HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-90 Preston Place (Form -Fred Co Townhouses - Silver Com) - Backfile (2)D
r
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5650
FAX 703 / 667-03 i'0
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHECKLIST
The application is not complete if the following are not present:
1. Two sets of comment sheets from the following agencies
�ialong with any marked copies of the plan;
4-�% VDOT 7 City of Winchester
;-P/ Co. San. Auth. 7 Co. Hlth. Dept.
d,27 Inspections Dept. e>2.a—/ Parks & Rec.
0? 7 Fire Marshall 747 Airport Authority
A L-902. 2 copies of the MDP application
cx 3. 25 copies of the plan on a single sheet
4. 1 reproducible copy of the plan (if required)
5. a 35mm. slide of the plan
* One copy of the application and comment sheets, three
copies of the plan and the marked plans from the review
agencies should be enclosed in a package which will be
forwarded to the County Engineer.
TRACKING
DATE
a7g� Application Received
n'W'* MDP information forwarded to Consulting Engineer
3-21-90 Review/Invoice received from Engineer
D Fee Pai ( a ount $
700. oo cb;%�) f 3-�SZ� . °" ,�a uc . o?��acre' �- X133. 7 b
'1' 0 MDP heard by Planning Commission
-9-9C MDP heard by Board of Supervisors
If-X-1 Final MDP submitted with review agency, Planning
Commission, and Board of Supervisors comments addressed;
deed of dedication bond estimate
Final plat information forwarded to Engineer
i Review received from Engineer
Final Fee paid and MDP approved.
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia
22F
RECEIPT
N-0 0227C4
AMOUNT DUE
AMOUNT PAID
$ J..„ fi(,3L,7�
BALANCE DUE
PAID BY
❑ CASH
❑ OTHER
FREDERICK COUNTY DEPT. OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
P. G. SOX 601 • S COURT SQUARE
W►NCHESTER. VIRGINIA 22601 • (703) 665.5651
RECEIVED FROM _
ADDRESS _.
THE SUM OF
FOR
DATE 407[ / aA " 0
DOLLARS $
C"y 3
)mod. 6. i J45.
DAY -TIMERS RE -ORDER No. 3221 —Printed in USA
BY
RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL FOR PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
PRESTON PLACE H
WHEREAS, the Virginia Housing Development Authority is considering the financing of a
multi -family residential housing development know as Preston Place II; and
WHEREAS, the proposed development will consist of approximately 72 units of housing to be
financed under Virginia Housing Development Authority's Conventional Multi -Family Loan
Program, and situated on approximately 5+ acres on the north side of Bufflick Road just east
of U.S. Route 522, in the County of Frederick, across from Preston Place I Apartments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Board of Supervisors for the County of
Frederick, Virginia, does hereby approve the proposed multi -family residential housing
development know as Preston Place II.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this approval is for the purpose of satisfying the
requirements of Section 36.55.39(B) of the Virginia Code and in no way constitutes approval
of a Master Development Plan or Site Plan for thereferenced development.
The above resolution was passed by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their
regular meeting of May 25, 1994, by the following recorded vote:
This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote:
Richard G. Dick Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Aye
Chairman Vice Chairman
Jimmie K. Ellington Aye
James J. Longerbeam Aye
CharlesW. Orndoff, Sr. Aye Bert M. Sager Aye
Richard G. Dick
C hairman, Board of Supervisors
County of Frederick, Virginia
CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL
In accordance with Virginia Code Section 36.55.39(B), the
Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia,
hereby certifies to the Virginia Housing Development Authority
its approval of the proposed multi -family residential housing
development called Preston.,Place II as expressed in its
resolution duly adopted on May 25, 1994, a certified copy of
which is attached hereto.
i ard� . Dick .�
h'irman, Board of Supervisors
County of Frederick, Virginia
J
LIJ&JLt t .O 1.
Cu tip Cot {�
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/667-0370
December 14, 1990
Richard Tremblay
Vice President for Planning and Development
Silver Communities
P.O. Box 7566
Fredericksburg, Va 22404
Mr. Tremblay:
The Preliminary Master Development Plan for Preston Place
(formerly Frederick County Townhouses) was approved by the
Board of Supervisors on May 9, 1990 and the Final Master
Development Plan was administratively approved by the Frederick
County Planning Department on November 2, 1990 for 117 Townhouses
situated on 22 acres.
Based on this approval a vested right has been established to
construct the uses approved. This right will accrue to subsequent
owners.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter do not hesitate
to call me.
Sincerely,
Robert W. Watkins
Director
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
e
P pEG1pNq � •
Icy
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT i! '
Of -A�
ROUTE 1, BOX 441 im go 1991
SFNING LHF Op 1 � i
WINCHESTER, VIRGIN IA 22601 1
(703) 6WO22 E V/
June 18, 1991
Mr. Robert W. Watkins, Director
Department of Planning and Development
Frederick County, Virginia
Post Office Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Response to Request for Comments
Master Development Plan for Preston Place
Dear Mr. Watkins:
As stated in our letter dated January 19, 1990 concerning Silver
Community's master development plan proposal, if townhouses are
built on the proposed site, the Airport Authority and the Board
of Supervisors will receive many complaints about aircraft noise.
The site is outside of the 65 LDN noise contour which the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) says is "OK" for residential
development. As a matey of fact, it lies between the 50 and 55
LDN. Unfortunately, the 65 LDN contour was developed to limit
the amount � �f funding the FAA would have to provide to resolve
noise disputes with angry residents and is not a wall at which
noise stops.
We respectfully propose that the County require (where possible)
or encourage PHR&A to comply with the following suggested
actions.
a. Build apartments thereby creating one land owner v. s.
117 land owners.
b. Present unequivocal notice of probable aircraft noise
and fly -over nuisance to be given to all potential townhouse
owners. Specifically, the Authority recommends:
(1) Requirement to present a dominant statement of
probable aircraft noise and fly ever nuisance in
disclosure packets.
(2) Requirement to post prominent warnings with
specific regard to the proximity of the airport and
probable aircraft noise and fly -over nuisance on all
advertisements, brochures, ures, and promotional materials.
(3) Require PHR&A t� � install and maintain prominent
warning signs on all roads leading to the development
during the entire period of construction until the .last
townhouse is sold.
Response to Request for Comments
PHR&A - Preston Place Master Development Plan
June 18, 1991
Page 2
(4) Require covenants in property deeds to advise
future buyers of the probability of aircraft noise and
fly -over nuisance.
(5) Require PHR&A to provide an avigation easement for
the entire development.
C. Require acoustical treatment of the townhouse units and
a master plan concept designed to minimize the inevitable
noise impact.
We appreciate the difficult position Frederick County planners
continuously face concerning zoning hindsight and the extremely
difficult position we are suggesting with respect to airport
noise.
The Airport is a vital economic development tool that, if
protected from residential development, will serve our growing
community and the Region for years to come.
If you should have questions, please contact me or the
Authority's Executive Director, Ken Wiegand.
Thank you for your continued support of the airport.
Sincerel your
Paul G. Anderson, Jr'
Chairman
PC: John Riley
W. Harrington Smith
PHR&A
�J
11240 Waples Mill Road
ENGINEERS Suite 100
ARCHITECTS Fairfax, Virginia 22030
SCIENTISTS 703.385.3566
Ed Strawsnyder, P.E.
Frederick County Planning Department
9 Court Square, Box 601
Winchester, VA 22601
Your Authorization: Signed Agreement
Preston Place Townhouse Development
Plan Review
Date: July 18, 1991
Please Reference:
Project No. 17554.134
Invoice No. 9104549
Client No. 07534
Project Manager
3.0
hrs
@33.25
99.75
Senior Engineer
6.0
hrs
@33.25
199.50
Admin. Assistant
1.0
hrs
@14.50
14.50
Total Direct
Total Indirect
Mileage 45 mi @ $.28
TOTAL DUE THIS INVOICE
313.15
470.63
784.38
12.60
$796.98
„�,�O �'ivca�+.ce� 7�3��9� tea.
0 a
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/667-0370
November 2, 1990
PHR & A & Associates, p.c.
Attn: Mr. Frank Carson
107 North Kent Street, Suite 100
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Dear Mr. Carson:
This letter is to notify you that on November 2, 1990, the
Frederick County Planning Department administratively approved the
Final Master Development Plan #003-90 of Preston Place (formerly
Frederick County Townhouses) for 117 Townhouses situated on 22
acres. This property is located on Route 645 off of Route 522
South, in the Shawnee Magisterial District and is identified as
parcel 45C on tax map 64 ((A))
If you have any question regarding the approval of this final
master development plan, do not hesitate to call this office.
Sincerely,
Kris C. Tiern
Deputy Director
KCT/slk
cc: Silver Communities, Inc.
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
0
CC&TY of FREDERICK
Q1
4
Departments of Planning and Building
REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS 703/665-5650
Frederick County Sanitation Authority
ATTN: Wellington Jones,-Engineer/Director
P.O. Box 618, Winchester, Virginia 22601
(703) 665-5690
The Frederick County Sanitation Authority is locatied on the
second floor of the Old Frederick County Courthouse in
Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form.
Applicant's name, address and phone number:.
Silver Communities; Inc.; P.O. Box 7566; Fredericksburg, VA 22404
c/o Patton Harris Rust & Associates; 107 N.-Kent Street;
Winchester, VA 22601; 722-4721
Name of development and/or description of the request:
Master development plan for a 117 unit townhouse development to
be known as Preston Place.
Location:
Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Sanitation Authority Ccuents:
.240 R7C'-_ VI" / 17;F l -- /,44rQi�D Y,�p 4 S
Sanit. Signature & Date: 5� eyv �
(NOTICE TO SANITATION , -,EASE RETURN THIS FORM TO APPLICANT.'
NOTICE TO APPLICANT
It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as
possibly in order to assist the agency with their review. Also,
please attach TWO copies of your plans and/or application form.
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
�I
1
r TOT'IOT 3� 8 i ' ' PHASE THREE
1 D I ;
I 24 UNITS
FM
bU 11 7 DU
S9 ,
III
)U ; 5 U
1
1 ,
1
PHASE O
� 24 UNITS
RA ZONI
8 D(� �\ \ RESIDEN L USE
D \
■
f
i.� W ■ 1
1
)U 4',D� '; q
i I 8
1
1, 1 0 _
—
I
/VQUF.YbAL1
`rutF cir '
;TINE) PHASE FIYE,, �-
17 UNITS
1 , I
I 1 '
I
WISE FOUR
5 UNITS
.2'ya '
FREi3[=.aICK COUNTY
SA►vFTA i W34 Ai)T'r; 31- :TY
L c, C""r-r AS NOTED
❑ { L %�i ::T AND kESLIWA3
ING o LEGEND
TYPICAL UNIT
IN
I_ —±EW— _ EXISTING WATER MAIN Q HYDRANT
PROPOSED WATER MAIN, HYDRANT, 81 VALVE
—Ess -04-- EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
_SS 0( PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
FM PROPOSED FORCE MAIN
APPROVED
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING a DEVELOPMENT DATE
S JHVII'
Offices:
f7aidam Va. -
UATF
FEB. 1990
NTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGIN
FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE
LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMENTS
Control No. 102290514 Date Received 101590 Date Reviewed 102290 '
Applicant Name Silver Communities, Inc.
Address P. O. Box 7566
Fredericksburg, VA 22404
Project Name Preston Place
Phone No. 703-786-140o
Type of Application Master Development Current Zoning RP
1st Due Fire Co. 18 1st Due Rescue Co. 18/3
Ele `tion District Shawnee
RECOMMENDATIONS.
Automatic Sprinkler System Residential Sprinkler System X
Automatic Fire Alarm System X Other
/
Emergency Vehicle Access;
Adequate X Inadequate Not Identified
Fire Lanes Required; Yes X No
Comments: In front of all hydrants per Frederick County Chapter 10.
Roadway/Aisleway Widths;
Adequate X Inadequate Not Identified
Special Hazards Noted; Yes No X
Comments:
- Continued -
' ~
%
Hydrant Locations;
� Adequate
Inadequate
'
Not Identified
X
Siamese Connection Location;
Approved Not Approved Not Identified X
Additional Comments: Hydrant locations will be reviewed and commented
on during site plan approval stage.
.
Based on national statistics for communities such as Frederick County,
Fire and Rescue will respond to 10 calls per year in this subdivision.
'
Review Time .50 hr
Douglas A. Kiracofe
Fire Marshal
"
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Departments of Planning and Building
REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS 703/665-5650
Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department
. ATTNs James Doran, Director
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:
Silver Communities, Inc.; c/o Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates
107'North Kent Street; Winchester, VA 22601; 703/722-4721
Name of development and/or description of the requests
Master development plan for 117 unit townhouse dev6lopment
Locations
_'Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Parks & Recreation Department Comments
Recreational.amenities provided appear to meet requirements of
Frederick County
Parks Signature and Dates
,(NOTICE TO PARKS - PLEASE
THE APPLICANT.)
23/90
NOThCE TO APPLICANT
It is your responsibilit 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.
9 Court .Square - P.O. Box 601 - . Winchester, Virginia - 22601
0 0
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Departments of Planning and Building
REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS 703/665-5650
Frederick -Winchester Health Department
ATTN: Herbert L. Sluder, Sanitation Engineer
P.O. Box 2056, Winchester, Virginia 22601
(703) 667-9747
The Frederick -Winchester Health Department is -located at the
intersection of Smithfield Avenue and Brick Kiln Road, if you
prefer to hand deliver this review form.
Applicant's name, address and phone number:
Silver Communities, Inc.; P.O. Box 7566;
Fredericksburg, VA 22404 703/786-1400
Name of development and/oar description of the request:
Master development plan,for 117 unit townhouse
development.
Location:
Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee
Magisterial district.
Health Department Comments:
Health Signature and Dater
(NOTICE TO HEALTH DEPT► - PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO APPLICAN .)
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.
9 Court Square
P.O. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia
22601
WrIk.4..,/ -74
COUNTY of FREDERICK
AwN'r'
C,
Departments of Planning and Building
ASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS 703/665-5650
<x1 Winchester, Virginia
Youmans, Planning Director
Rouse City Hall
15 N. Cameron Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
(703) 667-1815
The City of Winchester offices are located in Rouss City Ball at
15 North Cameron Street in Winchester, if you prefer to hand
deliver this review form.
Applicant's name, address and phone number:
Silver Communities, Inc.; P.O. Box 7566;
Fredericksburg, VA 22404 703/786-1400
Name of development and/or description of the request:
Master development plan for 117 unit townhouse
development.
Location:
Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee
Magisterial district.
City of Winchester Comments: 'KEY /��P /'1istEp pp�1G,
Wf vt t7 I17 AV►J hbr�1 W�� 12S I'R63CA) 1— fb7��AL D% '; /T/o/�/ 7-D AD DI7-1vA0L
TKAFric N �/ti lttT Rt> /N 7dC �FUTV ?_ cF t�ti�crFeC7�DeL� � fJEP 5/10vtp Ccwlti
/I5s�.DE„)��r.�'s�,UD E7�iE'i AcC�Ss /I5 /AFT of llr�sE „Q pe '
.Cc it RC Jrt.Yrrn/ /f•,..t (.-it t /q 4 / / /
R.1,, / /. FrZe /fit./•rr.nr.. doe /� 5r iJcl:/1•tJ•rl M• I/.•j Jrsi 7/ild wfi•
S/b4� / •J /Mrrrt %rUi•. Ir .r.� �.•
/II�U�� r� i9..�NifUl T/i♦ Off•/lAnr n...r f4.i%/ A. r�•..../.. /.pie itr is _ ./r. /J r-".�.
c,G.0 L,kC lam. li�i E /4 Er � T L1E�CICI`9i.[ Go!'nl.cf Seta-e/c
To Stf r'c.sL�c iC[..t�t.� rt�✓� , c....c-s
City Signature and Date:
(NOTICE TO CITY - PLEASE RETURN TH S FO O T11 APPLICANT.)
NOTICE TO APPLICAN
It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as
possible ill order to assist the agency with their review. Please
also attach a copy of your plans and/or application form.
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601
RECEIVED ►� L0 0 G 1990 'n�c�
��- r— ,/f-'rl
Winchester, Virginia - 22601
CANTY of FREDERICK
Departments of Planning and Building
REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS 703/665-5650
City of Winchester, Virginia
ATTN: Tim Youmans, Planning Director
Rouse City Hall
15 N. Cameron Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
(703) 667-1815
The City of Winchester offices are located in Rouss City Hall at
15 North Cameron Street in Winchester, if you prefer to hand
deliver this review form.
Applicant's name, address and phone number:
Name of developaent and/or description of the request:
Master development plan for 117 unit townhouse
development.
Location:
Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee
Magisterial district.
City of Winchester Commentes
1-l�1* t q
>OQt U / e V S Comm ElvT S / ` % `9,o
W# T w i4c o. cd� � T� To ✓GU F7 L-•u►Tio,� 012 A a 441011J G
s r H Lo.,►C 64� jul-S "14d caw. L �en vjL $PWAR. C-ki av r
City Signature and Date: &A ��
(NOTICE TO CITY - PLEASE RETURN HIS FMM TO
NOTICE TO APPLICA`I1T/
It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as
possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please
also attach a copy of your plans and/or application form.
RECEIVED FLD 0 G 1990
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
COOT TY of FREDERICK
Departments of Planning and Building
REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS 703/665-5650
Doug Riracofe, Frederick County Fire Marshall
F.O. Box 601, Winchester, Virginia 22601
(703) 665-5651
The Frederick County Fire Marshall is located at 21 Court Square
in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review -form.
Applicant's name, address and phone number:
Silver Communities, Inc.; P.O. Box 7566;
Fredericksburg, VA 22404 703/786-1400
Name of development and/or description of the request:
Master development plan for 117 unit townhouse
development.
Location:
Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee
Magisterial district.
Fire Marshall Commentss
_1. No problem with this development An additional hydrant should be added at
the phase 4 section. We have a gap in this area.
2. Fire lanes will need to be marked before occupancy of the properties
Fire.Mars3hall Signature & Date: g �_-- ' �.�.� � P.N. Stinnett, 19 FEB 90
(NOTICE' TO FIRE MARSHALL - PLEA E RETURN THIS FORM TO APPLICANT.)
NOTICE TO APPLICANT
It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as
possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also,
please attach TWO copies of your plans and/or application form.
9 Court Square
P.O. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia
22601
COUNTY of FREDERICK
f
Departments of Plaiuung and Building
REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS 703/665-5650
Frederick County Inspections Department
ATTN: Kenneth L. Coffelt, Director
P.O. Boa 601, Winchester, Virginia 22601
(703) 665-5651
The Frederick County Inspections Department is located at 9 Court
Square in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this revie ,
form. i&
1�
Applicant's name, address and phone number:
ni
ksburq, VA
22404
U11
Name of development and/or description of the request:
Master development plan for 117 unit townhouse
development
Location:
Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee
Magisterial district.
Inspections Departmen/t� Comments i
o�
JAN
N
7-o Use,11c.7
r U q
Inspect. Signature & Datef
(NOTICE TO INSPECTIONS - P�
E RETURN
TO APPLICANT.)
NOTICE TO APPLICANT
It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as
possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also,
please attach a copy of your plans and/or application form.
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
• 0
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Departments of Planning and Building
REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS 703/665-5650
Frederick County Sanitation Authority
AT'N: Wellington Jones, Engineer/Director
P.O. Box 618, Winchester, Virginia 22601
(703) 665-5690
The Frederick County Sanitation Authority is located on the
second floor of the Old Frederick County Courthouse in
Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form.
Applicant's name, address and phone numbers o41i 417--1
Silver Communities, Inc.; P.O. Box 7566 All RA X
Fredericksburg, VA 22404 703/786-1400 P. a dx 33 V
�R., V�
Name of development and/or description of the request: 4 r,7-00
W, FA,4*c/s
Master development plan for 117 unit townhouse development.
Location:
Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee Magisterial district.
Sanitation Authority Comments:
L1` �T�i11 f • ����' D ✓r�D � S ti D T,�. � �I�X,F'
Sanit. Signature & Date:
(NOTICE TO SANITATION - ASE RETURN THIS FORM TO APPLICANTP.)
� 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 1920
please attach TWO copies of your plans and/or application fo ^1'►a ?�
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia -
FE81990
PHR ti
60 Inchesterr 0/fice
Z L
0 0 r 16 '� 1 jp'�D
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Departments of Planning and Building
REQUEST FOR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS
Virginia Department of Transportation
ATTN: William H. Bushman, Resident Engineer
P.O. Box 278, Edinburg, Virginia 22824-0278
(703) 984-4133
The local office of the Transportation Department is locat
1550 Commerce Street, if you prefer to hand deliver this r
form.
Applicant's name, address and phone number:
Silver Communities, Inc.; P.O Box 7566•
Fredericksburg, VA 22404 703/786-1400
7
JAN 1990 N�
LO PffR & A ND
�Yinchester pnke
ek ,at
Is1.
Name of develop®ent and/or description of the request:
Master development plan for 117 unit townhouse
development.
