Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-96 Robert E Rose Memorial Foundation Center for Community Living - Stonewall District - Backfileb �a a� Q CUP TRACKING i V SHEET (To be completed by Frederick Co. Staff only.) CUP # 00.2 - 1 6 Owner/Applicant &6,ert C . Rose M e-mo r la Fo(4AWqft;A,T^C_- Application Date Fee Paid 0 yes initials: Sign Deposit FIZ3 yes Sign return date: Submittal Cut -Off Date 3'F-74C P/C Mtg. date: ¢ - 3- cj 6 BOS Mtg. date: ¢ 24 -% AGENCY REVIEW COMMENTS y VDOT_ Airport Authority _ Inspections City of Winchester Fire Marshal_ Co Sanitation Authority Health Dept. LorS falrfo HeaA Pii f*1Gf PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS OF 4 ` 3 - 9 (date) APPROVAL (WITH CONDITIONS) yes no DENIAL Signed ;Secretary Date BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUBLIC HEARING CTION (date) APPROVAL 1:�E..t,,. Signed k % , Coiint Alm. aDENIAL Date f r � D�d D.�ai 4& ¢ cafe tit 3.Iz.9& CASH RECEIPT .. , Addressi.� s� �� ' l l •q For sw W Aq •+ ACCOUNT �' , e 0m®=m HOW PAID ® � F - ®�=M 584661 COPYRIGHT: Il' c;. lqw XI STINCo NOTE: c owepT�k SITE F WST PL AP R F�ASe b oa `ti _------------------ VwT Mace. I ,' �af`1bSGAPIt�C� ax i SIt�EWRI�t� (TYP, ) ' r 1 1 1 x f ROAD RAMP 1 ml vr;ANIN (� f'Rlzkl N-C� prREA� r 1 , co , 1 , P-x IsTNO 1 1 , , 1 r 1 �x ISTI NCB vE�&[-,TAT-V4 ✓ �vil.vi�� OE� PT UA L" Sl 1- 1 / , 0 U Z? � o Jaz z� =0> LL Paz 000 V No � Y W U. aw �wcr U. ~ W Z In W 0 SCALE: 50 DATE: ti.5 •��O 1 41 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 TQi Finance Department FROM: Karen A. Clark, Receptionist/Clerk 11 SUBJECT: Return Of Sign Deposit DATE.: July 1, 1996 The amount of $25.00 was deposited in line item #10-1911-08 for the company named below as a deposit for a sign for Conditional Use Permit #002-96. They have now returned the sign and are therefore entitled to the return of their deposit. Please send a check in the amount of $25.00 to: Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue Winchester VA 22601 Please contact me if you have any questions. RSA/kac ATTN: MR. GREG STROSNIDER 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 564661 mr-,6HA KI CAL" fz ooM Mr--� RootA . MOH. tzooM t-i LIS STO"67a P%pM IRI-T"TivE PEA COPYRIGHT: �. ' S ' 6G 0 U Z_Z Z J0Q az ?o> LL Q z �000 W U LuY U W cc Ix W LLI w W LL Z W co W Q U(x N F- w 3 �1 ne W Q W Cie SCALE: SV� V 1 ' \�� (V �S �M �t� T V �/ V �� �✓lam! V DATE: ti' S °iC'o 3 584661 COPYRIGHT: I0-2 - tX IST 19 (-�, �- L,00R p l P��4 Z? /_ O J�Q z �X ?O> 00O V LLI Y W W W W it ~ W Z W m O U(x SCALE: 1/&11=I'-01I DATE: lo• �,.lc� 4 �,UI�C1�1C� h1cIeTN 584661 COPYRIGHT: 2 - S ' q(O DIN1 f5k I ER ,L BR SINKS BRA slk�Plf�C� 1,oc S ROOF wvv `WALL,-, T El- _ A��{ IBR Co sr, ` L! `b L- JW ITOI� ` I wal,Kw STApr t �7 M wom , At�m1t1. ♦ ' �� Tc�Gti � GANtxGAPI�� b�Y. r�cOM vEsTlsul.� \ �,, 1 j IMP. IIor j¢12 RAII,IN& fl 13 aco m TF R�vE K�TGt� I,out�l�E l; AF1= _�._ � IIIIIIiI► _�11 ACTIVITY RWp �{��MATIG MAN �VE�V pI.AN 0 U Z Z > z O Jaz z0 = LL O> Q z �O= O w � Y � ow w Ix LU LL Z w W 0 UM N 04 04 Lh N o W W 0 � Q 0 C LU w ce SCALE:1t i u I/ICe =1'O DATE: 2 q.0 March 0, 1996, Center for Community Living c/o Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Ave. Winchester, Virginia Addendum to Land Development Comments I've reviewed the application for a Conditional Use Permit, to operate a 26 bed care facility. I am recommending approval of the permit subject to approval of a site plan, which will come later in this process. The site plan will need to reflect the following. 1. Any required Fire Lane must be 20' in width, capable of supporting a 36,000 lb. vehicle, and posted with signage reading "No Parking Fire Lane". 2. Access via fire lane will be necessary, to the south and west sides of the proposed building. These are the sides of the building containing sleeping rooms and the Fire Dept. wants the ability to immediately access these rooms. 3. This building will be a I=1 or I-2 Use Group. The entire facility must be protected by an automatic sprinkler system. The siamese connection must be located on the north or east side of the building within 100' of the existing fire hydrant, which is located on the north side of the property. 4. The building must comply with all applicable sections of the Uniform Statewide Building Code, concerning means of egress, fire protection, fire alarms, and fire grading. All of these issues can be addressed at the time of site plan submission. If there are any questions as to the need for any of these items, or if there are any questions about these requests, please contact the Fire Marshal's Office at 540-665-6350. Douglas A. Kiracofe Fire Marshal cc: Engine Co. 18 File 1] 0 P/C Review Date: 4/03/96 BOS Review Date: 4/24/96 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #002-96 Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. Center for Community Living Adult Care Facility LOCATION: This property is located at 549 Valley Mill Road, Winchester, VA, approximately one mile from Dowell J. Howard Vocational School on Route 659; traveling east, property is on the left. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 55-A-56 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: RP (Residential Performance) ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: RP (Residential Performance), use is residential. PROPOSED USE: 26-Bed Licensed Home for Adults and Adult Care Facility. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation: We currently have a project for this section of Route 659 in the preliminary design phase. At this time, we do not know what the specific impacts on this property will be. Our minimum sight distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance on Route 659 to allow for commercial use. Inspections Department: Building shall comply with Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 308, Use Group I (Institutional) of the BOCA National Building Code/1993. Other codes that apply are title 24 Code of Federal Regulation, Part 36 Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities. Will need to show location of ADA Parking and Striping and submit ramp detail at the time of permit application. Note: 1) Section 105.10 Asbestos inspection in buildings to be renovated; 2) BOCA table for approved type of construction for I-1 or 1-2 uses. A/E Virginia Seal required on building plans. r: �i Page 2 Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. CUP #002-96 Fire Marshal: See attached letter from Douglas Kiracofe, Fire Marshal, dated 3-8-96. Lord Fairfax Environmental Health District: At the present time, the subject property is listed in our records as a private residence that is served by a septic system and drain field. The proposed use would overwhelm this existing system. In talking with the representative for the Memorial Foundation, they stated that the new proposed use will hook up to central sewer and water. This was not stated on the copy of plans submitted with the request. Therefore, if the new proposed use will hook up to central sewer and water and properly abandon the existing septic system, then the Health Department has no objection to the. proposed Conditional Use Permit for the property. Winchester Regional Airport: The developer should be familiar with and be required to comply with the provisions of the Frederick County Code, Article XIII, API Airport District, to ensure the complete safety of the Winchester Regional Airport. Airspace and navigational aids within the Airport District may limit the height and use type of the development. The developer should also be familiar with the following codes: Title 15.2 Code of Virginia, Section 491.02 (Airport Safety Zoning); and Title 5.1 Code of Virginia, (Permits Required for Erection of Certain Structures). City of Winchester Planning Dept.: No comments. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: Water and sewer are available. Planning Department: The proposed use would fall under the category of convalescent and/or nursing home and is permitted in the RP zoning district with an approved conditional use permit. Staff suggests that the Foundation address the VDOT comment that insufficient sight distance exists at this location for commercial use early on because this may be a very limiting factor needing an early decision. The Health Department comment concerning the question of whether this facility will be serviced by public sewer and water can be answered by stating that Frederick County will require this facility to be so connected. An engineered site plan will be required for the construction and conversion of this facility, and all issues that are surfaced now or during the site plan process will need to be adequately addressed prior to a certificate of occupancy being issued. • Page 3 Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. CUP #002-96 STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APRIL 3 1996 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This application meets all the requirements necessary for approval and the following conditions are recommended as appropriate: 1. A site plan must be submitted and approved prior to issuance of any building permits. 2. Applicant must comply with all requirements of the state and county codes pertaining to convalescent/nursing homes at all times. 3. Any expansion of this facility will require a revised site plan and a revised CUP. 4. All review agency comments must be adequately addressed and continually complied with at all times. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION SUMMARY FOR APRIL 3,1996: Twenty-eight citizens came to the podium to speak regarding this conditional use permit (CUP). Seven people spoke in favor of granting the CUP, 21 spoke in opposition, and two petitions of opposition were submitted. Persons who spoke in opposition to the proposal cited traffic problems on Route 659 as the major reason for their opposition. They stated that the road was narrow, it had dangerous blind curves, there was a speeding problem, and that severe weather made the road impassable. Opponents of the CUP felt this facility would add to the traffic congestion problem with delivery trucks, employees, vendors, and visitors. Because of the size of the proposed structure, they considered this to be a "business" and said that it was not compatible with their residential neighborhood. They felt the property was unsafe for handicapped people because it was steeply sloped and there was a lot of traffic. There was also the sentiment that the Rose Memorial Foundation was a profit -making organization and that this property was being purchased because it was a "good .deal." Persons who spoke in favor of the CUP stated that this facility provided a badly needed service in Frederick County and that parents of handicapped children had no place to take their children for daytime care. Proponents for the facility said that the current feeling of society is to provide services and care for handicapped people within the communities in which they live. The Planning Commission felt that the traffic generated by this conditional use permit would be less than if the property was developed under a master development plan for residential housing. It was i Page 4 Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. CUP #002-96 noted that as recently as one month ago, the Hill Valley residential development proposal (54 single family homes) for this same location was brought before the Commission for consideration and none of the neighbors were present at that time to speak out about the traffic problems. Commissioners were very concerned about the problems in this area with the traffic, the road, and the rapid growth, but they were unconvinced that this was not an appropriate location for this facility and unanimously recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. A site plan must be submitted and approved prior to any building permits being issued. 2. Applicant must comply with all requirements of the state and county codes pertaining to convalescent/nursing homes at all times. 3. Any expansion of this facility will require a revised site plan and a revised CUP. 4. All review agency comments must be adequately addressed and continually complied with at all times. (Mr. Wilson, Mr. Ours, and Mr. Romine were not present at the meeting.) File: KAWMCMNICOMMENTS\ROSE MERCUP 0 0 FILE COPY I April 25, 1996 Center for Community Living c/o Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. Attn: Kerm Schroeder, Chairman 365 National Avenue Winchester, VA 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 RE: CUP #002-96 OF ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION, INC.; P.I.N. 55-A-56 Dear r: This letter is to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of April 24, 1996. Your Conditional Use Permit, #002-96, to operate a licensed home for adults and adult care facility, was approved by the Board of Supervisors with the following conditions: 1. A site plan must be submitted and approved prior to any building permits being issued. 2. Applicant must comply with all requirements of the state and county codes pertaining to convalescent/nursing homes at all times. 3. Any expansion of this facility will require a revised site plan and a revised CUP. 4. All review agency comments must be adequately addressed and continually complied with at all times. If you have any questions regarding this action, please feel free to call this office. Sincerely, Kris C. Tierney, AICP Deputy Planning Director KCT/cg cc: Commissioner of Revenue 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 i lui Submittal Deadli P/C Meeting e BOS Meeting APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT'r' FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1. Applicant (The applicant if the owner X NAME: Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. ADDRESS: 365 National Ave., Winchester, VA 22601 TELEPHONE (540) 667-1919 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: Owner: Vera V. Dove 104 Timberlake Terrace Stephens City, VA 22655 Party in interest: Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) 549 Valley Mill Road, Winchester, VA Approximately 1 mile from Dowell J. Howard Vocational School on Route 659. Traveling east, property is on the left. 4. The property has a road frontage of approx. 860 feet and a depth of feet and consists of 3.29 acres. (Please be exact) 5. The property is owned by Vera V. Dove as evidenced by deed from Norman & Norene Dove recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. 685 on page 469 as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. 6. 14-Digit Property Identification No. 55000-A-0000-0056 Magisterial District Stonewall Current Zoning Residential Per ormance 7. Adjoining Property: USE North Residential East South West Residential Residential Residential ZONING Residential Performance Residential Performance Residential Performance Residential Performance • • 8. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) 26 bed licensed Home for Adults with 12 slot Licensed Adult Care program 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: 7525 sq. ft. wood and brick building to provide space for 16 residential beds and 12 Adult Care slots, kitchen and dining facility, etc. 10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides, rear and in front of (also across street from) the property where requested use will be conducted. (continue on back if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: (PLEASE LIST COMPLETE 14-DIGIT NUMBER.) =0 Address 549 Valley Mill Rd. Winchester, VA 22 Vera Dove Property ID# 55000-A-0000-056F Myrtle A. Koon Address 543 Valley Mill Rd. Winchester, VA 22 Property ID# 55000-A-0000=0055 David E. & Debra M. Address 105 Van Buren Court, Winchester, VA 22 Property ID# 55C00-7-0005-0017 Smith .Gregory V. Groves Address 104 Van Buren Court, Winchester, VA 2 Property ID# 55C00-7-0005-0018 J. Randolph & Address P.O. Box 444, Winchester, VA 22604 William W. Larrick T/A R&R Properties property ID# 55C00-7-0005-0025 J. Randolph & Address P.O. BOX 444, Winchester, VA 22604 William W. Larrick T/A R&R Properties Property ID# 55C00-7-0005-0026 i02 102 i02 '602 1 NAME Jeffrey A. & Pamela D. Gillum Address 100 Woody's Place, Winchester, VA 226 Property ID# 55COO-7-0005-0001 Carlisle Estates (Common Area) Address 741 Woodland Ave., Winchester, VA 226 Property ID# 55COO-3-0001-OOIA Dennis D. & Lorrie L. Collins Address 102 Woody's Place, Winchester, VA 226 Property ID# 55COO-3-0001-0002 Henry M. Mercier, Jr. Address 104 Woody's Place, Winchester, VA 226 Property ID# 55COO-3-0001-0003 Kenneth Rhoads Address 106 Woody's Place, Winchester, VA 2260 Property ID# 55COO-3-0001-0004 Joseph A. D'Arcangelis Address 108 Woody's Place, Winchester, VA 226 Property ID# p Y 55C00-3-0001-0005 Address Property ID# Address Property ID# Address Property ID# Address Property ID# Address Property ID# Address Property ID# 1S )l )2 )2 )2 11. Please use this page for your sketch of the property. Show proposed and/or existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines. • to 12. Additional comments, if any: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I.understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed use will be conducted. Kerm Schroeder Signature of ����-r1�-���"v Chairman PMF Board g Applicant Rf—Azr�tors Signature of Owner C2/ 2a Vera Dove - Owner Owners' Mailing Address 104 Timberlake Terrace Stephens City, VA 22655 Owners' Telephone No. (540) 869-7741 TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: Center for Community Living c/o Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Ave. Winchester, Virginia Addendum to Land Development Comments I've reviewed the application for a Conditional Use Permit, to operate a 26 bed care facility. I am recommending approval of the permit subject to approval of a site plan, which will come later in this process. The site plan will need to reflect the following. 1. Any required Fire Lane must be 20' in width, capable of supporting a 36,000 lb. vehicle, and posted with signage reading "No Parking Fire Lane". 2. Access via fire lane will be necessarrto the south and west sides of the proposed building. These are the sides of the building containing .sleeping rooms and the Fire Dept. wants the ability to immediately access these rooms. 3. This building will be a I-1 or I-2 Use Group. The entire facility must be protected by an automatic sprinkler system. The siamese connection must be located on the north or east side of the building within 100' of the existing fire hydrant, which is located on the north side of the property. 4. The building must comply with all applicable sections of the Uniform Statewide Building Code, concerning means -of egress, fire protection, fire alarms, and fire grading. All of these issues can be addressed at the time of site plan submission. If there are any questions as to the need for any of these items, or if there are any questions about these requests, please contact the Fire Marshal's Office at 540-665-6350. Douglas A. Kiracofe Fire Marshal cc: Engine Co. 18 File Lord FairfaxOEnvirunmental Healt# District 800 Smithfield Avenue P. O. Box 2056 i Winchester, Virginia 22604 a� (540) 722-3480 FAX (540) 722-3479 Counties of Clarke, Frederick, Page, Shenandoah, Warren, and City of Winchester February 22, 1996 Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue, Winchester, Va 22601 Dear Sirs, This letter is written in response to a Request For Conditional Use Permits Comments sent to the Winchester -Frederick County Health Department. At the present time the subject property is listed in our records as a private residence that is served by a septic system and drainfield. The proposed use would over whelm this existing system. In talking with the representative for the Memorial Foundation they stated that the new proposed use will hook up to central sewer and water. This was not stated on the copy of plans submitted with the request. Therefore if the new proposed use will hook up to central sewer and water and properly abandon the existing septic system then the Health Department has no objection to the proposed Conditional Use Permit for the property. If I may be of any further assistance in this matter plea contact me. Sincerely, Frank R. Lee Environmental Health Specialist Senior REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT COMMENTS Virginia Department of Transportation Attn: Resident Engineer P.O. Box 278 Edinburg, Virginia 22824-0278 (540) 984-4133 The local office of the Transportation Department is located at 1550 Commerce St. in Winchester if you prefer to hand deliver this form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Robert:E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue, Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 667-1919 Name of development and/or description of the request: Development of a 26 bed Licensed Home for Adults with 12 slot Licensed Day Care Program within existing building Location: and with new construction. 549 Valley Mill Road - Approximately 1 mile past Dowell J. Howard Vocational School. Traveling East on Route 659 property is on the left. Va. Dept. of Transportation Comments: We currently have a project for this section of Route 659 in the preliminary design phase. At this time we do not know what the specific impacts on this property will be. Our minimum sight distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance on Route 659 to allow for commercial use. VDOT Signature and Date :62A. 64ae c.t,— ,�.,o2 f z.i // %la� -/Z-&I d, (NOTICE TO RESIDENT ENGINEER*PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO APPLICANT.) xc; Mr. S. A. Melnikoff NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach a copy of your application form, location map and all other pertinent information. REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT COMMENTS Frederick County Inspections Department Attn: Building Official P.O. Box 601 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (703) 665-5650 The Frederick County Inspections Department is located at 107 North Kent Street, 4th Floor of .the County Administration Building in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue, Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 667-1919 Name of development and/or description of the request: 26 bed Licensed Home For Adults with 12 slot Licensed Day Care Program within existing building and with new Location: construction. 549 Valley Mill Road - Approximately 1 mild past Dowell J. Howard Vocational School. Travelina East on Route property is on the left. Inspection Department Comments: Building shall comply with Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 308, Use Group I (Institutional) of the BOCA National Building Code/1993. Other codes that apply are title 24 Code of Federal Regulation, Part 36 Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accomodations and in Commercial Facilities. Will need to show location of ADA Parking and Striping, and submit x amp .ems at the .1me o permit X Code Administrator Signature & Date: (NOTICE TO INSPECTIONS DEPT.*PLEASE URN THIS FORM TO LIC T.) NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach a copy of your application form, 1 -., t, :o. ;.map:,.and all other pertinent information."`" , application. Note: 1.) Section 105.10 Asbestos inspection. in buildings to be renovated. 2.) BOCA table for approved type o construction for I, 1 or I-2 uses. A/E Virginia Seal required on Building plans. wxw�- - Ft E C Ol MVE- R FEB 13 40 0 [LIMARI �,�COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA�0 FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMENTS Control No.0308963118 Date Received 021396 Date Reviewed 030896 Applicant Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. Address 365 National Ave. Winchester, Virginia 22601 Project Name Center for Community Living Phone No. 540-667-1919 Type of ApplicationCUP Current Zoning RP 1st Due Fire Co. 18 1st Due Rescue Co. 18 Election DistrictShawnee Tax I.D. No. 55-A-56 RECOMMENDATIONS Automatic Sprinkler SystemXX Residential Sprinkler System Automatic Fire Alarm System XX Other REQUIREMENTS Emergency Vehicle Access Adequate Inadequate XX Not Identified Fire Lanes Required Yes XX No Comments See attached Roadway/Aisleway Widths Adequate Inadequate XX Not Identified Special Hazards Noted Yes XX No Comments Hydrant Locations Adequate Inadequate Not IdentifiedXX Siamese Location Adequate Inadequate Not Identified XX Additional Comments Attached? Yes XX No Plan Approval Recommended? Yes XX No Signature,_ �, Title A �.��Z131qj5jG~1 REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS C6kMENTB' r J Frederick -Winchester Health Department` Attn: Sanitation Engineer s P.O. Box 2056 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (703) 722-3480 The Frederick -Winchester Health Department is located at the intersection of Smithfield Avenue and Brick Kiln Road, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form Applicant's name, address and phone number: Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue, Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 667-1919 Name of development and/or description of the request: 26 bed Licensed Home For Adults with 12 slot Licensed Day Care program within existing building and with new construction. Location: 549 Valley Mill Road - Approximately 1 mile past Dowell J. Howard Vocational School. Travelina East on Route 659 roperty is on the left. Health Department Comments: Health Signature and Date: (NOTICE TO HEALTH DEPT. - PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO APPLICANT.) NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach a copy of your application form, location map and all other pertinent information. r • REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT COMMENTS Winchester Regional Airport Attn: Executive Director 491 Airport Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540) 662-2422 The Winchester Regional Airport is located on Route 645, off of Route 522 South, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National c venue, Winclleste1 , VA 22601 ( 540 ) 667- Name of development and/or description of the request: 26 bed Licensed Home For Adults with 12 slot Licensed Day Care program within in the existing building and with new construction. Location: 549 Valley Mill Road - Approximately 1 mile past Dowell J. Howard Vocational School. Traveling East on Route property is on the left. Winchester Regional Airports Comments: �S e e n41- ) ,e J J Airport Signature and Date: C�s (NOTICE TO AIRPORT. * PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO APPLICANT.) NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach a copy of your application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and all other pertinent information. Recevied as an ttachment from S*. R. Manuel ItAEGIO& 0 (no date) �O WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT -"+ 491 AIRPORT ROAD SEINGTHE TOP OF VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 w. .J (703) 662-2422 Please consider the following comments when reviewing this Request for Master Development Plan: The Developer should be familiar with and be required to comply with the provisions of the Frederick Countv Code, Article XIII, API Airport District, to ensure the complete safety of the Winchester Regional Airport. Airspace and navigational aids within the Airport District may limit the height and use type of the development. The Developer should also be familiar with the following codes: Title 15.2 Code of Virginia, Section 491.02 (Airport Safety Zoning). Title 5.1 Code of Virginia, (Permits Required for Erection of Certain Structures). REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT COMMENTS CITY OF WINCHESTER Attn: Planning Director 15 North Cameron St. Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 667-1815 The City of Winchester Planning Dept. is located in Rouss City Hall at 15 North Cameron St. in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue, Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 667-1919 Name of development and/or description of the request: 26 bed Licensed Home For Adults with 12 slot Licensed Day Care program within the existing building and with new construction. Location: 549 Valley Mill Road - Approximately I mile past Dowell J. Howard Vocational School. Traveling East on Route 659 property is on the left. City of Winchester Comments: V h °`a, a 7 Director Signature and Date: �h •. - - �� ALT4), (NOTICE TO DIRECTOR * PLEASE RETURN I FORM O THE APPL NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please also attach a copy of your application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and all other pertinent information. -t,r Frederick County Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer Director P.O. Box 618 Winchester, 'Virginia 22604 (540) 665-5690 The Frederick County Sanitation Authority is located at 199 Front Royal Pike in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue, Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 667-1919 Name of development and/or description of the request: 26 bed Licensed Home For Adults with 12 slot Licensed Day Care program within the existing buildina and with new construction. Location: 549 Valley Mill Road - Approximately 1 mile past Dowell J. Howard Vocational School. Traveling East on Route 659 property is on the left. Sanitation Authority Comments: Sanitation Authority Signature & Date: (NOTICE TO SANITATION AIITHORITY * RN THIS �F�� 9TO APPLICANT.) NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach a copy of your application form, location map and all other pertinent information. Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. FACT SHEET ❑ Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. was incorporated in 1988, as a duly IRS recognized 501 c (3) publicly supported charitable organization. ❑ Rose Memorial Foundation is governed by a Board of Directors comprised of local citizens who serve on a volunteer basis. Our primary purpose is to provide community -based low-income housing and support services for the mentally disabled. ❑ Rose Memorial Foundation is a contract agent of Northwestern Community Services and services are provided in a closely coordinated manner. ❑ Rose Memorial Foundation operates 2 local housing programs: Rose Memorial Home, and The Alliance Home. ❑ Rose Memorial Home serves 6 adult males with mental retardation. ❑ The Alliance Home serves 3 adult males and 3 adult females with mental illnesses which are controlled and manageable with medication which is closely monitored. All residents are provided with appropriate support services and supervision. ❑ All residents are LOCAL CITIZENS. Rose Memorial Foundation DOES NOT IMPORT folks from other communities. We are a local service organization serving local citizens. ❑ Residents served by Rose Memorial Home and The Alliance Home are long term permanent residential placements. Rose Memorial Home currently serves the same 6 residents that it served when it was established in 1987. Upon admission to our programs, we make a commitment to our clients and their families to provide permanent long-term residential care and provide the necessary services to ensure their continued successful residential placement within their local home community. ❑ OUR RESIDENTS ARE NOT CRIMINALS, FREAKS, NOR MONSTERS. They are local citizens with disabilities who need the support and care of their LOCAL HOME COMMUNITY. Phone: 540 "7-1919 Facsimile: 540 "7-14" Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue Winchester, Virginia 22601 TO: Members of The Frederick County Board of Supervisors J FROM: Gregory A. Strosnider; LSW !I Executive Director DATE: April 11, 1996 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Application # 002-96 proposed Adult Care Residence to be located at 549 Valley Mill Road I am enclosing for your information a memo written in response to a request for information by Nina Simmons directed to Mr. Robert Watkins, Director of Frederick County Department of Planning and Development on Monday, April 8, 1996. Additionally, I am providing a "Fact Sheet" regarding Rose Memorial Foundation in an attempt to dispel what I believe to be an orchestrated effort by Ralph and Nina Simmons to create fear and spread misinformation throughout the neighborhoods surrounding the Valley Mill Road area. Several weeks ago, just prior to the Planning Commission public hearing on 3 April 1996, I received a letter from Mr. Walter Turkowsky who lives in the Valley Mill Road area with a copy of a flier being circulated by Ralph Simmons. Copies are enclosed for your information. On Friday, 22 March 1996, I spoke to Mr. Joel Friedman, President of the Brentwood Homeowner's Association regarding the proposed project to be located at 549 Valley Mill Road and; at that time offered to meet with individuals and/or groups to explain the proposed project. I am tentatively scheduled to meet with the Homeowner's Association at their next scheduled meeting on Tuesday, 14 May 1996. Mr. Friedman indicated that he had spoken to Ralph Simmons and suggested that I call him to discuss the project. I informed Mr. Friedman that I had a message of my answering machine and that I had planned to call him that day (Friday 22 March 1996). I have enclosed a letter from Mr. Friedman dated 9 April 1996, for your information. 