Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-94 Fieldstone Heights (Rev) - Shawnee - Backfile (2)1 * STAFF MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHECKLIST * This application is not complete if the following are not included: SUBMISSION PACKAGE 1. Comments sheets from the following agencies along with any marked copies of the plan; VDOT City of Winchester ✓ Sanitation Authority Health Department Inspections Dept. ✓ Parks & Recreation ✓ Fire Marshal `County Engineer zl One copy of the master development plan application ✓ 25 copies of the plan on a single sheet One reproducible copy of the plan (if required) A 35mm. slide of the plan TRACKING Date 0* Application received IFee Paid (amount $ y0 63..16 ) 09 Preliminary MDP heard by Planning Commission - Action taken 1g&P� 101/ - hHion : Appv061—' &• 0• Preliminary MDP heard by Board of Supervisors - Action tak 6"f- r0011Ke Letter to applicant regarding action and revisions. 0— Final MDP submitted with review agency, P/C and BOS comments addressed. O� Final MDP signed by County Administrator and Planning Director. (send two copies to applicant) d'Ba� ),ey'td o, Binw+lrl_ �y Info added to *#Pr"ej 2'XQ'"� ar.d fio rt ��,rY,+.ce *0011A&I-1 .1d 1 awo_� M Wpt�' �tiL suWvjsoti PLa, coMes tl,. RECEIPT N2 024089 AMOUNT DUE U $y AMOUNT PAID BALANCE DUE $CE 1/! CASH CHECK OTHER T. OF PLANINING AND DEVELOPMENT r.0. OVA bU1, 9 NORTH LOUDON ST. WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 DATEA,, RECEIVED FROM ADDRESS�� AIM CLlndyARS THE SUM OF - ,/ —1 I FOR �zf , BY DAY -TIMERS RE -ORDER No. 3221 — Printed in USA COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 February 27; 1996 Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates Att. Stephen M. Gyurisin 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Revised Fieldstone Heights Master Development Plan Approval Dear Steve: This letter is to notify you that the revised Master Development Plan for the above referenced project was administratively approved by Frederick County on February 26, 1996. The revised master development plan is approved for the development of 169 single family detached traditional lots within the 102.11 acre tract. This tract is zoned RP, Residential Performance District, and is identified as Property. Identification Number 55-A-181. Enclosed for your records are three copies of the final Master Development Plan with the appropriate signatures. Please .distribute approved copies to the property owners and maintain an approved copy for your records. Please contact me if I may answer any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Evan A. a W tt Y Planner II EAW Enclosure cc: Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., Stonewall District Supervisor George Glaize Ben Butler 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 September 30, 1994 Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates Attn: Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Fieldstone Heights Final Master Development Plan Information Dear Steve: The above referenced plan was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on July 6, 1994 and by the Board of Supervisors on August 10, 1994. The recommendation of final approval was based on the applicant addressing all review agency comments. Therefore, the following information needs to be provided for this application: 1) Please include information in the Phasing Schedule Table that describes the environmental features, as well as the amount disturbed within each phase. 2) Please provide a note on the plan that states: "Access connections to the Fu-Shep and Giles tracts not required due to significant steep slopes." 3) Please provide a note that describes the intent of the steep slope easement. 4) Please provide a note that states: "Minor disturbance of floodplain and wetland areas has been permitted by the Planning Commission under Section 165-31B(1) of the Zoning Ordinance." 5) Please provide a copy of the approved permits from DEQ and the Corps of Engineers that allows the disturbance described under item #4. 6) Please revise the plan to indicate all steep slope areas that will be disturbed. It appears that a portion of steep slope area along Channing Drive and Flagstaff Court will be disturbed when these road segments are constructed. 7) Please update the legend to indicate and describe the * symbol that appears in the southeastern portion of this plan. 8) Please increase the width of the phase lines. It is difficult to differentiate the phase lines from the sanitary sewer lines. 9) Please provide a signature on the Professional Engineers Certificate. 10) Please provide an approval block for the County Administrator and the Director of Planning. 11) Please provide an approved comment letter from VDOT. I had an opportunity to discuss the outstanding requirements with Bob Childress. In particular, items 1,2, and 9 specified in the letter from Bob Childress to Tom Price dated April 19, 1994 need to be resolved. 9 North Loudoun Street Winchester, VA 22601 P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22604 Page -2- Gyurisin Letter September 30, 1994 Please provide our department with six copies of the final Master Development Plan to address the comments specified in this letter. I will obtain the necessary approval signatures once this has been accomplished. Please contact me if I may answer any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, �Yj a_. 1� Evan A. Wyatt Planner II EAW cc: Bob Childress, VDOT P/C Review Date: 5/18/94 P/C Review Date: 7/06/94 BOS Review Date: 8/10/94 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #003-94 FIELDSTONE HEIGHTS (revised) LOCATION: South and adjacent to Route 659 (Valley Mill Road), 2300+ east of the intersection of Route 659 and Route 656 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 55-A-181 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) Land Use - vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) and RA (Rural Areas) - land use, residential and vacant PROPOSED USE: 169 single family detached, traditional homes REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: See attached letter to G. W. Clifford & Associates from W. H. Bushman dated April 19, 1994. Fire Marshal: Hydrant placement as shown will not comply with Chapter 10 of the Frederick County Code. Hydrants must be within 400' of each dwelling. All other fire related issues will be addressed on site plan. Sanitation Authority: 1st review - 14 items - correct and resubmit. County Engineer: See attached memorandum to Evan Wyatt, Frederick County Planning and Development, from Harvey E. Strawsnyder, County Engineer, dated June 20, 1994. Parks & Recreation: No comments. Planning &,yZoning: A master development plan was approved for Fieldstone Heights on February 16, 1988. The approved 2 plan called for the construction of 215 single family detached traditional dwellings, with an average lot size of 12,150 square feet. The applicant has submitted a revised master development plan for this project. This revision calls for 169 single family detached traditional dwelling units, with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. The revised master plan is proposed to have an overall gross density of 1.66 units per acre. The overall allowable gross density for a development of this size is currently four units per acre. Developments with minimum lot sizes of 15,000 square feet require no open space. Staff identified a number of issues that were discussed during the May 18, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. In particular,; these issues involved floodplain and wetland disturbance, steep slope easements, storm water management, and the location of roads and building lots in areas of significant steep slope topography. As a result of these issues, the applicant requested that this application be tabled until there was adequate time to address these comments. The applicant has attempted to address the issues identified during the May 18, 1994 meeting as follows: 1) Floodplain and Wetland Disturbance - The Planning Commission permitted the Zoning Administrator to allow for the disturbance of a small portion of area defined as floodplain and wetland as provided under section 165-31B(1) of the Zoning Ordinance. This approval was granted provided that the applicant obtain all required permits from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Army Corps of Engineers prior to the crossing and filling of this area for the proposed entrance road into this site. 2) Steep Slope Easements - The proposed plan calls for portions of individual building lots to be placed in steep slope easements. The plan indicates that these easements will extend from the southern side of Abrams Creek into the development. During the May 18, 1994 meeting, the applicant agreed with staff and stated that the purpose of the steep slope easements would be described in detail in the deed of dedication for this development. 3) Storm Water Management - The County Engineer comments require this development to maintain on -site storm water management. The master development plan has been revised to provide three on -site storm water management areas (the previous plan only indicated one storm water management area). These storm water management areas were provided after a meeting between the applicant and the County Engineer. The County Engineer will have an opportunity to review detailed storm water management plans during the subdivision planning process. 4) Roads/Building Lots In Steep Slope Areas - The staff and Planning Commission questioned the ability to create functional roads and building lots in the southeast portion of this site due to significant steep slopes. The applicant has revised the layout of Monterey Drive and Sanford Court to attempt to mitigate some of these concerns. The County Engineer has reviewed this road realignment and recommends that this layout be approved. The County Engineer will require detailed site plans for all building lots in areas of significant steep slopes prior to the issuance of any building permits. This will provide an opportunity to assess the impacts within the steep slope areas and ensure that the building lots are developed properly. It should be noted that the realignment of Monterey Drive eliminates a potential road connection to the Fu-Shep Farm Partnership parcel. Also, there is no road connection to the George W. Giles parcel from this parcel. However, the Fu-Shep parcel has approved connections along the southern property line. These connections are planned to connect to Morning Glory Drive in the Apple Ridge Subdivision, and Canyon Road in the Senseny Glen Subdivision. There are no road connections through existing or planned residential subdivisions to the Giles parcel. However, it should be noted that this parcel has substantial road frontage along Senseny Road. 5) Other - The applicant needs to address the comments made by VDOT. In particular, this involves the review and approval of a complete traffic study and the dedication of sufficient right-of-way along Valley Mill Road for future improvements. The applicant needs to update the phasing schedule to include the amount and percent of environmental area disturbance that is proposed for each phase of development. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 5118194 PC MTG.: Approval, provided that the applicant adequately addresses all staff comments, all required review agency comments, and addresses all comments and concerns of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION OF 5118194: Tabled. The Planning Commission tabled the revised master development plan application during the May 18, 1994 meeting. This action was based on concerns regarding the proposed road layout, functional building lots, storm water management, and disturbance of environmentally sensitive areas. The applicant requested that the master development plan application be tabled for thirty days to allow adequate time to address all concerns of the Planning Commission. 4 (Absent: B. Wilson and G. Romine) STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 7106194 PC MTG.: Approval, once the applicant has adequately addressed all review agency comments, as well as all comments and concerns of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION SUMMARY OF 716194: The Commission felt that the applicant's proposals for addressing concerns regarding the road layout, functional building lots, stormwater management, and disturbance of environmentally sensitive areas were adequate. There were no citizen comments. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION OF 716194: Unanimously recommends approval once the applicant has adequately addressed all review agency comments, as well as all comments and concerns of the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. 0 0 4 right-of-way street that served the back lot be designated as "restricted access" to service only that lot. Mr. Miller said that this had been taken care of on Page 3 of 3 of the subdivision plat and clearly designates "exclusive use right-of-way for Parcel B only." Mr. Ray Robinson was present to answer questions from the Commission. There were no review agency comments that needed to be addressed and there were no obiections to the proposal. Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Subdivision Application #003-94 of Ray Robinson, Jr. to divide one lot, consisting of 1.413 acres, into two lots. This property is designated by PINS 63-A-53 and 63B- 1-E and is located on Apple Valley Road, approximately .04 miles west of Valley Pike in the Back Creek District. (Vice Chairman Marker arrived at this point of the meeting.) Revised Master Development Plan #003-94 of Fieldstone Heights for 169 single-family detached, traditional homes. This property_ is located south and adjacent to Valley Mill Road in the Stonewall District. Action - Recommendation of Approval Mr. Charles Maddox, Jr., with G. W. Clifford & Associates, began by addressing some of the issues of concern from the Planning Commission's May 18 meeting. One issue was the ability to create functional roads and building lots in the southeast portion of the site due to significant steep slopes. Mr. Maddox explained revisions that were made to the layout of Monterey Drive and Sanford Court in their attempt to mitigate some of the Commission's concerns. He said that the revisions will also eliminate a tremendous amount of clearing and loss to woodlands. Mr. Maddox added that the County Engineer has recommended that the revised layout be approved, however, detailed site plans will be required for all building lots in areas of significant steep slopes prior to the issuance of building permits. It was noted by the Commission that the realignment of Monterey Drive eliminated a potential road connection to the Fu-Shep Farm parcel and the George W. Giles parcel. Mr. Maddox noted that the Fu-Shep parcel has approved connections planned along the southern property line and the Giles parcel has substantial road frontage along Senseny Road, both of which may be better access because of the level terrain. 3834 0 9 5 There was also a question about the proposed culvert underneath Sanford Court and concerns about it becoming obstructed with debris. Mr. Maddox felt that the 18"-24" pipe would be able to handle the situation and the worst case scenario would be an overflow onto the road. Mr. Wyatt reviewed the remaining issues of concern from the Commission's May 18 meeting: Regarding floodplain and wetland disturbances, the Commission has permitted the Zoning Administrator to allow for those under Section 165-3113(1) provided the applicant obtain all required permits from the DEQ and the Army Corps of Engineers; the steep slope easement will be described in detail in the deed of dedication for the development; the MDP has been revised to provide three on -site storm water management areas; the applicant will be required to address all VDOT comments and, in particular, the review and approval of a complete traffic study and the dedication of sufficient right-of-way along Valley Mill Road for future improvements. There were no citizen comments. The Commission felt that the applicant's proposals for addressing concerns regarding the road layout, functional building lots, stormwater management, and disturbance of environmentally sensitive areas were adequate and upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Revised Master Development Plan #003-94 of Fieldstone Heights for 169 single-family detached, traditional homes once the applicant has adequately addressed all review agency comments, as well as all comments and concerns of the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Conditional Use Permit #003-94 of Everett S. Riggs for automobile repair, without body repair, to be conducted in an attached garage. This property is identified with PIN 84-A- 18 and is located at the southeast corner of Hites Road and Cougill Road, in the Opequon District. Action - Recommend Approval with Conditions Mr. Miller said that the proposed activity is permitted in the RA Zoning District with an approved conditional use permit. He said that due to the close proximity to adjoining homes, it will be very important that all repair work is accomplished inside the attached garage, that there is no outside storage of parts or other materials, and that no inoperative vehicles be allowed on the property. He said that the number of vehicles awaiting repair should also be limited. Mr. Miller added that the review comment by the Inspections Department stated that BOCA requires a minimum two-hour fire separation between a residential and storage use. 3835 APPLICATION REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN Frederick County Virginia Date: 21 April 1994 Application # 003-94 OWNERS NAME: EASTERN FREDERICK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY • :•0 1' Winchester. Va 226Q& George W. Glaize. Jr., Benjamin M. Butler & Virgil T. Brown (Please list the name of all owners or parties in interest) APPLICANT/AGENT: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc Address: 200 N. Cameron St, Winchester, Va 22601 Phone Number: (703) 667-2139 DESIGNER/DESIGN COMPANY: same Contact Name: Tom Price 0 0 • • REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHECKLIST The following checklist is intended to assist the applicant in insuring that all required information is provided and to insure that all information is available to allow review by the County. This form must be completed by the applicant and submitted with the master development plan. All required items must be provided on the master development plan. Background Information: 1. Development's name: FIELDSTONE SUBDIVISION 2. Location of property: South & Adjacent to Rte 659 (Valley Mill Road). 