Location:
Route 645 off Route 522 in the Shawnee
Magisterial is ric .
Transportation Department Co=ents:
No objection to preliminary master plan. Before making any final comments,
this office will require a complete set of site plans drainage calculations
and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Fourth Edition
for review. Before starting any construction on the State s right -of -wad_
the eve oper will need to apply to this office for issuance of appropriate
permits to cover said work.
VDOT Signature and Date: �ti, �t/
(NOTICE TO VDOT - PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO THE PP ICANT.)
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 TEUREE copies of your plans and/or application form.
9C
4%W
PRELIMINARY MATER DEVOPMENLAN
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: r a
1. Development's name: Frederick County Townhouses C+�"
2. Location of property: Route 645, off Route 522
3. Total area of property:
22.0 acres
4. Property identification numbers:
Tax map 64 ((A))
Tax parcel 45 C
Tax ID # (21 Digit) 64000A00-0000-0000-0045B
5. Property zoning and present use RP Zoning; undeveloped.
6. Adjoining property zoning and present use: RA, residential use;
RP, residential use; RP, undeveloped; M1, undeveloped;
B2, undeveloped.
7. Proposed Uses: Townhouses
S. Magisterial District:
Shawnee District
9. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan?
Original XX Amended
- 6 -
C�
Please list all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning
property adjacent to both sides, to the rear, and in front
(across the street) of the property in question. Please list the
name, address, and most importantly, the complete 21-digit
property identification number. This information may be obtained
from the Commissioner of Revenue's office. Please attach
additional sheets, if needed.
Name: Thelma S. Cook
/ Address: Rt. 1, Box 1425; Berryville, VA 22611
Property I.D.#: 64000-A00-0000-0000-00540
64000-A00-0000-0000-00530
Name:_ C. Douglas and Fern L. Adams
/ Address: 5700 Gaines Street; Burke, VA 22011i
Property I.D.#: 64000-A00-0000-0000- 0045D & 00451W
Name: Melvin D. and Kathleen M. Boone
V4ddress: Rt. 1, Box 165; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00850.
Names
Luther
Pangle Estate c/o John L. Pan le
Address:
560 North Pershing Avenue; York, PA 17404
Jf /
Property
I.D.#:
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00550
V
Name:
Howard
J. and Lillie M. Ashby
�Address:
Rt. 1,
Box 185; Winchester, VA 22601
I
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00680
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00690
Name: James E. Wisecarver
Address: Rt. 1, Box 467; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00620
-.>
1/
• 0
Names
Address:
Flotie E. Boggs
Rt. 1, Box 191; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#:
Name:
Address:
Joseph C. and Thelma E. Bauserman
Rt. 1, Box 196; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00560
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00570
Name:
Elmar A and Luella J Sherman
Address: Rt, 1 Box 157• Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64C00-A00-0000-0000-0040
Name:
Address:
John R. and Lillie E. Hawkins
t. 1, Box 186: Winchester_ VA 22F()1
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00670
Name: Isabella V. Pingley
Address: P.O. Box 173; Winchester, VA
Property I.D.#:
22601
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00830;1
Names John A. and Donna T. Pearson
Address: Rt. 1, Box 188; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00630
Name: Clinton D. and Agnes J. Lewis
Address: Rt. 1, Box 168; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 0-A00-0000-0000-00860
Yj
Name: John M. and Pamela S. Ornforff /r
Address: Rt. 1, Box 187; Winchester VA 22601 J L/
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00640
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00650
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00660
Names Robert J. and Karen S. McDaniel
Address: Rt. 1, Box 166; Winchester. VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00900
Names Earl M. and Virginia M. Nicholson
Address: HC 38 Box 1320; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0001-0000-00580
Name: William Luther Copenhaver
Address: Rt. 1 Box 189; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#s 64B00-A00-0001-0000-00610
Names Timothy P. & E. Lorraine Rogers
Address: Rt. 1 Box 190; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-000-0000-00600
Name:
Address:
Property I.D.#:
Names
Address:
Property I.D.#:
Name:
Addresss
Property I.D.#:
Names
Address:
Property I.D.#:
•
)A,� oclm�� � Jy�
y5 ao po,-,k, /Cod
vo V
patL-►� p PiL iu S 2 use fqss C)C
0-7 N K-er.4 s-t S�, 4-4 � � o
P/C Review - 4/18/90
BOS Review - 5/09/90
4
PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #003-90
FREDERICK COUNTY TOWNHOUSES
SILVER COMMUNITIES, INC.
Zoned RP (Residential Performance)
22.0 Acres
LOCATION: Route 645, off of Route 522
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee
TAX MAP & PARCEL NUMBER: Tax map 64 ((A)), parcel 45 C
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance),
undeveloped
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: RA (Rural Area), RP. (Residential
Performance), M1 (Limited Industrial) and B2 (Business General)
zoning; and residential and undeveloped uses.
PROPOSED USE: Townhouses
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Frederick County Parks & Recreation: Recreational amenities
provided appear to meet requirements of Frederick County.
City Planning: Would like to see future revised plans.
Winchester Regional Airport Authority: See attached letter
dated January 19, 1990.
Fire Marshal: 1) No problem with this development. An
additional hydrant should be added at the phase 4 section.
We have a gap in this area. 2) Fire lanes will need to be
marked before occupancy of the properties.
Inspections: This request for Master Development Plan
approval, shall comply to Use Group "R" Residential, Section
309.0 of the BOCA National Building Code 111987"
0 . 0
Page 2
Frederick Co. Townhouses
Sanitation Authority: 4 items - approved as noted - make
changes and send me one blue line print.
Va. Dept. of Transportation: No objection to preliminary
master plan. Before making any final comments, this office
will require a complete set of site plans, drainage
calculations and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip
Generation Manual, Fourth Edition for review. Before starting
any construction on the State's right-of-way, the developer
will need to apply to this office for issuance of appropriate
permits to cover said work.
Planning & Zoning: Townhouses are a permitted use in the RP
zone. With 22 acres and 117 units proposed, the overall
density is 5.3 units per acre.
The plan needs to show the location of designated open space
as well as any environmental features present on the site.
If no environmental features exist, a statement to this affect
should appear on the plan.
The width of the entrance drive and travel ways should be
indicated on the plan. The applicant will need to insure that
adequate widths are provided for emergency vehicles through
parking areas.
The location of the active buffer lines should be shown on the
plan in addition to the inactive. Also, a more detailed
indication of plantings which will compose the buffers needs
to be provided.
Details on storm water management will need to be provided at
the site plan phase.
The scale indicated on the plan is wrong and should be
corrected.
Staff Recommendation for 4118190: Approval, with the review
agencies, county engineer, and staff comments being addressed.
(PC recs on next page)
0 . 0
Page 3
Frederick County Townhouses MDP
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS OF 4118190: Unanimous approval
with the following conditions:
1. That Silver Communities, Inc. will include a disclosure in all
sales contracts, deeds and subdivision covenants that the
property is in proximity to the Winchester Regional Airport.
2. Sales brochures for the project will include a location map
that will show the proximity of the site to the Winchester
Regional Airport.
3. Silver Communities will provide a navigational easement in
each deed which holds harmless the Winchester Regional Airport
Authority from any lawsuit regarding noise pollution or fly-
over nuisance.
In addition, all review agency, county engineer and staff comments
must be addressed.
(Note: Mr. Wilson abstained from voting.)
i
APPLICATION AND CHECKLIST
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Frederick County
Virginia
Date: February 22, 1990
OWNERS NAME: Silver Communities, Inc.
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, VA 22404
@ W7
FEB 2 7 1990
Application # 0Q3--!?(D
Edward O. Minniear, Jr,; President
(Please list the names of all owners, principals, or majority
stockholders.)
APPLICANT/AGENT:
Address:
Silver Communities, Inc.
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, VA 22404
Phone Number 703/786-1400
DESIGNER/DESIGN COMPANY: Patton, Harris, Rust and Associates, p.c.
Address: 107 North Kent Street, Suite 100
Phone Number
Contact Name
Winchester, VA 22601
703/722-4721
Frank Carson
- 5 -
PRELIMINARY 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: Frederick County Townhouses
2. Location of property: Route 645, off Route 522
3. Total area of property: 22.0 acres
4. Property identification numbers:
Tax map 64 ((A)) _
Tax parcel 45 C
Tax ID # (21 Digit) 64000A00-0000-0000-0045B
5. Property zoning and present use RP Zoning; undeveloped.
6. Adjoining property zoning and present use: RA, residential use;
RP, residential use; RP, undeveloped; M1, undeveloped;
B2, undeveloped.
7. Proposed Uses: Townhouses
8. Magisterial District: Shawnee District
9. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan?
Original kX Amended
- 6 -
General Information:
I. Have the following items have 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? 5
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 No
* * 8. Describe the following environmental features:
Total Area % Disturbed Area in
Open Space
Floodplains
Lakes and ponds
Natural retention areas
Steep slopes (15% +)
Woodlands
* Environmental features and a summary of the respective areas are to
be included with a supplemental drawing.
- 7 -
9. Are the following shown on the master development plan?
Street layout
Yes
X
No
Entrances
Yes
X
No
Parking areas
Yes
X
No
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 X No
12. The plan should include signature lines for the Director of
Planning and the County Administrator. Have the signature
lines been included? Yes No x
Residential Uses
If the Master Development Plan includes any land zoned RP,
(Residential Performance) or any residential uses, the following
items should be completed.
1. What housing types are proposed? Townhouses; 2 and 3 bedrooms
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
X
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? 55%
4. Are recreational facilities required? Yes X No
5. What types of recreational facilities are proposed? Swimming
pool, tennis court, volleyball court, and tot lot
r
6. Are separation buffers required? Yes X No
7. Are road efficiency buffers required? Yes X No
8. Are landscaping or landscaped screens required?
Yes X No
9. Are required buffers, screens, and landscaping described by
the plan with profiles or examples? Yes X No
*10. Are any of the following bonus improvements proposed to be
used?
Recreational Facilities Yes No
Energy Conservation Yes No
Pedestrian or Bikeway System Yes No
Underground Utilities Yes No
Street Design Yes No
*11. How many bonus factors have been earned?
*12. How will the bonus factors be used?
* CREDIT FOR EARNED BONUS IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT ADDRESSED AT
THIS TIME.
- 9 -
Please list all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning
property adjacent to both sides, to the rear, and in front
(across the street) of the property in question. Please list the
name, address, and most importantly, the complete 21-digit
property identification number. This information may be obtained
from the Commissioner of Revenue's office. Please attach
additional sheets, if needed.
Name: Thelma S. Cook
Address: Rt. 1, Box 1425; Berryville, VA 22611
Property I.D.#: 64000-A00-0000-0000-00540
64000-A00-0000-0000-00530
Name: C. Douglas and Fern L. Adams
Address: 5700 GaJDc- _street ; BurkP, VA 22015
Property I.D.#: 64000-A00-0000-0000- 0045D & 0045E
Name: Melvin D. and Kathleen M. Boone
Address: Rt. 1, Box 165; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00850.
Names Luther Pangle Estate c/o John L. Pangle
Address: 560 North Pershing Avenue; York, PA 17404
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00550
Name: Howard J. and Lillie M. Ashby
Address: Rt. 1, Box 185; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00680
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00690
Name: James E. Wisecarver
Address: Rt. 1, Box 467; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00620
Names Flotie E.. Boggs
Address: Rt. 1, Box 191; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00590
Names Joseph C. and Thelma E. Bauserman
Address: Rt. 1, Box 196; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00560
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00570
Name: Elmar A and Luella J Sherman
Address: Rt, 1. Box 157: Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#s . 64C00-A00-0000-0000-0040
Names John R. and Lillie E. Hawkins
Address: Rt..1, Box 186; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00670
Name: Isabella V. Pingley
Address: P.O. Box 173; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#s 64B00-A00-0000-0000-008301!1
Name: John A. and Donna T: Pearson
Address: Rt. 1_, Box 188; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00630
Name: Clinton D. and Agnes J. Lewis
Address: Rt. 1, Box 168; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00860
Name: John M. and Pamela S. Ornforff
Address; Rt. 1, Box 187; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00640
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00650
64B00-A00-0000-0000-00660
0 0
Name: Robert J. and Karen S. McDaniel
Address: Rt. 1, Box 166; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0000-0000-00900
Name: Earl M. and Virginia M. Nicholson
Address: HC 38 Box 1320; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0001-0000-00580
Name: William Luther Copenhaver
Address: Rt. 1 Box 189; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-0001-0000-00610
Name: Timothy P. & E. Lorraine Rogers
Address: Rt. 1 Box 190; Winchester, VA 22601
Property I.D.#: 64B00-A00-000-0000-00600
Name: oerr
Address: Kr. I
Property I.D.#:
Name:
Address:
Property I.D.#:
Name:
Address:
Property I.D.#:
Name:
Address:
Property I.D.#:
�i�cl�esfer , OA_ 2260
0 0
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 103/667-0370
April 4, 1990
TO THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S)
THE APPLICATION OF
Preliminary Master Development Plan for: Townhouses, zoned RP
(Residential Performance). This property consisting of 22.0 acres
is located on Route 645, off of Route 522 south in the Shawnee
Magisterial District, and is identified as parcel # 45B on tax map
64 ( (A)) .
This preliminary master development plan will be considered by the
Frederick County Planning Commission at their meeting of April 18,
1990 at 7:00 pm, in the old Frederick County Courthouse,
Winchester, Virginia.
Any interested party having questions or wishing to speak may
attend this meeting.
Sincerely,
eA-1-) 5Z-
Kris C. Tierney
Deputy Director
KCT/slk
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 -
Winchester, Virginia
22601
This is to certify th the attached correspondence w ailed to the following on
April 4, 1990 fro* e Department of Planning and lopment, FredericK
' County, Virginia:
Thelma S. Cook
Rte. 1, Box 1425
Berryville, VA 22611
C. Douglas & Fern L. Adams
5700 Gaines St.
Burke, VA 22015
Elmar A. & Luella J. Sherman
Rte. 1, Box 157 /
Winchester, VA 22601
William L. Copenhaver
Rte. 1, Box 189
Winchester_, VA 22601,
Timothy p. & E. Lorraine Rogers
Rte. 1, Box 1.90
Winchester, VA 22601
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF FREDERICK
I, Renee' S. Arlotta
NESSELRODT, J. H. EST. & LENA
C/O NESSELROOTP LENA
RT. 1 BOX 200
WINCHESTER# VA.
22601
BOONEt MELVIN Q.
& KATHLEEN M.
RT. 1 BOX 165 �
WINCHESTCR, VA.
22601
PANGLEt LUTHER ESTATE
C/O PANGLE, JOHN L. /
560 N. PERSHING AVENUE
YORK9 PA.
17404
ASHBY, HOWARD JUNIOR
& LILLY M.
RT. 1 BOX 185
WINCHESTERt VA.
22601
Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Director
Frederick County Dept. of Planning
, a Notary Public in and for the state and
county aforesaid, do hereby certify that Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Director,
for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the
foregoing, dated April 4, 1990 , 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 March 23, 1991
April
NOTARY PUBLIC
1990
WISECARVER, JAPES E.
RT, 1 BOX 467
WINCHESTERs VA. 22601 £CKAREN.
LSROBERT J.
RT. 1 BOX 166
WINCHESTER, VA,
BOGGS, FLOTIE E.
RT I BOX WINCHEST9
ERsVA.
NICHOLSONt
22601 EVIRGINIA EARL M.
MA
HC 38 BOX 1320
WINCHESTER, VA.
BAUSERMAN, JOSEPH C.
E THE.
I BOX X 196 / Silver Communities, Inc.
.
80
WINCHESTER, VA. 45 Plank Road
2260 1 Fredericksburg, Va. 22404
HAWK.INS, JOHN R. E LILLIE E.
RT. 1 BOX 186
WINCHESTER, VA.
22601
PINGLEY, ISABELLE V.
P. 0. BOX 173
WINCHESTER, VA.
22601
PEARSON, JOHN A. E DONNA T.
RT. 1 BOX 183
WINCHESTER• VA.
2260.1/
LEWIS, CLINTON 0. E AGNES J.
RT. 1 BOX 168 /
WINCHESTER, VA.
2260.1
ORNDORFFv JOHN MITCHELL
E PAMELA SE.ABRIGHT /
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTER, VA.
22601
22601
22601
Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates
107 N. Kent St., Suite 100
W mchester, Va. 22601
Jerry T�afollette
rt. 1, Box 193
Winchester, VA 22603_
itv�� e�� —
;...INNING
COUNTY OF FREDERICK
9 COURT SQUARE
P. O. Box 601
WINCHESTER VIRGINIA 22601
C. DOuglas & Fern L. Adams
5700 Gaines St.
.-,Bikrke, VA 22015
Afo w - Lvfft
Oly V%tP
U.S.POSTAGE
APR-4*90 7
E-- 0 .2 5
Mc��oM�
APR 101990
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703 / 667-0370
April 4, 1990
TO THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S)
THE APPLICATION OF
Preliminary Master Development Plan for: Townhouses, zoned RP
(Residential Performance). This property consisting of 22.0 acres
is located on Route 645, off of Route 522 south in the Shawnee
Magisterial District, and is identified as parcel # 45B on tax map
64 ( (A)) .
This preliminary master development plan will be considered by the
Frederick County Planning Commission at their meeting of April 18,
1990 at 7:00 pm, in the old Frederick County Courthouse,
Winchester, Virginia.
Any interested party having questions or wishing to speak may
attend this meeting.
Sincerely,
9 Court Square P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/667-0370
April 25, 1990
TO THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S)
THE APPLICATION OF FREDERICK CO. TOWNHOUSES/SILVER COMMUNITIES
Preliminary Master Development Plan for: Townhouses, zoned RP
(Residential Performance). This property consisting of 22.0 acres
is located on Route 645, off of Route 522 south in the Shawnee
Magisterial District, and is identified as parcel # 45B on tax map
64 ( (A)) .
This preliminary master development plan will be considered by the
Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of May 9,
1990 at 7:15 pm, in the old Frederick County Courthouse,
Winchester, Virginia.
Any interested party having questions or wishing to speak may
attend this meeting.
Sincerely,
Kris C. Tierney
Deputy Director
KCT/slk
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
This is to certi that the attached corresponden as mailed to the following,'on
April 25, 1990. that
the Department of Planning *Development, Frederick
t
County, Virginia:
fl,t�i Ry�� D3�i-, .J� Hgl =ii S�T,� i, LE +1,a
OAUi5€':34 tANiP__ JOSf. PH C s
��S?5i)
t. ;�1J ff#_J Jk-L3>i1?.)T� t. �...NA
1H La�l-� E
R T , 1 BOX 200
aT� I BOX 196
1W`1NCHESTi_Rq VA.
WINCHESTE1Z.? VA,,
- l
ON! r ME V 111 1)
KATHLLE4 H
I HA1i1 .jtjS, J('1HIN q, L ILL.1C E�
,.i. 1 BOX
t!¢�T" I � 0e- X 1.65
i �3J .� A'�1 �, �-f � ..� 7 �. ? Q VA.
Sg t t^ Y
22601
i 1_260.1
- _ 3
��t PINGs °i—Ip 9HES E�r�TA1E
CIyy//0�� PAi�GI_E'� t � I
-
z,1NGLE❑Y, T:�ABE LL V:o
p101-iN
i 3
�£.,j�(VV i�1 D fi �i`-�..it�R ��7,7 AV NU!` I
..ii `gg B,,))�7�q,J [� t)ig„'7� 1 ! 3) .
1.7404
!_ 6
ASHB'"a'a HOWAP9 JUNIOR
:- I `1
[
ZF !" a�t 1 �iC�1 >� 1 �i a
PEA SCINi JOHN An x., ;3C�3��NA .1
' 4 P STE`k 4 11An L' 3 ).;i
!ur. a 1 (aox iati
a INC.HESTE'Ry VA,
22601 �
yy i3 a 1}ES
RCS 1 BOX � 7
LEWIS-t CLINTON D� Z AGI'IIES J..,
W.1 NC11 EST E:; a VA<,
RT.,, I 301 1.68
HIIJIiCHESTERq V,A,
22601
-
22601
B0GGSi FLCl'T5� `n
R T s I BOX 1. 9 .i
t11i iCHES E-R9 VAS
22601
------ - — - ,
Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Director
Frederick County Dept. of Planning
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF FREDERICK
I, Renee'` S. Arlotta
, a Notary Public in and for the state and
county aforesaid, do hereby certify that Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Director,
.for the Department of Planning and
Development, whose name, is signed'to the
foregoing, dated April 25, 1990
, has personally appeared before me and
acknowledged the same in my state
and county foresaid.
Given under my hand this 25th
day of April $1990 ,
My commission expires on March 23,
1991
NOTARY PUBLIC
0
C )�lL7 ljtf= = v ,i0FiIN H I TC#-IELL - —
PAMEL'A .S cut># U;11 -
1-87
WTNCIIESTE.P, v VA
2260
F, KARF N S
Ri a ,, I BOX X 166
22601
1I; G I M I A
t,j 1i,jC,HES 3 ER 2 VA -
Flmar &Luella Sherman-----
Rt. 1, Box 157
Winchester; VA 22601
/ William Copenhaver
Rt. 1, Box 189
Winchestr, VA 22601
mii;lotby & Lorraine Rogers
Rt. 1, Box 190
Winchester, VA 2.2601
0
I Silver Communities, inc.