0 0 Frederick County Board of Supervisors April 11,1996 Page 2 Upon calling Ralph Simmons he indicated that his mind was made-up and that he would be attending the public hearing on 4/3/96. He stated that he felt that I, and the Frederick County Board of Supervisors were nothing more that a "Bunch of Slick Willies" trying to slide the proposed project into the neighborhood without any notice to the people who live there. I asked him how he learned of the upcoming public hearing. He indicated that he read the notice in the newspaper. I attempted to explain that this is the normal process for public input. He became belligerent and rude. I offered to meet with him and/or any other individuals or groups that might have questions. His response was that he would have his say at the public hearing. [ I believe anyone who attended the Planning Commission's public hearing on 4/3/96, would agree that he did indeed have his say.] I and members of The Foundation's Board of Directors continue to be available to meet with anyone having concerns or questions regarding the proposed project. [ However, there must be the understanding that such meetings will be conducted in a civil manner.] I am sure that all of you, as members of the Board of Supervisors, are receiving lots of calls and letters at this juncture. Mr. Simmons is circulating lots of copies of addresses and phone numbers (copy enclosed). You will be well known by the time this issue is completed. I have been engaged in Social Work here in the Winchester -Frederick area since 1976. I have worked with drug addicts, alcoholics, convicts, homeless, AIDS patients, mentally ill, and mentally retarded. And now I look forward to working with folks with MULTIPLE -HANDICAPPING CONDITIONS. This population needs our help desperately! I have often found that the right thing to do is not always the easy thing to do. Fear, Stereotypes, and Misinformation can result in good folks behaving badly. Anyone who attended the Planning Commission's public hearing on 4/3/96, must, in good conscience, concede that the opponents of this proposed project behaved badly. They may be good folks --but, they behaved badly. The members of the Planning Commission are to be commended for having displayed the courage to do the right thing in voting unanimously to approve the project. It was not an easy thing to do --but, it was the right thing to do. And, I am confident that when you, as Members of the Board of Supervisors, examine all the facts --you too will do the right thing and approve the proposed project. Frederick County Board of Supervisors April 11,1996 Page 3 If I or members of The Foundation's Board of Directors may provide additional information or be of assistance in any way, please do not desitate to call upon us. Your attention and assistance in the disposition of this matter is most sincerely appreciated. CC. The Honorable Beverly J. Sherwood The Honorable H. Russell Potts, Jr. The Honorable Frank R. Wolf Charles DeHaven, Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission John R. Riley, Jr., Frederick County Administrator Robert Watkins, Director Frederick County Department of Planning and Development Kris C. Tierney, AICP; Deputy Planning Director David M. Ziegler, Executive Director Northwestern Community Services Moneen Cristovich, President The Arc, Northern Shenandoah Valley, Inc. Dr. Pia Crandell, Executive Director Northwestern Sheltered Workshop, Inc. Robert Steig, Headmaster Grafton School Bill Fuller, Executive Director Access Independence, Inc. K. W. Poore, President K.W. Poore & Associates Joel M. Friedman, President Brentwood Homeowner's Association Members of the Board of Directors, Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. Phone: 540 667-1919 Facsimile: 540 667-1466 Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue Winchester, Virginia 22601 TO: Mr. Robert Watkins Director, Frederick County Department of Planning and Development VIA: Kris C. Tierney, AICP Deputy Planning Director FROM: Gregory A. Strosnider, LSW Executive Director DATE: April 9, 1996 SUBJECT: Request for information regarding conditional use permit #002-96, directed to Robert Watkins by letter dated 5 April 1996, from Nina Simmons -- ATTACHED This memo acknowledges receipt of a copy of the above cited request for information this date --late afternoon 4/9/96. In an effort to provide as complete and timely response as possible, each of the concerns will be addressed in their turn as enumerated. 1. Please define "HARD -TO -SERVE" mentally ill. The term "Hard -To -Serve" as utilized within the application documents for The Center For Community Living is used to refer to individuals with multiple - handicapping conditions. For example, an individual who in addition to having a mental disability may also have one or more physical disabilities. Currently, facilities which are designed to accommodate individuals with physical disabilities in a residential or day care program capacity are rare. Facilities which are designed to accommodate both mental and physical disabilities are even more rare and are desperately needed by local citizens in order to prevent expensive and inappropriate placement in State institutions. Currently, local citizens who have multiple -handicapping conditions are faced with inappropriate placement in State C� 0 Robert Watkins Memo April 9,1996 Page 2 Institutions simply because there are no community -based residential or day care programs which can meet their personal care needs within a facility which is equipped to be fully handicapped accessible. These inappropriate placements within State Institutions require the break-up of the family unit; destroy the naturally occurring supports systems of family and friends; and, cause tremendous pain and guilt. To be locked away from one's Family, Friends, and Community simply because there is no local facility to provide the supports necessary to remain in one's Home -Community is to be locked -up for a crime never committed. We, as a Caring Community, must do everything in our power to bring an end to inappropriate institutionalization. That which was thought appropriate 50 to 100 years ago can no longer be ignored nor tolerated. As a society, we can neither afford it in terms of actual tax dollar expense nor the high cost it exacts upon individual members of our community with disabilities and their families and friends. 2. Will this facility house criminally insane to include ex -offenders such as rapists, pedophiles and felonists? NO! The Center For Community Living is not a Correctional Facility of the Criminal Justice System and is not designed to handle Criminals nor Ex -Offenders. 3. Will this facility serve as a half -way house? 1►lei a. According to records filed with the County, this facility anticipates over a 3-year period, the residential care would serve 30 residents and the day-care would serve up to 80 clients based on a 12 -hour weekday operation. Please explain the turnover as it sounds like a training facility. The Center For Community Living will have 26 residential beds and 12 Day Care Slots. The above cited numbers represent projections of potential program utilization by individuals. The figure 30 represents a turnover of 4 within the residential program over a 3-year period. The figure 80 represents individuals living at home with Family who would utilize the Day Care program for one or more hours within a 12 hour operation day (6 a.m. to 6 p.m. M--F) over a 3-year period. It is anticipated that individual needs for Day Care services will vary in that not everyone will need Day Care services 5 days a week for 12 hours each 0 0 Robert Watkins Memo April 9,1996 Page 3 day. The demand for Day Care services will greatly depend upon the work schedule of parents and other family members who serve as primary care -givers. 4. Will it act in the capacity of a de-tox center for drugs and alcohol, now or in the future? NO! Absolutely NOT. Detoxification Centers come in basically two types -- Medical Model and Social Model. Typically, Medical Model Detox programs are linked with acute care medical facilities such as the Medical Center and require by law a totally different licensure process. Social Model Detox programs also require by law a different licensure process by the Division of Substance Abuse Services within the Virginia Department of MHMRSAS. If folks want Detox Services --I suggest they call Johnny Foreman with the Division of Court Services at The Starting Point Program. By way of trivial information, this writer, along with Major Robert E. Rose co-authored the original program design for Virginia's first Social Model Detoxification Program which today operates as "Starting Point" within The Winchester -Frederick Division of Court Services. The Center For Community Living is an "Adult Care Residence" (ACR) which is licensed by the Virginia Department of Social Services. ACRs are not medical facilities and are not licensed as such. ACRs are NOT nursing homes. Nursing homes are required to be licensed by The Virginia Department of Health and their services focus upon the resident's need for continued around the clock nursing care. ACR residents do not require continuous nursing care. ACRs are designed to be Adult Residential Programs which coordinate related Health Care and Mental Health Care Services with and/or for their residents. ACRs are licensed to provide one or more of THREE LEVELS OF CARE: Residential, Assisted Living, and Intensive Assisted Living. Each level of licensure requires that specific criteria be maintained by the facility in order to continue to be licensed to provide services. By way of another piece of trivial information, this writer served upon Virginia's Secretary of Health and Human Resources' Department of Social Services "Levels of Care Task Force" which was charged with the task of formulating the newly implemented State Standards and Regulations for the Licensure of Adult Care Residences in Virginia. Therefore, The Rose Foundation is reasonable well versed in the requirements for DSS State Licensure of ACRs. 5. What impact the realignment of Valley Mill and Greenwood Roads will have on the property and what is VDOT's target date for this project? a. When asked if the road could cause condemnation of this property, 0 Robert Watkins Memo April 9,1996 Page 4 the representative of Rose Memorial simply deferred saying they would do whatever was needed by the County. How could a permit be approved and construction begin as early as September, 1996, if the County has no idea what VDOT's location for the road is? The conceptual site plan represents the best estimate available as to the location of the realignment Valley Mill Road. During the preliminary design phase of the project, VDOT representatives 'on a Local, Regional and State level were consulted. The project will comply with the requirements of Frederick County and VDOT. 6. What criteria did the committee use to evaluate this application before recommending approval? I assume the "committee" refers to the Planning Commission. Required comments from various agencies were submitted as a part of the conditional use permit application which included: Fire Marshal, Health Department, Winchester Regional Airport, Winchester Planning Department, Sanitation Authority, and Frederick County Planning Department. Beyond this, The Planning Commission or Frederick County Planning Personnel will best answer this question. a. Was there any consideration given as to whether it would have a detrimental physical, visual, and monetary impact on the neighboring properties; Yes. During the preliminary planning the design of the facility and grounds were developed so as to minimize the impact upon the surrounding perimeter of the property. Landscaping will be utilized to maximize privacy and the aesthetic quality of the property. Rose Memorial Foundation welcomes input and ideas from surrounding neighbors as to the placement of plantings and any usage of fencing, etc. The Foundation would like to establish a Neighborhood Advisory Council to function on an ongoing basis. b. Result in undue traffic congestion, light, or noise; The Foundation maintains that traffic, light and noise are not legitimate issues of concern; but, is more than willing to listen to arguments to the contrary. c. Result in undue water pollution of the Creek and the environmental impact of treed area (not developable) adjoining the property; Robert Watkins Memo April 9,1996 Page 5 The Center For Community Living will be closely monitored by State Regulating Agencies. No pollution will occur. Natural wooded areas which are within the property boundaries and are not developable will remain as such. Indiscriminate destruction of natural areas will not occur. (1) When the question was asked, "Would we be looking at fences such as a prison," it was misconstrued by proponents of the facility that we wanted fences. Is the fence(s) shown on the conceptual site plan standard 4 foot height chin -link type or what? How will it affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood? There will definitely NOT be prison fences. The decision of fence type and aesthetic quality is an issue which will be considered and decided by the Neighborhood Advisory Council (financial feasibility is of course a deciding factor to be considered). (2) Since VDOT's minimum site distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance, reference was made that a traffic light could be placed at entrance. Expand on this as to how it would be safely possible with the curve and hill as it exists now and if VDOT has been contacted? This issue is a matter for the site engineers , VDOT, and Frederick County and is out of the writer's area of expertise. 7. Address the security measures that this facility would put in place to prevent their residents from wandering out into the road and on our properties. The preliminary design of the facility takes into account the security of the building and monitoring of residents. A mixture of facility design, that is, the placement of staff work stations and the use of electronic monitoring will provide for the total surveillance of the building and grounds. As individual resident assessment needs indicate, individual residents will be provided with necessary monitoring devices to ensure their safety. 8. The local newspaper stated that two public meetings had been held without opposition. When and for what purpose? I assume these "public meetings" were the public hearings relative to the CDBG process and are best addressed by Frederick County Planning Staff. \J Robert Watkins Memo April 9,1996 Page 6 9. The Foundation's representative stated the goals were to take the clients shopping and participate in community activities. What activities? We have no public transportation, no sidewalks, no park, no church, no community pool. We do have public transportation and its getting more handicapped accessible each year. Ask Bill Fuller with Access Independence! We do have a park. It's called Jim Barnett Park and is operated by Winchester -Frederick County Parks and Recreation. There are lots of Churches in the area. There is a community pool in Jim Barnett Park. Winchester Medical Center through Winchester Rehabilitation Center also has a wonderful therapeutic pool that some of our folks use as well. As far as the sidewalks --We'll have to work on that. My point here is that, the residents at The Center will be participating in all the same kind of community activities in which any regular folks in the community participate. 