village - Clearbrook Fire Department Comments 1% This letter is to document and confirm that the Fire Chief of the Clearbrook Fire Department, Chief Tommy Price, has received the rezoning application and information for Stephenson Village and has acquiesced his written comments to the Frederick County Fire Marshall's office. Therefore, Chief Price will not be issuing a written comment to you as part of the formal application process. By way of this letter and Cc: to Chief Price, let this letter serve as documentation of his concurrence. Should you need additional information, feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, Green ay Engine g Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. President Cc. Chief Tommy Price — Clearbrook Fire Department Evan Wyatt, AICP - Greenway Engineering lingineers Surveyors MAR '' 1 2003 Pile 112760C/MDS/dls 1'elcphone 5,10-662-4185 FAX 540-722-9528 r www.greenwayeng.com •i 00 I Mr. Evan Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 May 5, 2003 RE: Stephenson Village Revised Proffer Statement Frederick County, Virginia Dear Evan: COUNTY of F REDERICK Department of Public Works 540/665-5643 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 Your letter dated April 14, 2003, has adequately addressed all of our previous review comments except comment #4 related to community curbside trash collection. We are still somewhat skeptical of this responsibility being assigned to a homeowners' organization unless it includes an enforceable guarantee. This guarantee would need to occur without county intervention. If necessary, we are available to discuss this issue and possibly other alternative trash disposal methods. Sincerely, n Harvey . Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works HES/rls cc: Frederick County Planning and Development � file 'UrevslephelIsonviIIColl .wpd 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Department of Public 540/665-5643 FAX: 540/678-0682 Mr. Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Virginia 22602 Stephenson Village Rezoning Frederick County, Virginia We have completed our review of the proposed rezoning application for the Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community. Documents furnished for our review included an impact analysis and proffer statement prepared by Greenway Engineering and a phased traffic impact analysis prepared by Patton Harris Rust and Associates. All of our comments and concerns related to transportation issues have been coordinated with the planning department for their incorporation in their review to avoid duplications and/or contradictions. The following comments reflect our concerns related to the proposed rezoning as Portrayed in the documents prepared by Greenway Engineering: Refer to Site Suitability, Constriction Concerns. The phrase "depth of shale" should be corrected to read "depth to shale." The residual soils overlying the weathered shale bedrock typically average 30 inches in thickness. Refer to Drainage. We applaud the applicant's willingness to implement best management practices (B.M.P.) throughout the site. In conjunction with the implementation of these facilities, the analysis needs to address who will be responsible for maintaining these facilities. B.M.P. facilities normally require periodic maintenance to insure their continual performance. Refer to Solid Waste Disposal. The analysis of the solid waste generation for the project build -out has projected a rate of 16, 270 cubic yards per year. This number cannot be compared to our current or projected total capacity. Instead, this rate should be compared to our current annual disposal volume of 275,000 cubic yards recorded in 2002. Using this approach would indicate that the project would yield approximately six (6) percent of the waste stream as measured by volume. Virginia 22601-5000 Stephenson Village Rezoning Comments Page 2 Februaiy 11, 2003 4) Refer to Solid Waste Disposal. We applaud the applicant's commitment to utilizing curbside trash collection for residential and commercial development. This approach will certainly minimize the impact on our current trash collection methods. However, we are somewhat skeptical of assigning the responsibility of curbside trash collection to a homeowners association or multiple associations as referenced in the proffer statement under trash collection. The applicant needs to explain how this requirement can be legally and successfully assigned to the homeowners associations without county intervention. 5) Under the Creation of Homeowners Associations within the Proffer Statement, the additional responsibilities should be expanded to include curbside trash collection and the maintenance of stormwater facilities (i.e., B.M.P., storm drains, etc.) Our final approval will be contingent upon our receipt and review of the revised documents. Sincerely, �, k�T�� Harvey . Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works IDS/rls cc: Frederick County Planning and Zoning file C:\Corcl\\vm•dPerfect\Rhoudn\stephelIsoil illcom.11,pd • Memo To: Evan A. Wyatt — Greenway Engineer' From: Jesse W. Moffett — Executive Director Date: February 12, 2003 Re: Stephenson Village Rezoning Request Please accept the following comments regarding the rezoning application made for the Stephenson Village Planned Community. Based on the number of residential units and planned commercial development adequate capacity is available at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility to accommodate the projected flows of this development. Conceptual plans diverting flows from this development and other developments noted below are being evaluated. Under those conceptual plans the proposed pumping station and main collector lines within the Stephenson Village could be ultimately utilized to collect and convey wastewater flows from Stephenson Village, Northeast Corridor and other development to the Opequon facility. This would contribute to eliminating capacity concerns foreseen in the Abrams Creek Interceptor. I would recommend that the applicant be asked to provide an adequately sized pumping station site as agreed with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, that would accommodate expansion of the station to serve ultimately as a regional pumping facility. I would project that this facility would be in the capacity range of 3 MGD. In addition, I would request of the applicant a commitment to construct the main on -site collector of the collection system of adequate size and appropriate routing to allow future extension of the collection system to off -site development. MAR 2 1 2003 0 Page 1 Rezoning Comments - REVISED 2-12-03 Page 2 of 2 Sanitation Authority Comments: Capacity in the existing sewer lines, especially the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority Abram Creek Trunk Main, is limited. While the majority of the flow generated by the project may be within the capacity of the existing lines, it is prudent to have a pump station built sometime during this development to transmit sewage directly to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. Gravity lines will need to be sized to convey sewage from areas in the watershed outside the development and from the SWSA in the Clearbrook/Rest area. MAR 2, 1 2003 Rezoning Comments Frederick —Winchester Service Authority Mail to: Fred-Winc Service Authority Attn: Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director P.O. Box 43 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (540) 722-3579 Hand deliver to: Fred-Winc Service Authority Attn: Jesse W. Moffett 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: 540-662-4185 Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Location of property: The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Acreage: 825± Acres Fred-Winc ervice Authority's Comments: lot,&aChtA md;*w Fred- Wine Service Authority's Signature & Date: V,� Notice to Fred-Winc Service Authority — Please Return This Form to the Applicant MAR 2, 1 2003 pc&Z, r-=ud�� fEB 1 3 2003 Rezoninji Comments Frederick County Sanitation Authority Mail to: Frederick County Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer P.O. Box 1877 Winchester, Virginia, 22601 (540) 665-1061 Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Mailing Address Location of property: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer 315 Tasker Road Stephens City, Virginia Koute 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road i Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Sanitation Authority Comments: Sanatation Authority Signature & Notice to Sanitation Au Telephone: 540-662-4185 I V feet east of Martinsburg Pik .te 761) and south of inrcinn . Acreage: 825± Acres See Revised Statement February 12, 2003 (attached). zv W. H.Jones P.E_ 2-12-03 0 0 • �• Amoalv,6_1�� COUNTY of FREDERIC. August 19, 2003 Mr. Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Dear Evan: Parks and Recreation Departmer James M. Doran, Directc 540-665-567 FAX: 540-665-968 www.co.frederick.va.0 e-mail: fcprd@co.frederick.va.0 Please find below our response to the comments provided in your letter of August 5, 2003, regarding the Parks and Recreation Department's July 29, 2003 review of the April 24, 2003 Stephenson Village revised Proffer Statement: Item 91 Land Dedication - Site Acreage to Accommodate Athletic Fields It is the opinion of the Parks and Recreation Department that the 24-acre site proposed for recreational use, be dedicated to Frederick County for the sole purpose of providing parks and recreation services to the residents of northern Frederick County. Furthermore, the manner in which this proffered property is developed should be determined by county residents through the established process designed by the Board -of Supervisors. Although the County Comprehensive Plan should be considered, it should not be the only determinate. In addition to the Capital Improvement Plan, which is approved by the Board of Supervisors annually, community input, staff recommendation, an analysis of existing use, national trends, local participation numbers, and the county's ability to maintain the property should be considered. With reference to your inference that it is important to put the community "on notice" that the Board of Supervisors possesses the power to convey or lease interest in this property, I find it interesting that the developer feels this is a necessary part of this document. As a matter of information, the Board of Supervisors has supported the concept of public -private partnerships and ton July 9, 2003 "at the request of the Parks and Recreation Department, established the, procedures for public -private partnerships. Putting the community "on notice" as to how the Board of Supervisors can conduct business seems inappropriate as part of this agreement. With reference to Exhibit C, staff was told that the developer was in the process of completing a re -design of the 24-acre parcel; however, as of this date we have not received a copy of that information. 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Mr. Evan Wyatt Page 2 Item 92 - Recreational Facilities Credit No comment Item 93 - Linear Park Trails Staff has based its recommendation on Federal Highway Administration and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials guidelines which state that two directional linear walking/bike trails should be a minimum of 10 feet in width. Furthermore, the Parks and Recreation Department, in an effort to have conformity with trails connecting with other developments, recommends that all approved linear trails include a 10-foot wide asphalt surface as a minimum meeting the standard for trails constructed by this department. Item #4 - Major Collector Road Bicycle Lanes No comment Item 45 - Land Donation Value Staff agrees that the provision of public water and sewer service and appropriate grading to ensure positive drainage for the 24-acre site will increase the value of the acreage dedicated for public use. Staff recommends that all other rights requested to be retained by the developer for the 24-acre proffered site, be approved by the Board of Supervisors on. -a case by case basis. . Item #6 - Private Trail Systems Staff has requested a trail system plan be submitted so that an evaluation of its appropriateness can be completed. It is difficult to assess the merits of providing flexibility from established standards without having the opportunity to evaluate the entire trail plan. Item 97 - Linear Park Trail Construction With reference to linear park trail construction, it is not"clear to me why limitations due to County and State ordinances cannot be determined prior to execution of this agreement. Item #8 - Grading of the 24-acre Park Site The County appreciates any assistance the developer can commit to this effort. r Mr. Evan Wyatt Page 3 Evan, I believe we are making excellent progress on this project, and I look forward to continuing the process. After you have an opportunity to review our comments, please contact me with any questions you may have. James M. Doran, Director Parks and Recreation Department copy: Richard Shickle Lynda Tyler John R. Riley, Jr. Chris Mohn ✓ John Good Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation Mail to: Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia, 22601 (540)665-5678 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation County Administration Bldg., 2°d Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: 540-662-4185 Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Location of property: The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Acreage: 825t Acres Department of Parks & Recreation Comments: Please see attached. Pks. & Rec. Signature & Date: Notice to Department of Park s& Recreation — Please Return This Form to the Applicant MAP; PI -1 2003 STEPHENSON VILLAGE COMMENTS The recreational facilities within the restricted active adult housing area are not accessible to the general population and, therefore, have not been recognized as recreational units. The completion of the six lane 25-meter pool/aquatic center, the hard surface trail system throughout the development, and the assortment of smaller recreational units included in the proffer statement, would appear to meet the monetary requirements for recreational units. However, because the Clearbrook Park pool has the capacity to accommodate the additional load that would be created by this development, other amenities may be considered in lieu of the 25-meter pool. The land occupied by these recreational units, along with the 17.5 acres offered for the development of athletic fields, would appear to be approximately the same acreage required to install recreational units traditionally approved by the county. Therefore, the recreational areas provided are not necessarily greater than would be expected by current ordinances. The Parks and Recreation Department is recominending that all linear trails be asphalt or concrete, be a minimum of eight feet in width and meet the specifications used by this department for the construction of trails throughout the county. An exception to this standard would be when a four -foot trail on each side of the road is provided within the right-of-way of a roadway. Also, the development of linear trails is referred to throughout the proffer statement; however, there does not appear to be a commitment to the number of linear feet to be included in the trail system. Staff recommends that a trail system plan be required as part of the proffer statement so that an evaluation of its appropriateness can be completed. The department is asking that there be a clarification of the developers intent regarding the storing and stockpiling on, or borrowing of soil from the 17.5 acre park site. The county would not want to be left with undesirable material on the site to be removed or have desirable material taken from the site and be left with less desirable material. Because the Clearbrook Park pool currently operates below capacity, the inclusion of the 25-meter pool in the Stephenson Village development will result in a negative impact on our pool operation. An outdoor pool does not appear in our capital improvement plan because, at the present time, the need does not exist. As a result of these 2,800 housing units having access to their own aquatic facility, we will not realize an increase in revenue for swim lessons, admissions, pool rentals, concessions, or swim team participants. Because outdoor pools are not identified as a recreational need, this facility development will not reduce the impact Stephenson Village will have on the capital needs of the Parks and Recreation Department. • • The Parks and Recreation Department does not believe the 17.5 acre park land to be adequate to comfortably accommodate the twelve athletic fields and support facilities needed to serve the end users. In addition to what has been proposed in the proffer statement, and taking into account the comments that have been provided by the Parks and Recreation Department, staff would recommend that consideration be given to having the developer complete the construction of the athletic fields and support facilities planned for the 17.5 acre park land site. Staff notes that the monetary contributions offered do not adequately address the projections identified by the capital facilities fiscal impact model. Staff recognizes the amenities proffered, but, as noted above, feels that the offerings addressed in the proffer statement related to county ordinance requirements. • Ll January 27, 2003 Mark Smith, P.E., L.S., President Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane �'%inchester, Virginia 22602 RE: Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal Dear Mr. Smith: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX. 540/ 665-6395 The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the referenced proposal during their meeting of January 21, 2003. The HRAB reviewed information associated with the 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley, the Frederick County -Winchester Battlefield Network Plan, Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report, and information provided by the applicant. Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Comment The 825 acres proposed for rezoning from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the R4 (Residential Planned Community) District is included within the battlefield study area as identified in the Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley. Located adjacent to the subject property is core battlefield land of the Battle of Stephenson Depot. Located on the property to be rezoned is the Samuel Byers House that is listed as potentially significant in the Rural Landmarks Survey Report. Located adjacent to the property proposed for rezoning are the Helm McCann House, Milburn C hap;:i ;inu C�rr_eiery, and iho JeuLian Springs are ail identified as potentially significant in the Rural Landmarks Survey Report. There were no adverse comments by the HRAB regarding this rezoning application. The HRAB suggests consideration of the following with this application: Locate the proposed major collector road on the northeastern portion of the preservation tract so that the parcel remains intact. The HRAB is concerned that the proposed road could bisect the property in a manner that is detrimental to preservation and interpretation of the property. Provide minimum authentic landscaping along the proposed major collector road without elements that may give a talse sense of history. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 • lJ Page 2 Mark Smith, P.E., L.S., President, Greenway Engineering Re: Stephenson Village Rezoning Proposal January 27, 2003 • The HRAB has concerns regarding how the preserved parcel will be interpreted; it was suggested that an interpretative plan is appropriate. • Consider conducting archeology studies on the property and implement measures to ensure that any artifacts found are properly inventoried and preserved. • Consideration should be given to preserving the Sam Byers house on a large parcel of land. Please contact me if you have questions regarding this comment from the HRAB. Sincerely, ate 4IXS�` Rebecca A. Ragsdale Planner I RARsce U:\COMM ITTGFS\I IRAI3\ConnnentsC?003\Stephenson Vitlage.%%pd MAR 2 1 ?003 JAN P 9 �A03 �Frederlc County Public*hools .. Lt.i t_f l:_i) c- a:l til•,..l+.?, i? <` .,. _c-N,,'fli. Cl3�it�c11IL.:f i Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent March 20, 2003 Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 RE: Stephenson Village Rezoning Dear Mr. Wyatt: Al Orndorff omdorfa@frederick.k12.va.us This letter is in response to your request for comments concerning the rezoning application for the proposed Stephenson Village project. Based on the information provided, and using Frederick County's Fiscal Impact Model, it is anticipated that the proposed 1001 single family homes, 638 townhouses, and 479 condominium homes will yield 260 high school students, 236 middle school students, and 660 elementary school students for a total of 1,156 new students upon build -out. Based on the Frederick County Fiscal Impact Model, the land and cash proffers meet the recommended levels. It is also noted that, in addition to the land and cash proffers, financial adjustments will be made, based on the consumer price index and additional proffer payments, if the project exceeds the proffered limit of sixty students annually. Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving this area having student enrollments nearing or exceeding their practical capacity. The cumulative impact of this project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped residential lots in the area, will necessitate the future construction of new school facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The impact of this rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the approval process. Respectfully Yours, Al Orndorff Administrative sistant to the Superintendent MA 2003 � Copy: William C. Dean Ph. D., Superintendent of Schools i Robert W. Cleaver, Assistant Superintendent for Administration 1415 Amherst Street www.frederick.k12.va.us 540-662-3889 ext. 112 P.O. Box 3508 540-545-2439 Winchester, Virginia 22604-2546 540-662-3890 fax i� r• """' 151 Windy I fill Lane t� cry \,;inchesicr, Virginia 22602 Iviuided in 1971 April 24, 2003 Frederick County Public Schools 1415 Amherst Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Al Orndorff, Assistant to the Superintendent of Public Schools Dear Mr. Orndorff: The purpose of this letter is to request confirmation that the Frederick County Public Schools is capable of, and willing to provide an annual report to Stephenson Associates L.C., to identify the total number of school children that are generated from the Stephenson Village development. It is my understanding that Frederick County Public Schools will prepare an animal report that will utilize data from the September 30 public school enrollment report and will determine the number of school children based on the street address for all streets in the Stephenson Village development. As you know, the proffer statement for Stephenson Village commits to paying for all costs to Frederick County Public Schools for producing this report. Furthermore, the Applicant for Stephenson Village will provide Frederick County Public Schools with a letter in September of each year requesting the preparation of this report. Your signature indicates that you confirm the accuracy of the information in this letter. Once again, thank you for your continued assistance with the Stephenson Village project. Sincerely, I (� Evan Wyatt, AICP I confirm that the informa mis letter is accurate. Fligincers Surveyors fcichhonc ;d0-062-,1185 FAX5,10-722-9528 File 1/2760C/EAW wwwgreenivayeng.com Rezoning Comments !/ ... ... .....::......... �: �::: f.•Yi: i:h:4:L: ii%ii ::•: »:.•>..:::: isi4ii;Li3'i{{F.;;:.}�.;;:ris4:!ii:.iivC%i:•:•ii'•i:..:..:...:.. ...... ...r ............. .:/;rr;fr:.:/•:..::::v:. �:. �:. �::::::.�••::::::::::»: •r.•J.v: r.4::::::: i4 •: .: f•: i.tvv:%L:•i:w::::: r: .fiver r .»:. »...r;:��::.::;:'r,'ii...r..:..r..:.:.:.:•f4ii::rr;:i.r,,:...'»':�%::..::/i sib:•r.:;;::..,..,..,.....r...,..r•:;•i,'•.r•:»•,':.;'•.:';: r. r.. rr..: Winchester Regional Airport Mail to: Winchester Regional Airport Attn: Executive Director 491 Airport Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540) 662-2422 Hand deliver to: Winchester Regional Airport Attn: Executive Director 491 Airport Road (Rt. 645, off of Rt. 522 South) Winchester, Virginia Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: 540-662-4185 Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Wuichester, VA 22602 Location of property: The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Acreage: 825± Acres Winchester Regional Airport's Comments: Winchester Regional Airport's Signature & Date: Notice to Winchester Regional Airport — Please Return This Form to the Applicant odi FEB 14 W I MAR 2 1 2003 • • WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT NG 491 AIRPORT ROAD SERVING THE , FVIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 q�'. _,,,.�.� (540) 662-2422 February 12, 2003 Evan Wyatt, Planner Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Re: Rezoning Comments Stephenson Village Rezoning Stonewall Magisterial District Dear Mr. Wyatt: The above referenced proposal has been reviewed and it appears that the proposed site plan will not have an impact on operations at the Winchester Regional Airport as the proposed development lies within the airport's airspace it does fall outside of the airport's Part 77 surface. The Airport does request the opportunity to comment on future construction of commercial buildings or communication towers to ensure compatibility with Airport surfaces/operations. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration in the continuing safe operations of the Winchester Regional Airport. Sincerely, Serena R. Manuel Executive Director [VI AR ?, 1 2003 Rezoning Comments i 16 Frederick County Attorney Mail to: Frederick County Attorney Co. Administration Bldg., Suite 202 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia, 22601 (540) 665-6383 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Attorney Co. Administration Bldg., Suite 202 107 North Kent Street Second Floor Winchester, Virginia (540) 665-6383 Applicant:Please fill out the i if6tination as accui`ately;as possible in order'.to assist the County. Attoi7iey's,office,with their review Attach a copy,of your application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any =other , pertinent information Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: 540-662-4185 Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Location of property: The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11_North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Acreage: 794.6± County Attorney's Comments: / 9 cL/,1 Assistant County Attorney's Signature & Date: _7 Notice to County Attorney — Please Return This Form to the Applicant Frederick County Attorney Mail to: Frederick County Attorney Co. Administration Bldg., Suite 202 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia, 22601 (540)665-6383 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Attorney Co. Administration Bldg.; Suite 202 107 North Kent Street Fourth Floor Winchester, Virginia (540) 665-5651 Applicant's Name: Greenway EIn ink eeri ng Telephone: 540-662-4185 Mailing Address: 151 Windv Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Location of property: The subject property is located 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (US Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and south of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Current zoning: RA Zoning requested: R4 Acreage: 821.7± County Attorney's Comments: r s 77-er - � Assistant County Attorney's Signature & Date: l�C lei m/rfl-��?�Y•-c Zt/d Notice to County Attorney — Please Return This Form to the Applicant x IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Tax Map # 44-((A))-31 (Portion), 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292 & 44-((A))-293 794.6± Acres January 8, 2003 Revised March 7, 2003 Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 Current Owners: Stephenson Associates L.C. Contact Person: Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 540-662-4185 File #2760C EAW Greenway Engineering 0January 8, 2003 Steph Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Plannea Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared for the purpose of assessing the impact on Frederick County by the proffered rezoning of a 794.6±-acre parcel owned by Stephenson Associates L.C., sometimes referred to as the Applicant. The proffered rezoning includes all of tax parcels 44-A-31A, 44-A- 292, and 44-A-293, and the portion of tax parcel 44-A-31 that is located outside of the Core Area Boundary of Second and Third Winchester Battlefields identified by the September 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites In The Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. The subject properties are located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2000' east of Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North). The entire acreage within the subject site is zoned RA, Rural Areas District. Stephenson Associates L.C. proposes to rezone the 794.6 acres to R4, Residential Planned Community District in order to create the first residential planned community in Frederick County. The Stephenson Village development will provide positive impacts to surrounding neighborhoods including local shopping, ball fields and school, sewer and water infrastructure, affordable housing for the elderly, as well as positive revenue generation to the County. The first residential planned community in the County, Stephenson Village will serve as a model for future development. The proposed residential planned community zoning boundary is shown on a Zoning Boundary Plat prepared by Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S., dated March 2003 and is attached as Exhibit A. The 794.6 acres proposed for rezoning is further described on a Composite Plat of the land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. prepared by Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S., dated August 18, 2003. This Composite Plat has been' submitted to the Department of Planning and Development as a component of the rezoning application. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The parcels that will comprise the proposed residential planned community are a component of the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan's Northeast Land Use Plan. This plan identifies the general area associated with this acreage as residential planned community land use and includes the entire acreage within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and the majority of this acreage within the Urban Development Area (UDA). 1 Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Steph* Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planneu Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 SITE SUITABILITY Access The subject property is strategically located 2000' east of Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761). The primary access to the residential planned community is proposed on Old Charles Town Road, continuing through a new major collector road that will intersect with Martinsburg Pike at a signalized cross intersection with the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. The primary access for Stephenson Village implements the Northeast Land Use Plan proposed collector road plan within this area of the study. Stephenson Associates L.C. has executed an agreement with McCann and Omps that will allow for the development of the new major collector road through all properties to Martinsburg Pike. The Stephenson Village residential planned community will also allow for access on Old Charles Town Road to serve a 550-student elementary school and to serve a public park site that will contain soccer fields and baseball/softball fields. Access to all land uses within Stephenson Village will be accomplished through a system of internal streets, bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways and trail systems. Flood Plains The subject site is located on FEMA NFIP map # 510063-0110-B. The majority of the site is located within a "ZONE C" area that is outside of the flood plain limits with the exception of the Hiatt Run stream valley that is located in the central portion of the subject site. Hiatt Run is identified as a perennial stream, which is in a 100-year flood plain and classified as a "Zone A". The proffered rezoning proposes to establish riparian buffers to protect this resource and also proposes to protect the integrity of the stream valley through the development of a forest management plan on the south side of Hiatt Run and through a stream bank enhancement plan that will utilize existing vegetation and new plantings to stabilize the stream bed on the north side of Hiatt Run. Wetlands The National Wetlands Inventory Map identifies wetlands on the subject site within six ponding areas that have an approximate surface area of four acres. These wetland areas are located within the central portion of the subject site and drain through pronounced ravines and drainage ways that feed Hiatt Run. The wetland areas will be utilized in the overall storm water management plan for Stephenson Village that will incorporate retention ponds, detention ponds and bioretention facilities. Any disturbance of the identified wetland areas will be in conformance with all Corps of Engineers permitting procedures. 2 Greenway Engineering 40 January 8, 2003 Steph* Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 PlannM �ommunity Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 Mature Woodlands The subject site contains areas of mature woodlands that are located primarily in the central and southern portions of the subject site with additional scattered areas in the far eastern portion of the subject site. An open space corridor associated with the Hiatt Run stream valley is proposed, which will preserve portions of the mature woodland area. The developed portions of Stephenson Village will preserve woodland areas to the extent possible through the development of boulevard road systems with landscaped medians and open space pockets. A forest management plan is proffered to preserve woodlands along the Hiatt Run stream valley that will protect the integrity of this environmental feature. All disturbances of woodlands will comply with the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Soil Types Information for soil types on this site has been obtained from the Soil Survey of Frederick County, by the USDA Soil Conservation Service. The subject site is located on map sheet nos. 24, 25, 30 and 31 and contains six different soil types: Berks-Channery Loams 2-7% slopes Blairton Silt Loams 2-7% slopes and 7-15% slopes Carbo Oaklet Silt Loams and Rock Outcrop 2-15% Chilhowie Silty Clay Loams 7-15% slopes Clearbrook Channery Silt Loams 2-7% slopes and 7-15% slopes Weikert-Berks Channery Silt Loams 7-15% slopes, 15-25% slopes and 25-65% slopes Please refer to attached Soils Map prepared by Greenway Engineering, dated March 2003, attached as Exhibit B. Prime Agricultural Soils The Blairton Silt Loams 2-7% is the only soil type on the subject site that is identified as prime agricultural soils. The majority of the Blairton Silt Loams exist on the portion of parcel 44-A-31 that is not proposed to be rezoned. All of the aforementioned soils do not support crops without heavy fertilization, liming, and soil management. They do support pasture for livestock and hay cultivation if there is adequate rainfall. Weikert-Berks loam soils are listed as moderately to poorly suited for pasture and hay cultivation. Steep Slopes - 25% and Greater Steep slopes as defined exist within the central and eastern portion of the subject site. These steep slope areas are generally located within the pronounced ravines and drainage ways associated with Hiatt Run, as well as the Hiatt Run stream valley. The majority of the defined steep slope areas will remain undisturbed through the establishment of riparian buffers, with disturbance generally limited to road crossings, storm water management facilities and 3 Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Step n Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planne Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 pedestrian trail systems. All disturbances of steep slope areas will comply with the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Construction Concerns Shrink swell characteristics of the predominant soils are listed as low and therefore, will not be a major construction consideration. Depth to shale bedrock will typically average 30" in thickness on most of the site. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The properties surrounding Stephenson Village include residential land uses on small lots along Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and residential land uses on large lots along the southern and eastern boundaries of the subject site. Additional land uses surrounding Stephenson Village include agricultural land use to the south and west, as well as unimproved land. Several residential land uses on large lots and the Stephenson Rural Community Center exist within the proximity of Stephenson Village. The surrounding properties will benefit from the public uses and services, certain recreational amenities, public utilities and commercial development that will be made available to the outlying community by the development of Stephenson Village residential planned community project. TRAFFIC IMPACT The impact of the proposed rezoning of the 794.6± acres from RA, Rural Areas District to R4, Residential Planned Community District, on transportation is based on the proffered land use of 2,800 residential dwelling units, 190,000 sq. ft. of retail use, 60,000 sq. ft. of office use and a 550 student elementary school. The Stephenson Village development will provide for the construction of a major collector road system to implement the recommendations of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and will provide additional offsite improvements and monetary contributions to mitigate impacts to the regional transportation system. To determine the impacts associated with the proffered land use rezoning, the Applicant has prepared a detailed traffic impact analysis (TIA) for Stephenson Village. This TIA, prepared by John Callow, Vice President of Patton Harris Rust & Associates, considers impacts to Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North) and Interstate 81 Exit 317. The TIA provides for existing lane geometry and levels of service for the aforementioned road systems during AM and PM peak hours and provides for build -out lane geometry and levels of service during AM and PM peak hours as a three phase analysis for resulting years 2006, 2008 and 2015. The TIA phase periods accelerate the expected development schedule of Stephenson Village to identify the anticipated transportation improvements, and accelerate these improvements to prevent degradations to the transportation system. The background data for the TIA assumes a 5% annual traffic increase rate for the surrounding road systems through 2010, a 4 Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Step '0n Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 3% annual traffic increase rate between 2010 and 2015 and the development of 1,400,000 sq. ft. within the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. The background data provides for the traffic that is not generated by Stephenson Village. The TIA provides for land use traffic generation from the various residential land uses, retail and office square footage and elementary school that will be developed in Stephenson Village. These generation rates have been taken from the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Manual, 6`i' Edition utilizing the appropriate codes for each land use. The results of the TIA account for a total of 25,178 new average daily trips (ADT) in 2015 for the build out of Stephenson Village. The phased period for year 2006 accounts for 10,570 new ADT and the phased period for year 2008 accounts for 17,699 ADT. The results of the TIA suggest incremental improvements are necessary to ensure that the transportation system functions at an acceptable level of service. The Applicant will provide various measures to improve the transportation system including traffic signalization, turn lanes, road widening, bicycle paths and sidewalks. These improvements will occur as the Stephenson Village project develops based on the needs identified by the actual traffic counts and will be planned, designed and constructed when 80% of the actual traffic counts are realized to anticipate and mitigate the traffic impacts from the development program. The Applicant has proffered to utilize traffic counters at each end of the major collector road entering Stephenson Village to provide real time vehicle trip information associated with the development. This proffer is a proactive approach to determine actual traffic impacts associated with this development and provides a mechanism to provide for anticipated improvements to the transportation system. This proactive approach will ensure that the planning, design and implementation of all necessary transportation improvements begins when 80% of the actual traffic count volume is realized for the thresholds identified in the detailed traffic impact analysis (TIA). Completion of each proffered transportation improvement will occur within 18 months of the 80% actual traffic count volume to maintain an acceptable level of service for the road systems serving this development. Please refer to the attached Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, p.c. and dated February 7, 2003. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT AND WATER SUPPLY The impact of the proposed rezoning of the 794.6± acres from RA, Rural Areas District to R4, Residential Planned Community District, on sewage conveyance and water supply is based on the proffered land use of 2,800 residential dwelling units, 250,000 sq. ft. of retail and office use, and an elementary school. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) and Frederick Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) design figures estimate 225 GPD per residential unit for a mixed residential community, while design figures show an estimated 200 GPD, for both the sewer and water systems, per 1,000 square feet of ultimate commercial floor space (These numbers are in reference to the Land Development Handbook, Dewberry & Davis, 1996, page 461). 5 Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Stepho Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 The figures below represent the impact that Stephenson Village would have to the sewage conveyance system and water supply system at full build -out: Q = 225* GPD per dwelling unit Q = 225 GPD x 2,800 dwelling units Q = 630,000 GPD Q = 200* GPD per 1,000 sq. ft. commercial floor area Q = 200 GPD x 250 (1000) commercial floor area Q = 50,000 GPD Q = 9,000 GPD for public elementary school TOTAL Q = 689,000 GPD total for Stephenson Village * The GPD projections for mixed residential and commercial land uses exceed the average GPD experienced by the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority and the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The Board of Supervisors approved the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan in 2002. This plan identifies the water and sewer infrastructure necessary to serve the land areas identified within the Northeast Land Use Plan that fall within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), as well as the Stephenson and Brucetown Rural Community Centers. The first phase of this plan has been bid and will be complete before the end of 2003. This plan calls for the development of a 20-inch water line to supplement the existing 10-inch water line along Martinsburg Pike that is receiving water from the Northern Water Treatment Plant and for the development of an 8-inch sewer force main that will connect to the Redbud Run Pump Station near the CSX Railroad. The Northern Water Treatment Plant is currently providing 1.5 MGD of water from the Global Chemstone Quarry, which is more than twice the amount of water needed to serve Stephenson Village at build out. The 8-inch sewer force main is accessible to the subject site through easement agreements that exist between Stephenson Associates L.C. and McCann. The development of Stephenson Village will supplement flow to the 8-inch sewer force main, thus improving its function as very few users exist in the area to be served by the first phase of this sewer infrastructure project. The Applicant has advised* the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) and the Frederick Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) that Stephenson Village will direct flows to the Redbud Run Station initially and the Applicant is amenable to working with both groups to redirect flows in the future should a new route be planned. The development of Stephenson Village will provide for the development of the Lower Hiatt Run Pump Station by the Applicant that is identified in the plan. The Applicant has proffered to construct this regional pump station and dedicate the land for this facility to the FCSA, as well as construct all water and sewer lines G Greenway Engineering . January 8, 2003 Steph Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Plan ne Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 throughout Stephenson Village and bring this infrastructure to the property lines for the public uses. DRAINAGE Currently, storm water runoff from the 794.6±-acre site drains into pronounced ravines, fingers, natural streams, and drainage ditches. These conveyances flow primarily into Hiatt Run, which flows east and off the site to the Opequon Creek. The extreme southeastern portion of the subject site drains to Lick Run, which then converges with Hiatt Run near the Jordan Springs Hotel. Stephenson Village will be designed to utilize a variety of storm water management techniques including retention facilities, detention facilities, and bioretention facilities. Best management practices will be implemented in the Stephenson Village commercial center and in other areas that provide large parking areas to promote storm water quality measures. The Applicant has solicited technical assistance from several environmental groups to determine appropriate storm water management techniques and appropriate low impact development techniques. These environmental groups include the Potomac Conservancy, the Center for Watershed Protection, the Department of Conservation and Recreation Water Quality Division, the Potomac Watershed Partnership and the Department of Forestry. Soil conditions on the subject site are poorly drained; therefore, techniques will be implemented to slow storm water runoff including the development of street systems that utilize open ditch sections, flooding of small pockets of designated open space areas, bioretention filter design with under drains to promote infiltration, and the use of retention ponds throughout the development. The design of detention areas does not mandate the removal of existing forest cover and vegetative areas. These techniques will promote appropriate water quality and water quantity measures and will serve as a model for urban projects in the community. The Applicant will work with the aforementioned environmental groups and the Frederick County Public Works Department to ensure that drainage impacts are mitigated as the Stephenson Village project develops. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL The impact on solid waste disposal facilities can be projected from an average annual per household consumption of landfill volume figure of 5.4 cubic yards and an average annual business consumption of landfill volume figure of 5.4 cubic yards per 1,000 sq. ft. of commercial floor area. (This number can be found in the Civil Engineering Reference Manual, 4ch edition). The following figures show the increase in average annual volume based on the proffered residential unit density of 2,800 dwellings and 250,000 sq. ft. of commercial and office development: 7 Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Revised March 7, 2003 Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. per dwelling AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. x 2,800 dwellings AV = 15,120 Cu. Yd. AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. per 1,000 sq. ft. AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. x 250 (1,000 sq. ft.) AV = 1,350 Cu. Yd. TOTAL AV = 16,470 Cu. Yd. at build out Stepoon Village Residential Planned Community Rezoning PERCENTAGE OF 2002 ANNUAL DISPOSAL VOLUME AT BUILD OUT = 5.9% Stephenson Village will be developed within the parameters of a proffered phase plan; therefore, the comparison of projected solid waste disposal at build out to the 2002 annual disposal volume of 275,000 cubic yards for the Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill is greater than it would be in ensuing years due to overall annual volume increase. The following provides for an average annual disposal volume based on a projected 15-year build out phase plan: TOTAL AV = 16,470 Cu. Yd. at build out AV = 1,098 Cu. Yd. annually over a 15 year period 1,098 Cu. Yd./275,000 Cu. Yd. = 0.39% PROJECTED AVERAGE ANNUAL DISPOSAL VOLUME The Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill has a current capacity of 7,800,000 cubic yards (7.8 Million Cu. Yd.) that will serve the projected growth of the community through the year 2034. The Frederick County Public Works Department has been working through the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) permitting process to expand the vertical air space of the landfill to increase the capacity to 13,100,000 cubic yards (13.1 Million Cu. Yd.), which expands the life of the Regional Landfill through the year 2048. It is anticipated that the DEQ permit for the Regional Landfill will be issued in April 2003. It should be noted that the Construction Demolition Debris area of the Regional Landfill has capacity through the year 2050 based on construction growth projections developed by the Department of Public Works. The Stephenson Village residential planned community will provide curbside trash collection for all residential and commercial land uses. This service will be provided to mitigate impacts to the citizen convenience center located at the Clearbrook Park and will generate revenues to Frederick County through tipping fees at the regional landfill that will offset solid waste impacts associated with this project. The covenants guiding the Stephenson Village Homeowners Association will provide for curbside trash collection as a line item for the annual dues assessment for each residential unit. The language within the covenants will also provide for Stephenson Village Homeowners Association funded County collection service should the Board of Supervisors expand the Urban Service Area. Greenway Engineering • January 8, 2003 Steph Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planneu ommunity Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES The 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia identifies core battlefield area of Second Winchester and Third Winchester of which a portion is located on parcel 44-A-31. The Applicant has not requested a rezoning of this portion of parcel 44-A-31, which accounts for approximately 95.6± acres of land. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies the Samuel Byers House (#34-1124) as a potentially significant property due to architectural style. This structure is located in the central portion of the property and will be preserved and used as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. Additionally, in the event that any onsite cemeteries are found, the Applicant will preserve those areas in accordance with all applicable state regulations. Offsite areas of potential significance include the Helm McCann property (#34-703) and the Milburn Chapel and Cemetery (#34-950) located to the west of the project site and the Jordan Springs Hotel (#34-110) located to the southeast of the project site. The viewshed associated with these historic features will not be impacted by the development of Stephenson Village. Furthermore, the 1995 Frederick County Winchester Battlefield Network Plan identifies Milburn Road (Route 662) as a significant historic corridor that provides a linkage between areas associated with the Second and Third Winchester Battlefields. The Applicant has met with the property owners of the McCann and Jordan Springs parcels who have approved of these measures and the Stephenson Village rezoning. The Stephenson Village development will be designed to complement historic elements as themes for the project. Monumental entrances may include fence styles and stacked stonewalls that were from the Civil war era. The Northeast Land Use Plan calls for the development of a new major collector road that will serve as the primary road system for Stephenson Village. This major collector road intersects Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and moves through the core battlefield area into the project site, crossing Hiatt Run and then proceeding west across Milburn Road to Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North). The Applicant is responsible for implementing this road system and will develop this infrastructure improvement in accordance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The major collector road crossing of Milburn Road will be the only crossing or intersection associated with the Stephenson Village project. COMMUNITY FACILITIES - The design for Stephenson Village provides 20± acres of land for a public elementary school and 24± acres of land for a public park to ensure that appropriate public services are available in this geographic area of the community. The location of the public school site and the public park site provides for access on Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) to serve the outlying community and will have internal access to serve the residents of Stephenson Village. 9 Greenway Engineering • January 8, 2003 Steph� Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 PlanneTCommunity Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 In addition to the proffered land for public services, the Applicant is committed to further offset additional impacts through monetary contributions. The Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model identifies impacts to fire and rescue, public schools, parks and recreation, public library and county administration building. The Applicant will provide for monetary contributions that are consistent with, or exceed the results of the Fiscal Impact Model for residential land uses. The Applicant's proffer statement provides for this monetary contribution, which address all identified county services. It should be noted that the monetary contribution for the residential units within the active adult community and the affordable housing for the elderly has been reduced accordingly based on no impacts to public schools; however, a 50% premium has been provided to Fire and Rescue for each active adult unit and a 100% premium has been provided to Fire and Rescue for each affordable housing for the elderly unit. Additionally, the Applicant has proffered a 100% premium for Frederick County Public Schools for each student that exceeds the annual 60-student cap generation from this community, a $200,000.00 monetary contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc., and a $75,000.00 monetary contribution to Frederick County to be utilized as matching funds for transportation enhancements and/or for heritage tourism. OTHER IMPACTS The firm of Robert Charles Lesser & Co., LLC has been retained by the Applicant to prepare an economic analysis for the Stephenson Village project to determine the economic impact to Frederick County. Furthermore, the Applicant has agreed to pay all costs associated with an independent review of this analysis that is being conducted by two qualified firms selected by Frederick County. The results of this economic analysis demonstrate a positive fiscal impact to Frederick County even before considering the monetary and land contribution proffers in this rezoning application; therefore, the Stephenson Village project will more than pay its own way and will be a net positive revenue generator for the County. The program that has been developed for the Stephenson Village residential planned community will adequately mitigate all impacts to the County and will also provide the following benefits to the local community: • Mix of housing type reduces impact to schools and provides affordable housing for the elderly • Water and sewer infrastructure will be developed by the Applicant which will be made available to the area • Self-sufficient development so impacts to community are not increased • Comprehensive in-depth proffers to protect the community, as well as the County 10 Greenway Engineering . January 8, 2003 StephI Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planne Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 • Control of suburban sprawl • Creating an opportunity for better appreciation for local historic resources • Community shopping • Community employment opportunity during and after development • Ball fields and school within walking distance of neighborhoods • Public trail systems • Preserve open space and create open space corridor along Hiatt Run • Increase in local land values • Positive water quality impacts to Hiatt Run • Internal traffic capture and walkable community to minimize impacts to the transportation system Stephenson Village will be the first residential planned community built in Frederick County. It will tie the neighborhoods of Stephenson together and serve as a vital center, as well as bringing positive solutions to many of the concerns facing the County at this time. Stephenson Associates L.C. is committed to making this community a success and a model for development in the region. SOILS LEGEND rl es To 18 -Berks Channery 2-7 ,� ✓ 3B - Blairton 2-7% F Y •'�% 3C - Blairton 7-15% 0 6C - Carbo Oaklet (rocky) 2-15% 7C - Carbo Oaklet (outcrop) 2-15% . 8C - Chilhowie 2-7% 96 Clearbrook Channe 2 ea t To j� 7°�° 9C - Clearbrook Channery 7-15% e' • '` , � ' , , "II 1 C -Weikert Berks 7-15% . , \ C� u 41D -Weikert Berks 15-25% •• /� 1E -Weikert Berks 25-65% .98 B 41 C- . ; • %�' Source: Soil Survey of Frederick County, VA f � � N 4 W E S O a 9� 41E 7C 0 41 E 500 0 500 1000 Feet Be Rezoned - 41E - 9B m. 3C 41 D 17) -E %a . Uh �-, - 913 SOILS MAP _. dabIMPACT ANALYSIS ua EXHIBIT B Greenway Engineering August 18, 2003 W �p Z N C7 N I N W T O J � I �I �� / RTE. 761 {, OLD CHARLESTOWN ROAD z �_ N `o oa A N V Q: : ................ +� � .. .. A.B...... %E...:NET........ : TO . ...... v ::.. 92...: ACR... of tf . '.:::..TH .................... ....:':.';::. ' : . '.......................................................... / :::... :: ... .....'.......'....... ...'.'.'...; MARK D. SMITH :.: i.................'...........:..::..:::.. No.022837 !� sS ZONAL ... TM: 44-((A))-292 \TM:44-((A))-31 Z / E- E- W �; AREA TO BE REZONED C1. W Q R4 DISTRICT W /� 794,6 i ACRES d E- AREA NOT TO / Q / z 5E REZONED Q � 3.5± AGRE5 Z U) � o TM: 44-((A))-293 �D M C) d U L� aW of co)zw TM: 44-((A))-31A z N Z 0 TW / a. _- W t DATE: MARCH 2O03 t SCALE: i" 1000' DESIGNED BY: Mpg "— --- JOB NO. 2l60C SHEET i OF i 0 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Tax Map # 44-((A))-31 (Portion), 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292 & 44-((A))-293 821.7 * Acres 794. 6± Acres January 8, 2003 Revised March 7, 2003 Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 Current Owners: Stephenson Associates L.C. Contact Person: Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 540-662-4185 File #2760C EAW Greenway Engineering • January 8, 2003 Stephion Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared for the purpose of assessing the impact on Frederick County by the proffered rezoning of an 8 1�or-e 794.6±-acre parcel owned by Stephenson Associates L.C., sometimes referred to as the Applicant. The proffered rezoning includes all of tax parcels 44-A- 31 A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293, and the portion of tax parcel 44-A-31 that is located outside of the Core Area Boundary of Second and Third Winchester Battlefields identified by the September 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites In The Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. The subject properties are located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2000' east of Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North). The entire acreage within the subject site is zoned RA, Rural Areas District. Stephenson Associates L.C. proposes to rezone the 821 7± aefes 794.6 acres to R4, Residential Planned Community District in order to create the first residential planned community in Frederick County. The Stephenson Village development will provide positive impacts to surrounding neighborhoods including local shopping, ball fields and school, sewer and water infrastructure, affordable housing for the elderly, as well as positive revenue generation to the County. The first residential planned community in the County, Stephenson Village will serve as a model for future development. The proposed residential planned community zoning boundary is shown on a Zoning Boundary Plat prepared by Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S., dated March 2003 and is attached as Exhibit A. The Q21.7-L aeFes 794.6 acres proposed for rezoning is further described on a Composite Plat of the land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. prepared by Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S., dated March 7, 20 August 18, 2003. This Composite Plat has been submitted to the Department of Planning and Development as a component of the rezoning application. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The parcels that will comprise the proposed residential planned community are a component of the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan's Northeast Land Use Plan. This plan identifies the general area associated with this acreage as future industrial use residential planned community land use and includes the entire acreage within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and the majority of this acreage within the Urban Development Area (UDA). , request for404--ae-res- of M! , Light Lqd••stfi^'-D-i-st -iet-that was denied the Board oSupervisors in 2001. The approval of the Stephensen Village Residential Planned COMMUflit)' will neeessitate the extension of the Urban rleyel.,,- pent_ _Area ( D A) to follow the , t Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 StephW Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 SITE SUITABILITY Access The subject property is strategically located 2000' east of Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761). The primary access to the residential planned community is proposed on Old Charles Town Road, continuing through a new major collector road that will intersect with Martinsburg Pike at a signalized cross intersection with the Rutherford's Fann Industrial Park. The primary access for Stephenson Village implements the Northeast Land Use Plan proposed collector road plan within this area of the study. Stephenson Associates L.C. has executed an agreement with McCann and Omps that will allow for the development of the new major collector road through all properties to Martinsburg Pike. The Stephenson Village residential planned community will also allow for access on Old Charles Town Road to serve a 550-student elementary school and to serve a public park site that will contain soccer fields and baseball/softball fields. Access to all land uses within Stephenson Village will be accomplished through a system of internal streets, bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways and trail systems. Flood Plains The subject site is located on FEMA NFIP map # 510063-0110-13. The majority of the site is located within a "ZONE C" area that is outside of the flood plain limits with the exception of the Hiatt Run stream valley that is located in the central portion of the subject site. Hiatt Run is identified as a perennial stream, which is in a 100-year flood plain and classified as a "Zone A". The proffered rezoning proposes to establish riparian buffers to protect this resource and also proposes to protect the integrity of the stream valley through the development of a forest management plan on the south side of Hiatt Run and through a stream bank enhancement plan that will utilize existing vegetation and new plantings to stabilize the stream bed on the north side of Hiatt Run. Wetlands The National Wetlands Inventory Map identifies wetlands on the subject site within six ponding areas that have an approximate surface area of four acres. These wetland areas are located within the central portion of the subject site and drain through pronounced ravines and drainage ways that feed Hiatt Run. The wetland areas will be utilized in the overall storm water 2 Greenway Engineering , January 8, 2003 StephADVillage Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 management plan for Stephenson Village that will incorporate retention ponds, detention ponds and bioretention facilities. Any disturbance of the identified wetland areas will be in conformance with all Corps of Engineers permitting procedures. Mature Woodlands The subject site contains areas of mature woodlands that are located primarily in the central and southern portions of the subject site with additional scattered areas in the far eastern portion of the subject site. An open space corridor associated with the Hiatt Run stream valley is proposed, which will preserve portions of the mature woodland area. The developed portions of Stephenson Village will preserve woodland areas to the extent possible through the development of boulevard road systems with landscaped medians and open space pockets. A forest management plan is proffered to preserve woodlands along the Hiatt Run stream valley that will protect the integrity of this environmental feature. All disturbances of woodlands will comply with the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Soil Types Information for soil types on this site has been obtained from the Soil Survey of Frederick County, by the USDA Soil Conservation Service. The subject site is located on map sheet nos. 24, 25, 30 and 31 and contains six different soil types: Berks-Channery Loams 2-7% slopes Blairton Silt Loams 2-7% slopes and 7-15% slopes Carbo Oaklet Silt Loams and Rock Outcrop 2-15% Chilhowie Silty Clay Loams 7-15% slopes Clearbrook Channery Silt Loams 2-7% slopes and 7-15% slopes Weikert-Berks Channery Silt Loams 7-15% slopes, 15-25% slopes and 25-65% slopes Please refer to attached Soils Map prepared by Greenway Engineering, dated March 2003, attached as Exhibit G Exhibit B. Prime Agricultural Soils The Blairton Silt Loams 2-7% is the only soil type on the subject site that is identified as prime agricultural soils. The majority of the Blairton Silt Loams exist on the portion of parcel 44-A-31 that is not proposed to be rezoned. All of the aforementioned soils do not support crops without heavy fertilization, liming, and soil management. They do support pasture for livestock and hay cultivation if there is adequate rainfall. Weikert-Berks loam soils are listed as moderately to poorly suited for pasture and hay cultivation. Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Stepon Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 Steep Slopes - 25% and Greater Steep slopes as defined exist within the central and eastern portion of the subject site. These steep slope areas are generally located within the pronounced ravines and drainage ways associated with Hiatt Run, as well as the Hiatt Run stream valley. The majority of the defined steep slope areas will remain undisturbed through the establishment of riparian buffers, with disturbance generally limited to road crossings, storm water management facilities and pedestrian trail systems. All disturbances of steep slope areas will comply with the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Construction Concerns Shrink swell characteristics of the predominant soils are listed as low and therefore, will not be a major construction consideration. Depth to shale bedrock will typically average 30" in thickness on most of the site. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The properties surrounding Stephenson Village include residential land uses on small lots along Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and residential land uses on large lots along the southern and eastern boundaries of the subject site. Additional land uses surrounding Stephenson Village include agricultural land use to the south and west, as well as unimproved land. Several residential land uses on large lots and the Stephenson Rural Community Center exist within the proximity of Stephenson Village. The surrounding properties will benefit from the public uses and services, certain recreational amenities, public utilities and commercial development that will be made available to the outlying community by the development of Stephenson Village residential planned community project. TRAFFIC IMPACT The impact of the proposed rezoning of the 8''�acres 794.6± acres from RA, Rural Areas District to R4, Residential Planned Community District, on transportation is based on the proffered land use of 2,800 residential dwelling units, 190,000 sq. ft. of retail use, 60,000 sq. ft. of office use and a 550 student elementary school. The Stephenson Village development will provide for the construction of a major collector road system to implement the recommendations of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and will provide additional offsite improvements and monetary contributions to mitigate impacts to the regional transportation system. To determine the impacts associated with the proffered land use rezoning, the Applicant has prepared a detailed traffic impact analysis (TIA) for Stephenson Village. This TIA, prepared by John Callow, Vice President of Patton Harris Rust & Associates, considers impacts to Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North) and Interstate 81 Exit 4 Greenway Engineering . January 8, 2003 Stepho Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 317. The TIA provides for existing lane geometry and levels of service for the aforementioned road systems during AM and PM peak hours and provides for build -out lane geometry and levels of service during AM and PM peak hours as a three phase analysis for resulting years 2006, 2008 and 2015. The TIA phase periods accelerate the expected development schedule of Stephenson Village to identify the anticipated transportation improvements, and accelerate these improvements to prevent degradations to the transportation system. The background data for the TIA assumes a 5% annual traffic increase rate for the surrounding road systems through 2010, a 3% annual traffic increase rate between 2010 and 2015 and the development of 1,400,000 sq. ft. within the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. The background data provides for the traffic that is not generated by Stephenson Village. The TIA provides for land use traffic generation from the various residential land uses, retail and office square footage and elementary school that will be developed in Stephenson Village. These generation rates have been taken from the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Manual, 6`h Edition utilizing the appropriate codes for each land use. The results of the TIA account for a total of 25,178 new average daily trips (ADT) in 2015 for the build out of Stephenson Village. The phased period for year 2006 accounts for 10,570 new ADT and the phased period for year 2008 accounts for 17,699 ADT. The results of the TIA suggest incremental improvements are necessary to ensure that the transportation system functions at an acceptable level of service. The Applicant will provide various measures to improve the transportation system including traffic signalization, turn lanes, road widening, bicycle paths and sidewalks. These improvements will occur as the Stephenson Village project develops based on the needs identified by the actual traffic counts and will be planned, designed and constructed when 80% of the actual traffic counts are realized to anticipate and mitigate the traffic impacts from the development program. The Applicant has proffered to utilize traffic counters at each end of the major collector road entering Stephenson Village to provide real time vehicle trip information associated with the development. This proffer is a proactive approach to determine actual traffic impacts associated with this development and provides a mechanism to provide for anticipated improvements to the transportation system. This proactive approach will ensure that the planning, design and implementation of all necessary transportation improvements begins when 80% of the actual traffic count volume is realized for the thresholds identified in the detailed traffic impact analysis (TIA). Completion of each proffered transportation improvement will occur within 18 months of the 80% actual traffic count volume to maintain an acceptable level of service for the road systems serving this development. Please refer to the attached Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, p.c. and dated February 7, 2003. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT AND WATER SUPPLY The impact of the proposed rezoning of the 821.7± aere-s 794.6± acres from RA, Rural Areas District to R4, Residential Planned Community District, on sewage conveyance and water supply is based on the proffered land use of 2,800 residential dwelling units, 250,000 sq. ft. of retail and 5 Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Stephe*Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 office use, and an elementary school. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) and Frederick Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) design figures estimate 225 GPD per residential unit for a mixed residential community, while design figures show an estimated 200 GPD, for both the sewer and water systems, per 1,000 square feet of ultimate commercial floor space (These numbers are in reference to the Land Development Handbook, Dewberry & Davis, 1996, page 461). The figures below represent the impact that Stephenson Village would have to the sewage conveyance system and water supply system at full build -out: Q = 225* GPD per dwelling unit Q = 225 GPD x 2,800 dwelling units Q = 630,000 GPD Q = 200* GPD per 1,000 sq. ft. commercial floor area Q = 200 GPD x 250 (1000) commercial floor area Q = 50,000 GPD Q = 9,000 GPD for public elementary school TOTAL Q = 689,000 GPD total for Stephenson Village * The GPD projections for mixed residential and commercial land uses exceed the average GPD experienced by the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority and the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The Board of Supervisors approved the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan in 2002. This plan identifies the water and sewer infrastructure necessary to serve the land areas identified within the Northeast Land Use Plan that fall within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), as well as the Stephenson and Brucetown Rural Community Centers. The first phase of this plan has been bid and will be complete before the end of 2003. This plan calls for the development of a 20-inch water line to supplement the existing 10-inch water line along Martinsburg Pike that is receiving water from the Northern Water Treatment Plant and for the development of an 8-inch sewer force main that will connect to the Redbud Run Pump Station near the CSX Railroad. The Northern Water Treatment Plant is currently providing 1.5 MGD of water from the Global Chemstone Quarry, which is more than twice the amount of water needed to serve Stephenson Village at build out. The 8-inch sewer force main is accessible to the subject site through easement agreements that exist between Stephenson Associates L.C. and McCann. The development of Stephenson Village will supplement flow to the 8-inch sewer force main, thus improving its function as very few users exist in the area to be served by the first phase of this sewer infrastructure project. The Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 StepheO Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 Applicant has advised the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) and the Frederick Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) that Stephenson Village will direct flows to the Redbud Run Station initially and the Applicant is amenable to working with both groups to redirect flows in the future should a new route be planned. The development of Stephenson Village will provide for the development of the Lower Hiatt Run Pump Station by the Applicant that is identified in the plan. The Applicant has proffered to construct this regional pump station and dedicate the land for this facility to the FCSA, as well as construct all water and sewer lines throughout Stephenson Village and bring this infrastructure to the property lines for the public uses. DRAINAGE Currently, storm water runoff from the Q'"� 794.6±-acre site drains into pronounced ravines, fingers, natural streams, and drainage ditches. These conveyances flow primarily into Hiatt Run, which flows east and off the site to the Opequon Creek. The extreme southeastern portion of the subject site drains to Lick Run, which then converges with Hiatt Run near the Jordan Springs Hotel. Stephenson Village will be designed to utilize a variety of storm water management techniques including retention facilities, detention facilities, and bioretention facilities. Best management practices will be implemented in the Stephenson Village commercial center and in other areas that provide large parking areas to promote storm water quality measures. The Applicant has solicited technical assistance from several environmental groups to determine appropriate storm water management techniques and appropriate low impact development techniques. These environmental groups include the Potomac Conservancy, the Center for Watershed Protection, the Department of Conservation and Recreation Water Quality Division, the Potomac Watershed Partnership and the Department of Forestry. Soil conditions on the subject site are poorly drained; therefore, techniques will be implemented to slow storm water runoff including the development of street systems that utilize open ditch sections, flooding of small pockets of designated open space areas, bioretention filter design with under drains to promote infiltration, and the use of retention ponds throughout the development. The design of detention areas does not mandate the removal of existing forest cover and vegetative areas. These techniques will promote appropriate water quality and water quantity measures and will serve as a model for urban projects in the community. The Applicant will work with the aforementioned environmental groups and the Frederick County Public Works Department to ensure that drainage impacts are mitigated as the Stephenson Village project develops. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL The impact on solid waste disposal facilities can be projected from an average annual per household consumption of landfill volume figure of 5.4 cubic yards and an average annual business consumption of landfill volume figure of 5.4 cubic yards per 1,000 sq. ft. of commercial 7 Greenway Engineering . January 8, 2003 Stepho Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 floor area. (This number can be found in the Civil Engineering Reference Manual, 4`h edition). The following figures show the increase in average annual volume based on the proffered residential unit density of 2,800 dwellings and 250,000 sq. ft. of commercial and office development: AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. per dwelling AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. x 2,800 dwellings AV = 15,120 Cu. Yd. AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. per 1,000 sq. ft. AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. x 250 (1,000 sq. ft.) AV = 1,350 Cu. Yd. TOTAL AV = 16,470 Cu. Yd. at build out PERCENTAGE OF 2002 ANNUAL DISPOSAL VOLUME AT BUILD OUT = 5.9% Stephenson Village will be developed within the parameters of a proffered phase plan; therefore, the comparison of projected solid waste disposal at build out to the 2002 annual disposal volume of 275,000 cubic yards for the Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill is greater than it would be in ensuing years due to overall annual volume increase. The following provides for an average annual disposal volume based on a projected 15-year build out phase plan: TOTAL AV = 16,470 Cu. Yd. at build out AV = 1,098 Cu. Yd. annually over a 15 year period 1,098 Cu. Yd./275,000 Cu. Yd. = 0.39% PROJECTED AVERAGE ANNUAL DISPOSAL VOLUME The Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill has a current capacity of 7,800,000 cubic yards (7.8 Million Cu. Yd.) that will serve the projected growth of the community through the year 2034. The Frederick County Public Works Department has been working through the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) permitting process to expand the vertical air space of the landfill to increase the capacity to 13,100,000 cubic yards (13.1 Million Cu. Yd.), which expands the life of the Regional Landfill through the year 2048. It is anticipated that the DEQ permit for the Regional Landfill will be issued in April 2003. It should be noted that the Construction Demolition Debris area of the Regional Landfill has capacity through the year 2050 based on construction growth projections developed by the Department of Public Works. The Stephenson Village residential planned community will provide curbside trash collection for all residential and commercial land uses. This service will be provided to mitigate impacts to the citizen convenience center located at the Clearbrook Park and will generate revenues to 8 Greenway Engineering , January 8, 2003 Stephel*Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 Frederick County through tipping fees at the regional landfill that will offset solid waste impacts associated with this project. The covenants guiding the Stephenson Village Homeowners Association will provide for curbside trash collection as a line item for the annual dues assessment for each residential unit. The language within the covenants will also provide for Stephenson Village Homeowners Association funded County collection service should the Board of Supervisors expand the Urban Service Area. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES The 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia identifies , core battlefield area of Second Winchester and Third Winchester of which a portion is located on parcel 44-A-31. The Applicant has not requested a rezoning of this portion of parcel 44-A-31, which accounts for approximately 68�o ± awes 95.6± acres of land. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies the Samuel Byers House (#34-1124) as a potentially significant property due to architectural style. This structure is located in the central portion of the property and will be preserved and used as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. Additionally, in the event that any onsite cemeteries are found, the Applicant will preserve those areas in accordance with all applicable state regulations. Offsite areas of potential significance include the Helm McCann property (#34-703) and the Milburn Chapel and Cemetery (#34-950) located to the west of the project site and the Jordan Springs Hotel (#34-110) located to the southeast of the project site. The viewshed associated with these historic features will not be impacted by the development of Stephenson Village. Furthermore, the 1995 Frederick County Winchester Battlefield Network Plan identifies Milburn Road (Route 662) as a significant historic corridor that provides a linkage between areas associated with the Second and Third Winchester Battlefields. The Applicant has met with the property owners of the McCann and Jordan Springs parcels who have approved of these measures and the Stephenson Village rezoning. The Stephenson Village development will be designed to complement historic elements as themes for the project. Monumental entrances may include fence styles and stacked stonewalls that were from the Civil war era. The Northeast Land Use Plan calls for the development of a new major collector road that will serve as the primary road system for Stephenson Village. This major collector road intersects Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and moves through the core battlefield area into the -project site, crossing Hiatt Run and then proceeding west across Milburn Road to Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North). The Applicant is responsible for implementing this road system and will develop this infrastructure improvement in accordance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The major collector road crossing of Milburn Road will be the only crossing or intersection associated with the Stephenson Village project. 9 Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Stephen Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 COMMUNITY FACILITIES The design for Stephenson Village provides 20± acres of land for a public elementary school and 24± acres of land for a public park to ensure that appropriate public services are available in this geographic area of the community. The location of the public school site and the public park site provides for access on Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) to serve the outlying community and will have internal access to serve the residents of Stephenson Village. In addition to the proffered land for public services, the Applicant is committed to further offset additional impacts through monetary contributions. The Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model identifies impacts to fire and rescue, public schools, parks and recreation, public library and county administration building. The Applicant will provide for monetary contributions that are consistent with, or exceed the results of the Fiscal Impact Model for residential land uses. The Applicant's proffer statement provides for this monetary contribution, which address all identified county services. It should be noted that the monetary contribution for the residential units within the active adult community and the affordable housing for the elderly has been reduced accordingly based on no impacts to public schools; however, a 50 % premium has been provided to Fire and Rescue for each active adult unit and a 100% premium has been provided to Fire and Rescue for each affordable housing for the elderly unit. Additionally, the Applicant has proffered a 100 % premium for Frederick County Public Schools for each student that exceeds the annual 60-student cap generation from this community, a $200,000.00 monetary contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc., and a $75,000.00 monetary contribution to Shenandoah University44istorieal and Tourism Center Frederick County to be utilized as matching funds for transportation enhancements and/or for heritage tourism. OTHER IMPACTS The firm of Robert Charles Lesser & Co., LLC has been retained by the Applicant to prepare an economic analysis for the Stephenson Village project to determine the economic impact to Frederick County. Furthermore, the Applicant has agreed to pay all costs associated with an independent review of this analysis that is being conducted by two qualified firms selected by Frederick County. The results of this economic analysis demonstrate a positive fiscal impact to Frederick County even before considering the monetary and land contribution proffers in this rezoning application; therefore, the Stephenson Village project will more than pay its own way and will be a net positive revenue generator for the County. The program that has been developed for the Stephenson Village residential planned community will adequately mitigate all impacts to the County and will also provide the following benefits to the local community: • Mix of housing type reduces impact to schools and provides affordable housing for the elderly m Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Stepon Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Revised August 18, 2003 Revised September 3, 2003 • Water and sewer infrastructure will be developed by the Applicant which will be made available to the area • Self-sufficient development so impacts to community are not increased • Comprehensive in-depth proffers to protect the community, as well as the County • Control of suburban sprawl • Creating an opportunity for better appreciation for local historic resources • Community shopping • Community employment opportunity during and after development • Ball fields and school within walking distance of neighborhoods • Public trail systems • Preserve open space and create open space corridor along Hiatt Run • Increase in local land values • Positive water quality impacts to Hiatt Run • Internal traffic capture and walkable community to minimize impacts to the transportation system Stephenson Village will be the first residential planned community built in Frederick County. It will tie the neighborhoods of Stephenson together and serve as a vital center, as well as bringing positive solutions to many of the concerns facing the County at this time. Stephenson Associates L.C. is committed to making this community a success and a model for development in the region. IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Tax Map # 44-((A))-31 (Portion), 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292 & 44-((A))-293 821.7 ± Acres January 8, 2003 Revised March 7, 2003 Current Owners: Stephenson Associates L.C. Contact Person: Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 540-662-4185 File #2760C EAW Greenway Engineering Oanuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Villaesidential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared for the purpose of assessing the impact on Frederick County by the proffered rezoning of an 821.7±-acre parcel owned by Stephenson Associates L.C., sometimes referred to as the Applicant. The proffered rezoning includes all of tax parcels 44-A-31A, 44-A- 292, and 44-A-293, and the portion of tax parcel 44-A-31 that is located outside of the Stephenson's Depot Core Area Boundary identified by the September 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites In The Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. The subject properties are located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2000' east of Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North). The entire acreage within the subject site is zoned RA, Rural Areas District. Stephenson Associates L.C. proposes to rezone the 821.7± acres to R4, Residential Planned Community District in order to create the first residential planned community in Frederick County. The Stephenson Village development will provide positive impacts to surrounding neighborhoods including local shopping, ball fields and school, sewer and water infrastructure, affordable housing for the elderly, as well as positive revenue generation to the County. The first residential planned community in the County, Stephenson Village will serve as a model for future development. The proposed residential planned community zoning boundary is shown on a Zoning Boundary Plat prepared by Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S., dated March 2003 and is attached as Exhibit A. The 821.7± acres proposed for rezoning is further described on a Composite Plat of the land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. prepared by Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S., dated March 7, 2003. This Composite Plat has been submitted to the Department of Planning and Development as a component of the rezoning application. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The parcels that will comprise the proposed residential planned community are a component of the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan's Northeast Land Use Plan. This plan identifies the general area associated with this acreage as future industrial use and includes the entire acreage within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Crider & Shockey Inc., of West Virginia, a predecessor in title, submitted a rezoning request for 404 acres of M1, Light Industrial District that was denied by the Board of Supervisors in 2001. The approval of the Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community will necessitate the extension of the Urban Development Area (UDA) to follow the current SWSA boundary associated with this acreage. Currently, the UDA boundary is located just to the west of the subject site at the intersection of McCann's Road (Route 838) and the CSX Railroad. The proposed proffered rezoning requests the extension of the UDA boundary to follow the SWSA boundary associated with this acreage. The proposed extension of the UDA boundary is shown on a map entitled Residential Planned Greenway Engineering Oanuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Vil#-, Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Community and Urban Development Area & Sewer and Water Service Area Extension Plan dated March 2003 and is attached as Exhibit B. SITE SUITABILITY Access The subject property is strategically located 2000' east of Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North) and south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761). The primary access to the residential planned community is proposed on Old Charles Town Road, continuing through a new major collector road that will intersect with Martinsburg Pike at a signalized cross intersection with the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. The primary access for Stephenson Village implements the Northeast Land Use Plan proposed collector road plan within this area of the study. Stephenson Associates L.C. has executed an agreement with McCann and Omps that will allow for the development of the new major collector road through all properties to Martinsburg Pike. The Stephenson Village residential planned community will also allow for access on Old Charles Tov,�n Road to serve a 550-student elementary school and to serve a public park site that will contain soccer fields and baseball/softball fields. Access to all land uses within Stephenson Village will be accomplished through a system of internal streets, bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways and trail systems. Flnntl Plain. The subject site is located on FEMA NFIP map # 510063-0110-13. The majority of the site is located within a "ZONE C" area that is outside of the flood plain limits with the exception of the Hiatt Run stream valley that is located in the central portion of the subject site. Hiatt Run is identified as a perennial stream, which is in a 100-year flood plain and classified as a "Zone A". The proffered rezoning proposes to establish riparian buffers to protect this resource and also proposes to protect the integrity of the stream valley through the development of a forest management plan on the south side of Hiatt Run and through a stream bank enhancement plan that will utilize existing vegetation and new plantings to stabilize the stream bed on the north side of Hiatt Run. Wetlands The National Wetlands .Inventory Map identifies wetlands on the subject site within six ponding areas that have an approximate surface area of four acres. These wetland areas are located within the central portion of the subject site and drain through pronounced ravines and drainage ways that feed Hiatt Run. The wetland areas will be utilized in the overall storm water management plan for Stephenson Village that will incorporate retention ponds, detention ponds and bioretention facilities. Any disturbance of the identified wetland areas will be in conformance with all Corps of Engineers permitting procedures. 2 Greenway Engineering *anuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Vi11aResidential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Mature Woodlands The subject site contains areas of mature woodlands that are located primarily in the central and southern portions of the subject site with additional scattered areas in the far eastern portion of the subject site. An open space corridor associated with the Hiatt Run stream valley is proposed, which will preserve portions of the mature woodland area. The developed portions of Stephenson Village will preserve woodland areas to the extent possible through the development of boulevard road systems with landscaped medians and open space pockets. A forest management plan is proffered to preserve woodlands along the Hiatt Run stream valley that will protect the integrity of this environmental feature. All disturbances of woodlands will comply with the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Soil Types Information for soil types on this site has been obtained from the Soil Survey of Frederick County, by the USDA Soil Conservation Service. The subject site is located on map sheet nos. 24, 25, 30 and 31 and contains six different soil types: Berks-Channery Loams 2-7% slopes Blairton Silt Loarns 2-7% slopes and 7-15% slopes Carbo Oaklet Silt Loams and Rock Outcrop 2-15% Chilhowie Silty Clay Loams 7-15% slopes Clearbrook Channery Silt Loams 2-7% slopes and 7-15% slopes Weikert-Berks Channery Silt Loams 7-15% slopes, 15-25% slopes and 25-65% slopes Please refer to attached Soils Map prepared by, Greenway Engineering, dated March 2003, attached as Exhibit C. Prime Agricultural Soils The Blairton Silt Loams 2-7% is the only soil type on the subject site that is identified as prime agricultural soils. The majority of the Blairton Silt Loams exist on the portion of parcel 44-A-31 that is not proposed to be rezoned. All of the aforementioned soils do not support crops without heavy fertilization, liming, and soil management. They do support pasture for livestock and hay cultivation if there is adequate rainfall. Weikert-Berks loam soils are listed as moderately to poorly suited for pasture and hay cultivation. Steep Slopes - 25% and Greater Steep slopes as defined exist within the central and eastern portion of the subject site. These steep slope areas are generally located within the pronounced ravines and drainage ways associated with Hiatt Run, as well as the Hiatt Run stream valley. The majority of the defined steep slope areas will remain undisturbed through the establishment of riparian buffers, with disturbance generally limited to road crossings, storm water management facilities and 3 Greenway Engineering nuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Villa Zesidential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning pedestrian trail systems. All disturbances of steep slope areas will comply with the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Construction Concerns Shrink swell characteristics of the predominant soils are listed as low and therefore, will not be a major construction consideration. Depth to shale bedrock will typically average 30" in thickness on most of the site. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The properties surrounding Stephenson Village include residential land uses on small lots along Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and residential land uses on large lots along the southern and eastern boundaries of the subject site. Additional land uses surrounding Stephenson Village include agricultural land use to the south and west, as well as unimproved land. Several residential land uses on large lots and the Stephenson Rural Community Center exist within the proximity of Stephenson Village. The surrounding properties will benefit from the public uses and services, certain recreational amenities, public utilities and commercial development that will be made available to the outlying community by the development of Stephenson Village residential planned community project. TRAFFIC IMPACT The impact of the proposed rezoning of the 821.7± acres fiom RA, Rural Areas District to R4, Residential Planned Community District, on transportation is based on the proffered land use of 2,800 residential dwelling units, 190,000 sq. ft. of retail use, 60,000 sq. ft. of office use and a 550 student elementary school. The Stephenson Village development will provide for the construction of a major collector road system to implement the recornmendations of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and will provide additional offsite improvements and monetary contributions to mitigate impacts to the regional transportation system. To determine the impacts associated with the proffered land use rezoning, the Applicant has prepared a detailed traffic impact analysis (TIA) for Stephenson Village. This TIA, prepared by John Callow, Vice President of Patton Harris Rust & Associates, considers impacts to Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North) and Interstate 81 Exit 317. The TIA provides for existing lane geometry and levels of service for the aforementioned road systems during AM and PM peak hours and provides for build -out lane geometry and levels of service during AM and PM peak hours as a three phase analysis for resulting years 2006, 2008 and 2015. The TIA phase periods accelerate the expected development schedule of Stephenson Village to identify the anticipated transportation improvements, and accelerate these improvements to prevent degradations to the transportation system. The background data for the TIA assumes a 5% annual traffic increase rate for the surrounding road systems through 2010, a 3% annual traffic increase rate between 2010 and 2015 and the development of 1,400,000 sq. ft. 4 Greenway Engineering Oanuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Villafee Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning within the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. The background data provides for the traffic that is not generated by Stephenson Village. The TIA provides for land use traffic generation from the various residential land uses, retail and office square footage and elementary school that will be developed in Stephenson Village. These generation rates have been taken from the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Manual, 6t" Edition utilizing the appropriate codes for each land use. The results of the TIA account for a total of 25,178 new average daily trips (ADT) in 2015 for the build out of Stephenson Village. The phased period for year 2006 accounts for 10,570 new ADT and the phased period for year 2008 accounts for 17,699 ADT. The results of the TIA suggest incremental improvements are necessary to ensure that the transportation system functions at an acceptable level of service. The Applicant will provide various measures to improve the transportation system including traffic signalization, turn lanes, road widening, bicycle paths and sidewalks. These improvements will occur as the Stephenson Village project develops based on the needs identified by the actual traffic counts and will be planned, designed and constructed when 80% of the actual traffic counts are realized to anticipate and mitigate the traffic impacts from the development program. The Applicant has proffered to utilize traffic counters at each end of the major collector road entering Stephenson Village to provide real time vehicle trip information associated with the development. This proffer is a proactive approach to determine actual traffic impacts associated with this development and provides a mechanism to provide for anticipated improvements to the transportation system. This proactive approach will ensure that the planning, design and implementation of all necessary transportation improvements begins when 80% of the actual traffic count volume is realized for the thresholds identified in the detailed traffic impact analysis (TIA). Completion of each proffered transportation improvement will occur within 18 months of the 80% actual traffic count volume to maintain an acceptable level of service for the road systems serving this development. Please refer to the attached Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, p.c. and dated February 7, 2003. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT AND WATER SUPPLY The impact of the proposed rezoning of the 821.7± acres from RA, Rural Areas District to R4, Residential Planned Community District, on sewage conveyance and water supply is based on the proffered land use of 2,800 residential dwelling units, 250,000 sq. ft. of retail and office use, and an elementary school. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) and Frederick Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) design figures estimate 225 GPD per residential unit for a mixed residential community, while design figures show an estimated 200 GPD, for both the sewer and water systems, per 1,000 square feet of ultimate commercial floor space (These numbers are in reference to the Land Development Handbook, Dewberry & Davis, 1996, page 461). The figures below represent the impact that Stephenson Village would have to the sewage conveyance system and water supply system at full build -out: 5 Greenway Engineering 0anuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Villat Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning Q = 225* GPD per dwelling unit Q = 225 GPD x 2,800 dwelling units Q = 630,000 GPD Q = 200* GPD per 1,000 sq. ft. commercial floor area Q = 200 GPD x 250 (1000) commercial floor area Q = 50,000 GPD Q = 9,000 GPD for public elementary school TOTAL Q = 689,000 GPD total for Stephenson Village * The GPD projections for mixed residential and commercial land uses exceed the average GPD experienced by the Frederick -Winchester Service Authority and the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. The Board of Supervisors approved the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan in 2002. This plan identifies the water and sewer infrastructure necessary to serve the land areas identified within the Northeast Land Use Plan that fall within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), as well as the Stephenson and Brucetown Rural Community Centers. The first phase of this plan has been bid and will be complete before the end of 2003. This plan calls for the development of a 20-inch water line to supplement the existing 10-inch water line along Martinsburg Pike that is receiving water from the Northern Water Treatment Plant and for the development of an 8-inch sewer force main that will connect to the Redbud Run Pump Station near the CSX Railroad. The Northern Water Treatment Plant is currently providing 1.5 MGD of water from the Global Chemstone Quarry, which is more than twice the amount of water needed to serve Stephenson Village at build out. The 8-inch sewer force main is accessible to the subject site through easement agreements that exist between Stephenson Associates L.C. and McCann. The development of Stephenson Village will supplement flow to the 8-inch sewer force main, thus improving its function as very few users exist in the area to be served by the first phase of this sewer infrastructure project. The Applicant has advised the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) and the Frederick Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) that Stephenson Village will direct flows to the Redbud Run Station initially and the Applicant is amenable to working with both groups to redirect flows in the fixture should anew route be plarmed. The development of Stephenson Village will provide for the development of the Lower Hiatt Run Pump Station by the Applicant that is identified in the plan. The Applicant has proffered to construct this regional pump station and dedicate the land for this facility to the FCSA, as well as construct all water and sewer lines throughout Stephenson Village and bring this infrastructure to the property lines for the public uses. CI Greenway Engineering 10anuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Vi11a. Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning ilR A iN A f_F. Currently, storm water runoff from the 821.7± acre site drains into pronounced ravines, fingers, natural streams, and drainage ditches. These conveyances flow primarily into Hiatt Run, which flows east and off the site to the Opequon Creek. The extreme southeastern portion of the subject site drains to Lick Run, which then converges with Hiatt Run near the Jordan Springs Hotel. Stephenson Village will be designed to utilize a variety of storm water management techniques including retention facilities, detention facilities, and bioretention facilities. Best management practices will be implemented in the Stephenson Village commercial center and in other areas that provide large parking areas to promote storm water quality measures. The Applicant has solicited technical assistance fiom several environmental groups to determine appropriate storm water management techniques and appropriate low impact development techniques. These environmental groups include the Potomac Conservancy, the Center for Watershed Protection, the Department of Conservation and Recreation Water Quality Division, the Potomac Watershed Partnership and the Department of Forestry. Soil conditions on the subject site are poorly drained; therefore, techniques will be implemented to slow storm water runoff including the development of street systems that utilize open ditch sections, flooding of small pockets of designated open space areas, bioretention filter design with under drains to promote infiltration, and the use of retention ponds throughout the development. The design of detention areas does not mandate the removal of existing forest cover and vegetative areas. These techniques will promote appropriate water quality and water quantity measures and will serve as a model for urban projects in the community. The Applicant will work with the aforementioned environmental groups and the Frederick County Public Works Department to ensure that drainage impacts are mitigated as the Stephenson Village project develops. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL The impact on solid waste disposal facilities can be projected from an average annual per household consumption of landfill volume figure of 5.4 cubic yards and an average annual business consumption of landfill volume figure of 5.4 cubic yards per 1,000 sq. ft. of commercial floor area. (This number can be found in the Civil Engineering Reference Manual, 4`" edition). The following figures show the increase in average annual volume based on the proffered residential unit density of 2,800 dwellings and 250,000 sq. ft. of commercial and office development: AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. per dwelling AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. x 2,800 dwellings AV = 15,120 Cu. Yd. AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. per 1,000 sq. ft. 7 Greenway Engineering 0anuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Villf, kesidential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning AV = 5.4 Cu. Yd. x 250 (1,000 sq. ft.) AV = 1,350 Cu. Yd. TOTAL AV = 16,470 Cu. Yd. at build out PERCENTAGE OF 2002 ANNUAL DISPOSAL VOLUME AT BUILD OUT = 5.9% Stephenson Village will be developed within the parameters of a proffered phase plan; therefore, the comparison of projected solid waste disposal at build out to the 2002 annual disposal volume of 275,000 cubic yards for the Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill is greater than it would be in ensuing years due to overall annual volume increase. The following provides for an average annual disposal volume based on a projected 15-year build out phase plan: TOTAL AV = 16,470 Cu. Yd. at build out AV = 1,098 Cu. Yd. annually over a 15 year period 1,098 Cu. Yd./275,000 Cu. Yd. = 0.39% PROJECTED AVERAGE ANNUAL DISPOSAL VOLUME The Municipal Solid Waste area of the Regional Landfill has a current capacity of 7,800,000 cubic yards (7.8 Million Cu. Yd.) that will serve the projected growth of the community through the year 2034. The Frederick County Public Works Department has been working through the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) permitting process to expand the vertical air space of the landfill to increase the capacity to 13,100,000 cubic yards (13.1 Million Cu. Yd.), which expands the life of the Regional Landfill through the year 2048. It is anticipated that the DEQ permit for the Regional Landfill will be issued in April 2003. It should be noted that the Construction Demolition Debris area of the Regional Landfill has capacity through the year 2050 based on construction growth projections developed by the Department of Public Works. The Stephenson Village residential planned community will provide curbside trash collection for all residential and commercial land uses. This service will be provided to mitigate impacts to the citizen convenience center located at the Clearbrook Park and will generate revenues to Frederick County through tipping fees at the regional landfill that will offset solid waste impacts associated with this project. The covenants guiding the Stephenson Village Homeowners Association will provide for curbside trash collection as a line item for the annual dues assessment for each residential unit. The language within the covenants will also provide for Stephenson Village Homeowners Association funded County collection service should the Board of Supervisors expand the Urban Service Area. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES The 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia identifies a core battlefield area of Stephenson's Depot, of which a portion is located on parcel Greenway Engineering 0anuary 8, 2003 Stephenson Village Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning 44-A-31. The Applicant has not requested a rezoning of this portion of parcel 44-A-31, which accounts for approximately 68.51 acres of land. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey identifies the Samuel Byers House (#34-1124) as a potentially significant property due to architectural style. This structure is located in the central portion of the property and will be preserved and used as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. Additionally, in the event that any onsite cemeteries are found, the Applicant will preserve those areas in accordance with all applicable state regulations. Offsite areas of potential significance include the Helm McCann property (#34-703) and the Milburn Chapel and Cemetery (#34-950) located to the west of the project site and the Jordan Springs Hotel (#34-110) located to the southeast of the project site. The viewshed associated with these historic features will not be impacted by the development of Stephenson Village. Furthermore, the 1995 Frederick County Winchester Battlefield Network Plan identifies Milburn Road (Route 662) as a significant historic corridor that provides a linkage between areas associated with the Second and Third Winchester Battlefields. The Applicant has met with the property owners of the McCann and Jordan Springs parcels who have approved of these measures and the Stephenson Village rezoning. The Stephenson Village development will be designed to complement historic elements as themes for the project. Monumental entrances may include fence styles and stacked stonewalls that were from the Civil war era. The Northeast Land Use Plan calls for the development of a new major collector road that will serve as the primary road system for Stephenson Village. This major collector road intersects Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and moves through the core battlefield area into the project site, crossing Hiatt Run and then proceeding west across Milburn Road to Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11 North). The Applicant is responsible for implementing this road system and will develop this infrastructure improvement in accordance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The major collector road crossing of Milburn Road will be the only crossing or intersection associated with the Stephenson Village project. COMMUNITY FACILITIES The design for Stephenson Village provides 20-L acres of land for a public elementary school and 24± acres of land for a public park to ensure that appropriate public services are available in this geographic area of the community. The location of the public school site and the public park site provides for access on Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) to serve the outlying community and will have internal access to serve the residents of Stephenson Village. In addition to the proffered land for public services, the Applicant is committed to further offset additional impacts through monetary contributions. The Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model identifies impacts to fire and rescue, public schools, parks and recreation, public library and county administration building. The Applicant will provide for monetary contributions that are consistent with, or exceed the results of the Fiscal Impact Model for residential land uses. The Applicant's proffer statement provides for this monetary contribution, which address all identified county services. It should be noted that the monetary contribution E 6 Greenway Engineering January 8, 2003 Stephenson Vi11a�Residential Revised March 7, 2003 Planned Community Rezoning for the residential units within the active adult community and the affordable housing for the elderly has been reduced accordingly based on no impacts to public schools; however, a 50% premium has been provided to Fire and Rescue for each active adult unit and a 100% premium has been provided to Fire and Rescue for each affordable housing for the elderly unit. Additionally, the Applicant has proffered a 100% premium for Frederick County Public Schools for each student that exceeds the annual 60-student cap generation from this community, a $200,000.00 monetary contribution to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc., and a $75,000.00 monetary contribution to Frederick County for Heritage Tourism. OTHERIMPACTS The firm of Robert Charles Lesser & Co., LLC has been retained by the Applicant to prepare an economic analysis for the Stephenson Village project to determine the economic impact to Frederick County. Furthermore, the Applicant has agreed to pay all costs associated with an independent review of this analysis that is being conducted by two qualified firms selected by Frederick County. The results of this economic analysis demonstrate a positive fiscal impact to Frederick County even before considering the monetary and land contribution proffers in this rezoning application; therefore, the Stephenson Village project will more than pay its own way and will be a net positive revenue generator for the County. The program that has been developed for the Stephenson Village residential planned community will adequately mitigate all impacts to the County and will also provide the following benefits to the local community: • Mix of housing type reduces impact to schools and provides affordable housing for the elderly • Water and sewer infrastructure will be developed by the Applicant which will be made available to the area • Self-sufficient development so impacts to community are not increased • Comprehensive in-depth proffers to protect the community, as well as the County • Control of suburban sprawl • Creating an opportunity for better appreciation for local historic resources • Community shopping • Community employment opportunity during and after development • Ball fields and school within walking distance of neighborhoods mi Greenway Engineering Public trail systems Oanuary 8, 2003 Revised March 7, 2003 Stephenson Villa?? Residential Planned Community Rezoning Preserve open space and create open space corridor along Hiatt Run Positive water quality impacts to Hiatt Run Internal traffic capture and walkable community to minimize impacts to the transportation system Dn Village will be the first residential planned community built in Frederick It will tie the neighborhoods of Stephenson together and serve as a vital center, as well as bringing positive solutions to Stephenson Associates L.C. is commi for development in the region. many of the concerns facing the County at this time. ted to making this community a success and a model m m Ln y ZONING BOUNDARY PLAT o GREENWAY ENGINEERING Z Z m m IMPACT ANALYSIS - EXHIBIT A �� Z D 0 co D STEPHENSON VILLAGE REZONING o o � r x 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Founded In 1971 0 N 0 0 � ; G'f�1~C Engineers Telephone 540-662-4185 surveyors FAX 540-722-9528 N STONEWALL MAGESTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VA SOILS LEGEND 1 B - Berks Channery 2-7% 3B - Blairton 2-7% F-7 3C - Blairton 7-15% 6C - Carbo Oaklet (rocky) 2-15% k 7C - Carbo Oaklet (outcrop) 2-15% - 8C - Chilhowie 2-7% 9B - Clearbrook Channery 2-7% 9C - Clearbrook Channery 7-15% 41C - Weikert Berks 7-15% 0 41D - Weikert Berks 15-25% 41 E - Weikert Berks 25-65% Source: Soil Survey of Frederick County, VA 500 0 500 1000 Feet SOILS MAP IMPACT ANALYSIS EXHIBIT C Greenway Engineering March 2003 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 September 3, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1. COMMUNITY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT 2 2. PHASING PLAN TO MINIMIZE SUDDEN IMPACTS ON COUNTY SERVICES 2 3. USES, DENSITY AND MIX OF HOUSING TYPES 3 4. APPLICANT TO PAY 100 % OF CAPITAL FACILITY IMPACTS 5 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM 7 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC. 7 7. MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS 8 8. SCHOOL AND BALLFIELD SITES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC USE AREAS 11 9. RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND LINEAR PARK 13 10. ACTIVE ADULT AGE -RESTRICTED HOUSING 14 11. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY 16 12. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 16 13. COMMERCIAL CENTER 16 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE 18 15. COMMUNITY DESIGN FOR A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE 18 16. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND HABITAT PRESERVATION 19 17. COMMUNITY CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION 22 18. WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STEPHENSON AREA 23 19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY 23 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION(S) 23 21. PROFFERED HOUSING TYPES 24 22. STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING 25 23. COMMUNITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM 26 September 3, 2003 Executive Summary Of the Proffer Statement for the Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community The proffers for Stephenson Village define the conditions for the construction and maintenance of a residential planned community based on Smart Growth principles. As envisioned, Stephenson Village will feature a school, public ball fields, recreation centers, trails and convenient shopping that will tie the neighborhoods of Stephenson together and serve as a vital center. Stephenson Village itself will have a distinctive look, a strong architectural theme, and a mixture of housing types to meet the needs of people of all ages, including an age -restricted active adult community and affordable housing for the elderly. The plan emphasizes walkable neighborhoods —with boulevards, sidewalks, bike paths and trails throughout. In addition to the 135.6 acres in the core battlefield area (which is not included in the rezoning request), 794.6±-acre parcel will have approximately 250 acres of open space. Build -out of Stephenson Village is anticipated to take 20 to 25 years. The proffers provide a balance of design and market flexibility and County control over uses and densities. Planned Community Design Stephenson Village will use compact building design with extensive architectural and landscaping standards to create distinctive streetscapes. The proffers specify six new housing types and illustrate floor plans for each. The housing types will be mixed within each neighborhood. To assure overall mixing while maintaining flexibility, the proffers establish maximum percentages for single-family detached, multi -family (townhouse and semi-detached) and age -restricted housing. The design will provide opportunities for people to live, work and shop in the same community. The school and public ball field sites will be located on the north side of the property, along Old Charles Town Road. The center of Stephenson Village will have affordable housing for the elderly and 250,000 square feet of commercial and office space (60,000 square feet guaranteed), including space for a rent-free Frederick County satellite office. Land will be set aside for a day care center in an appropriate location. The south side of Stephenson Village will include a large age -restricted (55 and over) "active adult" community. This will be a gated community with its own recreational facilities and private streets and alleys. In addition, the Applicant will provide a minimum of 144 units for the elderly after sufficient retail space has been occupied to qualify for Federal affordable -housing programs. September 3, 2003 i Stephenson Associates 030703 The proffers establish an overall density cap of 2,465 units exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly, an average of 3.1 units per acre. To avoid sudden impacts on County schools and other services, the proffers establish a cumulative yearly construction cap of 8% on all units that are not age -restricted. Since age -restricted housing has positive tax impact on County budgets and no impact on schools, these unit types will be exempt from the phasing plan. Covering 100% of Capital Facilities Impacts Economic analysis of Stephenson Village indicates that its proffer payments, taxes and fees will more than cover the cost of County services. The Applicant will cover 100% of the capital costs predicted by the County fiscal impact model for each housing type. These proffer fees will be adjusted every two years using the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Additional proffer fees may be assessed by Frederick County if school population from the project is higher than projected. If the cumulative total increase in students from Stephenson Village exceeds 60 students a year, the County may assess an additional proffer fee of $3,925 for each additional student. Transportation Improvements The Applicant will make transportation improvements to maintain acceptable levels of service on existing roads. These improvements will be triggered by actual traffic counts, with levels specified in the proffers, at permanently installed traffic counters at the entrance on Old Charles Town Road and the southwestern entrance. This will allow us to anticipate traffic increases rather than react to them. Design and construction will begin when traffic reaches 80 percent of the trigger point. A four -lane boulevard will serve the community as the major collector road. This road, identified in the County Comprehensive Policy Plan, runs from Old Charles Town Road in the north to Route 11 in the south. The sides and medians of this boulevard will be heavily landscaped outside of conservation and tree -save areas. The boulevard will have bicycle lanes on each side, and sidewalks or walking trails for the entire length in Stephenson Village. The road will be built first in a two-lane half section, beginning at Old Charles Town Road. The road will be extended to Route 11 and the second two-lane section constructed when traffic counts reach specified limits. This major collector road will be dedicated to VDOT. The Applicant has obtained rights -of -way and easements for off -site transportation improvements and will execute agreements with VDOT. Traffic improvements will include: completing the two-lane half -section of the major collector road, extending the major collector road to the Rutherford Farm intersection at Route 11, widening Old Charles Town Road to three lanes between the entrance and Route 11, signalizing (with turn lanes) the northern entrance, and signalizing (with turn lanes) of the September 3, 2003 rr Stephenson Associates 030703 Page 1 PROFFER STATEMENT STEPHENSON VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY Rezoning # 06-03 September 3, 2003 Property Owner/Applicant: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Property: 794.6± Acres, Tax Map Nos. 44-((A))-31A, 44-((A))-292, 44-((A))-293, and A Portion of Tax Parcel 44-((A))-31 Stonewall Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Date: January 8, 2003 Revised: March 7, 2003 Revised: April 24, 2003 Revised: August 18, 2003 Revised: September 3, 2003 The undersigned, Stephenson Associates, L.C., (hereinafter referred to as Applicant), its successors and/or assigns, hereby proffers that the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict accordance with the following conditions and shall supersede all other proffers made prior hereto. In the event the above -referenced amendments are not granted as applied for by the Applicant, the below described proffers shall be withdrawn and null and void. The headings of the proffers set forth below, the Table of Contents and the Executive Summary have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the site adjacent to the improvement, unless otherwise specified herein. References made to the Master Development Plan, hereinafter referred to as the Generalized Development Plan, as required by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, are to be interpreted to be references to the specific Generalized Development Plan sheets prepared by Greenway Engineering and Land Planning and Design Group, dated September 3, 2003 attached as Exhibit A. The exact boundary and acreage of each land bay may be shifted to a reasonable degree at the time of site plan submission for each land bay in order to accommodate engineering or design considerations. The Applicant is submitting a Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) as a part of the rezoning application. The Generalized Development Plan is provided in lieu of a Master Development Plan, and contains all information deemed appropriate by the Frederick County Planning Department. The Generalized Development Plan does not eliminate the requirement for a Master Development Plan for the portion of the site to be developed, which will be provided following rezoning approval but prior to any development of any portion of the 794.6±-acre site (Property). Page 2 COMMUNITY DESIGN MODIFICATION DOCUMENT: September 3, 2003 In order for the Applicant and Frederick County to implement the Residential Community, it will be important for the Applicant and Frederick County Planning Staff to have the opportunity to anticipate, incorporate and to develop new advanced housing types and configurations that may be suitable in a Residential Planned Community. These housing types will include many of the neo-traditional housing types which are proffered in this Proffer Statement which allow for the creation of a true community and for the maximization and preservation of natural corridors and open space for the use and enjoyment of the community at large. A. Pursuant to Article II, Amendments of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the approval of this Proffer statement constitutes an amendment to the zoning ordinance, which will allow the expansion of the R4 District. B. The Applicant has proffered a Community Design Modification Document that is attached and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit F, and which is accepted by Frederick County. In addition to the above, by approving this Proffer Statement, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors agrees without need of any further Board of Supervisors or Planning Department approval to any modifications for any matter which has been previously agreed to and therefore approved by Frederick County. Further still, any submitted revisions to the approved Generalized Development Plan, the approved Master Development Plan and/or any of its requirements for any development zoned R-4 which affect the perimeter of the development or which would increase the overall density of the development shall require the Board of Supervisors' approval. If, in the reasonable discretion of the Frederick County Planning Department, the Planning Department decides any requested modification should be reviewed by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, it may secure said approval by placing this matter before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at its next regularly scheduled meeting. However, and not withstanding what is stated above, once a modification has been approved administratively, the Applicant shall not be required to seek approval for any subsequent similar modification. 2. PHASING PLAN TO MINB41ZE SUDDEN IMPACTS ON COUNTY SERVICES: A. Additional Proffer Payment To minimize sudden increases in the Frederick County Public School population and sudden impacts on other county services, the Applicant shall implement the following phasing plan on all residential housing that is not age -restricted. To ensure that unanticipated increases in Frederick County Public School population do not burden the county with extra costs, Frederick County may assess the Applicant to effectively double school - related proffers for each student that exceeds a cumulative yearly total increase of 60 students per year. Page 3 September 3, 2003 The total number of new Frederick County Public School students generated by Stephenson Village will be determined from the September 30 report produced by Frederick County Public Schools. The Applicant proffers to reimburse Frederick County Public Schools for its cost of creating the September 30 report data related to Stephenson Village. This additional proffer payment will be provided to Frederick County by the Applicant within 30 days of receipt of the September 30 report produced by Frederick County Public Schools. If the reported number of Frederick County Public School students generated by Stephenson Village exceeds the cumulative total of 60 students per year (9/30/03=60, 9/30/04=120, etc.), the Applicant shall pay an additional proffer payment of $3,925 as assessed by Frederick County for each Frederick County Public School child that exceeds the cumulative total. The additional proffer payment will be adjusted every two years by the Consumer Price Index. B. Limitation on Permits (1) Calculation The active adult housing units and the affordable housing for the elderly have been removed from the restrictions imposed by the phasing plan and are not part of the following phasing plan formula nor will they be included in the yearly building permit tracking system. The overall density cap for Stephenson Village is 2,465 units, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly. Once the planned number of active adult housing units and the affordable housing for the elderly have been removed, the adjusted total number of units subject to phasing restriction is 1,665. The phasing allowed quantities shall be limited to 8% per year on a cumulative yearly basis beginning with the date of approval of this rezoning based on the following formula: (2,465 — 800 to 1,300 range of age restricted units) x 8% + unused permits from prior year(s) = maximum non -age restricted permits for current year Any units not used in a given year shall be carried forward. 3. USES DENSITY AND MIX OF HOUSING TYPES: A. (1) The Applicant shall develop a mix of housing unit types to include those single-family detached, townhouse and multifamily housing unit types described in the Land Bay Breakdown Table in §3A(2) and further described in §21of this proffer statement. Each of the housing unit types in the R4 District, Section 165-67 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, is either a single-family dwelling, townhouse or multifamily unit type. For purposes of this Proffer, all of the above housing types shall be referred to as Mixed Residential. The following list could be used as they currently exist within the R-4 portion of the zoning ordinance. Page 4 September 3, 2003 (2) The following list of Land Bays within the Land Bay Breakdown Table sets forth the development parameters on the Property and is consistent with the proffered Generalized Development Plan identified as Exhibit A: LAND BAY BREAKDOWN LAND LAND USE ACREAGE % OF TOTAL BAY HOUSING UNIT TYPES MIN. MAX. I ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 20 Ac. NA NA II COMMUNITY PARK 24 Ac. NA NA (6 baseball fields & 6 soccer fields) III MIXED RESIDENTIAL 475 Ac. CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL/DAYCARE 7 Ac.* NA NA SFD 30 53 (Housing Unit Type 1,2,4,5, RP District SFD & Active Adult) TOWNHOUSE 10 30 (Housing Unit Type 6 & RP District Townhouse) MULTIFAMILY 7 30 (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3 & RP District Duplex, Multiplex, Atrium & Active Adult) IV ACTIVE ADULT 126 Ac. 30- 53 SFD (Housing Unit Type 1,2 &5) Multifamily (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3) V COMMERCIAL CENTER 26 Ac.* NA NA (Commercial Retail, Office & Public Service Satellite Facility) The actual acreage identified for each Land Bay is based on the bubble diagram calculated on the proffered Generalized Development Plan and may fluctuate within 5% of the total acreage based on final survey work. Page 5 September 3, 2003 Land Bay Breakdown Notes (1) The above table represents the ranges for the referenced housing types as proposed. The final mix will not exceed the 2,465-unit cap, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) and will be comprised of house type combinations representing a mixture identified in the table. The minimum and maximum percentages established apply to the general categories of single family, townhouses, multifamily and active adult units and are not intended to pertain to any one housing type in those categories. The housing unit type maximum percentage for the general categories of single family, townhouse, multifamily and active adult will not exceed the percentages identified in the table and will not exceed the total unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) based on any combination. *(2) The total commercial area will be a minimum of 4 % of the gross site area or 33 acres and will be located within Land Bays ]Il and V. (3) The Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel are approximately 125 acres. The remaining 113.5 acres of required open space will be provided within Land Bays I, H, III and IV. (4) The Applicant reserves the right to convert more of Land Bay III to active adult or affordable housing for the elderly. In no case shall the percentage of active adult or affordable housing for the elderly exceed 53% of the total unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11). B. For purposes of calculating density pursuant to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, all dedications and conveyances of land for public use and/or for the use of the development or any Homeowners Association shall be credited in said calculations. C. There shall be a unit cap of 2,465, exclusive of the affordable housing for the elderly (Section 11) on the subject property. D. In order to preclude unwanted industrial and heavy commercial uses, all land uses within the B-3 District and the M-1 District shall be prohibited, unless otherwise permitted in the RP District, the B-1 District or the B-2 District. In no case shall truck stops be permitted within Stephenson Village. 4. APPLICANT TO PAY 100% OF CAPITAL FACILITY IMPACTS: The Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model was applied to the Stephenson Village rezoning on January 9, 2003. The results of this model run demonstrate a fiscal impact to capital facilities in the amount of $5,327 per residential unit. Page 6 September 3, 2003 The Applicant will pay 100% of these impacts through monetary contributions and land donations to Frederick County, unless otherwise specified by the proffer. The parties agree that the value used for the land donations of $30,000 per acre is appropriate and acceptable. These monetary contributions provide for the capital facilities impacts created by Stephenson Village and shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance for each unit. The monetary contribution will be adjusted every two years by the Consumer Price Index — All Urban Consumers (Current Series) See example at the end of this section. The Applicant will pay for active adult units a 50% premium on proffer fees for fire and rescue over and above the Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model to cover any increased service demand; similarly, the applicant will pay for affordable apartment units for the elderly a 100% premium. However, these age -restricted units will not include monetary proffers for various capital facilities, such as schools, that they do not impact. The per unit monetary proffer for single family, townhouse and multifamily provides for: $3,925.00 for Frederick County Public Schools ($4,135 per model less $210 for land donation) $635.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation ($889 per model less $254 for land donation) $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue $145.00 for Public Library $152.00 for Administration Building The per unit monetary proffer for active adult units provides for: $635.00 for Frederick County Parks and Recreation ($889 per model less $254 for land donation) $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue 200.00 50% Premium $600.00 Total for Frederick County Fire and Rescue $145.00 for Public Library $152.00 for Administration Building The per unit monetary proffer for the affordable housing for the elderly provides for: $400.00 for Frederick County Fire and Rescue 400.00 100% premium $800.00 Total for Frederick County Fire and Rescue Should the index as currently published by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics cease to be published then the most nearly comparable index shall be used. Page 7 September 3, 2003 The following is an example of how the adjustment for inflation will be made. Consumer Price Index — all Urban Consumers (Current Series) 1982-84=100 2003 Index (upon approval) estimated 183.00 2005 Index (two years) estimated 225.00 2005 Index 2003 index X Proffer Amount = Revised Proffer Amount 185 X $5,327 = $6,550 5. MATCHING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND/OR HERITAGE TOURISM: In consideration of the approval of rezoning application # 06-03 the Applicant shall contribute $75,000 in matching funds to Frederick County to be utilized for transportation enhancements and/or for the promotion of heritage tourism. The money will be made available to Frederick County within 30 days of receipt of a written request for said funds by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or their authorized agent. 6. MONETARY CONTRIBUTION TO CLEAR BROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE, INC: To further mitigate the impact on fire and rescue services, the Applicant will pay to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Inc. the sum of $200,000.00 for its general fund. This is over and above the monetary contributions to Frederick County Fire and Rescue identified in §4 of this proffer statement. This amount will be payable as follows: $50,000.00 to be paid not later than nine months after zoning approval. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 5001h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2008. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,000`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2013. $50,000.00 to be paid within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the 1,500`h building permit in Stephenson Village but not later than December 31, 2018. Page 8 September 3, 2003 7. MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS: A. The following are improvements the Applicant will make to roads within the Property: (1) Major Collector Road (a) Pursuant to Section 7F (2), 7F (4) and 7F(5) of this proffer statement, the Applicant shall dedicate an 80 foot right of way and construct the Major Collector Road from Old Charles Town Road through Stephenson Village, and the properties currently owned by McCann and Omps to U.S. Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) in accordance with existing agreements executed between all parties to insure conformance with the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The width and configuration of all travel lanes, medians and other elements of the major collector road shall be provided by the Applicant as determined by VDOT. (b) The Applicant shall provide landscaped areas along, within, and/or adjacent to each side of the Major Collector Road in accordance with § 22-A of this proffer. (c) When the Major Collector Road is finally completed as a four lane divided boulevard, the median will be naturally vegetated with a combination of both woodland conservation areas and grassed areas supplemented with landscape plantings. If approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), all plantings, other than those in woodland conservation areas, will be installed by the Applicant and will have a maintenance agreement between VDOT and the Applicant which will transfer to the Homeowners Association of Stephenson Village (HOA) to cover all mowing, weeding, pruning, plant replacements, and irrigation maintenance responsibilities. Irrigation systems within the right-of-way will be designed as a separate system to allow the portion of the irrigation system falling within the right-of-way to be terminated if necessary without affecting the overall system. (d) The Applicant shall provide bicycle lanes within the Major Collector Road right of way over the property to be rezoned that are four feet in width and are contiguous with the outside travel lanes of the Major Collector Road and are properly marked and signed. (e) The Applicant shall prohibit individual residential and commercial entrances from intersecting Milburn Road (Route 662) and further proffers that the Major Collector Road will be the only road crossing of Milburn Road. Page 9 (2) Interparcel Connections September 3, 2003 The Applicant agrees to provide interparcel connections between land bays within the Property at the time the respective land bays are developed and to the extent reasonably possible. (3) Private Streets, Alleys and Common Drives (a) The Applicant shall provide for a gated community entrance for the active adult portion of the overall community and shall serve the active adult community with a complete system of private streets. The cross sectional dimension of pavement thickness and compacted base thickness will meet or exceed the public street pavement section standards utilized by VDOT. (b) Where private alleys are utilized, the Applicant will provide one-way alleys within a sixteen -foot (16') wide easement having twelve feet (12') of pavement with a two foot (2') shoulder on both sides of the pavement throughout the entire community. All private alleys, which intersect other private alleys at 90 degree angles or have turns at 90 degree angles shall provide for a minimum turning radius of 25 feet. Private alleys, intersection, public or private streets, shall provide curb cuts extending two feet beyond the paved edge of the standard alley width. (c) Where private alleys are utilized to serve housing types that front on private streets the Applicant shall provide for a minimum travel aisle width of 24 feet for the private street. The 24 foot travel aisle shall be in addition to on street parking designed for the private street. (d) When Housing Unit Type 4 (courtyard cluster) is developed, the common drive shall meet the following standards: (i) A minimum width of 20 feet (ii) A minimum depth of pavement section shall be a four inch compacted stone base and six inches of concrete or equivalent material. (iii) A "No Parking" sign shall be posted at the entrance to the courtyard. (iv) A fire hydrant shall be provided at the entrance to each corner drive to the courtyard clusters. When common drives are adjacent to or across the street from other courtyard cluster common drives, only one hydrant shall be required. (v) Visitor parking areas will be provided outside of the courtyard cluster common drive area. Page 10 September 3, 2003 B. The applicant has acquired easements and/or rights of way over the properties currently owned by McCann and Omps for the purpose of dedicating and constructing the Major Collector Road and for improvements along the south side of Old Charles Town Road from Route 11 north to the CSX railroad. The Applicant will acquire any additional rights -of -way and/or easements for all off -site transportation improvements proffered hereinafter. In the event the Applicant is not able to acquire any of the said rights -of -way and/or easements, Frederick County agrees to attempt to acquire such rights -of -way and/or easements by appropriate eminent domain proceedings at the request of Applicant and Applicant shall be responsible for all payments made to property owners for rights -of -way and/or easements so acquired. In the event that neither the Applicant nor Frederick County successfully obtains the required rights -of -way or easements for the offsite transportation improvements as required by the traffic study, the Applicant shall be permitted to continue with the development as proposed without any further requirement of right-of-way or easement acquisition or improvement. C. The Applicant will install full size entrance improvements with right and left turn lanes, in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation design guidelines, at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road serving as the entrance to the Stephenson Village Community during the first phase of development. D. The Applicant will execute a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the intersection of U.S. Route 11 and Old Charles Town Road. Additionally, the Applicant will construct full size entrance improvements with both a right turn lane and left turn lane on Old Charles Town Road, and a right turn lane on U.S. Route 11 at said intersection. These improvements will be installed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation design guidelines when warranted by VDOT. E. The Applicant will execute a signalization agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road serving as the entrance to the Stephenson Village Community. The Applicant will provide for the signalization at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and the Major Collector Road based on the terms of this agreement when warranted by the Virginia Department of Transportation. F. The Applicant will design and construct a four -lane boulevard Major Collector Road for the Stephenson Village Community in substantial conformance with the proffered Generalized Development Plan. The Major Collector Road will be constructed in two phases. The first phase will be a two-lane half section that is constructed from Old Charles Town Road to the limits of the development as depicted on the approved Master Development Plan. This phase of the Major Collector Road will be constructed and bonded in segments in accordance with the approved Subdivision Design Plan for Stephenson Village. The second phase of the Major Collector Road will provide for the ultimate four -lane section with appropriate right and left turn lanes based on the following program: (1) The design of the transportation improvements identified in Sections 7(F)2- 7(F)5 of this proffer statement will begin when 80% of the actual traffic count volume is Page 11 September 3, 2003 realized as identified in each Section. The completion of the improvements specified in each Section will occur within 18 months of initial design. (2) Once actual traffic counts of 7,996 vehicle trips per day have been documented on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of the additional lanes to the existing Major Collector Road to its ultimate four -lane section from Old Charles Town Road to the limits of the Major Collector Road within the development. (3) Once the actual traffic count reaches 10,570 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of a three -lane section of Old Charles Town Road, from the Entrance to Stephenson Village to U.S. Route 11 using the existing bridge. (4) Once the actual traffic count reaches 17,699 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of a two lane half section of the Major Collector Road from the limits of the four -lane section to U.S. Route 11 at the Rutherford Farm Industrial Park intersection to include right and left turn lanes on the east side of U.S. Route 11 as determined by VDOT. The Applicant agrees to enter into a signalization agreement with VDOT at the U.S. Route I I/Rutherford Farm Industrial Park intersection if traffic signalization is not otherwise provided at that time. Traffic counters will be installed at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village on the property as part of this improvement. (5) Once the actual traffic count at the southwestern entrance to Stephenson Village near the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park intersection reaches 7,996 vehicle trips per day on the Major Collector Road, the Applicant will bond and commence construction of the remaining additional lanes to the existing Major Collector Road from the limits of the four -lane section to provide for the ultimate four -lane section ending at the east side of U.S. Route 11. G. The Applicant will provide $50,000 that shall be utilized as matching funds by VDOT and/or the County of Frederick for future improvements to the Interstate 81/U.S. Route 11 interchange at Exit 317. This dollar amount is intended to assist VDOT and the County of Frederick with this regional improvement. The $50,000 will be made available to VDOT or to the County of Frederick, within 30 days of written request for said funds by the appropriate party. 8. SCHOOL AND BALLFIELD SITES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC USE AREAS: A. School Site: The Applicant shall dedicate 20 acres of land to the Frederick County School Board for use as a public school site which shall count towards the overall Page 12 September 3, 2003 open space requirement for the development. Said site will occur within the general location identified as Land Bay I on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), adjacent to Old Charles Town Road, which will allow direct access to the site for citizens living outside of Stephenson Village. The Applicant will allow access for Stephenson Village residents to the site from a local neighborhood street, and will provide access to water and sewer at a point reasonably acceptable to the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, along the property boundary, at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. The Applicant shall convey said school site not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing, at no cost. B. Soccer and Baseball Field Site: (1) The Applicant shall dedicate 24 acres of land to Frederick County or such other entity as Frederick County designates and as more specifically set forth below which, when combined with school ball fields, will be used for 6 soccer fields and 6 baseball fields as shown on the layout for School/Park Site (Exhibit C, graphic for illustrative purposes only), which shall count towards the overall open space requirement for the development. Said site will occur within the general location identified as Land Bay H on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), adjacent to Old Charles Town Road, which will allow direct access to the site for citizens living outside of Stephenson Village. The Applicant will allow access for Stephenson Village residents to the site from a local neighborhood street and will allow access to water and sewer at a point reasonably acceptable along the property boundary, at the time the adjacent land bays are developed. The Applicant shall convey said soccer and baseball field site, not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County or its designee in writing, at no cost. (2) Frederick County at its sole discretion may convey or lease its ownership interest in the soccer and baseball field sites to a corporation, trust or other entity which incorporates the direction of both the public and private sectors to provide recreation opportunities for the public. C. At the time the school and soccer and baseball fields sites are deeded to the County, the Applicant shall provide, at the Applicant's expense, a boundary survey and shall stake the corners of each site. Before Frederick County assigns or conveys any ownership interest in the Property conveyed herein by the Applicant to any third party, including, but not limited to the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, the third party will execute an agreement in recordable form which is satisfactory to the applicant which will provide and confirm that said third party agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Proffer Statement, including, but not limited to, provisions governing the use of the Property to be conveyed and also the application of all restrictive covenants governing the use of the Property and the construction of improvements upon it. By executing this Proffer Statement, Frederick County also agrees to be bound to and comply with the same. Page 13 September 3, 2003 D. Notwithstanding the potential uses of the parcels referenced in subparagraphs A and B above, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors shall have flexibility to determine the specific use located within each land bay dedicated for public use purposes, provided that said uses are one of those listed in subparagraphs A and B. Any other similar types of public uses shall be permitted only with the consent of the Applicant and provided that the use is of an architectural style and uses construction materials that are consistent with the restrictive covenants recorded against the property conveyed. Furthermore, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors agrees that if the public purposes are not constructed or installed, completed and in use on the parcels which are identified in subparagraphs A and B above within ten years of the conveyance from the Applicant, said properties may be purchased by the Applicant for the land value specified in §4 of this proffer statement. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby instructs and empowers its County Administrator to execute such other deeds or documents, which shall be required to effect the terms of this provision. E. The Applicant reserves the right to retain temporary and permanent grading, slope, utility, drainage, storm water management and access easements on all public use parcels which are dedicated to the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or the School Board of Frederick County, Virginia, provided said easements do not preclude reasonable use and development of the property for the intended purpose. RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND LINEAR PARK: A. Recreational Center The Applicant shall construct one (1) recreation center within the Land Bay identified as Land Bay III as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A), for the use of the residents of the Property and as determined by the Home Owners Association. The Applicant shall have the sole and absolute right to determine within said land bay, where the facility shall be located. The Applicant shall designate the location of the above facility on the Master Development Plan. The recreational center shall include a bathhouse and a 6-lane, 25-meter competition swimming pool. The facility will be fully bonded prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Work on this facility shall commence prior to the issuance of the 250th non -age restricted building permit and be completed prior to issuance of the 800th building permit for the non -age restricted housing products. B. Active Adult Recreational Center The Applicant shall construct one (1) recreation center within one of the Land Bays identified as shown on the Generalized Development Plan, for the private use of the residents of the Active Adult Community. This facility will be fully bonded prior to the issuance of the first building permit in the Active Adult Community. Work on this facility shall commence prior to the issuance of the 150th building permit and be completed prior to issuance of the 3501h building permit in the Active Adult Community. Page 14 C. Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk System September 3, 2003 The Applicant shall construct a pedestrian trail or sidewalk system, which connects each recreation area to the surrounding neighborhood. The final location and the granting of any such easements and/or trails shall be at the subdivision design plan stage. Such trails or sidewalk system shall be constructed of stone dust or wood chips or such other materials selected by the Applicant provided they are not part of the sidewalk system within the public right-of-way. D. Linear Park Trail A twenty -foot (20') wide trail easement shall be dedicated to Frederick County Parks and Recreation. The location is to be determined by the Applicant and a trail system plan shall be submitted by the Applicant for evaluation by the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department. The trail shall be provided within the Hiatt Run Corridor and run the length of said corridor on the subject property for 3,800 +/- linear feet as shown on the proffered General Development Plan (Exhibit A). The Applicant shall convey said easement after development of adjoining parcels, or reasonable access is provided, and not later than six months after it is requested by Frederick County Parks and Recreation in writing at no cost to Frederick County or Frederick County Parks and Recreation. Any area so dedicated shall be included in the calculation of required open space, and shall entitle the Applicant to recreational credit units for the value of the construction of the trail and dedicated land. The Applicant reserves the right to retain temporary and permanent grading, utility, sewer force main, slope, storm water management, construction and drainage easements within said dedicated area, although only temporary easements shall be retained as needed for the construction by the Applicant of the six-foot wide asphalt or concrete trail described herein. The asphalt or concrete trail at the discretion of the Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department may be changed to other surface materials in an effort to promote low impact development techniques. Construction of said trail by the Applicant is contingent upon the proposed trail being allowed by all applicable County and State ordinances, and limitations due to terrain and consttuctability considerations. In the event that the public linear park trail is unable to be constructed due to County or State ordinances, the Applicant shall develop the linear park trail as a private trail system for the use of the residents of Stephenson Village. This private linear park trail shall count towards the open space and recreational amenities requirements for Stephenson Village and will be constructed of similar materials and standards identified in section 9C of this proffer statement. 10. ACTIVE ADULT AGE -RESTRICTED HOUSING A. Applicant agrees that the following language shall be included in the deeds conveying real property designated as age -restricted housing on that portion of the property. At least eighty percent (80%) of the occupied residential units shall be occupied by at least one person fifty-five (55) years of age or older and within such units the following conditions shall apply: Page 15 September 3, 2003 (1) All other residents must reside with a person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older, and be a spouse, a cohabitant, an occupant's child eighteen (18) years of age or older, or provide primary physical or economic support to the person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older. Notwithstanding this limitation, a person hired to provide live-in, long term or terminal health care of a person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older for compensation shall also occupy a dwelling during any time such person is actually providing such care. (2) Guests under the age of fifty-five (55) are permitted for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days total for each such guest in any calendar year. (3) If title to any lot or unit shall become vested in any person under the age of fifty-five (55) by reason of descent, distribution, foreclosure or operation of law, the age restriction covenants shall not work a forfeiture or reversion of title, but rather, such person thus taking title shall not be permitted to reside in such lot or unit until he/she shall have attained the age of fifty-five (55) or otherwise satisfies the requirements as set forth herein. Notwithstanding, a surviving spouse shall be allowed to continue to occupy a dwelling unit without regard to age. B. A maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the occupied age -restricted residential units shall be allowed to be occupied by at least one person fifty (50) years of age or older and within such units the following conditions shall apply: (1) All other residents must reside with a person who is fifty (50) years of age or older, be a spouse, a cohabitant, an occupant's child eighteen (18) years of age or older, or provide primary physical or economic support to the person who is fifty (50) years of age or older. Notwithstanding this limitation, a person hired to provide live-in, long term or terminal health care to a person who is fifty (50) years of age or older for compensation shall also occupy a dwelling during any time such person is actually providing such care. (2) Guests under the age of fifty (50) are permitted for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days total for each such guest in any calendar year. (3) If title to any lot or unit shall become vested in any person under the age of fifty (50) by reason of descent, distribution, foreclosure or operation of law, the age restriction covenant shall not work a forfeiture or reversion of title, but rather, such person thus taking title shall not be permitted to reside in such lot or unit until he/she shall have attained the age of fifty (50) or otherwise satisfied the requirements as set forth herein. Notwithstanding, a surviving spouse shall be allowed to continue to occupy a dwelling unit without regard to age. Page 16 September 3, 2003 (4) The above -described use restrictions shall be amended from time to time in accordance with applicable local and state regulations governing age restricted housing and the Federal Fair Housing Act so long as the substantive intent as set forth herein is maintained. In no event shall the minimum age of residents be less than the ages set forth hereinabove. C. Applicant agrees that the language in this Section or such other language as may be necessary to comply with the requirements to qualify as Housing for Older Persons under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Fair Housing Act of Virginia shall be included in the deeds conveying real property designated as age -restricted on that portion of the property. 11. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY: Subject to the provisions of this proffer statement, the Applicant will develop and build apartment units to provide much needed affordable housing for the elderly. The Applicant will comply with the necessary requirements to qualify these apartment units for the "Housing for Older Persons" exception to familial status discrimination as allowed under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Fair Housing Act of Virginia. The construction of these apartment units will begin after at least 50 percent of the retail space has been developed, provided that the approval of appropriate federal and state housing authorities is obtained, and the project qualifies for the Multi -Family Loan Program and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program or equivalent. In the event that funding for the affordable housing for the elderly is not obtained, the Applicant proffers to reapportion those units to the active adult community housing units. 12. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES: A. Byers house: The Byers house will be preserved as deemed appropriate by the Applicant. B. Cemeteries: Prior to commencement of any earth disturbing activity in any section of the Property, the applicant shall mark and identify any cemeteries which may be located there. In the event any onsite cemeteries are found, the applicant shall preserve those cemeteries in accordance with all County and State regulations. 13. COMMERCIAL CENTER: The Applicant has identified an area as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) for a commercial center that will be developed at a time to be determined by Applicant. Within the commercial center development, the following shall be provided: A. The Applicant shall provide for all turn lanes and traffic signalization on the Major Collector Road serving the commercial center as warranted by VDOT. The Page 17 September 3, 2003 Applicant shall conduct traffic impact analysis studies for each commercial site plan submitted to Frederick County that will be reviewed and approved by VDOT to determine when these improvements are warranted. A traffic signalization agreement will be executed with VDOT by the Applicant to ensure that commercial uses developed prior to the warrants for traffic signalization contribute their pro-rata share for this improvement. B. The Applicant shall record architectural and design restrictive covenants for the commercial center and shall submit a copy to the Frederick County Planning Director and the Frederick County Building Official with the first site plan within the commercial center. Said covenants shall provide for the establishment of an architectural review board for the purpose of review and approval of all architectural elevations and signage for all commercial uses to assure a continuity of overall architectural appearances within the entire commercial development. C. The Applicant shall ensure that all commercial site plans submitted to Frederick County for the commercial center are designed to implement best management practices (BMP) to promote storm water quality measures. A statement will be provided on each commercial site plan identifying the party or parties responsible for maintaining these BMP facilities as a condition of site plan approval. D. The areas within the commercial center that are not required to be graded or cleared for the implementation of all approved site plans will remain undisturbed. One-way travel aisles will be utilized where practical to reduce the impervious areas of parking lots within the commercial center. E. The Applicant shall provide for a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial land use in Stephenson Village. The majority of the commercial land use will be located within the commercial center identified on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit). The development of smaller areas of commercial land use will be allowed in other areas of Stephenson Village. These commercial land use areas will be provided on the detailed Master Development Plan associated with the development of Stephenson Village. F. The Applicant has identified an area as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (Exhibit A) for a commercial center. The development of 60,000 square feet of commercial space will begin within the commercial center no later than the issuance of the 1,200`h non -age restricted residential building permit with completion of this commercial space within 18 months. The Applicant will be allowed to extend the commencement of commercial construction for an additional two year period if any one of the following circumstances has occurred: An elementary school has not been constructed on the Property; or a building permit is obtained for the development of a new grocery store within a three mile radius of commercial center within Stephenson Village. Page 18 14. RENT FREE COUNTY OFFICE SPACE: September 3, 2003 The Applicant shall provide up to 2,500 square feet of shell space for a 10 year period rent free exclusive of utility and common area maintenance (CAM) charges in the commercial center for the location of a Public Service Satellite Facility for Frederick County. The shell space shall be made available and commence upon the completion of the base building in which the space is located. Frederick County must complete build out and occupy the space within two (2) years of the completion of the base building. If Frederick County fails to build out and occupy the space within the two (2) year period then the space will revert to the Applicant. 15. COMMUNITY DESIGN FOR A STRONG SENSE OF PLACE: A. Design The Applicant agrees to provide an overall continuity of design within the community by means of selecting standards for the following elements, which will be uniformly specified and applied over the entire project: • Custom fixture street lighting program. • Custom mailbox design • Standardized common area fencing style and color • Standardized private residential fencing styles and color • Community color selections to create neighborhood theme • Uniform site furnishing selection (benches and trash receptacles) • Custom designed street signage and stop signage • Landscaping at the entrance monuments, along the collector road buffers and within the medians selected to provide for a repetition of the neighborhood flower color scheme and theme trees throughout the community The Applicant agrees to utilize innovative design techniques and quality design for the recreational center and bathhouse, common area landscaping, site design, and architectural design. B. Architecture (1) The architectural styling of Housing Unit Types I through 4 shall be constructed in accordance with the Housing Unit Types Exhibit(s) proffered herein. Housing Unit Types 5 and 6 shall be compatible with Housing Unit Types 1 through 4. (2) Access to garages by the use of alleys shall be allowed on Housing Unit Types 1 (Carriage House), 3 (Cottage House), 5 (Modified Single -Family Small Lot, and 6 (Modified Townhouse). Page 19 September 3, 2003 (3) Specific architectural elements that are allowed on Housing Unit Types, to include Housing Unit Types 5 and 6 shall include, but are not limited to, the use of peaked roofs, gables, chimneys, balconies or decks, porches and/or garages. C. HousingUnit nit Type 3 (Cottage House) and Unit Type 4 (Courtyard Cluster) (1) Decks and Patio All deck planks shall be Class I (A) fire rated composite lumber or approved equal of a standardized color to be selected by the Applicant. A maximum of two styles of deck railing shall be used on all decks and shall be made of the same composite lumber and the same matching color selection. (2) Fire Protection System Courtyard Cluster and Cottage houses will have a 13-D sprinkler system in the home and the garages. D. Lighting Any exterior lighting of individual homes or common use recreation areas shall be directed downward and inward on the site to reduce glare on adjacent properties, the public and/or private right-of-way, and upward stray illumination. E. Architectural and Design Covenants Stephenson Associates, L.C. shall develop architectural and design covenants for the overall community. Said covenants will establish an architectural review board for the purpose of review and approval of all architectural elevations, exterior architectural features (fences, railings, walls and decks) for all uses within Stephenson Village, as well as any publicly provided structures located on sites dedicated for public use. These covenants are intended to assure a continuity of overall architectural appearance, quality material selection, and a cohesive color palate for all structures within the entire development. 16. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND HABITAT PRESERVATION: A. Environmental Features and Easements: (1) Significant wildlife habitats shall be identified and preserved by the Applicant with technical assistance from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). Wildlife or bird habitats shall be further Page 20 September 3, 2003 enhanced by providing native plantings selected to encourage feeding areas while reestablishing forest in and around environmentally sensitive areas. (2) The Applicant shall limit the clearing and grading on each lot to the area needed for structures, utilities, access and fire protection to maximize tree save areas. (3) Unbuildable wetlands, unbuildable floodplains, and unbuildable steep slopes shall be designated and shall be subject to the following: (a) Grading: Protection of steeply sloped areas will be provided by the Applicant as follows: clearing and grading will not occur on any slopes of twenty five percent (25%) or greater, except for trails, road crossings, utilities, drainage and storm water management facilities. (b) Floodplain Areas: Development within floodplain areas shall be limited to the public Linear Park Trail system to include the trail, pedestrian bridges, benches and signage. (c) Buffers and Conservation Easements: (i) Buffer and Conservation Easements: A one -hundred foot (100� wide nondisturbance buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot immediately adjacent to Hiatt Run and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel. (ii) Conservation Easements/Floodplain: A twenty -foot (20) wide buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot immediately adjacent to the 100-year floodplain. The ten feet (10) adjacent to the floodplain shall be undisturbed. The ten feet (10� adjacent to the lots may be disturbed and, if disturbed, shall be re -vegetated by planting trees equal to the number of trees in excess of six inches (6") caliper removed by the disturbance, OR at the rate of 50 (2" caliper) trees per acre of disturbance, at the option of the Applicant. (iii) The above disturbed and undisturbed buffers as well as conservation easements not located within a platted lot and/or parcel shall be part of the common areas owned by the Homeowners Association(s). Covenants to be created as part of the Homeowners Association(s) documents shall provide for maintenance of said areas by the Homeowners Association(s). (4) Resource protection areas are identified for the Hiatt Run Corridor and the Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel that are further identified on the Generalized Development Plan. These resource protection areas contain various environmental features and provide different resource management plans for their treatment and protection by the Applicant. Page 21 September 3, 2003 B. Hiatt Run Corridor: (1) The Hiatt Run Corridor shall be considered a resource protection area. Clearing and grading by individual lot owners is prohibited within this zone. (2) A one -hundred foot (100') foot non -disturbance buffer shall be provided outside of any platted lot adjacent to the Hiatt Run Corridor and shall serve as the clearing limit for all lots that border the Hiatt Run Corridor as measured from the center line of the stream. (3) A minimum buffer of twenty feet (20') shall border all wetland preservation areas. Clearing and grading by individual owners is prohibited within this buffer. (4) Native plants and cluster trees will be preserved and/or reforested in accordance with the Forest Management Plan along the south side of the Hiatt Run Corridor. (5) Wildlife or bird habitats will be further enhanced by providing native plantings selected to encourage feeding areas while reestablishing forest in and around environmentally sensitive areas including steep slopes, woodlands and flood plain areas along the north side of the Hiatt Run Corridor. The planting plan along the north side of the Hiatt Run Corridor will be created with technical assistance from VDGIF and the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. C. Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel: The Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel shall be considered a resource protection area. Restrictive covenants recorded against the property will provide that clearing and grading by individual lot owners is prohibited within this zone. The Wetlands Intermittent Ravine Channel will be further enhanced, by providing native plantings, to establish an upland buffer. The planting plan for this upland buffer will be created with technical assistance from VDGIF and the Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District. D. Forest Management Plan:_ (1) The Forest Stewardship and Management Plan will be created with technical assistance from the Department of Forestry. Native plants and cluster trees will be preserved and/or reforested in accordance with the Forest Management Plan. Page 22 September 3, 2003 (2) Existing ponds will be identified and, if beneficial and appropriate, shall be used as storm water management facilities. In addition, the Applicant shall establish additional ponds on the site wherever possible and in such locations as the Applicant directs. The ponds shall be located and designed to promote water infiltration on the site. A minimum area of twenty feet (20') wide surrounding each such pond shall be developed as a park setting. (3) The Forest Management Plan will be created with technical assistance from the Department of Forestry. E. Environmental Utility / Road Impacts: Construction of utilities, roads, trails, bio-retention areas, or wetlands creation shall be allowed within the environmental features listed in § 16A-§ 16D of this proffer statement. Any construction of the above listed items will use low impact construction methods such as 90-degree crossings, minimal soil, and tree disturbances. When linear utility impacts such as force mains or transmission lines are required low impact construction techniques will be utilized. F. Implementation of Enhancements and Amendments The Applicant shall provide the location of the resource protection areas as a component of the Master Development Plan. Information pertaining to proposed enhancements and amendments to the resource protection areas shall be included as narratives of the Master Development Plan to ensure that these treatment measures will be implemented. 17. COMMUNITY CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION: A. The Applicant shall see that the properties within Stephenson Village shall be serviced by a commercial trash pickup and waste removal service. Said service shall provide curbside trash removal unless otherwise provided by Frederick County, for all residential uses and dumpster disposal for all high -density residential uses and commercial uses. Waste and trash removal services shall not dispose of trash and waste at any Frederick County Citizen Convenience Center. The Applicant shall be relieved of its obligations to see to the performance of this Proffer by assigning all of its obligations to a Homeowners Association for any portion or all of the development. B. Notwithstanding the above, Applicant shall locate dumpster sites as unobtrusively as possible. The area immediately surrounding each dumpster site shall be planted with vegetation similar to or identical to that planted in the median open vegetated areas, including, but not limited to, deciduous trees and evergreen shrubbery in addition to the required fence and gate enclosure. Page 23 September 3, 2003 18. WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STEPHENSON AREA: A. The Applicant shall dedicate land to be utilized for the location of a regional pump station as determined by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) in an area that is mutually agreed upon by both parties. B. The Applicant shall construct a pump station in conformance with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan as required to serve the Property and shall dedicate the pump station to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) for operation and maintenance. The pump station shall be constructed and operational prior to the first occupancy permit in Stephenson Village. C. The Applicant shall construct water and sewer lines in conformance with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority Route 11 North Sewer and Water Service Area Plan as required to serve all private land uses within Stephenson Village and shall dedicate the applicable water and sewer lines to FCSA for operation and maintenance. Furthermore, the applicant shall provide water and sewer lines of adequate size to the property line for all publicly dedicated properties. 19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY: By accepting and approving this rezoning application, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors authorizes the location and provision of those public uses and facilities specifically referenced on the Generalized Development Plan, in this Proffer Statement, and the extension and construction of water and sewer lines and facilities and roads necessary to serve this Property pursuant to the Virginia Code Section 15.2-2232 and the Frederick County Code. The general area of location for these uses and facilities are as shown on the Generalized Development Plan with the exact locations to be determined based on final engineering and as approved by Frederick County. Acceptance of this Proffer Statement constitutes approval of the public uses and facilities and their general locations and thereby accepts said uses and facilities from further Comprehensive Plan conformity review. 20. CREATION OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION(S): A. Creation of Association(s) A homeowners association or more than one homeowners association ("HOA") shall be created and shall be made responsible for the review and approval of all construction within the development to insure that all design standards for the Stephenson Village Development are satisfied and for the maintenance and repair of all common areas, together with such other responsibilities, duties and powers as are customary for such associations or as may shall be required for such HOA herein. Page 24 B. Additional Responsibility September 3, 2003 In addition to such other responsibilities and duties as shall be assigned; the HOA shall have title to and/or responsibility for: (1) All common open space including storm water facilities areas not otherwise dedicated to public use or maintained by commercial entities. (2) Common buffer areas located outside of residential lots. (3) Residential curbside trash collection. 21. PROFFERED HOUSING TYPES: The following plan(s), exhibit(s) and Housing Unit Types are proffered herein. Each may be altered at the time of final engineering and equivalent Housing Unit Types may be substituted with the approval of the Director of Planning or his/her designee. Any existing or future Housing Unit Type, which is permitted under the R4 Residential Planned Community District, may also be utilized. Housing Unit Types Exhibit(s) prepared by The Land Planning and Design Group, Inc. dated December 2002, listed below and attached hereto as Exhibit B (graphic for illustrative purposes only). The minimum design standards for the following housing types are summarized and listed on the attached chart prepared by Land Planning and Design Group, Inc., dated March 2003 and referred to as Exhibit E — Minimum Design Standards. "Housing Unit Type 1" (Carriage House): Carriage House Illustrative Carriage House Typical Carriage House Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 2" (Non -Alley Carriage House): Non -Alley Carriage House Illustrative Non -Alley Carriage House Typical Non -Alley Carriage House Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 3" (Cottage House): Cottage House Illustrative Cottage House Typical Cottage House Landscape Typical Page 25 September 3, 2003 "Housing Unit Type 4" (Courtyard Cluster): Courtyard Cluster Illustrative Courtyard Cluster Typical Courtyard Cluster Landscape Typical "Housing Unit Type 5" (Modified Single Family Detached Lot): Modified Single Family Detached Lot Typical "Housing Unit Type 6" (Modified "Townhouse" Attached Dwelling): Modified "Townhouse" Attached Dwelling Typical "Housing Unit Type 7" (Elderly Housing Dwelling): Elderly Housing Dwelling Specifications Elderly Housing Dwelling Illustrative Elderly Housing Dwelling Specifications and Illustrative Design provided in Community Design Modifications Document Other housing types shall be added, if approved, by Frederick County. 22. STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING: A. The Applicant shall provide landscaped areas on both sides of the Major Collector Road as illustrated on the attached Exhibit D (Typical Major Collector Road Section) dated March 2003 and in accordance with the following: (1) The landscaped area described above is designed to be a scenic urban linear park, which shall contain woodland conservation areas. (For purposes of this Proffer, a woodland conservation area shall be defined as an area designated for the purpose of retaining land areas predominantly in their natural, scenic, open or wooded condition.)The woodland conservation area shall have a varying width of no less than fifteen feet. Woodland conservation areas shall be provided where feasible based upon final engineering and design of the development. The Applicant shall provide, within the landscaped area, a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees, to include native types of trees originally found in this area and replacing any trees removed during development. Such trees shall be planted at the minimum rate of one tree every 40 linear feet along the roadway frontage and shall be planted in clusters rather than a linear pattern. Page 26 September 3, 2003 (2) The minimum planting standard for street landscaping or landscaped areas/woodland conservation areas shall be a mixture of deciduous trees, ornamental trees, evergreen trees, and shrubbery. At the Applicants option, trees and shrubs shall be planted in clusters and shall be planted at an equivalent rate of ten plant units per 40 linear feet of collector street roadway frontage. The plant unit credits are determined as follows: Shade Trees (2" min. caliper) = 10 plant units, Ornamental trees (1.5" minimum caliper) = 5 plant units, Evergreen trees (6' min. height) = 5 plant units, Shrubs (18" minimum height) = 2 plant units. B. The Applicant shall have the option of utilizing landscaped central islands within cul- de-sacs. When landscaped islands are utilized a twenty-eight foot (28') foot paved area shall be provided to accommodate on -street parking and travel aisles. C. Where conditions permit, vegetated open channels shall be used in street right-of- ways for storm water runoff, instead of curb and guttering. D. To the extent possible, stone fines or wood chip trails/paths shall be used instead of asphalt trails/paths. Where practical, such trails/paths shall be located on only one side of each interior road provided sidewalks are not required or practical within the adjacent road right-of-way. 23. COMMUNITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM: A. The Applicant reserves the right to construct community entry features including a monument style sign at the entrances to the development in accordance with the following parameters: Such signage shall not exceed two signs per intersection, one occurring on either side of the entrance. The sign panel area shall not exceed 65 square feet per sign, and shall be attached to a wall not to exceed 8 feet in height, excluding piers, which shall be 9.25 feet in height. The wall supporting the signage will not be included in the allowable square footage for the sign panel. B. The Applicant reserves the right to construct neighborhood entry features including a monument style sign at the entrance to each neighborhood in accordance with the following parameters: Such signage shall not exceed two signs per intersection one occurring on either side of the entrance. The sign panel area shall not exceed 40 square feet per sign, and shall be attached to a wall not to exceed 7 feet in height, excluding piers, which shall be 8.25 feet in height. The wall supporting the signage will not be included in the allowable square footage for the sign panel. C. Commercial freestanding business signs shall be monument style with similar design and materials as the community entry feature signs. These commercial freestanding business signs shall be no more than 20' in height measured from the base and shall be spaced a minimum of 100 feet apart. Page 27 SIGNATURE PAGE September 3, 2003 The conditions set forth herein are the proffers for Stephenson Village and supercede all previous proffer statements submitted for this Development. Respectfully submitted, Stephenson Asso iat , L.C. By: acne: J. Donald Shockey, Jr. Title: Manager Subscribed and sworn before me this 8th day of Sept. , 2003. Susan D. Stahl (Typed Name of Notary) My Commission Expires: 4-30- 2004 Notary Pub is CT�yp"vNg0N VILLAGE 4a.7 11J1 isa...i .— — - - Exhibit 1 NET FISCAL BENEFIT STEPHENSON VILLAGE 23 Years (2003 - 2025) New Tax Rate Old Tax Rate )0,000 $0 SOURCE: Robert Charles Lesser & Co., LLC Frederick County VA Modei-RR 12 cents increase.xis-OCra9p� E 00 Printed: 4/24/2003 Page 1 of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Crm,w'PU '.N90N VILLAGE CATEGORY REVENUES Real Property Taxes Personal Property Taxes Sales Taxes BPOL Taxes Miscellaneous Revenues Educational Revenues TOTAL EXPENDITURES TOTAL NET FISCAL IMPACT ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Exhibit 2 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED S EPTAX RATE HENSON VILLAGE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 23 Years (2003 - 2025) $100, 703,000 $48,193,000 $11,264,000 $2,608,000 $25,948,000 $64,741,000 $253_' 0 $215,326,000 $38,131,000 Page 1 of i 23-YEAR TOTAL 100 % Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xis-5u0m4-9Rz EEx 2 9-00 Printed: 4/24/2003 STEPHENSON VILLAGE $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,OOC $10,000,00( $5,000,00( Exhibit 3 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE CUMULATIVE NET FISCAL BENEFIT O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xls-cumu graph -Ex 3 04-9269.00 Printed: 4/24/2003 Page l of i ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 4 SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE ANNUAL NET FISCAL IMPACT NET FISCAL CUMULATIVE YEAR REVENUES EXPENDITURES iy. n ,Ayyy IMPACT (NFI) x� uy r NFI p ry+_ _ wrua mo-r: w:n 2003 $178,611 $0 $178,611 $178,611 $372,742 2004 $194,130 $0 $549,446 $194,130 $231,425 $604,167 2005 $780,873 $1,861,105 $1,534,792 $326,313 $930,460 2006 $2,673,034 $2,426,963 $246,071 $1,176,551 2007 $3,831,270 $3,464,654 $448,027 67 $1,991,194 2008 2009 $4,975,512 $4,527,485 $448,027 $1,621,132 $2,621,132 2010 $6,302,421 $5,672,483 $629,936 $969,581 $3,590,713 2011 $7,950,051 $6,980,470 $8,048,592 $978,947 $4,569,660 2012 $9,027,539 $10,796,661 $9,246,504 $1,550,157 $6,119,817 2013 2014 $12,286,946 $10,324,698 $1,962,248 $8,082,065 2015 $13,651,704 $11,482,337 $2,169,366 $10,251,431 $12,433,040 2016 $14,602,140 $12,420,531 $2,181,608 $2,197,056 $14,630,096 2017 $15,344,809 $13,147,752 $13,767,932 $2,224,983 $16,855,079 2018 $15,992,915 $17,035,864 $14,467,514 $2,568,350 $19,423,429 2019 2020 $17,748,046 $15,009,178 $2,736,668 $22,162,297 2021 $18,249,868 $15,459,453 $2,790,415 $24,952,712 $27,821,574 2022 $16,792,098 $15,923,237 $2,868,861 $2,953,502 $30,775,076 2023 $19,354,436 $16,400,934 60 $16,980 $3,540,357 $34 315,433 2024 $20,521,239 ,882 _ - �� n�a nn� 536.131,240 Frederick County VA Mode( -RR 12 cents increase.xis-Ann Su0m49RZ 9 00 Printed: 4/24/2003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Page 1 of 1 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 5 PUPIL GENERATION RATES BASECLCo RATEDBASED ONU.S. CENSUSDATA ON HOUSING AND ACTUAL ENROLLMENT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA AREA FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Single -Family Detached Single -Family Attached Multifamily Mobile Home Predicted Pupils Actual Pupils 3/ Predicted as % of Actual 1/ 2000 US Census 2/ Frederick County 3/ Frederick County Public Schools FREDERICK CO. ESTIMATE OCCUPIED RCLCO ESTIMATE PREDICTED PUPILS PER PREDICTED UNITS PUPILS PER PUPILS UNIT 2/ PUPILS e 2000 1/ UNIT a�t�. r�ww u� ar inn `u �s vwn¢tsaznixs cw---- �c moor s rnesausrt axe error u� Truant 16,741 0.5442 9,110 0.7000 11,719 1,872 0.2908 544 0.5400 1,011 1,309 0.1564 205 0.2300 301 2,175 0.5442 1184 0.2300 500 13,531 11,043 0,676 1 10,676 127% 103 % SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo Pupil Generation FrederickxlslPupil Generation 04-9269.00 Printed:412412003 Page I of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 6 EVALUATION OF RCLCo AND COUNTY PUPIL GENERATION RATES (FROM EXHIBIT 5) BASED ON FREDERICK COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA RCLCO FACTORS FREDERICK CO. FACTORS ; PERMITTED PUPILS PREDICTED PUPILS PER PREDICTED PUPIL INCREASE AREA UNITS PER PUPIL 1996-2001 1/ UNIT INCREASE PER UNIT 2/ i 1996-2002 cewx. h idroita �:59� HOME TYPE Y!R Mc wd rris N .+tr�n ° ax;� Ni' flfG1f'a'10.'111Wd W[RAY7 'Y/�1' LiIML FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 0.7000 1,799 2.1,399 Single -Family Detached 3/ ,570 05442 Single -Family Attached 3/ 454 0.2908 13Z 0.5400 245 Multifamily 474 0.1564 74 0.2300 109 598 0.5442 325 0.2300 138 Mobile Home 2,291 1,930 Predicted Pupil Increase 1,048 1,048 Actual Pupil Increase 2/ 219% 184% Predicted as % of Actual 1/ Frederick County 2/ Frederick County Public Schools 3/ Assumes 85% of permitted single-family units are detached. SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo Pupil Generation Frederick.xislPupil Generation (Permit) 04-9269.00 Printed:4/24/2003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. Page 1 of 1 < a r O O Z 0 3. 3 O� p m 3. OS S °c Z °. c O,o r C m I n 0 3 ,n m o O n o v m S C n m O D C O m on3 oRm i — n � m �. � A c Z 7u x rn 6 m �' O 3 r m Q m o a = m _I oc 3 < m �`� w = p a m D a a a m c 3 m N N N m C R .. N r�r y N p N XO r a R O m c 0 D,.q o U -< m 9 O _ O o m z .� U . O S rn Z7 'V > z-1 0 > a rr c om mr <co mvc R. m mr y n 7t uI m o m O c m ry N a x A p 0 M = 0 o 0 v' . _� T. m � x - p a < m R O 0 F 0 � W 0 c m m m v` D a Cm O N ° v N N N A O 0 Z n .cni P P m Ill n + o + 0 + + + D m O C JZ O Z Z N D O O D D D Z z n c z Z O > c�.i 0 0 L4 D D D; p D m x M N m o d � .- WO `� W c \ O r cam- W I GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN STEPHENSON VILLAGE EXHIBIT A STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA m 1] Hill 0 GREENWAY ENGINEERING THE LAND PLANNING 5300 WESTVIEW DR. 151 Windy Hill lane & DESIGN SUITE 103 Winchester, Virginia 22602 GROUP FREDERICK• MD 21703 Founded In 1971 301-695-6172 Engineers Telephone 540-882-4185 INC. FAX 301-6956219 Surveyors FAX 540-722-9528 LAND PLANNING, SITE PLANNING- LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE RTE.761 _ OLD CHARLES TORN ACCESS ROAD PAVED PARKING TYPICAL _ � SOC / c�AF'F�as 4qI( PAVILLION —� \ OVERFLOW PARKING TYPICAL( V �.J SERVICEIEMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD O ��. MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD v D MA`iOR O ooz 'II SCHOOL i OYLT. TO ACCESS ROAD \ JR. SOCCER FIELDS JR. iL F E DS SOCCER FIELDS goo�- 3�nXR � pa tt n o S z a U QZZZ i JZMD W wgo0v� F= -ddS(D S DATE: MARCH 2003 SCALE: 1"-126' DFMGNED BY: IPR JOB NO. 2760C STET 1 OR I QI ih1.4JOR xrrgra n„N COLLEF,3,OR RO INIIN /� ^I A, RI1s 4��/ III AI<I A NUJ 11" r A 117 r r.S .f I III SAMUEL BYERS LNDMARK q J ♦�/,�,1 �eC,�/ �� _ 34-1124 �' WETLANDS: McCq RTE• 838 D. . . 3.5 ♦1- ACRES AREA NOT TO BE REZONED MAJOR COLLEC I�r 1/ 4101, GDP LEGEND a" mom Romp MAWR COLLECTOR ROAD s� INTER PARCEL CONNECTIONS MRTIpinM •ED aEvflpHWT K.W D<bICFTr11wl 1z 'f W M,EoaauDrunvElvEPosE.soea.r T1IEITInLta .F�y osvrr.nowor rla uw,vwu„L 1AHoaAr—MEY r� A>30CUTFDmHEO11FM5IMYRE SIY.HTLY.LLTEEED ro \ _ � AFEIFLT IIWEACNUIF EI AREEpG. � INTERMEDIATE \ RAVINE CILANNEL /� ♦ III LINEAR PARK / 3 OPEN SPACE TRAIL HIATT RUN MATT RUN / 1 HIATT RIM III , LAND BAY 1 UND 4NDUSE RAT +. ACTWP. ADULT RECREATION L Y CHDO CENTER 4 11 GOYYUMITY PARK Y d EasWdl Rods k d sotto Rdds 111 l DEI J( v[1NENCE Cd1YERdAL/DAYCME H— g Unll TIp. 1,2,4,5, RP Dlstrkl SFD k DRNHOUSE Hous7 Unll T Ps 6 1, RP Dis4kl Toi6 11 RP Dls4kl Toi 11LTIFAMLY: Cnndanlnk— EIMAy Mousing. Hausing Unit Tips -Coltags House k RP DIWk1 Duplex, Multlplsx. poJ^ Irkm Garden A orlmsnt h Actlw Adult) r n ACT W. ADULT, (Housing Unit Tlps 1.2. A 5) ullllamgv (CondamMLuns, FIdYIP Housing, HausHq G ACREAGE Fu {M- sEE,olTs woaesswa.uovE CR.ArwnolsEEs uses. nENs�i Mix or lwuswc�swlno+i F U 1--1 to U Qa i7 O p� %EANGE DF urea ullrtNNNAAA 3ms A 1 1 Li /a 0 W 7 30 3o 53 DATE: SEPT 2. 2003 SCALE: 1'-1000' NA NA DESIGNED BY:MDS/JNT JOB NO. 27E0C SHEET - i OP 1 A Phased Traffic .Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village Located in: Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: Stephenson Associates, L.C. Box 2530 f 1 Winchester, Virginia 22604 prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc End neers. Surveyors. Planners. Lcndsccpe Architects. PR+AH 208 Church Street, S.E. Leesburg Virginia 20175 T 703.777.3616 F 703.777.3725 February 7, 2003 OVERVIEW Report Summary This study considers the traffic impacts associated with the build -out of the proposed Stephenson Village development, to be located southeast of the Route 11 & Old Charles Town Road intersection, in Frederick County, Virginia. The proposed project is to include 2,793 residential units, a 550 student elementary school, 60,000 square feet of office, and 190,000 square feet of retail. For the purposes of this analysis, full build -out is to occur over three (3) transportation phases by the year 2015. Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying the Stephenson Village development were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: • Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of impact, • Calculation of trip generation for the proposed Stephenson Village development, • Distribution and assignment of the Stephenson Village development -generated trips onto the completed roadway network, • Analysis of capacity and level of service with the newest version of the highway capacity software, HCS-2000, for existing and future conditions. EXISTING CONDITIONS Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR+A) conducted manual traffic counts at the following intersections: 1) Route 11 & SB I-81 on-ramp/off-ramp; 2) Route 11 & NB I- 81 off -ramp; 3) Route 11 & NB I-81 on-ramp/Redbud Road; and 4) Route 11 & Old Charles Town Road. Figure 1 shows the existing ADT (Average Daily Traffic) and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 2 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data and HCS-2000 level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. PH A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village 1 + 1 February 7, 2003 Page 1 0 No Scale W N JIL ter �._._. Figure 1 P R+A H ti %--ZI(99 d Charles Ol T) Wn Road I lea SITE�� Z1�ti lAp,Sl \ E° CU .o43 11 till p O 661 `36313 yS��Iy 2 I�AtiLIl� 661 / AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Existing Traffic Volumes A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 2 C/I No Scale Signalized Intersection LOS = C(Q`Cl r O a eto- $ol* s � x O Unsignalized 4P Intersection :9 Unsignalized Rural Two -Lane �` Intersection Roadway LOS = C(C) j_ - `�k'n Road ► . U � Uther�or�S��vek `. SITE aye. c�♦� a�bO ••`. wi �A Unsignalized Intersection AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) 'Denotes Free -Flow Movement Denotes Critical Unsignalized Movement Figure 2 Existing Lane Geometry and Level of Service PHASE 1(2006) A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PR+A February 7, 2003 H Page 3 Cl/ ) The purpose of this Phase 1 scenario is to maximize the Stephenson Village development while p assuming the following roadway conditions: 1) All traffic will enter and exit the property via a single unsignalized site - driveway located to the south of Old Charles Town Road. 2) The intersection of Route 11 & Old Charles Town Road is to be signalized. 3) The intersections of Route 11 with I-81 will include signalization and geometric improvements. 2006 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS The existing traffic volumes were increased using an historic growth rate of 5% per year (compounded annually). Additionally, PHR+A estimated trip generation for the Year 2006 Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park (350,000 square feet) based upon information provided in the report titled: A Traffic Impact Analysis of Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park, dated October 26, 2001. The trips were then assigned throughout the study area based upon methodology included in the aforementioned report. Figure 3 shows the 2006 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 4 shows the respective 2006 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS-2000 level of service worksheets and 2006 Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park trip generation are included in the Appendix section of this report. TRIP GENERATION The number of trips produced by and attracted to this site were established using the 6th Edition of ITE's Trip Generation Report. Table 1 shows the trip generation results for the proposed Phase 1 Stephenson Village development. Internal and pass -by trip reductions were not assumed during this Phase 1 condition. P A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 H Page 4 0 No Scale U Figure 3 PfAA h **--26CS> i� d Charles To Road lwn F oral. n"et,17 (6y SITE NiG r,..% (�2j�J84� IU •. �7 i It O 661 lbl��'IItiL 661 AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) 2006 Background Traffic Volumes A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 5 No Scale Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) f C`Gl r. � G�CI s IC�C �C Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) Signalized Intersection �LOS = C(C) C(C) Signalized Intersection LOS = B(B) W, � Jti d, NJ �Gl Signalized a Intersection a b n LOS = C(C) ss, GIG Rural Two -Lane Roadway LOS = C(C) 0 AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) `Denotes Free -Flow Movement Denotes Critical Unsignalized Movement Figure 4 2006 Background Lane Geometry and Level of Service PHI2n A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 6 O L— Table I Phase 1 Stephenson Village TriD Generation gnmninry Code Land Use Amount In AM Peak Hour Out Total V In PM Peak Hour Out Total ADT Percentage of Total 210 Single -Family Detached 429 units 77 232 310 255 144 399 4,290 220 Apartment 240 units 20 103 123 100 49 149 1,573 230 Townhouse/Condo 390 units 26 125 150 127 62 189 3,393 251 Elderly Housing - Detach 266 units 29 51 80 78 44 123 1,064 253 Elderly Housing - Attach 72 units 3 2 5 4 3 7 251 Total Trips 155 513 667 564 302 866 10,570 100% Total Internal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% Total Pass -by 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% Total "New Trips" 155 513 667 564 302 866 10,570 100% TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network surrounding the proposed site. Figure 5 represents the 2006 trip distribution percentages into and out of the Stephenson Village development. Figure 6 shows the respective Phase 1 development -generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments along the study area roadway network. 2006 PHASE 1 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Stephenson Village assigned trips (Figure 6) were added to the 2006 background traffic (Figure 3) to obtain 2006 Phase 1 build -out conditions. Figure 7 shows 2006 Phase 1 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 8 shows the respective 2006 Phase 1 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS-2000 level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the Stephenson Village development are acceptable and manageable. All study area intersections will maintain acceptable levels of service "C" or better during 2006 Phase 1 build -out conditions. PH1Zn A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 7 , No Scale 11 OldCharles Town Road , , cn' rl t'2 RUtbe o rford, nJ� 1P i SITE O �A ca 11 ro 0 9 a s� 0 M w a 661 z LPI-PA Figure 5 Phase 1 Trip Distribution Percentages A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PH �� February 7, 2003 Page 8 O /A AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 6 Phase 1 Development -Generated Trip Assignments PHRn A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 9 a , ^ AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 7 2006 Phase 1 Build -out Traffic Volumes PhR+A A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 10 0 No Scale or- V;ok s �CIG G� Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) Signalized SeRuralTwo -Lane C(C) Roadway Signalized t LOS = C(C) Intersection eft" C(C) LOS C(C) 11 �d Charles Town Road — A(A)* Signalized � r Intersection 12p�he LOS = B(B) �� Unsignalized" 0 �or�, � Intersection * �! o SITE 0-! m A Signalized n v Intersection a b LOS = C(C) z ss, GIG AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) `Denotes Free -Flow Movement Denotes Critical Unsignalized Movement Figure 8 2006 Phase 1 Build -out Lane Geometry and Level of Service A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village P R+A February 7, 2003 HPage 11 PHASE 2 (2008) The purpose of this Phase 2 scenario is to maximize the Stephenson Village development while assuming the following roadway conditions (in addition to those described under Phase 1): 1) The Old Charles Town Road site -driveway described under Phase 1 is to be signalized. 2) Old Charles Town Road will be a three -lane road with a continuous left -turn center lane east of Route 11. 3) The intersections of Route 11 with 1-81 will have additional geometric changes. 2008 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS The existing traffic volumes were increased using an historic growth rate of 5% per year. Additionally, PHR+A estimated trip generation for the Year 2008 Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park (580,000 square feet) development. These trips were then assigned throughout the study area based upon methodology assumed in the Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park traffic study. Figure 9 shows the 2008 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 10 shows the respective 2008 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS-2000 level of service worksheets and 2008 Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park trip generation are included in the Appendix section of this report. TRIP GENERATION The number of trips produced by and attracted to this site were established using the 61h Edition of ITE's Trip Generation Report. The total trip generation was then reduced to account for internal trip interaction and retail pass -by trips. Table 2 summarizes the Stephenson Village Phase 2 trip generation results as well as the internal and pass -by trip reductions. A detailed description of internal/pass-by trip interaction is provided in the Appendix section of this report. PR+AH A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 12 No Scale 6 en 0 ti J A `1iti6l�a� I,► Oor pies n Road ��bh1 11'U �� h I qjc ^bb � o�` N n1 Is o c 11�e �+ wa i O 0 SITE z<3j1�Q6'3� o, v �f3�ti51 u` ✓ N �61a6'bd�►I', °'� w 5 661 / AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 9 2008 Background Traffic Volumes PHI2� A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 13 No Scale M Co Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) r �Gl � 00 s 00C G� Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) Signalized /_;Z Intersection GLOS = C(C) C(C) Signalized Intersection GG i LOS = C(C) G� 1 i d rc SITE rya o bJ V •.�• �A Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) O 6 ssi Rural Two -Lane Roadway LOS = C(C) i 0 AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) `Denotes Free -Flow Movement * Denotes Critical Unsignalized Movement Figure 10 2008 Background Lane Geometry and Level of Service A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PR+A February 7, 2003 HPage 14 0 Table 2 Phase 2 Stephenson Village trip veneration summary AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Percentage Code Land Use Amount In Out Total In Out Total ADT of Total 210 Single -Family Detached 858 units 153 458 610 477 268 745 8,580 220 Apartment 240 units 20 103 123 100 49 149 1,573 230 Townhouse/Condo 390 units 26 125 150 127 62 189 3,393 251 Elderly Housing - Detach 531 units 49 86 135 112 63 175 2,124 253 Elderly Housing - Attach 144 units 6 4 10 8 6 14 501 820 Retail 50,000 SF 64 41 106 191 207 397 4,365 Total Trips 317 816 1,133 1,014 655 1,669 20,536 1 100% Total Internal 26 26 53 99 99 199 2,183 9% Total Pass -by 10 6 16 29 31 60 655 3% Total "New Trips" 281 784 1,065 886 525 1,411 17,699 I 88% TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network surrounding the proposed site. Figure 11 represents the 2008 trip distribution percentages into and out of the Stephenson Village development, Figure 12 shows the respective Phase 2 development -generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments along the study area roadway network. 2008 PHASE 2 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Stephenson Village assigned trips (Figure 12) were added to the 2008 background traffic (Figure 9) to obtain 2008 Phase 2 build -out conditions. Figure 13 shows 2008 Phase 2 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 14 shows the respective 2008 Phase 2 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS-2000 level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the Stephenson Village development are acceptable and manageable. All study area intersections will maintain acceptable levels of service "C" or better during 2008 Phase 2 build -out conditions. PHRn A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 15 O Figure 11 Phase 2 Trip Distribution Percentages A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PH R +_ nFebruary 7, 2003 i Page 16 A AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) j Figure 12 Phase 2 Development -Generated Trip Assignments A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PR+A February 7, 2003 HPage 17 0 �f ^ AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 13 2008 Phase 2 Build -out Traffic Volumes A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 18 No Scale Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) t IGIG �x n .00_., G�GI ICIG �< Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) Rural Two -Lane Roadway LOS = C(C) Signalized Intersection Signalized LOS = C(C) Intersection C(C) LOS = B(B) 01d Charles 4—C(C) j T01v Road *4" Signalized T� (A)A � o�c Intersection G� " ti -,Ie LOS — C(C) GG� voil (C C�keka SITE GyGI 0 d A Signalized Intersection a `� n LOS = C(C) b 661 IGIC / AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) `Denotes Free -Flow Movement Denotes Critical Unsignalized Movement Figure 14 2008 Phase 2 Build -out Lane Geometry and Level of Service A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PR _ n February 7, 2003 H1 1Page 19 PHASE 3 (2015) The purpose of this Phase 3 scenario is to maximize the Stephenson development while assuming the following roadway conditions (in addition described under Phases 1 and 2): All elementary school traffic will enter and exit the property via a single unsignalized site -driveway located along Old Charles Town Road to the east of the signalized site -driveway described under Phase 2. Residential and retail land uses will enter and exit the property via an additional signalized site -driveway (Spine Road) located along Route 11, opposite Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park. Route 11 will be a four -lane divided facility from the northbound ramps at I-81 through the intersection at Spine Road. Route 11 will be a three -lane roadway with a continuous left -turn center lane through the intersection at Old Charles Town Road. The intersections of Route 11 with I-81 will have geometric improvements. 2015 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS The existing traffic volumes were increased using an historic growth rate of 5% per year through Year 2010 and 3% per year through Year 2015. Additionally, the trips relating to the entire Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park (1,400,000 square feet) development were assigned throughout the study area. Figure 15 shows the 2015 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 16 shows the respective 2015 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS-2000 level of service worksheets and 2015 Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park trip generation are included in the Appendix section of this report. TRIP GENERATION The number of trips produced by and attracted to this site were established using the 61h Edition of ITE's Trip Generation Report. The total trip generation was then reduced to account for internal trip interaction and retail pass -by trips. Table 3 summarizes the Stephenson Village Phase 3 trip generation results as well as the internal and pass -by trip reductions. A detailed description of internal/pass-by trip interaction is provided in the Appendix section of this report. R+A A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PFebruary 7, 2003 H Page 20 Figure 15 AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) 2015 Background Traffic Volumes A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 21 O No Scale a M iG O M V) Signalized Intersection LOS = D(D) off- Signalized Intersection Rural Two -Lane LOS = C(C) Roadway V� LOS = C(C) Signalized Old Charles TOwn Intersection Road LOS = D(D) ; �qj q °t�s� l L a 7 SITE ° `°4♦ � C o n ;o a Signalizedcu a Intersection o LOS = C(D) � 1 � 11 1 cl a Qrnc �� o AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) "= Denotes Free -Flow Movement * Denotes Critical Unsignalized Movement Figure 16 2015 Background Lane Geometry and Level of Service A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PI -PA February 7, 2003 Page 22 Table 3 Phase 3 Stephenson Village Trin Generation Summary Code Land Use Amount In AM Peak Hour Out Total PM Peak Hour In Out Total ADT Percentage of Total 210 Single -Family Detached 858 units 153 458 610 477 268 745 8,580 220 Apartment 480 units 39 203 242 187 92 278 3,011 230 Townhouse/Condo 780 units 44 215 260 225 111 336 6,786 251 Elderly Housing - Detach 531 units 49 86 135 112 63 175 2,124 253 Elderly Housing - Attach 144 units 6 4 10 8 6 14 501 520 Elementary School 550 students 94 65 160 2 4 6 527 710 Office 60,000 SF 109 15 124 25 122 147 896 820 Retail 190,000 SF 143 91 234 460 499 959 10,299 Total Trips 636 1,138 1,774 1,495 1,164 2,659 32,726 100% Total Internal 167 167 334 260 260 519 6,003 20% Total Pass -by 21 14 35 69 75 144 1,545 4% Total "New Trips" 448 957 1,405 1,167 829 1,996 25,178 76% TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network (� surrounding the proposed site. Figure 17 represents the 2015 trip distribution percentages -'� into and out of the Stephenson Village development. Figure 18 shows the respective Phase 3 development -generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments along the study area roadway network. 2015 PHASE 3 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Stephenson Village assigned trips (Figure 18) were added to the 2015 background traffic (Figure 15) to obtain 2015 Phase 3 build -out conditions. Figure 19 shows 2015 Phase 3 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations within the study area. Figure 20 shows the respective 2015 Phase 3 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS-2000 level of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the Stephenson Village development are acceptable and manageable. All study area intersections will maintain acceptable levels of service "D" or better during 2015 Phase 3 build -out conditions. A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village PR+AFebruary 7, 2003 HPage 23 O -a- Figure 17 Phase 3 Trip Distribution Percentages PR+A A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 HPage 24 Cam) 1 A AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 18 Phase 3 Development -Generated Trip Assignments PH�n A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 25 ^ AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Figure 19 2015 Phase 3 Build -out Traffic Volumes PHI21� A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village February 7, 2003 Page 26 C) No Scale Of f- M Signalized Intersection LOS = D(D) Rural Two -Lane Roadway Signalized LOS = C(C) Intersection LOS = C(C) G� Signalized Intersection Unsignalized e. C(D) LOS = B(B) Intersection Signalized Jd Charles Town Road 4" C(C) A(A)* Intersection LOS = D(D) G (B)B ~ �► " 1 Rurhe� 4 d ofd, SITE (djC,� S d >�► i� ��'� load �� a c �Q � a. o w 91 Signalized �A c� Intersection o LOS = C(D) � 1 � 11 1 cl a AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) `= Denotes Free -Flow Movement * Denotes Critical Unsignalized Movement Figure 20 2015 Phase 3 Build -out Lane Geometry and Level of Service A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Stephenson Village P R+A February 7, 2003 1 Page 27 C' Appendix C�� C/ Table A: 2006 Background Development AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Land Use Amount In Out Total In Out Total ADT Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park 130 Industrial Park 350,000 SF 255 56 312 68 254 322 2,436 Total 255 56 312 68 254 322 2,436 Table B: 2008 Background Development AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Land Use Amount In Out Total In Out Total ADT Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park 130 Industrial Park 580,000 SF 423 93 516 112 422 534 4,037 Total 423 93 516 112 422 534 4,037 Table C: 2015 Background Development AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Land Use Amount In Out Total In Out Total ADT Rutherford's Farm Industrial Park 130 Industrial Park 1,400,000 SF 1,022 224 1,246 270 1,018 1,288 9,744 Total 1,022 224 1,246 270 1,018 1,288 9,744 (_l c; Table D: Phase 2 Internal/Pass-bv Trin Interartinn AM Peak Hour Phi Peak Hour Trips Going to/From Reduced Land Us( In Out Total In Out Total ADT Percentage Residential Retail 16 10 26 48 52 99 1,091 25% Office Retail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% Total Percentages 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% Pass -by Retail 10 6 16 29 31 60 655 15% Total Percentages 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% Retail Residential 10 16 26 52 48 99 1,091 Reciprocal Total Percentages 5%n 2% 3% 7% 13% 9% 8% 7% Total Retail Internal Trips 16 10 26 48 52 99 1,091 25% Total Retail Pass -by Trips 10 6 16 29 31 60 655 15% Total Retail "New" Trips 39 25 63 114 124 338 2,61 660% Total Residential Internal Trips 10 16 26 52 48 99 1,091 7% Total Residential "New" Trips 242 759 1,001 772 401 1,172 15,079 93% Total Internal 26 26 53 99 99 199 2,183 Total Percentages 8% 3% 5% 10% 15% 12% 11% 9% Total Pass -by 10 6 16 29 31 60 655 Total Percentages 3%n 1% 1% 3% 5% 4% 3% 3% Total "New Trips" 281 784 1,065 886 525 1,411 17,699 - Total Percentages 89% 96% 94% 87%n 80% 85% 86% 88% Total Trips 317 816 1,133 1,014 655 1,669 20,536 Total Percentages 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%n 100% 100% �J Table E: Phase 3 Internal/Pass-bv Trin Interaction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Going tolfrom Reduced Land Ust In Out Total In Out Total ADT Percentage Residential Retail 33 21 54 107 116 223 2,389 23% Office Retail 3 2 5 9 10 19 206 2% Total Percentages 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% Pass -by Retail 21 14 35 69 75 144 1,545 15% Total Percentages 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% Residential Office 11 1 12 2 12 15 90 10% Retail Office 2 3 5 10 9 19 206 Reciprocal Total Percentages 12% 29% 14% 50% 18% 23% 33% 25% Office/Retail/School Residential 62 101 162 130 I10 240 2,796 Reciprocal Total Percentages 26% 11 % 15% 15% 23% 18% 15% 18% Residential Schools 56 39 96 1 2 3 316 60% Total Percentages 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% Total Retail Internal Trips 36 23 59 116 126 242 2,595 25% Total Retail Pass -by Trips 21 14 35 69 75 144 1,545 15% Total Retail 'New" Trips 85 55 140 275 298 574 6,159 60% Total Office Internal Trips 13 4 17 12 21 34 296 25% Total Office 'New" Trips 96 11 107 12 100 113 601 75% Total Residential Internal Trips 62 101 162 130 110 240 2,796 18% Total Residential 'New" Trips 228 866 1,094 878 429 1,307 18,207 82% Total Schools Internal Trips 56 39 96 1 2 3 316 60% Total Schools 'New" Trips 38 26 64 1 2 2 211 40% Total Internal 167 167 334 260 260 519 6,003 Total Percentages 26% 15% 19% 17% 22% 20% 18% 20% Total Pass -by 21 14 35 69 75 144 1,545 Total Percentages 3% 1% 2% 5% 6% 5% 590 4% Total "New Trips" 448 957 1,405 1,167 829 1,996 25,178 Total Percentages 70% 84% 79010 78% 71% 75% 77% 76% Total Trips 636 1,138 1,774 1,495 1,164 2,659 32,726 Total Percentages 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% `60e�LtQC- CCUAZy A,4(44�dC--0C--W\%AU'J-1 rt COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA I , l + I ( o I i I 1 OFFICIAL RErrT;T FREDERICK CIR6 CDL!RT I CEED h:ECEIP? ..� I DATE: 06/25!04 TIME: 10:42:03 ACCOUNT: 069CLRO40011938 RECEIPT: 04000016256 CASHIER: EL REG: WE59 TYPE: PM PAYMENT: FULL PAYMENT �j INSTRUMENT • 040011938 BOOK: PAGE: RECORDED: 06/21/04 AT 10:41 I �I GRANTOR: STEPHENSON 4SSOCIATES LC EX: N LOC: CO I GRANTEE: STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES LC EX: N PCT: 100X I AND ADDRESS RECEIVED OF : fHE SHOCKEY COMPANIES CHECK : $33.00 DESCRIPTION 1: ST DIST PAGES: 17 - 2: NAMES: 0 CONSIDERATION: .00 ASSUMEIVAL: 00 MAP: MISC I CODE DESCRIPTION PAID CODE DESCRIP?ION PAID I 301 DEEDS 28.50 145 YELF 106 FUND FEE 3.60 y 2 DC- IS (1/90) TENDERED : AMOUNT PAID: CHANGE AMT . CLERK. OF COURT: REBECCA P. HOSAN 3.00 33.00 00 ` yy Jyy IA�A1 I I � I I I i FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF 0 S TEPHENSON A SSOCIA TES, L. C, STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, I/IRG/N/A JUNE 23, 2004 Fb S! \`ooa ert Rd Old Charles Town m� Ro e� �`�4C Rte. 761 . . °d so�a Stephenson Rte Rte. Mc 761 •. •�.'.'.'.'.'.'.'..'.'. Ro 6'� S 4, o� °a `a sr :... • .....'................. �9s OWNER'S CERTIFICATE THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES, L.C., AS APPEARS ON THE ACCOMPANYING PLATS, IS WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRES OF THE UNDERSIGNED OWNERS, PROPRIETORS, AND TRUSTEES, IF ANY. vt4�t t�2 COMMONWEALL 77T—OF V/ ?,N,/A��, Gl COUNTY OF �'/� TO WIT. THE FOREGOING OWNER'S CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS��7` DAY OF i��L 2004 BY /L'1 A pHWFq •� '�— ll -OF z, 3;, •�AS NOIAW MY COMMISSION EXPIRES f�� / ,�'�.J ''�,• A-' - e` NOTE: PARENT TAX PARCEL IDENTIFICATION T.M. 44—A—J1 /NST. No. 0J0005766 272.78J2 ACRES ZONE: R4 & R4 USE. VACANT/AGRI. T.M. 44—A-292 /NST. No. 0J0005766 259.11911 ACRES ZONE: R4 USE: RESID./AGRI. T.M. 44—A-29J INST. No. 0J0005766 174. 4102 ACRES ZONE.- R4 USE: VACANT/AGRI. APPROVAL: FREDERICK COUNTY SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR DATE GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Engineers Winchester, Virginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX: (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com NLTH OFL p l� t, RICHARD A. EDENS a No.002550 Iz3/0940�- SURv� 2760 SHEET 1 OF 17 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE LAND CONTAINED IN THIS BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT SURVEY IS A PORTION OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES, L.C. BY DEED DATED MARCH 19, 200J OF RECORD IN THE FREDERICK COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE AS INSTRUMENT No. OJ0005766. RICHARD A. EDENS, L.S. SHEET INDEX FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF S TEPHENSON A SSOC/A TES, L. C. STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, WRGINIA SCALE: 1" = 1250' 1 DATE: JUNE 23, 2004 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane 1*1*47 Engineers Winchester, rirginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com (IN FEET) p,LTH OF � O l� RICHARD A. EDENS a No.002550 2760 SHEET 2 OF 17 AREA TABULATION T.M. 44—A-31 EXISTING AREA OF T.M. 44—A-31 = 272.7832 ACRES LESS PORTION ADDED TO T.M. 44—A-292 = — 53.8575 ACRES LESS PORT70N ADDED TO T.M. 44—A-293 =—126.8590 ACRES ADJUSTED AREA = 92.0667 ACRES T M. 44—A-292 EXISTING AREA OF T.M. 44—A-292 = 259. 1191 ACRES LESS PORTION ADDED TO T M. 44—A-293 = — 40.5832 ACRES PLUS PORTION OF TM 44—A-31 ADDED = + 53.8575 ACRES PLUS PORTION OF T.M. 44—A-293 ADDED = + 59.1245 ACRES ADJUSTED AREA = 331.5179 ACRES T.M. 44—A-293 EXISTING AREA OF TM. 44—A-293 = 174.4102 ACRES LESS PORTION ADDED TO T.M. 44—A-292 = — 59.1245 ACRES PLUS PORTION OF T M. 44—A-292 ADDED = + 40.5832 ACRES PLUS PORTION OF TM. 44—A-31 ADDED = + 126.8590 ACRES ADJUSTED AREA = 282.7279 ACRES OTES THE BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A CURRENT FIELD SURVEY BY THIS FIRM. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. EASEMENTS MAY EXIST WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN. SEE SHEETS 11-17 FOR METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS OF THE PARCELS AS ADJUSTED HEREIN. THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON LIES WITHIN ZONE C, AREAS OF MINIMAL FLOODING, AND ZONE A, AREAS OF 100—YEAR FL00D; BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS AND FLOOD HAZARD FACTORS NOT DETERMINED, PER N.F.I.P. FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS No. 510063 0105 B & 510063 0110 B, DATED JULY 17, 1978. THE APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF SAID ZONE A ARE SHOWN HEREON AS DETERMINED BY GRAPH/C PLOT77NG UPON SAID MAP. LEGEND BRL = BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE PER ZONING ORDINANCE RIW = RIGHT OF WAY POB = POINT OF BEGINNING OF METES & BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS. 0 DENOTES ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER IDENTIFIER, SEE SHEETS 4 & 5 FOR DATA R DENOTES PROPERTY CORNER NUMBER AS USED IN METES & BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF S TEPHENSON A SSOCIA TES, L. C. STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, V/RG/N/A SCALE: N/A DATE: JUNE 23, 2004 GREENWAY ENGINEERING Su151 Windy Hill LaSugineene Engineers Winchester, Virginia 22602 4,7rvevors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com p,LTH OF � RICHARD A. EDENS a No.002550 C L Iz3104 2760 SHEET 3 OF 17 8 KEY TO ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS TAX AO IDENT7f1CATlON T.M. N0. 44-A-148 CURRENT OWNER DAOD C. JENKINS & SCARLET M. JENKINS RFFFREN(E DB 847 PG 6 LONE/USE R4/RESID © T. M. 44-A-149 ROBERT H. RUSSELL, ET ALS /NST No. 000011992 R4/RESID © TM. 44-A-150 GLENN A. STULTZ & BETTY A. STULTZ DB 253 PG 192 RA/VACANT OD T.M. 44-A-151 GLENN A. STULTZ & BETTY A. STULTZ DB 337 PG 171 R4IRESID & D8 253 PG 196 0 T M. 44-A-153 R4Y E. SP17ZER & CHRIS77NE E. SP17ZER DB 262 PG 29 R4/RESID OF T.M. 44—A-154 ROBERT E. VUILLERMET & ROSE E VUILLERMET DB 385 PG 687 R4/RESID © T.M. 44—A-155 1OHN R. STROTHER & VENELDA C. STROTHER DB 606 PG 542 R4/RESID HO T M. 44—A-156 R. CHARLES HOTT & KAY K. HOTT DB 304 PG 68 R4/RESID O T M. 44-A-157 WILLIAM G. LOUCH INST. No. 020015735 R4/RESID JO T.M. 44-A-158 ROBERT WILSON & MARY BETH WILSON /NST. No. 030025387 RA/VACANT O T M. 44C-2—A WILL/AM R. ZIRKLE & HELEN C. ZIRKLE DB 805 PG 151 R4/RESID © T.M. 44C-2—B CHARLES S. JOBE & MARY A JOBE DB 370 PG 204 RA/RESID O T M. 44C-2—D TERRY L. BLY & CONNIE S. BLY DB 924 PG 807 R4/RESID N T.M. 44—A-161 JEAN K. GRAY NICHOLSON DB 277 PG 417 R�4 RESID (PLAT—DB 785 PG 199)DB O T.M. 44—A-162 ELLEN E. GETTS (SURVMNG GRANTEE) 320 PG 274 RA/RESID © T.M. 44—A-163 JUAN(TA M. RITTER DB 752 PG 1813 RA/VACANT T M. 44—A-164 JbANITA M. RITTER DB 752 PG 1813 R4/VAC4NT ® T.M. 44—A-165 JUANITA M. RITTER DB 752 PG 1813 R4/RESID O TM. 44—A-139 ANNA 8. McKEE & LESTER W. McKEE DB 866 PG 1299 RA/GARAGE O T M. 44—A-166 ROBERT H. RUSSELL, E' ALS DB 866 PG 1305 R4/RESID © T M. 44—A-208 ACTRESS I. GOLLER /NST. No. 010007462 RA/RESID & DB 262 PG 7 OV T.M. 44—A-209 RODNEY L. AFFLECK DB 743 PG 1506 R4/RESID O TM. 44—A-210 WILL/AM C. ✓ONES, 1R. & BRENDA L JONES DB 758 PG 1072 R4/RESID OX T.M. 44—A-211 RICHARD R. KNUPP & BONNIE R. KNUPP DB 294 PG 212 R4/RESID OY T.M. 44—A-212 JACK L HA YES /NST. No. 0JO010006 R4/RESID O T M. 44—A-218 DINAH G. KRASICH & JOHN E. KR4SICH DB 925 PG 1531 RA/RESID ® T M. 44—A-213 ALLEN LEE LaFOLLETTE DB 312 PG 173 RA/RES1D ® T.M. 44—A-214 ROY C. CAMERON & MILDRED F. CAMERON DB 315 PG 501 RA/RESID O T M. 44—A-215 ANTHONY D. JOHNSON /NST. No. 030016809 R4/RESID T.M. 44—A-216 BAKER B. TYSON & SHIRLEY P. TYSON DB 923 PG 583 R41RESID ® T.M. 44—A-219 C. N. CHASLER, INCORPORATED DB 786 PG 316 R4/RESID ® TM. 44—A-220 RUSSELL 0. ANDERSON & DOROTHY P. ANDERSON DB 241 PG 191 R4/RESID ® T M. 44—A-221 GEORGE 0. TRAVERS �- .iMRYLYN V. TRAVERS DB 378 PG 656 RA/RES'ID © T.M. 44—A-222 ROGER A. McGAFFICK & MARY S. McC.4MCK DB 482 PG 42 RAIRESID ll T M. 44—A-223 DONALD L. MILBURN & KIMBERLY M. MILBURN DB 765 PG 1554 RA/RESID T M. 44—A-224 M/TCHELL B. SM/TI l & PATRICIA B. SMITH DB 249 PG 182 R4/RESID © TM 44—A-225 STEVEN A. LINK & DENNIS W. LINK /NST. No. 010017789 RA/RESID FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF S TEPHENSON A SSOCIA TES, L. C. STONEWALL MAGISTFRAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VTRGINA SCALE: N/A I DATE: JUNE 23, 2004 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Engineers Winchester, Kirginia 22602 .Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com OF D r RICHARD A. EDENS a No.002550 ( Z3 Ic4 suRv� 2760 SHEET 4 OF 17 TAX KEY IDENRF72770N TO ADJOINING NO. PROPERTY OWNERS CURRENT OWNER REFERENCE ON fUSE 0 T.M. 44—A-226 CLYDE STONE & VIRG/NM STONE DB 842 PG 530 RA/RESID © T.M. 44—A-228 DORIS B. HOOVER & GEARUNE B. RITTER WILL No. 010000127 (SEE DB 241 PG 96) RA/RES/D © T.M. 44—A-231 DONALD L. ESTEP & HELEN L. ESTEP DB 786 PG 218 R4/VACANT ® T M. 44—A-229 DONALD L. ESTEP & HELEN L. ESTEP DB 786 PG 218 R4/RES/D © T. M. 44—A-231 B HARRY S. FAUVER, JR. & JEANETTE M. FAUVER DB 427 PG 335 R4/VAC4NT ® T M. 44—A-230 HARRY S. FAUVER, JR. & JEANETTE M. FAUVER DB 404 PG 199 RA/RES/D ® T.M. 44—A-231A STEPHEN K. HEPNER & HOLLY D. HEPNER DB 706 PG 786 RA/VACANT ® T.M. 44—A-232 STEPHEN K. HEPNER & HOLLY D. HEPNER DB 706 PG 786 RA/RES/D O T M. 44—A-233 STEPHEN K. HEPNER & HOLLY D. HEPNER DB 706 PG 786 RA/VACANT © T.M. 44—A-234 /RUIN S. DAY & VIOLET V. DAY DB 314 PG 329 RA/VACANT OW T.M. 44—A-235 IRON S. DAY & VIOLET V. DAY DB 206 PG 486 RA/RES/D ® T.M. 44—A-236 GERALD W. MERRITT & BETTY J. MERRITT DB 388 PG 13 RA/RESID ® T.M. 44—A-286 DAMES D. K/NES, ET ALS INST. No. 000012262 RA/VACANT O T M. 44—A-287 DAMES D. K/NES, ET ALS INST. No. 000012262 RA/VACANT ® T.M. 44—A-288 WAYNE E. WALTERS DB 323 PG 430 R4/RES/D ® T M. 44—A-289 ELSE A. LOF7HOUSE INST. No. 020004624 R4/RES/D ® T.M. 44—A-291 RICHARD L. S4VILLE INST. No. 0JO018414 R4/RESID ® T.M. 55-7-14 W/LLMM G. ME/ER, lll, ET UX DB 744 PG 437 R4/RES/D ® T.M. 55-7-15 SAUN/E D. S/RBAUGH, ET UX DB 641 PG 110 R4/RES/D ® T M. 44—A-138A NORWOOD T 0 ROARK, ET UX DB 537 PG 709 R4/RES/D FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF S TEPHENSON A SSOC/A TES, L. C. STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRG/N/A SCALE: N/A I DATE: JUNE 23, 2004 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windv Hill Lane F_ngineers Winchester, Virginia 22602 40,07 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com p,LTH of A r .fit. RICHA A. EDENS a No.002550 2760 SHEET 5 OF 17 OLD CHARLES TOWN ROAD VA. ROUTE 761 - VARIABLE WIDTH R/W Z� DB 432 PG 366 & DB 432 PG 58 Z 0 a `" 0 14 15 16 17 18 o c� 2 W ct y 60 ' BRL� �'� S\ % S� > 10 OPQ �o�� 5/�� O` / Q ADJUS TED TAX PARCEL o ► 44-A 31 92.0667 ACRES 21 LOT 5 APPROXIMATE LIMITS �� e w 2 // I o OF FLOOD ZONE A z / J LOT 7 / 1 O APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ^'z � N LOT 6 1 0 / �s� /1 NATURAL GAS PIPELINE l �e� j � Q �1 SHENANDOAH GAS CO. EASEMENT 5 N< m / DB 235 PG 269 22 Q v <n POB ry°' T 26 (UNSPECIFIED WIDTH) W /O VP� C 0 '30; 'PO, ~�I25 ` \ �\ 6ho/ 23 T.M. 44—A-30 EMM,4NUEL UNITED \ METHODIST CHURCH (MILBURN CEMETERY) T q�Ci INST No. 020018966 SEE WILL BOOK 9 PG 220 o tiFc� 9� 9 IONS �� 4- /0 T.M. 44-A-29 24 'Q9 JUDITH McCANN SLAUGHTER ' INST. No. 020000469 / ZONE' RA USE.- AGRI. NOTE COURSES 19-20 THRU 23-24 ARE NEW LOT LINES HEREBY ESTABLISHED. 500 10 500 SEE SHEETS 11-17 FOR METES & BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS. GRAPHIC SCALE (IN FEET) FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF p,LTH OFF S TEPHENSON A SSOC/A TES, L. C. r��f STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIAD A. SCALE: 1" = 500' NoDATE: JUNE 23, 2004 RICHA.002 E550 a, GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Q O Engineers Winchester, Virginia 22602 �� SURv�'� Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwaveng.com 2760 SHEET 6 OF 17 S ToWN RpAD 61 OL.0 0 VA Ro W DARLTH R/W VAR n 432 PO 55 of �4D CH VA. ROUTE 261 - '9 T.Ow K14 `30 f'RESC P � %W 4 45 Ds U/@ 'wo ADJUS TED �a1P�,y TAX PARCEL ti 44-A -282 JJ 1. 5179 ACRES L\o�. OUTBUILDINGS a� \ POND O d0 POND •r \ z o \ d DWELLING �ES o Nt„ NATURAL GAT S PIPELINE OF \\ FORMER p �ATE� Q SHENANDOAH GAS CO. EASEMENT — HEREBY VA DB 235 PG 269 i (UNSPECIFIED WIDTH) POND 1 \ 0 73 \ \ P 71 \ 70 3 \ � o \ POND I T.M. 44—A-29 JUDITH MCCANN SLAUGHTER INST. No. 020000469 ZONE.- RA USE: AGRI. ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44—A-29J SEE SHEETS 9 & 10 500 0 500 GRAPHIC SCALE (IN FEET) FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF S TEPHENSON A SSOCIA TES, L. C. STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, ORGIN14 SCALE: 1" = 500' 1 DATE: JUNE 23, 2004 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Kill Lane Engineers Winchester, rirginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com 1 RICHARD A. EDENS a No.002550 4 � suRv� 2760 SHEET 7 OF 17 0 V N W V) O Z ti ADJUS TED TAX PARCEL 44-A -292 JJ 1.5179 ACRES 68 .0' PO( D ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44-A-293 SEE SHEETS 9 & 10 �q 'Poo N 55 self , 711V1 w -io. N0S uu ® 14 ° /yy / / ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44—A-29J / SEE SHEETS 9 & 10 NOTE 500 0 500 COURSES 66-67 THRU 7J-74 AND 74-2J THRU 20-19 ARE NEW LOT LINES HEREBY ESTABLISHED. GRAPHIC SCALE SEE SHEETS 11-17 FOR METES & BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS. (IN FEET) FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF S TEPHENSON A SSOC/A TES, L. C. STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1"SCALE: 5001DATE: JUNE 23, 2004JUNE 23, 2004 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Mindy Hill Lune Engineers Winchester, Vrginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com p,LTH of � O r�� RICHARD A. EDENS y No.002550 I Z31o4 �. SURv� 2760 SHEET 8 OF 17 CD 82 tf,�) 86 '� 'QO UlF 66 ��6f/ POB 80 ` p.. ` 89 90 91 81 92 0'�/, o� 93 83 84 i 88 BARN ` 0 94 \ ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL o - GRID MERIDIAN cy ; 44-A -29.3 / VA NORTH ZONE NAD83 s' PER GPS OBSERVATION 282.7279 ACRES C, 9S / Q ^ / T.M. 44-A-29 JUDITH McCANN SLAUGHTER CIS / INST. No. 020000469 ZONE. RA USE. AGRI. GAS k / 96 4010 / 1 r'UN �Fc �q26 S NF 0'- I J FF 1 97 � � I 98 c -- ti'li F, i /G 000 / FORMER LOT LINES / HEREBY VACATED ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44-A-31 SEE SHT. 6 72 ADJUSTED 73 TAX PARCEL 44-A-292 SEE SHEETS 7 & 8 I/ 500 0 500 GRAPHIC SCALE (IN FEET) MATCH TO SHEET 10 FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF S TEPHENSON A SSOCIA TES, L. C. STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, WRGINIA SCALE: 1 " = 500' 1 DATE: JUNE 23, 2004 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Engineers Winchester. Ktginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com of y 1 �C� RICHARD A. EDENS a No.002550 ' c�12,3 l c4 �. SUR,4 k 2760 SHEET 9 OF 17 MATCH TO SHEET 9 J c-n W / I I I I 2! I C! UI I� Z N 1 1 C1 o \ o APPROXIMATE LIMITS \ OF FLOOD ZONE A 1 I ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44-A-293 282.7279 ACRES GRID MERIDIAN VA NORTH ZONE NAD8J PER GPS OBSERVAT70N oTE COURSES 24-74 THRU 67-66 ARE NEW LOT LINES HEREBY ESTABLISHED. SEE SHEETS 11-17 FOR METES & BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS. 500 0 500 GRAPHIC SCALE (IN FEET) / 0 / 69 / ADJUSTED / TAX PARCEL / 44-A-292 / SEE SHEET 7 & 8 / 67 / �J FINAL PLAT FOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE LANDS OF S TEPHENSON A SSOC/A TES, L. C. STONEWALL MAGISTERML DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, WRGINIA SCALE: 1" = 500' 1 DATE: JUNE 23, 2004 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane 1+4� Engineers Winchester, Virginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44-A-292 SEE SHEET 7 & 8 PR1C' 66h 1�► , oo � RIB �PSd PR OF � t 0 RICHARD A. EDENS y No.002550 (� 123 (04- 4. 2760 SHEET 10 OF 17 0 METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS rn The accompanying plats represent a Boundary Line Adjustment Survey between three parcels of land, being a portion of the land conveyed to Stephenson Associates, L.C. by deed dated March 19, 2003 of record in the Frederick County Circuit Court Clerk's Office as Instrument No. 030005766 and more particularly being (i) all of "Parcel One" of Part C "McCann Tracts" described therein, less and except a small portion thereof conveyed to Trustees of Emmanuel United Methodist Church by deed dated April 22, 2002 of record in said Clerk's Office as Instrument No. 020018966, (ii) all of "Tract One" of Part A "McKee Tracts" described therein and (iii) all of "Tract Two" of Part A "McKee Tracts" described therein. The said land is situated near the community of Stephenson, lying south of Old Charles Town Road (Va. Secondary Route 761), east of Milburn RoadTVa. Secondary Route 662) and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Va. Secondary Route 664) in Stonewall Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia and is more particularly bounded as follows: ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44-A-31 Beginning at (1) a point in the center of Milburn Road (Va. Route 662), about 0.45 mile southwest of the intersection with Old Charles Town Road (Va. Secondary Route 761), corner to Emmanuel United Methodist Church; thence with the center of said Milburn Road for the following seven courses: N 25039'01" E - 163.35' to (2) the point of curvature of a curve to the left; thence 200.00' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 18,683.23' and a chord bearing N 25020'37" E for a distance of 200.00', to (3) the point of tangency; thence N 25002' 13" E - 937.80' to (4) the point of curvature of a curve to the left; thence 199.99' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 8,233.72' and a chord bearing N 24020'28" E for a distance of 199.99', to (5) the point of tangency; thence N 23038'42" E - 32.79' to (6) the point of curvature of a curve to the right; thence 200.00' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 33,188.12' and a chord bearing N 23049'04" E for a distance of 200.00', to (7) the point of tangency; thence N 23059'26" E-179.40' to (8) a point in the center of Milburn Road (Va. Route 662) at the southwestern terminus of the dedicated right-of-way; thence with the southwestern boundary of said right-of-way S 64035'06" E - 20.00' to (9) a %" iron rebar found in the southeastern boundary of Milburn Road (Va. Secondary Route 662) at the southwestern terminus of the dedicated right-of-way; thence with the southeastern boundary of Milburn Road for the following five courses: N 31007'32" E - 100.50' to (10) a''/z" iron rebar found; thence N 25024'54" E - 50.00' to (11) a %" iron rebar found; thence N 21036'03" E - 75.17' to (12) a''/z" iron rebar found; thence N 27003'05" E - 175.07' to (13) a''/z" iron rebar found; thence N 57026'26" E - 48.68' to (14) a''/s" iron rebar found on curve in the southern boundary of Old Charles Town Road (Va. Secondary Route 761); thence with said road boundary for the following four courses: 110.67' along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 1,175.92' and a chord bearing S 80°35'09" E for a distance of 110.63', to (15) a''/2" iron rebar found at the end of said curve; thence S 84010'54" E - 128.58' to (16) a''/i" iron rebar found; thence N 85005'00" E - 133.10' " to (17) a''/s" iron rebar found; thence File 2760 Sheet 11 of 17 CD N 83059'52" E - 75.92' to (18) a''/2" iron rebar found, corner to Norwood T. O'Roark, et ux; thence with O'Roark S 47041'53" E—1,207.05' to (19) a %2" iron rebar & cap set, corner to Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-292 described herein, thence along new division lines through the land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. and with Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-292 for the following four courses: S 33034'15" W - 117.39' to (20) a''/z" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 26035' 10" W - 610.00' to (21) a /2" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 21031'02" W - 561.64' to (22) a/z" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 21039'37" W - 376.59' to (23) a''/z" iron rebar & cap set; thence continuing along a new division line, with Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-292 and then Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-293 described herein S 2002T05" W - 659.32' to (24) a %" iron rebar & cap set in a line of Judith McCann Slaughter; thence with Slaughter N 63053'23" W—1,514.99' to (25) to a''/z" iron rebar found in a line of Emmanuel United Methodist Church (Milburn Cemetery); thence A ith said Church for the following two courses: N 25057'01" E - 114.87' to (26) a %" iron rebar found; thence N 64002'59" W, passing over a''/z" iron rebar found at 159.36' and continuing, 174.36' in all to (1) the point of beginning. Containing.......................................................................................................... 92.0667 Acres. ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44-A-292 Beginning at (27) a ''/2" iron rebar found in the southern boundary of Old Charles Town Road (Va. Secondary Route 761, about 0.45 mile east of the intersection with Milburn Road (Va. Secondary Route 662), corner to Glenn A. Stultz, et ux; thence with said road boundary S 71043'04" E - 200.86' to (28) a'/2" :ron rebar & cap found, corner to Ray E. Spitzer, et ux; thence with Spitzer S 18021'21" W - 295.22' to (29) a''/s" iron rebar & cap found; thence continuing with Spitzer, then Robert E. Vuillenmet, et ux, then John R. Strother, et ux, and then R. Charles Hott, et ux S 71038'39" E - 400.00' to a (30)'/2" iron rebar & cap found, corner to William G. Louch; thence with Louch S 73055'39" E - 100.10' to (31) a'/z" iron rebar & cap found, corner to Robert Wilson, et ux; thence with Wilson S 74022'24" E - 203.52' to (32) a''/z" iron rebar & cap found, corner to William R. Zirkle, et ux; thence with Zirkle S 71048'08" E - 140.35' to (33) a'/2" iron rebar found, corner to Charles S. Jobe, et ux; thence with Jobe and then Terry L. Bly, et ux S 72026'10" E - 195.98' to (34) a'/4" pinched pipe found, corner to Jean K. Gray Nicholson; thence with Nicholson S 57003'44" E - 64.70' to a (35) ''/z" iron rebar found, corner to Ellen E. Getts; thence with Getts and then Juanita M. Ritter File 2760 Sheet 12 of 17 0 a S 55044'46" E - 104.50' to (36) a ''/2" iron rebar found, corner to Anna B. McKee, et vir; thence with McKee for the following two courses: S 40049'52" W - 200.00' to (37) a %" iron rebar found: thence S 55044'46" E - 201.32' to (38) a `/2" iron rebar found; thence continuing with McKee and then Juanita M. Ritter N 40149'52" E, passing over a %z" iron rebar & cap found at 506.83' and continuing, 521.85' in all to (39) a point in the center of Old Charles Town Road (Va. Secondary Route 761); thence with the center of said road S 45052'57" E - 30.78' to (40) a point; thence departing said road and with Robert H. Russell, et al for the following three courses: S 40°00'02" W, passing over a ``/z" iron rebar found at 20.69' and continuing, 321.23' in all to (41) a %2" iron rebar found; thence S 46033'57" E - 112.00' to (42) a ``/z" iron rebar found, thence N 43026'03" E, passing over a %" iron rebar found at 300.00' and continuing, 319.21' in all to (43) a point in the center of Old Charles Town Road (Va. Secondary Route 761); thence with the center of said road for the following two courses: S 46008' 17" E - 171.32' to (44) a point; thence S 46041'21" E - 628.29' to (45) a point; thence departing said road and with John L. Goller, et ux for the following two courses: S 43°25' 16" W, passing over a %2" iron rebar & cap set at 15.00' and continuing, 564.68' in all to (46) a '/2" iron rebar & cap found; thence S 48038'44" E - 100.10' to (47) a ''/s" iron rebar & cap found, corner to Rodney L. Affleck; thence with Affleck, then William C. Jones, Jr., et ux, and then Richard R. Knupp, et ux S 48017'50" E - 300.13' to (48) a ``/z" iron rebar & cap found, corner to Jack L. Hayes; thence with Hayes and then Dinah G. Krasich, et vir S 48015'44" E - 250.10' to (49) a %" iron rebar & cap found, thence continuing with Krasich S 50002'51" E - 310.10' to (50) a ''/z" iron rebar & cap found in a line of C. N. Chasler, Incorporated; thence with Chasler, Inc. for the following two courses: S 28059'22" W - 7.03' to a (51) 1" iron pipe found; thence S 47050' 14" E - 98.27' to a (52) 1 " iron pipe found in a line of Russell O. Anderson, et ux; thence with Anderson for the following two courses: S 43026'54" W - 19.15' to a (53) ''/z" iron rebar & cap found; thence S 47008'06" E - 100.00' to a (54) %" iron rebar found, corner to George O. Travers, et ux; thence with Travers S 47005'57" E - 100.84' to a (55) '/2" iron rebar & cap found in a line of Roger A. McGaffick, et ux; thence with McGaffick for the following two courses: S 43026'27" W - 4.45' to (56) a 1 " pinched pipe found; thence S 49008'33" E - 100.10' to (57) a corner fence post, corner to Donald L. Milburn, et ux; thence with Milburn File 2760 Sheet 13 of 17 S 49008'55" E - 99.29' to (58) a I " iron pipe found, corner to Mitchell B. Smith, et ux; thence with Smith S 49002'24" E - 97.64' to (59) a corner fence post, corner to Steven A. Link, et al: thence with Link and then Clyde Stone, et ux S 49021'21" E - 200.12' to (60) a corner fence post, corner to Doris B. Hoover, et al: thence with Hoover S 49017'34" E - 218.63' to (61) a 2" iron pipe found, corner to Donald L. Estep, et ux, thence with Estep and then Harry S. Fauver, Jr., et ux S 49048'49" E - 300.37' to (62) a %2" iron rebar & cap found, corner to Stephen K. I Iepner, et ux; thence with Hepner for the following three courses: S 49038'21" E - 99.48' to (63) a 1" iron pipe found; thence S 49011'07" E - 215.79' to (64) a corner fence post; thence N 45018'31" E - 137.79' to (65) a'/2" iron rebar & cap found, corner to Irvin S. Day, et ux; thence with Day and then Gerald W. Merritt, et ux S 34000'54" E - 400.41' to (66) a'/2" iron rebar found; thence along new division lines through the land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. and with Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-293 described herein for the following eight courses: S 55025'03" W—1,727.06' to (67) a '/2" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 57031'33" W - 684.47' to (68) a %" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 83021'23" W - 985.43' to (69) a %" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 65057'20" W - 724.29' to (70) a %" iron rebar & cap set, thence N 37004'44" W - 494.10' to (71) a %2" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 86006'05" W—1,222.51' to (72) a %2" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 03016'45" W - 945.41' to (73) a'/2" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 76014'58" W - 724.35' to (74) a''/2" iron rebar & cap set in a line of Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-31 described herein, thence continuing along new division lines through the land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. and with Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-31 for the following five courses: N 20027'05" E - 295.03' to (23) a %" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 21039'37" E - 376.59' to (22) a %2" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 21031'02" E - 561.64' to (21) a %2" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 26035' 10" E - 610.00' to (20) a '/2" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 33034' 15" E - 117.39' to (19) a %2" iron rebar & cap set in a line of Norwood T. O'Roark, et ux; thence with O'Roark for the following two courses: S 47041'53" E - 33.08' to (75) a set stone found; thence N 40053'15" E - 711.36' to (76) a %2" iron rebar & cap found in a line of David C. Jenkins, et ux; thence with Jenkins S 86031'31" E - 37.00' to (77) a corner fence post, corner to James R. Russell, et ux; thence with Russell and then Glenn A. Stultz, et ux File 2760 Sheet 14 of 17 S 75007'31" E - 300.00' to (78) a'i/2" iron rebar found; thence continuing with Stoltz for the following two courses: S 71023'31" E - 51.40' to (79) a''/2" iron rebar & cap found; thence N 18006'29" E - 290.62' to (27) the point of beginning. Containing.......................................................................................................... 