23001± east of In x Rt, 659 & Rt 656 3. Total area of property: 102.11 Acres 4. Property ID #: 55-A-181 5. Property zoning and present use: RP (Vacant) 6. Adjoining property zoning and present use: RA (Vacant & Residential), RP (Vacant & Residential) 7. Proposed Uses: Single Family Detached - Traditional 8. Magisterial District: Shawnee 9. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan? Original Amended X 0 • General Information: 1. Have the following items been included? North arrow Yes_X No Scale Yes_X _ No Legend Yes_X__ No Boundary Survey Yes_X No Total Area Yes X_ No Topography Yes_X No Project Title Yes_X_ No Preparation and Revision Date Yes_X_ No Applicant Name Yes X No 2. Number of phases proposed? SIX (6) 3. Are the proposed phases shown on the Master Development Plan? Yes X No 4. Are the uses of adjoining properties clearly designated? Yes X No 5. Is an inset map provided showing the location of the project and all public roads within 2,000 feet. Yes X No 6. Are all land uses clearly shown? Yes X No 7. Are environmental features clearly shown? Yes X No 8. Describe the following environmental features: Total Area % Disturbed Area in Open Space Floodplains 13.8 6.0 0 Lakes and ponds 0 — 0 — 0 Natural retention areas 0 0 0 Steep slopes (15% or more) 31.0 15.0 0 Woodlands _32.0_ 7.0 0 0 • • 0 9. Are the following shown on the master development plan? Street layout Yes_XNo Entrances Yes X_ No Parking areas Yes No X Utilities (mains) Yes X No 10. Has a conceptual stormwater management plan been provided? Yes X No 11. Have all historical structures been identified? Yes No_X If the Master Development Plan includes any land zoned RP, (Residential Performance) or any residential uses, the following items should be completed. 1. What numbers and types of housing are proposed? 177 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED - TRADITIONAL 2. Is a schedule provided describing each of the following in each phase: Open space acreage Yes X No Acreage in each housing type Yes_) No Acreage in streets and right of ways Yes_X_ No Total acreage Yes_X_ No Number of dwellings of each type Yes X No 3. What percentage of the total site is to be placed in common open space? 0 4. Are recreational facilities required? Yes No X 5. What types of recreational facilities are proposed? N/A 6. Are separation buffers required? Yes No X 7. Are road efficiency buffers required? Yes No X • 0 8. Are landscaping or landscaped screens required? Yes No_X_ 9. Are required buffers, screens, and landscaping described by the plan with profiles or examples? Yes No X . • a1eed a � lr� 7/ztdsq J��, q-6w, REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHECKLIST The following checklist is intended to assist the applicant in insuring that all required information is provided and to insure that all information is available to allow review by the County. This form must be completed by the applicant and submitted with the master development plan. All required items must be provided on the master development plan. Background Information: 1. Development's name: FIELDSTONE SUBDIVISION 2. Location of property: South & Adjacent to Rte 659 (Valley Mill Road) 2300'+ east of Intx Rt 659 & Rt, 656 3. Total area of property: 102.11 Acres 4. Property ID #: 55-A-181 5. Property zoning and present use: RP (Vacant) 6. Adjoining property zoning and present use: RA (Vacant & Residential) RP (Vacant & Residential) 7. Proposed Uses: Sincgle Family Detached - Traditional 8. Magisterial District: Shawnee 9. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan? Original Amended X ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the public hearing. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a road from the re- quested property. The applicant is required to obtain the follow- ing information on each adjoining property including the 14 digit tax parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. Name: Elaine B. Lonaerbeam Address: Box 528 Be rryville, Va. 22611 Property I.D.#: 55-A-182D Name: William H. Schuller,Sr. Address: P.O. Box 897 Berryville- Va 22611 Property I.D.#: _55-A-181A ✓~ Name: Minnie Schull r /o Ken Schuller Address: 2138 Valley Mill Road Winchester,va 22601 Property I.D.#: 55-A-178 55-A-178A Name: Kenneth Schuller Address: 2138 Valley Mill Road Win hest r Va 22602 Property I.D.#: 55-A-177 Name: Gerald L. & Frances F. Ra_ey Address: 985 Valley Mill Road Winchester,Va 22602 Property I.D.#: 55-A-176A Name: Georgia wierman, est. ic/o Richard Bald Address: 327 Sweetbriar 77505 Property I.D.#: 55-A-176 Name: R. Mark Ritchi_ Address: 2270 Valley Mill Road Winchester.va 22602 Property I.D.#: 55-A-175A Name: Mill Race Homeowners Assoc, Address: _817 Dutton Place Win h ster_Va 22601 Property I.D.#: 55-A-175E Name: _Mark A. & Ann S. M hale Address: 2726 Valley Mill Road Winches r Va 22601 Property I.D.#: 55-A-165 Name: Lindon D. & Goldie L. Adams Address: _365 Eddvs Lane winchester.Va 22602 Property I.D.#: 55-A-210 Name: Fu-Shep Farm Par ner hip Address: _405 Briarmont Dr. Win h ster Va 22601 Property I.D.#: 55-A-209 Name: Elliot Delivery Service, Inc Address: P.O. Box 110 winch ster Va 22604 Property I.D.#: 55-A-204 s Name: C.C. Lonaerbeam Inc. Address: _P.O. Box 2018 -Winchester,Va 22604 Property I.D.#: 551-1-4-186 th i 204 551-1-4-234 thru 240 Name: _George E. Giles. als /o Wanda Hicrh Address: 2283 Senseny Road Win h er Va 22602 Property I . D . # : 65-A-3 9 3 - 2-52.A CAQL 5i.c isi&+m-s owN;�r�3 �ssoe.��-noti1 s 55 H - 1-3 - IB A &r3uRy TEme.c I-�oMc-a�.�w Assoc i A--nOJ VRyOC­ GkeV-r PQQ IDcQT I-7 Coat-r 1.���cH"3rc2 VA Z26oZ • 400 D GRAPHIC SCALE 200 400 800 ( IN FEET ) I inch = 400 ft. 65 1600 * Denotes lots requiring Site Grading Plan prior to issuance of building permit. FIELDSTONE SUBDIVISION * *I i � I-7/ CURYE DA 77,4 A�� TNc' /s ALA F� C' A = 8 8.9 5' 7= 44.64' CH= N8/'05 5B ""E Q_ J _— EQ-S T&-,eN ,6 = //° /0' 06 " R = /68Z. 86 ' A =367. 03' 7 = /64 0-9 C11= S8 7 °/4 %/"E 366. 43' F,QEDE-R/C.� �o E`er A = 398. 03' 7= 9'0/ //" Cf/= .S 7/ ° 916 "/7 " 6 396. 26 " A B R A M- 5 10 00 M_\ S \ Z 73 LAj. SEW. ES T O@\ �o fi Q V h 4 ACCE33 S /y00 Q �A:ae-95 s oo 0-9 •r,• NOTE: COMMON AREA SHOWN HEREON IS TO BE USED BY SECTIONS ONE, TWO, AND THREE OF MILL RACE ESTATES. FINAL PLAT -COMMON AREA MILL RAGE ESTATES SHAWNEE DISTRICT, FREDERICK CO., VA. ' SCALE : /" = ZOO' I DATE: OC'TOSER 27, 1987 II _ GREENWAY ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING CO.. INC. HT 6 BCIX 152C 'MILES EAST UN POUIE SO • 0 gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. INCORPORATED 1972 Engineers Land Planners Surveyors Water Quality Analyses Corporate Office: 150C Olde Greenwich Drive • P. O. Box 781 Fredericksburg, VA 22401 • (703) 898-2115 Winchester Office: 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, VA 22601 • (703) 667-2139 April 22, 1994 Mr. Kris Tierney Frederick County Planning Department 9 North Loudoun Street Winchester, Virginia 26201 RE: Fieldstone Heights Dear Kris, An application for revised master plan approval of the Fieldstone Heights project is attached along with all agency review comments and the appropriate fee as required. This application meets the April 25th cutoff, therefore we ask that this project be heard at the May 18th Planning Commission meeting for their recommendation If I can answer any questions or be of further assistance please give me a call. Sincerely Thomas W. Price Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. TWP/kf Encl. cc: George Glaize Ben Butler Virgil T. Brown BOARD OF DIRECTORS *E� Thomas J. O'Toole, P. E. Charles E. Maddox, Jr. ,P. E. Earl R. Sutherland, P. E. P. Duane Brown, C. L. S. William L. Wright, Laboratory Director 0 0 gilbert w. cli f ford & associates, inc. 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 9 Fax: 703-665-0493 July 27, 1995 Mr. Robert Childress Virginia Department of Transportation P.O. Box 278 Edinburg, Virginia 22842 RE: Fieldstone Heights Master Development Plan Dear Bob: In accord with your request, the attached transportation study is provided for your review. Providing this study completes all review comments for the pending Master Development Plan with Frederick County. Sincerely, gilbert w'clyford & associates, inc. Stephen"M. Gyurisin SMG/ 1s attyment i; cc: Mr. Evan Wyatt E E gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. INCORPORATED1972 Engineers Land Planners Surveyors Water Quality Analyses Corporate Office: 150C Olde Greenwich Drive * P. 0. Box 781 Fredericksburg, VA 22401 9 (540) 898-2115 Winchester Office: 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, VA 22601 • (540) 667-2139 memorandum To: Review Agencies From: Ron Mislowsky 0" Re: Fieldstone Heights Area Date: July 25,1995 Transportation Study Eastern Frederick Development Company is attempting to secure approval of its Fieldstone Heights Master Development Plan. In order to gain VDOT approval, the right of way width required for Channing Drive, a future collector, needs to be established. The right of way width determination was to consider full development of the area bordered by Greenwood Road on the west, Valley Mill Road on the north, future Route 37 on the east, and Senseny Road on the south. Furthermore, the future road plan for this area was to be implemented as the basis for traffic flow. Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates was commissioned by Eastern Frederick to study future traffic flows generated by development of the study area and recommended an adequate right of way width for Channing Drive. The study was to be provided to VDOT for their consideration and use in evaluating the suitability of the 80 ft. right of way called for on the current Master Development Plan. The study area consists of 1040.5 acres which as been marginally developed. Senseny Glen, Apple Ridge, Carlisle Estates, and Brentwood Terrace are the only existing development of concentrated single family housing. No significant commercial development is anticipated in the study area. A location map is provided on Figure #1. A density of 2.2 dwelling units per acre was used to establish the total number of houses at full development in the study area. Our traffic generation estimate is based on 2,289 lots. To determine trip generation by the study area, a factor of 10.016 was applied to the housing volume to develop total trip ends per day. The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 4th Edition generation rates are commonly accepted. The total trips generated on a daily basis is 22,928. Finally, the distribution of the site generated trips was assumed. There are nine points where traffic from the site can gain access to the major collector roads. Trips were routed to each of the access points based on probable destination and route convenience. The percentage of trips to each access point, as well as the future road network for the area are shown on figure #2. The trips per day on Channing Drive through Fieldstone Heights is estimated at 4,586. BOARD OF DIRECTORS *)EThomas J. O'Toole, P. E. Charles E. Maddox, Jr. P. E. Earl R. Sutherland, P. E. P. Duane Brown, C. L. S. William L. Wright, Laboratory Director Memorandum to Review Agencies Fieldstone Heights Area Transportation Study July 25,1995 The VDOT subdivision street requirements require a 24' pavement width and a 60 ft. right of way for local roads with daily trips over 4,000. It is our belief that the 80 ft. right of way proposed by the developer would meet all of VDOT needs for this roadway. According to 1993 traffic counts on Valley Mill Road, there are 401 trips per day on that road. In order to determine the lane requirements for Channing Drive at the future intersection it was assumed that the trips on Valley Mill Road double. It was further assumed that a vast majority of those trips are generated by single family uses. Using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, peak hour trips for Channing Drive and Valley Mill Road were estimated. The results are as follows: Channing Drive 4,586 TPD/10.016 TPD/Unit = 458 units 458 units x 1.012 TPH (p.m. peak hour generator) = 463 64% enter, 36% exit, 50% southbound Valley Mill Road 802 TPD/10.016 TPD/Unit = 80 units 80 units x 1.005 TPH (p.m. peak hour adjacent street) = 80 Assume 50% southbound Using these hourly trip rates an unsignalized T intersection was evaluated using the 3 lane layout on the local road and Valley Mill Road as proposed by the developer. This analysis reflects the methodology provided in the Highway Capacity Manual, SP209. The results indicate the intersection operates at a level of service "A". The calculations are provided in Figure #3. It is our opinion that the lane configuration proposed by the developer is adequate. The capacity of Valley Mill Road was not evaluated by this study. Surely growth in the area will effect its level of service. Future improvements to Valley Mill Road may be required to implement the County's Eastern Road Plan. Should questions concerning the calculations, attachments, or findings arise during review, please do not hesitate to contact the writer directly. �{w6a1A 'Alunoo jouapaij dew uoileoo-1 ApnjS uoile}aodsueal easy SIHO13H 3NOISa1313 6EGZ-L99-COL 109Zz `e!416aln `aa;sayoulM laags uoJaLueD 'N OOZ saxloossy pue pjoll!lo -M ljagl!J n ` a m /. 11// • / / 550 u •� \ In n / 0 - 4 I 61 Al J •• ••••-lC,'V ^ .� 1 > >\\�\\ (tea � //�J.. \ `°. -" _ // _ yy ED �,�-sue • I •, tw.• �,' l �• - _ 1�\ltf .\(� .+ y � � _ \ _ � �' WIN . 1• � ••\ ,l )� � , - III �� � _ u o' v. �, _ %// _.' -°��ta'O -�! F.; / _ ..i�C _. _ -• � � �•. � ., _ _.. �i'.-, i ')'ate � ' G. o—.1-.1 "R b 1f 146 TPD 5% !: T _............. .� 'r ;r 1146 D l� r 201 4586 TI �0;/ .. ......,�� 4,86 T IY 0 SAD T37 _Legend Arterial Major Collector --- --- Minor Collector — -- — -• Study Area Boundary Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. Fieldstone Heights Engineers Land Planners Surveyors Area Transportation Plan 150 C Olde Greenwich Dr, 200 North Cameron St, Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 898-2115 (703) 667-2139 Frederick County, Virginia SCALE none i or i 0I 1 LOCATION: Fieldstone Heights/Va Rte 659 NAME: ram HOURLY VOLUMES VOLUMES IN PCPH Major Street: Valley Mill Rd N- 40 - V(5) - V(5) V(2) - 40 147 - V(4) V(2) - 206 - V(4) V(3) - 146 V(3) - V(7) - 82 STOP V(7) - 115 83 V(9) YIELD 116 V(9) Date: weekday Time Period: PM Peak Hr N- Avg Run Spd: 35 Minor Street: Crooked Lane VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Movement No. 2 3 4 5 7 9 Volume (v h) 40 146 147 40 82 83 Vol. (pcph), Table 10-1 factor = 1.4 206 115 116 RT From Minor Street Conflicting Flow, V(c) 1/2 V(3) + V(2) = 113 vph(V(c9)) Critical Gap, T(c), and Potential Capacity,c(p) Actual Capacity, c(m) T(c) = 5.5 c(m9) = c( 9) = c(p9) = 1000 670 pcph pcph LT From Major Street Conflicting Flow, V(c) V(3) + V(2) = 186 vph (V(c4)) Critical Gap, T(c), and Potential Capacity,c(p) T(c) = 5.0 c(p4) = 1000 pcph Percent of c(p) Utilized and Impedance Factor Actual Capacity, c(m) (v(4)/c(p4))'100 = c(m4) = c( 4) = 20.58% 1000 P(4) = pcph 0.85 LT From Minor Street Conflicting Flow, V(c) Critical Gap, T(c), and Potential Capacity,c(p) 1/2 V(3)+V(2)+V(5)+V(4) = T(c) = 6.5 c(p7) = 187 730 vph(V(c7)) pcph Actual Capacity, c(m) c(m7) = c( 7) ' P(4) = 623 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITY C(sh) = v(7 + v(9) = 768.85 (v(7)/c(m7)) + (v(9)/c(m9)) Movement No v(pcph) c(m)(c h) c(sh)(c h) c(r) LOS 7 115 623 623 508 A 769 538 A 9 116 1000 1000 884 A 4 206 1000 794 A PROJECT NAME - Fieldstone Heights DATE - 20 July 1995 SITUATION: Full development of study area Figure 3 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department.of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 May 24, 1995 Virginia Department of Transportation Attn: Mr. William H. Bushman P.O. Box 278 Edinburg, Virginia 22824 RE: Fieldstone Heights Master Development Plan Dear Bill: I have had an opportunity to meet with representatives of the Commonwealth's Attorney Office to discuss the transportation and land ownership issues associated with the above referenced project.. The following information conveys Frederick County's position regarding these issues: Transportation - During our meeting with representatives of Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, the designer discussed issues associated with the Frederick County Eastern Road Plan, the willingness to dedicate an 80 foot right-of-way that will allow for the construction of a major collector road, and the desire to only develop the bridge, drainage, and three travel lanes at this time. Frederick County believes that this is appropriate unless the impact analysis determines that the traffic that is generated from the Fieldstone Heights project warrants an additional lane. If an additional travel lane is required through this project in the future, it will have to be funded through other means. Mill Race Estates Common Open Space - It is my understanding that the Mill Race Estates Homeowners Association decided to disband. It is the opinion of Frederick County that all property designated as common open space within the boundaries of the approved Mill Race Estates subdivision belongs to those property owners. A portion of the common open space may only be utilized for the proposed Channing Drive if equivalent property is taken from the Fieldstone Heights project and placed into the Mill Race Estates common open space area. Furthermore, the Fieldstone Heights developer would have to obtain approval from all property owners within the Mill Race Estates subdivision, and have the proposed transaction approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors. 