10. What happens to this facility should funding become limited or difficult? The Rose Foundation is already depending on the launching of a $300,000 local fund drive. The $300,000 local fund drive is a CAPITAL FUND DRIVE. There are two types of budgets: Capital or Development Budgets and Operating Budgets. The $300,000 fund drive is within the Development Budget and serves as local leveraging funds in competing for State funding for the development and construction of the facility and should not to be confused with the Operating Budget. CC. Rose Foundation Board John Riley James L. Longerbeam Harrington Smith Richard Shickle Charles Orndorff Margaret Douglas Robert Sager Charles Dehaven j H F• F' - c- T I 1 E 1 c- F F' E D 1TF C Ci C. T C n r•1 r i n r! _. 1 l -.._. ; r.:_: F• i rA• Ko4tcT C . Ko5,t `^(JAL' L!PT M YUUR Ckp � �t hn• fifes ,-�.°•�'� ���� APR15;1 P 466 Valley Mill Road eEPr. K © of ai�r�:��r�0 Winchester, VA 22602 ���D DEVE Opr4ctir April 5, 1996 �;' Mr. Robert Watkins Frederick County Department 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 of Planning and Development Re: Conditional Use Permit 0002-96 for 549 Valley Mill Road Dear Mr. Watkins: After conferring with County Supervisors regarding the above - subject permit, I was advised by Mr. Robert Sager, Opequon District, to direct a list of concerns to your attention with a specific request that you provide a copy of your response to all county Supervisors. Therefore, this hand --carried letter is being delivered to your office on Monday, April 8, in an effort to expedite response prior to the April 24th meeting of the Board of Supervisors. A follow-up copy will also be sent by U.S. Mail. 1. Please define "HARD -TO -SERVE" mentally ill. 2. Will this facility house criminally insane to include ex - offenders such as rapists, pedophiles and felonists? 3. Will this facility serve as a half -way house? a. According to records filed with the County, this facility anticipates over a 3-year period, the residential care would serve 30 residents and the day-- care would serve up to 80 clients based on a 12-hour weekday operation. Please explain the turnover as it sounds like a training facility. 4. Will it act in the capacity of a de-tox center for drugs and alcohol, now or in the future? 5. What impact the realignment of Valley Mill and Greenwood Roads will have on the property and what 13 VDOT's target date for this project? a. When asked if the road could cause condemnation of this property, the representative of Rose Memorial simply deferred saying they would do whatever was needed by the County. How could a permit be approved and construction begin as early as September, 1996, if the County has no idea what VDOT's location for the road Is? r�PR- 9-3E. T U E 1 4 : 3 3 FREDICF, C0 CT C0r-1M0FJ_: 17671 r:.'Tir?� F'.Ctz Mr. Robert Watkins April 5, 1996 Page 2 6. What criteria did the committee use to evaluate this application before recommending approval? a. Was there any consideration given as to whether it would have a detrimental physical, visual, and monetary impact on the neighboring properties; b. Result in undue traffic congestion, light, or noise; C. Result In undue water pollution of the creek and the environmental impact on treed area (not developable) adjoining the property; (1) When the question was asked, "Would we be looking at fences such as a prison," it was misconstrued by proponents of the facility that we wanted fences. Is the fence(s) shown on the conceptual site plan standard 4 foot height chain -link type or what? How will it affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood? (2) Since VDOT's minimum site distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance, reference was made that a traffic light could be placed at entrance. Expand on this as to how It would be safely possible with the curve and hill as it exists now and if VDOT has been contacted? 7. Address the security measures that th13 facility would put in place to prevent their residents from wandering out into the road and on our properties. 8. The local newspaper stated that two public meetings had been held without opposition. When and for what purpose? 9. The Foundation's representative stated the goals weze to take the clients shopping and participate in community activities. What activities? We have no public transportation, no sidewalks, no park, no church, no community pool. 10. What happens to this facility should funding become limited or difficult? The Rose Foundation is already depending on the launching of a $300,000 local fund drive. NF'F'- 9-36 TIIE 14:33 FRED& CO C:T COMMOWS 1 -.036 2 P.04 Mr. Robert Watkins April 5, 1996 Page 3 Your assistance with the above will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Simmons cc: Mr. James L. Longerbeam W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Margaret Douglas Robert M. Sager Richard C. Shickle Charles W. Orndorff, Sr. 25 March 1996 C(DPV Dear Greg, I received the enclosed sheet at my house this past weekend. I belong to the Brentwood Home Owner's Association and the gentleman who wrote the sheet is the vice-president of the Homeowners association. There are over 100 homeowners in this association. I for one support your project, but I wanted to let you know that opposition is forming, based on what I perceive as half-truths. Sincerely, WALTER J. TURKOWSKY Winchester DSS .AL rrtry w r I ON NE I GHBORS OF' PROPERTY A'T 5 4 9 VALLEY MI LL, R.OAD The Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. has applied for a Conditional Use Permit #002-96 for The Center for Community Living which is a proposed adult residential and daycare center to be located at 549 Valley Mill Road with a target population of "HARD -TO -SERVE" mentally and/or physically disabled adults. Individuals from 18 years and older with disabilities ranging from moderate to profound would be served by the facility. The immediate plans are for a 26 bed adult care resident with a 12 slot adult daycare program. It is anticipated the residential cares would serve 35Zesidents ova.% three yams and the day care would serve up to 50 different individuals during the first year and up to 80 over a three year period, with a total staff of 28 persons, based on its 12 hour weekday operation and the turnover of clients. Funding for the individuals' care or training would be from the Medicaid State Plan Option and/or Mental Retardation Waiver System of reimbursement per a fee -for :service arrangement. The develop- ment cost for the Center for Community Living is $1,141,893. Frederick County is being requested to apply for the maximum grant of $700,000 in CDBG funds of which $644,000 will be used to expand the existing building by an additional 7,580 S.F., and $56,000 is setaside for grant administration. In addition, $125,000 will be provided by Rose Memorial. The expected potential gross income is $618,820 and the annual operation expenses have been projected at $524,043. I strongly feel the above -proposed establishment is a commercial enterprise and should not be approved by the Frederick County Planning Commission because of the problems it will create for our residential communities such as excessive traffic un a road that is already over burdened and the impact an establishment such as this will have on property values. If this zoning is 140T stopped, the project could begin as early as September 1996, a;ld be operational by December, 1997. The proposed site which is totally sourrounded by residential properties is an existing ranch style home located at 549 Valley Mill Road situated on 3.29 acres. A conditional use permit is REQUIRED under the County's current zoning ordinance to change the residential zoning. The public hearing meeting is scheduled for April 3, 1996 at 7:00 P.M. in the Board Room of the old Frederick County Courthouse in Winchester. All interested parties PLEASE PLAN ON BEING THERE!!! Ralph Simmons Property Owner at 466 Valley Mill Road E BRENTWOOD TERRACE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. P. 0. Box 2053 Winchester, VA 22604 April 9, 1996 W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Frederick County Board of Supervisors 111 Mulberry Circle Stephens City, VA 22655 Dear Mr. Smith; This letter is written in response to the Frederick County Planning Commission's April 3, 1996 public hearing which addressed the Rose Memorial Foundation's efforts to establish a facility to provide residential and day support services to people with disabilities on Valley Mill Road. In anticipation of this issue being brought before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on April 24, 1996, the following is provided for your information: At this time, the Brentwood Terrace Homeowners Association, Inc., has not officially adopted a position in regard to the Rose Memorial Foundation's proposed facility. Those people who spoke at the public hearing and/or signed petitions did so as individual homeowners who reside in the Brentwood Terrace subdivision and surrounding areas. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 722-4900 (work) or 662-1133 (home). Thank you. Sin% erely, 0 1 M. Friedman~ P2esident cc: James Longerbeam John Riley Greg Strosnidee Rose Memorial Foundation LIST OF OFFICIALS TO CONTACT REGARDING HOME FOR "HARD TO SERVE" Mentally Ill To Be Located at 549 Valley Mill Road There are six County Supervisors and we need a majority vote. Therefore, I urge you to call and then write a follow up note to each and everyone of them. Then ATTEND the meeting on April 24th at 7:15 P.M. at the old Frederick County Courthouse. Chairman: Mr. James L. Longerbeam 318 Longview Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Office: 667-5903 Home: 667-6971 Fax: 667-7315 Backcreek District: Margaret Douglas 452 Barley Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Home: 667-4535 Gainsboro District: Richard C. Shickle 292 Green Spring Road Winchester, VA 22603 PLEASE DO NOT CALL EXCEPT ON EVENINGS AND WEEKENDS PER HIS REQUEST AT THE COUNTY LEVEL Home: 667-2264 Senator Russell Potts Room 621 General Assembly Building State Capitol Richmond, VA 23219 (804) 786-6069 Local Address is: 118 Cameron Street Winchester, VA Phone: 665-2092 Note: Have been unable to get an answer at local number. May be in Richmond in session. Vice Chairman: Shawnee District Mr. W. Harrington Smith, Jr. 111 Mulberry Circle Stephens City, VA 22655 Office: 667-1500 Home: 869-2963 Opequon District: Robert M. Sager P.O. Box 1090 Stephens City, VA 22655 Office: 868-7026 Home: 869-3664 Stonewall District: Charles W. Orndorff, Sr. 2897 Martinsburg Pike Stephenson, VA 22656 Office: 662-4004 Home: 667-3497 Delegate Beverly Sherwood P.O. Box 2014 Winchester, VA 22604 Phone: 667-8947 CONGRESSMAN FOR 10TH DISTRICT Honorable Frank Wolfe 110 N. Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Local: 667-0990 Toll Free: 1-800-945-9653 Local Letter to Honorable Frank R. Wolf Attention: Donna Crowley Stress the use of HUD funds and ask HUD to deny the financing of this property. The Winchester Star THOMAS T. BYRD, President and Publisher RON MORRIS, Managing Editor ADRIAN J: O'CONNOR, Editorial Page Editor Established July 4, 1896 OUR OPINION NMBY Frederick Residents he true measure of any society may be seen, perhaps, in the way it cares for the needy and the unfortunate — i.e. the elderly, the infirm, the physically handicapped, the mentally disabled. Indicative of where we in America stand today is our overarching tendency to assign responsibility for these people to an amorphous entity — the government. In so many cases, we would rather not deal with it ourselves, through our churches, local civic organizations, or private philanthropy. Let the government do it, we say. But what if a private or non-profit foundation, formed primarily for a requisite task — for example, providing low-cost housing for the mentally disabled — would like to perform a much -needed service? What then? Would we roll out the welcome mat for such an establishment, even if fae facility or place of operation were in our own neighborhood? These are the questions citizens on Valley Mill and Greenwood roads in Frederick County should be asking themselves. The Rose Memorial Foundation, a non-profit organization that already operates two such homes in Winchester, wants. to convert a building at 549 Valley Mill Road into housing for the mentally infirm. The proposal engendered no disfavor at two initial public hearings; however, last week, voices of opposition could be heard among the 70 or so people who attended a Frederick County Planning Commission meeting. The obvious question here is: Why, suddenly, all these contrary opinions? To be sure, the wheels of the democratic process often move ponderously. It could be .that opposition to this plan had not galvanized to the point that cogent dissent could have been raised at those earlier public hearings. Or, it might have been that few residents of the Valley Mill/Greenwood area were truly aware of what was transpiring until recently. Whatever the case, foes of this proposal made themselves heard last Wednesday, in the form of hisses, boos, and catcalls in response to the Planning Commission's 8-0 vote to recommend approval of a conditional use permit for the property in question. What made this entire episode more than somewhat Tuesday, April 9, 1996 )ppose Group Home off-putting, in our book, was the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) nature of earlier comments, delivered during the public hearing. Now, granted, a neighborhood or a residential area has every right to question, or even challenge, anything that might upset the accustomed apple cart. Change is tough. to accept. However, such people have the responsibility to present their concerns honestly. The county residents who spoke against the Rose Memorial proposal, in our opinion, failed to do this last Wednesday. Continually, these people couched their opposition in terms of potential traffic problems; the roads, they said, could not handle the increase in vehicular flow from a home that would house 26 adults, provide day-care slots for 12 more, and boast a staff of 28. However, on March 6, the Planning Commission approved a master plan for the Hill Valley subdivision, a development that would place 54 new, single-family homes .near the intersection of Valley Mill and Greenwood. As Planning Commissioner Robert Morris asserted, traffic from 54 new homes would be greater than any generated by the Rose Memorial facility. But nothing resembling a hue -and -cry went up at the public hearing for the Hill Valley plan; only two people spoke against it. What this suggests to us is that traffic worries have little to do with the real reason why these county people oppose this facility. We believe they just don't want the home in their back yard. And that is why they took such umbrage with the comments of Tom Keenan, who spoke in favor of the proposal. "I think what we see here is fear," Mr. Keenan said. "We can hide behind the road, but what we're talking about is more homes. Some people may question if this home is good for the community. My question is, is this community good enough for this home?" These words, we dare . say, stung. But then that, we surmise, was their intent. If folks do not want something in their back yard, then they had better display the courage of their convictions in stating their case. Is traffic the greatest concern on Valley Mill, or is it the presence of, at most, 38 new — and, yes, decidedly different — faces in the neighborhood? +FRANK R. WOLF QMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS �s 10TH DISTRICT. VIRGINIA _ SUBCOMMITTEES: TRANSPORTATION -CHAIRMAN WASHINGTON OFFICE: 241 CANNON BUILDING ��}► �,r.,r TREASURY -POSTAL SERVICE -GENERAL WASHING TON,DC20515-4610 (�I Ott QKK of e lteb �tatP� GOVERNMENT (202) 225-5136 C • s s�/.I e; �yj�( Q QAAP�v�� ee FOREIGN OPERATIONS -EXPORT FINANCCONSTITUENT SERVICES OFFICES: 30ouge of Repreantatibeg COMMISSION AND RELATED PROGRAMS 13873 PARK CENTER ROAD COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND surrE RNON13022�� 