4500 Flank Rd.
Fredericksburg, VA 22404
Pa-tton, Harris, Rust & Assoc., CF
107 N. Kent St., Ste. 100
Winchester, VA 22.601
i Jer_ry Lafollette I
Rt. 1, Box_ 193
Winc hester, VA 22601
C. Douglas & Fern L. Adams J
C/O Airport Business Center
i Rt. 1; Box 206-A
Winchester, Va. 22601
Thelma Cook
Route 1, Box 1425
Berryville, Va. 22611
AP-
14
SENT BY; XEROX Telecopier 7017 44-90 ; 8:31AM ; 7037866 17036670370;# 1
57LVER COMPANIES
P.O. Box 7566
4500 Plank Road
Prideritksburg, VA 22405
(703) 786-1400
F,A-x Nutaber (703) 786-6455
�s � TF -: —, '99S1ON COVER PACE
k, TELEPHONE/FAX I�NMAER:
_.
fc�l�tAl *ARR�k � �A�l�st d ***� r���� # ****�RdA* R #*Aii**A********#old***A****AAAAA
SENT
DATE AND TIME:
PAGES TO FOLLOW (INCLUDING COVER SHEET) s
COMWTS/SPECIAL MTRUCTIONStVol
!_
Uf
�� ro Gr.�� w ► ! ( Ix. v�-r f o c�vv
a.5 �� s�� hc�
me a0 � 3�__7 , Y� 44eo?��dl
0
•
-� V4
yye►�Ca ( ��,w
6- -L;-- t5x- �Q-
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/667-0370
October 29, 1990
W. Francis Carson, P.E.
Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates
107 North Kent Street, Suite 100
Winchester, Virginia 22601
RE:. F4DP for Preston Place (Silver Communities)
Dear Frank:
The Final Master Development Plan you submitted October 26, 1990
for Preston Place lacks two items necessary for approval.
The right-of-way widths of all travelways needs to be indicated on
the plan. This was pointed out in the initial planning staff
review and is required by section 14-5-3.1.11 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
The buffer detail shown on the plan does not meet the requirements
for a full screen as stated in section 3-12-2.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance. No deciduous species is indicated on the plan and
spacing of plantings is not indicated. This could be addressed by
adding a statement on the plan to the effect that all buffers will
meet the requirements of section 3-12.2.1
If there are any questions regarding either of these items please
let me know.
Sincerely,
Kris C. Tierney
Deputy Director
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
Pf 1h&A
Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc
Engineers, Surveyors, Planners, Landscape Architects
107 North Kent Street, Suite 100
PO Box 3548
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Winchester 703 722-4721
Woodstock 703 459-171
Offices:
Fairfax, VA
October 25, 1990 Bridgewater, VA
Chantilly, VA
Leesburg, VA
Rockville, MD
Virginia Beach, VA
Winchester, VA
Kris C. Tierney
Department of Planning and Development
Frederick County
9 Court Square
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: PRESTON PLACE
Master Development Plan
PHR&A No. 6616-1-0
Dear Kris:
We are submitting herewith eight (8) blueline prints of the
Master Development Plan for Preston Place as well as final
comment sheets from the Fire Marshal and Frederick County
Sanitation Authority. The plan has been revised in response
to review comments and includes the final conditions
stipulated by the Board of Supervisors in their approval.
Please review the plan and, if acceptable, have these signed
as provided for. We will pick up six (6) prints when they
are signed, so please give me a call when are ready.
Sincerely,
PATTON HARRIS RUST & ASSOCIATES
A Professional Corporation
Engineer,- W. Francis Carson, P.E.
Surveyors, Senior Project Manager
Planners &
Landscape
Architects WFC/j db
OCT 2 6
Mary Sue Terry
Attorney General
H. Lane Kneedler
Chief Deputy Attorney General
Deborah Love -Bryant
Chief -of -Stan
�,�.Pn- ��(�. • Ns 5 i Ivy ��.
• � Svfcnm•
�� � Coriesp.
COMMONWEALTH of VIRQINIA
Office of the Attorney General
August 16, 1990
The Honorable Lawrence R. Ambrogi
Commonwealth's Attorney for Frederick County
Frederick -Winchester Judicial Center
5 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
My dear Mr. Ambrogi:
K. Marshall Cook
Deputy Attorney General
Finance 8 Transportation Division
R. Claire Guthrie
Deputy Attorney General
Human 8 Natural Resources Division
Gail Starling Marshall
Deputy Attorney General
Judicial Affairs Division
Stephen D. Rosenthal
Deputy Attorney General
Criminal Law Enforcement Division
You ask whether a local governing body may require a landowner seeking to subdi-
vide property near a publicly owned airport to dedicate an "avigation easement" for pub-
lic use for the operation and navigation of aircraft over portions of the property being
subdivided, as a condition of subdivision approval, if the local subdivision ordinance con-
tains no requirement for such an easement. You also ask whether S 15.1-466(A)(d) of the
Code of Virginia enables a locality to include a requirement in its subdivision ordinance
for the dedication of such avigation easements on property near public airports.
I. Facts
You state that the owner of land near the Winchester Regional Airport (the "Air-
port") has submitted a preliminary subdivision plan, which you state complies with the
applicable county zoning and subdivision ordinances, to the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors (the "County" and the "Board"). The Board has approved the plan on the con-
dition that the developer grant an avigation easement to the Airport.
II. Applicable Constitutional and Statutory Provisions
Article 1, S 11 of the Constitution of Virginia (1971) provides
[tlhat no person shall be deprived of his life, liberty, or property without due
process of law; that the General Assembly shall not pass any law impairing
the obligation of contracts, nor any law whereby private property shall be
taken or damaged for public uses, without just compensation, the term 'pub-
lic ,ises' to be defined by the General Assembly ....
Virginia's subdivision enabling statutes are detailed in Article 7, Chapter 11 of Title
15.1, §5 15.1-465 through 15.1-485. The primary purpose of these statutes is to assure
the orderly subdivision of land and its development. See also § 15.1-427. Section
15.1-466 lists certain provisions that are required to be included in a subdivision ordi-
nance and additional provisions that may be included in such an ordinance.
Supreme Court Building • 101 North Eighth Street • Richmond, Virginia 23219.804 - 786-2071 •804 - 3 71-894 6 (V/TDD)
The Honorable Lawrence R. Ambrogi
August 16, 1990
Page 2
Section 15.1-466(A)(d) requires that a subdivision ordinance include regulations and
"adequate provisions for drainage and flood control and other public purposes, and for
light and air."
Article 1, Chapter 3 of Title 5.1, §5 5.1-31 through 5.1-41.1, grants local govern-
ments, acting alone or jointly with other localities, the authority for the acquisition,
establishment, operation and maintenance of airports and related facilities. Section
5.1-32 provides specific authority for acquisition of avigation easements:
Where necessary to provide unobstructed airspace for the landing and taking
off of aircraft utilizing airports or landing fields acquired or operated by any
county, city or town under the provisions of this article, any such county,
city or town may acquire, in the same manner as is provided for the acquisi-
tion of land for airport purposes, easements through or other interests or
privileges with respect to lands or waters outside the boundaries of such air-
ports or landing fields which are necessary to insure safe approaches to such
airports or landing fields and the safe and efficient operation thereof ....
Section 5.1-34 grants counties, cities and towns the power to acquire private property for
airport purposes, if necessary, by exercise of the right of eminent domain.
III. Board May Not Impose Conditions on Subdivision Approval
Beyond Stated Requirements of Subdivision Ordinance
You ask whether, in the absence of a provision in the County subdivision ordinance
requiring conveyance of an avigation easement, the Board may require such a conveyance
as a condition precedent to the approval of a preliminary or final subdivision plat. The
Supreme Court of Virginia has held that approval of a subdivision plat is a ministerial
act, enforceable by mandamus when an applicant has complied with all local ordinance
requirements. Bd. of Supervisors v. Horne, 216 Va. 113, 119, 215 S.E.2d 453, 457 (1975).
It is, therefore, my opinion that the Board may not condition approval of a subdivi-
sion plat upon fulfillment of any requirement (including the avigation easement discussed
above), unless the requirement is set forth in the County's duly adopted zoning and subdi-
vision ordinances.
IV. County Lacks Constitutional and Statutory Authority to Include Provision
in Subdivision Ordinance Requiring Unconditional Conveyance of Avigation Easement
You also ask whether 5 15.1-466(A)(d) authorizes a county to include a provision in
its subdivision ordinance requiring the conveyance of an avigation easement. An aviga-
tion easement "provides not just for flights in the air as a public highway --in that sense
no easement would be necessary; it provides for flights that may be so low and so fre-
quent as to amount to a taking of the property." United States v. Brondum, 272 F.2d 642,
645 (1959).
Besides requiring the inclusion of certain specific provisions in a subdivision ordi-
nance, § 15.1-466(A)(d) authorizes localities to include regulations and provisions for
The Honorable Lawrence R. Ambrogi
August 16, 1990
Page 3
"other public purposes." The precise question raised by your inquiry is whether this gen-
eral grant of authority allows a county to include a provision in its subdivision ordinance
requiring conveyance of an avigation easement, without compensation, as a condition of
subdivision approval.
In past decisions, the Supreme Court of Virginia has construed the grant of powers
in § 15.1-466 very narrowly, holding that, for example, it does not encompass the power,
in the absence of specific statutory language, to level a $25 fee for reviewing a subdivi-
sion plat. Nat. Realty Carp. v. Virginia Beach, 209 Va. 172, 163 S.F'.2d 154 (1968); see
also County of York v. King's Villa, 226 Va. 447, 309 S.E.2d 332 (1983) (§ 15.1-466(A)(j)
not authority for county administrator to fix sewer connection fees by contract).
The Court also has held that § 15.1-466 does not provide authority for a county
board of supervisors to condition subdivision plat approval on the subdivider's reconstruc-
tion of two existing public highways abutting the proposed subdivision. Hylton v. Prince
William Co., 220 Va. 435, 258 S.E.2d 577 (1979). There, the Court said:
[T]he authority granted by the statute to localities to coordinate streets
within and contiguous to a subdivision with other existing or planned streets
does not imply authority to charge a private landowner for the expense of
reconstructing public highways.
Id. at 441, 258 S.E.2d at 581.
The Court in Hylton relied heavily on the earlier case of Bd. Sup. James City
County v. Rowe, 216 Va. 128, 216 S.E.2d 199 (1975). In Rowe the Court held that a
county board could not require mandatory dedication of road right-of-way when the need
for the road improvements was substantially generated by public traffic demands rather
than by the proposed development. The Court based that holding not only on the lack of
statutory authority for the mandatory dedication, but also on a constitutional objection,
expressed as follows:
The Board cites nothing in the constitution, enabling statutes, or case law of
Virginia which empowers the sovereign to require private landowners, as a
condition precedent to development, to construct -or maintain public facili-
ties on land owned by the sovereign, when the need for such facilities is not
substantially generated by the proposed development. The private money
necessary to fund the performance of such requirements is 'property', and we
hold that such requirements violate the constitutional guarantee that 'no
person shall be deprived of his life, liberty, or property without due process
of law....' Constitution of Virginia, Art. I, § 11.
Id. at 139-40, 216 S.E.2d at 209 (footnote omitted).
There is no question that the type of avigation easement the Board proposes to
acquire is "property" protected by the constitutional guarantee cited in Rowe. As dis-
cussed above, §§ 5.1-32 and 5.1-34 empower the Board to acquire such easements by pur-
chase or condemnation, either of which methods would provide the landowner with just
0 0
The Honorable Lawrence R. Ambrogi
August 16, 1990
Page 4
compensation for the property right being acquired by the Board. It is well -settled that
aircraft flights at levels and frequencies justifying the need for an avigation easement
constitute a "taking" of property for which a landowner must be compensated. See Anno-
tation, Airport Operations or Flight of Aircraft as Constituting Taking or Damaging of
Property, 22 A.L.R.4th 863 (1983).
Under the principles enunciated in Rowe and Hylton, therefore, a local governing
body could constitutionally require mandatory conveyance or dedication of avigation
easements, as a condition of subdivision approval, only if the need for the easements
were generated by the proposed subdivision itself. In the facts you present, it is the
presence of the Airport, not the presence of the subdivision, that generates the need for
the easements.
I am of the opinion, therefore, that the Board lacks the statutory authority to
require conveyance or dedication of avigation easements as a condition of subdivision
approval for properties near the Airport, and that, even if such statutory authority were
found in § 15.1-466, applicable constitutional requirements would dictate that the subdi-
viding landowner be justly compensated for granting the easement.
With kindest regards, I am
Sincerely,
�V�
Mary Sue Terry
Attorney General
5:67/54-176
205 Regency Executive Park Drive
Suite 305
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
704-522-6096
FAX: 704-522-8315
•
IL R
0 nn P A N I E
Corporate Offices
P.O. Box 7566
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
703-786-1400
FAX: 703-786-6455
June 6, 1990
Mr. Mark Flynn
City Attorney
Rouss City Hall
15 North Camero- Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Dear Mr. Flynn:
8888 Keystone Crossing Plaza
Suite 1070
M Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
x�` �j1 � /U % 317-574-3800
X: 317-574-3804
l�
190,0
1 FREDERO COUNTY ,5,
r,J Administrators Office
co ...
Subject: Preliminary Master Plan,
Silver Communities, Inc. (PMP#003-90)
At our meeting of May 30, 1990, you suggested that we consider
expanding on the disclosure in the declaration of covenants for
our townhouse development to address both the issues of proximity
and noise associated with the airport. Should the Board of
Supervisors rescind the avigation easement condition as we have
requested, we would include the following statement in our
declaration of covenants:
Proximity to Winchester Regional Airport
The property is located approximately one -quarter mile
southwest of the Winchester Regional Airport runway
extension. Due to the proximity to the airport, some noise
will probably be heard from planes taking off and landing.
It is also possible that small planes may fly over or near
the property from time to time.
"Loudness day/night" (Ldn) is a decibel measure
established by the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) to measure noise levels around airports. Ldn
averages the noise from day and night aircraft
operations. The higher the Ldn number, the louder.
The lower the Ldn, the quieter. The noise measure
which the FAA considers to be objectionable for
residences is 65 Ldn and higher. However, at 55 Ldn
and lower, the FAA considers airplane noise to be no
more significant than other neighborhood factors, such
as traffic and neighbors.
Commercial & Residential Development Real Estate Management
Hotel & Motel Development & Management General Contracting Wholesale Building Materials
.I
Mr. Mark Flynn
Page 2
June 6, 1990
The Winchester Regional Airport Authority has
calculated and mapped the Ldn noise contours around the
airport based on projected future (year 2007) airport _
usage. This map shows that the property is well
outside the airport noise area which the FAA considers.
to be objectionable for residents (65 Ldn). The map
shows that today (and in 2007) a portion of the
property has a noise level of 50 Ldn. The rest of the -
property is in an even lower (more quite) zone.
Should you have any comments on the wording, please call me at
703/786-1400.
RT/.gw
CC: Harry Benham
John Riley
Sincerp-�ly,
SILV'EP/ XOW1U31-1T"IJ9O/ INC.
Rickard Tremblay
Vice president f r
Planning and Dev lopment
• 9
WING
CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
Rouss City Hall
15 North Cameron Street
Winchester, VA 22601
703-667-1815
13 June, 1990
Mr. John Riley
County Administrator
County of Frederick
9 Court Square
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Mr. Larry Ambrogi
County Attorney
County of Frederick
5 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
In re: Silver Communities Master Development Plan
Hand delivered
Gentlemen:
This letter is written to discuss the legality of the
Board's action on the Silver Communities master development
plan in approving the plan contingent upon the conveyance of
an avigation easement to my client, the Winchester Regional
Airport Authority.
To review the format of the approval, Silver
Communities, Inc. had applied for the subdivision of a
portion of its properties. Pursuant to your subdivision
ordinance, the applicant filed a preliminary master
development plan for planning commission and Board approval.
At the regular May Board meeting, the plan was approved,
with the above contingency, based on planning commission
recommendation.
As a preliminary matter, state law provides authority
to require the applicant to convey an easement along the
lines of the one in question. Section 15.1-466 A.(d) of the
Code of Virginia states, in part: "(a) subdivision ordinance
shall include reasonable regulations... that provide... for
adequate provisions for drainage and flood control and other
public purposes, and for light and air". The easement
serves to protect not only the Airport Authority, but, in
addition, the purchasers of the individual townhouse units,
since the easement will most clearly put them on notice of
the potential effects of the proximity of the airport, and
the overflight of ai Jflfi� APPLE CAPITAL"
a
V
It is my opinion that the master development plan
provisions of the county's zoning ordinance authorize the
Board to require the easement.
Section 21-14-1 of the zoning ordinance provides:
The purpose of the master development plan (MDP) is to
promote orderly and planned development of property
within Frederick County. It is the purpose of the MDP
to insure that such development occurs in a manner that
suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious
with adjoining property, and is in the best interest of
the general public. The MDP shall be used to
illustrate the characteristics of the property proposed
for development and of surrounding properties.
This language authorizes the Board to approve the
master development plan in a manner such that the plan will
"suit the characteristics of the land". In this case, one
of the characteristics of the land is the proximity of the
airport and the presence of aircraft over the development.
Further, the plan is to be reviewed to insure that the
development will be "harmonious with adjoining property".
The airport property -s nat oe�mitreaiately adjoin the
development. However, it appears to be the intent of the
ordinance that the plan be reviewed in light of properties
generally surrounding the development. See §14-3-1.3, which
allows the waiver of a plan if the property "is to be
developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding
properties and land uses". To the same effect is the last
sentence of 914-1, quoted above.
In this case, the easement can be justified on the
basis that it serves to put the buyers of individual
townhouses on notice of the possible effect of the airport
and aircraft using the airport. Further, the easement makes
it clear to the owners what rights and obligations they will
have. The proposed notice in the declaration of covenants
does not as clearly notify townhouse owners of their rights
and obligations.
By requiring the applicant to convey the easement, the
Board will be improving the quality of the development, for
the owners of the townhouses, for the reason that the
easement will clearly notify them of the area they are
buying into and moving into.
The the applicant has made several comments about the
effect of the FAA's sound level charts, such as the 65 Ldn.
It is important to keep in mind that following the FAA's
chart for land use compatibility is the following statement:
2
0
3
The designations contained in this table do not consti-
tute a Federal determination that any use of land cov-
ered by the program is acceptable or unacceptable under
Federal, State, or local law. The responsibility for
determining the acceptable and permissible land uses
and the relationship between specific properties and
specific noise contours rests with the local authori-
ties. FAA determinations under Part 150 are not
intended to substitute federally determined land uses
for those determined to be appropriate by local author-
ities in response to locally determined needs and val-
ues in achieving noise compatible land uses.
Accordingly, the fact that the property is outside the
65 Ldn area for the airport does not preclude the Board from
imposing conditions on the project, such as the easement
condition at issue.
If you have any questions on this matter, please call.
Sincerely,
i
Mark K. F nn
City Attorney
cc: Chairman, Winchester Regional Airport Authority
Ken Wiegand, Airport Executive Director
W INc
CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
Rouss City Hall
16 North Cameron Street
G1 Winchester, VA 22601
13 June, 1990 703-667-1815
Richard Tremblay
Vice President for Planning
and Development
Silver Companies
P.O. Box 7566
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
In re: Preliminary Master Plan - Silver Communities, Inc.
Dear Richard:
I have reviewed the proposed statement in you letter of
June 6, regarding the proximity of the airport to the
townyouse subdivsion.
I have the following comments regarding the proposed
statement, on behalf of my client, the Winchester Regional
Airport Authority. The comments and the following:;,.,suggested
language are made based on the rescission by the Frederick
County Board of Supervisors of its condition of the
--conveyance of an easement to my client, made at its May
meeting. It is my client's continued request that Silver
Communities will accept the Board's action, and agree to
convey the easement, in appropriate form.
I recommend that the first paragraph of the statement
be changed by deleting the word "some" in the second
sentence, and by reworking the third sentence to read as
follows: "Due to the proximity of.the airport, aircraft can
be expected to.regularly fly over or near the property,
during both day and night hours."
I further recommend that a second paragraph be added,
as follows:
Subject to federal restrictions on how close to
ground level aircraft may fly, the aircraft using the
airport; and/or flying in the area have the right to
fly over or near the townhouse property, and have the
right to make such noise, sound, vibrations and other
associated disturbances as are normally associated with
the flight of aircraft. Accordingly, the townhouse
lots are sold subject to those rights, and will remain
subject to those rights.
Regarding the second paragraph proposed in your
letter, before accepting the statement in the last sentence,
the authority in the FAA regulations supporting the
"THE APPLE CAPITAL"
statement needs to be identified. I am advised that the FAA
does not "consider airplane noise to be no more significant
than other neighborhood factors..." outside the 55 Ldn.
