HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-24 Comments rev 05.15.24From:Johnson, Joseph (VDOT)
To:Tyler Klein
Subject:"[External]"Fw: Wawa - Cstore Town Run - TM85-A-143
Date:Wednesday, May 15, 2024 3:24:48 PM
Attachments:image001.png
Outlook-mwn5ueey.png
See below.
Joseph W. Johnson, PE
Area Land Use Engineer / Edinburg Residency
Virginia Department of Transportation
14031 Old Valley Pike / Edinburg, VA 22824
Phone #540.534.3223
josephw.johnson@vdot.virginia.gov
From: Spielman, Joseph (VDOT) <Joseph.Spielman@vdot.virginia.gov>
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2024 3:43 PM
To: Jennifer Mullen <jmullen@rothjackson.com>; Johnson, Joseph (VDOT)
<josephw.johnson@vdot.virginia.gov>; Wyatt Pearson <wyatt.pearson@fcva.us>; I81 Public131
<jbishop@fcva.us>; Rod Williams <rwillia@fcva.us>; Funkhouser, Rhonda (VDOT)
<Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov>
Cc: Andrew Butsick <abutsick@kittelson.com>
Subject: Re: Wawa - Cstore Town Run - TM85-A-143
Jennifer,
VDOT has finalized its review of the proposed rezoning and TIA. We have no objection to the
proposal and are satisfied with the transportation proffers.
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Joseph Ryan Spielman
Land Development Engineer / Edinburg Residency
Virginia Department of Transportation
540-535-1829
joseph.spielman@vdot.virginia.gov
From: Jennifer Mullen <jmullen@rothjackson.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2024 12:02 PM
COUNTY OF FREDERICK
Roderick B. Williams
County Attorney
540/722-8383
Fax 540/667-0370
E-mail rwillia@fcva.us
March 19, 2024
VIA E-MAIL
Jennifer D. Mullen, Esq.
Roth Jackson Gibbons Condlin, PLC
1519 Summit Avenue, Suite 102
Richmond, Virginia 23230
Re: Rezoning Application – Wawa Stephens City
Tax Parcel Number 85-A-143 (the “Property”)
Dear Ms. Mullen:
You have, by correspondence dated March 5, 2024, submitted to Frederick County for
review a revised proposed proffer statement (the “Proffer Statement”) for the proposed rezoning
of the Property, 8.29± acres in the Opequon Magisterial District, from the RA (Rural Areas)
Zoning District to the B2 (General Business) Zoning District. I have now reviewed the Proffer
Statement and it is my opinion that the Proffer Statement would be in a form to meet the
requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be
legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following comments:
Heading – Thank you for including the identifying information regarding the rezoning.
For better visibility of the information, please increase the font size to 12-point and either
use 1.5 or double spacing for it. Also, please include a title, e.g., “PROFFER
STATEMENT”, on the first page of the document, centered either immediately above or
immediately below the heading information. Finally, please note that “Stephens City”
does not include an apostrophe.
Introductory paragraph – In line 5, this refers to “the applicant”. The Proffer Statement
does not actually identify an “applicant” as distinct from the owner and, because the
Proffer Statement would ultimately be binding on the owner and its successors and
assigns, this reference would better be to “the owner”.
Mr. Jennifer D. Mullen
March 19, 2024
Page 2
Proffer 1 – Generalized Development Plan (GDP)/Concept Plan – The proffer indicates
that the most recent revision of the GDP is dated January 12, 2024, but the most recent
date I was able to find on the GDP/Concept Plan submitted was November 16, 2023, in
the middle of the boxed information on its righthand side. Also, I again note that a
significant amount of the information on the Concept Plan – especially the form and
specific placement of signage – may not be necessary for inclusion at the
rezoning/proffer stage. I caution that the Proffer Statement, and its incorporated
GDP/Concept Plan, binds the property, such that material changes to concepts depicted
could require the owner to seek a rezoning amendment, which is seemingly not a
preferred approach. A GDP most often shows the general layout of features on the
property, the placement of site entrances, which the Concept Plan does do, and, if any,
proposed right-of-way dedications and any adjacent and off-site transportation
improvements.
Proffer 3 – Transportation Improvements:
o The proffer needs to state a time prior to which the improvements will be completed.
In a situation like this one, involving development of a single use on a site, that time
is typically the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
o Proffer 3b – This proffer should state, and the GDP/Concept Plan should identify, that
this turn lane would be, I presume, at the northern entrance to the Property.
I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable
and appropriate for this specific development, as my understanding is that review will be done by
staff and the Planning Commission.
Sincerely,
Roderick B. Williams
County Attorney
cc: John Bishop, Assistant Director of Planning & Development (via e-mail)
Tyler Klein, Senior Planner (via email)