20515�610 COOPER .UUROPE HE4703) 7 VA 80071 �'(� �� (7031 7093800 L� 1-(W%-945-9653 (WITHIN VIRGINIA) April 19, 1996 110 NORTH CAMERON STREET WINCHESTER, VA 22601 (703) 667-0990 Mr. John Riley County Administrator Frederick County 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22602 Dear Mr. Riley: I am writing on behalf of my constituents who have contacted me regarding a matter your jurisdiction. I recognize that this is not a matter within federal jurisdiction but falls exclusively under the authority of your local government. However, I would still like to take this opportunity to forward my constituents' letter to you so that you have an opportunity to respond to these concerns. If you have any information on this matter which you would like for me to provide to my constituents, I will be glad to forward it. It would be helpful if you could direct any return correspondence to the attention of Mrs. Donna Crowley at my Winchester office. FRW:dc Enclosure COPY TO: (605 rn& y/� /Pe4cr4u) —JLL _.WHS_CWO _RMS_RCS —MBD DATE: ORIGINAL: FILE__ Frank R. N Member of, THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS • 532 Valley Mill Road Winchester, VA 22602 April 12, 1996 Mr. James L. Longerbeam, Chairman 318 Longview Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Dear Mr. Longerbeam: 199r This letter is in reference to the home for the mentally disabled which is being talked about and was approved by the planning commission to be constructed on Valley Mill Road. We are home owners who live on Valley Mill Road across the street from where the house is being planned. We would like to express to you the dangers of allowing this home to be constructed on Valley Mill Road. We do not have a problem with handicapped citizens, but we do think that the safety of these citizens should be considered. The road is dangerous! Not only in bad weather but even on a clear day. The traffic on Valley Mill Road should be a factor in deciding anything. First, the citizens who live on Valley Mill Road do not always obey the speed limit. The Sheriff's Department has on many occasions ran radar to try to cut down on some of the speeders. Secondly, the turn on which the home would be located is dangerous. The bank is eroding away in places, but that does not seem to bother the department of transportation or anyone else in authority for that matter. Even though we have only live there a short time (approximately three years), we have been subject to many different and dangerous circumstances. We do not appreciate the ringing of our door bell in the middle of the night, but on the other hand, we do not feel we should leave someone stranded at any hour of the day or night. Over the past few years we have receive many unwanted guests at all hours of the day and night. This is due partly because of bad weather and partly because of out of town citizens who do not know the road have tried to turn around before going down the hill and have put their cars in ditches and had to be towed out. Do keep in mind, when someone is stranded due to an accident or whatever the case may be, we will help how we can. Mr. James L. Longerbeam, Chairman April 12, 1996 Page two We have a normal healthy twelve (12) year old child. The school bus driver did not feel that it was safe for her to pick up our child on Valley Mill Road. Mr. Charles Puglisi, director of transportation and Mr. Richard Rankin, assistant director of transportation sat in our driveway for one hour one day to determine if the road was safe or not. It only took them one hour to determine that the bus stop needed to be moved due to the safety of our child. Our child now has a special bus stop behind our home. She is the only person to be picked up at her stop. Under the circumstances, we do not feel that it would be in the best interest of the disabled citizens to be subject to the hazardous conditions of the road. We feel that the Board should just take a long look at the traffic and the condition of the road before a decision is made as to the outcome of the housing project. If you would like to talk with us, please feel free to call, after 5:00 PM Monday -Friday or anytime Saturday or Sunday. The phone number is 662-6218. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Respectfully, Cly L. VanMeter Carol A. Van -Meter PC: Margaret Douglas Richard Shickle W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Robert M. Sager Charles W. Orndorff, Sr. Senator Russ Potts Delegate Beverly Sherwood ,Jfonorable Frank Wolfe M I April 15, 1996 Mrs. Nina R. Simmons 466 Valley Mill Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 RE: Response to Questions Raised Dear Mrs. Simmons: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 I am in receipt of your letter, addressed to Mr. Watkins, regarding the Conditional Use Permit Application of the Rose Memorial Foundation. We appreciate your concerns and have attempted below to answer the questions raised in your correspondence which pertain to planning. In an effort to more accurately address the remainder of the questions related to the nature of the proposed facility and the cliental it would serve, Mr. Greg Strosnider, Executive Director of the Rose Memorial Foundation, has provided the attached memorandum. Question 5: "What impact the realignment of ValleyMill and Greenwood Roads will have on the property and what is VDOT's target date for the project?" The latest plans as described by Mr. William Bushman, P.E., Resident Engineer at the VDOT, Edinburg office, depict a realigned Valley Mill Road going to the North of the existing structure on the Dove parcel. Mr. Bushman points out that prior to public hearings, the precise alignment of the improvement is uncertain. The design, as currently conceived however, would not adversely affect the proposed use of the property, and would in fact greatly improve the travel conditions in the area. As with any other State road project, if the ultimate design were to require condemnation of a portion, or all of the Dove property, the State would be obligated to compensate the owners. The realignment is presently scheduled to go to bid in the Spring of 1997. Question 6: "What criteria did the committee use to evaluate the application before recommending approval?" The application was not reviewed by a "committee." The application process required that the applicant obtain comments on the proposed use from the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Frederick County Inspections Department, the Fire Marshal, and the Sanitation Authority, as well as the City of Winchester. These comments were obtained and, along with other application materials, were reviewed by the planning staff. 107 North Kent Street -- Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 E 9 Mrs. Nina R. Simmons Page 2 April 15, 1996 Upon reviewing the application materials, the Planning Staff anticipated no public health, safety, or welfare impacts that would preclude the proposed use of the property. Our recommendation to the Planning Commission was for approval of the request. In reference to this question, some background on the permit that is being requested may be in order. There are a variety of zoning categories within Frederick County. Each zoning category (or "district") carries with it a distinct set of regulations which apply to the land designated to be within that particular zone. In addition, each zone has certain uses which are permitted "by -right," meaning that they are allowed without any additional review or approval. Other uses are listed as "conditional," which means a permit must be obtained for such uses. All land within the County has been designated as one "zone" or another. The Dove property is zoned Residential Performance (or "RP"). According to Chapter 165, of the Frederick County Code, the use proposed by the Rose Foundation is a permitted use in the RP Zone with a Conditional Use Permit. Question 6,c.(2): "Since VDOT's minimum site distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance, reference was made that a traffic light could be placed at the entrance. Expand on this as to how it would be safely possible with the curve and hill as it exists now and if VDOT has been contacted. " Prior to a site plan being approved for any use of this parcel, all relevant review agency comments will need to be satisfactorily addressed. There are a number of measures that could be taken to improve sight distance, including relocating the entrance. A traffic signal is unlikely. Question 8: "The local newspaper stated that two public meetings had been held without opposition. When and for what purpose?" A public hearing was held on February 26, 1996 in the Frederick County Court House. The Planning staff conducted the hearing to receive input on housing needs within the community for the purpose of preparing a Community Development Block Grant application. A second public hearing was held on March 13,1996 in the Frederick County Court House. The hearing was before the Board of Supervisors. This hearing was to receive input from citizens regarding the County's intent to apply for a Community Development Block Grant to help fund the Center for Community Living. Both hearings were advertised in the Winchester Star and repeatedly through public services announcements on WINC, Q 102, and the local cable channel. 0 Mrs. Nina R. Simmons Page 3 April 15, 1996 I hope you find this information helpful. Please let me know if I can provide any additional information. Sincerely, Kris C. Tierney, AICP Deputy Director KCT/rsa cc: John R. Riley Jr., County Administrator Board of Supervisors Members Mr. Gregory Strosnider, Rose Memorial Foundation Mrs. Peggy Morrison, Poore & Associates a lore' Woo a. �t _ _ ,,� �U u)s W111C1.s_'Stoi_r� T-,,.. -.��,)' ��� 05 April 13, = _aq RRD.$9$•' ��, Pip FREDERICK mr. John Ri.! e.y' , 7ount-7 Admi'7. Administta+��Ot�NN q Fred.eric;� �Cn`tfc� 'Q. ' 07 N. i.'e1;.t. � � Winchester A.22t�(1:' �t.L A��►�IT�' Deal:` Sir: i am writing this letter to axpres s my s.'treli]e r::nger ,about liow I an," other citizens !were tre�t�:'.C' a.t ':lla Ap_--- 1996, meet-i ng of tht-:� Frederick County a_ln :_:C; Commission. I would 1i :? to quote the winchester Star article at appeared in the April 4, 1996, i.=sue Sect,oli B. "Af_t=-1,: breezi ng through two _),.iblic~ hearings without opposition. aplanned 6-1,ed home for the mentally hand.ic,-App-�d slammed into a wall of Sir, if this = s true this means thcit -here w-_re r_ wi Previous "aubl t' meetings of which I 6jas not A]ac-!' —1he only-:ntic- I rece-L ed is C'.ated. 20, it says t'i-at the public, meet nig '_s ^1. April 3. 1'99r-. outraged ._ha.. T_ was riot, ric::r °lt?r my r..ei aware of th-t s.e meetina. . °Phe concent c;.t a. public ]:'eering .'_ti' to _.,71Vf_ ti_C: the ;o?'.b1iC.' .m par of .`.his ;]ublic PiV VOlC' i(".} i .. considered a onq witli the (`,t'l7,er '_es-"dentS of 4lia surr�,ind.inc] area. Of the four or fiv? ;who .,pokey =o_ :le proposed development. at least two did '.lot even ' i .__i the neighborhood that is e:,rpected to 'house t.hi development. As Vm .,ire you know the planning commiss .on for this pl:oj ect over the objections of tl-,e ,citizens at th meeting. Approximately twenty peopl,a camE- podium to sneak against the -proposed. hone, Fram s'lolw of 1lalld dll additional �0 people, wilo Iav riot have r =t comfo2:t2.bir' Ln a public Spf'c?,King ;it,_Iat- o]' , -^;f_II,e ..YI attendance to try to hav`� their f, 'elir s )e 'sn(:-Wr_ and taken into account. still, cannot underst and ;low t'.ie pe---pla -n thy, planning < Oi:'.il'.it3Sit_11 Cal'1; h:)-`'7 no r?eoaze. - it'. ar:siweL'S to the -publics c'once-rn . all(, overOf SO O MFMy �,�ot3 �, ass silc:i ,3 A public shoLi.LQ conce,.-1 of _-he c i.ti af-aris . It ;^iaf. ji:_)tL not f ?.C�.:.tL'�:accp��.. �!.'J''> 1iestih,J yw 1. _r'� t.t. _. •�__. .J�� -. .. , _ 1- W Z ac t t,liat it i f l d'- 17 f,.1 this 'way a. 7 work --rl: r bother a, t as), anyt.'-Li?-f7 f ill i ')e treated wi!,-'p ri-(7l'it as '-t z ell One t h majc�rjitv TI-IiIs maeti:.- f --�--,Cw':-A MY th,�It the. 't the i,--Is 11C) 121 c.-tht''rs wnc,, ct� ':hey wisil—I sincered: — Josei.)h A. • 0 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS FRAi K R. WOLF 10TH DISTRICT, VIRGINIA WASHINGTON OFFICE: 241 CANNON BUILDING WASHINGTON,DC 20515-4610 (202) 225-5136 CONSTITUENT SERVICES OFFICES: 13873 PARK CENTER ROAD SurTE 130 HERNDON,VA 22071 (703) 709-5W 1-4800)-945 -9653 (WITHIN VIRGINIA) Congrog; of the Uniteb *tatez JOoua of Aeprrantatibeg Waoington, MIC 20515-4610 April 12, 1996 110 NORTH CAMERON STREET WINCHESTER,VA 22601 (703)667-OM Mr. John Riley, Administrator County of Frederick 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Mr. Riley: SUBCOMMITTEES: TRANSPORTATION -CHAIRMAN TREASURY-POSTALSERVICE-GENERAL GOVERNMENT FOREIGN OPERATIONS -EXPORT FINANCING AND RELATED PROGRAMS COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE APR 1996 (r-- F1RfDF&1CK COUN•i'•Y rw ?O Adminht►?$Om Office , 7 7 I am writing on behalf of my constituents who hav�`� contacted me regarding a matter under your jurisdiction. I recognize that this is not a matter within federal jurisdiction but falls exclusively under the authority of your local government. However, I would still like to take this opportunity to forward my constituents' letters to you so that you have an opportunity to respond to these concerns. If you have any information on this matter which you would like for me to provide to my constituents, I will be glad to forward it. It would be helpful if you could direct any return correspondence to the attention of Mrs. Donna Crowley at my Winchester office. With warm regards, FRW:dc Enclosures Sincerely, gress THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS .. • E ,,2anur&Donald ,toy 476 Ua11ey Mi l I R , x�N Winchester Ua.22, /y April �t h 1996 S APR { 9g6__ Dear Congressman Wolfe REGIZIVF-13 -4 FKEDLEIcK CQUNN a 10 t h district r:9 t�dminlstrrs Off 'Ca cam' 110 N.Cameron St. Winchester Ua, 22604 Ps your constituants My husband and I strongly oppose the building of 'hard to serve' Mentally I11 home to6=located at 549 Ualley Mill Rd.Winchester Ua,22602 We retired and came to Winchester to live a Quiet and peaceful life in our Golden Years. Coming from a large City we did not realize that Ualley Mill Rd.is a ma main artery for this area,unfortunately,Nobody ever brought this to our attention. To have a home of this nature in our neighborhood would impose an even greater burden on this road.It would also mean a loss of Ualue on our homes. To have a home like this would be a travesty. Please dont permit this home to be built. Thank You. We rermain, sincerely yours. P.S. The use of Hud funds would be unfair Please ask HUD to deny the financing of this prooerty. 466 Valley Mill Road Winchester, VA 22602 April 5, 1996 The Honorable Frank R. Wolf 110 N. Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Congressman Wolf: 14 1616 �� rl !� APR 1905-- > FRsDERICK %OUNI-Y �Q0 Adimosti ofim Offica a a BY We know that your office would not normally enter into the political waters of a local governing body. However, we learned that this project is to be financed by HUD and as a member of your constituency, I would like to express my feelings about an issue where I feel you can make a difference. In fact, I beg for your assistance. 