If you have any questions or comments, please advise.
Sincerel,
A��
K.
Counsel,
Winchester Regional
Airport Authority
CC: John Riley, County Administrator
Larry Ambrogi, County Attorney
Chairman, Winchester Regional Airport Authority
Ken Wiegand, Airport Executive Director
0
fJ ' �Ired Co T Ns l G/1 IVe{ Ccrnrn
amcli.> -
ZrrCvrYLt-'✓�-=�"
BURR P. HARRISON 1904-1973
WILLIAM A. JOHNSTON
H. K. BENHAM III
BILLY J. T151NGER
THOMAS A. SCHULTZ, JR.
BRUCE E. DOWNING
IAN R. D. WILLIAMS
ELIZABETH B. JOHNSTON
HARRISON 8 JOHNSTON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
WINCHESTER VIRGINIA 22601-0809
Mr. John R. Riley
County Administrator
County of Frederick
9 Court Square
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Dear John:
21 SOUTH LOUDOUN STREET
May 24, 1990
MAILING ADDRESS:
P. O. BOX 809
TELEPHONE
AREA CODE 703
667-1266
FAX NO.
703-667-1312
pvll-
MAY
FREDERICK COUNTY
S Administrators plfid. r\-y
coy
I am writing on behalf of Silver Companies Inc. regarding
the action taken by the Board of Supervisors at their May 9, 1990
meeting regarding the preliminary master plan of Frederick County
Townhouses, Silver Communities, Inc. (which property is near the
Winchester Regional Airport).
Silver Communities, Inc. is willing to make the disclosures
requested by the May 11, 1990 letter. However, it is concluded
that it should not and will not execute a navigational easement
as requested by the County. Moreover, the law firm of Hunton &
Williams has advised that the County has exceeded its authority
when requesting Silver Communities, Inc. to provide a
navigational easement. Consequently, Silver Communities, Inc.
would like the County to voluntarily removed its request for a
navigational easement. Thus, I would like to meet with you and
with such other individuals as you deem appropriate to discuss
the matter.
I feel confident that we can resolve the matter in a manner
that will be beneficial to all parties.
As I am available next Wednesday, May 30, 1990, could a
meeting be set for that date? If not, please advise what date
and time would be convenient for you.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
H. K. B nham, III
HKB,III:krb
r�i
OWE
2 2 !990
March 20, 1990
Kris Tierney, Deputy Director
Frederick County Dept. of Planning & Development
9 Court Square, Box 601
ENGINEERS Winchester, Va. 22601
ARCHITECTS
SCIENTISTS Re: Silver Communities Townhouses
Preliminary Master Development Plan
17555.063
Dear Kris,
I have reviewed the above referenced Preliminary
Master Development Plan and have the following
comments or suggestions.
A. ACCESS ISSUES
1. The small sliver of ground projecting toward
Route 522 could be dedicated to public right-of-
way to facilitate future turn lanes.
2. Route 645 provides access to the airport for
what is a commercial and industrial developing
area. As traffic generation increases the need
for a 90 foot right-of-way may develop. I would
suggest that at the minimum a five (5) foot
reservation strip (preferably a dedication)
should be considered. At the entrances, an
additional twelve (12) feet should be allowed
for right turn lanes.
3. Adequate sight distance to Route 645 will have
to be determined.
B. DRAINAGE ISSUES
1. Stormwater management is proposed by using the
existing pond which will be designed to
accommodate both this and a future phase. The
pond outlet will need to be modified and
■ 45180 Business Court
Sterling, Virginia 22170
703.435.5007
Telefax 703.4355071
r S •
to ENGINEERS
ARCHITECTS
SCIENTISTS
designed to handle the design storms as well as
safely pass the 100 year storm. Calculations and
design documents will be required to be
submitted at the design review phase.
2. Uncontrolled drainage
the Northeast of the
verified as adequate.
off site as indicated to
site will have to be
C. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION ISSUES
1. A detailed E & S plan will be required with the
site development plans. This will include a
narrative outlining the phasing of the plan,
maintenance, and permanent stabilization.
I feel that this plan can be approved, however, I
also feel that it should incorporate the appropriate
right-of-way dedications.
If you have any question, please let me know.
Sincerely,
DO HUE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Pau A. Bernard, P.E.
Project Manager
PAB/jla
cc:Frank Carson - P.H. R & A
file:fredco-17555.063
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT At1TWnF;?1-rY
SERVING THE TOP opVIRGINIA
April 24, 1990
vwwc*carsnREGIONAL AIRPORT
noorc 1, ooxw,
w/wo*corcn, v/nomm 22601
Mr. Kenneth Y. Stiles, Chairman
Frederick County Board of Supervisors
Route 1, Box 276
Clearbrook, Virginia 22624
Dear Kenny:
The enclosed memorandum was prepared for Mayor Betsy Helm by Mark
Flynn (the Airport Authority's Counsel) in response to her
inquiry concerning the attached Senate Joint Resolution Number
14.
I think that Mark's comments are accurate and to the point; and,
therefore, chose to share the memo with you.
I am also enclosing a copy of the Star article that addressed the
recent Planning Commission meeting in which the Commission
recommended approval of the Silver Companies master development
plan hinged on the proffer of an avigation easement over the
residential site to the Airport Authority.
We have given this matter careful consideration and strongly
recommend that the written disclosure addressed in the Senate
Resolution be taken one step further to insist on an avigation
easement.
Anything else (for instance, a notification of the airport's
proximity to the residential area which was offered by Mr.
Tremblay) would be worth less than the paper it is written on.
Please stand firm on this vitally important issue. An avigation
easement may save the Airport and protect public investments
received from the state, federal and local governments.
Before approving their Master Development Plan, please insist
that Silver Companies provides an Qvigation Easement over all
planned residential property.
Kenneth Y. Stiles
Avigation Easement
Page 2
If you should have questions or wish to discuss this matter,
further, please let me know.
Thank you for your continued support. .
Sincerely"
�^_
�Paul G. Anderson, Jr.
Chairman
Enclosures
pc: Board of Supervisors
Planning Commission
Mark Flynn
Mayor Helm
Airport Authority
CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
�rR G1
Memorandum
To: Mayor Helm
From: Mark K. Flynn, City Attorney
Re: Senate Joint Resolution 14 - Airport Noise
Date: April 16, 1990
Rouse City Hall
15 North Cameron Street
Winchester, VA 22601
703-667-1815
In our case, as you have suggested, the main impact of
the Senate resolution would be felt in Frederick County.
However, since the resolution is only a request, unless the
county government is interested, the resolution will be
meaningless.
.For your information, I have been working with Ken
Wiegand on the airport's response to a proposed townhouse
project near the airport. My two suggestions for protection
of the airport were 1. to ask the county to negotiate for a
noise easement from the project developers in the land use
permit approval process, and 2. to seek zoning restrictions.
I am concerned that as the area around the airport .
builds up, if there are many housing units in the build-up,
the Authority, the county and city governments -will be hit
with ongoing complaints from new. residents. If the
Authority obtains easements from the project developers,
(item 1, above) the Authority, which, as a separate
political subdivision, is responsible for such noise, will
be fairly well insulated from nuisance claims.
By the way, I understand that Doug Adams is proposing
to turn some of his industrial park into residential uses.
Frederick County can help the Authority, and the
community by pursuing these matters as soon as possible.
l/cc: Ken Wiegand
"THE APPLE CAPITAL"
• SENATE JOINT RE
SOLUTION N0. 14
Urging local governing bodies to require certain notices to prospective purchasers of
property for residential and institutional use.
Agreed to by the Senate, March 9, 1990
Agreed to by the House of Delegates, March 7, 1990
WHEREAS, the decision as to what land uses will be permitted in the vicinity of
licensed public use, military, and government airports has largely been left by the General
Assembly to local governments; and
WHEREAS, many local governing bodies have chosen not to use their zoning powers to
prohibit construction for residential and institutional use beneath or adjacent to airport
approach zones, departure zones, and other areas where aircraft noise may affect the
quality of life of citizens; and
WHEREAS, persons considering the purchase of property for residential and institutional
use in the, vicinity of airports may be unaware that the property may be affected by
aircraft noise; and
WHEREAS, in most instances, sellers of property for residential and institutional use in
the vicinity of airports are under no obligation to inform potential buyers that the property
may be affected by aircraft noise; and
WHEREAS, the investment of the Commonwealth and the United States in the air
transportation infrastructure of Virginia can be eroded by the reduced utility of airports
through operations curfews and other noise generated restrictions; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED by the Senate, the House of Delegates concurring, That the General
Assembly urges local governing bodies to prohibit in their zoning ordinances construction
for residential and institutional use beneath or adjacent to, airport approach zones,
departure zones, and other areas where aircraft noise may affect the quality of life of
citizens, or when allowed, to require that sellers of such residential and institutional
properties disclose in writing to potential purchasers the fact that the properties may be
adversely affected by aircraft noise and that deeds recorded maintain the disclosure to run
with the land in perpetuity; and, be it
RESOLVED FURTHER, That the Clerk of the Senate shall prepare a copy of this
resolution for presentation to the governing body of each county, city, and town in the
Commonwealth in order that local governments may be apprised of the, sense of this body.
:ASTER STAR, Thursday, April 19, 1990
Pro ect Near Airport Hen es on Easement
By STAN HOUGH
. Star Staff Writer
The construction of 117
townhouses near the Winchester
Regional Airport may hinge on
Whether the project's developer is
willing to provide the airport with a
fly -over easement.
The Frederick County Planning
Commission recommended ap-
proval of the Silver Cos.' prelimi-
nary master -development plan on
Wednesday, providing that Silver
grants the easement —designed to
protect the airport and the county
from lawsuits based on noise com-
plaints.
Silver Vice President Richard
Tremblay asked if the easement
would be"proper and legal," and
said it might "withhold the rights":
of homeowners in the planned
townhouse complex, 1,000 yards
from the airport's western bound-
ary on Route 645.
Tremblay has said he would in-
clude in all brochures, deeds, and
sales contracts a notification of the
townhouses' proximity to the air-
port.
The disclosures will be "more
than adequate," he said, par-
ticularly since the site location does
not violate county noise -pollution
standards.
Airport Manager Ken Wiegand
Tremblay has said he would include in all • Recommended approval of a
brochures deeds and sales contracts a preliminary master development
> plan for Fort Collier Industrial
notification of the townhouses proximity to 'Park just north of Winchester.
the airport. The plan detailed park owners'
plans to build an access road onto
said on Wednesday that Tremblay's
concerns are "absurd" and that
without the fly -over easement, the
county and the airport will have the
same legal problems over noise that
have .plagued "hundreds of com-
munities across the country."
"If the Silver Cos. are really con-
cerned about our community, then
they will proffer the easement,"
Wiegand said. "It's no skin off their
nose; it keeps us square legally,
and it keeps our politicians out of
hot'water."
Wiegand offered to pay the legal
fees involved in writing the ease-
ment, which he said is a "perfectly
legal" measure.
The rights of homeowners to pro-
test, complain, or "picket the air-
port" would not be hindered by the
easement, he said. . .
Based' on Silver's intentions and
the possibilty of other homes being
built near the airport, the authority
has been working with county of-
ficials for several months to
establish a buffer area that 'would,
ideally, prohibit any residential de-
velopment within a certain radius
of the airport, and at the very least
require fly -over easements.
The Planning Commission
recommended on Wednesday that a
buffer zone with easement re-
quirements be placed in the coun-
ty's Comprehensive Plan.
The commission and the Board of
Supervisors are expected to work
out the specifics of the buffer area
at a work session on April 30.
Final approval of Silver's plan is
subject to a vote by the Board of
Supervisors. Tremblay said he
would • consider offering the ease-
ment before the matter appears be-
fore the supervisors.
'In other business, the commis-.
sion:.
U.S. 11 North that would bear the
_burden of truck. traffic using the
park.
But Jim McElvaine and Whit
Wagner of Fort Collier Group Part-.
nership balked at the commission's
recommendation that they extend
the road to the park's southern'
boundary to allow access to 20 acres,
owned by William Lockhart. .
"I feel like we've been stepped
on,". McElvaine said. "It will cost.
us $1.5 million to build that road.
We're willing to work with Lockhart
if he's willing to share some of. the"
cost.
McElvaine and Wagner also had.
problems with the county planning
staff's recommendation to have
them consider redesigning Fort
Collier Road to eliminate a sharp
S-shaped curve at the park's east-
ern entrance. -
Wagner said the access road onto
U.S: 11 North would eliminate the
need to straighten Fort Collier
Road for better truck access.
McElvaine said after the meeting .
that the commission's conditional
recommendation might cause them
to withdraw the plan until a more
equitable solution can' be reached
with the county planning staff.
• Recommended approval of a
subdivision application by devel-
oper Dave Holliday to build 91.
townhouses on 12 acres just east of
Stephens City.
Construction of Stephens Ridge
will begin immediately, with 29
homes scheduled to be built in the
development's first phase, said pro-
ject engineer Chuck Maddox of
G.W. Clifford and Associates.
Stickley Drive and Ridgefield
Avenue will be extended to provide
access to the development, Maddox
said.
Present at the meeting were:
Chairman . James Goiladay and
Commissioners Beverly Sherwood,
John Marker, Carl McDonald, S.
Blaine Wilson, George Romine,
Marjorie Copenhaver, and Douglas
Rinker. Roger Thomas and Manuel
DeHaven were absent.
04
205 Regency Executive Park Drive
Suite 305
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
704-522-6096
FAX: 704-522-8315
SILVER
C 0 M P n N I E
Corporate Offices
P.O. Box 7566
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
703-786-1400
FAX: 703-786-6455
January 25, 1990
8888 Keystone Crossing Plaza
Suite 1070
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
317-574-3800
FAX: 317-574-3804
67897�>>t'
Ff8 B90 w�
(� nchaster
A v
0lfice /
'�S2�Z���Zdti
Mr. Paul Anderson, Jr.
Chairman
Winchester Regional Airport Authority
Route 1, Box 208-A
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Subject: Silver Communities Townhouse Development
on Airport Road, Route 645
Dear Mr. Anderson:
This letter is to confirm in writing the commitment Silver
Communities, Inc., made at the Winchester Regional Airport
Authority meeting of January 19, 1990, regarding our proposed
townhouse development on Airport Road, Route 645. The land to be
developed is presently zoned Residential Performance, RP. Silver
Communities, Inc. will include a disclosure in all sales
contracts, deeds and the subdivision covenants that the property
is in proximity to the Winchester Regional Airport. Also, the
sales brochures for the project will include a location map that
will show the proximity of the site to the airport.
Silver Communities, Inc, is aware of the Airport Authority's
concern over land use compatibility around the airport. However,
our property is a considerable distance, 1500 feet, south of the
runway, and well outside the 65 LDN noise contour recognized by
the Federal Aviation Administration for residential compatibility
(see enclosure). Moreover, the property is outside the 55 LDN
contour according to a recent map prepared by your engineer,
Delta Associates, based on a 20-year noise forecast (see map
enclosed).
Commercial & Residential Development Real Estate Management
Hotel & Motel Development & Management General Contracting Wholesale Building Materials
Mr. Paul Anderson
Page 2
January 25, 1990
To our knowledge, the 55 L;DN level is the strictest guideline
recognized in the Country -for airport area residential
compatibility. The FAA na:ise compatibility literature (excerpt
enclosed) recognizes that "at 55 LDN and below, noise is
considered no more importaint than various other environmental
factors". HUD, DOT and EP.?A recognize LDN 55 as a goal for
outdoors in residential areas in protecting the public health and
welfare with an adequate margin of safety (see enclosure).
We hope that our disclosur-e commitment will help alleviate the
concerns of the Airport Awthority members.
SincerAly, .
SILi?iOMTjUJNI3"vj INC .
Wich'�ird Tremblay
Vice President f r
Planning and Development
RT/gw
Enclosures (4)
CC: Paul Elkin, Silver Coampanies
James Golladay, Jr., Chairman, Planning Commission
Edward Minniear, Silvier Companies
Larry Silver, Silver Companies
Kenneth Stiles, Chair man, Board of Supervisors
W. Harrington Smith, Supervisor, Shawnee District
John R. Riley, Frederick County Administrator
Robert Watkins, Fredesrick County Director of Planning
Ken Weigand, Executivoe Director, Airport Authority
• ENCLOSURE 1
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY* WITH YEARLY DAY -NIGHT AVERAGE SOUNO LEVELS
Yw" day-rjgM Ovwno aoursd level IL ) In docbels
WAS
Lord use
Residential. cew than mobile Isornee and trrtalerM bd".—
jrN
' N
I N
N
N
N
N
N
Mobdo home parks...—� .__.—___._._........
Y
r
N
I N
I N
N
' N
N
N
Transient lodgm". --
Pubac use.
Schools, hospish wd nusn9 hamea...__..�.—...__.».�_
y
25
23
30
30
N
N
N
N
N
N
haft
Cta"dws, sudrtorfume, and coca ha _
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Governmental services —..---
Y
Y
.
• y
'
Transportation _—
Y
Y
e Y
a Y
Y
Parking
comnlorfial usr.
Y
Y
2S
30
N
I
ffic Oft butklsss and pole'�sal
.
wholesale and retal--bt+idrq motor" hardware Ord farm
Y
a y
• Y
• Y
I
oquwr*m ......_ ----_.___...._...—_..._......__
Y
Y
Y
25
30
N
I
n reds--gerwOl..—
Y
Y
. y
I
Utititiss—__.—_..—.� .--"'
Y
Y
Y
y
2S
a y
30
e y
N
• y
I
I
Manufachnq and production
Manufacturing. general. ,_____._._.--
Y
Y
25
30
N
l
Photographic and optidl .._�..__._
Y
a
Y
• Y
• Y
a
Agricvttue (except iwsock) and bMsry-- --
Y
a Y
r y
N
N
livestock farming oral
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Mining rd f&1 % ream"* production lind a droction
Recreational
y
s y
a y
N
N
Outdoor sports cranes oral spectator *Ports------
N
N
N
N
Outdoor music $hells.
y
Y
Y
N
N
N
tfs
Nelms axhband zoos.,-.-.
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Amufemrft parka, resorts oral cups _.
Y
Y
25
30
N
GoN causes, riding stables and water rernatbn...__—
-- - .The designations cw twined in Mia table do not ocreutule a Federal detwmsstiort that Mann use Of hid coveed by Vw
program b acceptable or uacceptabio made" Federal. State, or led law. The resPo(- b for daermlr- alto acceptable
and penTnwble land uses remans with de local sull or*im FAA deterrronatiors ruder Part 150 are rat intended a u bs"
federally determined lend uses bar ease defemrrred to be appr0priae by local rRwiseO in response to bcahr deter -red
needs and values in hour" nose co patbia lard uses.
Y (Yawl --{and Use rd related riuciur" compat"o w,daut resricsma
N OW —lord Use rd noted jw%xsmes re not twmpasde and should be Oroh"ed.
NLR--Nose level Red cton faAdoor 10 +doe) to be ocrxavad tvo•gh nmrPorsGon Of nose anerasbon nb ge dwgn
and construction of the swuck"e.
25, 30. of 3S--lre use rd totaled etruct"e grsraay eompattAw. meatus b acrre.e NLR at 25. 30. or 35 oast W
rrorporsW too daaq and corwow on d stricture,
r y4wo M eo nsnay dearness that resdvV}al uses rust be e110wed. "~*a to schave 0uldoor 10 •door NM4
Laval Reduceorr RtLAI of to teats 25 d9 rd 30 dB mould be intorparrad fro Drddra2 codes oral be considred 01 nhvidsl
epOrmaw Normal curearweon can be erpeted to orovlla a WA of 20 dB, tt.n. " reduction rpuiemema are 04I01 stated
as S. 10 or IS d9 ovr are rs ON construction and norm`&" asa+ne medrr> -at venNation and dosed wi 4" Yen round
However. the use d MA aer1O we no eibm-se wtdoor noise probla•'sa
' Measvee to ad"" NLA of 25 must be nCwporaled nt0 M dergn and owsavcaors of porkore ol tress bridngs
,.ter" rM public a reco ed o?aoo read, nose esnrtve areas Our wtwo Ine normal now Levant is low.
• 1"~" t0 actrao NLA d 30 rust be Yaorponslod nb the Bosom tiro O"tucbOm Of portions Of these buk*ge
where ore MA*c Y received 0a0a roes. nose semi" tees at two Its normal nods leval Is low.
• Meow"ea b adieve NLA of 35 sluts be neorparaatd MO the do PW and co strucaon of Poeb'sa off000 bui"
to»eve e PIS toetalved. office antes, horse wool -a woos or .ore tie normal Wore Itvel Is law.
• Lard use co•mpeaft provided apeW sound ronFmcamrd systeme we wwaasd
' Rawdereat brldnit rear=a an NLA of 2S.
I Reardenset butdrnge reare an NLA at 30.
' RtodenNl bull" nor Pon.