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22604 • Page -2 ' Bushman Letter May 24, 1995 I hope this information is beneficial to your review of this project. Please contact.me if I may answer any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Evan A. Wyatt Planner II cc: Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Commonwealth Attorney John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator Robert W. Watkins, Planning Director Ronald A. Mislowsky, Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE DAVID R. GEHR P.O. BOX 278 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN, P. E. COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, 22824.0278 RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 January 23, 1996 Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin Ref: Fieldstone Heights Subdivision C/O G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. Area Transportation Study 200 North Cameron Street Routes 659 Winchester, VA 22601 Frederick County Dear Steve: We have completed our review of the impact analysis for the referenced development. Your study was based on the 4th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual and the Highway Capacity Manual SP209. The 5th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual gives slightly lower trip rates and the 3rd Edition of the Highway Capacity Manual updated in 1994 uses a different method of determining the anticipated functional characteristics of an intersection. However, when the later publications were used in our review the level of service did not change significantly. Based on the information provided, we agree with your estimated 4,586 trips per day on Channing Drive through the Fieldstone Heights development. However, your proposed distribution of traffic at the Channing Drive intersection with Route 659 is based on pure assumption. Depending on the type of future development in the area trips per day as well as distribution rates could change significantly. To this end an 80' right-of-way on Channing Drive which is now being proposed will be acceptable for the aforementioned 4,586 trips per day. This width meets VDOT's current subdivision street design requirements as well as the county subdivision ordinance. We made no attempt to project the volume of traffic on Route 659 when all the planned development adjacent to the roadway is completed. However, in all probability, Route 659 will require some type of improvements when this occurs. If you have any questions or wish to discuss the above, please let me know. Sincerely, Robert B. Childress Permits/Subdivision Spec. Supv. RBC/rf xc: T. L. Jackson, J. B. Diamond, S. A. Melnikoff, R. W. Watkins, George Glaize, Jr. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY 91011Ln 00 411 COMMONWEAL TH of VIRCjINI DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE - DAVID R. P.O. BOX 278 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN, P.E. COMMISSIONER GEHR COMIONER EDINBURG, 22824-0278 RESIDENT ENGINEER TELE17031984-5600 February 27, 1995 � FAX (703) 984-5607 Mr. Ron Mislowsky, P.E. Ref: Fieldstone Heights Subdivision C/O G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. Proposed Quadruple Box Culvert 200 North Cameron Street Route 659 Winchester, VA 22601 Frederick County Dear Ron: Upon further review of the referenced project's revised site plans dated December 21, 1994 please find our comments marked in red on the enclosed plans and as follows: 1. The easement access for the box culvert shown is inadequate. We understand the developer may have difficulty obtaining an easement downstream of the structure. However, as in our last review, VDOT needs adequate permanent easement or right- of-way for maintenance of the box and fill. VDOT maintenance vehicles need access to both ends of the box. As shown, the east end of the 60' right-of-way does not even cover the box. Although not directly a VDOT issue, it appears temporary easements are needed for construction of the diversion channel, box and fill. 2. The guardrail layout shown is inadequate. A. The two sections on the west side should be connected. B. Both sections to the south should be extended southward for now to Station 2+85, end of construction. When the roadway is extended then the guardrail will need to be extended and terminated appropriately. C. The northeast end needs to be extended to provide adequate protection from the box and fill. D The ends of all guardrail sections need proper terminal and site preparation (widening of shoulders to accommodate terminals). E. Final approval of guardrail layout will be done by VDOT's Traffic Engineering Section after grading is nearing completion. 3. The toe of fill along the proposed right turn lane on Route 659 will need to be shown by some method such as proposed contours, cross sections, or fill line. 4. The temporary diversion ditch is 40' in detail, but scales 20' on the plan. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY Mr. Ron Mislowsky Ref: Fieldstone Heights Subdivision February 27, 1995 Page 2 5. The temporary diversion ditch is shown over an existing sanitary sewer main. Is the sewer main deep enough not to be a problem? The sewer will also need to be shown on the profile sheet. The easement for the sanitary sewer will need to be quitclaimed within the proposed right-of-way prior to our acceptance of Channing Road into the Secondary System. 6. The profile shows a very large cut from Stations 5+00 to 10+00. While not to be constructed during this phase we do want to point out the possible problems and expense this may cause. For example: If a layout similar to that shown on the January, 1994 Sheet 1 of 1 Flood Study Plan is planned, it appears to us that: • The next two intersections (Highcliffe and Kingsley) are in 20' and 10' cuts. This would result in high grading costs. • The profiles of those street connections and entrance profiles might have problems. • Side hill cuts on the left would even be higher since the terrain rises to the west. • It appears many of the lots fronting Channing Road would not be usable due to the cut slopes. • The typical section shows a 3:1 cut slope. This would put the top of the cut slope even further back on the lots. We assume you are aware of these difficulties but mention them for your benefit. 7. Proposed and future drainage flowing north to Station 4+00 and then to Station 2+00 has not been addressed. The proposed "temporary grade" is a fill that ties into an existing swale at Station 3+72. The future combination of very large cuts, the 8.5% grade, and the transition to fill slopes left and right of Station 3+50± will require special attention, probably including paved ditches. Two plans, one for this phase and one for future phases, may be needed. 8. In your last letter to this office you questioned the requirement the box culvert be cast -in -place. This issue is related to foundation requirements. See items 6 and 7 in our last letter (copy enclosed) to you of December 1, 1994. During our previous review, we had discussed this installation at length with our District Bridge Section. We felt the least expensive combination was to recommend a cast -in -place box and reduce the foundation preparation discussed in the submitted geotechnical report (Triad, 7/21/93) to an 8" to 12" layer of 21-A stone. This would be a substantial savings in foundation preparation and is justified by the superior bridging characteristics of cast -in -place over precast. i .. 0 9 Mr. Ron Mislowsky Ref: Fieldstone Heights Subdivision February 27, 1995 Page 3 We have again discussed the issue with our Bridge Section. If you would like to use precast, we will agree to it provided: • You revert back to the original foundation preparation detailed in the geotechnical report and • You submit precast plans with full details subject to our approval and meeting Section 302.03 of VDOT's January, 1994 Road & Bridge Specifications. 9. Many of the slope rates were left off the typical sections. They will need to be added as shown. 10. The roadway base stone will need to be extended 1' beyond the edge of pavement and so noted on each typical section. 11. The dimensions shown for the 200' right turn lane and 150' taper on Channing Road need to be clearer. 12. The proposed contours adjacent to the box are confusing. 13. The hydrologic and hydraulic analysis submitted for the proposed culvert was reviewed by Mr. R. H. Carry, our District River Mechanics Engineer. He had several questions and comments regarding the analysis that need to be addressed, particularly Item is A. At the culvert, left and right channel stations should be at the inside of the barrel. B. At the culvert, the artificial levees need to be set at the proper elevations. C. A complete road profile is needed for the weir calculations; extended left and right as appropriate. D. Runs should begin at normal depth, not critical depth, to ensure profile converges before modeling culvert. E. For VDOT standard cast -in -place box culverts, an entrance loss coefficient of 0.2 can 'be used since the culvert has 12" radius rounding at the inlet end. This will change the FHWA chart from #8 to #9, Scale 1. If precast, use the appropriate coefficient. F. The top of the roadway elevation should be 558.81 since this is the lowest elevation of the weir (at edge of existing Route 659). G. The upstream and downstream cross sections of the existing ground do not agree with the center line cross section plot of existing ground. Why is this? H. The road profile does not seem to agree with the weir profile used in the HEC-2 run. (Elevations over the sides of the culvert do not agree with the road profile and culvert location on Page 3 and Page 4 of the plans.) I. The approach section of the culvert (9262) shows an increase in excess of the 1' allowed. Unless other items in the analysis yet to be corrected have a lowering effect on the increase, it appears a larger culvert will be required. Mr. Ron Mislowsky Ref: Fieldstone Heights Subdivision February 27, 1995 Page 4 J. A section of the "existing conditions" (predevelopment) run should be placed at the location of the upstream and downstream faces of the box (9206 & 9108) so as to have an equal number of sections in each run up to the approach section (9262). K. Which standard VDOT lining will be used on the temporary diversion ditch? L. Consideration may need to be given to the alignment of the box in relation to the flood flow direction. M. The need for the slope protection at the box should be addressed. 14. Additional comments as marked on the plans will need to be addressed. Please revise and resubmit three copies for further. Should any changes be deemed necessary, please design them to meet or exceed the above recommendations. If you have any questions or would like to discuss any of the above items, please us know. Sincerely, William H. Bushman Trans. Resident Engineer (/ /,�, Z :� '41� -C /17,/ By: Robert B. Childress Trans. Permits & Subdivision Specialist Supervisor RBC/rf Enclosures xc Mr T L.Jackson Mr. J. B. Diamond Mr. P. W. Thompson Mr. S. A. Melnikoff Mr. R. W. Watkins Mr. H. E. Strawsnyder Mr. George Glaize, Jr. DAVID R. GEHR COMMISSIONER �•� : F I c�.0 Sry r..1 C M�16lf1 �A G7{y,� U * a h to COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE P.O. BOX 278 EDINBURG,22824-0278 December 1, 1994 eoo WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN, P.E. RESIDENT ENGINEER TELE(703)984-5600 FAX (703) 984-5607 Mr. Ronald A. Mislowsky, P.E. Ref: Fieldstone Heights Subdivision C/O G. W. Clifforu & Associates, Inc. Proposed 12'xS' Quadruple Box Culvert 200 North Cameron Street Route 659 Winchester, VA 22601 Frederick County Dear Ron: As requested, we have reviewed the referenced project's site plan dated September, 1994. Our comments may be found on the enclosed plans marked in red and as follows: 1) Although the Monteray Drive connection to the proposed Twin Lakes Development has been eliminated, traffic generated by this project as well as the other adjacent developments will still have a significant impact on Route 659. The pavement widths and lengths you show are inadequate. Due to the proposed traffic 36' of pavement should be provided across the box and a right turn lane provided on Route 659 as follows: A) 50' E.P. radii at the intersection will need to be provided. B) A 200' right turn lane and 150' taper on Channing Road will need to be provided. C) A 100' right turn lane and 150' taper will need to be provided on Route 656. Additional right-of-way and easements will be required as necessary to accommodate the improvements to Route 659. D) 24' of pavement will need to be provided up to Kingsley Drive. 2) The landing shown on Profile Sheet No. 3 is insufficient. A flat landing extending 50' to 60' from the edge of pavement of Route 659 at a grade of 3% maximum will need to be provided. The existing ground line on the profile is not legible and should be darkened. 3) Standard GR-2 guardrail may be required along Route 659 in addition to that on Channing Road. Appropriate terminal ends Standard GR-6 or GR-7 will be required. Three (3) additional feet of shoulder will be required where the GR-2 guardrail is to be installed. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY Mr. Ron Mislowsky Ref: Fieldstone Heights Subdivision December 1, 1994 Pa e 2 4) A standard VDOT stop sign will be required on Channing Road at Route 659. 5) We recommend 2:1 slopes in lieu of 3:1 slopes be used over the box culvert to minimize the box length. 6) The box culvert is to be cast in place only. The plan should so note that no precast alternative is to be allowed. 7) The submitted geotechnical report recommends for either a box culvert or a bridge the alluvial soils under the foundation be completely removed and backfilled with controlled fill. Our District Bridge Section feels this is unnecessary for a box culvert which is actually lighter than the fill and does not have the point load associated with bridge foundations. The Bridge Section recommends the box culvert foundation be excavated down only enough to provide an 8" to 12" layer of VDOT No. 21 A Aggregate in order to minimize differential settlement of the approaches and the box. High rock found within 6" below the 21-A layer should be removed and backfilled with 21-A. 8) Additional information is needed in the hydraulic report and analysis. Please refer to the enclosed memo from Mr. R. H. Cary, our District River Mechanics Engineer, dated October 28, 1994. Complete HEC-2 input and output is required along with a report discussing the study and its conclusions. 9) The centerline radius at Station 2+00 will need to be increased to a minimum 260'. Additional right: -of-way and easements will need to be provided at the bo as shown. The exact combination of right-of-way, easements and center line radius provided can be discussed if the Mill Race Estates property line becomes an issue. It appears a large temporary easement will also be needed off that property for a temporary diversion channel. Details of your diversion channel should be included in the site plan. 10) The pavement design of Channing Road is inadequate. At least 8" of 21-B Aggregate, 4" BM-2 and 1.5" Type SM-2A Asphalt Concrete will be required. 11) A VDOT Inspector will be assigned to monitor the roadway and box culvert construction on an account receivable basis. .r 1% Mr. Ron Mislowsky Ref: Fieldstone Heights Subdivision December 1, 1994 Pa e 3 12) Site distance and accurate references will need to be added to the plan. Please revise and resubmit four (4) copies for further review. Should any changes be deemed necessary, please design them to meet or exceed the above recommendations. If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, William H. Bushman Trans. Resident Engineer /j zlqt-�a�� By: Robert B. Childress Trans. Permits & Subdivision Specialist Supervisor RBC/rf Enclosures xc: Mr. T. L. Jackson Mr. J. B. Diamond Mr. P. W. Thompson Mr. S. A. Melnikoff Mr. R. W. Watkins Mr. H. E. Strawsnyder Mr. George Glaize IL 0 0 REQUEST FOR REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS Virginia Department of Transportation ATTN: Resident Engineer P.O. Box 278 Edinburg, Virginia 22824-0278 (703) 984-4133 The local office of the Transportation Department is located at 1550 Commerce Street, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: EASTERN FREDERICK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O. Box 2097 Winchester, Va 22601 Aaent: G.W. Clifford & Assoc. 200 N. Cameron St. Winchester, Va 22601 Attn: Tom Price (703)667-2139 Name of development and/or description of the request: Fieldstone Heicxhts Location: South & Adjacent to Rte. 659 (Valley Mill Road), 23001± east of Intx. Rt. 659 & Rt. 656 Transportation Department Comments: See attached letter from W. H. Bushman to G. W. Clifford & Associates dated April 19, 1994. VDOT Signature and Date: Ca) -¢ 19 44- (NOTICE TO VDOT - PLEASE RETURN THI9 FORM TO THE AGENT.) 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 attache THREE copies of your plans and/or applicati E form. E�gURG �E$1D�NCY fEB 4 1994 w C3 KCy fl 0 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 278 DAVID R. GEHR EDINBURG, 22824 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN COMMISSIONER RESIDENT ENGINEER (703) 984-5611 TELE (703)984-5600 April 19, 1994 FAX (703) 984-5607 Mr. Tom Price Ref: Fieldstone Heights C/O G. W. Clifford & Associates Route 659 200 North Cameron Street Frederick County Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Tom: We have reviewed the referenced development's master development plan dated January, 1994. Our comments may be found marked on the enclosed plans and as follows: 1. This development has the potential to significantly increase traffic on Route 659 and to have a high traffic count on proposed Channing Road. A complete traffic study will need to be provided which includes intersection splits in order to determine ultimate right-of- way widths, typical street sections, and pavement designs. This study should also include ultimate traffic counts of the affected roads caused by this development and by potential developments to the south, east and west. 2. Sufficient right-of-way along the south side of the Route 659 across the entire property frontage should be donated for present or future improvements to Route 659. Right turn and/or left turn lanes on Route 659 as part of this project may be needed pending review of the needed traffic study. I The typical section shown on Sheet 2 is incomplete and is not shown to which roads the section applies. 4. There may be insufficient room for the Abram's Creek structure with the alignment shown due to the proximity of the Mill Race Estates property. Could permanent easements on this property be obtained? The structure may also need to be wider than what is shown in order to accommodate two lanes. 5. The radius of the two horizontal curves on Channing Road should be kept as large as possible. The first curve on Highcliffe Drive should be at least a 260' radius. 6. Adequate intersection sight distance is needed at Kingsly Drive and Channing Road. 7. Sanford Court appears to be a very poor location to build a road, centered along a drainage swale with 25 % side slopes. Its relocation should be seriously considered. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY A • • Mr. Tom Price Ref: Fieldstone Heights April 19, 1994 Page 2 8. The end of Monterey Drive may also be a problem due to topography. 9. It may be more preferable to move the intersection of Channing Road with Route 659 approximately 100'± west provided minimum sight distance can be maintained. This will have to be balanced against other alignment constraints and can be further discussed in conjunction with other comments. A wider right-of-way of Channing Road may be needed at the intersection of Route 659. 