1. The Rose Memorial Foundation (a non-profit organization) of Winchester, Virginia, who acts as Contract Agent of the Northwestern Community Services Board, applied for and was granted (over the opposition of approximately 70 to 100 homeowners) a Conditional Use Permit through the Frederick County Planning Commission for an adult residential and day-care center for the "HARD -TO -SERVE" mentally ill consisting of 26 beds and 12 daycare slots to be located at 549 Valley Mill Road, Winchester, Virginia. This is a property that is zoned residential performance to the north, east, south, and west and is totally surrounded by residential neighborhoods. The property currently sets on a narrow two-lane country road that is already overburdened with traffic, has no sidewalks, or public transportation. To my knowledge, no meetings were held regarding the impact of this commercial -type establishment going into a community where roads are already overburdened, nor have we been able to determine from anyone what "HARD TO SERVE" means. We need to know if HUD is financing a building that will thrust ex offenders to include pedophiles and criminally insane into our neighborhood, can this building eventually be turned into a detox treatment center for alcohol and drugs or what are the long-term plans that would justify HUD financing. a. We also need to remember that Frederick County is only beginning to experience real growth in population and has no laws to allow your constituency an appeals process other than through elected officials. We have no processes to appeal a planning commission decision nor is there any means for a lawful agreement as used in other jurisdictions that would provide a limited means of protection from such zoning action. Honorable Frank E. Wolf Page 2 April 5, 1996 2. Our Board of Supervisors will be our last chance. However, it is my feeling that somehow the above -referenced project was founded on a "quick fix" politically incorrect situation from the encouragement I received to contact my State Officials and you while discussing the matter with my County Supervisor, Mr. Harrington Smith. Neither do we have an avenue of appeal with the Board of Supervisors other than through the judicial system at our personal expense. 3. Good governments tax and spend wisely. As we believe this property will be financed by HUD, we are therefore asking you to intervene on behalf of approximately 70 homeowners who appeared at the planning commission and others who voiced opposition by means of petitions of this conditional use permit for what we felt were valid reasons. Someone has to protect the taxpaying citizens who also have rights. Please investigate the situation fully, and ask HUD to deny financing of this property based on the facts that tax money should be spent wisely to benefit the majority for long and lasting gain, not to destroy communities. 4. Further, we ask that you continue to support your constituency, by advocating accountability and responsibility of governing bodies at all levels. Any time or consideration given on behalf of the above issue is appreciated. Sincerely, /,Z�t4, R. Simmons 466 Valley Mill Road Winchester, VA 22602 April 5, 1996 Mr. Robert Watkins Frederick County Department 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 APR 1996 REC-IVYU GS' DEPT. OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT .� of Planning and Development Re: Conditional Use Permit #002-96 for 549 Valley Mill Road Dear Mr. Watkins: After conferring with County Supervisors regarding the above - subject permit, I was advised by Mr. Robert Sager, Opequon District, to direct a list of concerns to your attention with a specific request that you provide a copy of your response to all County Supervisors. Therefore, this hand -carried letter is being delivered to your office on Monday, April 8, in an effort to expedite response prior to the April 24th meeting of the Board of Supervisors. A follow-up copy will also be sent by U.S. Mail. 1. Please define "HARD -TO -SERVE" mentally ill. 2. Will this facility house criminally insane to include ex - offenders such as rapists, pedophiles and felonists? 3. Will this facility serve as a half -way house? a. According to records filed with the County, this facility anticipates over a 3-year period, the residential care would serve 30 residents and the day- care would serve up to 80 clients based on a 12-hour weekday operation. Please explain the turnover as it sounds like a training facility. 4. Will it act in the capacity of a de-tox center for drugs and alcohol, now or in the future? 5. What impact the realignment of Valley Mill and Greenwood Roads will have on the property and what is VDOT's target date for this project? a. When asked if the road could cause condemnation of this property, the representative of Rose Memorial simply deferred saying they would do whatever was needed by the County. How could a permit be approved and construction begin as early as September, 1996, if the County has no idea what VDOT's location for the road is? Mr. Robert Watkins April 5, 1996 Page 2 6. What criteria did the committee use to evaluate this application before recommending approval? a. Was there any consideration given as to whether it would have a detrimental physical, visual, and monetary impact on the neighboring properties; b. Result in undue traffic congestion, light, or noise; C. Result in undue water pollution of the creek and the environmental impact on treed area (not developable) adjoining the property; (1) When the question was asked, "Would we be looking at fences such as a prison," it was misconstrued by proponents of the facility that we wanted fences. Is the fence(s) shown on the conceptual site plan standard 4 foot height chain -link type or what? How will it affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood? (2) Since VDOT's minimum site distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance, reference was made that a traffic light could be placed at entrance. Expand on this as to how it would be safely possible with the curve and hill as it exists now and if VDOT has been contacted? �7. Address the security measures that this facility would put in place to prevent their residents from wandering out into the road and on our properties. ,8. The local newspaper stated that two public meetings had been held without opposition. When and for what purpose? 9. The Foundation's representative stated the goals were to take the clients shopping and participate in community activities. What activities? We have no public transportation, no sidewalks, no park, no church, no community pool. 10. What happens to this facility should funding become limited or difficult? The Rose Foundation is already depending on the launching of a $300,000 local fund drive. • Mr. Robert Watkins April 5, 1996 Page 3 Your assistance with the above will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Nina R. Simmons cc: Mr. James L. Longerbeam W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Margaret Douglas Robert M. Sager Richard C. Shickle Charles W. Orndorff, Sr. r f.1 466 Valley Mill Road Winchester, VA 22602 April 5, 1996 Mr. Robert Watkins Frederick,County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Conditional Use Permit #002-96 for 549 Valley Mill Road Dear Mr. Watkins: After conferring with County Supervisors regarding the above - subject permit, I was advised by Mr. Robert Sager, Opequon District, to direct a list of concerns to your attention with a specific request that you provide a copy of your response to all County Supervisors. Therefore, this hand -carried letter is being delivered to your office on Monday, April 8, in an effort to expedite response prior to the April 24th meeting of the Board of Supervisors. A follow-up copy will also be sent by U.S. Mail. 1. Please define "HARD -TO -SERVE" mentally ill. 2. Will this facility house criminally insane to include ex - offenders such as rapists, pedophiles and felonists? 3. Will this facility serve as a half -way house? a. According to records filed with the County, this facility anticipates over a 3-year period, the residential care would serve 30 residents and the day- care would serve up to 80 clients based on a 12-hour weekday operation. Please explain the turnover as it sounds like a training facility. 4. Will it act in the capacity of a de-tox center for drugs and alcohol, now or in the future? 5. What impact the realignment of Valley Mill and Greenwood Roads will have on the property and what is VDOT's target date for this project? a. When asked if the road could cause condemnation of this property, the representative of Rose Memorial simply deferred saying they would do whatever was needed by the County. How could a permit be approved and construction begin as early as September, 1996, if the County has no idea what VDOT's location for the road is? Mr. Robert Watkins April 5, 1996 Page 2 6. What criteria did the committee use to evaluate this application before recommending approval? a. Was there any consideration given as to whether it would have a detrimental physical, visual, and monetary impact on the neighboring properties; b. Result in undue traffic congestion, light,, or noise; C. Result in undue water pollution of the creek and the environmental impact on treed area (not developable) adjoining the property; (1) When the question was asked, "Would we be looking at fences such as a prison," it was misconstrued by proponents of the facility that we wanted fences. Is the fence(s) shown on the conceptual site plan standard 4 foot height chain -link type or what? How will it affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood? (2) Since VDOT's minimum site distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance, reference. was made that a traffic light could be placed at entrance. Expand on this as to how it would be safely possible with the curve and hill as it exists now and if VDOT has been contacted? 7. Address the security measures that this facility would put in place to prevent their residents from wandering out into the road and on our properties. 8. The local newspaper stated that two public meetings had been held without opposition. When and for what purpose? 9. The Foundation's representative stated the goals were to take the clients shopping and participate in community activities. What activities?. We have no public transportation, no sidewalks, no park, no church, no community pool. 10. What happens to this facility should funding become limited or difficult? The Rose Foundation is already depending on the launching of a $300,000 local fund drive. Mr. Robert Watkins April 5, 1996 Page 3 Your assistance with the above will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, d Nina R. Simmons cc: Mr. James L. Longerbeam W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Margaret Douglas Robert M. Sager Richard C. Shickle Charles W. Orndorff, Sr. Cl • • C 0 V E R FAX S H E E T To: GREG STROSNIDER @ ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION Fax #: .*Tl"-1466 667 Subject: Letter re: Conditional Use Permit Application Date: April 9, 1996 Pages: 4 , including this cover sheet. COMMENTS: From the desk of... Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Planning Department 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 S40-665-5651 Fax:S40-678-0682 h*•xY";,�'''i � cr,kr�'r�.ate.:........_..,.....+..;t.+ji+:,�t�;+Ftt+,}rrr}:}frfi/,k*****k***** P.01 TUE 14:34 .-. rr.r.:}+.+va+.rr.4****+**********,***? °r**** • • i Robes-t E. I�t M• CkP 466 Valley Mill Road Winchester, VA 22602 April 5, 1996 Mr. Robert Watkins Frederick County Department 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 0.rt�,' Ift 4 .r. �J A PR 19P� c. CFP7, LF Pl,4pl;11ttG AND DEVEI0PMEtjT of Planning and Development COPY FOR YOUR Re: Conditional Use Permit #002-96 for 549 Valley Mill Road Dear Mr. Watkins: After conferring with County Supervisors regarding the above - subject permit, I was advised by Mr. Robert Sager, Opequon District, to direct a list of concerns to your attention with a specific request that you provide a copy of your response to all County Supervisors. Therefore, this hand -carried letter is being delivered to your office on Monday, April 8, in an effort to expedite response prior to the April 24th meeting of the Board of Supervisors. A follow-up copy will also be sent by U.S. Mail. 1. Please define "HARD -TO -SERVE" mentally ill. 2. Will this facility house criminally insane to include ex - offenders such as rapists, pedophiles and felonists? 3. Will this facility serve as a half -way house? a. According to records filed with the County, this facility anticipates over a 3-year period, the residential care would serve 30 residents and the day- care would serve up to 80 clients based on a 12-hour weekday operation. Please explain the turnover as it sounds like a training facility. 4. Will it act in the capacity of a de-tox center for drugs and alcohol, now or in the future? 5. What impact the realignment of Valley Mill and Greenwood Roads will have on the property and what is VDOT's target date for this project? a. When asked if the road could cause condemnation of this property, the representative of Rose Memorial simply deferred saying they would do whatever was needed by the County. How could a permit be approved and construction begin as early as September, 1996, if the County has no idea what VDOT's location for the road is? Mr. Robert Watkins April 5, 1996 Page 2 6. What criteria did the committee use to evaluate this application before recommending approval? a. Was there any consideration given as to whether it would have a detrimental physical, visual, and monetary impact on the neighboring properties; b. Result in undue traffic congestion, light, or noise; C. Result in undue water pollution of the creek and the environmental impact on treed area (not developable) adjoining the property; (1) When the question was asked, "Would we be looking at fences such as a prison," it was misconstrued by proponents of the facility that we wanted fences. Is the fence(s) shown on the conceptual site plan standard 4 foot height chain -link type or what? How will it affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood? (2) Since VDOT's minimum site distance requirements are not met at the existing entrance, reference was made that a traffic light could be placed at entrance. Expand on this as to how it would be safely possible with the curve and hill as it exists now and if VDOT has been contacted? 7. Address the security measures that this facility would put in place to prevent their residents from wandering out into the road and on our properties. 8. The local newspaper stated that two public meetings had been held without opposition. When and for what purpose? 9. The Foundation's representative stated the goals were to take the clients shopping and participate in community activities. What activities? We have no public transportation, no sidewalks, no park, no church, no community pool. 10. What happens to this facility should funding become limited or difficult? The Rose Foundation is already depending on the launching of a $300,000 local fund drive. Mr. Robert Watkins April S, 1996 Page 3 Your assistance with the above will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, iti�R. Simmons cc: Mr. James L. Longerbeam W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Margaret Douglas Robert M. Sager Richard C. Shickle Charles W. Orndorff, Sr. FILE COPY COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 March 11, 1996 Mr. Kerm Schroeder Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. 