Tab A
70 v / ,/- F474
v
LL7�1
i - y
�)in 6je 5-f �,— . ,or.► l 9i
,1-17-VI90
m
0
11�
v
N
TABLE D-1. EFFECTS OF NOISE ON PEOPLE
(Residential Land Uses Only)
I iearing
Speech
Annoyance2
Loss
Interference
Gener-1 L:ommunity
Average
Altitude Towards
Indoor
Outdoor
\hl
Community
Area
Distance in
Reaction -
Qualitative
°lo Sentence
Meters for
Description
lntelligi-
95'lo Sentence
°lo of Population
Highly Annoyed
bility
Intelligibility
May Begin
98010
0.5
37010
Very
Noise is likely to bt the most imp,lrtrnl ur all
75 and
to
Severe
adverse aspects of the community C .vu Qnrn. ut_�
above
Occur
Will Not
99'/•
U.y
25%
Severe
Noise is one of tare r,rost important aJversc
70
Likely
aspects of the community environment.
Occur
Will
1.5
15019
Significant
Noise is one of the important adverse
65
Not
10017o
aspects of the community environment.
Occur
Will
10001/0
2.0
90/0
Moderate
Noise may be considered an adverse aspect
60
Not
of the community environment.
Occur
to
Will
100'l0
3•5
-°J0
Slight
Noise considered no more important than
SS and
Not
various other environmental factors.
below
Occur
I. "Speech Interference" data are drawn from the following tables in
E:PA's "Levels Document": lahle 3, I IF 1)-I, 1•Ig.
1).2. 1-1g. D-1. All
other data from National Acadcnly of Sslence 1977 rcprtrl' (ruldelule.
for Preparing E:nvlrtmnlcntal Impact Statement. on Noise. Report ill
Working Group 69 on E vailialtllrl of Eris lrtlrltllcrlial Impact of Noise.—
2. Depends on attitudes and other factors.
3. The percentages of people reporting annoyance to lesser e.rtents are
higher in each case. An unknown small percentage of people will report
being "highly annoyed" even in the quietest surroundings. One reason
Is the difficulty all people have in integrating annoyance over : very long
time.
-. Attitudes or other non•acousuc lactors can muutn tnts. Franc ar It —
level. can still he an unporiant prohlem, parucularac when it Intrude% in-
to a quiet environment.
NOTE: Research implicates noise as a factor producing stress -related
health effects such as heart disea•c, high -blood pressure rnd
stroke, ulcers and other digestive dvotdcrs. The IC131 .nslrl1, he
twccn noise and these cflects, how.ter, have not a% let t.ccn
quantified.
Km
W
0
/ENCLOSURE 4
TABLE 1. NOISE, "LONE CLASSIFICATION
Noise Descripinr
1 t l
i
\Oise
DNLI i L.othoun� NzFs
HUD Noise
noise
Exposure
Day -might Averagel Equivalent Noise Zxposure
Standards
Zone
Class
Sound Level Sound Level Forecast
A
Minimal
rtamiiceed ng I
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Exposure
'�-'<a��.' carat
SS
20
"Acceptable'
B
Moderate
_
Above 552 But
Above 55 But
Above 25 But
xv
Exposure
' Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
65
65
30
Above 65
Above 65
Abov: 30 But
C-1
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Significant
Exposure
70
70
35
"Normally
Unacceptable"5
Above 70 But
Above 70 But
Above 35 But
C-2
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
75
75
40
Above 75 But
Above 40 But
D-i
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
80
80
45
Severe
"Unacceptable"
E:,posui
Above 80 But
3u;
%bnve .0 put
D-2
Not Ex:e:ding
I Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
85
85
50
D-3
Above 85
.Above 85
Abov: 50
ICNEL — Community Noise Equivalent Level (California only) uses the same values.
2HUD. DOT and EPA rccognl a Ldn 35 dB as 1. a goal for outdoors in,�, a fiat arias in protcaing the
public health and welfare with an adequate margin of 'safety (Re fdetuteA414U r 4 �geutnettt+�>n:
However, it is not a regulatory goal. -it 6 a level defined by a negotiated ukntifitconsensu'stitli6nteoncero
for economic and technological feasibility or the needs and desires of pnr panieuim-community.4,_
3Thc Federal Highway Administration (FHWWA) noise policy uses this descripior as an alternative to L 0 (noise
level exceeded ten percent of the time) in connection with its policy for highway noise mitigation. he L q
(design hour) is equivalent to DNL for planning purposes under the following conditions; 1) heavy trucs
equal ten percent of total traffic flow in vehicles per 24 hours; 2) traffic between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. does not
exceed fifteen percent of the average daily traffic flow in vehicles per 24 hours. Under these conditions DNL
equals Llo - 3 decibels.
417or use in airport environs only; is now being supercedcd by DNL.
5The HUD Noise Regulation allows a cenain amount of flexibility for non -acoustic benefits in zone C-1.
Attenuation requirements can be waived for projects meeting special requirements.
N,44
ESTER REGION
SERVING THE TOP OF VIRGINIA
January 19, 1990
IRPORT _AUTHOR
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT
ROUTE 1, BOX 208-A
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
17031662 - 2422
Mr. Robert W. Watkins, Director
Department of Planning and Development
Frederick County, Virginia -
Post office Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
�.667 8 9 10>>'
FEB B90
ncheHs pffice
Re: Response to Request for Master Development Plan Comments
Silver Companies, Incorporated
117-Unit Townhouse Development, Route 645 (Airport Road)
Dear Mr. Watkins:
Silver Companies, Incorporated, is proposing a master development
plan for a 117-unit townhouse development on Route 645 (Airport
Road) off of Route 522 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
The site will be subject to increasing levels of aircraft noise
and fly -over nuisance as Winchester Regional Airport grows from
47,000 current operations' to 70,000'by 1998 and 89,000
operations by 2008, a 3.4% average growth rate.2
Airport noise is a chronic national problem. In their efforts to
find a balance between the air service needs of their community
and noise concerns, many airport authorities have requested noise
compatible zoning within certain defined distances of their
airport. This is done to encourage land use around their airport
which is compatible with aircraft fly -over noise considerations.
We have not done this and may very well suffer the effects of
residential development near the airport as proposed by Silver
Companies. (A request to establish an Airport Support Area will
follow soon.)
--------------------
1. Based on Aircraft Activity Survey, Virginia Department of
Aviation, 1987.
2. Based on Table 3.2-13, Virginia Air Transportation System
Update, July 1989.
Responge to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 2
Unfortunately, we were not prepared to address airport noise
impact on residential areas at the time this particular
rezoning action was reviewed. our comments to the rezoning
request were prepared using Frederick 'County Is current
Airport Zoning District restrictions and Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) guidelines concerning land use
compatibility with yearly day -night average sound level
which indicate compatibility for residential below a 65 Day -
Night Average Sound Level (LDN) [See Tab A].
As a matter of information; FAA guidelines suggest noise analysis
for airports which exceed 90,000 forecasted annual operations.
As indicated above, we do not anticipate this operational level
until after the year 2008, however, noise estimates were
performed in.1987 for Winchester Regional Airport by Delta
Associates, P.E., Incorporated, our airport engineering and
consulting firm. The estimates were prepared for a twenty-year
period using the FAA's Integrated Noise Model, Version 3.9 which
produced noise contours. (Refer to the Noise Contour maps at
Tab B.)
Numerical values attached to the contours represent a day -night
average sound level in decibels. The LDN method imposes a 10
decibel penalty on all nighttime (10pm - 7am) aircraft operations
based on the anticipated type of aircraft and frequency of
operations. The contours are superimposed over land use maps of
the airport vicinity to determine areas of non -compatibility.
As you can see, the site Silver Companies plans to develop is ;.
well outside the 65 LDN contour and in an area which the FAA
model indicates should be compatible with airport noise.
Unfortunately, the 65 LDN contour is not a wall at which aircraft
noise stops. There is little scientific guidance, other than
administratively generated FAA LDN standards, to assist land use
planning outside of the 65 LDN contour.
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 3
Noise is subjective.
A noise which may be inconsequential to one person may be
objectionable to another. A given level of noise may be
objectionable when made by an aircraft but tolerable if made,.for
example, by a lawn mower or passing motor vehicle. Many people
are disturbed by the presence of aircraft flying over their
neighborhood, as much by the aircraft's noise. Also, for many
people, it is not the noise of a single aircraft, but the
cumulative "rainfall" of noise from many aircraft that causes
distress.
All of the (very few) noise complaints. we have received were made
during our bi-annual fly -ins when traffic was unusually heavy.
All complaints came from homes well outside the 65 LDN contour.
Residential encroachment can very well devastate a community
airport and create an untenable situation for local and state
officials as well as airport sponsors due to citizen complaints.
The former airport in Woodbridge, Virginia, is a good example...
or maybe a bad example?
Winchester Regional Airport is a vital link in the National Air
Transportation System that is used by private citizens,
commercial air carriers, business and industry to transport
people and goods around the world. It is a valuable public
investment and a proven key contributor to the controlled
economic growth of Frederick County and the Region. As the
County and the Region expand economically, the airport and its
services also expand. This major public investment must be
allowed to expand without interference from incompatible, land
use, i.e., townhouses and other residential construction, if the
area's economic growth is to continue.
According to a 1988 update of an airport economic impact study
conducted by the consulting firm of Simat, Helliesen & Eichner
for the Virginia Department of Aviation, the airport's direct
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 4
economic impact on our community was $3.4 million creating 64
jobs and the airport's total impact was $6.8 million creating 96
jobs.
Because of this, the Airport Authority feels certain that
residents of our community do not want to develop a noise problem
for our airport. Furthermore, the Authority cannot conceive of
any good reason why a developer would want to build a residential
area composed of 117 individual land owners near and practically
adjacent to an airport even though it is zoned residential... a
zoning decision which was an obvious mistake made as a result of
pressures brought to bear by persistent and over zealous
developers on well meaning and overwrought public officials.
Understanding the current situation and knowing human nature, we
realize that, even though potential buyers of the proposed
townhouses are forewarned about aircraft noise and fly -over
nuisance by the obvious presence of the nearby airport, they will
still purchase a townhouseand then complain to their Supervisor
and other elected representatives as well as the Airport
Authority about aircraft noise.
Nevertheless, it appears that unless the Board of Supervisors
takes action -to reverse the zoning of the parcels in question,
we would respectfully ask that Frederick County require or
negotiate with Silver Companies to:
a. Construct.apartment dwellings only, thereby creating one
land owner vs 117 land owners.
b. Present unequivocal notice of probable aircraft noise
and fly - over nuisance to be given to all potential townhouse
owners. Specifically, the Authority recommends --
(1) Requirement to present a dominant statement of
probable aircraft noise and fly -over nuisance in
disclosure packets.
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 5
(2) Requirement to,post prominent warnings with
specific regard to the proximity of the airport and
probable aircraft noise and fly -over nuisance on all
advertisements, brochures, and promotional material.
(3) Requirement to install and maintain prominent
warning signs on all roads leading to the development.
during the entire period of construction until the last
townhouse unit is sold.
(4) Require covenants in property deeds to advise
future buyers of the probability of aircraft noise and
fly -over nuisance.
(5) Require Silver Companies to provide a noise
easement for the development which holds harmless the
Winchester Regional, Airport Authority from any lawsuit
regarding noise pollution or fly -over nuisance.
C. Require acoustical treatment of the townhouse units and
a master planning concept designed to minimize the
inevitable noise impact.
We appreciate -the difficult problems Frederick County planners
continuously face concerning zoning hindsight and the extremely
difficult 'position we are suggesting with respect to airport
noise.
Ideally, we hope that Frederick County officials will understand
the mistakes made in this particular case and choose to seek
restricting the parcels for use as industrial or business sites
only. We understand that this may involve some expense and
embarrassment to the County as well as the Airport Authority, but
not half the expense and embarrassment that may evolve from
complaints from 117 frustrated individual land owners.
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 6
The airport is a vital economic development tool that, if
protected, will serve our growing community and the Region as a
for years to come.
If you should have questions or require additional data, please
do not hesitate to contact me or the Authority's Executive
Director, Ken Wiegand.
Thank you for your consideration and continued support.
Sincerely yours,
,P"j 2 a, j"
Paul G. Anderson, Jr.
Chairman
Enclosures
pc: Kenneth Y. Stiles, Chairman, Board of Supervisors
W. Harrington Smith, Supervisor, Shawnee District
John R. Riley, Frederick County Administrator
Silver Communities, Inc.
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY" WITH YEARLY DAY -NIGHT AVERAGE SOUND LEVELS
Lard use
Yearly day-Nght average sound level (W In decibels
Below
65-70
70-75
75�0
60-65
Over
65
65
Residential:
Residential, other than mobile lames and transient lodgings........
Y
' N
r N
N
N
N
Motilehome parks.........................................................................
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Transient lodgings ................................
r N
r N
PUNIC use:.
Schools. hospitals end nursing lames .................................... _..... _..
Y
25
30
N
N
N
Churches, auditonums, and concert halls ........ _................................
Y
25
30
N
N
N
Governmental services, ............ . ................................................ . .........
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Transportation ......................... „........................................ _...................
Y
_
Y
s Y
. Y
. Y
' Y
Parking...............................................................................„...................
Y
Y
a Y
a Y
' Y
N
Commercial use:
Offices. business and professional.....................................................
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Wholesale and retail —building materialist. hardware and farm
(
equipment.............................. .»...................................................... _..
Y
r• Y
s Y
a Y
Y
N
Retail trade —general .......................... „..... ...... ...................... „_........
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
UGhbes............ .............................. _.... _.Mir..._.......„..„ ........... «.._...._..
Y
Y
s Y
s Y
• Y
N
Communication.-......................„........„_.»....._.....„....._.......__._»»„...
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Manufarturirg and production:
Manufacturing, general .............„...„..».»»...... ....... ........
Y
Y
a Y
a Y
' Y
N
Photographic and optical ................. _.................................. _.»_.._.
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Agriculture (except livestock) and foresby........................... „.„....„.
Y
s Y
s Y
s Y
a Y
a Y
Livestock farming and breedrlg.................................................... _.....
Y
s Y
a Y
N
N
N
Mining and fishing, resource production and extraction........ ....... ....
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Recreational:
Outdoor sports arenas and spectator sports .................
Y
aY
a Y
N
N
N
Outdoor music shells, amphitheaters ............... ................... ...... „......
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Nature exhibits andzoos ........................................... ...........
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Amusements, parks, resorts and camps
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Goll courses, riding stables and water recreation ............... .
V
Y
25
30
N
N
'The designations contained in this table do not constitute a Federal detafminwtion that arty use of land covered by this
Program is acceptable or unacceptable under Federal. State, or local law. The responsibility for determining the acceptsD4
and permissible land uses remains with the local authordies. FAA determinations under Part 150 are not intended to subst,luts
federally determined land uses for those determined to be appropriate by local authorities in response to locally determined
needs and values in achieving noise compatible land uses.
Y (Yes) —Land Use and rotated structures compatible --hour m%I nctons.
N (No) —land Use and related structures we no( cornpat r, and should be Prohibited
NLR-Morse Level Reduction (outdoes to indoor) to be achieved through ncorpesation of noise attenuation No Via design
and ooe"i clion of this structurs.
25. 30. or 35--Lard use and related structure generally compat"s, rneasures to schwve NLR or 25. 30, or 35 must be
Incorporated Into design and cdnseructon of structure.
' Whwe the conxnwty doterrrr»s Out residential uses roust be allowed. measures lo achieve outdoor to nd" Now
I" Reduction (NLR) of at bast 25 dB end 30 d8 should be ncorporated into building codes and be consrowed In indrvroual
spprovals. Normal construction can be expected to provide a NLR of 20 68. thus, the reduction requirements are often stated
as S. 10 or 15 a8 over standard construction and normally risscme mechanical ventilation and dosed windows year round
However, the use of NLR cllena err ndt a4mate outdoor noise problelns.
s Measures to act"ve NLR of ?5 must be incorporated into One design and construclion of portions of these buildings
*two the public a racwved. off" uau, nose sensitive woos or wnwe the n o mat noise wvoi is low
' Moasues to sleeve NLR of 30 must be ir"Weled into One design and construction of portions of these buildings
wrwe the pdre Is received. office arias, "" sons," areas or whore the normal row level Is low.
' Measures to aclwve NLA of 35 must he ncayorated Into the design and construction of porons of these buildings
wil,we rxs public Is received. off" revs, nor" sus" areas or whore the nrnnai noise level is low.
' Land Use cornpettbta provided specael sand rolntomemem systoms are +nataaW
' Aesoo-lial buh6rya requro an NLR of 25
' Residential buildings requre an NLR of 30.
• Readent al t.ldnge not pwmaed.
Tab A
f — — -- r-- logo" ROM
VALLEY COLWWY 7
1
li
• • ql7
c% fl
ARJTUIIC PilaPOtTY �
ACOMMKIN
,ek, —AAND 9 9r MPARK
70 Ldn
RESERVED FOR RMME
COYPATIBIE AMA710/ OCVELDPME)rT \
Proposed Townhouse Development
SCALE: 1 "=1000'
75 Ldn
r"
_ oo
� � ►noraaev EA�]KXT
0� •G OOSMNO EAWrOIT
aow
65 Ldn
01
•I
r _ ..._ I r
4
CAM" VAUZY CCI M CLUB
PROKM 1OW11W Dnr" tON
SCALE: 1 "=10001
ice" 7-7 "mum F:-i "-- --gm .. 5---
65 Ldn 75 Ldn
i C04PA11LE AVIATION DEVELOP1OR \
st M
1 �
oJc a� doo D o
00%
rvrjptt
ACGIRITIOM
AND euslNEss PARK
Proposed Townhouse Development
00
1 � � .RO►O�D U>F1aENT
EIOSiMO EASEMEW
.a
70 Ldn
NOISE CONTOURS — 2007I
with EXTENSION
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT
WINCHESTER, MRGINIA
delta associates p.e., Inc. 1988
-* I
40
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703 / 667-0370
May 11, 1990
Silver Communities, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Richard Tremblay
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
Dear Mr. Tremblay:
This letter is to confirm action taken by the Frederick County
Board of Supervisors at their meeting of May 9, 1990:
Approval of Preliminary Master Development Plan #003-90 of
Frederick County Townhouses, Silver Communities, Inc., for
townhouses, situated on 22.0 acres zoned RP (Residential
Performance). This property is located on Route 645, off of Route
522 South, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and is identified
as parcel 45B on tax map 64.
The Final Master Development Plan should be submitted to the
Planning Department as soon as possible with the following
conditions having been addressed and shown on the FMDP:
1. That Silver Communities, Inc. will include a disclosure in
all sales contracts, deeds and subdivision covenants that the
property is in proximity to the Winchester Regional Airport.
2. Sales brochures for the project will include a location map
that. will show the proximity of the site to the Winchester
Regional Airport.
3. Silver Communities will provide a navigational easement in
each deed which holds harmless the Winchester Regional Airport
Authority from any lawsuit regarding noise pollution or flying
over nuisance.
4. Residential seperation buffers to be provided as required
by the Zoning Ordinance shall include a 6' high opaque fence.
5. All review agency, county engineer and staff comments must
be addressed.
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
Page -2-
Silver Communities, Inc.
May 11, 1990
If you have any questions regarding the preliminary approval of
this Master Development Plan or its conditions, do not hesitate to
call this office.
Sincerely,
Kris C. Tierney
Deputy Director
KCT/slk
w�
11
C
205 Regency Executive Park Drive
Suite 305
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
704-522-6096
FAX: 704-522-8315
BY FACSIMILE
SILVER
C 0 M P A N I E ti
Corporate Offices
P.O. Box 7566
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
703-786-1400
FAX: 703-786-6455
January 25, 1990
Mr. Robert Watkins
Director of Planning and Development
County of Frederick
P. 0. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Dear Bob:
8888 Keystone Crossing Plaza
Suite 1070
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
317-574-3800
FAX: 317-574-3804
L8 �T)
rrJAN 2 9 {9A U
Subject: Silver Communities, Inc. Preliminary
Master Plan Application for Townhouses
on Road 645
Thank you for your time speaking with me on the telephone
yesterday about questions we had on the filing of our preliminary
master plan for 117 townhouses on 22 acres on the north side of
Route 645. As I explained, Silver Communities, Inc. has not yet
decided whether to develop townhouses or apartments on the 20-
acre parcel we own on the south side of Route 645. Once that
decision is made, we will file for master plan approval on that
parcel.
Our engineers, Patton, Harris and Rust, will be submitting this
week to your office the preliminary master plan for the parcel
north of Route 645 along with the pertinent review agency
comments. We understand that this package will then be referred
to the County's consulting engineer for review.
Commercial & Residential Development Real Estate Management
Hotel & Motel Development & Management General Contracting Wholesale Building Materials
•
Mr. Robert Watkins
Page 2
January 25, 1990
Should you have any questions on this matter, please call me at
(703) 786-1400.
Sincere,
SILV MMU T NC.
Ric d Tremblay
Vice President f r
Planning and Development
RT/gw
CC: Kris Tierney, Deputy Planning Director
Frank Carson, PHR&A
Edward Minniear, Jr., Silver Communities, Inc.