331.5179 Acres. ADJUSTED TAX PARCEL 44-A-293 Beginning at (80) a point in the center of Milburn Road (Va. Route 662), about 1.04 miles southwest of the intersection with Old Charles Town Road (Va. Secondary Route 761), corner to other land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. (TM 44-A-3 I A); thence with the center of said road for the following fourteen courses: N 22046'05" E - 174.83' to (81) the point of curvature of a curve to the right; thence 350.00' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 54,691.24' and a chord bearing N 22°57'06" E for a distance of 350.00, to (82) the point of tangency; thence N 23008'03" E - 32.67' to (83) the point of curvature of a curve to the left; thence 139.61' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 765.59' and a chord bearing N 17154'39" E for a distance of 139.42', to (84) the point of tangency; thence N 12041' 12" E - 65.87' to (85) the point of curvature of a curve to the right; thence 119.55' along the are of said curve, having a radius of 561.23' and a chord bearing N 18047'20" E for a distance of 119.32', to (86) the point of tangency; thence N 24053'28" E - 34.32' to (87) the point of curvature of a curve to the left; thence 149.98' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 4,100.23' and a chord bearing N 23050'35" E for a distance of 149.97', to (88) the point of tangency; thence N 22047'43" E - 106.42' to (89) the point of curvature of a curve to the left; thence 149.99' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 6,328.14' and a chord bearing N 22106'58" E for a distance of 149.991, to (90) the point of tangency; thence N 21026'13" E - 26.61' to (91) the point of curvature of a curve to the right; thence 109.96' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 1,611.28' and a chord bearing N 23023'32" E for a distance of 109.94', to (92) the point of tangency; thence N 25020'50" E - 98.74' to (93) the point of curvature of a curve to the right; thence 149.95' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 719.34' and a chord bearing N 31019'08" E for a distance of 149.68', to (94) a point comer to Judith McCann Slaughter; thence with Slaughter for the following five courses: S 43051'33" E, passing over a %2" iron rebar found at 15.18' and continuing, 1,050.67' in all to (95) a corner fence post; thence S 62001'37" E - 1,525.27' to a (96) corner fence post; thence N 48020'14" E - 701.37' to (97) a corner fence post; thence File 2760 Sheet 15 of 17 N 06045' 13" E - 1,130.00' to (98) a '/2" iron rebar found; thence N 63053'23" W - 681.99' to (24) a %2" iron rebar & cap set, corner to Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-31 described herein; thence along a new division line through the land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. and with Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-31 N 20027'05" E - 364.30' to (74) a''/" iron rebar & cap set, corner to Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-292 described herein; thence continuing along new division lines through the land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. and with Adjusted Tax Parcel 44-A-292 for the following eight courses: S 76014'58" E - 724.35' to (73) a'/2" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 03016'45" E - 945.41' to (72) a %" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 86°06'05" E—1,222.51' to (71) a''/z" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 37004'44" E - 494.10' to (70) a %" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 65057'20" E - 724.29' to (69) a %z" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 83021'23" E - 985.43' to (68) a ''/z" iron rebar & cap set; thence S 57031'33" E - 684.47' to (67) a''/z" iron rebar & cap set; thence N 55025'03" E—1,727.06' to (66) a'/2" iron rebar found, corner to Gerald W. Merritt, et ux; thence with Merritt N 45016'06" E, passing over a''/z" iron pipe found at 300.66' and continuing, 318.27' in all to (99) a point in the center of Jordan Springs Road (Va. Secondary Route 664); thence with the center of said road S 34005'06" E - 162.64' to (100) a point; thence departing said road and with James D. Kines, et als S 55°34'34" W, passing over a fence post at 22.39' and continuing, 318.15' in all to (101) a''/z" iron rebar found; thence continuing with Kines S 34000'54" E - 200.00' to (102) a %" iron rebar found, corner to Wayne E. Walters; thence with Walters S 30004'05" E - 103.73' to (103) a %" iron rebar found, corner to Gerald W. Lofthouse, et ux; thence with Lofthouse S 30033'57" E - 103.67' to (104) a %2" iron rebar found, corner to Richard L. Saville; thence with Saville for the following two courses: S 24024'39" E - 192.01' to (105) a %" iron rebar found; thence N 56124'04" E, passing over a %" iron rebar found at 282.44' and continuing, 304.10' in all to (106) a point on curve in the center of Jordan Springs Road (Va. Secondary Route 664); thence with the center of said road for the following five courses: 54.36' along the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 615.1 V and a chord bearing S 08°27'39" E for a distance of 54.35', to (107) the point of tangency; thence S 05055'44" E - 9.85' to (108) the point of curvature of a curve to the right; thence 148.90' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 573.13' and a chord bearing S 01130'50" W for a distance of 148.48', to (109) the point of tangency; thence File 2760 Sheet 16 of 17 CD co S 08057'25" W - 102.73' to (110) the point of curvature of a curve to the left; thence rV 15.48' along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 550.00, and a chord bearing S 08°09'01" W for a distance of 15.481, to (111) a point; thence departing said road and with Greig D. W. Aitken, et ux for the following five courses: S 58°55'05" W, passing over a ''/z" iron rebar found at 18.99' and continuing, 1177.22' in all to (112) a ''/.," iron rebar found; thence N 43025'08" W - 291.00' to (113) a set stone found; thence S 43002'25" W - 822.79' to (114) a corner fence post in concrete; thence N 40020'51" W - 813.15' to (115) a set stone found: thence S 41°38'30" W - 2,318.25' to (116) a set stone found, corner to William G. Meier, I11, et ux (Lot 14-A, Woods Mill Subdivision); thence with Meier N 49033'24" W - 398.82' to (117) a power pole, corner to other land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. (TM 44-A-31 A); thence with said other land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. for the following three courses: N 48035'16" W - 1,518.38' to (118) a corner fence post; thence S 45051'14" W - 514.78' to (119) a corner fence post; thence N 77051'16" W, passing over a'/2" iron rebar found, corner to other land of Stephenson Associates, L.C. (TM 44-A-31A), at 3,834.28' and continuing, 3,849.47' in all to (80) the point of beginning. Containing.......................................................................................................... 282.7279 Acres. Surveyed.......................................................................................................... June 23, 2004. �,LTH OF O � U RI HARD A. EDEN No.002550 rq �(23(a4-oI' �D sU;`� VIRGINIA: FREDERICK COUNTY, SCT. is instrtunent of writing was produced tome on oA5,a0o�"at at with certificate of acknowledgement thereto annexed w �admitted to record. T imposed by Sec. 58.1-802 of $ , and 58.1-801 have been paid, if assessable 4ew A�V , Clerk File 2760 Sheet 17 of 17 RUN DATE: 3/19/2003 PAYMENTS BY MAP NUMBER PAGE: 1 *: Denotes information retrieved from the Cleared file. T R A N S A C T I 0 N DRAWER RUNNING TAX PAYER DEPT TICKET # NUMB. TYPE DATE AMOUNT NO. CHECK NUMBER BALANCE MAP NUMBER: 44 A 31 CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WV RE2002 6661-0001 96032 PAY 2002/06/11 264.98CR LBX BB&T-FM 317201 264.98CR CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WV RE2002 6661-0002 5365 PAY 2002/12/06 264.98CR AFW FM 328689 529.96CR RUN DATE: 3/19/2003 PAYMENTS BY MAP NUMBER PAGE: 2 *: Denotes information retrieved from the Cleared file. T R A N S A C T I O N DRAWER RUNNING TAX PAYER DEPT TICKET # NUMB. TYPE DATE AMOUNT NO. CHECK NUMBER BALANCE MAP NUMBER: 44 A 31A SHOCKEY/DULLES, LC RE2002 30006-0001 97062 PAY 2002/06/12 88.65CR LBX BB&T-FM 317202 618.61CR SHOCKEY/DULLES, LC RE2002 30006-0002 5366 PAY 2002/12/06 88.65CR AFW FM 328692 707.26CR RUN DATE: 3/19/2003 PAYMENTS BY MAP NUMBER PAGE: 3 *: Denotes information retrieved from the Cleared file. T R A N S A C •T I O N DRAWER RUNNING TAX PAYER DEPT TICKET # NUMB. TYPE DATE AMOUNT NO. CHECK NUMBER BALANCE MAP NUMBER: 44 A 292 CRIDER & SHOCKEY OF WVA RE2002 6658-0001 96032 PAY 2002/06/11 581.56CR LBX BB&T-FM 317201 1,288.82CR CRIDER & SHOCKEY OF WVA RE2002 6658-0002 5365 PAY 2002/12/06 581.56CR AFW FM 328689 1,870.38CP RUN DATE: 3/19/2003 PAYMENTS BY MAP NUMBER PAGE: 4 *: Denotes information retrieved from the Cleared file. T R A N S A C T I 0 N DRAWER RUNNING TAX PAYER DEPT TICKET # NUMB. TYPE DATE AMOUNT NO. CHECK NUMBER BALANCE MAP NUMBER: 44 A 293 & SHOCKEY INC OF WVA RE2002 6657-0001 96032 PAY 2002/06/11 115.43CR LBX BB&T-FM 317201 1,985.81CR CRIDER CRIDER & SHOCKEY INC OF WVA RE2002 6657-0002 5365 PAY 2002/12/06 115.43CR AFW FM 328689 2,101.24CR 0 6 030005765 i qP Exemption pursuant to Virginia Code Section �� g THIS DEED, made and entered into on this the 19' day of March, 2003, by and between SHOCKEY/DULLES, L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, party of the first part, GRANTOR, and STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES, L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, P.O. Box 2530, Winchester, Virginia 22604, party of the second part, GRANTEE; WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the party of the first part does hereby grant and convey, with covenants of General Warranty of Title, unto the party of the second part, all of that certain lot or parcel of land more particularly described as follows: All that certain tract or parcel of land, together with all the rights, rights of way, privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging, containing 184.2477 acres, more or less, fronting on the East side of Route 661 just Northwest of Winchester in Stonewall Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia, and being more particularly described by plat prepared by P. Duane Brown, C.L.S., dated October 20, 1987, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 663 at Page 676; and being the same property conveyed to Shockey /Dulles, L.C., a Virginia limited liability company as assignee of John P. Good, Jr., by deed dated executed December 20, 1995, by Jol-m Driggs, Managing General Partner and Joint Venturer of JJJA Associates, a Virginia general partnership/joint venture, said deed being of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 851 at Page 848. This conveyance is subject to restrictive covenants, easements, conditions, restrictions, and rights -of -way of record affecting the aforesaid realty. This document prepared by: Tax Parcel Numbers: LAWSON AND SILEK, P.L.C. 160 Exeter Drive, Suite 103 Winchester, VA 22603 WITNESS the following signature and seal: SHOCKEY/DULLES, L.C., a Virginia limited liability company � CD ry Donald Shockey, r. 4 Its:,/ Manager COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AT LARGE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was sworn to, signed and acknowledged before me this /3 i3 day of March, 2003, by J. Donald Shockey, Jr. the Manager of SHOCKEY/DULLES, L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company. i My Commission expires: PREPARED WITHOUT BENEFIT OF TITLE EXAMINATION BY AND RETURN TO: Thomas Moore Lawson Attorney at Law Lawson and Silek, P.L.C. P. O. Box 2740 Winchester, VA 22604 otary Public VIRGINIA: FREDERICK COUNTY, SCT. This instrumant of writing was pmdunod to me on and with certificate of acknowledgement thereto annexed was admitted tto--record. T imposed by Sec. 58.1-802 of e� ' , and 58.1-801 have been paid, if assessable I Clerk 2 MAR 2 1 2003 HIE„M, ..; , 030005766 r � Exemption pursuant to Virginia Code Section — g (10) THIS DEED, made and entered into on this the jd:P� day of March, 2003, by and between CRIDER & SHOCKEY INC. of WEST VIRGINIA, a West Virginia corporation, party of the first part, GRANTOR, and STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, P.O. Box 2530, Winchester, Virginia 22604, party of the second part, GRANTEE; WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the party of the first part does hereby grant and convey, with covenants of Special Warranty of Title, unto the party of the second part, all of that certain lot or parcel of land more particularly described as follows: A. MCKEE TRACTS TRACT ONE- All of that certain tract of land, containing 200 Acres, more or less, lying South of and adjacent to TRACT TWO hereinbelow described, and just South of Highways 761 and 664 in Stonewall Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia, and being the same property conveyed to Mae V. Bailey and O.R. Bailey, her husband, as joint tenants with the right to survivorship, by Herbert S. Larrick, Special Commissioner, by Deed dated June 24, 1947, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 200, at Page 581; and also by Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure dated October 21, 1994, from JJJA Associates, A Virginia General Partnership, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 829, at Page 456. Upon the death of O.R. Bailey in 1962, Mae V. Bailey, as the surviving tenant, became the sole owner of the property. TRACT TWO- All of that certain tract of land, containing 259 acres, more or less, fronting on the South side of Highways 761 and 664; LESS AND EXCEPT that certain .918 Acre parcel and a non-exclusive easement of right of way across the adjacent existing land to the Old Charlestown Road (Virginia Route 761) This document prepared by: LAWSON AND SILEK, P.L.C. 160 Exeter Drive, Suite 103 Winchester, VA 22603 MAR 2 1 2003 reserved by the Grantors herein, as shown more particularly described in the attached Boundary Line Adjustment of the land of Anna B. McKee, dated September 11, 1996, by Mark D. Smith, Land Surveyor, and being all of the remaining property conveyed to Mae V. Bailey and Ora R. Bailey, her husband, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship, by Deed dated November 6, 1947 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 203, at Page 32. Upon the death of Ora R. Bailey in 1962, Mae V. Bailey, as the surviving tenant, became the sole owner of said N property. (The original property was 310 Acres from which approximately 56 off conveyances have been made.) ry Mae V. Bailey died testate of March 20, 1996, and by her Will, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County in Will Book 108 at Page 968, she devised these two parcels to her daughter, Anna B. McKee. Anna B. McKee was duly qualified as the Executrix of the Estate of Mae V. Bailey by Order entered March 28, 1996, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Will Book 108, at Page 969. It being the same property conveyed to Crider & Shockey, Inc. of West Virginia by deed dated September 27, 1996 from Anna B. McKee, Executor under the Will of Mae V. Bailey, Deceased, and Ana B. McKee and recorded in the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia in Deed Book 866, at Page 1281. B. McCANN (.7315 acres) All that certain lot of land, containing .7315 Acres, lying in Stonewall Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia, on South side of Old Charles Town Road (Virginia Route 761) and on West side of Milburn Road, on East side of C.S.X. Railroad property and on North side by property owned by McCann Land Trust, shown as Parcel B on sketch dated September 21, 2000 attached to Instrument No. 000010521, in Deed Book 977 at Page 1330 as Exhibit A and more particularly described by a plat prepared by Mark D. Smith, Land Surveyor, dated October 2, 2000, attached to and by this reference made a part hereof, and being the same property conveyed to Harry L. McCann by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia in Deed Book 91, at Page 173. It being the same property conveyed to Crider & Shockey, Inc. of West Virginia by deed dated September 29, 2000 from N. K. Benham, III, Trustee of the McCann Land Trust and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County on October 4, 2000, as Instrument No. 000010521 in Deed Book 977 at page 1330. OA MAR 2 1 Z003 PLAN;'ANIG, 5IT 0 0 C. McCANN TRACTS PARCEL ONE- All of that certain tract of land, containing 273.2421 Acres, more or less, lying in Stonewall Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia, more particularly described on the attached plat prepared by Mark D. Smith, L.S., dated September 22, 2000, lying East of Milburn Road or the centerline of same, as the case may be, South of Rote 761, West of property owned by the Grantee and North of property owned by Shockey/Dulles, L.C.; and being a portion of "Tract Two" and all of "Tract Three" conveyed to the Grantor N herein by deed dated July 10, 1988 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia in Deed Book 67, at Page 137. c PARCEL TWO- All of that certain tract of land, containing 40.1062 Acres, more or less, lying in Stonewall Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia, more particularly described on the Final Plat for Major Rural Subdivision of the land of Crider & Shockey, Inc. of West Virginia prepared by Mark D. Smith, L.S., dated May 10, 2002 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County on July 17, 2002 as instrument number 0a.0011,23 a_ It being the same property conveyed to Crider & Shockey, Inc. of West Virginia by deed dated October 2, 2000, from H.K. Benham, III, Trustee of the McCann Land Trust and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County on October 4, 2000 as Instrument No. 000010522 in Deed Book 977 at Page 1335. This conveyance is subject to restrictive covenants, easements, conditions, restrictions, and rights -of -way of record affecting the aforesaid realty. WITNESS the following signature and seal: CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC. of WES7y VIRGINIA, a West Virginia corporation �--� By: 3 SEAL) MAID 2 1 2003 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AT LARGE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, TO -WIT: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this � day of March, 2003, by J. Donald Shockey, Jr. who is the President of Crider & Shockey, Inc. of West Virginia, a West Virginia corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Nota Public My commission expires PREPARED WITHOUT BENEFIT OF TITLE EXAMINATION BY AND RETURN TO: Thomas Moore Lawson Attorney at Law Lawson and Silek, P.L.C. P. O. Box 2740 Winchester, VA 22604 TAX PARCELS: CONSIDERATION CONVEYANCE VIRGINIA: FREDERICK COUNTY, SCT. This instrument of of wring was pmduoed oo me on at iii3d with r., ,,ideate of acknowledgement thereto annexed was ad;;nitted to record. T imposed by Stc. 58.1-802 of and 58.1 801 have been paid, if assessable. 4e..t /6; , Clerk /,i ;4 /)- a %. . h/�Z- f( - 01 Y-3 a f MAR 2 1 2003 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planniing and Development 540/665-5651 FAX. 540/665-6395 ME MOR AND U M TOE Finance Departilient V FROM-� Karen A. Cain, Office Aff ssisant ,,,UB,JF,CT: Return Of Sicm Deposit. DATE- September '25, 20031 The amount of $150.00 -,,N-as cleposited in line item P 3-0 10-019110-000,9 for the business named below asa. deposit. For three signs for the Stephenson Village Rezoning Application #06-03. They A — ZD have now returned the signs and are flicrefore cntifled to the return of their deposit. YOU may pay i-hiS, through the regular bill cycle. ID 'Please send a check in the amount of $150.00 to: RSA/kac Shockcy Company A'i.W: John Goociman P.O. Box 2530 WHichemer, VA 22604 107 Noy th Kent, Street. - AvincbeMcv, Virginia 22601-5000 0 • KUYKENDALL, JOHNSTON, MCKEE & BUTLER, P.L. C. 112 SOUTH CAMERON STREET P. O. DRAWER 2097 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604-1297 (540) 662-3486 Facsimile (540) 722-3787 E-Mail: bniblaiv@adelphia.nei PETER K. McKEE (1934-1967) BENJAMIN NI. BUTLER STEPHEN G. BUTLER May 10 2004 Eric Lawrence Frederick County Planner 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: STEPHENSON VILLAGE My File 11978 Dear Eric: J. SLOAN KUYKENDALL (1906-1995) J. SLOAN KUYKENDALL, III EDWIN B. YOST John G. Lavoie of Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, L.L.P. and I represent Newland Communities, the contract purchaser from Stephenson Associates of the project known as Stephenson Village located in Stonewall District, Frederick County, Virginia. We are requesting clarifications but not a change to any of the proffers. Our principal question involves Item 3A(2)(4) on page 5 and relates to the Land Bay Breakdown Notes. The question arises from the proffer stating that "the Applicant reserves the right to convert more of Land Bay III to active adult or affordable housing for the elderly..." What is not clear from the proffers is that if the Applicant converts a portion of Land Bay III to Active Adult at the early stages of the project, will the Applicant then be allowed to build Mixed Residential on corresponding acreage in Land Bay IV that is identified as Active Adult on the Generalized Development Plan? The clear intent of the proffers is to minimize sudden increases in the school population by phasing non -age restricted housing. The proffers also clearly suggest that the phased development of the Major Collector Road is to commence from Old Charles Town Road. However, if Active Adult is to be the only use allowed in Land Bay IV, its development is likely to be postponed until the latter stages of the project when it is accessed by the phased Major Collector Road. Additionally, certain areas of Land Bay III are topographically flatter and therefore better suited for persons of age who may have difficulty negotiating more sloped terrain. Eric Lawrence • Frederick County Planner • May 10, 2004 Pave 2 I do have several other questions which I will take up with you at the meeting concerning the timing on subdivisions filings and filing of Master and Final Site Plans, but I will wait for the meeting to address those as these issues are general in nature. The developer is looking for approximate timing to schedule the development. I appreciate in advance the time which you can give me in order to explore a clarification. :•C cc: John G. Lavoie, Esq. Very truly yours, MCKEE & BUTLER je ' min M. Butler SUGGESTED LETTER FROM ZONING ADMINISTRATOR The Frederick County Planning Staff has reviewed the Proffer Statement for the Stephenson Village Residential Plarmed Community, and in particular, the uses and mix of housing types in Land Bays III and IV, appearing at item 3 on pages 3-5 of the proffer statement ("the Proffers"). Our interpretation of the Proffers is that, subject to the limitations contained in subparagraph 4 (on page 5) limiting the percentage of Active Adult to 53 %, the Applicant is allowed to develop Active Adult in Land Bay III as well as Land Bay IV. To the extent that a portion of Land Bay III is utilized for Active Adult housing, then Mixed Residential housing may be developed on a corresponding amount of acreage in Land Bay IV. Very truly yours, comments "for the record" 0 • Subject: comments "for the record" Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 07:22:51 -0400 From: "William & Peggy Rosenberry" <rosenbwc@adelphia.net> To: "Arlotta, Rene FC Planning" <rarlotta@co.frederick.va.us> William C Rosenberry comments "for the record" at the August 20, 2003 Planning Commission Public Meeting on Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village: <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Personally I find the Stephenson Village proposal attractive. But I find it to be bad for Frederick County. Let me explain. First, I note that those people who would live as neighbors object to this rezoning, by a large majority. On the whole, my issue is not so much with the Shockey Stephenson Village project, specifically, as with any project of large residential development. Because there is so much land already eligible for "by right" residential development in the county, rezoning additional large tracts raises a concern in me about the infrastructure required. By infrastructure, I refer, for one example, to the availability of water. A study is undergoing in this area and I think delay is appropriate pending its outcome. As it is, the county already has to buy a large amount of water from Winchester. The same goes for an air pollution study. Another example of infrastructure is my common sense concern about this additional development's impact on traffic congestion, particularly in Northeast Frederick County. Therefore, I must vote to deny this rezoning application. 1 of 1 9/4/2003 8:06 AM • 0 /v4,.lL.) �-4 Page —3- (cont. transportation) Absolutely no road improvement proffers to Rt. 11 except for the interchange area with the Rutherford rezoning - The Rt. 11 corridor is being loaded and not even V.D.O.T. has looked at the cumulative effect of traffic impact. Also the fact that the Woodsmill — M6Iborne Road to Red Bud may become a shortcut to avoid the traffic light has not even been identified. It is hard to define the impact the traffic will have on this area however it is very clear these roads cannot handle this load and support these projects. The County needs to clearly define how the impacts of this residential development can become manageable for the Rt. 11 corridor. Fire and Rescue The impact of emergency services with this rezoning becomes a very important issue. Fire and Rescue services are currently struggling as evident with the reports in the papers recently. Inevitably a cash proffer to Clearbrook Fire Department is today's way of doing business areeeptable fiscal i_ Impaot model fot.�r�wement�ad/on squire fca�t/�t` (� (tan -C L}�,� L` P ��f-R \• � � .1.C1 '1 \CL"l C � G C�, '� `Y�'�N��._ • 1 ��. 1.-,. r��n � i'� ,u. //'I.Pr."zdG''l,� cri: �,yf%�(K.C`� �" 7"/� � .r/l� �in-'Cl�n y�' '41.�/'�• i.�._) �� '��. �� t,�-��.C� `��r'L� r:..�y _ t4n a!a 4� !/ Page —4- (cont. fire & Rescue) u r,have HOA's have a yearly payment to Fire and Rescue Services. In this cue-Q arbrook Fire and Re a is being impacted by 100% from its current service arela—M a utely no answer from the County on how to service the impact. I e are to m la land use and rezone the property, emery service question should be answered. R-4 With the R-4 designation Stephenson Village chooses to reflect 4% of the project towards commercial business, while the ordnance reflects 10-50%. In order for this to be a planned community, business is to take place inside the entity so there are employment opportunities close to this residence and limit the need for traffic impact outside the development. It is also important to provide this mixed use for the project to help pay its way as a tax base. cLl\ 4 E- - L L Mr. ShoGkey has stated this Well w fiscal impact to en in the County. ill not costfayers a dime. ordaoe and ha`v�ke a positive ;fead of limiting it, can pay fort e services and the real estate to offset the tax Page —5- (cunt. R-4) t To limit the commercial business of this proposal makes this project nothing more than a glorified R-P rezoning offering more Varity of housing with alleys and private streets, The bottom line is more residential homes and very little business in R-P zoning any way you look at it. There is nothing special about this development - houses -houses- houses- To address this rezoning request for Stephenson Village we must also address the land use Plan. As Planning Commissioners, you are in a unique position to understand the importance of having a land use plan that addresses all phases of the impact of development and must recognize the responsibility to the public to address the issues that impact the quality of life in their community. Y To ignore this issue is to ignore the trust put in you by your community. This land use plan is incomplete and does not address impact of this development or any other development with R-P zoning. Density The density of this development creates the impacts that makep undesirable. 100o's of housing units are undesirable feature in an area of rural character of the county. It is impossible to for see the tremendous impact on the Stonewall District and the entire County. • 0 w MDP I No de lopment should be allowed in F C. without the use of an overall Master We lopment Plan and the use of phasery. If the applicant has a project hey can't master plan then rezone less acres so they can plan the projectj; properly. Every development has been required in current standards to have a MDP. • ,F As each developed entity gets sold to other developers and years pass t there will be no one to accept -responsibility for the problems associated with this development. With regard to the rezoning of Stephenson Village" he ability to rezon' property is a government given right and policed through the ordinance written with the intention off providing safeguards to its suurro� dlr « community t l impacts.of the development -have been fl JMF"M� gated andro ensure the community that the governing body has acted in the best management and planning practicea to insure the health -safety and welfare of the community, as required by state law. Page —7- It is my opinion that the RE. L.U.P. with it's R-4 designation and the rezoning of Stephenson Village do not address the impacts of development. The F.C.B.O.S's has failed to provide any acceptable management practices to control the traffic impacts outside of this r development. Also St-vdi:.(Fire and Rescue._Cojjar eney-seMces:--For these LA r aso sthe health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Stonewall Districrnave been jeopardized. For these reasons I have stated to make a motion to deny rezoning request C- of Stephenson Village. S MPHENSON ASSOCIATE% L.C. P.O. BOA[ 2530 WMCIMSTM YA P.HW4 August 21, 2003 Frederick County Department of County Administration 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator Re: Stephenson Village Rezoning Application Dear John: During the August 13, 2003 Board of Supervisors meeting, I was asked to consider reviewing the current density and phasing program for the Stephenson Village residential planned community project. It is our desire to do so; therefore, `we request that this rezoning proposal not be included on the September 10, 2003 Board of Supervisors agenda. I will contact you to determine when we can proceed with our rezoning application at a subsequent Board of Supervisors meeting. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding the information in this letter. Sincerely, Stephe on Associates, L. ,v J. Donald Shockey, Jr. Cc: Richard Shickl(/ Lynda Tyler �arry Ambrogi 1/Eric Lawrence Chris Mohn Ty Lawson Pile #2760C/JDS • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC MEETING FAX: 540/665-6395 August 6, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public meeting being held on Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This meeting is the continuation of the Planning Commission's consideration of the following application: Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Any interested parties may attend this meeting. Please note that this application is scheduled as a public meeting. Indeed, the public hearing required for this application was conducted and formally concluded during the Planning Commission's July 16, 2003 meeting. As such, anyone wishing to speak concerning this application must do so during the citizen comment portion of the agenda, which occurs at the start of each Planning Commission meeting. 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. Sincerely, IN ^"�c�,*�"%Q� . Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/bad O \Agendas\Adjoiner Ltrs\2003\REZONINGS\StephensonVillagc wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 44 - A- - 289- LOFTHOUSE, ELSIE A 1034 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1914 l.0F I <+34 i 17U,> -�0 08/09/03 FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND LOFTHOUSE' ELSIE LC ANN PO BOX 22.56 WINCHESTER VA 22604-1456 RETURN TO SENDER ?�W J COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC MEETING FAX: 540/665-6395 August 6, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public meeting being held on Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This meeting is the continuation of the Plamung Commission's consideration of the following application: Rezoning 906-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Any interested parties may attend this meeting. Please note that this application is scheduled as a public meeting. Indeed, the public hearing required for this application was conducted and formally concluded during the Planning Comm.ission's July 16, 2003 meeting. As such, anyone wishing to speak concerning this application must do so during the citizen comment portion of the agenda, which occurs at the start of each Planning Commission meeting. 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. Sincerely, I�N ^C*1-�1*1-Q- . Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/bad O'\Agendas\Adjoiner Ltrs\2003\REZONINGS\StephensonVillage wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 44 A- 288. )> WALTERS, WAYNE E G-) 8800 OLD OCEAN VIEW RD �—L NORFOLK,VA 23503-5308 C=) O WALT800 23503r-2041 1E502 02 08/11/0� FORWARD T1 t-d E E X P RTN TO SEND WALTERS PO BOX 1982 MARTINSBURG WV 25402-1982 11111111 Jill III • • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING July 2, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, July 16, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This hearing is to consider the following: Proposed Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, R4 - Residential Planned Community District; Section 165-72.0., Other Regulations, to Allow Modifications of Ordinance Requirements for Greater Design Flexibility in the R4 District. Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Any interested parties may attend this 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. Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/bad 0.\Agcndw\Adjoiner Ltm\2003\REZONINGS\StephensonVill & Prop Amcnd.wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester. Virginia 22601 L T 44 - A- - 289- LOFTHOUSE, ELSIE A 1034 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1914 JUL 3 , 0 2003 I -0r- I O.i 4 r, a, -) "3,-? 0 ,13'i 1 2 1-) -) 4( ) / / " �, / o FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND LOFTHOUSE'ELSIE LC ANN PO BOX 2256 WINCHE6TER VA 22604-1456 RETURN TO SENDER 2 2 6 C) % - S rj rj Ci 2% 1 111 11 11 111111 11 1111; If 11 111fif IIH AlIfIIIIIIIIIIiIIIHIIIIII 1833 ROSSER LAN 46 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 2601 August 18, 2003 Mr. Eric Lawrence, Chairman Planning Commission Frederick County 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Lawrence: I live in the City of Winchester and will be only by Stephenson Village. However, I do live in the section of the Meadowbranch PUD, which I believe Mr. Shockey. marginally impacted "active adult" also originated with It seems that the Board of Supervisors has now cleared the way for your action on this project. However, based on the Meadowbranch experience, I would suggest that you give any proposal the most careful study. Be certain that every "i" is dotted and every "t" crossed. The final plans, especially where they concern drainage and road construction, must be exacting. Chances are Mr. Shockey will not be involved for any length of time after the project begins. Parcels will be sold off to other developers (possibly from out of state) for execution. DO NOT under any circumstances agree to roads in any portion of the project which do not conform to VDOT standards. "Active adults" are very quick to object to maintaining private roads when they are paying taxes to the County at the same rate as other residents and obtaining fewer services. Also, drainage issues MUST be thoroughly addressed. Open ditches and retention ponds, which the residents ultimately must maintain, present real health hazards. The shopping area which was supposed to be established for the convenience of Meadowbranch residents has not materialized. Two years after we moved in, and several years after the start of the development, only one building has been completed. It is partially occupied by a real estate firm (not something you would use on a regular basis). It is an eyesore of weeds, dirt piles, and construction debris with no completion date in sight. City officials have tried to address our concerns, but they are hampered by development plans approved some twelve years ago. It might be wise for you to consult with members of the Planning Commission and the City Council for Winchester to learn of the problems they are facing. I don't know if this project will benefit the County or not, but if it is going to receive approval, planning must be properly done. Sincerely yours, �Ida ur weger cc: Winchester Star Winchester Gun Club Gun Club Road Stephenson, Virginia July 16, 2003 Mr. Richard C. Shickle Chairman -At -Large BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 292 Green Spring Road Winchester, VA 22603 Dear Sirs: The Winchester Gun Club (WGC) owns ± 90 acres of property accessed fi•orn Gun Club Road and Route 664. This Club is a recreational shooting facility for trapshooting and shooter education. The Club has approximately 100 stockholders and 50 active members. Further, the facility and grounds are used by the Virginia Trapshooting Association, The Virginia Trapshooting Hall of Fame; as well as local league activities for residents in and around the Winchester, Virginia area. These groups number in excess of one thousand shooters a year. We are proud of our facilities and have enjoyed an excellent working relationship with all our neighbors over the years. On behalf of the Winchester Gun Club, I urge you to support the rezoning of the Shockey properties in the Stephenson area ("Stephenson Village"). Many residents in this area want residential development as proposed by Stephenson Village and view the proposal as one that will bring parks, shopping and increased property values. Mr. Shockey has made a generous offer to preserve the battlefield, protect the environment, and cover the costs of schools as well as other improvements. We are all aware of the need for sewer service in the area. The Shockey project will pay for sewer lines that will be welcome news for old and new residents alike. For the sake of the County's development and for the sake of Stephenson residents, please support the rezoning of this parcel. Sincerely, 4&W Sonny yers, President Cc: Board of Supervisors JUL 2 2 2003 Planning Commission • Glenn Penton 221 Settlers Lane Stephenson, VA 22656 Eric Lawrence, AICP Director of Planning, Frederick County 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 July 14, 2003 M FILE Copy RE: SWSA and UDA Inclusion In The NELUP Process - Stonewall District Dear Eric, The landowners located between Redbud and Jordan Springs, Woods Mill Rd and Rt I 1 are hereby requesting inclusion in the SWSA and UDA. We are requesting that this area be included in SWSA and UDA during the current update of the NELUP. Spot planning has created an incoherent plan. We believe that this area is better suited liar SWSA and UDA inclusion due to proximity to Rte 7, Rte 11, the City o1' Winchester, and existing SWSA and UDA. Please include this area in the comprehensive planning process at this time. Windy Jones supports including this area in the SWSA because it will_allow a more complete and contiguous network tier servicing the stonewall community. The sewer network will have a more direct connection to the Rte 7 Opequon Treatment Facility that is down hill from this proposed SWSA/ UDA area. We respectfully request that this issue proceed through the appropriate committees and proper channels as quickly as possible. Sincerely, �� Glenn PC Iton Enclosure: Proposed SWSA sketch plan and SWSA/UDA plan cc: Richard Shickle, Chairman Board of Supervisors Chuck DeHaven, Chairman Planning Commission John Riley, County Administrator -AIW - A" on - Stonewall Magisterial District WSA 71. M/ l I` ; L , ( ZONE ACRES EM 122 u I r �I •h. I _�-�. •� I ./ �.; G. M1 263 M2 123 `. MH1 14 RP 172 i4oA> ►:- W E��%` i � awaorArta S 0.4 24 3. ila / 06/26/2003 09:33 5406783457 SBI DON SHOCKEY PAGE 01 6 • S'I'£M$NS N A&9=14TM L.C. PA. BOAC als30 *MCNESTM viltam ! 28804 June 25, 2003 Mr. Eric .Lawrence 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Eric: Many of you have expressed a desire to learn more about planned communities before a public hearing at the Planning Commission. I'd like to invite you to a workshop advocate Thomas Hylton, author of Save Our Land, Save Our Towns, at Jordan Springs this Wednesday evening. I want to make it clear that Mr. Hylton does not endorse specific projects. Mr. Hylton is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and a three -time winner of the .American Planning Association's annual journalism award. He is an advocate for planning communities to preserve farm land, open space and quality of life. My colleague John Good attended one of Mr. Hylton's presentations recently and was very impressed. I am looking forward to meeting Mr. Hylton, and I hope you can be there to participate. We will also have Jim Baish, designer of Breamar, at the workshop to discuss the practical experience of creating a planned community in this region. The workshop will be held at Jordan Springs on Wednesday, July 2"', at 7:00 PM. We will serve light refreshments. Participants will receive a complimentary copy of Mr. Hylton's book, Save Our Land, Save Our Towns. The workshop will be open to the public. Members of the Planning Corrumssion and the Board of Supervisors have been invited, along with the press. I think this will be an important evening and I hope you can be there. Si ely, Don Sh ckey Cc: The Winchester Star, Northern Virginia Daily Post -it Fax Note 7671 Dat , ZIo, # of s o, pagTo 1 From cenoeo Co./Dept. Co. 1 Phone # Phone # Fax 4 STEPHI±NSON ASSOCIATES„ L.C. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTRR, VIRGIM* 22604 June 25, 2003 Mr. Eric Lawrence 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Eric: Many of you have expressed a desire to learn more about planned communities before a public hearing at the Planning Commission. I'd like to invite you to a workshop advocate Thomas Hylton, author of Save Our Land, Save Our Towns, at Jordan Springs this Wednesday evening. I want to make it clear that Mr. Hylton does not endorse specific projects. Mr. Hylton is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and a three -time winner of the American Planning Association's annual journalism award. He is an advocate for planning communities to preserve farm land, open space and quality of life. My colleague John Good attended one of Mr. Hylton's presentations recently and was very impressed. I am looking forward to meeting Mr. Hylton, and I hope you can be there to participate. We will also have Jim Baish, designer of Breamar, at the workshop to discuss the practical experience of creating a planned community in this region. The workshop will be held at Jordan Springs on Wednesday, July 2"d, at 7:00 PM. We will serve light refreshments. Participants will receive a complimentary copy of Mr. Hylton's book, Save Our Land, Save Our Towns. The workshop will be open to the public. Members of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors have been invited, along with the press. I think this will be an important evening and I hope you can be there. Si rely, Don Shockey Cc: The Winchester Star, Northern Virginia Daily 0 0 TRAN7RISSIOH VERIFICATION REPORT • TIME 06/26/2023 11:36 NAME FRED CO PLANNING DEP FAX 5406656395 TEL 5406655651 SER.# BROC2J170677 DATE,TIME 06/26 11:35 FAX NO. /NAME 97223295 DURATION 00: 00: 24 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM - - -4uo10o401 5BI DON SHaCKEY �. SMPMMR AMCL*Tftr�o LC. June 25, 2003 Mr. Eric .%.WMce 107 Nmh Dent Street Winch, 'VV.A, 2201 DW Erie: Many o-e you have expressed a desiM to learn catnmtmities be f*,e a public he adnp; at thte glar�ning +Coxrmusmme cl ou l rmed You to a works -hop arlvaCatc Thomas Hylton Tawft6, at lcardan 7 author of Save Our Land, Save G t,w Springs this Wednesday evening, I vent to rmke it cleair that Mr. HyltOn does bat endor5e specific proects. Mr' HyltDn is a Pulitzer Prr'= 'Winning journalist and a three�tirne wxrtrter of A the rnuica n Planning Ass*ciation's annual journalisIn award. He is an canerdvoca tax plaZuung ccmrburties to preserve inrm land, open space and duality of life. My P-011e4gue John Good attended one of �&, Wton's presentations recently and was very impressed. I am lookiag forward to meeting Mr, Hylton, and I hope you can be there to participate. We will also have VM Baish., designer of trearnar, at the workshop to discuss the Practical experience Of creating a Planned Comrnmity in t,1us regicm. The workshop will be held at Jordan Sptangs on W 7:ednesday, July znd, at(0 PM. we will seM light rehments. l�aattieipauuts will receive a cr�rnplirnentary oaRY of Mr. 14vltc)ri'a hnnL- v.,.— .-,..- r --_ -r W — _ PAGE 01 PRESS RELEASE Hold for publication until March 15 For more information contact: Bill Hardigg (703) 609-3776 or (703) 426-4670 Economic Study on Stephenson Village Concludes Project Will More than Pay for Itself March 14, 2003 Stephenson, VA --The residential planned community proposed for Stephenson will generate over $20 million in new revenues for Frederick County over the next 23 years, according to an economic study conducted by Robert Charles Lesser & Company, LLC. The $20 million is the net revenue after County operating expenditures for services are subtracted from expected revenues from Stephenson Village. "I promised the people of this County that I would move forward on this project only when I am sure that it won't cost the County taxpayers a dime," said Don Shockey, CEO of the Shockey Companies and the subsidiary, Stephenson Associates, created to plan the project. "I am now satisfied that we will be a benefit to the County, and the economic projections have a comfortable margin." The study also included projections from a market study by Robert Charles Lesser & Company. The market analysis projects that it will take 21 years to complete the residential planned community in Stephenson. Base prices for homes will range from $95,000 to $400,000. The market analysis also projects the final mixture of single-family detached homes, town houses, condominiums, "active adult" and other age -restricted housing, as well as a likely timetable for the supermarket, offices and local shops in the town center. "The results of the detailed fiscal impact model show that Stephenson Village will have a highly positive fiscal impact on Frederick County," said Leonard Bogorad, the lead economist for the study. "In other words, Stephenson Village will generate enough in taxes and other revenues that it will pay its own way, including paying to educate the children living there, and still help to pay for other County needs." - MORE - Page 2 Stephenson Village Press Release March 14, 2003 Net fiscal impact on the County is expected to be positive in every year, growing to more than $2 million annually by build -out in 2024, for a cumulative total of over $20 million at current tax rates. If County taxes rise 15 cents per every $100 of valuation, the cumulative benefit to County taxpayers would total over $40 million. "It's important to realize that this $2 million revenue stream will be self-sustaining after the community is built," said Bogorad. "These are not proffer fees. These are property taxes and other taxes paid by the residents." "However, the analysis does not include capital costs for schools and infrastructure or proffer payments to the County, which are governed by the Frederick County Rezoning Impact Model," cautioned Bogorad. "This was the approach preferred by the two consultants selected by Frederick County to review our analysis, and is customary when there is a capital impact model in place." Shockey has proposed to cover 100% of the capital cost impacts through proffer fees, with periodic adjustments using the Consumer Price Index. Shockey has also proposed extra proffer fees if impacts on the County school population are higher than projected - "This is the first time anyone in the County has proffered 100% of these impacts, and the first time anyone has put an inflation adjustment on proffer fees," said Evan Wyatt of Greenway Engineering, land planner for the project. "But this is the first residential planned community in Frederick County. I expect a lot of firsts." Shockey has announced two community meetings for the Stonewall District to answer questions about the economic study and other aspects of the project on March 25 and March 27, at 6:30 pm at Jordan Springs. "We said in our meetings before Christmas we'd report back as soon as the economic study was complete, and now we're going to do that," said Shockey. The study was conducted by Leonard Bogorad, Managing Director and Marc McCauley, Senior Consultant at Robert Charles Lesser & Company. The company's fiscal impact analysis clients include Loudoun County and the City of Charlottesville. ### END #### • • J. DONALD SHOCKCY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA March 14, 2003 22604 Mr. Eric R. Lawrence Planning Commission, Secretary 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Eric: I'm happy to report that our economic study of Stephenson Village is complete. Here is the copy that has been submitted to the County's independent reviewers for their final review. Our economist Leonard Bogorad feels comfortable that they will concur with its main fording: Stephenson Village will more than pay for the cost of County services it uses. With the County facing the prospect of a tax increase, I thought that you should know that Stephenson Village, and projects like it, may ease the tax burden in future years. Revenue flows to the County look positive in every year of the study, and they are projected to total over $20 million net benefit to the County treasury at build -out, based on today's tax rates. With the pending 15- to 18-cent tax increase, this net benefit increases to over $40 million. Initially, our concept was that this study would include all costs to the County. However, at the request of the County's independent reviewers, our economist has removed capital costs for Colony facilities, because they are normally covered by proffers. We intend to cover 100% of the capital costs in our proffers. I promised not to move forward on this rezoning unless I was absolutely sure that it wouldn't cost the County a dime. I am now satisfied. We are now finalizing the proffers and you should see them soon. We plan to hold two meetings in the Stonewall District the last week of March to go over this report and the proffers with our neighbors, as described in the attached invitation. I hope you can make it. In the meantime, if you have any questions about this report, please give me a call at my office (540-665-3214) or my cell phone (540-323-3214). I look forward to hearing fi•om you. SinceXelv,k Donald Shockey,_Jr�- . 2003 fY OU Pi'1 T hA Ae. LAA a (� rn �►�► �t SSiD�r. J • J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 March 14, 2002 [Firstname Lastname Address 1 Address 2 City, State ZIP] Dear Neighbor: During our community meetings in December, I promised we'd report back to everyone when the economic study of Stephenson Village was complete. It's taken a little longer than I expected, but I am happy to report that our economic study and our package of proffers is now ready to present. I'd like to invite you to Jordan Springs again to discuss the economic report and the proffers for Stephenson Village. Well hold two meetings in case people have schedule conflicts, one on Tuesday evening, March 25, and one on Thursday evening, March 27. We will be serving dessert and coffee, beginning at 6:30 p.m. The meeting will get underway about 7:00 p.m. with a short presentation followed by a question and answer session. The address is 1160 Jordan Springs Road. Hopefully there will be no snow this time. I've said many times that I would move forward on this project only when I am convinced that it won't cost the County taxpayers a dime. I am now satisfied that we can say that, with a large margin of comfort. We will have copies of our proffer package and economic report at the meeting. If you want an advance copy, or you can't attend the meeting, please call us at (540) 323-3320 and we'll make sure you get one. In the meantime, if you have any questions at all, please call us. I look forward to seeing you at Jordan Springs. Sincerely, Don Shockey 0 0 J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. Eric Lawrence 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Eric: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested hi learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Sinc y, RV\ — Don Shockey Enclosure J11l .1 1 2003 r\c- -, '� s�►c �S� ° ��. J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. Rick Ours 461 Westmoreland Drive Stephens City, VA 22655 Dear Rick: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end. The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure 0 J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. Charles Triplett 140 Lone Willow Lane Gore VA 22637 Dear Charlie: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Sinc , Don Shockey Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure 0 • J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. George Kriz 547 Apple Pie Ridge Road Winchester, VA 22603 Dear George: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Since , Don hockey Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. John Light 2973 Woodside Road Clearbrook, VA 22624 Dear John: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested m learning about anew concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end. The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Enclosure • 0 J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. Robert Morris 110 Mulberry Circle Stephens City, VA 22655 Dear Bob: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Sinc ly, Don Shockey Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure • 0 J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. Gene Fisher 246 Bush Drive Winchester, VA 22602 Dear Gene: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. S' er ly, D hockey Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure 0 • J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. Greg L. Unger 668 Germany Road Stephens City, VA 22655 Dear Greg: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end. The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Sinc ly, D hockey Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure 11 June 17, 2003 Mr. Cordell Watt 310 Muse Road Gore VA 22637 Dear Cordell: J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about anew concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. \-V. 1 i1 lV L\. L"Yy 1 V11V V Enclosure i 0 J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. William C. Rosenberry 207 Crestwood Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Dear Bill: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Enclosure 51 J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. Roger Thomas 127 Halifax Avenue Stephens City, VA 22655 Dear Roger: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. S' ,Mf1 , hockey Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure 0 • J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mr. Charles DeHaven, Jr. 2075 Martinsburg Pike Winchester, VA 22603 Dear Chuck: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end. The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. Sin e , Shockey Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure • J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mrs. Pat Gochenour 134 Country Club Circle Winchester, Virginia 22602 Dear Mrs. Gochenour Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. STISPhockey ly, D Cc: Eric R. Lawrence Enclosure J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 June 17, 2003 Mrs. Marie F. Straub 133 Morning Glory Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 Dear Mrs. Straub: Over the past month we have been making a presentation on Stephenson Village to the majority of the civic clubs in our area. We will be continuing to do more in the coming weeks. These presentations have been received very well, as people are most interested in learning about a new concept for our county, "A Planned Community". I'm enclosing a videotape of one of our recent presentations. They each have the same format of course, the questions vary at the end The video is approximately 30 minutes long. I hope you will take time to review it. Thanks a lot. S' erely, Don Shockey Cc: Eric R Lawrence Enclosure GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 i Founded in 1971 June 12, 2003 Frederick County Planning Department 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Chris Mohn, Deputy Planning Director Dear Mr. Mohn: The purpose of this letter is to request continuation of the Stephenson Village rezoning application that has been scheduled for the July 2, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. Please reschedule this public hearing for consideration at the July 16, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. Thank you for your assistance regarding this matter. Sincerely, ..L)CL4 I Evan Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering Cc: Don Shockey J! E N % J 03 Thomas Lawson Engineers Surveyors Telephone 540-662-4185 FAX 540-722-9528 www.greenwayeng.com i 3'' I SI Windy I (ill Ltnc �I€ Winnc�tirCr. Virginia 2260_> Founded ilr 1971 May 23, 2003 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Frederick County Planning Commissioners County Administration Building 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Response to Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community Inquiries Dear Members of the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission: Please find attached information that has been prepared by the Stephenson Village project team in response to several inquires made by Mr. Bill Rosenberry. Recently, Mr. Rosenberry participated in a tour of the Braemar community to learn more about residential planned community land use and design techniques. Following our tour, Mr. Rosenberry provided Greenway Engineering with several questions pertaining to planning and financial assumptions for the Stephenson Village project. Mr. Rosenberry has asked many good questions, which the project team has provided responses for. The project team felt that the questions and responses should be provided to all members of the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission and staff for informational purposes. Please review this information and do not hesitate to contact me or other members of the Stephenson Village project team if you have any questions. Thank you for your continued interest in the Stephenson Village residential planned community project. Sincerely, LUCLI l:l... Evan A. Wyatt, AICP Cc: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator Larry Ambrogi, County Attorney ✓-ric Lawrence, Planning Director Stephenson Village Project Team Engincers Survepors I'clephone 540-662- 1165 FAX 540-122-9528 Project !12760C/EAW www.giCcm Waycnl;.n,nt 0 Evan, here are the questions I thought were appropriate to have answered, per our discussion. Thanks again for taking the time (you and Bill) to give me a tour last Thursday. Please send your replies as soon us you can. Thanks. s/Bill Rosenberry PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS: 1) County Growth Rates How marketable will the development be if the County growth rates were reduced from 3% per year to I % per year? The answer to this question would depend on why the growth rate was reduced. If it were reduced through some sort of legislative action (as in Loudoun County), then Stephenson Village would be more marketable, because demand would outstrip supply. If the growth rate fell due to slack demand, then Stephenson Village sales would probably slump as well. However, these cycles are normal in the housing industry, and have been accounted for in the marketing analysis. Stephenson Village offers a number of amenities that give it a favorable position in the Frederick County market, particularly the age- "active adult" (over 55) market. 