10. All items contained in our earlier review letter dated January 18, 1994 to your office concerning the use of the bebo arch structure over Abram's Creek will need to be addressed. Once detailed site plans are available, we would appreciate the opportunity to review such. In the meantime please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, William H. Bushman Trans. Resident Engineer By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Senior RBC/rf Enclosures xc: Mr. T. L. Jackson Mr. J. B. Diamond Mr. S. A. Melnikoff (w/ copy of plan) Mr. R. W. Watkins Mr. H. E. Strawsnyder 0 • COMMONWEALTH of VIRGI IA RAY D. PETHTEL COMMISSIONER Mr. Tom Price C/O G. W. Clifford & Associates 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Tom: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. 0. BOX 278 EDINBURG, 22824 (703) 984-5611 March 2, 1994 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN RESIDENT ENGINEER TELE (703) 984-4133 FAX (703) 984-9761 Ref: Fieldstone Heights Route 659 Frederick County As you know we have received your master development plan for the referenced project. Due to the size and complexity of the project, we have forwarded the plan on to our District Office in Staunton for review. Once we are in receipt of any comments, we will forward same to you. In the meantime, if you have any questions please let me know. RBC/rf xc: Mr. S. A. Melnikoff Mr. R. W. Watkins Sincerely, William H. Bushman Trans. Resident Engineer By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Senior TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY PLNNN�NG GAD EVEI.Gp�`Nj 7 I e �eMRR / COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINI DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. 0. BOX 278 RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 COMMISSIONER January 18, 1994 Mr. Ronald A. Mislowsky, P.E. C/O G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Ron: We would appreciate the[ oppod '- t V. to meantime, if you have ant�ues ii�ns pl William H. Bushman -aris. Resident Engineer By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Senior RBC/rf Attachments xc: Mr. L. L. Misenheimer Mr. C. E. Mattox Mr. S. A. Melnikoff Mr. R. W. Watkins Mr. H. E. Strawsnyder C4� �C�'� pNp pEVEi.O OAM H. BUSHMAN RESIDENT ENGINEER TELE(703)984-4133 FAX (703)984-9761 Ref: Fieldstone Route 659 Frederick County hen available. In the TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY • • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I N T R A- DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM January 7, 1994 (tr— ;-V = - TO: Mr. W. H. Bushman ATTN: Mr. Bob Childress SLF FROM: Mr. L. L. Misenheimer ,�- ❑r��; �' 7 SUBJECT: Fieldstone - Proposed Bebo Arch We have reviewed the preliminary plans for the proposed Bebo Arch over Abrams Creek. We offer the following comments: (1) There are two (2) boring locations shown on the "Section" sheet of the preliminary plans. We would like to request that the boring information be made available to us. (2) Foundation a) The "Lean concrete backfill" between bedrock and the foundation is undefined. We request that this be defined as A3 Concrete. b) The use of "well compacted shale material" between the bedrock and the wing foundation is unacceptable. Perhaps this material is sufficient for the necessary load -bearing capacity, but it is clearly unacceptable in concern for scour. We request that A3 Concrete be used here also. (3) The "Section" sheet in the preliminary plans refers to the "Design loading" being the AASHTO HS20-44 loading. Current VDOT policy requires that all structures be designed for the HS20-44 and Alternate Military Loadings. (4) Federal and State policies require that this structure be analyzed and rated for five specific rating vehicles. The attached sheet has the necessary axle loadings and spacings for each vehicle. We request that the analysis and rating be performed for each vehicle in accordance with the AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges and the AASHTO Manual for Maintenance Inspection of Bridge and furnished to VDOT prior to final approval or acceptance of the structure into the system. Since this structure has fill over it and the ratings would be dependent on the actual "as -built" depth of fill, we should stipulate that the ratings be done based on "as -built" conditions and that they be furnished with computations prior to the project being accepted into the System. 0 0 (5) Will transverse connectors between the arch elements be provided? (6) We request that the joints between the,arch elements be sealed and waterproofed. (7) Final plans should show all pertinent dimensions, details of internal reinforcement, etc. and be clear and legible forsake of microfilming. These comments should be considered generic in case hydraulics dictates a different size arch. This will, be an interesting project and we look forward to being involved in it. If you have any questionsor comments, please advise. L. L. Misenheimer District Structure and Bridge Engr. Attachments PWT/dvg cc: Mr. T.L. Jackson 56B 93-27.4 -17- August 1, 1993 VEHICLES FOR RATING AND ANALYSIS HS20 (at inventory and operating stress levels) Axle Weight Distance to No. lj bs.) Next Axle(ft.) '1 8,000 14' center of gravity is 18.67' 2 32,000 14' from axle no. 1, and 3 32,000 9.33' from axle no. 3 GVW 36 Tons or a uniform load of 6401/1. f., plus a concentrated load of 18,0001 for moment or a load of 26,0001 for shear. 90,000# Blanket Permit Vehicle (at operating stress level) Axle Weight Distance to Z1Q, (lbs.1 Next Axle(ft.) 1 12,500 8' center of gravity is 20.52' 2 22,000 4' from axle no. 1 and 23.48' 3 22,000 28' from axle no. 5 4 16,750 .4' 5 16,750 GVW = 45 Tons 115,000# Blanket Permit Vehicle (at operating stress level) Axle Weight Distance to No. if bs.1 Next Axle(ft.) 1 12,001) 8' center of gravity is 31.41' 2 17,833 4' from axle no. 1 and 32.59' 3 17,833 4' from axle no. 7 4 17,833 40' 5 16,500 4' 6 16,500 4' 7 16,500 GVW = 57.5 Tons ' (continues) 56B 93-27.4 -18- August 1, 1993 VEHICLES FOR RATING AND ANALYSIS (continued) Legal load - single unit truck (at intermediate stress level) Axle Weight Distance to No. (1bs.) Next Axle(ft,) - 1 20,00020' center of gravity is 13.85' 2 17,000 4' from axle no. 1, and 3 17,000 .10.15' from axle no. 3 GVW = 27 Tons Legal load - truck and semi -trailer (at intermediate stress level) Axle Weight Distance to No• (lbs.) Next Axle(ft.) 1 12,000 10, center of gravity is 25.92' 2 17,000 4' from axle no. 1, and 25.08, 3 17,000 33' from axle no. 5 4 17,000 4' 5 17,000 GVW = 40 Tons REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS Frederick County Sanitation Authority ATTN: Engineer Director 199 Front Royal Pike P.O. Box 618 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 665-5690 The Frederick County Sanitation Authority is located on U.S. 522 South, one tenth of a mile from the U.S. 50 intersection, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Jasbo, Inc. & Fred L. Glaize,III Box 6 Stephens City, Va 22655 (703)869-1800 Aaent: G.W. Clifford & Assoc. 200 N. Cameron St Winchester, Va 22601 Attn: Tom Price (703)667-2139 Name of development and/or description of the request: es /LLD S 7Vy-` 5"41,9D/y, Location: South of Va. Rte. 659 West and adjacent to Va. Rte. 716, 1/2 mile east of City of Winchester Sanitation Authority Comments: /S7'.B9EylfW- Al 1Tifl;fo5- Ap-S���L� Sanit . Signature & Date: (NOTICE TO SANITATIO - EASE RETURN THIS FORM TO AGENT.) 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 TWO copies of your plans and/or application form. 6 6 41c; COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMENTS Control No. 0204941080 Date Received 020494 Date Reviewed 021194 Applicant Name G. W. Clifford & Assoc. Address 200 N. Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Project Name Fieldstone Heights Phone No. 703-667-2139 Type of Application Rev. Master Dev. Current Zoning RP 1st Due Fire Co. 18 1st Due Rescue Co. 18 Election District Shawnee RECOMMENDATIONS Automatic Sprinkler System Residential Sprinkler System Automatic Fire Alarm System X Other Emergency Vehicle Access; Adequate X Inadequate Fire Lanes Required; Yes Comments Roadway/Aisleway Widths; Adequate X Inadequate Special Hazards Noted; Yes Comments Not Identified No X Not Identified No X - Continued - v E • Hydrant Locations; See Notes Adequate Inadequate X Siamese Connection Location; Approved Not Approved Not Identified Not Identified X Additional Comments: Hydrant placement as shown will not comply with Frederick County Chapter 10. Hydrants must be within 400' of each dwelling. All other fire related issues will be addressed on site plan. Revdmow Time .5 hr Douglas A. Kiracofe Fire Marshal 0 REQUEST FOR REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department ATTN: Director of Parks P.O. Box 601 Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 665-5678 The Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department is located on the second floor of the Frederick County Administration Building, 9 Court Square, Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: EASTERN FREDERICK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O. Box 2097 Winchester, Va 22601 Agent: G.W. Clifford & Assoc 200 N. Cameron St Winchester, Va 22601 Attn: Tom Price (703)667 2139 Name of development and/or description of the request: Fieldstone Heights Location: South & Adjacent to Rte. 659 (Valley Mill Road) 2300'± east of Intx Rt. 659 & Rt. 656 Parks & Recreation Department Comments: No comment Parks Signature And Date: 2/16/94 (NOTICE TO P - PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO THE AGENT.) 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 plans and/or application form. 0 0 • 0 COUNTY of FREDERICK Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works 9 North Loudoun St., 2nd Floor 703/665-5643 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Evan Wyatt, Frederick County Planning and Development FROM: Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Director of Pubic Work \�C DATE: June 20, 1994 SUBJECT: Revised Master Development Plan Fieldstone Subdivision Chuck Maddox and I met on June 15, 1994 to review the purposed revisions to the Master Development Plan of the Fieldstone S ubdivision. In particular, we focused our discussion around the proposed revisions to Sanford Court and Monterey Drive. These two areas of the proposed subdivisions generated numerous questions and concerns at the Planning Commission level. As a result of these concerns, G.W. Clifford and Associates revised this area with an emphasis on designing buildable lots. Based on my brief review of the revised road alignment and proposed lot layout, I recommend that the revised master plan be approved. We intend to perform a detailed review of the subdivision plan. It is anticipated that 2 to 4 building lots will be sacrificed to accommodate the revised master plan layout and the proposed stormwater management facilities. The proposed road alignments for Sanford Court and Monterey Drive will result in several lots requiring detailed site plans. It is also anticipated that extensive piping will be required to convey stormwater flows in these areas and provide buildable lots. HESY,sa 9 o�r��`� jr ^w i�j 'boo t7FO�t� Fax: 703/678-0682 - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22604 E COUNTY of FREDERICK Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. Director of Public Works 9 North Loudoun St., 2nd Floor 703/665-5643 March 25, 1994 Mr. Tom Price, Project Manager Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Revised Master Development Plan Fieldstone Subdivision Shawnee Magisterial District Dear Tom: We have completed our review of the proposed master development plan for Fieldstone Subdivision and offer the following comments: 1) Stormwater management will be required for the entire subdivision. Considering the entire site is underlain by the Martinsburg Shale, we recommend that a runoff coefficient of 0.35 be adopted for the pre -developed condition. At a minimum, a runoff coefficient of 0.5 should be adopted for the post -developed condition. This value may be increased depending on the actual lot sizes. 2) Individual site plans will be required for all lots bordering major drainage easements or located in steep terrain. A list of these lots should be included on the respective subdivision plans. 3) Based on our review of the revised master development plan, it appears that major grading operations will be required to construct Sanford Court and the end of Montery Drive. The grading design including related lots should be shown on the subdivision plans. 4) The flood study related to the Abrams Creek crossing should be submitted with the subdivision design documents. Fax: 703/678-0682 - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22604 G � ot�gM�Nkv • Mr. Tom Price March 25, 1994 Page Two Please contact me if you have any questions related to the above comments. Sincerely, Harvey Strawsnyder, r., P.E. Directo of Public Works HES:rls cc: file • 11LE COPY COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Commonwealth Attorney John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Planning Director SUBJECT: Vesting Issues in Relation to Pioneer Heights and Fieldstone Heights DATE: July 8, 1993 On November 13, 1991, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors adopted a new subdivision ordinance. For the first time, subdivisions with smaller lots were required to have curb and gutter, sidewalks, and street lights installed by the developer. It was felt that this would greatly improve the quality of development in the areas served by public sewer and water in eastern Frederick County. Vesting Issues The staff believes that submittal of a master development plan (as required by the zoning ordinance) for approval may vest a project from subsequent changes in requirements of the zoning ordinance pertaining to master planned items. These include issues of use, density, general layout, and environmental protection. However, the staff does not believe that the submittal of a master plan will vest a project from the requirements of the subdivision ordinance concerning design details that are not addressed by the master development plan. In Parker v. the County of Madison, et al., 244 C. 39 (1992), the Virginia Supreme Court has stated that a local governing body may not apply a prior law to a pending subdivision application. In this case, the applicant had submitted a subdivision application. The subdivision ordinance was amended prior to approval of the application. Madison County approved the subdivision in spite of the ordinance amendment based on an unwritten vesting practice. The Court stated that the governing body had no authorization to grant the approval without a written law. Therefore, the staff believes that great care is needed in granting vesting. The Frederick County subdivision ordinance describes no vesting procedures. It does allow the Board of Supervisors to grant variations or exceptions from the provisions of the ordinance in unusual situations or in cases of substantial injustice or hardship. O North L.oudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Wuichester. VA 22601 Winchester, VA 220W Page 2 Lawrence R. Ambrogi John R. Riley, Jr. Vesting Issues July 8, 1993 Pioneer Heights In this instance, a master development plan, as required by the zoning ordinance, was submitted for Pioneer Heights in 1988 and approved by the Board of Supervisors on May 10, 1989. The master plan is a general plan describing the approximate location of uses, open space, roads, environmental features, recreational facilities, buffers, utilities, and historic structures. Information of numbers of dwelling units and acreages is required. Detailed information of the design of lots, streets, sidewalks, stormwater management, and utilities is not required and usually not provided on the masterplan. The Pioneer Heights master plan did not describe whether the streets would use curb and gutter or ditch section. The presence or absence of streetlights, sidewalks or other design details was not addressed. Approval of the plan constituted approval of the general layout and not design details. Subdivision plans, as required by the subdivision ordinance, were submitted for the first of two development phases in September of 1989. They were approved by the Subdivision Administrator on April 30, 1990. They clearly described a road design that used ditches instead of curb and gutter. Sidewalks and streetlights were clearly not included. However, no subdivision design plan was submitted for the second phase of the development prior to the adoption of the new subdivision regulations. Since the first phase was constructed to the old standards, building the second phase to new standards will make for a difficult transition. Existing streets will have to change design when they enter the new phase. In the opinion of the staff, this would create an unusual situation and possibly a hardship as described by the ordinance. This would be an ideal case for a variance or exception granted by the Board of Supervisors. It might even provide some vesting to this project due to the investment that was made in the project construction prior to change in the regulations. Fieldstone Heights The master development plan for Fieldstone Heights was received and approved in 1988. Again, as is the norm, the master development plan did not include any information concerning the design of streets, utilities, and other features. It did not describe whether the streets would use curb and gutter or ditch section. The presence or absence of streetlights, sidewalks or other design details was not addressed. Approval of the plan constituted approval of the general layout and not design details. No subdivision plans describing the design of streets, utilities, or other features have ever been received. r y 3 11 Page 3 Lawrence R. Ambrogi John R. Riley, Jr. Vesting Issues July 8, 1993 Because no design plans were submitted nor construction started prior to the change in regulations, the, staff believes that no vesting has occurred in relation to infrastructure design standards. This subdivision should meet the current standards concerning the design of infrastructure. In conclusion, we believe that Pioneer Heights should be allowed to continue the construction of infrastructure in their next phase in accordance with the design that was allowed and constructed in the first phase. They could be allowed to do this because they are vested or because the Board grants an exception due to the unusual situation. We do not believe that Fieldstone Heights is vested nor that it involves any unusual situation or hardship that would not be faced by any new development. We would appreciate your opinion on this issue. We will arrange a meeting shortly to discuss it. RWW/rsa I COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 FAX TRANSMITTAL PAGE DATE: May 4, 1994 TRANSMITTAL TIME: PLEASE DELIVER PAGE(S) IMMEDIATELY TO: NAME: Tom Price COMPANY: G. W. Clifford & Associates CITY,STATE: Winchester, VA FAX NUMBER: 665-0493 RE: Fieldstone Hgts. MDP comments TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE: -4- MESSAGE: Tom: I will provide you with my staff review comments in the near future. These comments only reflect the Planning Commission meeting. Give me a call if you have any questions. FROM: E. Wyatt/sk TITLE: Planner II FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PHONE: FAX NUMBER: (703) 665-5651 (703) 678-0682 ') Not -di Loudrnin Strccl Wmdicster. VA 22601 P.O. Box 601 WHicllester, VA 22604 0 '. lb rrr to Ir I FIELDIM1,1S 14EIGH-M M �P REv1E� 99- § 165-125 ZONING § 165-125 ✓(1) The scale shall be one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet or larger (the ratio of feet to inches shall be no more than one hundred (100) feet to one (1) inch] or at a scale acceptable to the Director. The scale shall be sufficient so that all features are discernible. ✓ (2) No sheet shall exceed forty-two (42) inches in size unless approved by the Director of Planning and Development. If the MDP is prepared on more than one (1) sheet, match lines shall clearly indicate where the sheets join. 3© All MDP s shall include a North arrow, a scale and a legend describing all symbols. ✓(4) A boundary survey of the entire property related to true meridian and certified by a certified Virginia surveyor, architect or engineer, with all dimensions in feet and decimals of feet, is required for all MDP's. ✓(5) The total area of the property shall be specified on the MDP. /(6) The topography shall be shown at contour intervals acceptable to the Director. 