365 National Avenue Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Receipt of Conditional Use Permit Application for Center for Community Living Dear Kenn: This letter is to confirm our receipt of your Conditional Use. application. The application will be heard by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on April 3, 1996. The Commission makes a. recommendation to the Frederick County Board of Supervisors who in turn hold a second public hearing. We would anticipate the Board hearing the application at their regularly scheduled meeting of April 24, 1996. Please let me know if I can answer any questions concerning the status of your application or the approval process. Sincerely, Kris C. Tierney, AICP Deputy Director cc: Mrs. Peggy Morrison 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 M ArrrrMWTI ON N = GHBaRS OF' L=>n0B'ERTY AT 549 VAL L.E Y M I L L R O A D The Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc. has applied for a Conditional Use, Permit #002-96 for The Center for Community Living which is a proposed adult residential and daycare center to be located at 549 Valley Mill. Road with a target population of "HARD -TO -SERVE" mentally and/or physically disabled adults. Individuals from 18 years and older with disabilities ranging from moderate to profound would be served by the facility. The immediate plans are for a 26 bed adult care resident with a 12 slot adult daycare program. , It is anticipated the residential care would serve 30 residents over three years and the.day care would serve up to 50 different individuals during the first year and up to 80 over a'three year period, with a total staff of•--28 persons, based on its 12 hour weekday operation and the turnover of clients. Funding for the individuals' care or training would be from the Medicaid State Plan Option and/or Mental Retardation Waiver System of reimbursement per a fee -for service arrangement. The develop- ment cost for the Center for Community Living is $1,141,893. Frederick County is being requested to apply for the maximum giant of $ 7 00, 0"g 1h 'CDBG ' funds of which '$644, 000 will be.. used to expand the existing building by an additional 7,580 S.F., ,and $56,000-is setaside for grant administration. In addition, $125,000 will be provided by Rose Memorial. The expected potential gross income is $618,820 and the annual operation expenses have been projected at $524,043. . , I strongly feel the above -proposed establishment is a commercial enterprise and should not be approved by the Frederick County Planning Commission because of -the problems it will create for our residential communities such as excessive traffic on a road that is already over burdened and the impact an establishment such as this will have on property values. If this zoning is NOT stopped, the project could begin as early as September i996, and be operational by December, 1997. The proposed site which is totally sourrounded by residential properties is an existing ranch style home located at 549 Valley Mill Road situated on 3.29.acres. -A conditional use permit is REQUIRED under the County's current, zoning ordinance to change the residential zoning. The public hearing meeting is scheduled for April 3, 1996 at 7:00 P.M. in the Board Room of the old Frederick County Courthouse in Winchester. All interested parties PLEASE -PLAN ON BEING THERE!!! Ralph Simmons Property Owner at 466 Valley Mill Road iJ 44� /ice�' ldU�°t�Elt uil� --ter �• -ski Ell JIM r AI now p `JJJM Y � � r AV 11 L. - - - - . r PETITION TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO OPPOSE THE APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #002-96 OF THE ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION The following signatures #002 )96: ' NME 4, A�7 OPPOSE the conditional use permit, ADDRESS 'J, �jl"A�ell w 3 C (oJer dg 1E C+W'^ (444tor In P0-6blibvcdc Zr • 0 PETITION TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO OPPOSE THE APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #002-96 OF THE ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION The following signatures OPPOSE the conditional use permit, #002-96: NAME MO Vic ADDRESS / � zip z ! '� C4� ,�Ja` 1 /` C' X, r LEA - 1 zy PETITION TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO OPPOSE THE APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #002-96 OF THE ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION The following signatures 4002-96: NAME OPPOSE the conditional use permit, ADDRESS T 05- VAW 30K 1-.s c± 16711 log cloyydaZ.4 CoUA- %c-�-r I� II , I I I 2� PETITION TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO OPPOSE THE APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #002-96 OF THE ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION The following signatures OPPOSE the conditional use permit, #002-96: NAME 1- ADDRESS IIOC�ycro�r�7'l A 0 0 PETITION TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO OPPOSE THE APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #002-96 OF THE ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION The following signatures OPPOSE the conditional use permit, #002-96: NAME ADDRESS /D 2 k014A PC- l) /� X (ilia , e/ Z zF oZ� io S4- W lLI CIVA-60 VA x 6'DZ zz�oZ PETITION TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO OPPOSE THE APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #002-96 OF THE ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION The following signatures OPPOSE the conditional use permit, #002-96: ADDRESS j To Whom it May Concern, I C_•sFn by contract approximately 26 .skies adjoining `"..-ha L.,o#e tract on Valley Mill Road. i find no objection to he Rose Hill Memorial sal Foundation request for their intended use. This is an area ear enough to city services and labor availability and is surrounded by townhouses, q rental units, another school and proposed condominiums/apartments. This site will be on an "island'' e€ahen V€ OT completes its projected work on the roadways. What better use could be made of the property. Thank you in advance I remain, Sincerely! Dave Holliday �V President EAB / s._ 79C. P.O. BOX 2715 - WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 - (540) 667-2120 - FAX (540) 667- 5414 State Registration #A-013864 0 �7_ PUBLIC HEARINGS: 3 Conditional Use Permit Application #002-96 of Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation to operate a licensed home for adults and adult care facility. This property is located at 549 Valley Mill Road and is identified with PIN 55-A-56 in the Stonewall District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Mr. Miller gave the background information and review agency comments. Mr. Miller said that the proposed use falls under the category of convalescent and/or nursing home and is permitted in the RP Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit. He said that the staff suggests that the Foundation address the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) comment that insufficient site distance exists and this location. Mr. Miller said that VDOT has also stated that they currently have a project for this section of Route 659 which is in the preliminary design phase. Mr. Miller added that an engineered site plan will be required for the construction and conversion of this facility and all issues that are surfaced now or during the site plan process will need to be adequately addressed prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued. Mr. Gregory Strosnider, Executive Director of the Rose Memorial Foundation, said that they have been in contact with Senator Russ Potts Office and Delegate Beverly Sherwood to obtain the best guess estimate of where the new road would be going and we have adjusted our plans accordingly. Mr. Strosnider said that they have been working with Frederick County in the submission of community development block grant funds and the submission date was March 29. (Response back probably late May, early June) (putting out to bid late summer, early fall) (go to closing and begin construction in Sept.) Mr. Strosnider described the facility, stating that it will be a Department of Social Services licensed adult care that would service three levels of care --residential, assisted living, and intensive assisted living. Fully handicapped accessible; Two separately licensed programs: a 26- bed (16 of those beds are slated for assisted or intensive -assisted living.) And a 12 slot licensed adult day care (would not live there). 3.29 acre lot; 28-member total staff over three shifts. Mr. Sager said that this is going to be one of the most congested areas when all the development is finished; off of Valley Mill Road and off of Greenwood Road; --why did you choose this area? Mr. Strosnider said reasons were the ownership of the property, the price, the location. We feel it is an excellent location. Chairman DeHaven called for citizens wishing to speak in favor of the application and the following persons came forward: 4 OMrs. Janet Bixby, was present on behalf of Bill Fuller and Access Independence, said that from their daily experience, they feel there was a real need for this type of facility. I can not imagine why what really amounts to an apartment complex in terms of its effects on its surroundings would be a problem. These people need places to live. I feel this could be a good facility and is very much needed judging by the number of phone calls we get on a regular basis for housing. Valuable project for the community. Mrs. Jeanne Brown, with her son Mark, said that they have been residents of Frederick County for the passed eight years. Mrs. Brown said that her son, Mark, graduated from N-Rep School in June of 1995 and from then until now he has no where to go and nothing to do because of a lack of facilities. Mrs. Brown said that she was fully in favor of the day program that her son would be able to go during the day while she works, and would be given the therapies that he daily needs. She said that her son, and other children like him, are in wheelchairs, are non-verbal, they are not a threat to the community, they are not aggressive or destructive. Mrs. Brown said that she has been a resident of Brentwood Terrace for the passed seven years and she was sure that most of her neighbors that were present did not even know where she lived. She said that her son does not go onto the neighbors property, has not done anything to any of them. She felt the neighbors did not want this facility at this location because of the stigma. J Mrs. Cheryl Farris, with her daughter Katlyn, said that her daughter is currently attending school full-time at N-Rep and they have been residents of Frederick County for four years. Mrs. Farris said that since age 2, Katlyn has activily participated in regular activities with peers, professionals, therapists, and teachers. Mrs. Farris said that she can not physically provide all that stimulation, care, and recreation alone, even with the help of her family. She said that without adequate day care, she can not even think about returning to work or continuing her education. She said that if something happened to her husband and she was forced to seek employment, Katlyn would not have anywhere to go. � Mr. Murry Smith, President of the Northwestern Workshop, said that Northwestern Workshop serves about 100 disabled people in this community for the passed 25 years. Mr. Smith said that as proud as they are of this facility, they can not provide a residential facility. He said that this community needs is an overall plan that covers 24-hour a day care. Mr. Smith said that the Northwestern Workshop is in favor of this application. eMs. Mooney Christovitch, President of the Arc of Northern Shenandoah Valley, formerly the Association for Retarded Citizens, emphasized the humane aspect of this issue. That we are talking about people first and secondly, people with physical and mental disabilities and special needs. She said that 30 years ago, people with disabilities in our community were sent away to institutions for care and services. She said that society no longer values that method of treatment and has moved towards providing services and care within the community. She urged the community not to take a step backward, but to step forward and grant the proposed CUP to enrich the lives of the people with disabilities in our community. • 5 Chairman DeHaven read a letter that the Commission received from Mr. Dave Holliday in support of the proposed conditional use permit. Chairman DeHaven called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the conditional use permit and the following persons came forward: a Mr. Ralph Simmons, resident at 466 Valley Mill Road, said that he was in opposition to the proposed CUP. Mr. Simmons said that he gathered from records at the Planning Department that there would be 80+ people dropped off and in approximately three years there will be in the neighborhood of 150 clients and employees at this location. No one knows when the roads will be built. Mr. Simmons said that he was the Vice President of the Brentwood Terrace Homeowners Association and he has canvassed the community and is speaking for the majority of the homeowners and submitted a petition containing approximately 100 signatures. Mr. Simmons said that an operation of this size constitutes a commercial enterprise and the proposed size is totally out of proportion for this residential area. Surrounded by a narrow, two-lane country road that is already over -burdened. To place extra traffic on this road will almost certainly mean grid -lock for the homeowners attempting to get out of their driveways, jeopardize the safety of area children, and would be detrimental to the clients of the proposed establishment. Mr. Simmons said that no one has described this operation or the proposed clients to the residents of the community. 0 Mr. Simmons wanted to know what constituted "hard to serve" clients? Will there be people from prisons or half -way homes, detox, or pedefiles? Could this turn into drug rehab center, a half -way house, home for sex offenders? Will there be a fence? Traffic will be generated from vendors and deliveries of food, medical supplies, linens, and other miscellaneous supplies. Mr. Simmons asked for a show of hands from people in the audience who were opposed to the conditional use permit (approximately 20-30 people). Mr. Simmons also had a problem with not seeing a public hearing sign on the property. Mr. Tierney said that the numbers that Mr. Simmons was quoting were projected cummulative totals over a three-year period. It will be a 26-bed facility with 12 day-care slots and will not exceed that. Mr. Miller said that the sign is required to be posted seven days prior to the public hearing and the sign in question has been posted 12 days before the public hearing. 0 Mrs. Patricia DArcangelis, adjoining property owner, said that as an educator, she is fully aware of the humanity of the issue and agree the children need some place to go. Mrs. DArcangelis said that this site was not appropriate for several reasons: 1) it did not belong in an area of single-family residential homes; 2) traffic generated from the facility will aggrevate an already difficult situation; 3) 28 staff members means 112 trips per day; 4) community sentiment 0 is strongly in opposition; 5) the 7,000 square foot area is too large for this small area; 6) the proposed site is steeply sloped. Mr. Danny Strosnider, resident at 470 Valley Mill Road, said that he spoke with Mr. Jerry Copp of VDOT and Mr. Copp said that the location for the new proposed road has not yet been decided and he felt the road being relocated would cause changes to that whole area. He said that the client geographic service area for this establishment will be the Lord Fairfax Planning District 7, which he felt was a large service area. Mr. Strosnider also questioned the term "protected environment." He said that this type of facility will be taking persons that regular nursing homes will not. Mr. Strosnider felt this was a needed service, but not in an area of single family residences. He also stated that the traffic was terrible in this area now and will probably get worse. Mrs. Merk Koon, neighborhood resident, said that she has highway stakes in her front yard for the proposed road and now she has this proposed facility crowding her from the side. Mrs. Koon said that she is in this location because the county and the city condemned her 80-acre farm for sewage plant. She felt she was being crowded out and she was opposed to the cup. Mrs. Grant High, 106 Windcrest Circle, said that she sympathized with the parents of the handicapped children. Mrs. High said that this is going to be a business and this was not the right location for a business because it was so confined. TMrs. Pamela Gillum, 100 Woodys Place, Carlisle Estates, said that she can see the front of the proposed building from her back deck. Mrs. Gillum said that this property is not safe for handicapped children because it is very steeply sloped and the road is dangerously curved. She said that the road was so dangerous that cars have ended up in neighbors yards. Mrs. Tracy Finn, 118 Pioneer Road, was concerned about the traffic on Route 656. Mrs. Finn said that the traffic on Route 656 was horrible due to all the construction traffic, the additional Redbud traffic, the additional school buses. She said that motorists use her subdivision street to make a "B-line" for the 7-11 Store. Mrs. Finn said that her street is unsafe for her children to play. Mrs. Finn felt this facility would add to this traffic problem. Mrs. Finn presented a petition of opposition with signatures from residents in the area. CO) Mrs. Moreen Schray, resident at Brentwood Terrace, said that she moved here from Manassas to get away from the congestion there. Mrs. Schray said that she drives this road every day and almost every day she has to stop just around the bend to allow another car to go through. She said there is a lot of speeding. 