2) Transportation Requirements Is the marketability of the development dependent on Rt. 37 East and enabling commuting to the East? Our traffic study —which does not include Route 37—shows that there will be good service levels on local roads throughout the construction of Stephenson Village. We can handle the traffic from Stephenson Village very well without Route 37. VDOT approved our study, finding that the improvements we are committed to make "adequately address transportation concerns on Route 11 and Route 761, Old Charles Town Road." As currently proposed, Route 37 would cut Stephenson Village in half, without reducing the need for these road improvements. 3) KEY ISSUE - What is the build out rate of the development? How many houses per what year? The proffers place an 8% per year limit on building permits for non -age -restricted units. (Age restricted units are so economically advantageous to the County that we do not want to restrict the pace of their construction.) This limit, along with start-up and slow -down years, means that Stephenson Village could not be completed in less than 15 years. We use 8% rather than a fixed number of units because the amount of "active adult" housing is expected to be significantly higher than the minimum proffered 675, which would create a build -out rate faster than 15 years. We use units rather than building permits, because condominiums require only a single permit for 24 units. The economic study by Robert Charles Lesser & Company, LLC forecasts that build -out will be complete by the year 2025. Filc 112760C./EAW 0 • Publicly, we state that Stephenson Village will be completed in 15 to 25 years, an average of 100 to 200 units a year. This range represents the 8% limit in the proffers, the mid -range estimate in the economic study, and the slow case from the marketing study. 4) In what year does the supermarket and commercial properties become active? You already answered this one - as soon as a supermarket chain sees development as being commercially feasible. The forecast for the 60,000 square foot grocery anchor is 2013. This forecast is based on the statistical demand model used by supermarket chains, which uses the number of households in the Stephenson area, the average annual expenditures on groceries, and the percent capture based on distance to the nearest anchor grocery. (That being said, supermarket chains do sometimes locate earlier to gain a positional advantage.) At that time the grocery anchor will support about 30,000 square feet of additional retail space. The forecast also projects that Stephenson Village can support about 50,000 square feet of office space by that year. Due to growth in Stephenson Village and the surrounding area, an additional 40,000 square feet of retail and 10,000 square feet of office can be supported by 2019. For conservatism, the remaining 50,000 square feet of retail space has been assumed at build -out in 2025. 5) Have we projected what will be required to attract supermarket and other commerce? Will incentives be required? What's the track record? No incentives will be required. Supermarket chains make their location decisions based on an economic model, which the economic study used. The remainder of the commercial space will be small retail (deli, day care center, etc.) and office (dentist, insurance, realty, etc.) The proffer statement also provides the opportunity for 10 years of rent-free shell space in the commercial center for County satellite office facilities that are identified as a need in the adopted Frederick County Capital Improvements Plan. 6) School/School Age children Assumption a) State Revenues in support of children: projected on a per unit or per child basis? State revenues were projected on a per child basis. b) 2000 Census Data: Households with children School Age children demographics Annual Changes in Age Demographics Why were these not used? These figures were used. In the study, student generation rates for Frederick County were based on the actual number of students and the actual number of housing units in Frederick County. As stated in the study, "The actual number of students was- allocated File /12760C/EAW among housing types by beginning with the rates for each housing type used by LoudoUn County and adjusting them to be consistent with 2000 Census data for Frederick County. These calculations result in student generation rates of 0.5442 per single-family detached unit, 0.2908 per townhome and 0.1564 per condominium unit. The active adult and seniors apartment units will not generate any school children." When these rates are multiplied by the number of occupied housing units in Frederick County according to the 2000 Census, they predict a population of 11,043 public school students, compared to the actual number of 10,676 students in September 2000. The factors used by Frederick County predict a population of 13,531 public school students in 2000, 27% higher than the actual number. The study also compared the two rates (the County rate and the rate derived from the 2000 Census) to actual Frederick County permits issued between 1996 to 2001.The County rate predicted an increase of 2,291 students, compared to an actual increase of only 1,048, or over two times what actually occurred. The rate derived from the 2000 Census predicted an increase of 1,930 students, or 84% higher than what actually occurred. The two rates are in all likelihood conservative. The rate derived from the 2000 Census was used in the economic study, which examines operating costs versus revenues. The County's rate was used, as required, in the Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model, which examines capital costs. The proffered monetary contribution for the residential land uses in Stephenson Village is calculated from the Frederick County Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model. Emergency Services requirements of age -restricted communities Considered? What assumptions made? To account for the additional expected demand from the "active adult" community, we have proffered a 50% premium over 100% of the capital impacts predicted by the Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model, or an additional $200 per unit. To account for the additional expected demand from affordable housing for the elderly (senior apartments), we have proffered a 100% premium, or an additional $400 per unit. We had extensive meetings with the Frederick County Fire and Rescue Department to review project design issues and to determine if land for a new fire station within Stephenson Village would be advantageous. It was determined that monetary contributions instead of land for a fire and rescue station were desirable. In addition to proffer fees to the County, we have proffered $200,000 to Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Inc. 0 0 8) Traffic Counts and effect on NoX gases in the county's air quality? Projected? The Impact Analysis Statement for Stephenson Village projects traffic counts that are consistent with the Institute of Traffic Engineers Manual, 6`f' Edition for the proposed residential and commercial land uses in Stephenson Village. Projections for the effect of NOX gases in the County's air quality is not part of the Impact Analysis Statement as the County does not consider this in the development application approval process. However, VDOT estimates on NOX emissions by vehicles in Frederick County could project the following numbers: Trucks on I-81 contribute over 50% of the NOX emissions in the County. (In terms of total emissions, a single tractor -trailer pollutes as much as 150 cars, according to the Clean Air Trust.) Taking simple measures such as prohibiting trucks from idling for hours at truck stops would reduce total County NOX emissions by 20%. Assuming these measures are taken, assuming truck traffic increases projected by VDOT over the next 20 years, and using new diesel engine standards required in 2004, it is reasonable to project that NOX emissions from Stephenson Village at build -out to be about 1 % of total County NOX emissions. (conservative) 9) Water Consumption and the effects of quantity and quality on existing and fitture supplies? Projected? Stephenson Village will use public water and sewer. The Northern Water Treatment Plant has more than enough capacity to supply the 683,000 gallons per day projected for Stephenson Village at build -out. This water supply comes from artesian springs at the Global Chemstone quarry, which has been dumped at the rate of 2 million gallons per day into the Opequon since the 1950s to keep the quarry dry; therefore, no impacts on existing or future supplies are anticipated. (Capturing artesian spring water at the surface cannot affect local wells or groundwater.) Furthermore, public water can be provided by the City of Winchester to supplement FCSA supplies if necessary. The proffers require us to dedicate land to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, build a pump station, and build a force main and associated infrastructure. None of the utility infrastructure associated with the project will cost the County taxpayers money. Easements will be provided for existing neighborhoods to connect to these facilities. Since septic systems are marginal in the area due to low permeability soil, there should be a positive effect on groundwater in those areas of Stephenson that connect to the sewer. There is an opportunity to improve the quality of Hiatt Run and associated wetlands through better stormwater control. Most (over 90%) of the soils on the property will not support crops without heavy amendment. Much of the soil has low permeability, which has historically caused stormwater runoff problems in the streams, ditches and ravines. Low impact development methods will be used as appropriate for stormwater management. These will include measures to direct runoff from steep slopes and use File 112760C/EAW • 0 existing ponds where beneficial to the environment. Additional ponds, infiltration areas and bio-retention facilities will be developed to limit runoff to Hiatt Run. FIN11NCIAL ASSUMPTIONS: 1) KEY ISSUE - Expenditures Why aren't they itemized in the report? What are they? All expenditures were derived from the categories in the County budget on a straight-line basis. The report. estimates the portion of each type of non -educational operating expenditures that is attributable to residential and non-residential uses, and calculates the average per resident and per employee. Most expenditures were allocated on a per resident and per employee basis, based upon the Frederick County distribution (population 76.0% and employment 24.0%), with the exceptions of health and welfare and parks and recreation, which were skewed towards residents. Community college was allocated entirely to residential. The resulting non -educational operating cost is $329 per employee and $465 per resident. Educational operating expenditures were derived from the County budget. 2) Projections on school age children expenditures and revenues: What are the annual projections? Expenditures were estimated at $7,762 per student (with 3% inflation) by straight-line method from the County budget. Average student population at build -out will be 805 students according to the 2000 Census model. 3) What references were used to project the revenues gained from commerce sources? The assessed values of the retail and office are consistent with the identified strength of the market (they are 80% of the values per square foot approved by Loudoun County for fiscal impact analyses, based on input from County assessors, which we judge to be a reasonable differential for the locational difference). Sales taxes will be generated by retail at Stephenson Village as well as by residents who make purchases elsewhere in the county, with adjustment to avoid double counting (90% of neighborhood center expenditures by Stephenson Village residents are assumed to be trade at the town center once the full center is open). Retail sales tax was calculated based on estimated sales per square foot of $400 in 2002, based on sales typical of and required by the types of retailers likely to locate in the town center. Sales tax per household was based on household income brackets. Robert Charles Lesser & Company, LLC used the taxable expenditures within each income bracket in the Bureau of Labor File 112760c/Enw Statistics consumer expenditure survey high -income tables multiplied by the sales tax rate to determine sales tax revenues generated by each household. These expenditure figures were applied to household income for each property type to calculate sales tax revenues generated by residents. Based upon the Bureau of Labor Statistics data, it was estimated that 35% of retail spending by residents will be in neighborhood shopping centers. It was estimated that 35% of retail expenditures by Stephenson Village residents will be within the county, based upon the relative sales tax revenues in the county versus the city of Winchester and the location of Stephenson Village. The County receives 0.58% of business receipts from professional services; based upon estimates used in nearby counties, 19% of gross receipts in the office space (conservatively estimated to be $75,000 per employee) are estimated to be from professional services. The County also receives 0.16% of business receipts of contractors. The average construction cost per unit is 41 % of the improved value of the property (excluding land). The County also receives 0.20% of revenues from retailer gross receipts, with sales estimated as described above. Total BPOL revenues with the rezoning are $2.6 million, for the period from 2003 through 2025. 4) Assumption was made that 25% of construction materials would be bought in the county: What is this assumption based on? Materials delivered to a jobsite are taxable in the locality of the jobsite. The 25% is a conservative assumption, based on experience in other counties. 5) Why is CPI and 3% used as the basis for projected inflation vs. localized inflation rates? There is no significant difference between the national inflation rate and the localized inflation rate reflected in the cost of County services. County spending increases over the past 10 years have been remarkably close to the inflation rate times the rate of increase in population, indicating that use of a 3% consumer price increase in expenditures per person and per student is eminently reasonable. Why are adjustments for inflation taken in 7 year increments? Proffer fees are paid each time a building permit is issued. However, the County will not need to build facilities immediately, and it may not need to spend the money for many years after the fees are collected. The monetary contributions received by the County are placed in interest bearing escrow accounts until utilized for capital facilities projects. In the meantime, the interest on the unspent fees will more than cover inflation. Seven years was chosen for the adjustment because it strikes a fair balance. Stephenson Village is the first development proposal in Frederick County to proffer monetary contribution adjustments for inflation, which should be viewed as a very positive step in ensuring that the project will pay its fair share of capital facilities costs. File /12760C/EAW COUNTY of FREDERICK ■ Sidney A. Reyes Supervisor Gainesboro District Home 540/888-4619 Memorandum Fax 540/888-4648 E-mail: sreyes@ nk.com To: John R. Riley, Jr. ."�' '49ao`�1� .. County Administrator From: Sid Reyes I 11 y i i Supervisor Subject: Stephenson Village Impact Analysis Reconciliation Meeti�Azq'c�� April 25, 2003, Frederick County Conference Room 1 P.M. to 5:30 P.M. Date: April 29, 2003 Please distribute to all board members and Mr. Patrick Barker copies of the enclosed meeting agenda, list of attendees and action items subsequent to the meeting. Also enclosed is a copy of Mr. Len Bogorad's presentation display (Robert Charles Lesser & Co.) It was a very informative meeting. The input provided by all participants may have a significant bearing on my decision when it comes before the board. Many thanks again for your assistance in setting up the meeting for me and allowing staff to participate. Your continued cooperation is appreciated should a follow up meeting is requested. —RCS—iMig --- 0 '`-. ___.RMS_SAR_,.MBO. W DATE L� Qu l cQ --- NIGINAI FILE h r � �' i c,( i)t.`� �.r i(, �'Lkw I 350 Redland Road • Cross Junction, Virginia 22625 'J)c,Av ik V- (C(DPY0 Stephenson Village Impact Analysis Reconciliation Meeting 4/25/03 Meeting Objectives To identify, and develop responses to, the key questions and issues stemming from the economic analyses done -to -date on the Stephenson Depot proposal. To develop agreements on how the results of the meeting (conclusions and future actions) will be communicated to the Board of Supervisors and the public in general. Meeting Scope Economic Analyses done on the Stephenson Depot Proposal as now defined. The versions of the analyses include: a. Cost and Capital analyses b. The various BOS chartered analyses (i.e. RLC's, Springsted's, RFC's) Components of Impact Analysis to be considered include: a. Data references and assumptions b. Methodology used (avg.cost approach vs. case-study/marginal approach) c. Models used d. Scope (what factors were included, what were not included) e. Economic and Non -economic impacts f. Relevance of these studies to the parallel efforts underway to upgrade Frederick County's Impact Analysis capabilities (MPO, Air and Water Task Forces, Impact Modeling Task Force) Meeting Agenda & Questions 1. Introductions 2. Review and Agreement on Meeting Objectives and Scope 3. Study Scope questions/issues a. Why were traffic, environmental, and social impacts considered in the planning of the development but not monetized in the economic analysis? b. Why aren't projected capital costs and debt service included in the capital modeling and cost modeling respectively? c. Why aren't operating costs attributable to SV for various entities (schools, libraries, county staffs, etc.) included? 4. Study Methodology questions/issues a. Why was an average cost approach used vs. a case study/marginal approach? b. Why wasn't sensitivity analysis done on key model variables? c. Why are the economic models themselves not being shared? 5. Study Data References and Assumptions questions/issues a. Different school -age children projections have been used in cost and capital modeling as well as proffer language. What is the data/assumption basis for these different projections? What is their degree of accuracy? How sensitive is the results to these differences? b. Gov't. Expenditure Projections; why was a nationally -based 3% inflation rate used vs. a localized rate? c. How was it determined what the build -out rate should be? d. How was it determined when the shopping center revenues would begin to impact the financial outcomes? What is the accuracy and probability of that assumption based on? e. What is the certainty that no school age children will be present in the age -restricted housing based on? f. What is the ratio of newcomers to current FC residents assumed/calculated for the SV buyer mix? 6. Study Communications a. Why aren't the year -over -year cash flows from the project being communicated? b. Why aren't known sensitivities being communicated? c. Why isn't the scope of the study, especially those variables that have been consciously removed, being communicated? 7. Relevance of this Study to Other County modeling Upgrades a. Overview of activity taking place in MPO, Air and Water Task Forces, Impact Modeling Task Force b. Discussion of the relationship and leveraging opportunities between the various activities/studies 8. Meeting Actions 0 C(DP:))f . 0 Action Items Resulting from the Meeting O n Issue Action to Be TAen Who 1, Questions Concerning the Capital Modeling Results from the County Staff's Model: County Staff to provide Sid/Gina to a. The subtotal from column `Costs of Required Capital Facilities"; does this answers to this follow up with represent the projected capital costs to the County solely from the Stephenson meeting's participants County Staff Village proposal? (Y/N) b. The subtotal from column "Total Potential Tax Credits": What is the source(s) and references for this projection? What time period does it cover? c. How is debt service accounted for in this model? 2. Sensitivity Analysis Shockey Company Shockey Co. a. The County decision -makers need to have an assessment of the potential reps. Will consider meeting risks associated with the economic projections. These risks cannot be running this analysis participants quantified by using the "single number" answer (i.e. avg. result) that has and bring their position been provided by the current economic analyses. back to the meeting's b. The proposal agreed to in the meeting to minimally quantify the potential participants risk was: i. Consider 3 risk -related elements: number of school children (max. risk. at 1200), commerce tax revenue potential, and age -restricted units (could be increased) ii. Answer the question: would the projected economics go negative when each of the elements is separately revised to the higher risk projection? Notes: 1. Shockey Co. participants expressed concern for creating greater confusion in the general public by publicizing this next level of economic modeling 2. Mike McMillan noted that a requirement for sensitivity analysis is included in the scope of the new proposed Impact Model design now being developed by the County, Mr. Bogorad is Mr. Bogorad 3. Inflation Rates a. Mr. Bogorad used an nationally -based inflation rate of 3% as the inflation ding thi considering factor used in the current economic modelhypothesis b. W. Lehman and Mr. McMillan pointed out that the county's operating will bring his position back expenses are increasing at a 9% rate (minimum last 5 year trend), 6% if to the meeting's participants adjusted for County growth. c. The hypothesis posed was: shouldn't the economic model use this county. operating expense inflation rate when projecting the future inflation of county services? CT'1ppM1 NSON VILLAGE New Tax Rate Old Tax Rate Exhibit 1 NET FISCAL BENEFIT STEPHENSON VILLAGE 23 Years (2003 - 2025) $0 $4u,UUv,wv SOURCE: Robert Charles Lesser & Co., LLC Page 1 of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC 10,000 S Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xls-OCrra9p� EEx 1 Printed: 4/24/2003 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 2 OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE PROPOSED STEPHENSON VILLAGE FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 23 Years (2003 - 2025) 23-YEAR TOTAL !4 CATEGORYsr.t:acr % c :wc �rca_ �::s�s°excroe•3sys mu:rxiac �esabetne: wx}enu �smr rao ins,asumvmesev ��ra?i rx�:_�['z,�ea�s�,ce•Ks�rau:,.uaa,_ 4% REVENUES $100, 703,000 19 Real Property Taxes $48,193,000 4% Personal Property Taxes $11,264,000 1 % Sales Taxes $2,608,000 10% BPOL Taxes $25,948,000 26% Miscellaneous Revenues $ 64, 741,000 100% Educational Revenues $253 457 000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $215,326,000 100% TOTAL $38,131,000 NET FISCAL IMPACT Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xls-Sure-9Rz EEx 2 04-9.00 Printed: 4/24/2003 Page 1 of 1 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 3 $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,00C $ 5,000,00C $C SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE CUMULATIVE NET FISCAL BENEFIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O N cN 0 X N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xls-cumu graph -Ex 3 04-9269.00 Printed: 4/24/2003 L ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC Page 1 of 1 STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 4 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO., LLC SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEW TAX RATE STEPHENSON VILLAGE ANNUAL NET FISCAL IMPACT NET FISCAL CUMULATIVE j YEAR REVENUES EXPENDITURES IMPACT (NFI) NFI Nti9'NCtdi�.r✓ti."�h3�L'SL:h�trilREVE:'23'�24L+"MlrC�7flKS:!9NFhi4U1:VA(Gtti!!')filsilN'I�Si%YYL'�uFGJu""�5b32t:17L'PY1�'iLYtV`atislfi�3F:i:'YafhNE:m4'L'SHTIS'lam-?" i"a'ti2tllf 2003 $178,611 $0 $178,611 $178,611 2004 $194,130 $0 $194,130 $372,742 2005 $780,873 $549,448 $231,425 $604,167 2006 $1,861,105 $1,534,792 $326,313 $930,480 2007 $2,673,034 $2,426,963 $246,071 $1,176,551 2008 $3,831,270 $3,464,654 $366,616 $1,543,167 2009 $4,975,512 $4,527,485 $448,027 $1,991,194 2010 $6,302,421 $5,672,483 $629,938 $2,621,132 2011 $7,950,051 $6,980,470 $969,581 $3,590,713 2012 $9,027,539 $8,048,592 $978,947 $4,569,660 2013 $10,796,661 $9,246,504 $1,550,157 $6,119,817 2014 $12,286,946 $10,324,698 $1,962,248 $8,082,065 2015 $13,651,704 $11,482,337 $2,169,366 $10,251,431 2016 $14,602,140 $12,420,531 $2,181,608 $12,433,040 2017 $15,344,809 $13,147,752 $2,197,056 $14,630,096 2018 $15,992,915 $13,767,932 $2,224,983 $16,855,079 2019 $17,035,864 $14,467,514 $2,568,350 $19,423,429 2020 $17,748,046 $15,009,178 $2,738,668 $22,162,297 2021 $18,249,868 $15,459,453 $2,790,415 $24,952,712 2022 $18,792,098 $15,923,237 $2,868,861 $27,821,574 2023 $19,354,436 $16,400,934 $2,953,502 $30,775,076 2024 $20,521,239 $16,980,882 $3,540,357 $34,315,433 $38,131,240 2025 $21,306,115 $17,490,308 $3,815,807 Frederick County VA Model -RR 12 cents increase.xls-Ann 5u0m492 9x 4 .00 Printed: 4/24/2003 Page 1 of 1 w A STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 5 PUPIL GENERATION RATES BASED ON HOUSING TYPES AND ACTUAL ENROLLMENT RCLCO RATES BASED ON U.S. CENSUS DATA FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA OCCUPIED RCLCO ESTIMATE FREDERICK CO. ESTIMATE i PREDICTED AREA UNITS PUPILS PER PREDICTED PUPILS PER UNIT 2/ e PUPILS €: • HOME TYPE 20001 UNIT PUPILS '_.h"93S:lW.JH1Y 'i�'WY4kln%LuG'L'.L• b:73t]llfL'Ak C'L4U!B"u''YPJ![G3A24'il4iL15A(d4.�C.GEYiIiti:SvsTr.'!;NyShY.til's!'.f:'SI:U`i.'_1:IM.si:17l�ukTCi"v' 'JiA]' ITllu-i[is142MF'1R]1.2L*".^2YUh":1n.JfitKt!I:N°i11tlLd�'IN11LS2dL'L'N4:SiAlnf4fiwY1%"sPdB1'tlw�'.5ttG2 t2+SNli'BTIG11.1''L'S'Sl3dbc_diIPJRF.@t:t: FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 0.7000 11,719 Single -Family Detached 16,741 0.5442 9,110 1,011 Single -Family Attached 1,872 0.2908 544 0.5400 Multifamily 1,309 0.1564 205 0.2300 301 2,175 0.5442 1,184 0.2300 500 Mobile Home 11,043 13,531 Predicted Pupils 10,676 10,676 Actual Pupils 3/ 127% 103% Predicted as % of Actual 1 / 2000 US Census 2/ Frederick County 3/ Frederick County Public Schools SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo Pupil Generation Frederick.xlslPupil Generation 04-9269.00 Printed:4/24/2003 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. Page l of l STEPHENSON VILLAGE Exhibit 6 EVALUATION OF RCLCo AND COUNTY PUPIL GENERATION RATES (FROM EXHIBIT 5) BASED ON FREDERICK COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA RCLCO FACTORS FREDERICK CO. FACTORS PERMITTED PUPILS PREDICTED PUPILS PER PER PREDICTED PUPIL INCREASE AREA UNITS PER PUPIL 1996-20011/ UNIT INCREASE UNIT 2/ 1996-2002 x+ �) HOMETYPE mt+.'.^*...nLB'«'SmTlerzuJ3:„:tiraz•�.�.;ww:.. �.•uyhnntmn,�a6;Ccm«,mm rinnn:.eal2us»GL6usAu73a�wutrxe nr!runLarm:•rsvro�rsdeanvam7.nmr'�f!ulrik!SLrtM�.1�1utaLl_kduS�vrNi,AfN +au�i'n�tttrtv.L !'C+F+ntl-.;a' FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Single -Family Detached 3/ 2,570 0.5442 1132 0.00 ,799 1245 Single -Family Attached 3/ 454 0.2908 132 0.5400 Multifamily 474 0.1564 74 0.2300 109 09 Mobile Home 598 0.5442 325 0.2300 138 1,930 2,291 Predicted Pupil Increase Actual Pupil Increase 2/ 1,048 1,048 Predicted as % of Actual 184% 219% 1/ Frederick County 2/ Frederick County Public Schools 3/ Assumes 85% of permitted single-family units are detached. SOURCE: US Census; Frederick County; Frederick County Public Schools; RCLCo Pupil Generation FrederickalslPupil Generation (PenniO 04-9269.00 ROBERT CHARLES LESSER & CO. Page I of I Printed:4/24/2003 0 D J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 April 14, 2003 Mr. Sidney Reyes Supervisor, Gainesboro District County of Frederick 350 Redland Road Cross Junction, Virginia 22625 Dear Sid; Thank you for taking the time to meet with us this morning. 1 think this meeting you suggested with Mr. Lehman and Mr. McMillan is a clear honest approach. We're ready. I think we may find more agreement than disagreement on main issue-- the County needs development that pays its way. I will be out-of-town until the 23a, but there's no need to wait for me. They need to meet with Len Bogorad, the economist who authored the study, and someone from our proffer team Just give Bill Hardigg a call at 703-609-3776 and he'll set it up. Sincer , J. Do Sffocey,Jr. 87 i 9 Lfa 7 Z Z__ s— - -- _�....__ 4-7 r /j�SsoC . 70 77e Jd J, DONALD SHOCK)EY, JP— I'.O. BOX 2,130 Apra 28, 2003 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 Mr_ Sidney A Reyes Supervisor, Gainesboro District County of Frederick 350 Redland Road Cross Junction, Virginia 22625 Dear Sid, Thank you for arranging the meeting with Mr_ Lehman and Mr. McMillan. I think it was a helpful exchange of views, and yotl are a very good moderator. I have asked Leonard Bogorad to run his model again with the worst Case numbers for school children and commercial, to make sure that revenues to the County are positive. He should have the numbers for you early this week I've also asked Buren Wyatt to look at the County's capital impact model again. I'll let you know of the results as soon as we have them. If you need any thing, please call me at my office (540-665-3214) or my cell phone (540-323-3214)_ Thanks again for your consideration. Sincerely, J. Donald Sborkey, Jr. td Wd2S : za E:00z 6Z 'Udd ON XUA 96809b e8e XUA MN30 I Sad S313d : WMId 0 E Memorandum COUNTY of FREDERICK Sidney A. Reyes Supervisor - Gainesboro District Home 540/888-4619 Fax 540/888-4648 E-mail: sreyes@ nk.com To: John R. Riley, Jr. �T County Administrator M. From: Sid Reyes I 11 Supervisor rpr `eta Rdmim,-. '•�5 '� Subject: Stephenson Village Impact Analysis Reconciliation Meetin April 25, 2003, Frederick County Conference Room 1 P.M. to 5:30 P.M. Date: April 29, 2003 Please distribute to all board members and Mr. Patrick Barker copies of the enclosed meeting agenda, list of attendees and action items subsequent to the meeting. Also enclosed is a copy of Mr. Len Bogorad's presentation display (Robert Charles Lesser & Co.) It was a very informative meeting. The input provided by all participants may have a significant bearing on my decision when it comes before the board. Many thanks again for your assistance in setting up the meeting for me and allowing staff to participate. Your continued cooperation is appreciated SWUM a follow up meeting is requested. RCS WKS__.bWf '� RAS— SAR—M80W DATE- Li I. I �3 ORIGINAL FILE 350 Redland Road • Cross Junction, Virginia 22625 ,JL4Y %LV- 45CWk-tY • • • (CO PT Stephenson Village Impact Analysis Reconciliation Meeting 4/25/03 Meeting Objectives To identify, and develop responses to, the key questions and issues stemming from the economic analyses done -to -date on the Stephenson Depot proposal. To develop agreements on how the results of the meeting (conclusions and future actions) will be communicated to the Board of Supervisors and the public in general. Meeting Scope 1. Economic Analyses done on the Stephenson Depot proposal as now defined. The versions of the analyses include: a. Cost and Capital analyses b. The various BOS-chartered analyses (i.e. RLC's, Springsted's, RFC's) 2. Components of Impact Analysis to be considered include: a. Data references and assumptions b. Methodology used (avg.cost approach vs. case-study/marginal approach) c. Models used d. Scope (what factors were included, what were not included) e. Economic and Non -economic impacts f. Relevance of these studies to the parallel efforts underway to upgrade Frederick County's Impact Analysis capabilities (MPO, Air and Water Task Forces, Impact Modeling Task Force) Meeting Agenda & Questions 1. Introductions 2. Review and Agreement on Meeting Objectives and Scope 3. Study Scope questions/issues a. Why were traffic, environmental, and social impacts considered in the planning of the development but not monetized in the economic analysis? b. Why aren't projected capital costs and debt service included in the capital modeling and cost modeling respectively? c. Why aren't operating costs attributable to SV for various entities (schools, libraries, county staffs, etc.) included? 4. Study Methodology questions/issues a. Why was an average cost approach used vs. a case study/marginal approach? b. Why wasn't sensitivity analysis done on key model variables? c. Why are the economic models themselves not being shared? 5. Study Data References and Assumptions questionsrissues a. Different school -age children projections have been used in cost and capital modeling as well as proffer language. What is the data/assumption basis for these different projections? What is their degree of accuracy? How sensitive is the results to these dfferences? b. Gov't. Expenditure Projections; why Aas a nationally -based 3% inflation rate used vs. a localized rate? c. How was it determined what the build -out rate should be? d. How was it determined when the shopping center revenues would begin to impact the financial outcomes? What is the accuracy and probability of that assumption based on? e. What is the certainty that no school age children will be present in the age -restricted housing based on? f. What is the ratio of newcomers to current FC residents assumed/calculated for the SV buyer mix? 6. Study Communications a. Why aren't the year -over -year cash flows from the project being communicated? b. Why aren't known sensitivities being communicated? c. Why isn't the scope of the study, especially those variables that have been consciously removed, being communicated? 7. Relevance of this Study to Other County modeling Upgrades a. Overview of activity taking place in MPO, Air and Water Task Forces, Impact Modeling Task Force b. Discussion of the relationship and leveraging opportunities between the various activities/studies S. Meeting Actions 0 0 C(OPYO 0 Action Items Resulting from the Meeting Open Issue Action to Be Taken Who 1. Questions Concerning the Capital Modeling Results from the County Staff s Model: County Staff to provide Sid/Gina to a. The subtotal from column "Costs of Required Capital Facilities"; does this answers to this follow up with represent the projected capital costs to the County solely from the Stephenson meeting's participants County Staff Village proposal? (YIN) b. The subtotal from column "Total Potential Tax Credits": What is the source(s) and references for this projection? What time period does it cover? c. How is debt service accounted for in this model? 2. Sensitivity Analysis Shockey Company Shockey Co. a. The County decision -makers need to have an assessment of the potential reps. Will consider meeting risks associated with the economic projections. These risks cannot be running this analysis participants quantified by using the "single number" answer (i.e. avg. result) that has and bring their position been provided by the current economic analyses. back to the meeting's b. The proposal agreed to in the meeting to minimally quantify the potential participants risk was: i. Consider 3 risk -related elements: number of school children (max risk at 1200), commerce tax revenue potential, and age -restricted units (could be increased) ii. Answer the question: would the projected economics go negative when each of the elements is separately revised to the higher risk projection? Notes: 1. Shockev Co. participants expressed concern for creating greater confusion in the general public by publicizing this next level of economic modeling 2. Jvfike McMillan noted that a requirement for sensitivity analysis is included in the scope of the new proposed Impact Model design now being developed by the Caun . Mr. Bogorad is Mr. Bogorad 3. MflZ;n Rates a. Mr. Bogorad used an nationally -based inflation rate of 3% as the inflation considering this factor used in the cuiremt economic model hypothesis and will b. Mr. Lehman and Mr. McMillan pointed out that the county's operating bring his position back expenses are increasing at a 9% rate (minimum last 5 year trend), 6% if to the meeting's adjusted for county growth. participants c. The hypothesis posed was: shouldn't the economic model use this county operating expense inflation rate when projecting the future inflation of county services? 0 0 tCo: PDY J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. SOX 2530 'W1'INCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 April 14, 2003 Mr. Sidney Reyes Supervisor, Gainesboro District County of Frederick 350 Redland Road Cross Junction, Virginia 22625 Dear Sid; Thank you for taking the time to meet with us this morning. I think this meeting you suggested with Mr. Lehman and Mr. McNhUan is a clear honest approach. We're ready. i think we may End more agreement than disagreement on main issue-- the County needs development that pays its way. I will be out-of-town until the 23d, but there's no need to wait for me. They need to meet with Len Bogorad, the economist who authored the study, and someone from our proffer team Just give Bill Hardigg a call at 703-609-3776 and he'll set it up. Sincer , J. Do Sffocey, Jr. P 0_t'Y.._._ 7Z Z �Q1__V�^� ......__._R•_L,t Cks�1iL 70 -- J. DONALD SHOCK EY, .IR. i'.O. BOX 2530 April 28, 2003 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 Mr_ Sidney A. Reyes Supervisor, Crainesboro District County of Frederick 350 Redland Road Cross Junction, Virginia 22625 Dear Sid, Thank you for arranging the meeting with Mr. Lehman and Mt. McMillan. I think it was a helpful oxchange of views, and yott are a very good moderator. I have asked Leonard $ogorad to run his model again with the, worst case numbers for school children and commercial, to make sure that revenues to the County are positive. He should have the numbers for you early this week I've also asked Evan Wyatt to look at the County's capital impact model again. IT let you Imow of the results as soon as we have tbom If you need any thing, please cal} ma at my office (540-665-3214) or my cell phone (540-323-3214)_ Thanks again for your consideration. Sincerely, J. Donakd Shockey, Jr, Td WdZS : z0 200Z 6Z '-add :,""ON XH3 968b9b 8eB XH3 3JN3QIS3b S3),32t] : WONJ 0 .1. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2534) WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 April 14, 2003 Mr. Eric R. Lawrence 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Eric: FYI, here is a mailing we have sent to about 300 nearby neighbors and property owners. It brings together the questions and answers from five neighborhood meetings. The most frequent question we hear is about sewer connections. We are also getting questions on the project hotline and responding to them individually. If you know of someone who wants a copy, just have them call our hotline (540-323- 3320) and leave their name and address. I will be out of town until the 23rd, but one of our project team will be glad to track down any information you might need Feel free to call Evan Wyatt (office: 540-662-4185; cell: 540-974- 2701), Mark Smith (office: 540-662-4185; cell: 540-974-0335), John Good (office: 540-665-3212; cell: 540-533-8222), our lawyer Ty Lawson (office: 540-665-0050; cell: 540-247-2650), or our public relations counsel Bill Hasdigg (office: 703-426-4670; cell 703-609-3776) in the meantime. If they don't know the answer, they'll put you in touch with someone who does. Thanks again for your consideration. Sin cer , J. Donald Shockey, Jr. w'� • FREQUENTLY ASKED UESTIONS ABOUT STEPHENSON VILLAGE /o�xeS - Paq,L y JckwIs-Pad` 6 ✓OWU rc4e - pa GA ale r Sew e v- -- Pa -at- `� L� April 2003 Dear Neighbor, When we first introduced Stephenson Village to the community last fall, I promised that we would move forward with the rezoning only when I was satisfied that Stephenson Village would be good for the neighborhood and good for the County. We have received a lot of good comments in our neighborhood meetings, and we have received a good economic report, which has been checked and double- checked by outside experts. This is a long-term plan, which will take 15 to 25 years to build, and we want to be sure of our numbers. This booklet should answer many of the frequently asked questions about Stephenson Village. If your question isn't included here, or you'd like an answer in person, you can always call our project hotline at 540-323-3320 and leave a name, address and phone number where you can be reached. Before we go on to the questions and answers, I want to answer the question we have heard most frequently from our neighbors: "Can I connect to the sewer lines in Stephenson Village?" Yes. Stephenson Village will bring sewer infrastructure to the area, and we will provide easements so that existing neighborhoods can connect to these lines. I'd also like to answer another very important question: "I like what I'm hearing, but how do I know it will come true?" The answer is: We make our promises in legally enforceable documents, and we back up our facts with expert sources. There is no hidden agenda here. We will be glad to provide you with any of the documents or information referred to in the answers below, or answer any questions you have. Sincerely Questions about Traffic Nobody likes to sit in rush-hour traffic. For the sake of our neighbors, and future residents of Stephenson Village, we rill keep service on local roads good. Will Stephenson Village create a need for Route 37? Absolutely not Our traffic study —which does not include Route 37—shows that there will be good service levels on local roads throughout the construction of Stephenson Village. We can handle the traffic from Stephenson Village very well without Route 37. Route 37 would cut our community in half. We can't keep the state from condemning our land, but we hope the state can find a better way. Will Stephenson Village have entrances on Jordan Springs Road? Absolutely not The only entrances to Stephenson Village will be in the west, where our major collector road feeds into Route 11 (via Old Charles Town Road in the north and at the Rutherford Industrial Park intersection in the south). What about the entrance to the school? This is an entrance to the school only. The driveway at the proposed school on Old Charles Town Road will not connect through into Stephenson Village. Will traffic from Stephenson Village use Jordan Springs Road and Woods Mill Road as a shortcut to Route 7? Traffic is a problem all over the area. People take this particular shortcut to avoid the intersection of Route 11 and I-81. A few of the commuters from Stephenson Village will certainly also use it, but not enough to interfere with the free flow of traffic on Old Charles Town Road. Our traffic study indicates that Old Charles Town Road will remain at its current Level of Service "C" throughout the building of Stephenson Village. Why? Traffic usually takes the path of least resistance. Our road improvements —turn lanes and lights —will make it easier to take Route 11 instead of the shortcut. There will be only one entrance on Old Charles Town Road and no entrances on Jordan Springs Road. All construction traffic will be required to use Route 11 instead of Jordan Springs Road. We have supported, and will continue to support, community efforts to solve the problems on Jordan Springs and Woods Mill Road through sight line improvements, speed reductions and limits on thru trucks. We will also contribute our fair share to the upgrading of the Route 11/I-81 intersection. 2 What is Level of Service C? Traffic flows freely during rush hour. On a Level of Service "C" road, rush hour traffic moves at the speed limit. At traffic lights, cars use only about a third of each green light cycle. At stop signs, cars wait only about 30 seconds. How can our roads possibly handle this much traffic? Two reasons: First, we have planned this community to be walk -able and bike -able, with convenient shopping in the center, so several thousand trips will never leave Stephenson Village. Second, we will make road improvements. VDOT confirmed that the improvements we are committed to make "adequately address transportation concerns on Route 11 and Route 761, Old Charles Town Road." Traffic studies can be wrong ... how do we know this one is right? Our road improvements will be triggered by actual traffic counts, not estimates in the traffic study. We will have counters permanently installed at the two entrances to Stephenson Village. This will allow us to anticipate when traffic is getting heavier, so we can make improvements before problems occur. Our proffers require us to begin work on road improvements when actual counts reach 80% of the level at which they are needed, and we axe required to finish the improvements in 18 months. What are these road improvements? As Stephenson Village is built, we will install traffic signals at the intersection of Old Charles Town Road and Route 11 and the entrance of Stephenson Village onto Old Charles Town Road. Old Charles Town Road will be widened to three lanes between the entrance to Stephenson Village and Route 11, and the Stephenson Village connector road will extend all the way to Route 11 at the Rutherford Farm intersection. We will be adding turn lanes at all these key intersections. These improvements will be made in several phases, which are described in the proffers and the traffic study. What are you doing about the mess down at the I-81 and Route 11 interchange? We will contribute our fair share of money toward the planned improvements at this interchange, using a formula VDOT has given us. It is in our interest, and the interest of everyone in the area, to see that the problems at this interchange are fixed. KI 0 Effect on the County Budget Unplanned growth has raised taxes in many Virginia counties by adding more school children than their taxes will support. Stephenson Village is a planned community with a balance of housing types to appeal to di erent age groups, including a large number of age -restricted units that will add no children to the county schools. Stephenson Village will pay its own way. Will this development cost the taxpayers money? Stephenson Village will not cost the County taxpayer a dime. Last November, we hired the firm of Robert Charles Lesser & Company, LLC to answer this question, and their economic study found that Stephenson Village "will pay its own way, including paying to educate the children living there, and still help to pay for other County needs." How much net revenue could Stephenson Village bring to the County? At the new tax rate of 73 cents per $100, Stephenson Village will generate about $38 million net positive revenue for the County between groundbreaking and build -out, which should take about 23 years, according to the economic study. After it is built, Stephenson Village should generate about $3.9 million every year in net positive revenue for the County. How do I know the Stephenson Village economic study is reliable? The Frederick County Board of Supervisors has hired two independent firms to check the results of Robert Charles Lesser & Company, LLC, and they confirm the net positive benefits to the County found by the study. One of these independent firms is Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates of Richmond, Virginia, the leading accounting firm for local governments in Virginia, and Frederick County's auditing firm. The second independent firm is Springsted Incorporated of St. Paul, Minnesota, one of the largest independent financial advisory firms in the United States, which works only for public sector clients. According to VISION, the Stephenson Village economic study is a "best case" scenario ... is this true? Not true. The economic study is conservative. It does not include indirect benefits like higher property values in the surrounding areas, the hundreds of construction jobs it will create, or retail sales tax from spending by construction workers and contractors, or increases in heritage tourism. 0 • • Isn't the money the project would generate just a "drop in the bucket" compared to the County's budget? Not true. Stephenson Village will generate one to four million dollars net revenue a year for the County. That is the equivalent of over 5 cents on the County's real estate tax rate of 73 cents per $100. Somebody said that the County's inflation rate is really 9%, not the 3% that the study claims ... is this true? Not true. The inflation rate in Frederick County is roughly the same as the inflation rate elsewhere in the United States, which has averaged about 3% over the past 20 years. Somebody said that Loudoun County supervisors think planned communities like Stephenson Village are "the No.1 reason their growth spiraled out of control" ... is this true? Not true. In December, the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors approved Moorefield Station, a planned community very similar to Stephenson Village, by a vote of seven supervisors to two. Supervisor Jim Burton, a strong critic of unplanned growth, was quoted in the local newspaper saying, "We have structured something here that works from a fiscal standpoint." (Moorefield Station is a community of 2,500 homes on about 600 acres, to be built over a 20-year period.) What are proffer fees? Proffer fees are money paid by a developer to offset the cost of building new schools and other facilities (parks, fire stations, etc.) for a new community. Stephenson Village will pay proffer fees to cover 100% of the County's facilities impacts, using the County's model. In addition, Stephenson Village will adjust these fees by the Consumer Price Index every seven years, and pay additional proffer fees if there are more schoolchildren than expected from Stephenson Village. No other rezoning in Frederick County history has ever paid 100% proffer fees, an inflation adjustment, or extra fees if there are more schoolchildren than expected. Why are your proffer fees only adjusted for inflation every seven years? Proffer fees are paid each time a building permit is issued. However, the County will not need to build facilities immediately, and it may not need to spend the money for many years after the fees are collected. In the meantime, the interest on the unspent fees will more than cover inflation. Seven years was chosen because it strikes a fair balance. R Questions about Schools Unlike "by -right" development, Stephenson Village mill pay the entire cost of building schools to educate the children wbo live there. How many students will Stephenson Village add to the County's public schools? Stephenson Village will add between 40 to 60 students a year to the County schools from groundbreaking to build -out. If students are added at a faster rate, additional proffer payments will be made to the County. Over the 15 to 25 years it will take to build Stephenson Village, this will total between 800 and 1,200 students. The economic study by Robert Charles Lesser & Company, LLC estimates 805 students based on the U.S. Census and current trends. The County's model estimates 1,155 students. Proffer fees to cover school construction are based on the County's estimate of 1,155. Why does the project only have one school site? Stephenson Village is a logical location for an elementary school site, because it is within walking distance of enough students to fill the school (between 450 and 650 elementary students when Stephenson Village is complete). There will not be enough students to fill a middle school or a high school. However, the proffer fees to cover school construction costs include money to pay the community's fair share of a new middle or high school, wherever the County decides to build them. Will we need a new middle school and a new high school too? Stephenson Village will not generate enough students to require a new middle school or a new high school. When it is completely built, Stephenson Village will generate between 150 to 250 middle school students, and between 150 to 300 high school students. The County may decide to build these schools at some time in the future, or it may decide to add to existing schools, or student populations may decline and no new schools may be needed. Stephenson Village will pay proffer fees to cover its fair share of these school construction costs. Was the cost of the debt to build new schools included in the Stephenson Village economic forecasts? Proffer fees are cash payments to cover school construction costs. There is no "cost of debt" associated with cash payments. 6 Someone has claimed that the "age -restricted" housing will generate up to 60 school -age children ... is this true? Not true. Age -restricted housing will generate no school -age children. Children under the age of 18 will be allowed to stay in these homes only as guests, no more than 60 days in any one year. Someone said you couldn't keep children out of a "seniors only" community... is this true? Not true. The Virginia courts have upheld these restrictions in other "active adult" and senior communities. Questions about Planned Communities Stephenson Village will be a planned community with a school, public ball fields, parks, trails and convenient shopping that will lie the neighborhoods of Stephenson together and serve as a vital center. Stephenson Village itself will have a distinctive look, a strong architectural theme, and a mixture of housing types to meet the needs of people of all ages. Why do we need a planned community? Stephenson Village fills four key needs: It will define an 822-acre tract in the center of Stephenson in a way that increases the value of surrounding neighborhoods and brings sewer infrastructure, convenient shopping and recreation. It will give older adults housing choices that don't exist elsewhere in the County, in a community setting where they can be near friends and family. Stephenson Village also brings the County significant new revenues for schools and other services. For the region, Stephenson Village will soak up some of the suburban sprawl and serve as a model for responsible development in the northern Shenandoah. Can I afford to live in Stephenson Village? Stephenson Village is a planned community where several generations can live together —young people just starting out in life, parents with children, "empty nesters" and senior citizens. There will be condominiums starting at $95,000 for first -tune buyers, townhouses starting at $145,000, and a variety of other home styles from $170,000 to $400,000. There will an "active adult" (over 55) community with homes ranging from $170,000 to $250,000, as well as affordable housing for the elderly. FA Someone said that the planned community of Reston, Virginia has a high crime rate ... is this true? Not true. According to the Fairfax County Police, Reston has a lower than average crime rate compared to Fairfax County as a whole, and Fairfax County has one of the lowest crime rates in the state. What is Smart Growth? Smart Growth is a set of principles of sustainable community planning developed and endorsed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and dozens of organizations, including national environmental groups, community groups, local and state governments that make up the Smart Growth Network. Stephenson Village meets all ten principles of Smart Growth planning. How fast is the County really growing? According to the U.S. Census, the County's population has been growing about 3% per year for the past decade. The school population grew more slowly, about 2.3% per year. Over the past six years, Frederick County has issued an average of 685 building permits a year. How fast will Stephenson Village grow? Stephenson Village will be completed in 15 to 25 years, an average of 100 to 200 units a year. These numbers come from the proffers and the economic study. The proffers place an 8% per year limit on building permits for Stephenson Village. This limit (along with start-up and slow -down years) means that Stephenson Village could not be completed in less than 15 years. The economic study by Robert Charles Lesser & Company, LLC forecasts that "build -out" will be complete by the year 2024. How many people will live in Stephenson Village? The economic study projects about 6,000 residents at build -out. Can I use the parks in Stephenson Village? Yes. There will be public ball fields, a public school, a linear park along Hiatt Run, and public walking trails and bike trails throughout the community. M. How do we know the recreation center will be built? The recreation center must be bonded before any building permits for homes are issued. The proffers require that design and construction begin when the 250th building permit is issued and completed before the 800th building permit is issued. Someone said incentives from the County will be necessary to get a grocery store to locate in Stephenson Village ... is this true? Not true. Grocery chains use an economic formula to decide when to build a new supermarket. This formula is based on the number of households in the area and the distance to the nearest competing supermarket. Using this formula, the economic study forecasts a grocery store will locate in Stephenson Village within ten years. Questions about Environmental Protection Ile are working urith the Center for Watershed Protection, the Potomac Conservancy, the Potomac Wlatershed Partnersh p, the Virginia Department of Conservation WfaterQuabo Division, the Virginia Department of Forestry and others to enhance Hiatt Run and make Stephenson Village a model for environmental controls How can you say 2,800 homes will control sprawl? Clustering preserves open space. The 2,800 homes in Stephenson Village will be built on about 825 acres of land, which includes 200 to 250 acres of open space. The same number of homes on 5-acre lots, which can be built by right in Frederick County, would occupy 14,000 acres of rural land. Do we have enough water to support this many homes? Yes. Stephenson Village will use County water and sewer, not well and septic. The Northern Water Treatment plant has more than enough capacity to supply the 683,000 gallons per day needed by Stephenson Village at build -out. Will people outside Stephenson Village be able to connect to the sewer lines? Yes. The proffers require Stephenson Associates to dedicate land to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, build a pump station, and build a force main and associated infrastructure. Easements will be provided for existing neighborhoods to connect to these facilities. 9 None of the utility infrastructure associated with the project will cost the County taxpayers money. Won't the cars in Stephenson Village add tremendously to our air pollution problems? Cars are a minor source of pollution compared to the truck traffic on I- 81, which causes over two-thirds of the air pollution in Frederick County. Unlike cars, trucks are not required to have pollution controls on their exhaust. The Clean Air Trust estimates that a single tractor - trailer pollutes as much as 150 cars. (Federal standards, beginning in 2004, will require engines on new trucks to be 50% cleaner.) Questions about Historical Preservation Will you rezone the battlefield? Defnitelynot. None of the land identified by the National Park Service as core battlefield is included in the rezoning request. What will happen to the Byers House? The Byers house will be preserved. Are there Indian mounds on the property? There are no known Indian mounds on the property. However, if any are found, they will be treated as cemeteries and preserved in accordance with County and State regulations. Will you widen Milburn Road? With the exception of a road crossing at the southern end of the property, Milburn Road will remain exactly as it looks today. Where can I get more information? If you would like a copy of the economic study, the traffic study, or the proffers for Stephenson Village ... or maybe just an answer to a question, please call 540-323-3320. We will be glad to provide copies to everyone who is interested. STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES Box 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 10 �uCV N V i✓,A uL,, ]ROBINSO V q FAR Y IL ER, Cox AssoCIATIES CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS A PROFESSIONAL LIAR= LIABILITY COMPANY M E M O R A N To: Mr. John R. Riley, Jr. County Administrator County of Frederick, Virginia From: Steven J. Jacobs, Director Graham F. Payne, Senior Consultant Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates Date: April 3, 2003 - D U M Re: Evaluation of Fiscal Impact Analysis for Stephenson Village in Frederick County, Virginia Robinson Farmer Cox Associates (RFC) has completed its evaluation of Robert Charles Lesser & Co's (RCLCo) "Fiscal Impact and Market Analysis for Stephenson Village" dated March 11, 2003. The evaluation relied on preparing our own Fiscal Impact Study and comparing the results to those detailed in the RCLCo Report. The forecasts contained in this document are for planning purposes only and are not to be regarded as accountants' opinions of the present or future financial position of the County of Frederick. The forecasts are based upon past trends and expectations for near and mid term operations and their validity depends upon the outcome of future events. Additionally, modification of these estimates will become necessary as County growth and development progresses, or in the event of material changes in market, project specific, or other eco- nomic conditions. Periodic review and revision is recommended. The financial forecasts in this report are intended for the purpose of providing some insights into the potential intermediate term effects of proposed development in the County of Frederick, and should not be used for any other purpose. This forecasted cash flow, as are all efforts to extrapo- late, is clearly subject to change and modification. The variability or error in the forecast should also be expected to increase with "distance" from the present time. There will usually be differences between the forecasted and actual results because events and circumstances frequently do not occur as expected and these differences may be material. RICHMOND OFFICE STEVEN J. JACOAS MANAGING DIRECTOR 401 SO UTH7.4KFBOULEVARD TELEPHONE: (804) 378-4200 SUITE C 1 FAX (804) 378-5168 RICIIMOND, VIRGINL4 23236 E-AL41L: jake@rfca.coai INTERNET.