47) The title of the proposed project, the date, month, year the plan was prepared or revised, the name of the applicant(s), owner(s) and contract owner(s), and the names of the individuals or firms preparing the plan shall be clearly specified. ✓(8) A schedule of phases, with boundaries and the order developed, shall be provided. the approximate location of phase in which the phases are to be ✓(9) The use of all adjoining properties shall be clearly designated on the MDP. 010) An inset map shall be provided showing the location of the project along with the location of all existing or approved public roads, streets or rights -of -way within two thousand (2,000) feet of the boundaries of the project. B. Contents of a preliminary master development plan in the Residential Performance District, the Residential Planned Community District, the Residential Recreational Community District and the Mobile Home 16651 • • § 165-125 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-125 Community District. The preliminary MDP shall contain a conceptual plan, showing the location and functional relationship between all proposed housing types and land uses, including the following information: ✓(1) A land use plan, showing the location, arrangement and approximate boundaries of all proposed land uses. (2) The approximate acreage in common open space, in each use and housing type and in roads, streets or rights -of -way for each phase and the total development. -'(3) The location and approximate boundaries of proposed housing types conceptually shown in accord with residential performance dimensional requirements. ✓(4) The proposed number of dwelling units of each type in each phase and in the total development. (5) The location and approximate boundaries of existing environmen- tal features, including floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater retention areas, steep slopes and woodlands. WA(6) The location of environmental protection land to be included in j common open space. (7) The approximate acreage of each type of environmental protection land, the amount and percentage of each type that is to be disturbed and the amount and percentage of each type to be placed in common open space. 8) The amount, approximate boundaries and location of common open space, with the percentage of the total acreage of the site to be placed in common open space. d/A(9) The location and general configuration of recreational facilities, with a general statement of the types of recreational facilities to be provided. 4/A(10) The location and extent of proposed buffers, with statements, profiles, cross sections or examples clearly specifying the screening to be provided. 16652 0 0 § 165-125 ZONING § 165-125 11 The proposed location, arrangements and right-of-way widths of roads and streets and the location of proposed access to surrounding properties. ✓(12) The location and arrangement of street entrances, driveways and parking areas. �13) The approximate location of sewer and water mains with statements concerning the connection with and availability of existing facilities. 14 A conceptual plan for stormwater management with the location of stormwater facilities designed to serve more than one (1) lot. 0/A15) Calculations describing all proposed bonus factors with the location of and specifications for bonus improvements, when proposed. (16) The location and treatment proposed for all historical structures and sites recognized as significant by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or as . identified on the Virginia Historical Landmarks Commission Survey for Frederick County. (17) A history of all land divisions that have occurred in relation to the tract since the adoption of this requirement. C. Contents of a preliminary master development plan in the M 1 Light Industrial District, the M2 Industrial General District, the EM Extractive Manufacturing District, the HE Higher Education District, the B 1 Neighborhood Business District, the B2 Business General District or the 63 Industrial Transition District. The preliminary MDP shall contain a conceptual plan, showing the location and functional relationship between streets and land uses, including the following: (1) A conceptual plan, showing the location and arrangement of proposed uses. (2) The existing environmental features, including floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater detention areas, steep slopes and woodlands, as defined. (3) The proposed location and arrangement of all streets and utility systems. 16653 WILLIAM a PRUITT Commissioner ROBERT D. CRAFT Chief, Administration and Finance ROBERT W. GRABB Chief, Habitat Management ROBERT J. MARKLAND Chief, Law Enforcement JACK G.TRAVELSTEAD Chief, Fisheries Management ASSOCIATE MEMBERS SIDNEY H. CAMDEN Eastville, Virginia o GEORGE S. FORREST Poquoson, Virginia JOHN W. FREEMAN, SR. Hampton, Virginia }}�� ��((}} (� COMMONWEALTH JL®1 �11 tY1Y EALTg� of VIRIIA ''��!! HAYES TIMOTHY G. Virginia Richmond, Virginia WILLIAM A. HUDNALL Marine Resources Commission Heathsville, Virginia DONALD L. LIVERMAN, SR. P. 0. Box 756 Virginia Beach, Virginia 2600 Washington Avenue PETER W. ROWE Chesapeake, Virginia Newport News, Virginia 23607 0756 JANE C. WEBBNewport News, Virginia March 24, 1994 Eastern Frederick Development c/o Mr. Ronald Mislowsky "Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., 200 North Cameron St. Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Sir : Co. Inc. RE: VMRC #94-0090 The enclosed permit will be issued to you after the necessary -signatures are affixed. and notarized. 1. Please review these documents 2. Sign both copies before a Notary Public 3. Return both copies to this office in the enclosed self- addressed envelope. 4. A check or money order should be made payable to the Marine Resources Commission as follows: Permit fee....................................$100.00 Royalty for the encroachment over 2,100 square feet of State-owned land at $.30 per square foot..........................$630.00 Note Special Condition #16 in the attached permit regarding payment of royalty assessed for encroachment over State-owned submerged land. TOTAL AMOUNT DUE TO MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION ........................$100.00 Please pay only the total amount shown above at this time r.le; hc: (8041 ?47­2200 (804) 247-2.292 V/TL7D lWormation and I=RIf ro_encv 1-lotline 1-800-541-4W) v. T nn Eastern Frederick Development Co. March 24, 1994 VMRC 094-0090 Page 2 Upon receipt of the signed documents bearing the proper signatures, the Marine Resources Commission will execute your permit and return it to you. The permit is not valid until signed by the Permittee(s), a Notary Public and the Commissioner. Be sure to include the title of the person accepting the financial and performance obligations explicit in the permit. If for any reason you cannot return these documents within sixty days, please inform me of the reasons for the delay. Sincerely, Robert W. Grabb Chief, Habitat Management. RWG/bac HM Enclosure cc: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Applicant riFC30-317 • *C# 94-0090 Applicant: Eastern Frederick Development Co COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA. MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION PERMIT The Commonwealth of Virginia; Marine Resources Commission, hereinafter referred to as the Commission, on tbis2 2 n dday of March 1994, hereby grants unto: Eastern Frederick Development Co. P.O. Box 2097 Winchester, Virginia, 22604 hereinafter referred to as the Permittee, permission to: U Encroach in, on, or over State-owned subaqueous bottoms pursuant to Chapter 12, Subtitle III, of Title 28.2 of the Code of Virginia. ❑ Use or develop tidal wetlands pursuant to Chapter 13, Subtitle III, of Title 282 of the Code of Virginia. Permittee is hereby authorized to: Install a 30-foot long arch bridge over Abrams Creek adjacent to the_Permittee's property in Frederick County. . All activities authorized herein shall be accomplished in conformance with plans and drawings dated 'received January 25, 1994, which are attached and made a part of this permit This permit is granted subject to the following conditions: (1) The work authorized by this permit shall be completed by March 31, 1997 The Permittee shall notify the Commission when the project is completed. The completion date may be extended by the Commission in its discretion. Any such application for extension of time shall be in writing prior to the above completion date and shall specify the reason for such extension and the expected date of completion of construction. All other conditions remain in effect until revoked by the Commission or the General Assembly. (2) This permit grants no authority to the Permittee to encroach upon the property rights, including riparian rights of others. (3) The duly authorized agents of the Commission shall have the right to enter upon the premises at reasonable times, for the purpose of inspecting the work being done pursuant to this permit (4) The Permittee shall comply with the water quality standards as established by the Virginia Water Control Board and all other applicable laws, or- dinances, rules and regulations affecting the conduct of the project The granting of this permit shall not relieve the Permittee of the responsibil- ity of obtaining any and all other permits or authority for the projects. (5) This permit shall not be transferred without written consent of the Commissioner. (6) This permit shall not affect or interfere with the right vouchsafed to the people of Virginia concerning fishing, fowling and the catching of and taking of oysters and other shellfish in and from the bottom of acres and waters not included within the terms.of this permit (7) The Permittee shall, to the greatest extent practicable, minimize the adverse effects of the project upon adjacent properties and wetlands and upon the natural resources of the Commonwealth. (8) This permit may be revoked at any time by the Commission upon the failure of the Permittee to comply with any of the terms and conditions hereof or at the will of the General Assembly of Virginia. (9) There is expressly excluded from the permit any portion of the waters within the boundaries of the Baylor Survey. (10) This permit is subject to any lease of oyster planting ground in effect on the date of this permit. Nothing in this permit shall be construed as al- lowing the Permittee to encroach on any lease without the consent of the leaseholder. The Permittee shall be liable for any damages to such lease. (11) The issuance of this permit does not confer upon the Permittee any interest or title to the beds of the waters. (12) All structures authorized by this permit which are not maintained in good repair shall be completely removed from State-owned bottom within three (3) months after notification by the Commission. (13) The Permittee agrees to comply with all of the terms and conditions asset forth in this permit and that the project will be accomplished within the boundaries as outlined in the plans attached hereto. Any encroachment beyond the limits of this permit shall constitute a Class 1 misde- meanor. (14) This permit authorizes no claim to archaeological artifacts which may be encountered during the course of construction. If, however, archae- ological remains are encountered, the Permittee agrees to notify the Commission, who will, in turn notify the Department of Historic Resources. .The Permittee further agrees to cooperate with agencies of the Commonwealth id the recovery of archaeological- remains if deemed necessary. (15) TbePermittee agrees to indemnify and save harmless the Commonwealth of Virginia from any liability arising from the establishment, opera- tion or maintenance of said project. PERMITTEE - WHITE COPY COMMISSION - YELLOW COPY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - PINK COPY VMRC * 94-0090 The following special conditions are imposed on this permit: (16) This permit includes an assessment of a royalty of $630.00 under paragraph D of Section 28.2-1205 of the Code of Virginia. Inasmuch as this charge for private uses of State-owned submerged lands is presently under review, this assessment is not now due and payable. In the event the charge is determined to be assessable, you will be sent a letter reminder and bill for the royalties which have been held in abeyance. (17) The yellow placard accompanying this permit document must be conspicuously displayed at the work°site throughout the construction phase of the authorized activity. (18) Permittee agrees to not the Commission a minimum of 15 days prior to the start of construction of the activities authorized by this permit. (19) All areas of State-owned bottom and adjacent lands disturbed by this operation shall be restored to their original contours and natural conditions within ten .(10.) days from the date of completion of the bridge installation. All excess material shall be removed to an upland site and contained in such a manner as to prevent its reentry into State waters. (20) The Permittee measures will construction State waters. agrees that erosion and sediment control be employed and maintained throughout the period to prevent uncontrolled sedimentation in PERMITTEE—WHITE COPY COMMISSION —YELLOW COPY CORPS OF ENGINEERS —PINK COPY VMRCt# 94-0090 `emit issuing fee of $100 . 00 and a royalty of $630.00 for the encroachment over 2,100 square feet of State -owned -bottom @ $.30 per square foot for a total of $730.00 is due and payable ltdW6Xdtate(k(txUt9CdWGIWt�X9(c}flkliKDb)idtt This / permit consists of Ls 1 j h t (8 ) sheets. PERMITTEE Permittee's signature is affixed hereto as evidence of acceptance of all of the terms and conditions herein. In cases where the Permittee is a corporation, agency or political jurisdiction, please assure that the individual who signs for the Permittee has proper authorization to bind the organization to the financial and performance obligations which result from activity authorized by this permit. PERMITTEE Acceptedfor Eastern Frederick Development Co day of -'19 By (Name) (Title) State of City (or County) of I, , to -wit before me in my City (or County) and State aforesaid. Given under my hand this _ a Notary Public in and for said City (or County) and State hereby certify that Permittee, whose name is signed to the foregoing, has acknowledged the same day of '19 Notary Public My commission expires on the day of .19 COMMISSION IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Commonwealth of Virginia, Marine Resources Commission has caused these presents to be executed in its behalf by day of (Name) (Title) MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION 19 By State of Virginia City of to -wit I, — a Notary public within and for said City, State of Virginia, hereby certify that whose name is signed to the foregoing, bearing the 22 nd day of March 19 94 , has acknowledged the same before me in my City aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of '19 Notary Public My commission expires on the day of 19 PERMITTEE—WHITE COPY COMMISSION —YELLOW COPY CORPS OF ENGINEERS —PINK COPY 4f0 ,�C s rn \ 555.5 .. :.... \ xletlnq wetlands ' No 'o be disturbed :7 x 858.3 I ' I c 1 0 1250 eq. Wetlond I � —� 4a/new Nigh • 4 � � or°ek 120 \ astern Fre Ick Deve o 7t Com ny FIELDSTONE BRIDGE Plan SCALE: 1 "=50' HIM A,rch Bridge .e. gilbert w. cliffor ass.ociates, inc. Bntinmrs • Lind PLanu. Surr.yor. 130c old. o ..o h er1.. 3o0 1ao c_ �.. , ., kt.bo.. ""W, 11,01 Cron 1-..1111 •'Imbr�n, Vbitil. 22601 (=I tr 109 l m 5'6 57. 672 670 689 684 664 662 660 664 566 664 662 660 6l1 644 64 01 Eak4V wet It b. daurbd Loon ooror.l. badTn Con ..4. rdh and lounddon Shal. bedrock Propewd rod tunaw �tm) 1 N. Ir.par>aon- I. PA.1. a1. gr+dV , wg.ldband d rwlmd It a dWh ofMTh i r I h. gradV "a than b. rrrw.wd, 2. Ed dlrg loped MTMI I ha Rdry brit Shan b. drl{hp.d and Mod4l(W to a # dwbMad w M M. plu S. AN. rrrgwl d uwut.U. aW aw wit. V. w6ad. Nall b. proohoiad to bed. botol d odl apoM or — of awetaw p-VkV. There a than b..."d and rapnwd wN o-t.W o—padd Ill. st.d..1 None* I . At d" raMhlorr-9 to be grad 60 par ASTM A616 and ASTM A 146 2. At oor-vf. to b. 4200 fa • 21 dyt m i--,,.dw drrnplh S. AI Mdororn.rt 1. haw r Mh—tI oowr u 0— odhrW . apadW a. A p1m stowiV Iwdalion kywA mud be µproved by ah..n0nn..r 6. Dool2n kedrg ASSHTO HS 20•M. ry--2.-•-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I IV 'Aj I I grea S.ba Arch Svv b.r• +iy.,;..J IFT arw gaeelon to b. 06% N t h-46LI —A— d.nay pw ' Typo A 01 M `+•:L:y I \ AW40 T.90 rnoohod A ftti 2% d oprl— m blur. I fig. I Aralh h.ipfhl 4•C:• I ) I I I Eataep rr..m wk*h FIELDSTONE BRIDGE Section SCALE: 1 "=8' gilbert w. clifford-f CS-IV.