0 Mrs. Pam Crank, resident at Brentwood Terrace, said that she can also vouch for how dangerous this curve is. She said that the property in question is along this curve and the property is very steep. Mrs. Crank felt there was not enough yard available for the children WA attending the facility to be out outside and be safe. She felt that a better location could be found where the children could be outside and be safe. (fa)Mr. Dennis Collins, 102 Woodys Place, said that it was his yard that an automobile crashed through. Mr. Collins said that he called VDOT to see about getting a guardrail put in and the state said that they did not have the money to do it. Mr. Collins said that Harrington Smith, Shawnee District Board Representative, was out to this area checking water run off and saw what remained of his lamp post laying over. Mr. Collins said that if there is snow and ice, motorists cannot make it up the hill. The road is many time overcome with water. He said that this road has been on the Road Improvement Plan for six years already and he does not forsee it being improved any time soon. The roads are not only curved, but they are very narrow. Mr. Collins felt this facility would negatively effect his property value. He felt the facility should be located in a B2 Zoning District. 13 Mr. Mark Boczar, 457 Valley Mill Road, said that this is not an appropriate location for a commercial enterprise. Mr. Boczar said that this road is already overloaded with traffic now. Mr. Boczar felt this facility would generate more traffic through employees, deliveries and services, medical supplies. Mr. Boczar didnt see how they could accomodate the building plus all the parking on this lot. 6� Mr. Joseph A. DArcangelis, adjoining property owner, said that this was not the proper location for a commercial enterprise. Mr. DArcangelis said that he has been waiting for seven years for road improvements and nothing has been done. He said that he phoned the Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation and never had his call returned. He felt this type of growth was harmful and haphazard and will have an adverse effect on the surrounding area. He felt it was not consistent with community sentiment. 0 Mr. Jeff Sikes, resident of Brentwood Terrance, felt the road could not handle any additional traffic. He also felt his property values would be negatively impacted. He felt this was not the proper location for this facility. ® Dr. Thomas Keenan, Frederick County property owner, said that he can understand the emotional issues of both sides, the parents of the handicapped children and the residents of the area; however, Dr. Keenan felt that what he was seeing was fear. He felt the neighborhood residents were hiding behind the issues of traffic, property values, etc. He said that the additional 50-200 homes that have been approved for this area on this same road will add much more traffic to the area than this facility. He felt that as a community, we should be asking whether or not we "need" this facility. He said that many philosophers have said that the measure of a community is how they handle those who are less fortunate than they are. Dr. Keenan felt the question was not whether these kids and this home was good for the community, but is this community good enough for this home? 0 Mrs. Lynn Collins, 100 Woodys Place, said that she did not want this in her back yard, not because of their disabilities, but because of the road. Mrs. Collins said that it was her lamp post that was destroyed when a car that went off the road. She said that if her children would have been in the yard at that time, they would have been hurt. She said that in severe weather, her street becomes a parking lot because motorist cannot get through on the road. 0 Mr. Donald P. Joy, 476 Valley Mill Road, said that he was originally from New York City and he knows what a traffic problem is. Mr. Joy said that this road is very treacherous and he often fears for his safety. He said that the speed limit sign was changed from 45 to 35, but that has not solved the speeding problem. DYMr. Jeff Gillum, 100 Woodys Place, said that both he and his neighbors have put up fences to block out the view of the road. Mr. Gillum said that he is originally from Reston, Virginia and moved from there because the houses were so close together. Mr. Gillum said that his house is directly below the house in question. Mr. Gillum was concerned about the size of the proposed structure and said that he will be looking at a 9,000 square foot structure from his back yard. He was concerned about a decrease in property values. He also felt the road was terrible and needed improvements. He felt the only reason the applicant wanted this property was because of the money issue. Its been for sale for three years and they got a good deal on it. 01q Mr. and Mrs. Mark Todd, 106 Woodys Place, was concerned about the traffic, especially when the new school is built. He said the traffic on this road is very bad. The entrance to this facility is on a blind curve and a steep slope. In severe weather, the road is impassible. There will be no yard available for the children to be able to be outside in nature. The proposed facility is located on a steep hill. ® Mr. David Cotrell, 107 VanBuren Place, said that the proposed structure is located at the top of a steep hill. 0 Ms. Debbie Overstreet, resident of the Stonewall District and mother of a handicapped child, said that the children attending this facility will be supervised at all times. She wanted to know if the parents in the neighborhood could say the same about their children. Ms. Overstreet said that if the traffic and roads have been such a problem, why havent the neighborhood residents come before the Commission before this. She wanted to know why it took the Rose Memorial Foundations proposal to bring everyone in. Mrs. Overstreet asked the neighbors to help the parents of the handicapped children find a suitable location if they did not want this facility located here. `P Mr. Robert Landis, 104 Woodys Place, said that this is not the place for the proposed facility. Mr. Landis said that traffic is an issue, safety is an issue. Mr. Landis said that this is a business trying to locate in a residential area purely for profit. Mr. Landis said that the neighborhood residents do not want this facility at this location. Chairman DeHaven closed the public portion of the meeting and gave Mr. 0 I Strosnider an opportunity to address the concerns raised. Mr. Strosnider said that Rose Memorial Foundation is a 5010 charity corporation. He said that there is no profit and this is not a "for profit" business. Mr. Strosnider said that the reason these people do not have a place to live is because they do not have money. They have to depend on community non-profit organizations to develop housing for them. Mr. Strosnider said that he still felt this was a good location and that they could meet any of the requirements as far as the site plan was concerned. In answer to a commissioners question on the total number of residents at any given time, Mr. Strosnider replied there would be 12 day care people, 26 residential persons, for a total of 38 served, plus supervising staff. It was noted by one of the Planning Commissioners that as recently as one month ago the Hill Valley proposal was brought in for consideration at this same location. This proposal was for 54 single family detached cluster homes and none of these people were present to talk about traffic problems. It was noted that 54 homes would create a lot more traffic than this proposed facility. Other members of the Commission felt that the traffic generated by this conditional use permit would certainly be less than if this property was converted into an additional housing development through a master development plan. Commissioners were very sensitive to the traffic problems, the road problems, and the growth problems in this community. J. Ellington: There are no simple answers to complex problems. Everyone has said that this facility provides a needed service, but not in a single-family residential neighborhood. If it is not in a residential area, then where is it appropriate --in B2 or an industrial park? I remain unconvinced that this is not an appropriate site. Supported the cup. Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Thomas, Unanimous for approval. I NUTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (home he Frederick County Planning Commission ll hold a public hearing on April 3, 1996 at 7 m. in the Board ROOM of the Old Frederick ount Courthouse in Winchester, Virginia, to er a following: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICA- ON #002-96 of the Robert E. Rose morial Foundation, to operate a licensed for adults and adult care facility. This perty is located at 549 Valley Mill Ro-d and dentified with PIN 55- \ S6 in the Stonewall trict. Z ONC ,� , n "�60la F. 2. An amendment to Chapter 165, Zoning of the Frederick County Code, Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165-23, Setback Requirements. The pro- posed amendment will establish survey stan- dards for primary structures and accessory are located gf vet feet or lesser than 500 s from bueding set knack lines. 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. Further information may be Obtained at the Department of Planning & Development, 107 North Kent St., 4th floor, Winchester, Virginia or by calling (540) 665 5651. BY: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission W.0 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 I J�rlr,rr\rlo, Jr PUBLIC' HEARRIG April 10, 1996 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND /OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) f E: APPLICATION OF ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION, INC. On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified.of a public hearing Being held at their regular meeting on April 24, 1996, at 7:15 p.m., in the board room of the Old Frederick County Courthouse, Winchester, Virginia. This hearing is to consider the application of Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc., Conditional Use Permit #002-96, to operate a licensed home for adults and adult care facility. This property is located at 549 Valley Mill Road and'is identified with PIN 55-A-56 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this meeting. A copy of the application is available for review at the Handley Public Library or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, VA. Sincerely, W. Wayne iller Zoning Administrator W WM/cg 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 " This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on ,Virginia:a�lovq%� from th�partment of Planning and Deve ent, Frederick C 55c 3 A. 10 55 A 56F CARLISL.E ESTATES DOVE:, VERA V 104-4 TIMBERLAKE TERRACE STE:PHENS CITY, VA 22655-- 55 A 55 KOON, MYRTLE A 543 VALLEY MILL RD WINCHESTER, VA 22602-- 55C 7 5 17 SMITH, DAVID E & DEHRA M 105 VAN HUREN COURT WINCHESTER, VA 22602-- 55C 7 5 t9 GROVES, GREG:ORY V . 104 VAN BURE:.N CT WINCE -(ESTER, VA 22602-- 55C 7 5 25 L.ARRICK, J. RANDOLPH & WILLIAM WARD T/A R & R PROPERTIES P O BOX 444 WINCHESTER, VA 22604-- 55C 3 1 1 G I L.LUM , JETT-ERY A & PAME:L.A DENISE 100 WOODYS PLACE WINCHESTER, VA 22602- 741 WOODLAND AVENUE WINCHESTER, VA. 22b01 - 55C 3 1 2 COLLINS, DENNIS D. & LORRIE L. 102 WOODYS PLACE WINCHESTER, VA. 22602-- 55C 3 1 3 F'E:DERAL HOME: LOAN MORTGAGE CORP C/O NORWEST MORTGAGE INC 405 S DES MOINES, IA 50309-4626 55C 3 1 4 TODD, MARK E & SHELBY D 1.O6 WOODYS PLACE: WINCHESTER, VA 22602- 55C 3 1 5 D'ARCANGELIS, JOSEPH A 108 WOODY'S PLACE WINCHESTER, VA 22b02- k v - - v . Wayne Mille , Zoning A i istrator Frederick Coun y Dept. of Planning STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK I, Pj�ho- HQ11 a Notary Public in and for the state and county aforesaid, do hereby certify that W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated AQL I I() I gCfLJ2 has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my state and county foresaid. Given under my hand this day of ,197i!/. My commission expires on V-v—,A LL —icjq NO Y PUBLIC I March 20, 1996 COUNTY of FREDERICK .Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 ICAMCNtI A I JF PUBL 1C rlsA IM IG TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND /OR ADJOINING TROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: APPLICATION OF ROBERT E. ROSE MEMORIAL FOUNDATION. INC. On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held at their regular meeting on April 3, 1996, at 7:00 p.m., in the board room of the old Frederick (,ounty Courthouse,.Winchester, Virginia. This hearing is to consider the application of Robert E. Rose Memorial Foundation, Inc., Conditional Use Permit #002-96, to operate a licensed home for adults and adult care facility. This property is located at 549 Valley Mill Road and is identified with PIN 55-A-56 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this meeting. A copy of the application is available for review at the Handley Public Library or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, VA. Sincerely, W. Wayn Miller Zoning Administrator WWM/cg 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 This is to certify that the attached correspondence was ailed to the following on March 20, 199b from j& Department of Planning and De�opment, Frederick County, Virginia: 5"5C 3 1 1 -- .-. 55 DOVE, VERA V 104-4 TIMBERLAKE TERRACE STEPHENS CITY, VA 55 KOON, MYRTLE A 543 VALLEY MILL RD WINCHESTER, VA 55C SMITH, DAVID E & DEHRA M 105 VAN BUREN COURT WINCHESTER, VA 55C GROVES, GREGORY V. 104 VAN HURE:N CT WINCHESTER, VA A 560 22655--- A 55 22602- 7 5 17 22602-- 7 5 18 22602- 55C 7 5 25 L.ARRICK, J. RANDOLPH b WILLIAM WART T/A R & R PROPERTIES P O BOX 444 WINCHESTER, VA 22604-- 55C 3 1 5 D'ARCANGELIS, JOSEPH A 108 WOODY'S PLACE WINCHESTER, VA 22602— GIL.LUM, JEF'FERY A & PAME:LA DENNIE 1.00 WOODYS PLACE WINCHESTER, VA 22602- 55C 3 1 1.0 C:ARLISLE ESTATES 741 WOODLAND AVENUE WINCHESTER, VA. 22601— 55C 3 1 2 COL.LINS, DENNIS D. & LORRIE L. 102 WOODYS PLACE WINCHESTER, VA. 22602- 55C 3 1 3 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORP C/O NORWEST MORTGAGE INC 405 S DES MOINES. IA 50309--462e4 55C 3 1 4 TODD, MARK E & SHELHY D 106 WOODYS PLACE WINCHESTER, VA 22602— W. Wayne Miller, ning Administrator Frederick County tept. of Planning STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF-�F�REDERICK I, &} I A. Hal I , a Notary Public in and for the state and county aforesaid, do hereby certify that W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated V • a0 • q (-'0 , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my state and county foresaid. Given under my hand this 1911) day of m Q rc ,lq% My commission expires on Febr-u aftl C)R 1gg9 %,-_ N TA PUBLIC Application Process Evaluation We would like to learn from you what we might do to improve this process. Please complete this form and submit it to the Planning Department. You can submit it to us separately from the application if you wish. You may submit it anonymously. 1. Which type of application did you complete? Rezoning Master Development Plan Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Subdivision _ Variance 2. Which part, if any, of the application process did you find particularly difficult? (Check as many as you wish) Completing the application form Tax verification Agency review comments _ Adjoiner identification information V Other (please specify) 3. Did you have a discussion with a staff member before submitting the application? Yes \! No 4. Were you able to receive the assistance or information that you needed from the stag? Yes NO What additional assistance or information would have been useful? 5. What portion of this process took the longest for you? Completing plans Completing the application form Tax Verification Agency review comments Other (please specify) 6. What do you think could have been done differently to make this process quicker? 7. Do you have any suggestions about what we could do to make this process work better?