• www.rfca.com ,ti Memorandum to John Riley Evaluation of Fiscal Impact Analysis for Stephenson Village Pape 2 The forecasts do not have to be formally adopted by the Board of Supervisors, but are intended to assist the Board in its deliberations. Our analysis (summary of the analysis is presented on attached Tables 1 through 3) addressed all expected revenues, expenses, and capital costs associated with the devel- opment of Stephenson Village. We relied on the RCLCo Report for certain base informa- tion on the proposed market support for the planned development and the likely home/unit prices. The base information included: • 531 active adult homes (may only be occupied by households with one member age 55 and over, and no children would be allowed to reside in these units), 354 single- family detached and 177 attached; • 1,001 single family detached homes of various sizes and types; • 638 townhomes; • 479 condominium homes; • 144 senior apartment units; and • A town center with 190,000 square feet of retail (including a supermarket) and 60,000 square feet of office space. Additional assumptions used in our analysis were based on: • The RCLCo Report, "Fiscal Impact and market analysis for Stephenson Village" dated March 11, 2003 • Frederick County Annual Budget 2002-2003; • Frederick County Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports from Fiscal Year's 1998 to 2001. Fiscal Year 2002 data was collected from the draft copy of the Frederick County Audit for 2002; • 2000 Census Data for Frederick County; and • Frederick County Development Review Fee Schedule and Frederick County Depart- ment of Public Works and Inspections Fee Schedule (effective January 1, 2003) RICI&YfOND OFFICE STEVEN J. JACOBS, MANAGING DIRECTOR 401 SOUTTM4KEBOULEVARD TELEPIIONE.• (804) 378-4200 SUITE C-1 TAX. (804) 378-5168 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23236 E-MAIL: jake@rfca.com iw INTMATT.• www. rfca. co in • 0 Memorandum to John Riley Evaluation of Fiscal Impact Analysis for Stephenson Village Page 3 The results of our analysis indicate that the proposed development will generate revenues of approximately $176.8 million and associated expenditures of approximately $156.4 million yielding a positive net fiscal impact of approximately $20.4 million for Frederick County over the 23 year time period. Assumptions and Methodology In the interest of brevity, the following assumptions were adopted from the RCLCo report: Build Out of Stephenson Village • Types of residential homes and commercial businesses to be built • Total number of residential units and commercial square footage; • Values of the Residential and Commercial units to be built; • Population per Household, by unit type; • Students per Household , by unit type; • Average size, in square feet, of each type of residential unit; • Square Feet of Commercial space per employee; and • County employment Several different assumptions were used by RFC for: • Pace of buildout; • Frederick County Population was based on 2000 Census Data, adjusted for 2003; • Student population, as measured by Average Daily Membership from the Frederick County School Board; • Number of Households, from 2000 Census data for Frederick County; • Average Household size was an RFC computation. (population divided by the households); • Rate of annual growth of Real Estate Assessed Valuation; and • Rate of annual growth in sales price of residential units While most of the assumptions and base data were similar between the RCLCo report and the RFC report, the methodology was fundamentally different in two distinct areas: RFC looked at revenue and expense items at the local level. RFC addressed locally generated revenue items that could be directly associated with the proposed devel- opment. Expenditures were treated in the same fashion, RFC only considered operating expenditures that were funded by locally sourced revenues, electing to RICHMOND OFFICE STEVENJ. JACOBS MANAGING DIRECTOR 401 SOUTHLAYE BOULEVARD TELEPHONE: (804) 378-4200 SU17 . C-1 FAX. (804) 378-5168 RICHMOND, VIRGINL4 23236 EA1ALLJake@rfca.com 1W INTERNh . www.rfca.cora • • Memorandum to John Riley Evaluation of Fiscal Impact Analysis for St6phenson Village Page 4 net out all State and Federal revenue from expenditures. RCLCo elected to include Federal and State Educational revenue and expenditures. RFC relied on the previous five years audits to develop trends for local revenues and expenses. All relevant revenue and expenditure items from FY 1998 to 2002 were linearly regressed to provide an expected annual increase (decrease) for each year from 2004 to 2025 with the FY 2003 Frederick County budget serving as "base data". RCLCo elected to grow all revenues and expenditures at 3% annually for the time period from 2004 through 2025. Like RFC, RCLCo used FY 2003 budget data as their base data in determining the County's future revenues and expenditures. Both analyses then adjusted all relevant expense and revenue items to a per capita/per student/per household figure and then multiplied by the proposed development outputs to achieve development specific revenues and expenditures. The following revenues were project specific and required independent calculation: • Real Property Taxes; • Sales Taxes; • BPOL taxes; • Permits and Other fees; and • Recovered Costs (Proffers were subtracted out) The following revenue items were excluded from the analysis: • Mobile Home Taxes; • Real and Personal Public Service Corporation Taxes; • Machinery and Tools Taxes; • Auto Rental Tax; and • Street Light Assessments The following expenditure items were excluded from the analysis: Debt Service in the General Fund and the School Debt Service Fund, these would not be effected by the development; and Capital expenditures necessitated by the development, the corresponding portion of which should be offset by proffer revenue and thus neither were included in the analysis. RICKMOND OFFICE STEVENJ. JACOBS, MA NAGINGDIRECTOR 401 SOUHMAKEBOULEVARD TELEPTIOAW.- (804) 378-4200 SUITE C-I FAX- (804) 378-5168 RICHMOAD VIRGJNIA 23236 E-MAff--jake@rfca.com INTERNET..• www.rfca.com TW 0 • Memorandum to John Riley Evaluation of Fiscal Impact Analysis for Stephenson Village Page 5 Findings Revenues RFC arrived at a Real Property Tax value of $76 million, over the 23 year period which included the assessed value of land and residential and commercial units taxed at $0.61 per $100 of assessed value. RCLCo arrived at a slightly larger value of $84 million using the same method outlined above, using a 3% growth rate for the assessed value of property versus the 1 % used by RFC. RFC computed Personal Property Tax revenue of on a per capita basis totaling approxi- mately $64 million, over the 23 year period. RCLCo's Personal Property Tax revenue estimate of $48 million was computed using factors such as household income. RFC arrived at Sales Tax revenue of $12.5 million, over the 23 year period, which is $900,000 greater than RCLCo's $11.3 million. The. difference in these values is the approach taken. RFC projected out the likely mix of retail establishments, including the 60,000 sq. ft. grocery store, and their corresponding sales per square feet using 2002 data gathered from the Newspaper Association of America's, "Sales Per Square Foot of Stores in U.S. Shopping Centers." Additionally RFC assumed all residents of the development use the shopping center. RCLCo opted for a different approach that incorporated house- hold income brackets, expected sales per household and sales per square feet. RCLCo assumed 90% of residents used the shopping center. RFC arrived at its Business Professional and Occupational License Tax Revenues of $2.4 million, over the 23 year period, $200,000 less than RCLCo's $2.6 million. While similar methodologies were used in both analysis, the greater RCLCo value is generally attribut- able to the use of a sales per square foot figure of $400, for retail establishments. The RFC figure for sales per square foot varies within a range from $310 to $110. RFC arrived at its Miscellaneous Revenue of $21 million by regressing each remaining revenue line item, with the exceptions of those noted above, and summing the total. It should be noted that when RFC regressed the Recovered Costs revenue proffers were not included. RCLCo appears to have arrived at their Miscellaneous Revenue item in a similar fashion. RICHMOND OFFICE STEVEN J. JACOBS MANAGING DIRECTOR 401 SOUTILAKE BOULEVARD THYPHONE.• (804) 378-4200 SUITE C-1 TAX • (804) 378-5168 RICHMOAD VIRGINIA 23236 EMA1Ljake@rfca.com BVTLRNET.• :uww. rfca.coni iw Memorandum to John Riley Evaluation of Fiscal Impact Analysis for Stephenson Village Page 6 Expenditures The single largest expenditure item in both analyses was Education. The largest driver of difference between the two analyses is the growth of Education expenditures. Within the RFC model education expenditures, without debt service, grow at approximately 5% per annum (8% in the early years declining to 3% in the out years). The RCLCo report fore- casts education expenditures with a growth rate of 3% per annum for the entire period. RFC did not include any Capital Costs or proffers in this analysis. The proffer revenue is designed to compensate for any additional required capital costs. Therefore excluding both of these items yields no impact on the analysis. Net Fiscal Impact RFC arrived at a Net Fiscal Impact over the 23 year period of approximately $20.4 million with a positive net fiscal impact each year. RCLCo arrived at a Net Fiscal Impact over the 23 year period of approximately $21.6 million with the largest gains occurring in years 2015 through 2025. The two largest revenue items, Real Property Tax and Personal Property Tax, constitute 79% of the development's revenue item according to the RFC analysis. These revenue items are very sensitive to the annual growth rates applied to them. Additionally the pace of build out has a large effect on the revenues generated from the project. (Tables 1-3 attached) Simply put, the faster the buildout is completed the greater the revenues. We have assumed that the pace of buildout used in the RCLCo report is the high end of the buildout pace and represents a "Pace of Buildout" equal to 100%. The following table illustrates the affect a slower pace of buildout has on the proposed development: Pace of Buildout Revenues Expenditures Net Fiscal Impact Present 0 Value @ 5 /o 100% $178,123,000 $156,436,000 $21,687,000 $11,411,000 80% $165,768,000 $145,463,000 $20,305,000 $10,431,000 60% $144,486,000 $128,365,000 $16,121,000 $7,521,000 RICFUTOND OJT -ICE =VEN J. JACOBS, MANAGING DIRECTOR 401 SOUTFILAKEBOULEVARD TEL HONE: (804) 378-4200 SU17E C-1 FAX- (804) 378-5168 RICFIMOND, VIRGINIA 23236 E—MA,U_ jake®rfca.corn flV=RNET.• www.rfca.com iw 0 0 Memorandum to John Riley Evaluation of Fiscal Impact Analysis for Stephenson Village Page 7 RFC considers 5% to be a reasonable rate at which to discount future cash flows and as such has used this in determining a Present Value of the Net Fiscal Impact. It is evident that the pace of buildout not only influences the total cash flow over the 23 year period (Net Fiscal Impact) but also affects the timing of the cash flows, by moving them later in the forecast, thus reducing the Present Value of the proposed development. It is clear, although somewhat counterintuitive, that this predominantly residential develop- ment is expected to have a positive fiscal impact on the County, regardless of the pace of development. However, we note that the composition of the development is a critical and sensitive factor. Elimination of the 675 age restricted units, which contain no children, from the development yields a negative fiscal impact: over the 23 year period the cost of services is forecast to exceed revenues generated by $2.6 million. Additionally, if the retail/commercial component was also eliminated, the negative impact is estimated to exceed $8 million. It is recommended that the County carefully consider any proposed alteration to the residential use mix of the development. RICHMOND OFFICE 401 SOUTFrrn E BOULEVARD TELEPIIONE.• (804) 378-4200 SUITE C-1 FAX- (804) 378-5168 RICHMOND, VIRGEVIA 23236 E—MAIL: jake©rfca.cwe INTERATTr w7mrfca.com =VEN J. JACOBS, MANAGING DIRECTOR TABLE 1 Frederick County, Virginia Fiscal Impact Analysis Stephenson Village Comparison RCLCo and RFC RCLCo Category 23 year total $ % Revenues Real Property Taxes $ 84,149,000 35.5% Personal Property Taxes $ 48,193,000 20.3% Sales Taxes $ 11,264,000 4.8% BPOL Taxes $ 2,608,000 1.1 % Miscellaneous Revenues $ 25,948,000 11.0% Educational Revenues $ 64,741,000 27.3% $ 236,903,000 100.0% TOTAL Expenditures Operating Costs $ 215,326,000 100.0% $ 215,326,000 100.0% TOTAL Net Fiscal Impact $ 21,577,000 Pace Of Development At 100% Of Developer Estimates RFC Category 23 year total $ % Revenues Real Property Taxes $ 76,077,000 43.0% Personal Property Taxes $ 64,234,000 36.3% Sales Taxes $ 12,527,000 7.1 % BPOL Taxes $ 2,401,000 1.4% Miscellaneous Revenues $ 21,578,000 12.2% Educational Revenues $ 176,817,000 100.0% TOTAL Expenditures Operating Costs $ 156,436,000 100.0% $ 156,436,000 100.0% TOTAL Net Fiscal Impact $ 20,381,000 Discounted Present Value At 5.00% $ 10,572,000 • TABLE 2 Frederick County, Virginia Fiscal Impact Analysis Stephenson Village Comparison RCLCo and RFC RCLCo Category 23 Vear total $ % Revenues Real Property Taxes $ 84,149,000 35.5% Personal Property Taxes $ 48,193,000 20.3% Sales Taxes $ 11,264,000 4.8% BPOL Taxes $ 2,608,000 1.1 % Miscellaneous Revenues $ 25,948,000 11.0% Educational Revenues $ 64,741,000 27.3% $ 236,903,000 100.0% TOTAL Expenditures Operating Costs $ 215,326,000 100.0% $ 215,326,000 100.0% TOTAL Net Fiscal Impact $ 21,577,000 Pace Of Development At 80% Of Developer Estimates RFC Category 23 year total $ % Revenues Real Property Taxes $ 71,301,000 43.4% Personal Property Taxes $ 59,314,000 36.1 % Sales Taxes $ 11,525,000 7.0% BPOL Taxes $ 2,331,000 1.4% Miscellaneous Revenues $ 19,948,000 12.1 % Educational Revenues $ 164,419,000 100.0% TOTAL Expenditures Operating Costs $ 145,463,000 100.0% $ 145,463,000 100.0% TOTAL Net Fiscal Impact $ 18,956,000 Discounted Present Value At 5.00% $ 9,612,000 0 • TABLE 3 Frederick County, Virginia Fiscal Impact Analysis Stephenson Village Comparison RCLCo and RFC RCLCo Category 23 Vear total $ % Revenues Real Property Taxes $ 84,149,000 35.5% Personal Property Taxes $ 48,193,000 20.3% Sales Taxes $ 11,264,000 4.8% BPOL Taxes $ 2,608,000 1.1 % Miscellaneous Revenues $ 25,948,000 11.0% Educational Revenues $ 64,741,000 27.3% $ 236,903,000 100.0% TOTAL Expenditures Operating Costs $ 215,326,000 100.0% $ 215,326,000 100.0% TOTAL Net Fiscal Impact $ 21,577,000 Pace Of Development At 60% Of Developer Estimates RFC Category 23 ear total $ % Revenues Real Property Taxes $ 62,612,000 43.7% Personal Property Taxes $ 51,200,000 35.8% Sales Taxes $ 9,886,000 6.9% BPOL Taxes $ 2,228,000 1.6% Miscellaneous Revenues $ 17,251,000 12.0% Educational Revenues $ 143,177,000 100.0% TOTAL Expenditures Operating Costs $ 128,365,000 100.0% $ 128,365,000 100.0% TOTAL Net Fiscal Impact $ 14,812,000 Discounted Present Value At 5.00% $ 7,521,000 • • STEPHENSON ASSOCIATES, L.C. P. O. Box 2530 Winchester, Virginia xx"4 March 21, 2003 Frederick County Planning Department Attn: Eric Lawrence, Planning Director 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Stephenson Village Rezoning Application Dear M nce: 9 r1'C./ Our team has finalized the information necessary for filing of the rezoning application for Stephenson Village. It is my understanding that filing this information today would allow for the Stephenson Village rezoning to be considered during the April 16th Planning Commission meeting. Please know that we want you and your star to have adequate time to conduct the Northeast Land Use Plan public meetings on April 1" and April 7`}', as well as have more than the normal time to review and process our rezoning. Therefore, I am requesting that you accept this rezoning application today for the purpose of presentation to the Planning Commission on May 7`li, 2003. This additional time will assist your star and allow for meetings between your department and our team if desired. Sincerely J. Donald Shockey, Jr. Cc: Board of Supervisors Planning Commission John Riley, Jr. Larry Ambrogi, Esq. Kris Tierney Jay Cook MAR 2 1 2003 !-REl E'11CK COUNTY PI_ MNINIG 117, C'7V 10H,4Fi 11 t J. DONALD SHOCKEY, JR. P.O. BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA March 21, 2003 22604 Mr. Eric R. Lawrence Planning Commission, Secretary 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Eric: Here is the Proffer Statement and Impact Analysis Statement fi-om our rezoning application package for Stephenson Village, as submitted to the Planning Department. We are providing this to you for reference and information at this point. We have asked the staff not to schedule any hearings until after the April meetings with the Stonewall District on the Northeast Land Use Plan. This rezoning will define the fixture of the Stephenson area. Many of our neighbors have given input to these proffers and expressed the need to define this large tract of land. We think it is important for this package to be available to the public before those meetings in Stonewall. Stephenson Village is a rezoning with several goals, which are outlined in the executive summary. We think this project will be positive for Frederick County and the Stephenson area in many ways. It will help to control sprawl, bring new revenues to the County, support heritage tourism, bring sewer and water to the Stephenson area, provide ball fields and recreation for our young people, and provide housing that appeals to different age groups, including active adult and low-income housing for the elderly. In view of the concern about the impact of development on the County budgets, we have taken special care in designing a formula for proffer fees to cover capital facilities impacts. We intend to cover 100 percent of these impacts, with periodic adjustments for inflation and extra proffer fees if Stephenson Village adds more school children to the County system than anticipated. These fees, plus the revenue predictions of the economic study, give us confidence that this project will more than pay its way. I am always available to discuss this privately or answer any questions you have. Feel free to give me a call any time (office: 540-665-3214 or 540-323-3214). Thanks. Sincer , J. Donald Shockey, Jr. r� a WASc�i1� 40W . Cl F MAR 21 2003 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Founded in 1971 TRANS M I TTAL Project Name: Stephenson Village Rezoning File No.: 2760C Date: March 21, 2003 To: FC Planning Attn: Eric Lawrence Copied: From: Evan Wyatt/dls GREENWAY ENGINEERING Phone: 540-662-4185 Fax: 540-722-9528 Remarks: 1`" Urgent C For Your Review J7 As You Requested l7 Please Comment Message: Eric, Attached are the following for the above rezoning: -Cover letters from Don Shockey -Application Fee Check -Rezoning Application (original signature) -Adjacent Property Owners -Deeds -Taxes Paid -Impact Analysis Statement w/Exhibits -Traffic Impact Analysis s MAR 2 j 2003 -Output Module -Proffer Statement (original signature FREEC—RICKt; �r ' _. -Agencies Comment Sheets E � h,�I��G 1hr_� 1I -1 copy of the composite plat -A sample packet w/order of all attachments included in all attached boxes NOTE: 67 copies of attachments are included, lset is the Master copy and 1 set is the sample Thank you, as always, for your assistance with this project. Please call with any concerns. Engineers Surveyors Telephone 540-662-4185 FAX 540-722-9528 greenway@visuallunk. co m COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING FAX: 540/665-6395 September 10, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, September 24, 2003, at 7:15 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, to consider the following application: Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 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 hearing, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia. The staff report for this application may also be viewed online via the Planning Department's web page, which can be accessed through www.co.frederick.va.us. Sincerely, 0-- Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/bad S F P ' f� 2003 O \Agcndm\Adjoincr Ltn\2003\PEZONINGS\StcphcnsonVillagcPublicarBOS wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 F COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester. Virginia 22601 44 - A- - 158- DEHAVEN, HELEN I 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1828 I ) t-- H, )A -) "5 -4 I -, rl "-) `, "- ()-. - )') 'n Or` � 0 ( ) ;� / 1 FORWARD 'TIME EXP RrN TO SEND DEHAVEN 75 RALPHS CT MARr11\J5BURG WV 25401-0664 RETURN TO SENDER 1 111111 fill fill lilt IIIIII Illill! lilt it III III)l Illitl I !III COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING FAX: 540/665-6395 September 10, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, September 24, 2003, at 7:15 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, to consider the following application: Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 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 hearing, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia. The staff report for this application may also be viewed online via the Planning Department's web page, which can be accessed through www.co.frederick.va.us. Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM1bad "? O WgendasWdjoiner Ltrs\2003\RFZOMNGS\StephrnsonVillagePubHearBOS wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester. Virginia 22601 44 - A- - 289- LOFTHOUSE, ELSIE A 1034 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA. 226561914 FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND LOFTHOUSE'ELSIE LC ANN PO BOX aR56 WXNCI-4t5TER VA P-2604-i456 RETURN TO SENDER COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING FAX: 540/665-6395 September 10, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, September 24, 2003, at 7:15 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, to consider the following application: Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 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 hearing, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia. The staff report for this application may also be viewed online via the Planning Department's web page, which can be accessed through www.co.frederick.va.us. Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/bad 0AAgcndas\Adjoincr Ltrs\2003\REZONINGS\StcphcnsonVillagcPublicarBOS.wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning & Development -107 North Kent Street Winchester• Virginia 22601 GO f-n 0 s% H 44 - A- - 288- WALTERS, WAYNE E 8800 OLD OCEAN VIEW RD NORFOLK, VA 23503.5308 WALT800 235032049 1502 05 09/15/03 FORWARD TIME ER RTN TO SEND WALTERS PO BOX 1982 MARTINSGURG WV 23402- 1982 KUYKENDALL, JOHNSTON, McKEE & BUTLER, P.L. C. 112 SOUTH CAMERON STREET P. O. DRAWER 2097 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604-1297 (540)662-3486 Facsimile (540) 722-3787 E-Mail: bmblaiv@adelphia.net PETER K. McKEE (1934-1967) BENJAMIN M. BUTLER STEPHEN G.BUTLER May 10 2004 Eric Lawrence Frederick County Planner 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: STEPHENSON VILLAGE My File 11978 Dear Eric: J. SLOAN KUYKENDALL (1906-1995) J. SLOAN KUYKENDALL, III EDWIN B. YOST John G. Lavoie of Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, L.L.P. and I represent Newland Communities, the contract purchaser from Stephenson Associates of the project known as Stephenson Village located in Stonewall District, Frederick County, Virginia. We are requesting clarifications but not a change to any of the proffers. Our principal question involves Item 3A(2)(4) on page 5 and relates to the Land Bay Breakdown Notes. The question arises from the proffer stating that "the Applicant reserves the right to convert more of Land Bay III to active adult or affordable housing for the elderly..." What is not clear from the proffers is that if the Applicant converts a portion of Land Bay III to Active Adult at the early stages of the project, will the Applicant then be allowed to build Mixed Residential on corresponding acreage in Land Bay IV that is identified as Active Adult on the Generalized Development Plan? The clear intent of the proffers is to minimize sudden increases in the school population by phasing non -age restricted housing. The proffers also clearly suggest that the phased development of the Major Collector Road is to commence from Old Charles Town Road. However, if Active Adult is to be the only use allowed in Land Bay IV, its development is likely to be postponed until the latter stages of the project when it is accessed by the phased Major Collector Road. Additionally, certain areas of Land Bay III are topographically flatter and therefore better suited for persons of age who may have difficulty negotiating more sloped terrain. Eric Lawrence May 10, 2004 Frederick County Planner Page 2 I do have several other questions which I will take up with you at the meeting concerning the timing on subdivisions filings and filing of Master and Final Site Plans, but I will wait for the meeting to address those as these issues are general in nature. The developer is looking for approximate timing to schedule the development. I appreciate in advance the time which you can give me in order to explore a clarification. Very truly yours, MCKEE & BUTLER e ' min M. Butler C : a cc: John G. Lavoie, Esq. SUGGESTED LETTER FROM ZONING ADMINISTRATOR The Frederick County Planning Staff has reviewed the Proffer Statement for the Stephenson Village Residential Planned Community, and in particular, the uses and mix of housing types in Land Bays III and IV, appearing at item 3 on pages 3-5 of the proffer statement ("the Proffers"). Our interpretation of the Proffers is that, subject to the limitations contained in subparagraph 4 (on page 5) limiting the percentage of Active Adult to 53%, the Applicant is allowed to develop Active Adult in Land Bay III as well as Land Bay IV. To the extent that a portion of Land Bay III is utilized for Active Adult housing, then Mixed Residential housing may be developed on a corresponding amount of acreage in Land Bay IV. Very truly yours, The Winchester Star-Shockey Gives $50,000 to Clearbrook Fire and Rescue http://www.winchesterstar.com/TheWinchesterStar/031018/Area SHoc.asr f -VE FEEHIMNIS Home Subscribe Classifieds Links Community Contact Us Past Issues ---------------------------- Homes Guide-NEWI Auto Guide-NEWI Auctions -NEW[ Help Wanteds-NEWI Lap By Lop lIMUR-NE Place Classifieds Advertl�ing Rates Stocks Dear Abby Movie Listings TV Listings Online Games Other Newspapers ---------------------------- BYRD NEWSPAPERS The Winchester Star Daily News -Record The Warren Sentinel Shen. Valley -Herald Page News & Courier The Valley Banner ---------------------------- Virginia's Travel Information Service Saturday, October 18, 2003 Back To Home Page Shockey Gives $50,000 to Clearbrook Fire and Rescue By Tim Allen The Winchester Star CLEARBROOK — The first evidence of financial benefits resulting from the recently approved Stephenson Village mixed -use development came Friday to Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Company. Officials with The Shockey Cos., the developers of the 2,500-residential-unit Stephenson Village south of Old Charles Town Road, presented Clearbrook firefighters with a check for $50,000 as part of an overall promise to give the fire station $200,000. Lloyd Winters, president of the Clearbrook Fire Company, said the money can be used to help pay for a new fire truck after one was destroyed in a wreck earlier this year. He said the company also needs a new ambulance that later checks may help in acquiring. "It won't be enough to offset the overall demand" from Stephenson Village, Winters said of the $200,000. "But r it definitely helps." In a meeting of the Frederick County Volunteer Fire and Rescue Association before the rezoning for Stephenson Village was approved, members of Clearbrook Fire Company said the volume of new residents from the massive development would make it vc ry rliffirnit fnr the i-n nnaritr, nt itc nrPePnt 103inchester, vie'ginia - Today's Weather - Winchester, VA 61°Fj16°C Unknown at 6:00 AM {.. 1�,Q�l ;;��,,, Click for Forecast Football Preview L . T1-1I,, PICCADILLY PRINTING COvIPANY rU0 1 of 2 9/27/2004 9:08 AM The Winchester Star-Shockey Gives $50,000 to Clearbrook Fire and Rescue htip://www.winchesterstar.com/TlieWinchesterStar/031018/Area SI-Ioc.asr level of service. Clearbrook has already asked Frederick County government to provide it with seven new paid fire and rescue employees to meet its current demands. Clearbrook volunteers have said they will likely need many more paid employees when Stephenson Village reaches its completion in 15 to 20 years. Back to Home Page Email this article to a friend Click here to review past issues of www.winchesterstar.com Today I Sept. 25 1 Sept. 24 1 Sept. 23 1 Sept. 22 1 Sept. 21 1 Sept. 201 ARCHIVES Copyright© 2002-2003 by The Winchester Star - All Rights Reserved. PRIVACY POLICY This site was designed by IIveka I&- Nlafl-q eatth System 2 of 2 9/27/2004 9:08 AM gRR m O / f m < / Ic-D ;DD . �E o� m „ / o x O z v O ` m I n O I 2 o I i m C) \ D O _-- _ I JJ 0 0 _ z C�'> O O n I G] m O Dp r- I N Icb x O O 1 O I t� O 1 � 1 I r tT 77 m Q c / 0 W n 1 D O a3 1 � rn r ao r 0 0 Oy <_ o Z � o O m I / m cf)In D A o T r n O m 1 m (f) Mall alall 0 O yo .a � O LAYOUT FOR SCHOOL / PARK SITE THE LAND & LANNING 5300WES ViEW1. GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 HV�e ° n 8 STEPHENSON VILLAGE DESIGN sDrt GROUP FREDER�CH.MD 2I ]_ 03 EXHIBIT C 30,5958172 INC. FA%3016956219 hest, Winchester,�Winchester,irgw. zzeoz r°r,4�",Yr, Engineer. Telephone 510-e62-41e5 Surr.yors FAX W-722-952e In STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA UNDPUNMNG SREPUNNING ANDSCAPE ARCHREC LRE II r` 44 / WETLANDS INTERIvfEDIATE RAVINE CHANNEL K LAND BAY BREAKDOWN LAND BAY/ LAND USE ACREAGE % RANGE OF HOUSING UNIT TYPES MIN. MAX. 1 ELEM.SCHOOL 20 Ac. +/— NA NA 11 COMMUNITY PARK (6 baseball fields & 6 soccer fields) 24 Ac. t/— NA NA 111 MIXED RESIDENTIAL: 475 Ac. t/— ONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL/DAYCARE 7 Ac.+/— NA NA FD (Housing Unit Type 1,2,4,5, RP District SFD & Active Adult) 30 53 TOWNHOUSE (Housing Unit Type 6 & RP District Townhouses) 10 30 ULTIFAMILY: Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type —Cottage House & RP District Duplex, Multiplex, trium, Garden Apartment & Active Adult) 7 30 IV ACTIVE ADULT: FD (Housing Unit Type 1.2. & 5) Multifamily (Condominiums, Elderly Housing, Housing Unit Type 3—Cottage House) 126 Ac.+/— 30 53 V COMMERCIAL CENTER (Retail, Office & Public Service Satellite Facility) c. + — NA NA SEE NOTES ADDRESSING ABOVE CHART IN PROFFER J. USES, DENSITY & MIX OF HOUSING TYPES A. (2) (1-0) c� z CQ O O W N C2 W N v m m Z 'C m W 1~ o W I i' Ct Tl «+ q0 W iiI,am C b o a n L. 9. 5 0 w rn 0 m N n 0 0 o r - r_ - N Ln 5 p m rn N i W 9 w U On m O X O w < M U. In w X IL C) U z ZzU z co D WQO�U PILCb(5z w U v w H U U Q: a. w Q U G Z 5 w z E- a E- Z w la o -� �77 E- 7 w Q CamO �D -o U` U Qi d � w W Q � z � W v T� V 1 DATE: SEPT 3, 2003 SCALE: 1"=1000' DESIGNED BY:MDS/JNT JOB NO. 2760C SHEET 1 OF 1 4"' s COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development . 540/665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING FAX: 540/665-6395 September 10, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, September 24, 2003, at 7:15 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, to consider the following application: Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 794.6 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 76 t), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 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 hearing, or at the Department of Plamling and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia. The staff report for this application may also be viewed online via the Planning Department's web page, which can be accessed through www.co.frederick.va.us. Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/bad OA\Agendas\Adjoincr Ltrs\2003\RBZONINGS\StephensonVillagePubHearBOS.wpd 107 North Dent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 6 0 Thi is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on . I&,, 01, & from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: 44 - A. - 36. a ? -, a f 44 - A- - 292. a_ I CRIDER & SHOCKEY OF WVA PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VA 22604.1730 44 - A• - 25 ) , BENHAM, FI K III TRUSTEE PO BOX 809 WINCHESTER, VA 44 - A- - 28-B UNGER, KENNETH R. 288 MILBURN RD WINCHESTER, VA. Owe tx 22604.0809 22603.4721 44 - A- - 29. SLAUGHTER, JUDITH MCCANN 170 MCCANNS RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4179 44 -A - - 32. ? JENKINS, TERRY L & EVELYN G 357 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1725 44 - A STROSNIDER, SHIRLEY M. ETALS CIO LEOTA S. MOULDEN 327 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1725 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK DYKE, ROBERT C & ALCESTA R 293 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1724 44 - A- - 40-A CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WVA PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VA 22604.1730 0 0 Lt'pv-- 44 - A- - 131- MORTON, WALTER G & VIRGINIA E 505 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1822 44 - A- - 132- JENSEN, LOUIS R & NOBY RUTH 497 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1726 44 - A- - 133- DAVIS, WAYNE MARSHALL 487 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1726 Chri o r M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. 40', �26� a Notaiy Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do Aereby certify that -iristopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of Pl nin and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated . 10 003 , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my Statg and Cou ty aforesaid. Given under my hand this DJ day of 00 My commission expires on 00 NOTARY P LIC 0 Vg-e 44 - A- - 134- 44 - A- • 146- EDWARDS, CLIFFORD Eift NARY, RANDOLPH C & KATHERINE E 477 OLD CHARLES TO *OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1726 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1729 44 - A• - 147- 44 • A - WEAVER, TIMOTHY J & WANDA K DAVIS, HELEN E 465 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 478 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1726 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1729 44 - 44 - A- - 148- RAMSEY, RODGER R & TERRI B JENKINS, DAVID CALVIN & SCARLET M 453 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 879 DICKS HOLLOW OW RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1726 WINCHESTER, VA 22603.3721 44 - A- - 149. 44 - A- • 1 RUSSELL, ROBERT H ETALS GODFREY, E F & ADA L 104 WINSLOW CT 443 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD WINCHESTER, VA STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1726 22602 6762 44 A 138 44 A - 150 / 1 MADISON, DAVID R & RHONDA G STULTZ, GLENN A. & BETTY A. 133 PARKINS LN 518 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD WINCHESTER, VA 22602.2361 STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 138-A 44 - A- - 153- O'ROARK, NORWOOD T. & LAURA W. SPITZER, RAY E. & CHRISTINE E. 540 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 380 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1728 44 - A- - 154- VUILLERMET, ROBERT EUGENE BRAGG, BETTY LOU 420 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 550 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1729 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1828 44 - A• - 155- 44 - A- • 139- STROTHER, JOHN R. MCKEE, ANNA B & LESTER W 560 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 102 FAIRWAY DR STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 WINCHESTER, VA 22602.6016 44 • A- - 156- 44 - A- - 140- HOTT, R. CHARLES & KAY K. SCOTT, DAVID & LOUISE 400 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 572 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1729 STEPHENSON, VA. 22656 1828 44 • A- • 141- 44 • A- - 157- KEITER, RAY G. & RUTH J. LOUCH, WILLIAM G 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 410 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1828 STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1729 44 - A- - 158- 44 - A- - 143- DEHAVEN, HELEN I LAW, BOBBY D 432 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1729 22656.1828 44 - A- - 144- 44 - A- - 161- MAYERS, AUDREY L GRAY, JEAN K 442 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD CIO JEAN NICHOLSON STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1729 PO BOX 151 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.0151 44 • A- - 145- 44 - A- - 162- STEWART, NORMA L GETTS, ELLEN ELAINE 454 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 660 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1829 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1729 This is to certifythat the attached correspondence was mailed to the following p on 6 C903 from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick Coun , Virginia: 44 - A- - 202- ,-2 44 - A- - 163- /(,(-/ /i,ti'.. BRAGG, DAVID L RITTER, JUANITA M 688 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1829 44 - A- - 166- RUSSELL, ROBERT H ETALS 532 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1828 44 - A- - 167- CHITTUM, FRANCIS M JR PO BOX 141 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0141 44 - A- - 168- SHANHOLTZER, WELTON K 721 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1824 44 - A- - 169- BUSSERT, GERALD & JOAN E. & 707 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1824 44 - A- - 170-C ANDERSON,JOHN KENNETH PO BOX 27 STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.0027 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK PO BOX 174 CLEARBROOK, VA 22624.0174 44 - A- - 206- LAKE, JAMES T. & HELEN E. 771 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1824 44 - A. - 207- LUDWICK, JAMES L & NANCY L 779 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1824 44 - A- - 208- GOLLER, ACTRESS I 776 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1830 44 - A- - 209- AFFLECK, RODNEY L 786 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1830 Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Christopher M. Molm, Deputy Director for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of My commission expires on NOTARY PUBLIC D I//5;c 44 - A- - 210- JONES, WILLIAM C JR & BRENDA L 796 OLD CHARLES TOWi!!J BR STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1830 44 -A- - 211- KNUPP, RICHARD R & BONNIE R PO BOX 97 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0097 44 - A- - 212- DIXON, MARY V 471 GRACE CHURCH RD CLEARBROOK, VA 22624.1333 44 - A- - 218- KRASICH, DINAH G & JOHN E 776 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1911 44 - A- • 219. CHASLER, C N INC 203 E BOSCAWEN ST WINCHESTER,VA 22601.5012 44 - A- .220. ANDERSON, RUSSELL 0 794 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1911 44 -A- - 221- TRAVERS, GEORGE 0. 804 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 222. MCGAFFICK, ROGER A & MARY S 816 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 223- MILBURN, DONALD L & KIMBERLY M 826 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 224- SMITH, MITCHELL B 836 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 225- LINK, STEVE A & DENNIS W 846 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 226- STONE, CLYDE & VIRGINIA 856 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 228- HOOVER, BORIS BROWN & RITTER, GEARLINE BROWN 821 REST CHURCH RD CLEAR BROOK, VA 22624.1510 44 - A- • 229-/._a. / ESTEP, DONALD L & HELEN L AhBOX 66 �EPHENSON,VA 22656 44 - A- - 230- HEPNER, STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1913 44 -A- - 231-A - C3 FAUVER, HARRY S JR 906 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1913 44 - A- - 232- r) ; .1 HEPNER, STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1913 44 - A- - 234- >_ 5 DAY, VIOLET PO BOX 153 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0153 44 - A- - 236- MERRITT, GERALD WRIGHT 976 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1913 44 - A- - 237• ROBERTS, CHRISTINE K & EDDIE R SR & GIBBS, THERESA K & DAVID B 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST, VA 22663.1811 44 - A- - 238. SHRECK, CATHERINE EST. 208 GREENFIELD AVE WINCHESTER, VA. 22602.6635 44 - A- - 283- JAMES, DAVID F 1025 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1918 44 - A. - 284. ROBERTS, EDDIE JR & ROBERTS, EDDIE SR & CHRISTIN 1013 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1918 44 - A- - 285- WOLF, CLARENCE C. & DOROTHY A. 1009 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1918 44 -A- - 286• -') , HEIRS OF DORIS KINES CIO THERESA K GIBBS 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST, VA 22663.1911 44 - A. - 288. WALTERS, WAYNE E 8800 OLD OCEAN VIEW RD NORFOLK, VA 23503.5308 D This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on !d '2 00 3 from the Department of Plarming and Development, Frederick County, Virginia 44C - 1- - 15- 44 - A- - 289- LOUZONIS, JOSEPH THOMAS JR LOFTHOUSE. ELSIE A 1034 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1914 44 - A- - 291- HOVERMALE, NANCY M & PECK, DANIEL L 1054 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1914 44 - A- - 294- AITKEN, GREIG D W & WALLACE, TONIE M 1160 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.2015 44C - 1- - A. COLLETT, JOEL A. & DIANE L 527 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 13. FOUT, MARK ALLEN & KATHY D 613 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1823 44C - 1- - 14- LARKIN, DOUGLAS J 134 WEST ST STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655.3303 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK 543 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 16- PENDZICH, ANTHONY R JR & DESTINY D 555 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1822 44C-1.- 17. MILLER, BARRY L & DAWN D LLOYD 565 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 18- PAUGH, CHARLOTTE V 573 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 19- SWARTZ, RICHARD A. & BONNIE H. 585 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1822 Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of My commission expires on NOTARY PUBLIC 0 0� 44C - 1- - 20. MCCAULEY, JULIANN "' & GRANVILLE B 595 OLD CHARLES T ,D STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 21- HOLLIDAY, NANCY 164 CRINOLINE LN WINCHESTER, VA 22603.3801 44C - 2- - A- ZIRKLE, WILLIAM RAY & HELEN CHRISTINE 614 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1829 44C - 2- - B- JOBE, CHARLES S. & MARY A. 634 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656 22656.1829 44C - 2- - D- BLY, TERRY L & CONNIE S 644 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1829 45 -9- 3- 1- HALL, WILLIAM H III & REBECCA 1081 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1918 45 -9- 3. 2- HOFFMAN, WILLIAM D. & PATSY L. PO BOX 22 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.0022 55 - A- - 6. HULVER, JOSEPH F T JR 1023 REOBUD RD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22603.4757 55 -A. - 7- ") 4 OATES, GARY K & CONSTANCE JOBE 1071 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4757 55 - A- - 8. SCHWARTZMAN, BERNARD 1105 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4758 55 - A- - 9. STOTLER, DONALD L 1141 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4758 55 - A- - 10. / Q, PENTON, E GLENN & BIGGS, DAWN R 221 SETTLERS LN STEPHENSON, VA 22656.2027 55 -7- - 13- MIDDLETON, TIMOTHY L & DONNA L 261 LICK RUN CROSSING STEPHENSON, VA 22656.2023 55 -7- - 14- MEIER, WILLIAM G I11 & BARBARA E *7 PLAZA ST NE EESBURG, VA. 20176.2428 55 -7- - 15- SIRBAUGH, SAUNIE D. 290 LICK RUN CROSSING STEPHENSON,VA 22656.2023 Mr. Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 A P P4 IC-4&t- - 9 �E72 �06-- 0 TO: Barbara - Data Processing OM: Carol Huff - Planning Dept. . lease print _6 sets of labels by: ,1 1, 0 0 3 THANKSM STEPHENSON VILLAGE R1��.� _ �......�.. --...,..,,LAITY REZONING Owner Properties PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING Su Je 44-((A))-31 - Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-31 A Agricultural RA District �nr uty 44-((A))-292: Agricultural RA District I 44-((A))-293 - Agricultural RA District Adjoining property owners PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 44-((A))-25 Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-26 Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-28B Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-29 -' Agricultural RA District 44-((A))-32 . Residential RA District 44-((A))-33 ' Residential RA District 44-((A))-34 Residential RA District 44-((A))-35 % Residential RA District 44-((A))-36 Residential RA District 44-((A))-37 / Residential RA District 44-((A))-38 i Residential RA District 44-((A))-39 Residential RA District 44-((A))-40A ' Residential RA District 44-((A))-131 Residential RA District 44-((A))-132 Residential RA District 44-((A))-133 ' Residential RA District 44-((A))-134 Residential RA District 44-((A))-135 %" Residential RA District 44-((A))-136 Residential RA District 44-((A))-137 Residential RA District 44-((A))-138 Residential RA District 44-((A))-138A Residential RA District 44-((A))-138B Residential RA District 44-((A))-139 Residential RA District 44-((A))-140 Residential RA District 44-((A))-141 = Residential RA District 44-((A))-142 Residential RA District 44-((A))-143 Residential RA District 44-((A))-144 Residential RA District 44-((A))-145 Residential RA District 44-((A))-146 Residential RA District 44-((A))-147 Residential RA District 44-((A))-148 Residential RA District 2760ClEA W 0 11 Adjoining property owners PARCEL ID NUMBERUSEZONING 44-((A))-149 Residential RA District 44-((A))-150 ' Residential RA District 44-((A))-151 / Residential RA District 44-((A))-153 Residential RA District 44-((A))-154 Residential RA District 44-((A))-155 -" Residential RA District 44-((A))-156 ` Residential RA District 44-((A))-157 ' Residential RA District 44-((A))-158 Residential RA District 44-((A))-161 Residential RA District 44-((A))-162 Residential RA District 44-((A))-163 Residential RA District 44-((A))-164 Residential RA District 44-((A))-165 Residential RA District 44-((A))-166 Residential RA District 44-((A))-167 Residential RA District 44-((A))-168 Residential RA District 44-((A))-169 Residential RA District 44-((A))-170C Residential RA District 44-((A))-202,; " Residential RA District 44-((A))-205 ^` Residential RA District 44-((A))-206 Residential RA District 44-((A))-207 Residential RA District 44-((A))-208 " Residential RA District 44-((A))-209 ' Residential RA District 44-((A))-210 Residential RA District 44-((A))-211 Residential RA District 44-((A))-212 Residential RA District 44-((A))-218 Residential RA District 44-((A))-219 Residential RA District 44-((A))-220 Residential RA District 44-((A))-221 Residential RA District 44-((A))-222 / Residential RA District 44-((A))-223 ' Residential RA District 44-((A))-224 Residential RA District 44-((A))-225 ' Residential RA District 44-((A))-226 Residential RA District 44-((A))-228 Residential RA District 44-((A))-229 Residential RA District 44-((A))-230 Residential RA District 44-((A))-231 Residential RA District 44-((A))-231A Residential RA District 44-((A))-231 B Residential RA District 44-((A))-232 / Residential RA District 2760ClEA W Adjoining property owners PARCEL ID NUMBERUSEZONING 44-((A))-23 3 44-((A))-234 44-((A))-23 5 44-((A))-236 ' 44-((A))-237 44—((A))-238 44—((A))-283 44—((A))-284 44—((A))-285 44—((A))-286 44—((A))-287 44—((A))-288 44—((A))-289 44—((A))-291 44—((A))-294 44C—((1))—A 44C—((1))-13 44C—((1))-14 44C—((1))-15 44C—((1))-16 44C—((1))-17 44C—((1))-18 44C—((1))-19 44C—((1))-20 44C—((1))-21 44C—((1))-22-4,qo�- on ie 44C-((2))-A 44C-((2))-B 45-((9))-3-2 55-((A))-6 55-((A))-7 55-((A))-7A 55-((A))-8 55-((A))-9 55-((A))-10 55-((7))-12 55-((7))-13 55-((7))-14 55+7))-15 Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Office/Agricultural Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Agricultural Agricultural Agricultural Agricultural Agricultural Agricultural Residential Residential Residential Residential RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District B2 District/RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District RA District 'NiAR 2 1 2JJ;' 27600EA W 0 COUNTY of FREDERICK (i Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING July 2, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, July 16, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This hearing is to consider the following: Proposed Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, R4 - Residential Planned Community District; Section 165-72.0., Other Regulations, to Allow Modifications of Ordinance Requirements for Greater Design Flexibility in the R4 District. Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Any interested parties may attend this 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. Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/bad O.\Agendas\Adjoincr Lirs\2003\RBZONINGS\StephensonVill & Prop Amend.wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 f - 0 110 T 's is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on C s from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick unty, irginia: 44 - A- - 32- 44 -A- - 31- CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WV PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER,VA 22604 44 - A- - 31-A SHOCKEYIDULLES, LC PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VA 22604.1730 44 - A- - 292- CRIDER & SHOCKEY OF WVA PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VA 22604.1730 44 - A- - 293- CRIDER & SHOCKEY INC OF WVA PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VA 22604-1730 44 - A- - 25- BENHAM, H K III TRUSTEE PO BOX 809 WINCHESTER, VA 22604-0809 44 - A- - 28-B UNGER, KENNETH R. 288 MILBURN RD WINCHESTER, VA. 22603-4721 44 - A. - 29- SLAUGHTER, JUDITH MCCANN 170 MCCANNS RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4179 JENKINS, TERRY L & EVELYN G 357 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1725 44 - A- - 34- STROSNIDER, SHIRLEY M. ETALS CIO LEOTA S. MOULDEN 327 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1725 44 - A. - 36. DYKE, ROBERT C & ALCESTA R 293 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1724 44 - A. - 39. CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WV PO BOX 2530 WINCHESTER, VA 22604-1730 44 - A- - 131- MORTON, WALTER G & VIRGINIA E 505 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1822 Chris her . Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERIC I,'4.4j,c / ' , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hy 31-by certify that Chr' topher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of P annin gg and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my tate mill Co ty aforesaid. 1 Given under my hand this My commission expires on 7Lp— day of 0?Oo,8 7 NO A Y PU Ryl IC 44 - A- - 132- JENSEN, LOUIS R & NOBY RUTH 497 OLD CHARLES TO STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1726 44 - A- - 133- DAVIS, WAYNE MARSHALL 487 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656-1726 44 - A- - 134- EDWARDS, CLIFFORD E & 477 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1726 44 - A- - 135- DAVIS, HELEN E 465 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1726 44 - A. - 136- RAMSEY, RODGER R & TERRI B 453 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1726 44 - A- - 137- GODFREY, E F & ADA L 443 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1726 44 - A- - 138- MADISON, DAVID R & RHONDA G 133 PARKINS LN WINCHESTER, VA 22602-2361 44 - A- - 138-A O'ROARK, NORWOOD T. & LAURA W. 380 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1728 44 - A- - 138-B BRAGG, BETTY LOU 420 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1729 44 - A- - 139- MCKEE, ANNA B & LESTER W 102 FAIRWAY OR WINCHESTER,VA 22602.6016 44 - A- - 140- SCOTT, DAVID & LOUISE 400 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1729 44 - A- - 141- KEITER, RAY G. & RUTH J. 410 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656-1729 44 - A- - 143- LAW, BOBBY D 432 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STFPHFNSf1N VG MSG. 1779 44 - A- - 144- MAYERS, AUDREY L 442 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1729 44 -A, - 145. EWART, NORMA L 0 4 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON. VA 22656-1729 44 - A- - 146- TRENARY, RANDOLPH C & KATHERINE E 466 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1729 44 - A- - 147- WEAVER, TIMOTHY J & WANDA K 478 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1729 44 - A- - 148- JENKINS, DAVID CALVIN & SCARLET M 879 DICKS HOLLOW RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603-3721 44 - A- - 149. RUSSELL, ROBERT H ETALS 104 WINSLOW CT WINCHESTER, VA 22602.6762 44 - A- - 150- STULTZ, GLENN A. & BETTY A. 518 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 153. SPITZER, RAY E. & CHRISTINE E. 540 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656-1828 44 - A- - 154- VUILLERMET, ROBERT EUGENE 550 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1828 44 - A- - 155- STROTHER, JOHN R. 560 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 156- HOTT, R. CHARLES & KAY K. 572 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 157- LOUCH, WILLIAM G 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1828 44 - A- - 158. DEHAVEN, HELEN I 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1828 44 - A- - 161 GRAY, JEAN K CIO JEAN NICHOLSON PO BOX 151 STEPHENSON,VA 22656-0151 44 - A- - 162- GETTS, ELLEN ELAINE 660 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656-1829 This is to certifythe that County, Virginia: 44 - A- - 163- RITTER, JUANITA M attached correspondence was mailed to the following on from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick 688 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1829 44 - A- - 166- RUSSELL, ROBERT H ETALS 532 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1828 44 - A- - 167- CHITTUM, FRANCIS M JR PO BOX 141 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0141 44 - A- - 168- SHANHOLTZER, WELTON K 721 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1824 44 - A- - 169- BUSSERT, GERALD & JOAN E. & 707 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656-1824 44 - A- - 170-C ANDERSON, JOHN KENNETH PO BOX 27 STEPHENSON, VA. 22656-0027 44 - A- - 202 BRAGG, DAVID L PO BOX 174 CLEARBROOK, VA 22624.0174 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK 44 - A- - 206- LAKE, JAMES T. & HELEN E. 181 771 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1824 44 - A- - 207- LUDWICK, JAMES L & NANCY L 779 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1824 44 - A- - 208- GOLLER, ACTRESS I 776 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1830 44 - A. - 209. AFFLECK, RODNEY L 786 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 226561830 44 - A. - 210. JONES, WILLIAM C JR & BRENDA L 796 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1830 Christo er . Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of My commission expires on NOTARY PUBLIC 44 -A- - 211- KNUPP, RICHARD R & IE R PO BOX 97 STEPHENSON,VA 22656-0097 44 - A- - 212- DIXON, MARY V 471 GRACE CHURCH RD CLEARBROOK, VA 22624-1333 44 - A- - 218. KRASICH, DINAH G & JOHN E 776 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1911 44 - A- - 219- CHASLER, C N INC 203 E BOSCAWEN ST WINCHESTER,VA 22601-5012 44 - A.. 220. ANDERSON, RUSSELL 0 794 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1911 44 - A- - 221- TRAVERS, GEORGE 0. 804 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1912 44 - A.. 222. MCGAFFICK, ROGER A & MARY S 816 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1912 44 - A- .223. MILBURN, DONALD L & KIMBERLY M 826 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1912 44 - A- - 224. SMITH, MITCHELL B 836 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 226561912 44 - A. - 225. LINK, STEVE A & DENNIS W 846 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 44 - A- - 226. 22656 1912 STONE, CLYDE & VIRGINIA 856 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 228. HOOVER, DORIS BROWN & RITTER, GEARLINE BROWN 821 REST CHURCH RD CLEAR BROOK, VA 22624-1510 44 - A- - 229. ESTEP, DONALD L & HELEN L PO BOX 66 STEPHENSON,VA 22656 44 - A- - 230- *NER, STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1913 44 - A- - 231-A FAUVER, HARRY S JR 906 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1913 44 - A- - 232- HEPNER, STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1913 44 - A- - 234- DAY, VIOLET PO BOX 153 STEPHENSON, VA 22656-0153 44 - A- - 236. MERRITT, GERALD WRIGHT 976 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1913 44 - A- - 237- ROBERTS, CHRISTINE K & EDDIE R SR & GIBBS, THERESA K & DAVID B 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST, VA 22663-1811 44 - A. - 238. SHRECK, CATHERINE EST. 208 GREENFIELD AVE WINCHESTER, VA. 22602.6635 44 - A- - 283. JAMES, DAVID F 1025 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1918 44 A- - 284. ROBERTS, EDDIE JR & ROBERTS, EDDIE SR & CHRISTIN 1013 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 44 _ 22656-1918 WOLFA 285• 1009 JORDANN pCE R RINGS RI) q- STEPHENSON, VA, 44 - A- - 286- 22656.1918 HEIRS OF DORIS KINES CIO THERESA K GIBBS 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST, VA 44 - A. - 288.22663 1811 WALTERS, WAYNE E 8800 OLD OCEAN VIEW RD NORFOLK, VA 44 A 289.23503 5.?nR LOFTHOUSE, ELSIE A 1034 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656-1914 1� - - T • 0 This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: 44 - A- - 291- HOVERMALE, NANCY M & PECK, DANIEL L 1054 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1914 44 - A- - 294- AITKEN, GREIG D W & WALLACE, TONIE M 1160 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.2015 44C - 1- - A. COLLETT, JOEL A. & DIANE L 527 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 13- FOUT, MARK ALLEN & KATHY D 613 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1823 44C - 1- - 14- LARKIN, DOUGLAS J 134 WEST ST STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655.3303 44C - 1- - 15- LOUZONIS, JOSEPH THOMAS JR 543 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1822 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK 44C - 1- - 16- PENDZICH, ANTHONY R JR & DESTINY D 555 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1822 44C - 1- - 17- MILLER, BARRY L & DAWN D LLOYD 565 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 18- PAUGH, CHARLOTTE V 573 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 19- SWARTZ, RICHARD A. & BONNIE H. 585 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 20- MCCAULEY, JULIANNA W. & GRANVILLE B 595 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1B22 Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid. Given under my hand this My commission expires on day of NOTARY PUBLIC 44C -1-- 21. HOLLIDAY, NANCY • 164 CRINOLINE LN WINCHESTER, VA 22603-3801 44C - 2- - A. ZIRKLE, WILLIAM RAY & HELEN CHRISTINE 614 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1829 44C - 2. - B- JOBE, CHARLES S. & MARY A. 634 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656 22656-1829 44C -2. - D. BLY, TERRY L & CONNIE S 644 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 226561829 45 - 9- 3. 1. HALL, WILLIAM H III & REBECCA 1081 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1918 45 - 9- 3- 2. HOFFMAN, WILLIAM D. & PATSY L. PO BOX 22 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.0022 55 - A. - 6. HULVER, JOSEPH F T JR 1023 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22603.4757 55 - A.. 7. BATES, GARY K & CONSTANCE JOBE 1071 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603-4757 55 - A- - 8. SCHWARTZMAN, BERNARD 1105 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603-4758 55 - A. - 9. STOTLER, DONALD L 1141 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4759 55 - A- - 10. PENTON, E GLENN & BIGGS, DAWN R 221SETTLERS LN STEPHENSON, VA 22656-2027 55 - 7. - 12. PENTON, E GLEN 221SETTLERS LN STEPHENSON, VA 22656-2027 55 - 7- - 13- •MIDDLETON, TIMOTHY L & DONNA L 261 LICK RUN CROSSING STEPHENSON, VA 22656.2023 55 -7- - 14. MEIER, WILLIAM G III & BARBARA E 207 PLAZA ST NE LEESBURG, VA. 20176-2428 55 -7- - 15- SIRBAUGH, SAUNIE D. 290 LICK RUN CROSSING STEPHENSON, VA 22656 2023 Mr. Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. Greenway Engineering 1 5 1 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 • • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC MEETING FAX: 540/665-6395 August 6, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public meeting being held on Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This meeting is the continuation of the Plamling Commission's consideration of the following application: Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Any interested parties may attend this meeting. Please note that this application is scheduled as a public meeting. Indeed, the public hearing required for this application was conducted and formally concluded during the Planning Connnission's July 16, 2003 meeting. As such, anyone wishing to speak concerning this application must do so during the citizen comment portion of the agenda, which occurs at the start of each Planning Commission meeting. 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. Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Planning Director CMM/bad O \Agenda \Adjoineil.tis\2003\ItBZONINGS\StepltensonVillege.wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 - o Th' is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on fr o2 6�3 from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick Coun , Virginia: 44 - A- - 34- ?