-rr& associates, inc. Enliawr/ • Lana Planner/ surrayorl 0 0 I20•C ON. 0,.-wk► Dr}.. Pr W. klrb.rl, Vblln 1. 22'01 r70l) 891.2111 2D0 ar H.rm Q-- T Mla.b..— Vbgbt. 22901 (702) W-2," Sty FIELDSTONE BRIDGE Profile SCALE: 1 °-a' gilbert w. cliffor & associates, inc. P tine.,, - L.ud Pl..-,, sbfY.ref. RN.kt�n{. YY{IW 13.01 (I0f1 If{ll if v1�k���, Vb{rk i]WI (10) Mlll1 cn cn crn U cn N Ln U, rn rn 14 o C nn o CP o cn o `.. Arch element I r.; 12" Spandrel wall 4— Detail typical of four corners one of eleven arch elements shown one of three wing wall sections shown 6" 0 01 0%\ . \(ODD O � 0 �di � 6N 0 Spandrel Wall/Wing Wall Connection (-,rnlit Fill Grout Leveling Pad (2" n Longitudinal Bars #4 @ 8 1/4 Transverse Bars #4 @ 4" o.c. w/3" cove 3'a 1 . 3- Arch Element Foundation I Us #4 bars 6" o.c. ' ` " eachface 12" 12" Base J 18 Foundatlon 3" _6' -� 3" r< -8' Wing Wail Section FIELDSTONE BRIDGE gilbert w. cliffor associates, inc. Details sotin"n . >.=d Pknnm SCALE: 1 "=4' s°^'•ro" 120-C 01" 0.-wkb Dri" M " * C. 2trr Prb r kkA-g. Vtrlhm" 22401 (202) 6*1.211$ Mlab— V"*mU 22f01 (M) 60-21" • A • 0 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Norfolk District, Northern Virginia Regulatory Section Northern Virginia Field Office 138 Graham Park Road, Suite 102 Dumfries, Virginia 22026 Project Number: 94-0090 1. Property Owner: Eastern Frederick Development Co. P. O. Box 2097. Winchester, Virginia 22604 Waterway: Abrams Creek ............................................................................................................. 2. Authorized Agent: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Attn: Mr. Ronald Mislowsky May 20, 1994 3. Project Location: The project is located approximately 1 mile east of the intersection of Greenwood Road and Valley Mill Road, in Frederick County, Virginia. 4. Project Description: The project consists of the discharge of fill material into jurisdictional areas for the construction of a concrete arch structure to cross Abrams Creek. 5. Findings This is in reference to your request to perform work in the waters of the United States as described above. This activity has been reviewed and found to satisfy the criteria contained in the Corps Nationwide Permit (14) and (26), attached. (The Corps Nationwide Permits and Regulations can be found in 33 CFR 330 published in Volume 56, Number 226 of the Federal Register dated November 22, 1991.) Provided the enclosed conditions are met, an individual Department of the Army Permit will not be required. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's 401 Certificate is also attached. You may contact the Department of Environmental Quality at (804) 527-5061 for information concerning 401 certifications and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission at (804) 247-2200 for information concerning State and local permit requirements. Please note that the special conditions of the 401 Certificate are part of the Corps Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (Part B, Number 14 and 26). This verification is valid for two years from the date of this letter, unless the Norfolk District Engineer uses discretionary authority to modify, suspend or revoke this verification. The Chief of Engineers will periodically review the nationwide permits and their conditions and will decide to either modify, reissue or revoke the permits. If the nationwide permits verified in this letter are reissued without modification or if your activity complies with any subsequent nationwide permit, the expiration date of this verification will not change. However, if the nationwide permits verified in the letter are modified or revoked so that the activity listed above would no longer be authorized and you have commenced or are under contract to commence the work, you will have twelve months from the date of that permit change to complete the activity. Activities completed under the authorization of a nationwide permit which was in effect at the time the activity was completed continue to be authorized by that nationwide permit. If after consultation with Corps at the end of the 2-year period, there is no change in the nationwide permit, the activity remains authorized until the nationwide permits expire in January 1997. It is your responsibility to remain informed of changes to the nationwide permits. We will issue a special public notice announcing any changes to the nationwide permits when they occur. 6. Corps Contact: Mr. Ron Stouffer / (703) 221-6967 ruce F. Williams NAO FL 13 REVISED DEC 90 Chief, Northern Virginia Regulatory Section N 33 CFR 330 Appendix A iquoted in art Nationwide Permit (14) Road Crossing.. Fills for roads crossing water of the United Page 1 7. Wild and Scenic River. No activity may occur in a component of the National Wild States (including wetlands and other special aquatic sites) provided: and Scenic River System; or in a river officially designated by Congress as a "study river" for poss iion in the e river is in an official study status. * lus a. The width of the fill is limited to the minimum necessary foi• the actual crossing; Info mat oln oncWild and Scenic tRivershile mayt be obtained from the National Park Service b. The fill placed in waters of the United States is limited to a filled area of no more and the U.S. Forest Service. than 1/3 acre. Furthermore, no more than a total of 200 linear feet of the fill for the than can occur in special 8. Tribal rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including, roadway pe aquatic sites, including wetlands; but not limited to, reserved water rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights. c. The crossing is culverted, bridged or otherwise designed to prevent the restriction 9. Water quality certification. In certain states, an individual state water quality of. and to withstand, expected high flows and tidal flows, and to prevent the restriction of certification must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). low flows and the movement of aquatic organisms; d. The crossing, including all attendant features, both temporary and permanent, is part of a single and complete project for crossing of a water of the United States; and, e. For fills in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, the permittee notifies the district engineer in accordance with the "Notification" general condition. The notification must also include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands. Some road fills may be eligible for an exemption from the need for a Section 404 permit altogether (see 33 CFR 323.4). Also, where local circumstances indicate the need, district engineers will define the term "expected high flows" for the purpose of establishing applicability of this nationwide permit. GENERAL CONDITIONS: The following general conditions must be followed in order for any authorization by a nationwide permit to be valid: 1. Navigation. No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. 2. Proper maintenance. Any structure or fill authorized shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety. 3. Erosion and siltation controls. Appropriate erosion and siltation controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. 4. Aquatic life movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the movement of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species which normally migrate through the area, unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. 5. Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands must be placed on mats or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. 6. Regional and case -by -case conditions. The activity must comply with any regional conditions which may have been added by the division engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and any case specific conditions added by the Corps. 10. Coastal zone management. In certain states, an individual state coastal zone management consistency concurrence must be obtained or waived. (see 33 CFR 330.4(d)) 11. Endangered Species. No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such designation,'A§ identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act, or which is likely to destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species. Non- federal pemittees shall notify the district engineer if any listed species or critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project and shall not begin work on the activity until notified by the district engineer that the requirements of the Endangered Species Act have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service. (see 33 CFR 330.4(f)) 12. Historic properties. No activity which may affect Historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places is authorized, until the DE has complied with the provisions of 33 CFR 325, Appendix C. The prospective permittee must notify the district engineer if the authorized activity may affect any historic properties Iisted, determined to be eligible, or which the prospective permittee has reason to believe may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and shall not begin the activity until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. Information on the location and existence. of historic resources can be obtained from the State Historic Preservation Office and the National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)). 13. Notification. (a) Where required by the terms of the NWP, the prospective permittee must notify the District Engineer as early as possible and shall not begin the activity: (1) Until notified by the District Engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the district or division engineer, or (2) If notified by the District or Division engineer that an individual permit is required; or (3) Unless 30 days have passed from the District Engineer's receipt of the notification and the prospective permittee has not received notice from the District or Division Engineer. Subsequently, the permittee's right to proceed under the NWP may be modified, _ suspended, or revoked only in accordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2). _ _ N 33 CFR 330, Appendix A (quoted in part) (b) The noufrcaUon be Page 2 r required fees: must in writing and include the following information and any (1) Name, address and telephone number of the prospective permittee; s (2) Location of the proposed project; (3) Brief description of the proposed project; the project's purpose; direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause; any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s) or individual permit(s) used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity; (4) Where required by the terms of the NWP, a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands; and (5) A statement that the prospective permittee has contacted: (i) The USFWS/NMFS. regarding the presence of any Federally listed (or proposed for listing) endangered or threatened species or critical habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project; and any available information provided by those agencies. (The prospective permittee may contact Corps District Offices for USFWS/NMFS agency contacts and lists of critical habitat.) (ii) The SHPO regarding the presence of any historic properties in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project; and the available information, if any, provided . by that agency. (c) The standard individual permit application form (Form ENG 4345) may by used as the notification but must clearly indicate that it is a PDN and must include all of the information required in (b)(1)-(5) of General Condition 13. (d) In reviewing an activity under the notification procedure, the District Engineer will first determine whether the activity will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or will be contrary to the public interest. The prospective permittee may, at his option, submit a proposed mitigation plan with the predischarge notification to expedite the process and the District Engineer will consider any optional mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse environmental effects of the proposed work are minimal. The District Engineer will consider any comments from Federal and State agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permits and the need for mitigation to reduce the project's adverse environmental effects to a minimal level. The district engineer will upon receipt of a notification provide immediately (e.g. facsimile, transmission, overnight mail or other expeditious manner) a copy to the appropriate offices of the Fish and Wildlife Service, State natural resource or water quality agency, EPA, and, if appropriate, the National Marine Fisheries Service. With the exception of NWP 37, these agencies will then have 5 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted to telephone the District Engineer if they intend to provide substantive, site -specific comments. If so contacted by an agency, the District Engineer will wait an additional 10 calendar days before making a decision on the notification. The District Engineer will fully consider agency comments received within the specified time frame, but will provide no response to the resource agency. The District Engineer will indicate in the administrative record associated with each notification that the resource agencies' concerns were considered. Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps multiple copies of notifications to expedite agency notification. If the District Engineer determines that the activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP and that the adverse effects are minimal, he will notify the permiuee and include any conditions he deems necessary. If the District Engineer determines that the adverse effects of the proposed work are more than minimal, then he will notify the applicant either: (1) that the project does not qualify for authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant on the procedures to seek authorization under an individual permit; or (2) that the project is authorized under the nationwide permit subject to the applicant's submitting a mitigation proposal that would reduce the adverse effects to the minimal level. This mitigation proposal must be approved by the District Engineer prior to commencing work. If the prospective permittee elects to submit a mitigation plan, the DE will expeditiously review the proposed mitigation plan, but will not commence a second 30-day notification procedure. If the net adverse effects of the project (with the mitigation proposal) are determined by the District Engineer to be minimal, the District Engineer will provide a timely written response to the applicant informing him that the project can proceed under the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit. (e) Wetlands Delineations: Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps. The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic site. There may be some delay.if the Corps does the delineation. Furthermore, the 30-day period will not start until the wetland delineation has been completed. (f) Mitigation: Factors that the District Engineer will consider when determining the acceptability of appropriate and practicable mitigation include, but are not Iimited to: (1) To be practicable the mitigation must be available and capable of being done considering costs, existing technolbgy, and logistics in light of overall project purposes; (2) To the extent appropriate, permittees should consider mitigation banking and other forms of mitigation including contributions to wetland trust funds, which contribute to the restoration, creation, replacement, enhancement, or preservation of wetlands. Furthermore, examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing buffer zones to protect aquatic resource values; and replacing the loss of aquatic resource values -by creating, restoring, and enhancing similar functions and values. In addition, mitigation must address impacts and cannot be used to offset the acreage of wetland losses that would occur in order to meet the acreage limits of some of the nationwide permits (e.g. 5 acres of wetlands cannot be created to change a 6 acre loss of wetlands to a 1 acre loss; however, the 5 created. acres can be used to reduce the impacts of the 6 =e loss). COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 401 CERTIFICATION ISSUED TO - U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS' NORFOLK DISTRICT, FORT NORFOLK NORFOLK, VIRGINIA PURSUANT TO SECTION 401 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT (33 U.S.C. SECTION 1341) The State Water Control Board hereby certifies, subject to the special conditions listed herein, that the proposed Nationwide Permit Number 14, Road Crossings, published in the Federal Register on.November 22, 1991 will comply with (1) the Virginia Water Quality -Standards which became effective on July 20, 1970 and which are, as amended in full force and effect under Section 303(a) of Pubic Law 95-217; (2) other applicable limitations, standards, regulations and requirements in accordance with the -State Water Control Law (Title 62.1-44.2 through 62.1-44.34 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended). The Board further certifies that there are no other applicable promulgated effluent limitations or other limitations under Sections 301, 302 and 303 and there is not an applicable standard under Sections 306 and 307 of Public Law 95-217 presently in effect. The District Engineer, Norfolk District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers shall immediately notify the Board of any modification of this permit and shall demonstrate in a written statement to the Board that said modification will not violate any conditions of this Certification. If such demonstration cannot be made, the District Engineer shall apply to the Board for a modification of this Certification. This Certification, after proper hearing, is subject to revocation for failure to comply with the conditions herein. It is issued in accordance with the restrictions placed upon a class of projects described by the Corps of Engineers and certifies that by following these provisions, the applicant and the project contractor will not violate the Water Quality Standards to accomplish the project. Any violation of the Water Quality Standards will be subject to enforcement, abatement and control under the State Water Control Law. I Page 2 The use of this Water Quality Certificate may be terminated, revoked and reissued, or requirement for certification waived upon a finding by the Executive Director that such action would be in the general public interest. Such action shall be taken in accordance with the Commonwealth of Virginia, State Water Control Board Regulations. The Executive Director may re-evaluate his decision to require individual certification under this general water quality certificate at any time should circumstances warrant. Circum- stances that could require re-evaluation include, but are not limited to, the following: a. The permittee fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this certificate. b. The information provided by the applicant in support of his/her permit application proves to have been false, incomplete or inaccurate. c.. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching its original public interest decision to certify the nationwide permit. Such re-evaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the revocation and reissuance, modification and termination procedures contained in Procedural Rule No. 3 or other subsequent regulation adopted by the State Water Control Board. This Certification is valid providing the Nationwide Permit applicant complies with the following Special Conditions, which are made a part of this Certification. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. All pipe culverts, box culverts and similar structures shall be countersunk a minimum of six inches below stream bottom elevation to facilitate the re-establishment of a natural stream bottom within the culvert and to facilitate fish passage. Where multiple boxes or pipes are used only one box or pipe need be countersunk. 2. All multiple pipe culverts, box culverts and similar structures shall provide for a low flow channel and a high flow channel to ensure that stream hydrology is not impaired and fish passage during low flow periods is assured. 3. The construction or work authorized by this permit shall be executed in a manner so as to minimize any adverse impact on instream beneficial uses as defined in Title 62.1 - 10 (b). Page 3 4. No channel modifications beyond that necessary to align and place piers or culverts within State waters is _authorized under this permit. 5. All dredging and/or filling will be accomplished so as to minimize disturbance of the bottom and turbidity increases in the water which tend to degrade water quality and damage aquatic life. 6. Any deposition of dredged or excavated materials onshore, and all earthwork operations will be carried out in such a manner as to prevent the erosion of the material and preclude its entry into State waters. Upon completion of earthwork operations, all fills onshore and other areas onshore disturbed during construction will be seeded, riprapped or given some other type of protection from soil erosion. 7. The permittee shall contact the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission to determine whether a time -of year restriction is appropriate for any period of dredging or construction in trout waters, waters containing endangered species, or waters critical to the movement and reproduction of anadromous fish. The permittee shall maintain a copy of such time of year restriction as is issued, or notification that no restriction is necessary, for the duration of the construction phase of the project. 8. The permittee shall take every reasonable precaution to ensure no spill of fuels, lubricants,or other pollutants into State waters. 9. The permittee shall advise the Executive Director in writing when unusual or potentially complex conditions are encountered which require debris removal or involve potentially toxic substances, and shall not take measures to remove the obstruction, material, or toxic substance, or change the location of the structure until written approval by the Executive Director or his authorized representative is received. 10. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this water quality certificate can result in enforcement actions against the permittee and/or contractor. 11. Acceptance of these conditions and the Nationwide Permit does not relieve the applicant of liability for damages caused by violations of the State Water Control Law or other State law. Page 4 12. This water quality certificate unless revoked and reissued, waived, or terminated shall be in effect for a period not to exceed five (5) years from the date of issuance. 13. In issuing this water quality certificate the State Water Control Board and the Commonwealth of Virginia does not assume any liability for the following: a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpermitted activities or from natural causes. b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities undertaken by or on behalf of the Commonwealth of Virginia in the public interest. C. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused by activity authorized by this permit. d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work. e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit. 14. This water quality certificate, unless revoked and reissued, terminated, modified, or waived, will be in effect until January 21, 1997. By: Date: Ditebtor NATIONWIDE PERMIT SECTION 404 ONLY CONDITIONS In addition to the General Conditions, the following conditions apply to activities that involve the discharge of dredged or fill material and must be followed in order for authorization by the nationwide permits to be valid: 1. Water_ supply intakes. No discharge of dredged or fill material may occur in the proximity of a public' water supply intake except where the discharge is for repair of the public water supply intake structures or adjacent bank stabilization. 2. Shellfish production. No discharge of dredged or fill material may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish production, unless the discharge is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by nationwide permit 4. 3. Suitable material. No discharge of dredged or fill material may consist of unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, etc.) and material discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see section 307 of the Clean Water Act). 4. Mitigation. Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States must be minimized or avoided to the maximum extent practicable at the project site (i.e., on -site), unless the DE has approved a compensation mitigation plan for the specific regulated activity. ' 5. Spawning areas. Discharges in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 6. Obstruction of high flows. To the maximum extent practicable, discharges must not permanently restrict or impede the passage of normal or expected high flows or cause the relocation of the water (unless the primary purpose of the fill is to impound waters). 7. ' Adverse impacts from impoundments. If the discharge creates an impoundment of water, adverse impacts on the aquatic system caused by the accelerated passage of water and/or the restriction of its flow shall be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. 8. Waterfowl breeding areas. Discharges into breeding areas for migratory waterfowl must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 9: Removal of temporary fills. Any temporaryfills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to their preexisting elevation. NWPs numbered 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 19, 24, 28, and 35 do not require 401 water quality certification since they would authorize activities which, in the opinion of the Corps, could not reasonably be expected to result in a discharge and in the case of NWP 8 is seaward of the territorial seas. NWPs numbered 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 32, 36, 37, and 36 involve various activities, some of which may result in a discharge and require 401 water quality certification, and others of which do not. State denial of 401 water quality certification for any specific NWP in this category affects only those activities which may result in a discharge. For those activities not involving discharges, the NWP remains in effect. NWPs numbered 12, 15, 16, 17, 25, 26, and 40 involve activities which would result in discharges and therefore 401 water quality certification is required. Discretionary Authority COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 401 CERTIFICATION ISSUED TO U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS NORFOLK DISTRICT, FORT NORFOLK NORFOLK,- VIRGINIA PURSUANT TO SECTION 401 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT (33 U.S.C. SECTION 1341) The State Water Control Board hereby certifies, subject to the special conditions listed herein, that the proposed Nationwide Permit Number 26, Headwaters and -'Isolated Waters Discharge, published in the Federal Register.on November 22, 1991 will comply with (1) the Virginia Water Quality Standards which became effective on July 20, 1970 and which are, as amended, in full force and effect under Section 303(a) of Pubic Law 95-217; (2) other applicable limitations, standards,'regulations and requirements in accordance with the State Water Control Law (Title 62.1-44.2 through 62.1-44.34 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended). The Board further certifies that there are no other applicable promulgated effluent limitations or other limitations under Sections 301, 302 and 303 and there is not an applicable standard under Sections 306 and.307 of Public Law 95-' 217 presently in effect. The District Engineer, Norfolk District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers shall immediately notify the Board of any modification of this permit and shall demonstrate in a written statement to the Board that said modification will not violate any conditions of this Certification. If such demonstration cannot be made,,the District Engineer shall apply to the Board for a modification of this Certification. This Certification, after'proper.hearing, is.subject to revocation for failure to comply with the conditions herein. It is issued in accordance with the restrictions placed upon'a class of projects described by the Corps of Engineers and certifies that by following these provisions, the applicant and the project contractor will not violate the Water Quality Standards to accomplish the project. Any violation of the Water Quality Standards will be subject to enforcement, abatement and control under the State Water Control Law. 0 Page 2 The use of this Water Quality Certificate may be terminated, revoked and reissued, or requirement for certification waived, upon a finding by the Executive Director that such action would be in the general public interest. Such action shall be taken in accordance with the Commonwealth of Virginia, State Water Control Board Regulations. The Executive Director may re-evaluate his decision to require individual certification under this general water quality certificate at any time should circumstances warrant. Circum- stances that could require re-evaluation include, but are not limited to, the following: a. The permittee fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this certificate. b. The information provided by the applicant in support of his/her permit application proves to have been false, incomplete or inaccurate. c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching its original public interest decision to certify the nationwide permit. Such re-evaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the revocation and reissuance, modification and termination procedures contained in Procedural Rule No. 3 or other subsequent regulation adopted by the State Water Control Board. Under this Water Quality Certificate, the State Water Control Board will, within 30 days after the receipt of a complete application and mitigation plan where applicable, take action to issue an individual Water Quality Certificate, waive the requirement for Water Quality Certification, or notify the applicant that it intends to recommend denial of Section 401 Water Quality Certification. For the purposes of this certificate, a mitigation plan is required for all applicants whose projects will permanently impact one acre or more of non - tidal wetlands, or where stream channel relocation or channelization will be necessary to accomplish the project. Mitigation plans should describe the type of mitigation proposed (e.g. no mitigation, replacement, enhancement, preservation, etc...), including such sketches as are necessary to provide clarification and the location of the mitigation site. The Board will within 15 days of the receipt of the application, inform an applicant verbally, and in writing, whether it requires further data or information to complete its evaluation of an incomplete application. Should further information be required, the applicant shall have a maximum of 45 Page 3 days from the date of the request to supply the necessary information to complete the application. The Board shall have a maximum of 60 days from the date of the request to take final action on any application for which further information or data was necessary to complete the application. Should the Board not respond -to an applicant within 30 days after receiving a complete application and mitigation plan, the applicant may presume that the requirement for a Section 401 Water Quality Certificate is waived. This Certification is valid providing the Nationwide Permit applicant complies with the following Special Conditions, which are made a part of this Certification. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. This Nationwide Permit may not be utilized to impound perennial streams or other'State waters. Applicants wishing to obtain a permit to impound State waters must obtain individual water quality certification from the State Water Control Board. For the purposes of this certificate perennial streams are those streams in which water flows ,throughout an average year. a. Construction of farm ponds and agricultural Best Management Practices (BMPs) conducted in strict accordance with the Field Office Technical' Guide of the U. S. Department of Agriculture,.Soil Conservation Service, are exempt from this condition, excepting those activities for agricultural BMP ponds impounding perennial streams will be determined on a case by case basis. b. Construction of stormwater management ponds in non - perennial streams (waters whose flow is solely dependent on daily precipitation events, or is. seasonally dependent), and whose drainage area is less than 560 acres, are exempt from this condition, excepting that fills for this purpose are limited to less than one (1) acre of non -tidal wetlands. . 2. Individual water quality certification is required for activities in State water which fill one (1) acre or -more of non -tidal wetlands. Fills of less than one (1) acre of wetlands do not require individual water quality certification. 3. No stream channel modification affecting more than 60 linear feet of any perennial stream is authorized under this Page 4 Nationwide Permit. Channel modifications generally include, but are not limited to: rechannelization, channel deepening, channel widening or channel relocation. 4. The construction or work authorized by this permit shall be executed in a manner so as to minimize any adverse.impact on instream beneficial uses as defined in Title 62.1 - 10 (b). 5. All fill material placed in State waters shall be clean and free of toxic pollutants and debris. 6. All activities resulting in a discharge of dredged or fill material will be accomplished so as to minimize disturbance of the bottom and turbidity increases in the water which tend to degrade water quality and damage aquatic life. 7. Any deposition of dredged or excavated materials onshore, and all earthwork operations will be:carried out in such a manner as to prevent the erosion of the material and preclude its entry into State waters. Upon completion of earthwork operations, all fills onshore and other areas onshore disturbed during construction will be seeded, riprapped or given some other type of protection from soil erosion. 8. The permittee shall contact the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission to determine whether a time of year restriction is appropriate for any period of dredging or construction in trout waters, waters containing endangered species, or waters critical to the movement and reproduction of anadromous fish. The permittee shall maintain a copy of such time of year restriction as is issued, or notification that no restriction is necessary, for the duration of the construction phase of the project. To avoid unnecessary delay in processing time, the water quality certificate will be issued within the time frames specified on page two of this certificate whether or not the necessary time of year documentation has been received. 9. The permittee shall take every reasonable precaution to ensure no spill of fuels, lubricants or other pollutants into State waters. 10. The permittee shall advise the Executive Director in writing when unusual or potentially complex conditions are encountered which require debris removal or involve potentially toxic substances, and shall not take measures to remove the obstruction, material, or toxic substance, or A Page 5 change the location of the structure until written approval by the Executive Director or his authorized representative is received. 11. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this water quality certificate can result in enforcement actions against the permittee and/or contractor. 12. Acceptance of these conditions and the Nationwide Permit does not relieve the applicant of liability for damages caused by violations of the State Water Control Law or other State law. 13. This water quality certificate unless revoked and reissued, waived, or terminated shall be in effect for a period not to exceed five (5) years from the date of issuance. 14. In issuing this water quality certificate the State Water Control Board and the Commonwealth of Virginia does not assume any liability for the following! a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpermitted activities or from natural causes. b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities undertaken by or on behalf of the Commonwealth of Virginia'in the public interest. c. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused by activity authorized by this permit. d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work. e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit. 15. This water quality certificate, unless revoked and reissued, terminated, modified, or waived, will be in effect until January 21, 1997. By: Date: Director • 9 gilbert w. cli f f ord & associates, inc. 200 North Cameron Street 0 Winchester, Virginia 22601 540-667-2139 • Fax: 540-665-0493 February 20,1996 Mr. Robert Watkins, Planning Director Frederick County Dept. of Planning & Development 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Fieldstone Master Development Plan - Final Plan Dear Bob: Based upon the attached January 23, 1996 letter of review from Mr. Robert B. Childress of VDOT, we believe that the attached plan is acceptable for your final approval. Channing Drive is shown at 80' as suggested. The plans have been revised to include Planning comments of 9/30/94. Additionally, a note has been added to the plan to satisfy future VDOT design requirements. Copies of the Final Master Development Plan for Fieldstone Heights are enclosed for your approval and signature. Sincerely, gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. Sie nn M. Gyurisin G/cls enclosure cc: /Mr. Evan Wyatt Mr. George Glaize Mr. C. E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. boob O 44 00�01 C] • gilbert w. cli f ford & associates, inc. 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 • Fax: 703-665-0493 June 16, 1994 Mr. Bob Watkins Frederick County Planning Dept. 9 N. Loudoun Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Re: Fieldstone Heights Revised Master Development Plan Dear Bob, In accordance with the Planning Commission request of May 18 we have had the opportunity to take a closer look at the steep slope portions of the plan presented. After close review with your county engineer we have performed the following revisions: 1) Changed location of Stanford Court to a transverse crossing of the swale in lieu of the installation inside the swale as previously shown. 2) Designated lot areas which will definitely require individual lot site plans prior to building permit. This list of lots may be modified or increased at the time of final subdivision plat approval. 3) Designated additional stormwater management areas on the plan. 4) Shifted Monterey Road to provide better building sites on the west side of the road. Also, in keeping with items discussed with your transportation committee regarding the eastern road plan, we have adjusted the main entrance road (Channing Road) to eliminate lot frontage in preparation as a "major collector" designation. We appreciate the opportunity to work with your staff and to improve our planning. We look forward to your approval. Sincerely, C. E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., Vice President Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. s mo D np3 -9 l gilbert w. cli f ford & associates, inc. 200 North Cameron Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 • Fax: 703-665-0493 Mr. Evan Wyatt Frederick County Planning Dept. 9 N. Loudoun Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Evan, Please further table July 6, 1994. involved. June 1, 1994 Re: Fieldstone Estates accept this letter as a request of the Planning Commission to consideration of the Fieldstone Master Development Plan until This will allow additional time to work with staff on the issues Thank you. Sincerel , E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., Vice President Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. CEM/cls 0 i COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 July 27, 1994 TO THE APPLICANTS) AND /OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS) The Application of: FIELDSTONE Preliminary Master Development Plan #003-94 for 169 single family detached, traditional homes. This property is located South and adjacent to Valley Mill Road (Route 659) 2300± east of the intersection of Valley Mill Road and Greenwood Road (Route 656), in the Stonewall District, and is identified as PIN 55-A-181. This revised master development plan will be considered by the Frederick Board of Supervisors at their meeting of August 10, 1994, at 7:15 p.m., in the board room of the old Frederick County Courthouse, Winchester, Virginia. Any interested parties may attend this meeting. Sincerely, Evan A. Wyatt Planner II EAW/dc 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 This is to certify that attached correspondence was Ad to the following on July 27, 1994 from the Department onnina and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: Sm A 55 A 1.81 EASTERN ERN FREDE::RIC K F' () FiOX 2097 WINCHE:STE:R, VA 55 L.ONGE:RBEAM , E:L.A I NE':: N F' (7 DUX 201.8 WINC:HE.STE:R, VA RITCHIE, R. MARK 2 2'70 VALLEY MILL RD WINC:HE:S'T'E:R, VA J. 7sF 212A09- 22604-• 55 A :i.75F. MIL.L. RACE HOMEDWNERS ABSOC. A 1821 C3i'7 DUTTON F'L.A(-E: WINC HE:S'T'E:R, VA. 5"l; A i. 65 ,. MCHAL..E: , MARK A. S. ANN 9. 1.726 VALLEY MILL RD. WINCHE::STE:R, VA. 260 i -- Elaine B. Longerbeam 55 A 2io Box 528 ADAMS, LINDEN D & GOI...I)IE: L.. Berryville, Virginia 22611 :3455 E:DDYS LANE A 3.Ei].F WINCHESTER, VA SCFIUL.LER , W ]: L.L.:1: AM H . � . 55 A 209 F' . O . E<OX 997 F'U - ;3HE P FARM PARTNERSHIP DE:RRYVILL.E, VA- 22 6i3... 40'5 DRIARMONT DR WINCI••IE::STE::R, VA 55 q 3. 70 - r3C:1-IUL.L.E:R, MI:NN:CE: EKST. 55 E::L 1_.:I:C)'I"T' DEL. ]: VE:Fiy SERVICE, A 204 INC, C/(l SE,HUI_.L.E ER, KE:NNE TH— F' BOX 1.1.0 :2i: 8 VALLEYit IL..L. RD. W:I:NCHE:ST'ER, VA WINCHESI*E::R, VA- 226U3. - �'�"••A L.ONC:E:F<E+EAM , C C: INC EiCi7: 1. 4 1. C.36 55 A 9.76E F' O BOX 203.8 RACEY, GE:RAL..D L. & FRANCES F WINCHE:STE:R, VA "P85 VAL..LE:'Y MIL.L.. RD :' '604-- WINCF•IE:STER, VA 55 A 1.76 WIERMAN, GEORGIA E:ST. C:/0 RICHARD BAL.DWIN 3727 SWE::E:TBRIAR PASADE::NA , TEXAS Georgia Wierman, est. c/o Richard Bald 327 Sweetbriar Pasedena, TX 77505 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK I, Renee' S. Arlotta Kenner 5c1-��lelr Z 1312 V011-1lm,ll P Evan A. Wyatt, Pl4ner II Frederick Co. Plan ing Dept. , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II, for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated July 27, 1994 , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County foresaid. Given under my hand this 27 day of July 1994 My commission expires on n...'...-a 41 1 nnr 0 0 I.Y .fy. fr...1::. i:Y ! �n(XE� (•J1•ti(Yf::. '�:. n 1::.•T• 1••7f..•i:7 (.i/ 3 WhNlfil-7 411(Nf'1 WIN('wb•1EST'Ii R, VA Wdtl'::i...:l:;Er1..:1:•::. HEI::C(r!••1•T S HOMEOWNERS ASSOC.' ' W:I:N(::HEE:ST'ER, VA 22604.... SUN �A:E3%1aURY ' T'I:E:RRAC.EE: HOMEOWNERS OWNEE:RS (a#t>fi OC. n 0/0 R WAYNEi: C:t:}Rk:sl"::•T' .PFvF:;:i:i:)<}Ee:i'+I.T. WWI? NC:f••fEBTER, VA (G.W. Clifford Associates !Attn: Tom Price 1200 N. Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 0 • i COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 June 22, 1994 TO THE APPLICANT(S) AND /OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) The Application of: FIELDSTONE Preliminary Master Development Plan #003-94 for 169 single family detached, traditional homes. This property is located South and adjacent to Route 659 (Valley Mill Road), 2300± east of the intersection of Route 659 and Route 656, in the Stonewall District, and is identified as PIN 55-A-181. This revised master development plan will be considered by the Frederick County Planning Commission at their meeting of July 6, 1994, at 7:00 p. m. , in the board room of the old Frederick County Courthouse, Winchester, Virginia. Any interested parties may attend this meeting. Sincerely, Evan A. Wyatt Planner II EAW/dc 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 This is to certify th 0 he attached -correspondence was diled to the following on Junp:2z 19()4 from the Department of Planning qqo_Developmqnt,________' Frederick County, Virginia: IP411...L RACE HOMEOWNERS 1^7SS004 !EASTERN FREDERICK SIT DUTTON. j P 0 BOX 2097 WINCHESTER, VA., 'WINCHEBTERA V6 22&01 MARK A. & ANN S. A 1821 1272a VALLEY'MILL RD. I ... ONGERBEAM. ELAINE B BOX BERRYVILLE, VA I ADAMS, LANDEN D & GOLDIE 1- so A 3&S EDDYS LANE ISCHULLMR, WILLIAM H. WINCHUSTER, VA 1p,O. BOX 89''? jBKRRYV%LL11*:A VA. 22611 A FU-BHEP FARM PARTNERSHII::' I-WIMCMESTER. VA 22aol- =Z8 VALLEY MILL RD., 55 A 204 iWINCHESTER. VA iELLIOTT DELIVERY SERVICE, INC. RACKY, GERALD L. & FRANCEB I-:* VhL1 lli:y MIL'I FU> WINCHESTER, VA WIERMAM, GEORGIA EST' - C/O RIC"ARD.MALDWIN SWEETBRIAR i FASADENA, TEXAS Georgia Wierman, est. 327 Sweetbriar Pasedena, TX 77505 RITCHIE. R_ MARK j2p.7o VALLEY Mx1_1 m) WINCHESTER, VA 22602- A 77505 c/o Richard Bald STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK I, Renee S. Arlotta. IP 0 Box 110 !WINCHESTER, VA "2Z 2604-­ t 115 m 06), LONCERBEAM, C C INC, P 0 BOX 2018 WIMCHMSTEW VA 02&04.... Evan A. Ivyatt, Pfe ner II Frederick Co- Plating Dept. a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II, for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated June-&, 1994 has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County foresaid. Given under my hand this -L-Z day of My commission expires on June 1994 August 31, 1995 ILES, MEORME E! MY ALS :2 1/0 WANDA !200Z BE; NSENY RD nWINCHEM OTER, VA 32602— !CARLISLE HEICHTS MOMEOPMERM AMSOC-1 0 BOX 2241. ve.) 22604— WOURY TERRACE HOMEOWNERS ASSM C/O-R WAYNE CORBET PREGXDEN'V J17 AMBURY COUR'T* VA 22602.... G.W. Clifford Associates Attn: Tom Price 200 N. Cameron Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 )j claJbrrj.�), MOP #o-u3-(qt(� PLANNING COUNTY OF FREDERICK COURTHOUSE COMMONS 2ND FLOOR 9 N. LOUDOUN ST. — P. O. Box 601 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22604 RETu" )p FQ ' hDfR o 7 IJCH 44SgDfN,,� X MBfR U.S.POSiAGE s JUN22'94 UULLE ; F`r:Ut: U1 U5/Za/54 21 1A #1 Georgia Wierman, est. c/o Richard Bald 327 Sweetbriar Pasedena, TX 77505 s mmummmom f. a ' COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 June 22, 1994 TO THE APPLICANT(S) AND /OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) The Application of: FIELDSTONE Preliminary Master Development Plan #003-94 for 169 single family detached, traditional homes. This property is located South and adjacent to Route 659 (Valley Mill Road), 2300± east of the -intersection of Route 659 and Route 656, in the Stonewall District, and is identified as PIN 55-A-181. This revised master development plan will be considered by the Frederick County Planning Commission at their meeting of July 6, 1994, at 7:00 p.m., in the board room of the old Frederick County Courthouse, Winchester, Virginia. Any interested parties may attend this meeting. Sincerely, Evan A. Wyatt Planner II EAW/dc 9 North LOLKIOUn Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 U COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 May 4, 1994 TO THE APPLICANTS) AND /OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) The Application of: FIELDSTONE Preliminary Master Development Plan #003-94 for 177 single family detached, traditional homes. This property is located South and adjacent to Route 659 (Valley Mill Road), 2300± east of the intersection of Route 659 and Route 656, in the Stonewall District, and is identified as PIN 55-A-181. This revised master development plan will be considered by the Frederick County Planning Commission at their meeting of May 18, 1994, at 7:00 p.m., in the board room of the old Frederick County Courthouse, Winchester, Virginia. Any interested parties may attend this meeting. Sincerely, L� k. 4�1- Evan A. Wyatt Planner II EAW/dc 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 This is to certify that t attached correspondence was mJ& to the following on May 4,, 1994 from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: F, C) vo) :rNM Iii.1 A:I:Nl:,: Vi UVI U-I ve.). 1. "S V r".) L. L.,�: C) W Nl::: R 81 B OC11 A 1*-•�., 0.1. 7 DIXY-1,01 WX MC111-11" 113TE, R I W-) j & A V A I 1-.I:.:y lit} A J. 0 1 el y11 MXI L' Fn) VA 1:;:65-lhvzx) ..T.:11,41:43: AR Tr"NAC-3 Geo-rgia Wierman,'e'st. c/o Richard Bald 327 Sweetbriar Pasedena, TX 77505 R. HARK 12.�12*70 VAI-I-EN 11111.1.1 RX) 'VA STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK "i N WX NCI::II;N:rT-I;-- R V U H 1"': V, FARM F, ART N E. 11*4 43 1-41 F* 1 40,r---'J V%RTARMONT DR t%lx 1,1 V6 f V 5 U.5 A .-:IL.TCYTIT X*- :L,,TVI:.!Ry i: Ii.:RV1C,,I;: x 1\1 F, C) ve) 22<1 C" TNC, CIII-4f, SITE. R VA *04 &- Evan A. Wyatt, anner II Frederick Co. Planning Dept. I? Renee q. Arlotta , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II, for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated May 4, 1994 :m has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County foresaid. Given under my hand this 4th day of My commission expires on August 31, 1995 Mav 1994 4ARY POBLIC MDP .13: G'I-I VA M V.511!33: R' S W: C) x-*I0X,"Z VA. VA G.W. Clifford Associates - Attn: Tom Price 200 North Cameron Street Winchester';:.Virginia 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 December 14, 2001 Mr. Darren Foltz Crreenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane. Winchester, VA 22602 RE: Eastern Frederick Development Company - Final Plat of Subdivision: Review Dear Darren: I have had the opportunity to review the final plat of subdivision for the Eastern Frederick Development Company submitted to our office on December 3, 2001. Please address the following comments: 1. The Master DevelopmertPlanapproved onFebruary26,1996,entitled"FieldstoneHeights,"is associated with this proposed subdivision. The MDP depicts a proposed sewage metering station and a proposed sanitary sewer easement on the parcel to be subdivided. If these improvements are determined to be necessary, please ensure that these proposed improvements are depicted on the final plat. 2. Valley Mill Road (S.R. 659) is designated as a major collector. The required right-of-way for a major collector is 80'. A 20'-wide dedication of right-of-way to the Virginia Department of Transportation is required 3. The applicable setbacks for the RP (Residential Performance) District must be depicted. The setbacks are: 35' front, 25' rear, and 10' for the sides. 4. Individual residential lot access is prohibited on roads identified as major.collectors; therefore, no further subdivision ofthis parcel will be permitted unless alternative access to a state -maintained road is provided. Insert this note on the plat. Please address the above comments and re -submit. You may include the revised plat with the required application for a two lot residential subdivision. I am available should you have questions. Sincerely, Paul Patrick T. Davenport Zoning and Subdivision Administrator PTD/kac Enclosure UAPatnck\CommonNS D Rev&ws\EFDev final plat_tevicw.wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 FINAL PLAT OF SUMMON OF A PORTION OF THE LAND OF EASTERN FREDERICK DEI /EL OPMENT COMPANY R08UD MAGISTERIAL D/STRICr,, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA ocrOBER 5, 2001 OWNER'S CERTIFICATE THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF THE LAND OF EASTERN FREDERICK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, AS APPEARS ON THE ACCOMPANYING PLATS, IS WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRES OF THE UNDERSIGNED OWNERS, PROPRIETORS AND TRUSTEES, IF ANY. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY / COUNTY OF TO WIT: THE FOREGOING OWNER'S CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF 20 BY NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES , SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE LAND CONTAINED IN THIS SUBDIVISION IS A PORTION OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO SAD R SIC PMEAJTivIPA1V�C DES DATED JULY 1, 1987, OF RECORD I IC}��IRCUITOUR ERK''S FFICE INDEED BOOK 652 AT PAGE 4 '8r '� .:.i � NOT TO BE USC 'TRUCTIM ARREN S. FOLTZ, L.S. NOTE: PARENT TAX PARCEL IDENTIFICATION EASTERN FREDERICK DEVELOPMENT CO. 55—((A))-181 ZONE: RP USE: AGRI. APPROVALS: FREDERICK COUNTY SANITATION AUTHORITY DATE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DATE FREDERICK COUNTY SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR DATE GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Engineers Winchester, Vuginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone. (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Fowtded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com TH OF �I O 'DARREN S. FOLTZ� No. 002257 2160—RPO1 SHT 1 OF 3 DIMASI INST, NO. 000012070 T.M. 55-((A))-182D - ZONE,- RP USE: Ry386.94 1i/Ifrlll�frV!'�ING/�/ COMPANY 6�p go NEW PARCa 55-(«)-18I C 5.978 ACRES IPF ER/CK—W/NCESTER SER CE AUTHORITY cnAN/TARY SEW R EASEMENT o 5791790`� $AN TARP SEW ER• • ' - -1► • . ', '. MANHOLE ' � CARLISLE HEIGHTS �. 3 • \� \ 1 _ _ HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION COMMON AREA' 40' \D. B. 759y396 r \' T.M. 55I-((2))-1-31A�— NE.• RP USE- VACANT ; Al. FLOOD ZONE'• "A ". I SEE'NOTE- ON vl SHED( .3 • _ IPF V . \' N ' 12'27'11 " W . 30;62.\ .\' S.�aW. sl,i, CARLISLE HEIGHTS o \ ! HOMEOWNERS .p SANIrARY. f ASSOCIATIONER COMMON AREA I MAOLE 8 S N rGr✓ D.B. 7161790-845 y' vlcd ; T M. 55/-((1))-252 ss vs��.'`�'� NORTH FROM ZONE: RP USE: VAC NT � � . � • � o PLAT BY ENGINEERING GREENWAY , ,� . •. f � : '• '. a, i i & SURVEYING, CO., INC. D.B. 652 PAGE 480 SPIKE IN CORNEFENCE 30 r R --„„ „,,.� . ` • ,,. • . • iQ EW �VN • LANE . ' • , " 1287 o0,ELM _ _ 308.13/PS 100 0 100 S W05 27• .W� 1595.13 ' (TOTAL). T.M. 55=((A))-181 y ?'ONE- RP USE.-.!AGRI GRAPHIC SCALE REMA/NDER, OF D,B.. 652y47$ - I (IN FEET) 94.399 ACRES nN4L PLAT OF SLODMSION OF A PORTION EAS DEYELOPMlEI1 T C �E USED FOR CONS REDBUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREO K COUNTY VIRGINIA SCALE. 1 " = 100' DATE.• ocroaER 5 2001 �'DARREN S. FOLTZ� ' No.002257 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 15! Windy Hill Lane Engineers Wnclester, Yuginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX. (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 wwv.greenwayeng.com r2160—RP01 SHT 2 OF 3 1. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. OTHER EASEMENTS THAN THOSE SHOWN MAY EXIST. 2. A PORTION OF THIS SUBDIVISION LIES -WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOOD ZONE, MARKED AS 'ZONE A" ON F.I.R.M. PANEL # 510063 0120 B, DATED JULY 17, 1978. J. PERIMETER BOUNDARY BASED ON A CURRENT SURVEY BY THIS FIRM. LEGM. . IRS — 1/2" IRON REBAR SET, W/CAP IRF — IRON ROD FOUND OTHER CORNERS AS NOTED AIgEA TABU[A1FON: TRACT 1: 5.978 ACRES TRACT 2: 94.399 ACRES TOTAL AREA: 100.377 ACRES CURVE DAM CURVE RADIUS ARC LENGTH CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING TANGENT C 1 1805.37 202.03' 201.92' S 79'01 ' 17" E 101.12' C2 616.72' 65.2 1' 65.17' S 79' 11 54 E 32.63 NEW PARCEL r�II.1p�/� yy� . /VNiG ly, r . ESTAW PARENT TRACT (REMAINDER) INSET MAP SCALE. 1 " = 1000' VALLEY -.MILL ROAD jy J NOT. TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCT0 f7NAL. PLAT OF SUBOMSION OF A PORTION OF THE LAND OF TH pF �l EASTERN FREDERICK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY REDBUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA U SCALE: NIA DATE. OCTOBER 5, 2001 DARR S. FOLTZ No. 002257 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Engineers Winchester, Vugmia 22602 -'1J S[JFZ Surveyors Telephone. (540) 662-4185 FAX (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com 2160—RPO1 SHT 3 OF 3