•
205 Regency Executive Park Drive
Suite 305
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
704-522-6096
FAX: 704-522-8315
BY FEDERAL EXPRESS
SILVER
C 0 M P A N I E ti
Corporate Offices
P.O. Box 7566
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
703-786-1400
FAX: 703-786-6455
April 9, 1990
Ms. Renee S. Arlotta
Office Manager
Department of Planning and Development
Frederick County
9 Court Square
P. 0. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Subject: MDP#003-90
Dear Ms. Arlotta:
8888 Keystone Crossing Plaza
Suite 1070
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
317-574-3800
FAX: 317-574-3804
Enclosed is our check in the amount of $1,683.75 which is the
Master Development Plan review fee for our townhouse development
on Route 645. This item is slated for the April 18, 1990,
Planning Commission.
Sincere)ey,
E .�llUAVALS Iawe E,VEi�.:0&
Riclkard Tretmblay /
Vice President for
Planning and Development
RT/gw
Enclosure
Commercial & Residential Development Real Estate Management
Hotel & Motel Development & Management General Contracting Wholesale Building Materials
Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc
Engineers, Surveyors, Planners, Landscape Architects
107 North Kent Street, Suite 100
PO Box 3548
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Winchester 703 722-4721
Woodstock 703 459-4715
Offices:
Fairfax, VA
Bridgewater, VA
March 26, 1990
Chantilly, VA
Leesburg, VA
Rockville, MD
Virginia Beach, VA
Winchester, VA
Kris C. Tierney
County of Frederick
Department of Planning and Development
9 Court Square
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: Frederick County Townhouses
Silver Communities, Inc.
PHR&A No. 6616-1-0
Dear Kris:
Enclosed herewith are the slides to accompany the Master
Development Plan application for the referenced project.
As we discussed on Friday, there are no steep slopes on this
site which would be adversely impacted.
Sincerely,
PATTON, HARRIS, RUST AND ASSOCIATES
a professional corporation
1.
iftD9Y)1e---
W. Francis Carson, P.E.
Senior Project Manager
WFC/jdb
Engineers,
Surveyors, Enclosure
Planners &
Landscape
Architects
4,0"11- .
MAR
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
703 / 665-5651
FAX 703/667-0370
April 3, 1990
Mr. Frank Carson
Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, P.C.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 100
Winchester, Virginia 22601
RE: Fees Due for MDP #003-90 Frederick County Townhouses
Dear Mr. Carson:
The fees incurred on Master Development Plan #003-90 Frederick
County Townhouses/Silver Communities, Inc. are listed below. These
fees must be paid prior to review by the Planning Commission.
Please make your check payable to the Treasurer of Frederick
County.
$ 700.00 - MDP base fee
550.00 - 22 acres @ $25/acre
433.75 - Engineer review
$1,683.75 - Total amount due
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Av/ 0 044,tE,
Renee' S. Arlotta
Office Manager
41 t�
P
9 Court Square
P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia
' Nlr* 1
D 0 0 ENGINEERS
ARCHITECTS
SCIENTISTS
0
11240 Waples Mill Road
Suite 100
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
703.385.3566
Kris Tireney, Deputy Director
Frederick County Planning Dept.
9 Court Square, P.O. Box 601
Winchester, Va. 22601
Your Authorization:
Signed Agreement
0
Date:
March 20, 1990
Please Reference:
Project No.
17555.063
Invoice No.
9002528
Client No.
07534
Silver Communities Townhouses
Preliminary Master Development Plan review
Project Manager
Senior Engineer
Admin. Assistant
2.0 hrs @ 33.25
3.0 hrs @ 33.25
.5 hrs @ 14.50
Total Direct
Total Indirect
66.50
99.75
7.25
173.50
260.25
TOTAL DUE THIS INVOICE $433.75
W0NCHESTER REGIONAL
SERVING THE TOP opvIRGINI*
March 6, 1990
ORT AUTHORITY ,
WINCHESTER REGIONAL Ampom
xours/. uoxzoo`a
WImc ESrER'VIRGINmaom/
(703)662'2+22
Mr. James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman
Frederick County Planning Commission
Post Office Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Airport Support Area (ASA)
Winchester Regional Airport
Dear Mr. Galloday:
The Silver Companies' proposal to build a 117 unit townhouse
development on Route 645 (Airport Road) off of Route 522 in the
Shawnee Magisterial District has brought to light the immediate
need of land use restrictions in certain areas around the airport
to protect the airport from resideRial encroachment and
subsequent noise problems.
Airport noise is a chronic national problem. In their efforts to
find a balance between the air service needs of their community
and noise concerns, many airport authorities have requested. noise
compatible zoning within certain defined distances of their
airport. This is done to encourage land use around their airport
which is compatible with aircraft fly -over noise considerations.
Therefore, as discussed during the joint session of the Frederick
County Planning Commission and the Airport Authority on February
26, 1990, we respectfully request that the Planning Commission
consider supporting adoption of an Airport Support Area as part
of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan to establish policies
for use in reviewing rezoning and development proposals around
Winchester Regional Airport. Furthermore, we recommend the ASA
include, as a minimum, the area depicted on the attached County
Section Map (enclosure 1). `
The ideal situation would be the estab]ish/ent of an ASA that
wocld prohibit future residential development. However, more
realistically, the goals and objectives of the ASA should be to
guide public and private activities within the area around the
airport. It should be designed to recognize a landowner's right
to reasonable use of his or her property while, at the same time,
realizing that there is a continuing need to allow for the growth
of the airport for the benefit of all citizens.
It is with this in mind that we offer the attached draft ASA
goals and objectives (enclosure 2).
0
Airport Support Area
March 6, 1990'
Page 2
We also suggest that the following measures be considered when
evaluating this request.
a. Require avigation easement or encourage the proffer of
avigation easement to the Airport Authority by the owners of all
property to be developed.
b. Require or encourage compatible land use within the proposed
ASA, such as business and industrial.
c. Require or encourage landowners/developers to:
(1) Provide covenants in property deeds to advise future
buyers of the probability of aircraft noise and fly -over
nuisance. —
(2) Provide acoustical treatment of all habitable
structures designed to minimize the inevitable noise impact.
(3) Present a dominant statement of probable aircraft noise
and fly -over nuisance in disclosure packets.
(4) Provide prominent warning signs with specific regard to
the proximity of the airport and probable aircraft noise and
fly -over nuisance on all advertisements, brochures, and
promotional material.
(5) Install and maintain prominent warning signs on all
roads leading to a planned site during the entire period of
construction and sales.
There is no doubt that you will hear proponents of residential'
development make claim that Federal quidelines suggest that -
residential development is acceptable outside of an airport's
65 Ldn contour. Foriunately, this is not the case.
Unfortunately, the 65 LDN contour is not a wall at which aircraft
noise stops because noise is subjective. For example, a noise
which may be inconsequential to one person may be objectionable
to another. A given level of noise may be objectionable when
made by an aircraft but tolerable if made, for example, by a lawn
mower or record player. Many people are disturbed by the
presence of aircraft flying over their neighborhood, as much by
the aircraft's noise. Also, for many people, it is not the noise
of a single aircraft, but the cumulative "rainfall" of noise from
many aircraft that causes distress.
Airport Support Area
March 6, 1990
Page 3
All noise complaints we have received were made during fly -ins
when traffic was unusually heavy and came from homes
the 65 LDN contour.
Residential encroachment can very well devastate a community
airport and create an untenable situation for local and state
officials as well as airport sponsors due to citizen complaints.
Winchester Regional Airport is a vital part of the National Air
Transportation System that is used by private citizens,
commercial air carriers and business and industry to transport
people and goods around the world. The airport is an extremely
valuable public investment and a proven key contributor to the
controlled economic development of Frederick County and the
Region. As the County expands economically, the airport and its
services must also expand, and it must be allowed to do so
without interference from incompatible land use.
Again, we appreciate the difficult problems Frederick County
planners continually face concerning zoning and controlled
growth.
If you should have questions, require additional information or
our assistance in presenting the proposal, please do hot hesitate
to contact me or our Executive Director, Ken Wiegand.
Thank you for your continued support.
Sincerelyr
yours,
�
Paul G. Anderson, Jr.
Chairman /
Enclosures
To: Kenny Stiles
John Riley
Bob Watkins
Ken Wiegand
AIRPORT SUPPORT AREA
SOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goals and objectives of an ASA would be to guide public and
private activities within a defined area around the airport. It
would be designed to recognize a landowner's right to reasonable
use of his or her property while, at the same time, realizing
that there is a continuing need to allow for the expansion of the
airport for the benefit of all citizens.
a. Goals.
(1) To guide development near the Winchester Regional
Airport, which is currently experiencing growth pressures
from residential, commercial and airport development
interests, in a rational fashionin order to minimize
conflicts and to preserve the ability of the airport to grow
and to assure both a functional and scenic living and
working environment. '-
(2) To encourage and guide development activities in the
ASA in a manner which will protect the character of existing
residential neighborhoods.
b. Objectives.
In an effort to,establish specific guidelines for the
Frederick County Board of Supervisors to coordinating
development in an ASA, the following objectives indicate
specific aims for achieving the stated goals.
(1) Toencourage the continued expansion and -improvement of
the Winchester Regional Airport.
(2) To protect existing residents and workers in the ASA.
`
(3) To prevent infringement of incompatible.land uses in the
vicinity of the airport.
(4) To provide for the continued expansion of the airport
and surrounding air operations by recognizing them as the
dominant uses of the area.
(5) To restrict uses which concentrate people in the ASA.
(6) To establish the pattern of land use near the airport
based on airport noise and nuisance levels.
(7) To permit uses in the ASA which support the airport.
1
HE
SERVING THE TOP opvIRGINIa
March 6, 1990
ER REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
vmmcxESrmREsmmxL AmpVx
nnurs/. uoxzoo,o
vmmcxssnER'mmsINmzz6o/
(703)662'2*22
Mr. James W. Bolladay, Jr., Chairman
Frederick County Planning Commission
Post Office Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Airport Support Area (ASA)
Winchester Regional Airport
Dear Mr. Galloday:
The Silver Companies' proposal to build a 117 unit townhouse
development on Route 645 (Airport Road) off of Route 522 in the
Shawnee Magisterial District has brought to light the immediate
need of land use restrictions in certain areas around the airport
to protect the airport from residential encroachment and
subsequent noise problems.
Airport noise is a chronic national problem. In their efforts to
find a balance between the air service needs of their community
and noise concerns, many airport authorities have requested noise
compatible zoning within certain defined distances of their,
airport. This is done to encourage land use around their airport
which is compatible with aircraft fly -over noise considerations.
Therefore, as discussed during the joint session of the Frederick
County Planning Commission and the Airport Authority on February
26, 1990, we respectfully request that the Planning Commission `
consider supporting adoption of an Airport Suppokt Area as part
of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan to establish policies
for use in reviewing rezoning and development proposals around
Winchester Regional Airport. Furthermore, we recommend the ASA
include, as a minimum, the area depicted on the attached County
Section Map (enclosure 1). -
The ideal situation would be the establishment of an ASA that
would prohibit future residential development. However, more
realistically, the goals and objectives of the ASA should be to
guide public and private activities within the area around the
airport. It should be designed to recognize a landowner's right
to reasonable use of his or her property while, at the same time,
realizing that there is a continuing need to allow for the growth
of the airport for the benefit of all citizens.
It is with this in mind that we offer the attached draft ASA
goals and objectives (enclosure 2).
'
�
Airport Support Area
March 6, 1990
Page 2
We also suggest that the following measures be considered when
evaluating this request.
CA. Require avigation easement or, encourage the proffer of
avjgation easement to the Airport Authority --by the owners of all
property to be developed.
b. Require or encourage compatible land use within the proposed
ASA, such as business and industrial. DiscourAge residential.
C. Require or, encourage landowners/developers to:
(1) Provide covenants in property deeds to advise future
buyers of the probability of aircraft noise and fly -over
nuisance.
(2) Provide acoustical treatment of all habitable
structures designed to minimize the inevitable noise impact.
(3) Present a dominant statement of probable aircraft noise
and fly -over nuisance in disclosure packets.
(4) Provide prominent warning signs with specific regard to
the proximity of the airport and probable aircraft noise and
fly -over nuisance on all advertisements, brochures, and
promotional material.
(5) Install and maintain prominent warning signs on all
roads leading to a planned site during the entire period of
construction and sales.
There is no doubt that you will hear proponents of residential
development make claim that Federal guidelines suggest that
residential develor-iment is acceptable outside. of an airport's
65 Ldn contour. Fortunately, this is not tho case.
Unfortunately, the 65 LDN contour is not a wall at which aircraft
noise stops because noise is subjective. For, example, a noise
which may be inconsequential to one person may be objectionable
to another. A given level of noise may be objectionable when
made by an aircraft but tolerable if made, for example, by a lawn
mower or, record player. Many people are disturbed by the
presence of aircraft flying over, their, neighborhood, as much by
the aircraft's noise. Also, for many people, it is not the noise
of a single aircraft, but the cumulative "rainfall" of noise from
many aircraft that causes distress.
Airport Support Area
March 6, 1990
Page 3
All noise complaints we have received were made during fly -ins
when traffic was unusually heavy and came from homes well qgtIlde.
the 65 LDN contour.
Residential encroachment can very well devastate a community
airport and create an untenable situation for local and state
officials as well as airport sponsors due to citizen complaints.
Winchester Regional Airport is a vital part of the National Air
Transportation System that is used by private citizens,
commercial air carriers and business and industry to transport
people and goods around the world. The airport is an extremely
valuable public investment and a proven key contributor to the
controlled economic development of Frederick County and the
Region. As the County expands economically, the airport and its
services must also expand, and it must be allowed to do so
without interference from incompatible land use. `
Again, we appreciate the difficult problems Frederick County
planners continually face concerning zoning and controlled
growth.
If you should have questions, require additional information or
our assistance in presenting the proposal, please do not hesitate
to contact me or our Executive Director, Ken Wiegand.
Thank you for your continued support.
Sincerely yours,
�
V
Paul G. Anderson, Jr.
Chairman
Enclosures
' pc:Kenny Stiles
John Riley
Bob Watkins
Ken Wiegand
AIRPORT SUPPORT AREA
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goals and objectives of an ASA would be to guide public and
private activities within a defined area around the airport. It
would be designed to recognize a landowner's right to reasonable
use of his or her property while, at the same time, realizing
that there is a continuing need to allow for the expansion of the
airport for the benefit of all citizens.
a. Goals.
(1) To guide development near the Winchester Regional
Airport, which is currently experiencing growth pressures
from residential, commercial and airport development
interests, in a rational fashion in order to minimize
conflicts and to preserve the ability of the airport to grow
and to assure both a functional and scenic living and
working environment.
(2) To encourage and guide development activities in the
ASA in a manner which will protect the character of existing
residential neighborhoods.
b. Objectives.
In an effort to establish specific guidelines for the
Frederick County Board of Supervisors to coordinating
development in.an ASA, the following objectives indicate
specific aims for achieving the stated goals.
(1) To encourage the continued expansion and improvement of
the Winchester Regional Airport.
. (2) To protect existing residents and workers in the ASA.
(3) To prevent infringement of incompatible land uses in the
vicinity of the airport.
(4) To provide for the continued expansion cf the airport
and surrounding air operations by recognizing them as the
dominant uses of the area.
`.
(5) To restrict uses which concentrate people in the ASA.
(6) To establish the pattern of land use near the airport
based on airport noise and nuisance levels.
(7) To permit uses in the ASA which support the airport.
1
p 0 1
F till E P.
cr�an' r •! - 0 ' Fw : ' r r,on�; �-� 17D3667D370'# 2
5 5-J. ver „� .e, -�� �� 14•� J ie e� ,
t
ISILW j
?OS cYer:�' E,te.:utive Park Drive 8888 Keystone C;ass,;,8 P':BLa
11 M f A N I E Suitt :07ts
�u�te 3t�5
o-th Caroiina 28217 indian.apods, lnd.ara 462XI
h096 Corporate Offices 317.574 3800
FAX: 7:±4 52''-5315 FAX: 317-574-3804
P.O. Box 7565
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
703-786.1400
FAX: 703-786-6455
January 5 , 199u
.parr z s Aso
s_tt;ect: Silver Communities. :nc. Preliriit:a�Y
Haste.- Plan Application for 'townhouses
on Kocici 645
Tian;~ you i)ur * ime speak;nq itn :r.e on tre; telephone
,cstertay tkbct_°: questions we has on the filing .f our preliminary
master olan for 117 townhouses on 22 acres on the north side oi-
O-Ute 645. An y explained, Silver Communit .es. lnc, has not yet
ir.o� r'ed whetner to develop townhouses or apartments on the «;a--
acrt pari7e1 we own on the south side of Route 646. Once tnat
d,7cisicn is made, we will the for master plan approval on that
-incrin?er-s, Patton. Harris and Rust, will be submitting This
�aeeK tc yt)u- otfice the preliminary master plan for the parcel
nort�t of Ioute 645 alorig with the pertinentreview agency
:nmments, We understand that this package wii1 then be rererred
to tt.r County' > consuiting engineer tor review.
Hi —el & Motel
,,55NT BY:Silver Compan e:s 0 : ^-:00 ; SiIdeg^ CIO*os- 17036670370;# 3
Hr. Robert Watkins
Page 2
JanuarV 25, 1990
Shouid you have any questions on this matter, please call me a,,
(703) 786-1400.
Sinc:;�O
,
SILV IiMUATLZ.O�NC .
RichQxd `rrembl �qy ,j
Vice Pr�:�ident. -' f..r
Planning
Kris Tierney, Deputy Planning Da rector
F.-ann :.'arson, PHR&A
Edward Minniear, Jr., Silver Communities, rn_.
�EP� BY:SiIver companies
—25-90 ; 115:0' Silver comoies—
SILVER COMPANIES
P,O- Box 7566
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, VA 22401
(703) 786-1400
PAX Number (703) 786-6455
PAX TRANSMISSION COVER PAGE
170366'10370;� 1
0A`I c t _ !" o TELEPHONE/FAX NUMEER � -C',
')"i'VER TOs J
A%AAA
R#!#!i#!�!!!#7tlAl�ltl�ty!#�##**#**tl�i#A!#!c!!Aa*3t!ll4iiatlt�r#{t�t!!!1lA
SENT bYz
bAx'Ir;*kNO TIME:
PAGE-$ TO FOLLOW ( INCLUDING COVER SHEET) s
CO.MMENTS/SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
•
205 Regency Executive Park Drive
Suite 305
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
704-522-6096
FAX: 704-522-8315
D � r'j►
JAN 6 !`
I
ISILVEIZ
COM P A N I ES
Corporate Offices
P.O. Box 7566
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
703-786-1400
FAX: 703-786-6455
January 25, 1990
Mr. Paul Anderson, Jr.
Chairman
Winchester Regional Airport Authority
Route i, Box 208-A
Winchester, Virginia 22601
8888 Keystone Crossing Plaza
Suite 1070
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
317-574-3800
FAX: 317-574-3804
Subject: Silver Communities Townhouse Development
on Airport Road, Route 645
Dear Mr. Anderson:
This letter is to confirm in writing the commitment Silver
Communities, Inc., made at the Winchester Regional Airport
Authority meeting of January 19, 1990, regarding our proposed
townhouse development on Airport Road, Route 645. The land to be
developed is presently zoned Residential Performance, RP. Silver
Communities, Inc. will include a disclosure in all sales
contracts, deeds and the subdivision covenants that the property
is in proximity to the Winchester Regional Airport. Also, the
sales brochures for the project will include a location map that
will show the proximity of the site to the airport.
Silver Communities, Inc. is aware of the Airport Authority's
concern over land use compatibility around the airport. However,
our property is a considerable distance, 1500 feet, south of the
runway, and well outside the 65 LDN noise contour recognized by
the Federal Aviation Administration for residential compatibility
(see enclosure). Moreover, the property is outside the 55 LDN
contour according to a recent map prepared by your engineer,
Delta Associates, based on a 20-year noise forecast (see map
enclosed).
Commercial & Residential Development Real Estate Management
Hotel & Motel Development & Management General Contracting Wholesale Building Materials
0
Mr. Paul Anderson
Page 2
January 25, 1990
To our knowledge, the 55 LDN level is the strictest guideline
recognized in the Country for airport area residential
compatibility. The FAA noise compatibility literature (excerpt
enclosed) recognizes that "at 55 LDN and below, noise is
considered no more important than various other environmental
factors". HUD, DOT and EPA recognize LDN 55 as a goal for
outdoors in residential areas in protecting the public health and
welfare with an adequate margin of safety (see enclosure).
We hope that our disclosure commitment will help alleviate the
concerns of the Airport Authority members.
Sinceer/r ly,
SILZ-COMM,MITJ4ie INC.
ich d Tremblay
Vice President f r
Planning and Development
RT/gw
Enclosures (4)
CC: Paul Elkin, Silver Companies
James Golladay, Jr., Chairman, Planning Commission
Edward Minniear, Silver Companies
Larry Silver, Silver Companies
Kenneth Stiles, Chairman, Board of Supervisors
W. Harrington Smith, Supervisor, Shawnee District
John R. Riley, Frederick County Administrator
Robert Watkins, Frederick County Director of Planning
Ken Weigand, Executive Director, Airport Authority
ENCLOSURE 1
--LAND USE COMPATIBMM' WITH YEARLY DAY-Na4T AVERAGE SOUND LEVELS
YMt* daYft 0% avaapa sound WJW (L _) in deabUs
86ioan
65-70
70-75
75-W
W-65
Over .