- 44 - A. - 3 1 - - STROSNIDER, SHIRLEY M. ETALS ' CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WV CIO LEOTA S. MOULDEN PO BOX 2530 327 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD WINCHESTER,VA 22604 STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1725 44 - A- - 36- DYKE, ROBERT C & ALCESTA R 44 -A- - 31-A 293 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD SHOCKEYIDULLES, LC STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1724 44 - A- - 39- PO BOX 2530 CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WV WINCHESTER, VA 22604.1730 PO BOX 2530 - 44 - A- - 25- WINCHESTER, VA 22604.1730 BENHAM, H K III TRUSTEE PO BOX 809 44 - A- - 131- WINCHESTER, VA 22604.0809 MORTON, WALTER G & VIRGINIA E 44 - A- - 28-B UNGER, KENNETH R. 288 MILBURN RD WINCHESTER, VA. 22603-4721 44 - A- - 29. SLAUGHTER, JUDITH MCCANN 170 MCCANNS RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4179 44 - A- - 32- JENKINS, TERRY L & EVELYN G 357 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1725 505 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1822 44 - A- - 132. JENSEN, LOUIS R & NOBY RUTH 497 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1726 Christ h M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do ereby certify that C14istopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of P nning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated ;Z-Op 3 , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my Stat nd County aforesaid. Given under my hand this _ My commission expires on 44 - A- - 133- DAVIS, WAYNE MARSHALL 487 OLD CHARLES TOOD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1726 44 - A- - 134- EDWARDS, CLIFFORD E & 477 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1726 44 - A- - 135- DAVIS, HELEN E 465 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1726 44 - A- - 136- RAMSEY, RODGER R & TERRI B 453 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1726 44 - A- - 137- GODFREY, E F & ADA L 443 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1726 44 - A- - 138- MADISON, DAVID R & RHONDA G 133 PARKINS LN WINCHESTER, VA 22602-2361 44 - A- - 138-A O'ROARK, NORWOOD T. & LAURA W. 380 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1728 44 - A- - 138-B BRAGG, BETTY LOU 420 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656-1729 44 - A- - 139. MCKEE, ANNA B & LESTER W 102 FAIRWAY DR WINCHESTER, VA 22602-6016 44 - A- - 140. SCOTT, DAVID & LOUISE 400 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1729 44 -A- - 141- KEITER, RAY G. & RUTH J. 410 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1729 44 - A- - 143- LAW, BOBBY D 432 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1729 44 - A- - 144- MAYERS, AUDREY L 442 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1729 44 - A- - 145- STEWART, NORMA L •OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1729 44 - A. - 146. TRENARY, RANDOLPH C & KATHERINE E 466 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1729 44 - A- - 147- WEAVER, TIMOTHY J & WANDA K 478 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1729 44 - A- - 148- JENKINS, DAVID CALVIN & SCARLET M 879 DICKS HOLLOW RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.3721 44 - A- - 149- RUSSELL, ROBERT H ETALS 104 WINSLOW CT WINCHESTER, VA 22602.6762 44 - A. - 150. STULTZ, GLENN A. & BETTY A. 518 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 153- SPITZER, RAY E. & CHRISTINE E. 540 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 44 - A. - 154. VUILLERMET, ROBERT EUGENE 550 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1828 44 - A- - 155. STROTHER, JOHN R. 560 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656-1828 44 - A- - 156. HOTT, R. CHARLES & KAY K. 572 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656-1828 44 - A- - 157. LOUCH, WILLIAM G 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1828 44 - A. - 158- DEHAVEN, HELEN I 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1828 44 - A- - 161. GRAY, JEAN K CIO JEAN NICHOLSON PO BOX 151 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.0151 Pis to certi that t e attached corres ondence was mailed to the followin onfY P g0d from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick , Virginia: 44 - A- - 170-C 44 - A- - 162- GETTS, ELLEN ELAINE 660 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1829 44 - A- - 163. RITTER, JUANITA M 688 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1B29 44 - A- - 166- RUSSELL, ROBERT H ETALS 532 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1828 44 - A- - 167- CHITTUM, FRANCIS M JR PO BOX 141 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0141 44 - A- - 168- SHANHOLTZER, WELTON K 721 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1824 44 - A- - 169. BUSSERT, GERALD & JOAN E. & 707 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1824 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERI ANDERSON,JOHN KENNETH PO BOX 27 STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.0027 44 - A- - 202- BRAGG, DAVID L PO BOX 174 CLEARBROOK,VA 22624.0174 44 - A- - 206- LAKE, JAMES T. & HELEN E. 771 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1824 44 - A.. 207. LUDWICK, JAMES L & NANCY L 779 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1824 44 - A- - 208- GOLLER, ACTRESS I 776 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1830 Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do ereby certify that C stopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of P M�nnngiand Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated o Ob , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my Sta and County aforesaid. Given under my hand this &,& day of My commission expires on %/ /.�__ti ��Lzrlliqvjr� 44 - A- - 209- AFFLECK, RODNEY L 786 OLD CHARLES TOWI. STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1830 44 - A- - 210- JONES, WILLIAM C JR & BRENDA L 796 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1830 44 -A- - 211- KNUPP, RICHARD R & BONNIE R PO BOX 97 STEPHENSON,VA 22656-0097 44 - A- - 212- DIXON, MARY V 471 GRACE CHURCH RD CLEARBROOK,VA 22624.1333 44 -A. - 218- KRASICH, DINAH G & JOHN E 776 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1911 44 -A- -219. CHASLER, C N INC 203 E BOSCAWEN ST WINCHESTER, VA 22601.5012 44 - A- - 220- ANDERSON, RUSSELL 0 794 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1911 44 - A.. 221. TRAVERS, GEORGE 0. 804 JORDAN SPRINGS RO STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1912 44 - A- - 222. MCGAFFICK, ROGER A & MARY S 816 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 223- MILBURN, DONALD L & KIMBERLY M 826 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1912 44 - A. - 224. SMITH, MITCHELL B 836 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1912 44 - A- - 225- LINK, STEVE A & DENNIS W 846 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1912 44 - A- - 226- ^TONE, CLYDE & VIRGINIA � 6 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1912 44 - A- - 228- HOOVER, DORIS BROWN & RITTER, GEARLINE BROWN 821 REST CHURCH RD CLEAR BROOK, VA 22624.1510 44 - A- .229. ESTEP, DONALD L & HELEN L PO BOX 66 STEPHENSON,VA 22656 44 - A- - 230- HEPNER, STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1913 4 -A- - 231-A 7 WVER, HARRY S JR 906 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1913 44 - A- - 232- HEPNER, STEPHEN K. 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1913 44 - A- - 234. DAY, VIOLET PO BOX 153 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.0153 44 - A- - 236- MERRITT, GERALD WRIGHT 976 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656-1913 44 - A. - 237- ROBERTS, CHRISTINE K & EDDIE R SR & GIBBS, THERESA K & DAVID B 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST, VA 22663-1811 44 - A- - 238- SHRECK, CATHERINE EST. 208 GREENFIELD AVE WINCHESTER, VA. 22602.6635 44 - A. - 283. JAMES, DAVID F 1025 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1918 44 - A- - 284- ROBERTS, EDDIE JR & ROBERTS, EDDIE SR & CHRISTIN 1013 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1918 (T T i t certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on s ce fY p g from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick C my irgi ra: 44C - 1- - A- 44 - A- - 285- COLLETT, JOEL A. & DIANE L WOLF, CLARENCE C. & DOROTHY A. 527 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 1009 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1822 STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1918 44 - A- - 286- '. ' HEIRS OF DORIS KINES CIO THERESA K GIBBS 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST, VA 22663.1811 44 -A - W ALTERS,WAYNE E 8800 OLD OCEAN VIEW RD NORFOLK,VA 23503.5308 44 - A- - 289- LOFTHOUSE, ELSIE A d/�y103 1034 JORDAN SPRINGS RD D` STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1914 44 -A- - 291- HOVERMALE, NANCY M & PECK, DANIEL L 1054 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1914 44 - A- - 294- AITKEN, GREIG D W & WALLACE, TONIE M 1160 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.2015 44C - 11 - 13- FOUT, MARK ALLEN & KATHY D 613 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1823 44f, - 1- - 14- LARKIN, DOUGLAS J 134 WEST ST STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655.3303 44C - 1- - 15- LOUZONIS, JOSEPH THOMAS JR 543 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1822 44C-1.• 16. PENDZICH, ANTHONY R JR & DESTINY D 555 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1822 Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDE K I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County a oresaid, do ereby certifrtrat C stopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of 1 nning wid Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated 0,L , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my Stat nd Coun6 aforesaid. n Given under my hand this My commission expires or 44C - 1- - 17- MILLER, BARRY L & DA1'"t D LLOYD 565 OLD CHARLES TOW STEPHENSON, VA. 22656-1822 44C - 1- - 18- PAUGH, CHARLOTTE V 573 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 19- SWARTZ, RICHARD A. & BONNIE 11. 585 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656-1822 44C -1- - 20. MCCAULEY, JULIANNA W. & GRANVILLE B 595 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656-1822 44C - 1- - 21- HOLLIDAY, NANCY 164 CRINOLINE LN WINCHESTER, VA 22603.3801 44C - 2- - A- ZIRKLE, WILLIAM RAY & HELEN CHRISTINE 614 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1829 44C - 2- - B. JOBE, CHARLES S. & MARY A. 634 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656 22656.1829 44C - 2- - D. BLY, TERRY L & CONNIE S 644 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1829 45 - 9- 3- 1- HALL, WILLIAM H III & REBECCA 1081 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1918 45 - 9- 3- 2. HOFFMAN, WILLIAM D. & PATSY L. PO BOX 22 STEPHENSON, VA 22656-0022 55 - A- - 6. HULVER, JOSEPH F T JR 1023 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22603-4757 55 - A- - 7- GATES, GARY K & CONSTANCE JOBE 1071 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603-4757 55 - A. - 8. #CHWARTZMAN, BERNARD 1105 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603-4758 55 - A- - 9- STOTLER, DONALD L 1141 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4758 55 -A. - 10. PENTON, E GLENN & BIGGS, DAWN R 221SETTLERS LN STEPHENSON,VA 22656.2027 55 - /- - 13. MiiJULETON, TIMOTHY L & DONNA L 261 LICK RUN CROSSING STEPHENSON, VA 22656-2023 55 - 7. - 14. MEIER, WILLIAM G III & BARBARA E 207 PLAZA ST NE LEESBURG, VA. 20176-2428 55 - 7. - 15. SIRBAUGH, SAUNIE D. 290 LICK RUN CROSSING STEPHENSON, VA 22656.2023 Mr. Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 • ,e M a t — a r 1 +I �,. ? _ [°`.x a:rRf s ..r. 'f �S. � as .,.�.�.5 ;@,.5i � '� °�"`w.'r ..�.•:.'"�_':� 2�ali.wp ,..�k t d� _. .t �� 4 .'�'� _. _—. R.3"-; ay''�y..e• ?T s s r P a A ►r . CF L f s to A % g,. + • y �' '+` � • ' � 1�.� �;Sid vi ,. • ;` ' 1 "f s .wv wie a c , : s o i 4 Winchester COUNTY of FREDERICK Di .nartman+ of Pl annina and nPw-lnnnient North Ken 000 y 9� 200 Wednesday, Jul 3 `- 'Tel THE WINCHESTER STAR, Wednesday, July 2, 2003 )395 `°� NOTICE OF 0* SMI PUBLIC HEARING The Frederick County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, July TO: 16, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia to . COMPANY: consider the following: Dati Nur. Proposed Amendment to the Frederick FAX #: County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordi- nance, Article VII, R-4 — Residential Planned Community District; Section 165- 72.0., Other Regulations, to Allow Modifica- tions of Ordinance Requirements for Greater Design Flexibility in the R4 District. Remarks: Hi Sisubmitted Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) Here is the lega District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is locat- mission on July Please run on Vi ed east of Milburn Road (Route 662), sday, July 9, 20( south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Thanks! Road .(Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, • 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Interested citizens may appear before the Commission to speak -on the above items. A copy of the agenda will be available at the Handley Library and the Bowman'Library approximately one week before the meeting. Further information may be obtained at the Department of Planning and Development, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia or by calling (540) 665-5651. NOTICE OF v PUBLIC HEARING the Frederick County Planning Commission Nill hold a public hearing on Wednesday, July 16, 2003, 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: Proposed Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordi- nance, Article VII, R-4 —'Residential Planned Community District; Section 165- 72.0., Other Regulations, to AIIow'Modifica- tions of Ordinance* Requirements for Greater Design Flexibility in the R4 District. Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is locat- ed east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property. Identification Numbers 44-A-31[portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Interested citizens may appear before the Commission to speak on the above items. A copy of the agenda will be available at the Handley Library and the Bowman Library approximately one week before the meeting. Further information may be obtained at the Department of Planning and Development, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia or by calling (540) 665-5651. From the desk of. R., Qji.ge, , --y The WOester Star 10 "— Tuesday,y Jul 15 2003 :RIFICATION REPORT B6 SENT SY: THEM �.�K , COG AGENDA, a � l FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia JULY 16, 2003 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 1) June 4, 2003 Minutes 2) Committee Reports 3) Citizen Comments PUBLIC HEARING 4) Proposed Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article VI I, R4 - Residential Planned Community District; Section 165-72.0., Other Regulations, to Allow, Modifications of Ordinance Requirements for Greater Design Flexibility in the R4 District., 5) Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east, of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included'with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 447A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in -the Stonewall Magisterial District. 6) Other TIME 07/14/2023 10:20 NAME FRED CO PLANNING DEP FAX 5406656395 TEL 5406655651 SER.# BROC2J178677 0: 19 HE STAR 10 JUL•13.03 22:01; PACE- 1/1 j 1 -)-"- Interested citizens may appear before the Commission to speak on the above items. A copy of the agenda will be available at the Handley Library and the Bowman Library approximately one week before the meeting. Further information may be obtained at the Department of Planning'and Development, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia or by calling (540) 665-5651. You can also -visit us on the web at: A,,, www.co.frederick.va.us/PlanningAndDevelopment/PlanningAndDev.htm. MH F 1NA1, APPROVALffl=Mn onBnUdWq ' Wlndtelr4er, tlirglnlo OF THIS PROOF JULY 163 2003 1) June 4, 200$ Minutes 2) Committee Reports 3) Citizen Comments 4) -31 RUBLIC HEARING Proposed Amendirmeet to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article Vtl, R4 - Residential Punned GornmQnity Dlatrlct; $action 166-72.0., Other Reygulatlons, to Allow Modifications of Ordinance Requirements for Greater Design Flexibility in the FI4 District. Rezoning 4W03 od Sbphensan Village, submittod fey Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821,7 acra5 from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Resldentlal Planned Community) District. This pmperty Is boated east of Milburn Roark (Route 66?), souin of old Otyatle& Town Road (Routs 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route %4), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pkko (Route 11 North), The propetties irwludad with this O+plirndon are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A•31A, 44•A•292, and 444.293 in the Stona tll M9919tedai District. -vu N DEPT. OF GEOGRA-PHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGMA ^fia f f = Fb E GIS, MAPPING, GRAPHICS WORD REQUEST S DATE RECEIVED: REQUESTED COMPLETION DATE: REQUESTING AGENT: Department, Agency, or Company:_ Mailing and/or Billing Address: Telephone: E-mail Address: ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECT: ". DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: (Write additional information on back of request) KE Z :tt-06-03 �� 44-A-J9� .S�e��so� vala�� 3oA 44-A-�93 44— 4 - P1Ns 44 -� 3l , 30 • 44 R-z9z �iq DIGITAL: PAPER: FAX: - SIZES: COLOR: BLACK/WHITE: NUMBER OF COPIES: STAFF MEMBER: COMPLETION DATE: MATERIALS: DATE OF PICK-UP/DELIVERY: AMOUNT DUE: AMOUNT BILLED: METHOD OF PAYMENT: HOURS REQUIRED: AMOUNT PAID: CHECK NO.# Q Frederick County GIS, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA 22601, (540)665-5651) TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME 08/01/2023 15:39 NAME FRED CO PLANNING DEP FAX 5406656395 TEL 5406655651 SER.* BROC2J178677 DATE,TIME 08/01 15:36 FAX NO./NAME 96671649 DURATION 00:02:58 PAGE(S) 08 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 107 North lout Street + Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Telephone. 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 FAX TRANSMISSION TO: Tire A llerx COMPANY: Wineheater.Sw,, FAX #: 667-W+2 Date;August 1, 2003 Number of Pages (including cover sheet) g Remarks. Per Uric, attached is the adjoiner letter and list of adjoiners for the 8/20/03 Planning Commission Meeting for Stephenson Village. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Telephone: 540/665-5651 FAX:540/665-6395 FAX TRANSMISSION TO: Tim Allen COMPANY: Winchester Star FAX #: 667-9ft 2 \ Date:August 1, 2003 Number of Pages (including cover sheet) 8 Remarks: Per Eric, attached is the adjoiner letter and list of adjoiners for the 8/20/03 Planning Commission Meeting for Stephenson Village. From the desk of: A3., 2AIlVe, COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC MEETING FAX: 540/665-6395 August 6, 2003 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS RE: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF STEPHENSON VILLAGE On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public meeting being held on Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This meeting is the continuation of the Planning Commission's consideration of the following application: Rezoning #06-03 of Stephenson Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 821.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District. This property is located east of Milburn Road (Route 662), south of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761), and southwest of Jordan Springs Road (Route 664), approximately 2,000 feet east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties included with this application are identified with Property Identification Numbers 44-A-31 [portion], 44-A-31A, 44-A-292, and 44-A-293 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Any interested parties may attend this meeting. Please note that this application is scheduled as a public meeting. Indeed, the public hearing required for this application was conducted and formally concluded during the Planning Commission's July 16, 2003 meeting. As such, anyone wishing to speak concerning this application must do so during the citizen comment portion of the agenda, which occurs at the start of each Planning Commission meeting. 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. Sincerely, Christopher M. Mohn, AICP Deputy Plarming Director CMM/bad O \Agcndm\Adjoiner Ltrs\2003\REZONINGS\SlephcnsonVillage.wpd 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on oG a-3 from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick Coun , Virginia: 44 - A. - 34.3' 44 -A. - 31- STROSNIDER, SHIRLEY M. ETALS CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WV CIO LEOTA S. MOULDEN PO BOX 2530 327 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD WINCHESTER, VA 22604 STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1725 44 - A- . 36- � '-7 c' DYKE, ROBERT C & ALCESTA R 44 -A- - 31-A 293 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD SHOCKEYIDULLES,LC STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1724 44 - A. - 39. PO BOX 2530 CRIDER & SHOCKEY, INC OF WV WINCHESTER, VA 22604.1730 44 - A. - 25. BENHAM, H K III TRUSTEE PO BOX 809 WINCHESTER, VA 22604.0809 44 - A- - 28-B UNGER, KENNETH R. 288 MILBURN RD WINCHESTER, VA. 22603.4721 44 - A- - 29. SLAUGHTER, JUDITH MCCANN 170 MCCANNS RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603-4179 44 - A- - 32. 3 3 JENKINS, TERRY L & EVELYN G 357 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1725 STATE OF VIRGINIA .dome We]a W I111011101:7 [a]:� PO BOX 2530 «' A) /t WINCHESTER, VA 22604.1730 44 - A- - 131- MORTON, WALTER G & VIRGINIA E 505 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1822 44 - A- - 132- JENSEN, LOUIS R & NOBY RUTH 497 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1726 Christ h M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. I, d ' Lx , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do ereby certify that Cl4istopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of P nning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated 00 3 , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my Stat and CourZy aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of b0 My commission expires on o?00 FA W-0 I MIA -1 44 - A. - 133- DAVIS, WAYNE MARSHALL 44 - A- - 145- STEWART, NORMA L 487 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1726 44 - A. -134- EDWARDS, CLIFFORD E & 477 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656-1726 44 - A- -135- DAVIS, HELEN E 465 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1726 44 - A- - 136- RAMSEY, RODGER R & TERRI B 453 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1726 44 - A- -137- GODFREY, E F & ADA L 443 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1726 44 - A- - 138- MADISON, DAVID R & RHONDA G 133 PARKINS LN WINCHESTER, VA 22602.2361 44 - A- - 138-A O'ROARK, NORWOOD T. & LAURA W. 380 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1728 44 - A- - 138-B -/ U, BRAGG, BETTY LOU 420 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1729 44 - A- - 139- MCKEE, ANNA B & LESTER W 102 FAIRWAY DR WINCHESTER, VA 22602.6016 44 - A- - 140. SCOTT, DAVID & LOUISE 400 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1729 44 - A- - 141. KEITER, RAY G. & RUTH J. 410 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1729 44 - A- - 143. LAW, BOBBY D 432 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1729 44 - A- - 144. MAYERS, AUDREY L 442 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1729 454 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1729 44 - A- - 146. TRENARY, RANDOLPH C & KATHERINE E 466 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1729 44 - A- - 147- WEAVER, TIMOTHY J & WANDA K 478 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1729 44 - A- -148. JENKINS, DAVID CALVIN & SCARLET M 879 DICKS HOLLOW RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603-3721 44 - A- -149. RUSSELL, ROBERT H ETALS 104 WINSLOW CT WINCHESTER, VA 22602.6762 44 - A- - 150. STULTZ, GLENN A. & BETTY A. 518 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 153- SPITZER, RAY E. & CHRISTINE E. 540 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 154- VUILLERMET, ROBERT EUGENE 550 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1828 44 - A- - 155- STROTHER, JOHN R. 560 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 156. HOTT, R. CHARLES & KAY K. 572 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1828 44 - A- - 157. LOUCH, WILLIAM G 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1828 44 - A- - 158. DEHAVEN, HELEN I 582 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1828 44 - A- - 161. GRAY, JEAN K CIO JEAN NICHOLSON PO BOX 151 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0151 T 's is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on 0 b from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick ou , Virginia: 44 - A- - 170-C ANDERSON,JOHN KENNETH 44 - A- - 162. PO BOX 27 GETTS, ELLEN ELAINE STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.0027 660 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 44 - A- - 202.,. •y a3 STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1829 BRAGG, DAVID L 44 - A- - 163-/&� _ /(, r RITTER, JUANITA M 688 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1829 44 - A- - 166- RUSSELL, ROBERT H ETALS 532 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1828 44 - A- - 167- CHITTUM, FRANCIS M JR PO BOX 141 STEPHENSON, VA 22656.0141 44 - A- - 168- SHANHOLTZER, WELTON K 721 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1824 44 - A- - 169- BUSSERT, GERALD & JOAN E. & 707 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1824 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERI PO BOX 174 CLEARBROOK,VA 22624.0174 44 - A- - 206- LAKE, JAMES T. & HELEN E. 771 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1824 44 - A- - 207. LUDWICK, JAMES L & NANCY L 779 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1824 44 - A- - 208. GOLLER, ACTRESS I 776 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1830 Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. 1, ll� 41&1 , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do ereby certify that Clastopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director for the Department of P nning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated o 0 b 1 , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my Sta and County aforesaid. Given under my hand this Ld day of My commission expires on 44 . A- - 209- 44 • A• - 226- AFFLECK, RODNEY L STONE, CLYDE & VIRGINIA 786 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD 856 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1830 STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1912 44 • A- . 228- 44 • A• - 210- HOOVER, BORIS BROWN JONES, WILLIAM C JR & BRENDA L & RITTER, GEARLINE BROWN 821 REST CHURCH RD 796 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD CLEAR BROOK, VA 22624.1510 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1830 44 A 229 44 • A• - 211 ESTEP, DONALD L & HELEN L KNUPP, RICHARD R & BONNIE R PO BOX 66 PO BOX 97 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0097 STEPHENSON, VA 22656 A 212 44 • A• • 230- DIXON,DMARY V HEPNER, STEPHEN K. 471 GRACE CHURCH RD 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD CLEARBROOK, VA 22624.1333 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1913 44 - A• • 218• 41, • A- - 231•A -- 3 KRASICH, DINAH G & JOHN E F-AUVER, HARRY S JR 776 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 906 JORDAN SPRINGS RD 22656.1911 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1913 44 • A• • 219• CHASLER, C N INC 44 • A- . 232•? ;,� HEPNER, STEPHEN K. 203 E BOSCAWEN ST WINCHESTER, VA 918 JORDAN SPRINGS RD 22601 5012 44 - A• - 220. STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1913 ANDERSON, RUSSELL 0 44 • A- - 234- 794 JORDAN SPRINGS RD DAY, VIOLET STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1911 PO BOX 153 44 • A.. 221. STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0153 TRAVERS, GEORGE 0. 44 - A- • 236- MERRITT, GERALD WRIGHT 804 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1912 976 JORDAN SPRINGS RD 44 • A• • 222• STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1913 MCGAFFICK, ROGER A & MARY S 44 • A- • 237. 816 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA ROBERTS, CHRISTINE K & EDDIE R SR 22656.1912 & GIBBS, THERESA K & DAVID B 44 - A- • 223• 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE MILBURN, DONALD L & KIMBERLY M VA WHITE POST, 22663.1811 44 . A• • 238- 826 JORDAN SPRINGS RD SHRECK, CATHERINE EST. STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1912 208 GREENFIELD AVE 44 • A• - 224• WINCHESTER, VA. 22602.6635 SMITH, MITCHELL B 836 JORDAN SPRINGS RD 44 • A- • 283• STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1912 JAMES, DAVID F A - 1025 JORDAN SPRINGS RD L LINK, STEVE A & DENNIS W STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1918 846 JORDAN SPRINGS RD 44 - A• - 284• STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1912 ROBERTS, EDDIE JR & ROBERTS, EDDIE SR & CHRISTIN 1013 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1918 J (T T4�6' st certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on goo D 3 from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick C ty irgi ia: 44C - 1• • A- 44 - A- - 285- WOLF, CLARENCE C. & DOROTHY A. 1009 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1918 44 - A- - 286- A � 7 HEIRS OF DORIS KINES CIO THERESA K GIBBS 1968 FAIRFAX PIKE WHITE POST, VA 22663.1811 44 - A- - 288- WALTERS, WAYNE E 8800 OLD OCEAN VIEW RD NORFOLK, VA 23503.5308 44 - A- - 289- LOFTHOUSE, ELSIE A 1034 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.1914 44 - A- - 291- HOVERMALE, NANCY M & PECK, DANIEL L 1054 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1914 44 - A- - 294- AITKEN, GREIG D W & WALLACE, TOME M 1160 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON, VA. 22656.2015 COLLETT, JOEL A. & DIANE L 527 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1822 44C -1- - 13- FOUT, MARK ALLEN & KATHY D 613 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1823 44G - 1- - 14- LARKIN, DOUGLAS J 134 WEST ST STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655.3303 44C - 1- - 15- LOUZONIS, JOSEPH THOMAS JR 543 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1822 44C-1--16. PENDZICH, ANTHONY R JR & DESTINY D 555 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON, VA 22656.1822 Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director Frederick Co. Planning Dept. STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDE K IXoresa�— , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aid,do ere by certify t at C stopher M. Mohn, Deputy Director. for the Department of 1 nning d Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated am 0� , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my Stat d Coun aforesaid. n Given under my hand this My commission expires of 44C - 1- - 17- MILLER, BARRY L & DAWN D LLOYD 565 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 18- PAUGH, CHARLOTTE V 573 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656-1822 44C - 1- - 19- SWARTZ, RICHARD A. & BONNIE H. 585 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 20- MCCAULEY, JULIANNA W. & GRANVILLE B 595 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA. 22656.1822 44C - 1- - 21- HOLLIDAY, NANCY 164 CRINOLINE LN WINCHESTER, VA 22603.3801 44C - 2- - A. ZIRKLE, WILLIAM RAY & HELEN CHRISTINE 614 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1829 44C -2- - B. JOBE, CHARLES S. & MARY A. 634 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656 22656.1829 44C - 2- - D. BLY, TERRY L & CONNIE S 644 OLD CHARLES TOWN RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656.1829 45 -9- 3- 1- HALL, WILLIAM H III & REBECCA 1081 JORDAN SPRINGS RD STEPHENSON,VA 22656-1918 45 -9- 3- 2. HOFFMAN, WILLIAM D. & PATSY L. PO BOX 22 STEPHENSON,VA 22656.0022 55 - A. - 6. HULVER, JOSEPH F T JR 1023 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22603.4757 55 - A. - 7. '7,q OATES, GARY K & CONSTANCE JOBE 1071 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4757 55 - A. - 8- SCHWARTZMAN, BERNARD 1105 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4758 55 - A. - 9. STOTLER, DONALD L 1141 REDBUD RD WINCHESTER, VA 22603.4758 55 - A. - 10. PENTON, E GLENN & BIGGS, DAWN R 221 SETTLERS LIU STEPHENSON,VA 22656.2027 55 -7- - 13. MIDDLETON, TIMOTHY L & DONNA L 261 LICK RUN CROSSING STEPHENSON,VA 22656.2023 55 -7. - 14. MEIER, WILLIAM G III & BARBARA E 207 PLAZA ST NE LEESBURG, VA. 20176.2428 55 -7. - 15. SIRBAUGH, SAUNIE D. 290 LICK RUN CROSSING STEPHENSON,VA 22656.2023 Mr. M ark D./Smith, P.E., L.S. Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 i� Newland Communities Newland Communities NEWLAND COMMUNITIES IS ONE OF THE LEADING DEVELOPERS OF MASTER -PLANNED COMMUNITIES IN THE NATION, SPECIALIZING IN THE ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL LAND, THE DEVELOPMENT AND ENTITLEMENT OF MASTER -PLANNED COMMUNITIES, AND THE SALE OF FINISHED LOTS TO HOMEBUILDERS AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS. NEWLAND COMMUNITIES PRODUCES SIGNATURE MASTER -PLANNED COMMUNITIES THAT IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND CREATE A SENSE OF PLACE FOR THEIR RESIDENTS. NEWLAND'S MISSION TO DEVELOP AND MANAGE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH PRODUCT AND GEOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY; TO MANAGE RISK AND OPTIMIZE REWARD; AND TO CREATE PROJECTS WITH HIGH VALUES AND STRONG CASH FLOWS. ■ ". °� W L A N D '" G N A T U R E Master -Planned. Development n regions experiencing rapid population and job growth, planned development is recog- nized as the most progressive approach to creating new housing and the best solution for communities and residents alike. The most popular and desirable new homes today are being built within master -planned communities, creating a strong demand nationwide for Newland's experience and knowledge. A master -planned community is a place Where lifestyle features are integrated with an Array of new home choices. The primary difference between Newland's communities and traditional single-family subdivisions is our concern with the details of combining amenities and living spaces in enduring, high -quality environments. A Newland master -planned community is designed from the beginning for the aesthetic use of the land's contours, incorporation of natural features and open space, maximum access to views, compatibility of architectural styles, and concern for personal safety and ease of resident movement within the development. We challenge our planners to exceed the day-to-day needs of residents by including green ■ belts and parrs, water features such as lakes and streams, hiking and biking trails, recreational facilities that might include swimming pools, tennis courts, play areas and golf courses, as well as schools, libraries and shopping. The varied densities and diversity of products within a Newland master -planned community set it apart from traditional subdivisions and provide an abundance of housing options. Products include single-family detached homes, custom and semi -custom homes, townhomes, patio homes, condominiums and apartments, all planned in a series of distinct residential environments delineated by architectures, home sizes and price points. Retail, office and industrial areas are often included in the community plan to serve the needs of our residents as well as the surrounding market area. The path to success in developing master - planned communities involves commitment, patience and careful planning. The intense involvement of Newland's people at every phase in the development cycle, from acquisition of the land to the sale of the final home, assures positive long-term results. t E A Master -Planning Continuum ver the last 35 years, Newland has been developing successful and vibrant communities that meet a broad range of neighborhood and housing needs. With a strong emphasis on the sunbelt states, Newland has been responsible for the development of over 50 distinctive communities across the United states, each designed to reflect the character of its region. We have master -planned more than 75,000 acres in these states containing over 175,000 existing and planned homes, 17 golf courses and over 17,000 acres of open space. Included in many of these developments is a mixed -use operations. Beginning in 1968, Newland's principals joined Genstar's land and real estate development group, which built 16, 000 homes and developed millions of square feet of commercial real estate, becoming one of the top three land development companies in North America. In 1986, Genstar was acquired by Imasco Ltd. of Montreal, which spun off its real estate operations in the United states. The manage- ment of the U.S. real estate group formed The Newland Group, Inc., and in July 1987 entered into a partnership with an investment company to acquire and develop 19 component, totaling ' ` .;1,1 master -planned more than 6,200 Whitney Oaks, Sacramento, California communities and acres of retail, office and industrial land projects across the United States. In development. 1993, with a majority of these projects in Today, Newland manages a growing progress or successfully completed, the portfolio of more than 40 community partnership was dissolved and the assets divided. developments. The company develops and sells In 1994, many of the principals and 4,000-5,000 lots a year nationwide, creating managers of the former Newland Group new homes worth approximately $1 billion reformed Newland and began developing and annually. managing new project opportunities. The new Newland traces its roots to Genstar company received impetus from an initial Corporation, a diversified Canadian -based allocation of $60 million from the California company with land and real estate development Public Employees Retirement system (CAPERS). 4 K 0 F ■ Paseo del Sol, Temecula, California In 1999, t_ae company's name was changed subsidiary of British American Tobacco, plc, for to Newland Ccmmunities and Hunt Realty $223 million. The assets of Genstar Land Corporation acquired a substantial interest in Newland. A partne-ship with Hunt Realty gave Newland a solid financial foundation from which to grow our poxAfolb of communities and expand our relationshias with institutional partners. In addition to a-cquiring and developing individual commum ies, Newland is also a buyer of property portfolios and real estate development companies. In 2000, Newland purchased Genstar --and Company from a ■ consisted of 27 land development projects in seven states. Combining the acquired properties with the company's existing assets, Newland became one of the largest master -planned community developers in the United ,Mates. Newland began the 21st century with access to significant new financial resources and an expanded vision to acquire and develop master - planned communities in a larger number of strategic markets across the continental U.S. ■ ■ ■ San Migue Fanch, San Diego, California 0 5 4S Ranch, San Diego, California ■ 71 N E W L A N D' S U N I Q U E N E S S Fulfilling Dual Roles ith 35 years of experience, Newland is a mature and successful real estate development organization with a large and growing portfolio of master -planned communities nationwide. Newland has a distinctive identity within the residential development industry, capable of fulfilling the dual roles of master -planned community developer and advisor to pension funds and institutional investors on the acquisition and development of residential communities. As a developer, we directly manage the entire master planning process, from land acquisition through the marketing and sale of homes. As an advisor, we perform financial analyses, feasibility studies and due diligence that help our institutional investor partners select the highest -quality, highest -potential projects that will meet their investment objectives. The ability to function as both developer and advisor has proven invaluable to both Newland and its institutional clients. Of the seven firms originally selected to advise the California Public Employees Retirement System's real estate development program in 1994, Newland was the only company whose historical focus was in land development rather than finance. By applying our expertise to the acquisition and development of residential land, Newland became CalPERS' leading land development partner, with an investment allocation that has grown to over half a billion dollars. In carrying out these roles, Newland brings a unique blend of specialized shills to the development process, including: • Maintaining a constant pipeline of high -quality investments in targeted growth markets and in the path of development; • Timing the acquisition of land and planning the phased buildout of projects to maximize returns and take advantage of changing market dynamics; • Obtaining entitlements and satisfying government requirements in a variety of regulatory environments across the United States; • Designing, engineering and building singular amenities that meet the special needs and diverse lifestyles of each community; Eagle Ridge, Spokane, Washington 0 6 0 ■ RiverRim, Eend, OrEgcn • Maintaining strict financial controls and performance objectives; • Nlanaging Lie marketing and sales process to maximize cash flow, g---oss revenaes ani earnings; • -W t-)rk-ng in partnership with financially strong and experienced development par-tn.�rs and. homebuilders. ■ IN ■ Over the years, careful and disciplined imple- mentation of this pvocess _-ias allowed Newland to -3rovide thousands of bu-ildable lets for homes in she most-eonomieally desi`able regions of the United States. Thilc remaining c:msistently prcfitable throughou_ the ups and I owns of the real estate development cycles, Newland :-gas built award -winning commun_.ies, creating thriving environments in whit-1 pecpl-3 live, work and play. Fi.hers Lancing, Vancouver, Washington 0 7 Creekstore, Kennevick, Wwhington A E W L A N D' S V A L U E Managing the Development Process he land development process is a life cycle that involves several stages. Newland has the capability to serve as a partner or manager throughout the entire process, and assume responsibility for execution of one or more individual stages. • Partner Due Diligence. Newland's continuing success is based in part on establishing partner- ships with landowners and other developers. Our projects begin with a period of due diligence by both the potential partner and Newland. The most productive long-term relationships are based on mutual trust and a demonstrated record of financial and business achievement. An understanding of each party's background and strengths improves the outlook. • Project Due Diligence. A feasibility study and financial analysis is conducted on the proposed project. This stage includes reviewing financial pro formas to determine that they meet the project's investment criteria under a variety of financial and market conditions. Projections are made for cash flows, loan drawdowns and repayments, and potential profits and losses. Economic forecasts are done to determine product types, pricing and absorption rates that are consistent with employment and population growth projections in the region. Based on the n value maximization scenario chosen for the property, a schedule for development is set. • Land. Purchase. Using economic, demographic and market studies, parcels are analyzed for their development potential based on the state, city and section of the city in which the property is located. If the project meets Newland's rigorous criteria, the land is acquired. • Entitlements and. Documentation. Before development proceeds, government entitlements and the approval of local planning jurisdictions are secured. Environmental studies are initiated and soil, hazardous waste and biological assess- ments prepared. In addition, all appropriate legal documentation and filings are completed to support project development and financing. • Planning and. Engineering. Once land is purchased and entitlements received, planning, processing and engineering are completed. At this stage, the exact product types, densities, open spaces and amenities are established. Project designs take into account topography, siting, elevations and the lifestyle needs of target buyer groups. A balance of square footage, floor plans and options is determined to guarantee the attractiveness of housing products within their market and price ranges. • Community Involvement. With input from regulatory agencies, design review organizations and local residents, community involvement is a part of the process of establishing quality neighborhood plans and well -designed projects. • sale of Undeveloped. Land. Depending on project timing, changing land prices, and development strategy, parcels of raw land may be sold to third parties at some stage prior to development. In some cases, Newland will retain the residential portion of a project and sell or joint venture the commercial portion. Teravista, Austin, Texas ■ 8 0 Simmerwood, Houston, Texas • Constru:don. Following the development timetal lc, lcts are graded into pads and utility hook-ups instaled in preparation for homebuildin7. Roadwe_y, , c-_ mmon areas and amenities arE constructed. sale o- =at-. We then sell finUec or unfiniszed pe_rcels to residential and commercial builder3 and Lveiopers for home and commercial bt_ilding construction. • sales and iNtarleeting Plan Performance. Newland rem _ns involved with the execution o- ■ tiF Seven Mead)ws,Houston, Texas the sales and marketing effort. As phases of the development a^e released and sold, product mix, pricing ar_d mar6t acceptance are reviewel to determine possible modificatior_s to the timing and construction of subsequent pnases With our intimate knowledge of the d velopment process, Newland has the ability- to maize every project we are involved in realize its full aesthetic and f_nancial potential. n Grayson Lakes, Hous-on Texas a 9 0 ■ ■ N E W L A N D' S P A R T N E R S IH Il FleAle structures and attractive Returns ewland provides development, manage- ment, and transaction -structuring expertise to landowner and developer partners for the acquisition and development of residential land projects. All of Newland's communities are privately owned, held in individual development partnerships with institutional and private investors and, in some cases, with financially strong and experienced local landowners and builders. These partners generally are seeking above -average returns from soundly managed, non -speculative land development investments. With the solid foundation and capital resources afforded by its partnerships with CalPERS and Hunt Realty, Newland's continuing growth and success create opportunities for new relationships with landowners and developers. Among these are: Acquiring additional master -planned communities for our own portfolio. We will continue to work in every targeted region to find suitable projects for investment. Activities ■ include the development of parcels of undevel- oped land and acquiring and completing projects started by others. Purchasing portfolios of assets. Pension funds, insurance companies, real estate development companies, corporations and institutional investors occasionally sell portfolios of land and residential investments in various stages of completion. Newland will consider buying portfolios of projects for management, development and eventual sale. Offering joint venture, entity investment and lot hanhing programs to developers and Builders. Newland actively seeks partnership opportunities with qualified developers, landowners and builders in well -positioned land development and lot banking projects. joint ventures allow Newland and partners throughout the United States to combine land acquisition and investment opportunities with Newland's unique capital resource base. ■ ■ Sterling on the Lake, Atlanta, Georgia ■ 10 ■ C Fishl-awk Ranch, Tampa, Florida Joint venturing with others to complete unfinisbed communities. We can assist investors and developers in repositioning a community, malting physical changes, building out and selling unfinished properties, or preparing alternatives for further development. ■ LJ ■ In all cases, Newland uses an equity structure that ensures optimum returns, control over the lot development process, and limited liability and tax protection for our partners. Newland's compensation is determined by the profitable completion of each project or program, and is primarily dependent on the overall return earned by the partner. Covington Park, Tampa, Florida 0 11 L A S T I N G C O N T R I B U T I O N S Quality, Value and Trust ewland has built a strong position in the land development industry by setting the highest standards of quality and innovation and following through to completion, to the benefit of our residents, customers and investors alike. Greener Communities. Newland Communities understands that open space, vegetation, water management and the responsible use of resources are important to the long-term health of our communities and the happiness of our residents. Simply stated, a green community is one that is planned and built in a manner that conserves resources. Our company's respect for the environment motivates us to find innovative ways to manage our impact on the land before, during and after construction. Amenity -Rich Communities. Newland's communities are "amenity -rich," delivering a range of lifestyle options to homebuyers. We know the level and quality of amenities add significantly to the master -planned community experience, and maize a critical difference when buyers are choosing between a Newland community and another community. Amenities are developed based on a combination of experience, marketing studies and consideration for the lifestyle needs of a particular region. Lake Shore on Lake Wylie, Tega Cay, South Carolina 0 12 ■ F ■ L ■ Stonemill Farms, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota onnected Communities. Taping advantage of --he rapid integration of broadband technologies -n the 21st century, Newland is involved in -nnovative applications of technology to the -vaster-planned community business. These =nclude community Intranets, exclusive, private _ietworhs that are available only to the members c-f individual communities, and pre -wired homes tat enable the homeowner to take advantage of emerging "smart Home" technologies. Commitment to ,Schools. During the planning and development of its master -planned eommu- -ities, Newland has maintained a long-standing commitment to local school systems. At most of its large, master -planned communities, Newland has been involved either directly or indirectly with the construction of schools. Newland has also participated in education enrichment programs at the schools serving our communities. Newland's communities are built to last. We understand that a community must provide a positive living environment for its first generation of residents, and for many generations to come. Newland's master -planned communities will remain our signature, serving as enduring examples of our dedication to quality, value and building trust. 0 13 0 ■ ■ N E W L A N D' S C O M M I T M E N T superior Results uring the 21st century, it is our goal to enhance our position as one of the nation's leading master -planned community developers. In particular, we will endeavor to continue to earn the respect and trust of our partners and customers and build their confidence that we will be with them for the duration. As we move forward, we will follow the principles that have guided our success to date: • Diversify geographically. We will vary our investments by state and city and add new markets that meet our criteria. • Diversify by product. Our projects will include a mix of products and price ranges that appeal to a broad range of residential buyers and commercial entities. • Spread ftnancial risk. Newland will invest in a large number of projects at various stages in the development cycle. A • Maintain strong cash flows. Projects will be acquired, managed and marketed to optimize cash lows and create the highest rates of return. • Involve management. We will remain involved on a day-to-day basis in the life cycle of every project. The Newland vision will continue to be accomplished by a well -integrated team of professionals, experienced and dedicated individuals who understand the long-term implications of their efforts and the impact of their work on people's lives. As we look to the future, we are buoyed by the challenges and excited about the many opportunities. Newland's long-term commitment to quality and value in our communities ensures a superior standard of living for the people who call them home, as well as consistent profitability for our company. U 7 1A DEREK C. THOMAS Vice Chairman and Chief Operating Officer iiloi I _� `raw VOW I+ Newland Communities 9404 Genesee Avenue, Suite 230 La Jolla, California 92037 Telephone 858.455.7503 Facsimile 858.455.5368 e-mail: info@newlandcommunities.com www.newlandcommunities.com N e w a n d s Master -Planned S i g n a t (nmmunities u r e F' Newland Communities NEWLAND COMMUNITIES ACQUIRES 21 TIRRABROOK COMMUNITIES Transaction Confirms Newland as Lite LarLgesl iNlaster- Plalined Communit3T Developer in the U.S. QVPntPfrd Newland Communities has announced it has acquired Washington, D C. In addition to heing the nation's substantially all of the residential community develop- largest developer of master -planned cornmunilies, (in(o Ranh went portfolio and related management operations of we are now also the most geographically diversified.' Clarksburg Terrahrnnk, the land development subsidiary of Marc Scroggins, Chief Fxecutive Officer of Terrahrook 1a le s Westbrook Partners LLC. Newland has acquired 21 of said, "Newland and Terrabrook have been rin S -9----------- Terrabrook's master -planned residential communities competitors for several years, and we respect each IS(ayera in the states of Cdrrfumia, Culuiadu, Texas, Florida, other's accornplishrrrents. Our, operating philosophy Fallon Pointe Georgia, North Carolina and Maryland. The value of and overall approach to community development is GreatWood the all -cash transaction is $600 million. very similar. We both believe that the most desirable Robert McLeod, Newland's Chairman and Chief new homes today are being built within master- GreenLinks Executive Officer, said, "The acquisition of the planned communities offering lifestyle amenities flighland (reek Terrabrook portfolio solidifies Newland's position that are carefully integrated into a well -designed flUnter S Creek as the country's leading master -planned community community plan. As a result, this transaction should developer, with more than 60 communities in 11 be viewed positively by our homebuyers, builders and MiraBay states." employees." Oak Valley Greens Included in the transaction is development land Thomas added thatTerrabrook's operations and PdSeOS entitled for approximately 18,000 single-family approximately 150 employees will immediately residences, 4,000 multifamily residences, 500 acres become a part of Newland Communities. "The Reata of residential parcels, 1,800 commercial acres and people joining Newland from Terrabrook will add Rivei(inL three daily fee golf courses. The combined company depth at both the corporate and project level,. that Stonebridge Ranch is projected to sell 9,500 lots a year, creating new will allow us to quickly inteqrate the two portfolios homes worth over $3 5 billion annually and expand in our markets in the firture," he, said. Stonegate Newland will own the properties in Newland National Torrey fulls Partners, its partnership with Lhe California Public t° "} s� .............................rn Vista Lakes Employees' Retireeril System (GaIPERS). Newland = "' --- --_ has been a partner in CaIPEHS' land acquisition and West(hase development investment program since 1994. w West(hase Golf Course "The portfolio being acquired is an exceptional fit Westridge Golf Course at with our geographic footprint," said Derek Thomas, Stonebridge Ranch Newland's Vice Chairman and Chief Operating Officer. "More than half of the properties are located in Windermere markets where we are already an active community Windermere Golf Course developer. The remaining properties give us an immediate presence in highly desirable metropolitan areas such as Dallas, Denver, Orlando and T R 0 P fI MiraBay Once a sleepy, agricultural area on the eastern shore of Tampa Bay, the coastal town of Apollo Beach is about to become home to a new coastal community anti a special way of life. The litestylc community of IVhraUay will redefine what it means to enjoy watcrfront living. The community, which is in thr early stages of development, features gated access, fresh water lagoons and miles of canals. Homes began selling in 2003, and the community is expected to take seven years to complete. When complete, MiraBay is expected to include 1,350 single-family and approximately 700 multifamily homes priced from the $200.000s to more than S2 million. MiraBay encompasses 750 acres, offering a 13.5-acre freshwater lagoon, spectacular water views of pristine lakes and three -and -a -half miles of saltwater canals with private boat docks. MiraBay's community plan includes a strong focus on the natural environment, especially protecting manatees and other aquatic, life. Nev laend's predecessor company was Genstar Land - O.S.A., the U.S. development subsidiary of Genstar. From 1968-1986, Genstar built 16,000 homes and developed millions of square feet of commercial real estate; becoming one of the top three land development companies In North America. Y P R preserving wetlands and improving the area's ecology. An Outfitter's Center offers kayak and paddleboat rentals, sailing lessons and fishing trips, as well as boat maintenance. At the center of the community is the MiraBay Club, with a fully equipped fitness center and social areas. There are also two resort -style pools, including a waterslide and a junior Olympic -sized pool for lap swimming. The Racquet Club offers four championship tennis courts for leagues and informal play plus a Center Court for special matches. Fort Wilderness Park offers a fanciful and fun environment with a tot -lot and pathways for the children. MiraBay is centrally located, with Tampa, St. Petersburg and Sarasota all within 30 minutes by car or by boat. For more infoirnation, visit www.mhabay.com. Cinco Ranch After 12 successful years, Cinco Ranch has become a Texas tradition, the #1-selling community in incest Hnuston for the past 3cvcral years. The community is known for its wide array of outdoor activities, including an 18-hole daily fee golf course, beach club and swim lagoon. and six recreation centers. Cinco lunch resi- dents also enjoy great schools, natural beauty and award -winning landscape architecture -- all within a short distance from Houston. This vibrant, 7,200-acre planned community is 32 miles west of downtown. Construction is proceeding in three major phases, with Cinco East being completed in 2003; Cinco West in the midst of mostiuctiou and sales, with uompletiori set for 2006; and Cinco Southwest opening in ^00 5 and continuing to sell through 2012. When complete, the community will include 12,000 single-family and multifamily homes. Cinco Ranch celebrates the spirit of the West with outstanding amenities. In addition to the Carlton Gipson designed golf course. In 1986, lnnnasco €.tot. of Montreal acquired Genstar and spurn off Genstar Land -- ti. .A. In July 1987, the management of Genstar Land formed The Newland Group., Inc., and entered into a partnership with American General Realty Investment Corporation. The partnership acquired 19 master -planned communities nities and land projects across the United States. With a majority of these projects in progress or successfully completed, the partnership was dissolved and the assets divided. ManV of the principals and managers of the former Newland Group formed Newland Associates arid began developing new project opportunnities. The new company rcccrvcd an allocation of "SbU million €rosin the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPER ) to invest in new housing projects in California. residents enjoy a 130-acre retail center, a network of "exer-traits" connecting playground areas, parks and picnic facilities, lakes stocked for fishing and a new YMCA, complete with fitness facilities and swimming pools. The acclaimed Katy Independent School District offers excellent schools from K-12 and a branch of the University of Houston is located within the Cinco Ranch property. It is little wonder the community of Cinco Ranch is marketed under the harmer "The (test in the Wp..st " Visit vvwnnr r.inrnranch.cnm. Stonebridge Ranch Home to three of the finest golf courses in North Texas, Stonebridge Ranch is a 5,000-acre planned community in McKinney, Texas, that has become the top -selling community in the Dallas -Fort Worth metroplex. Stonebridqe Ranch offers detached homes and multifamily units from inure than 30 well-known homebuilders, with prices varying from the $120,OOOs to over $1 million. More than 1,100 acres within the community are devoted to open s; ace for residents' enjoyment, with over 10 miles of landscaped Terrabrook established its portfolio when Westbrook Partners tt:C purchased the assets and operations of Mobil Land Oeve€opmen Corporation and American General Eared Development Corporation. The portfolio Included several properties originally stoartcd by American General and The Newland Group, including Highland Greek in Charlotte, Westchase in Tampa Stay,Hunter's Creek in Orlando, Cinco Ranch and Greatwood in Houston, and Torrey Hills in San Diego. hiking and biking trails. One of the prestige amenities offered at Stonebridge Ranch is the only beach and swim lagoon in North Texas, which features a half -acre swim lagoon, picnic tables, a sand volleyball court, four lighted tennis courts, a tot -lot play- ground, a basketball court, a cabana and paddleboats. With 12 lakes scattered throughout the community, Stonebridge Ranch offers lakefront living and fishing, sailing and paddle boating on selected lakes. A new state -of -the art Aquatic Center opened in 2000. In addition to the community itself, Newland is acquiring Westridge Golf Course, an 18-hole daily -fee course at Stonebridge Ranch that was designed by Jeffrey Brauer. Residents also have access to two private golf clubs. Stuiiebridge Country Club features the aiva'a only signature Pete Dye golf course as well as a 36,000-square- foot Victorian -style clubhouse. The Ranch Country Club's 27-hole golf course, designed by Arthur Hills, meanders through lush, winding terrain. Memberships to these private clubs are available to residents of Stonebridge Ranch. For more information, visit www.stonebridgeranch.cgm. Newland changed its name to Newland Communities. Hunt Realty Corporation of Dallas acquired an interest in Newland. Newland received an additional allocation from Cal ERS of $200 million that was raised to $300 million a Vear later for the development opt residential projects nationwide. Newland Communities avid IHP The acquisition of Capital Partners, with the support 21 properties from of Cal ERS, purchased Genstar Terrabrook confirms Land Company from a Canadian Newland as the subsidiary of British American largest master - Tobacco, pie, for $223 million. The planned community assets of Genstar Land consisted developer in the of 2$ lornd dcvolopmcrnt projects in United Stales. Florida, Georgia; Texas, California, Oregon, Washington and Minnesota. With this acquisition, Newland Communities nities became one of the cocintry,s major land developers.