95
Latd um
65
Readenbat
outer than rtrobie hones "bum" f00pnpa
Y
IN
IN
N
N
11
ResdaarL
Y
N
N
N
N
h
Motile ebnr parks"'
Y
t N
' N
1 N
N
h
Transtertt b igw'UL
Public usa
y
25
30
N
N
h
Sd=i& h and m"M homes.
Y
25
30
N
N
!
Churches. auditarand 00nten hmft krrr.
y
Y
Y
- y
25
s y
30
s y
N
• V
h
• 1
Goverm er" savtcM
TransportationY
y
s Y
s Y
• V
!
Parking
c4mmerael use.
Y
y
25
30
N
!
No poMrorW
I
WWgSSW and MWS._braking ntor—. hWwere and Is-
Y
s Y
• y
4 V
V
Y
r
y
25
30
N
Reler
y
V
y
Y
Y
V
y
Y
s Y
25
a Y
25
Y
s y
30
s y
30
•
• V
N
. y
N
•
i
CoiTmnuncatpon.______
MaMactu" and podicb=
MaMacbuvq. goners'.
Photograprac and IF
Agncudxe ((excW kveslock► and larestrY
Y
• Y
, y
N
N
Lnvestm* frnrq W bnadq
V
Y
Y
V
y
Mmg amid Wknq r wwm poduction od ad —bon
Reaeaoonat
y
• Y
• Y
N
N
Outdoor sports aertu arid spoWdOr sPons
Y
N
N
N
N
Outdoor munc shuts. amp ffMIdSs— -
Y
Y
N
N
N
Nature ardtiblfa W nova
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Anne Wft parks,reeorle ad camps
Y
Y
25
30
N
Golf rouses. ndrq stables and water nereation...-
N
N
N
N
-- - -The dasigrtatiorm oonttaintad in leis table do not eartikAa a Fedral dmm Imom that any Um of lard covered tly ew
program r acceptable or utaeeeotade under Federal. State, or local law. The ragpomMili y for delanrmq er aocaplabM
and pem asible land uses mnam vnit dm local autlmbes. FAA Wwrmabona Wider Part 150 are not ntertded b su0s0aM
federally detemrrd lend uses for etose dominurd to be appmprnale W local &Ahonbm in naF' l0 locellln desaraa@d
needs and vakm in scrmw g raw corttp Wo lend uses.
V (Ves1-L&d Use and rMMad sanrcuff" campetable wrowW resrK>v'a - -- - -
N (No1-lard Use and rSj@W sln+cwes are not oanWWabe and snaM be aondared.
NLR-None level Redceon (oudoor to Indoor) to be arlwved avougtt noorparauon of nose anerxutton Inb 1ha (1809
W corebwaon of ate IMFUMae-
25. 30. or 35-Lad use andtooled atruC47e grtrarM mttrpaldM rrraesraes 10 nrrtveve NLR or 25. 30, or 35 mual be
moarparmmd nb deapnt and owwwcaon ar sttnchm
t Whaa to 0prmm n" defentnnea " resderlaW uses mint the allowed. erasures 10 aclrva audoor to adl= Nnaa
Level Reduetrdn MLR) of IN Meal 25 d8 and 30 d13 shard be Nborporated nb Or d&V code* ale be earmdred In
atdvdtrl
approwis. Normal cormVWcMn can be e■pecsad b provsde a NLR of 20 dB, exn. dve reduMm repure"rtm we atlen staled
u S. 10 or 15 d8 over standard mroru men W narenally saaWne nMdmnieei vrmetion and ciased wmdowa Veer rdM
However. em lame of MA alarm w a Ind owv mte oukfoor none poolenr-
• Measures 10 ad"" NLR of 25 must be nCarPOratad sad VW design and cmmrtrcadn Of PMMM of erM taA&MM
ware era Pitt ry recewaA arms reel mme eerwarm areas or �emre v.: na!r..: mass 1rs:! z _—
r Meeflsuna to actwve MR of 30 anus be v4on anted nb eM 0069 end OarrtrucbDn of Pa11am of emme bidiNpa
wrmn eraake Is nouve4 oft* ereim nme ser active areas ofrm wne eJIM more Meal is low.
• lresemN to assess NA o1 35 mug be ebarporwd nb ow dawgn and oamauctrdn of pone•+ of eteae alidn p
werere em farft r reearre A aHoe WM& now sertulve anees or.ere er xov rare level . low.
r Lard use OW"PIRWO p 0 ' ' up*" sotetd rai nlamemrtt Mures re Nmtaeed.
• R&W&~ b Sonp rm"m an NLR of 2S.
t RaatAarraaf bli0rga replae an NO of 30.
• Render" taw" ro pama- 4
Tab A
. 1 Gll.4� ii
I
z
r
0
C
t7J
m
155
8
RI
I
rvre co
ro
v
tJ
TABLE D-1. EFFECTS OF NOISE ON PEOPLE
(Residential Land Uses Only)
IIcaring
Speech
Loss
Interference
Annoyance2
Gener..l Community
Average
Attitr,de Towards
Indoor
Outdoor
\Average
Cu aclo�'v
Area
Distance in
Qualitative
010 Sentence
Meters for
Description
Intelligi-
95% Sentence
0/o of Population
Highly Annoyed
bilily
Intelligibility
May Begin
75 and
to
98010
0.5
37410
Very
Noise is likely to be the most important of alt
above
Occur
Severe
adverse aspects of the community e.viroum�rl.
70
Will Not
Likely
990/0
0.9
250/o
Scvcrc
Noise is one of the .rost important adverse
Occur
aspects of the co.»n,unity environment.
65
Will
Not
100'10
1.5
150/0
Significant
Noise is one of the important adverse
Occur
aspects of the community environment.
Will
60
Not
100'r/o
2.0
90/0
Moderate
Noise may be considered an adverse aspect
Occur
to
of the community environment.
55 and
Will
Not
1000/0
3.5
40/0
Slight
Noise considered no more important than
below
Occur
various other environmental factors.
I. "Speech Interference" data are drawn trom the following tables in
E:PA'% "Levels Document": [able 3, 119 D-I, 1-19. 1) 2. l ig. D-1. All
other data from National Academy of Science 1977 report " (uudchnt:%
for Preparing Lrivnronnrcnial Impact Staicnncnts on Noise. Report of
Working Group 69 on L-valuatiun of Lnvuunntental Impair tit Nome."
2. Depends on attitudes and other factors.
3. The percentages of people reporting annoyance to lesser cAtcnt% are
higher in each cast. An unknown small percentage of people %%ill report
being "highly annoyed" even in the quietest surroundings. One reason
is the difficulty all people have in integrating annoyance over very long
time.
4. Anitudes or other non -acoustic laciors can nnodity this. Noisc at low
levels can Mill be an innpurtant problem, particularly when it uurudes in-
to a quiet encrronmem.
NOTE: Research implicates noise as a factor producing stress -related
health effects such as heart disea-.e, high -blood pressuwc and
stroke, ulcers and other digestive di%ottlers. The relatn.uslutb•. tie
(wcen noise and these effects, hog.. vet, have not .n >ct taco
quantified.
tr1
z
t...)
r
0
M
c
t3j
w
•
/ENCLOSURE 4
TABLE 1. NOISE ZONE CLASSIFICATION
Noise Descriptnr
1
i`o►se
DNLI I L.fllhour►1 HUD Noise
Noise
Exposure
Day -might Average Equivalent Noise exposure Standards
Zone
Class
Sound Level Sound Level Forecast
A
Minimal
Exposure
atg- (
Not Exceeding I
55
Not Exceeding
20
••�
B
Moderate
Above 552 But '
Above 55 But
Above 25 But
`epnbte
Exposure
Nos Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
65
65
30
Above 65
Above 65
Above 30 But
C-1
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Not Exceedin;
Significant
Exposure
70
70
35
"Normally
Unacceptable-5
Above 70 But
Above 70 But
Above 35 But
C-2
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
75
75
40
Above 75 But
Above 40 But
D.I
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
Not Exceeding
80
80
45
Severe
"Unacceptable"
Exposure
Above 80 But
,`u. e ;+; 3;.; " Inve -5 Fut
D-2
Not Exceeding
I Not Exceeding Not Exceeding
85
85 50
D-3
Above 85
.Above 85 Above 50
ICNEL — Community Noise Equivalent Level (California only) uses the same values.
2HUD. DOT and EPA reco!7S dB >iLs i goal for outdoors_�id ttal.az p its
public health and welfare with •atra egtratt: margin of lafety i etettee^ g�
However. it is not a regulatory goad is a level defuaed by_a negoa wtld w ma uii. twe =coaeera
for economic and technological feasibility or the needs and desires o/ jsiyc$.paegtatla omautait3r ^
3The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) noise policy uses this descrp an alternative to 1.10 (noise
level exceeded ten percent of the time) in connection with its policy for highway noise mitigation. The Leq
(design hour) is equivalent to DNL for planning purposes under the following conditions: 1) heavy trucks
equal ten percent of total traffic flow in vehicles per 24 hours; 2) traffic between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. does not
exceed fifteen percent of the average daily traffic flow in vehicles per 24 hours. Under these conditions DNL
equals 1_10 - 3 decibels.
4For use in airport environs only; is now being superceded by DNL.
5The HUD Noise Regulation allows a certain amount of flexibility for non -acoustic benefits in zone C-1.
Attenuation requirements can be waived for projects meeting special requirements.
+ :+ 4.:
+ +0 + + t + . . . . . . :+ +m f: -+ 4
+ + +: :+
P.01
'RAN.DHCTICM REPORT
T H RT
SENDER R X
T I r-1 E P GE = f 111-1 1
i 5 0 22
7037866455
1 4
+ 4 t + f
l+:
:+ 4. f: i + :+ 4. + +
er 0"m0an:es
a
SILVER COMPANIES
P,O. Pox 7566
• 4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, VA 22401
(703) 786•-1400
PAX Number (703) 786•-6455
FAX TRANSMISSION COVER PAGE
17036670370;# 1
DATE: � �' �� � � _ TELEPHONE/FAX NUMBER
DELIVER TOO
r�itir*1ti��tA�tA�ic�ltAli**tt*ttt**t**�1-y**t*******tAt*R***tttiAA�itttiili*it**t*tR*#
SENT bYt
DATE: AND TIME:
PAGES TO FOLLOW (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): �
R**#tit#�FiiittittA!*iiRtf**tt*!tt**k*Rti�t*rti*****tlifrtt**iiitiiitir�►t*****irA
COMMENTS/SPECIAL INSTRUCTION:
i
•,. Vr' a J t'�, �� .."�'., ., J , u. `ice _�l 'r�F'S—•7036670370i#t 2
=SILVER]
: h M" A N I E
Corporate Offices
P.O. Pox 7566
4500 Plank Road
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
703.786-1400
FAX: 703-786-6455
January 25, 1990
'!r.. Robert Watkins
Li-:ector of Pianning and Development
Coui.t y, o- irederick
F. 3oX a01
Fdlt,_nester. Virginia 22601
8888 Keysrone Crossing Plata
Suiit- 1070
Indianapo!4, Indiana 46240
3)7-574.38Dt1
FAX: 317-5a.1804
Sub)ectl silver Communities, Inc. rti-,minar.y
Piaster Plan Application cor Towr.hc3uses
on Road 645
Thailk you - or your time speaking with me c>r, tnP, - zna
yesternay about questions we had on the * ilir.g LDr preliminary
,master pion for 117 townhouses or: 22 acres on the _xth lade of
ii,oute 645. As 1. explained, silver Communities. Inc. has not yet
dec-ded whether to develop townhouses or apartments on the 20-
acre parcel we own an the south side of Route 645. Once that
decision xs made, we will rile for master plan approval on that
jar':. !
( U.' —nol leers, Patton, Harris and Rust, will be SL':bmittiT1q Chis
weeK to your otfice ttie preliminary master plan :or the parcel
nartr. .s2 route 645 along with the pertinent review agency
comments. we understand that this Package wi11 tr.en hP referred
to _Ile '�Ounty` s consuiLing engineer for review.
!'{c)i PI ,�: ti.0', :i; I'+_�alc>,'P•ltflt 3C liailaSe+fien� .i�;izr3, .. ,_ �.._. ._ \.. .,. i3;. .. � ;ate* hi=
l i
SENT UY i i ver Companies 0-25-El , l t : 02 Si I ver Um ies-+ 170366703'' -.
Watkins
r
,�l.i ,."ilY 25, 1990
you nave any questions on this matter, please call ,,te A-.r
Sincere' ,
SILV tlbiV T'
:s 'i'lerney, Deputy Planning Director
-ar,;un, . R&A
1E.Qward Mininiear, Sr., Silver communities, Inc.
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT
ROUTE 1, BOX 208-A
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
SERVING THE TOP OF VIRGINIA
(703)662-2422
January 19, 1990
Mr. Robert W. Watkins, Director
Department of Planning and Development
Frederick County, Virginia
Post Office Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Response to Request for Master Development Plan Comments
Silver Companies, Incorporated
117-Unit Townhouse Development, Route 645 (Airport Road)
Dear Mr. Watkins:
Silver Companies, Incorporated, is proposing a master development
plan for a 117-unit townhouse development on Route 645 (Airport
Road) off of Route 522 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
The site will be subject to increasing levels of aircraft noise
and fly -over nuisance as Winchester Regional Airport grows from
47,000 current operations' to 70,000 by 1998 and 89,000
operations by 2008, a 3.4% average growth rate.'
Airport noise is a chronic national problem. In their efforts to
find a balance between the air service needs of their community
and noise concerns, many airport authorities have requested noise
compatible zoning within certain defined distances of their
airport. This is done to encourage land use around their airport
which is compatible with aircraft fly -over noise considerations.
We have not done this and may very well suffer the effects of
residential development near the airport as proposed by Silver
Companies. (A request to establish an Airport Support Area will
follow soon.)
--------------------
1. Based on Aircraft Activity Survey, Virginia Department of
Aviation, 1987.
2. Based on Table 3.2-13, Virginia Air Transportation System
Update, July 1989.
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 2
Unfortunately, we were not prepared to address airport noise
impact on residential areas at the time this particular
rezoning action was reviewed. our comments to the rezoning
request were prepared using Frederick County's current
Airport Zoning District restrictions and Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) guidelines concerning land use
compatibility with yearly day -night average sound level
which indicate compatibility for residential below a 65 Day -
Night Average Sound Level (LDN) [See Tab A].
As a matter of information, FAA guidelines suggest noise analysis
for airports which exceed 90,000 forecasted annual operations.
As indicated above, we do not anticipate this operational level
until after the year 2008, however, noise estimates were
performed in 1987 for Winchester Regional Airport by Delta
Associates, P.E., Incorporated, our airport engineering and
consulting firm. The estimates were prepared for a twenty-year
period using the FAA's Integrated Noise Model, Version 3.9 which
produced noise contours. (Refer to the Noise Contour maps at
Tab B.)
Numerical values attached to the contours represent a day -night
average sound level in decibels. The LDN method imposes a 10
decibel penalty on all nighttime (10pm - 7am) aircraft operations
based on the anticipated type of aircraft and frequency of
operations. The contours are superimposed over land use maps of
the airport vicinity to determine areas of non -compatibility.
As you can see, the site Silver Companies plans to develop is
well outside the 65 LDN contour and in an area which the FAA
model indicates should be compatible with airport noise.
Unfortunately, the 65 LDN contour is not a wall at which aircraft
noise stops. There is little scientific guidance, other than
administratively generated FAA LDN standards, to assist land use
planning outside of the 65 LDN contour.
0
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 3
Noise is subjective.
A noise which may be inconsequential to one person may be
objectionable to another. A given level of noise may be
objectionable when made by an aircraft but tolerable if made, for
example, by a lawn mower or passing motor vehicle. Many people
are disturbed by the presence of aircraft flying over their
neighborhood, as much by the aircraft's noise. Also, for many
people, it is not the noise of a single aircraft, but the
cumulative "rainfall" of noise from many aircraft that causes
distress.
All of the (very few) noise complaints we have received were made
during our bi-annual fly -ins when traffic was unusually heavy.
All complaints came from homes well outside the 65 LDN contour.
Residential encroachment can very well devastate a community
airport and create an untenable situation for local and state
officials as well as airport sponsors due to citizen complaints.
The former airport in Woodbridge, Virginia, is a good example...
or maybe a bad example?
Winchester Regional Airport is a vital link in the National Air
Transportation System that is used by private citizens,
commercial air carriers, business and industry to transport
people and goods around the world. It is a valuable public
investment and a proven key contributor to the controlled
economic growth of Frederick County and the Region. As the
County and the Region expand economically, the airport and its
services also expand. This major public investment must be
allowed to expand without interference from incompatible land
use, i.e., townhouses and other residential construction, if the
area's economic growth is to continue.
According to a 1988 update of an airport economic impact study
conducted by the consulting firm of Simat, Helliesen & Eichner
for the Virginia Department of Aviation, the airport's direct
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 4
economic impact on our community was $3.4 million creating 64
jobs and the airport's total impact was $6.8 million creating 96
jobs.
Because of this, the Airport Authority feels certain that
residents of our community do not want to develop a noise problem
for our airport. Furthermore, -the Authority cannot conceive of
any good reason why a developer would want to build a residential
area composed of 117 individual land owners near and practically
adjacent to an airport even though it is zoned residential... a
zoning decision which was an obvious mistake made as a result of
pressures brought to bear by persistent and over zealous
developers on well meaning and overwrought public officials.
Understanding the current situation and knowing human nature, we
realize that, even though potential buyers of the proposed
townhouses are forewarned about aircraft noise and fly -over
nuisance by the obvious presence of the nearby airport, they will -
still purchase a townhouse and then complain to their Supervisor
and other elected representatives as well as the Airport
Authority about aircraft noise.
Nevertheless, it appears that unless the Board of Supervisors
takes action to reverse the zoning of the parcels in question,
we would respectfully ask that Frederick County require or
negotiate with Silver Companies to:
a. Construct apartment dwellings only, -thereby creating one
land owner vs 117 land owners.
b. Present unequivocal notice of probable aircraft noise
and fly -over nuisance to be given to all potential townhouse
owners. Specifically, -the Authority recommends --
(1) Requirement to present a dominant statement of
probable aircraft noise and fly -over nuisance in
disclosure packets.
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 5
(2) Requirement to post prominent warnings with
specific regard to the proximity of the airport and
probable aircraft noise and fly -over nuisance on all
advertisements, brochures, and promotional material.
(3) Requirement to install and maintain prominent
warning signs on all roads leading to the development
during the entire period of construction until the last
townhouse unit is sold.
(4) Require covenants in property deeds to advise
future buyers of the probability of aircraft noise and
fly -over nuisance.
(5) Require Silver Companies to provide a noise
easement for the development which holds harmless the
Winchester Regional Airport Authority from any lawsuit
regarding noise pollution or fly -over nuisance.
C. Require acoustical treatment of the townhouse units and
a master planning concept designed -to minimize the
inevitable noise impact.
We appreciate the difficult problems Frederick County planners
continuously face concerning zoning hindsight and the extremely
difficult position we are suggesting with respect to airport
noise.
Ideally, we hope that Frederick County officials will understand
the mistakes made in this particular case and choose to seek
restricting the parcels for use as industrial or business sites
only. We understand that this may involve some expense and
embarrassment to the County as well as the Airport Authority, but
not half the expense and embarrassment that may evolve from
complaints from 117 frustrated individual land owners.
Response to Request for Comments
Silver Communities, Inc.
January 19, 1990
Page 6
The airport is a vital economic development tool that, if
protected, will serve our growing community and the Region as a
for years to come.
If you should have questions or require additional data, please
do not hesitate to contact me or the Authority's Executive
Director, Ken Wiegand.
Thank you for your consideration and continued support.
Sincerely yours,
4r -) -, /)/ 2
- 61-'t I —Paul G. Anderson, Jr.
Chairman
Enclosures
pc: Kenneth Y. Stiles, Chairman, Board of Supervisors
W. Harrington Smith, Supervisor, Shawnee District
John R. Riley, Frederick County Administrator
Silver Communities, Inc.
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY* WITH YEARLY DAY -NIGHT AVERAGE SOUND LEVELS
Land use
Yearly day -night average sound level (L .) in decibels
Below
65-70
70-75
75-80
80-85
85
Residential:
Residential, other than mobile homes and transient lodgings........
Y
' N
' N
N
N
N
Mobile home parks................................................................................
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Transient lodgings..................................................................................
Y
' N
' N
' N
N
N
Public use:
Schools, hospitals and nursing homes ...............................................
Y
25
30
N
N
N
Churches, auditoriums, and concert halls ..........................................
Y
25
30
N
N
N
Governmental services........................................................ _...............
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Transportation........................................................................................
Y
_
Y
s Y
' Y
• Y
• Y
Parking....................................................................................................
Y
Y
' Y
' Y
• Y
N
Commercial use:
Offices, business and professional.....................................................
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Wholesale and retail —building materials, hardware and farm
I
equipment...........................................................................................
Y
r Y
' Y
s Y
• Y
N
Retail trade—general.............................................................................
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Utilities.....................................................................................................
Y
Y
' Y
' Y
• Y
N
Communication.......................................................................................
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Manufacturing and production:
Manufacturing, general .................. _...............
' Y
'
Photographic and optical......................................................................
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
Agriculture (except livestock) and forestry .........................................
Y
s Y
r Y
e Y
' Y
' y
Livestock farming and breeding...........................................................
Y
" Y
r Y
N
N
N
Mining and fishing, resource production and extraction ...................
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Recreational:
Outdoor sports arenas and spectator sports .....................................
Y
s Y
s Y
N
N
N
Outdoor music shells, amphitheaters..................................................
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Nature exhibits and zoos......................................................................
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Amusements, parks, resorts and camps ............................................
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Golf courses, riding stables and water recreation ............................
Y
Y
25
30
N
N
'The designations contained in this table do not constitute a Federal determination that any use of land covered by the
program is acceptable or unacceptable under Federal, State, or local law. The responsibility for determining the acceptable
and permissible land uses remains with the local authorities. FAA determinations under Part 150 are not intended to substitute
federally determined land uses for those determined to be appropriate by local authorities in response to locally determined
needs and values in achieving noise compatible land uses.
Y (Yes) —Lard Use and related structures compatible without restrictions. - -- ------ -
N (No) —Land Use and related strictures are not compatible and should be prolubled.
NLR—None Level Reduction (outdoor to wWoor) to be achieved through incorporation of nose anenuatan into the design
and construction of the structure.
25. 30. or 35—Land use and related structure generally compatible; moasuies to achieve NLR or 25, 30, or 35 must be
ricorporeted into design and consVucbon of structure.
' Where the conwrkmiry determines that residential uses must be allowed. measures to achieve outdoor to indoor Noise
Level Reduction (NLA) of at Mast 25 d8 and 30 dB shouts be incorporated into building codes and be considered in wKWidual
approvals. Normal construction can be expected to provide a NLR of 20 d8, thus, the reduction requirements are often stated
as 5, 10 or 15 dB ova standard construction and normally assume mechanical ventilation and Closed windows year round.
However. the use of NLR criteria will not o"nate outdoor noise problems.
r Measures to aclwave NLR of 25 must be incorporated into the design and construction of pontoons of these buildings
where the public is racwved, office areas, noise sensitive areas or where the normal nose level is low.
' Measures to achieve NLR of 30 mtust tie incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings
whore the public is received, office areas, none sensitive areas or whore the normal noise level is low.
• Measures to atlseve NLR of 35 must be wtoorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings
where the pubsc is received. office areas. raise sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is low.
• Land use compatibN provided special sound reinforcement systems ue instafled
' Residential buildings regime an NLR of 25
* Residential buildups require an NLR of 30.
• Resdenhel bufdwngs not permtted.
Tab A
0
w
cAireR: vALLtY COUNTRY aue�
_
eaae�' e� a
00
00�
FU URE PROPEM
ACOU9TION
SCALE: 1 "=1000'
,,/-- 70 Ldn
RE3ERVED FOR FUTURE
caMPAnele AHAnaN oevftov►rtxr
0 1
I
PROPOSED NOUSTRIAL
AND 8U9NESS PARK
Proposed Townhouse Development
rA
a � .
pow It A
65 Ldn
75 Ldn
s
a ' PRDPosED EASEMENT
EMSTINo EASEMENT
\I
NOISE CONTOURS — 1987I
EXISTING CONDITIONS
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
delta associates p.e., Inc. 1988
- --- _, ice"' ram---- •.wi� s.----�...� w� r•-•—
w
e '
�4 7
65 Ldn 5 Ldn
RE97tVED FOR nmmc \
CpAPATIKE ANATION DEVELOPMENT \
CAIPEf!'! VAtllY COUMf11EY CUM
91 72E
P110P09<D 1000'K100' FJfTEN90N -
SCALE: 1 "=1000'
!r V d od 0 0
AD
00%
��
IUftA� PROP�i r
ACOUt57TON
PMtOPOSEO RIDUSiR1AL—`�
AND BugWSS PARK
Proposed Townhouse Development
s
ppLr
/ �• o PROPOSED EA9]IENT
E)MNO EASEMOn'
•o
70 Ldn
NOISE CONTOURS - 2007
with EXTENSION
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
delta associates p.e.. Inc. 1988
0
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
SERVING THE TOP OF VIRGINIA
January 19, 1990
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT
ROUTE I, BOX 208-A
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(703(662-2422
Mr. Robert W. Watkins, Director
Department of Planning and Development
Frederick County, Virginia
Post Office Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Airport Support Area
Winchester Regional Airport
Dear Mr. Watkins:
The Silver Companies' proposal to build a 117 unit townhouse
development on Route 645 (Airport Road) off of Route 522 in the
Shawnee Magisterial District has brought to light the immediate
need of rezoning restrictions in certain areas around the airport
to protect the airport from residential encroachment and
subsequent noise problems.
Airport noise is a chronic national problem. In their efforts to
find a balance between the air service needs of their community
and noise concerns, many airport authorities have requested noise
compatible zoning within certain defined distances of their
airport. This is done to encourage land use around their airport
which is compatible with aircraft fly -over noise considerations.
We have not done this and may suffer the effects of residential
development near the airport such as that proposed by Silver
Companies.
Therefore, the Winchester Regional Airport Authority respectfully
requests that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors consider
the inclusion of an Airport Support Area into its Comprehensive
Plan. Furthermore, the Authority recommends the area encompass
that land which is described and outlined on the County Section
Map at enclosure 1.
The area should be restricted from rezoning to Residential status
to protect the operational "fly -over" areas and noise sensitive
areas from future residential development even though most of the
area is well outside of the established 65 LDN contours as
Airport Support Area
January 19, 1990
Page 2
depicted on the sketch at enclosure 2.
As a matter of information, FAA guidelines suggest noise analysis
for airports which exceed 90,000 forecasted annual operations.
We do not anticipate this operational level until after the year
2008 as indicated by noise estimates prepared in 1987 for
Winchester Regional Airport by Delta Associates, P.E.,
Incorporated, our airport engineering and consulting firm. The
LDN estimates were prepared for a twenty-year period using the
FAA's Integrated Noise Model, Version 3.9 which produced the
noise contours.
Numerical values attached to the contours represent a day -night
average sound level in decibels where 65 LDN separates noise
sensitive from noise tolerant areas. The LDN method imposes a 10
decibel penalty on all nighttime (10pm - 7am) aircraft operations
based on the anticipated type of aircraft and frequency of
operations. The contours are superimposed over land use maps of
the airport vicinity to determine areas of non -compatibility by
LDN standards. These areas are those inside of the 65 LDN
contour.
As you can see, the proposed Airport Support Area is well outside
the 65 LDN contour and in an area which the FAA model suggests
should be compatible with airport noise.
Unfortunately, the 65 LDN contour is not a wall at which aircraft
noise stops. To make matters worse, there is little scientific
guidance, other than administratively generated FAA LDN
standards, to assist land use planning outside of the 65 LDN
contour.
Noise is subjective.
A noise which may be inconsequential to one person may be
objectionable to another. A given level of noise may be
objectionable when made by an aircraft but tolerable if made, for
Airport Support Area
January 19, 1990
Page 3
example, by a lawn mower or record player. Many people are
disturbed by the presence of aircraft flying over their
neighborhood, as much by the aircraft's noise. Also, for many
people, it is not the noise of a single aircraft, but the
cumulative "rainfall" of noise from many aircraft that causes
distress.
All of the (very few) noise complaints we have received were made
during fly -ins when traffic was unusually heavy and came from
homes well outside the 65 LDN contour.
Residential encroachment can very well devastate a community
airport and create an untenable situation for local and state
officials as well as airport sponsors due to citizen complaints.
The former Woodbridge airport is a good example... or perhaps a
bad example?
Winchester Regional Airport is a vital link in the National Air
Transportation System that is used by private citizens,
commercial air carriers, business and industry to transport
people and goods around the world. It is a valuable public
investment and a proven key contributor to the controlled
economic growth of Frederick County and the Region. As the
County and the Region expand economically, the airport and its
services also expand. This major public investment must be
allowed to expand without interference from incompatible land use
if the areas economic growth is to continued.
According to a 1988 update of an airport economic impact study
conducted by the consulting firm of Simat,'Helliesen & Eichner
for the Virginia Department of Aviation, -the airport's direct
economic impact on our community was $3.4 million creating 64
jobs and the airport's total impact was $6.8 million creating 96
jobs.
In order to insure the continued efficient use of the facility,
the proposed support area will serve as a buffer zone between the
airport and residential areas.
Airport Support Area
January 19, 1990
Page 4
The Authority feels certain that no one wants to see a noise
problem develop around our Regional transportation hub, therefore
we ask you to bear these considerations in mind when evaluating
the Airport Support Area concept.
If you should have questions, require additional information or
our assistance in presenting the proposal, please do not hesitate
to contact me or our Executive Director, Ken Wiegand.
Thank you for your continued support.
Sincerel(y� yours,
Paul G. Anderson, Jr.
Chairman
Enclosures
pc: Kenneth Y. Stiles, Chairman, Board of Supervisors
W. Harrington Smith, Supervisor, Shawnee District
John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator
Benjamin B. Dutton, Jr., County Rep to WRAA
Evan Wyatt, County Planner
Kenneth F. Wiegand, Airport Manager
i
AIRPORT SUPPORT AREA
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND LAYOUT
This paper describes considerations in laying out the proposed
Airport Support Area for Winchester Regional Airport.
The proposed model, referred to as the Traffic Pattern Model,
encompasses land generally bounded by I-81 to the west, Route 50
to the north, Buffalo Lick Run to the south, and predominant
property lines which connect points where Route 645 and Buffalo
Link Run intersect and Route 50.
Considerations in Formulating -the Model
a. Approximate traffic patterns used by smaller aircraft
landing on both runways (both directions). Current traffic
patterns where identified using land marks on -the ground and
plotted in red on the attached map. (A standard traffic
pattern is established which require pilots to make left
turns at each corner. This is done because the pilot sits
in the left seat and can easily see any traffic or conflict
to his left side before making a turn.)
b. Instrument arrivals (from the southeast) and departures
(to the northwest). For safety reasons, instrument
approaches and departures are commonly made straight out on
a runway heading. The departure direction is usually
determined by wind direction and velocity, however, runway
32, which points to the northwest, is most commonly used.
C. Turbo powered aircraft. These aircraft are usually the
larger and faster aircraft. They are asked to maintain a
much wider traffic pattern at higher altitudes. This
accomplishes two things:
(1) Separates the larger, faster aircraft from -the slower,
smaller aircraft.
(2) Reduces noise by keeping them at higher altitudes until
they are on final approach. Even then, they would not
create as much noise because they are usually throttled to
idle and are not in the lower traffic pattern until they
reach the boundary of the proposed Support Area.
Enclosure 1
t
0
d. A 5,500' runway. The runway extension is considered and
is scheduled to be complete within 24 months. The extension
should not draw any larger aircraft than are now operating
at the airport. It is a "safety net" which will allow the
types of aircraft using the airport today to safely carry
greater payloads.
Design and'Layout
Unfortunately, scientific data that could be used to establish a
support area does not exist. Even the FAA generated noise models
which use the "noise contours (LDN) were designed using general
opinion surveys because noise and fly -over nuisance are totally
subjective.
With this in mind, we designed the Traffic Pattern Model by
placing a 1,500' noise and fly -over buffer on the
approach/departure ends of the traffic pattern and a 1,000'
buffer along both sides of the traffic pattern which parallel the
runway. The buffer permits flexibility in the traffic pattern to
allow pilots to maneuver safely.
We believe that the model presents a realistic boundary that, if
applied, will protect the interests of the public and Winchester
Regional Airport.
\� ', f�Y , i1 -• b B' �31e. '� a v V \\ r� •�'1�� :.'i-`� •b c l .
zi ""' 1 ::Gnr � T a • r r�'°'y i� '�"• `_ _Q+,r1\.•1`'i�i.'P T t 2 1 4 � �� ��• i
77
Cleenwiwi]VpI
,a�.«, r�sT• ns I \a�i� - �� / .�'_ t. dal � :I - ('J �`j 1�j \: f/
s _
� yy
a
)r • • � Gabs Vail
IQ
8.713 - s 1,5 �`��� !e •a frtrt +u �-) r a.:' �._ Ltd
ir
,� �- ��• / ... � 0 '.! 0 a r� (.. o9r, � _ _ dlj /� .,,�.'' �-,,; 1 ) (!�� � ,� !> _',� �) � fix'"� � �� y�-
'r /` •'� �. _ - aoG .�- !dt _��7fi e�� •r- - - . l "/ !.i-:" / as .�/��+�� /. C�.,. / �'
1 . •` • .� ,,� � � �.\i ,vwr�atenlA unldVat !, <�r \ `��� � V ! Q J µ•e: - /�/ ° ��t ^ -
I �` �•-- � - Y" �.: - �Nt r :- � I' . � � e i. � ems- � �, \ ss�.. ` ��fQ _ �r �� i 1 ', /C_ �
! .. .- � 1.: ��,r' .'I Lr I � \ 4✓ tax IIt. i. _- .-/ .�..
, .. 1912Po;er su
DRAFT
c .s
VALLEY COUWM CUM
r `
00�
FVTURC PROvE
A00"TOCW
0
n
SCALE: 1 "=1000'
1
r PROPIX;FD *4"TM AL
ANO 804NESS PARK
.70 -Ldn
REERN D FOR FUTURE �
cwPAMLE AMATION DEN11OPWANT
7"
ii a p
wpop`°
p t •,o
65 Ldn
75 Ldn
po PROP09ED EA3CM'NT
DaSTWO EASF]+LNT
NOISE CONTOURS - 1987
EXISTING CONDITIONS
WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT
WINCHESTER, MGINIA
delta associates p.a., Inc. 1988
w 16 �
RUN BATE: 03/16/ FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
PLANNING C DEVELOPMENT LABEL LIST
*� HAP
INAMlE/
PROPERTY
DESCRIPTION
_kT.
- - - - -
___/ADiR_SS
,-• NO NAME ON
FILE YY
w
64C30 '�00-10000-0000-L�?`�-i�
NFSSFLR� DT, J. H. 'EST.
� LENA
8UFFLICK
ROAD
C/ 0 N :SSFLR )DTt LC -NA
RT. 1 BOX 200
w
WINCHESTERt VA.
22601
NE:S.SELrR` OTt J. He C LENA
BUFFLICK
ROAD
C/O NESSELRO!3Tt LENA
w
RT. 1 BOX 200
WINCHESTERt VA.
22601
- - - - -
NO NAME ON
FILE P
NO NAME ON
FILE
6490C-A00-{),ln:-1-0000-0085-0
BOONi=t MELVIN D.
F. R. ROAD
C KATHLEEN Me
w
RT. 1 BOX 165
WINCHESTEP., VA.
2.2601
64`i00-!HOC:-" `:`_ -^
ANGLGt LUTHE3 ESTATE
F. R. ROAD
C/O PAN;GLEt JOHN L.
560 N. PERSHING AVENUE
w
YORKt PA.
17404
ASHBY, HOWARD JUNIOR
dUFFLICK
ROAD
& LILLY M.
w
R.T. 1 BOX 185
WINCHESTERt VA.
22601
64300-A00-000h-63000-0069-0
ASHt�Yt HOWARD JUNIOR
BUFFLICK
ROAD
& LILL.Y Mt.
RT. 1 BOX 165
w
WINCHESTERt VA*
22601
64B00-ACC3-0�i� )-00 i0-0 }62-1J
`41Sr CARVER.t JAMES E.
BUFFLICK
ROAD
RT. 1 BOX 467
WINCHESTLR.t VA.
22601
w
64B00-A00-r'000-0000-0059-0
3OGGSt FLOTIE E.
BUFFLICK
ROAD
RT. 1 BOX 191
WINCHESTERt VA.
22601
i< 217648
0004-0000-005E,-`)
tiAU RMANt J0S,..PH c
BUFFLICK
ROAD
- _9 --THE-LMIA E.
w
_ RT. 1 BOX 196
WTNCHFSTFR t VA.
22601
bv�300-AUO-Or`s{)C1-C!lr?t)-0J`
-AUSER4ANt JOSEPH Co
llUFFLICK
ROAD
L THELMA L.
RT. 1 b0X 1q6
WINCHi:STERt VAm
22601
- - - - -
M=- NO NAME ON
FILE #*
•
64aOO A00-C�0 :'-0000-0067-0
HAWKINSt JOHN R. F. LILLIE E•
BUFFLICK
ROAD
RT. 1 b9X 186
WTNCHESTERt VA.
226C)1
6-4B00-AC0-Of) 00-Ci0,,)0-' 197-C�
PINGL _Yt ISABELLE V.
F. R. ROAD
P. Co SOX 173
•
WINCHESTER• VA.
22601
PAGE 1
LAND IMlPROV.
ACREAGE ZONE U/C VALUE VALUE --
.50 A2 RS 69000 21t600
.50 A2 AG 4t000
.66 RP RS 7000 45t400
.50 A2 AG 4#000
.50 A2 RS 6000 40000
.50 A2 AG 4000
.50 A2 RS 6000 599500
.50 A2 RS 4t000 18t800
.50 A2 RS 6000 48t800
1.00 A2 RS 87000 22t200
.50 A2 RS 69000 28t500
1.00 RP RS 81000 47t500
7
w�
RUN DATE: 03/16/90
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT LABEL LIST
NAME/
PROPERTY
MAP 140.
/ADDR.ESS
DESCRIPTION
-----------
-------
6430(—At)C�-0�`�f}—f�s�f>>
-----------
P�ARS()Nt JOHN A. E DONNA
T.
BUFFLICK ROAD
'. 1 i_?OX 188
WINCtic3TE Rt VA.
22601
,4300—A '_ `�00-0000-0086-0
LcW lS • CLINTON 0. f AGNES
J.
F. R. ROAD
RT. 1 i33X 168
WINCHE-STERi VA.
22601
64BOO—A00—O`)n^—0000—rn64—°`)
0RNDORFFr JOHN MITCHE-LL
5UFFLICK ROAD
E PAMELA. SEABRIGHT
? T. 1 B9X 187
WINCHESTER? VA.
22601
64800-400-0000-0000-0�y65-0
ORNDORFF 9 JOHN M ITCHELL
BUFFLICK ROAD
& PAMELA SE<AB? I UHT
RT. 1 3OX 137
WTNCHE STE Rt VA.
22601
4r500—A00-0000-0000-0`66-0
-RND0 "FFi JOHN MITCHELL
3UFFLICK ROAD
E PAME-LA SEAHRIGHT
`- T. 1 8t3X 187
WINCHESTER? VA.
22601
64B00—A00-1';-)— P,00—()()Si(.-
MCDANI EL t ROBE=RT J.
F. R. ROAD
E KAREN S.
RT. 1 BOX 166
WINCHFSTER# VA*
22601
NICHOLS"Ni EARL M.
BUFFLICK ROAD
E VIRGINIA M.
LCT I BLOCK 1
HC 38 BOX 1320
WINCHESTERt VA.
22601
NO NAME ON FILE
A`
NO NAME ON FILE
PAGE 2
LAND IMPROV.
ACREAGE ZONE U/C VALUE VALUE
------- ---- --- ------------
1.00 A2 RS 99000 27000
.33 RP RS 6000 279300
.33 A2 AG 39000
. 50 A2 AG 11000
.50 A2 RS 6000 639800
1.47 RP RS 91,000 331,200
.50 42 RS 81,000 32.800
0
01
• ORNOORFFt JOHN MITCHELL
E PAMELA SEABRIGHT
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTERr VA.•
ORNDORFFi JOHN MITCHELL
E PAMELA SEABRIGHT
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTERi VA.
22601 •
22601 •
• W AJ../r d. w A .�..�. w ✓. J= J+ A W +b .A. .b � M I. J. A A w M..a. A w W 4 N.
YYY MYYMY�P 'P9 Mti•YMYYY "�•YMY'I`Y "I•YM'."PM
64BOOA000001000000610
NO NAME OR ADDRESS ON FILE
• ;`MYY1`YYYM'+WI•YM^wPM'WY•'APYMY•Vw•Y YMYYT�w!`YYY`MYY
• www..Ib�W+bwwwww.I. ✓. ✓.wWww WA✓. J..>. •A.w AAW.I. ✓.w
�YMM'PMYYMMYM'Y 'PYY1•YM•P �I•'Y'ti•Y'PYYYYMYMI`
64BOOA000001000000600
NO NAME OR ADDRESS ON FILE
• www ww✓. w✓.Awwww w✓.ww A.bw�W.b .bwA✓.WAww
YYM YYYYY I`YYYYyYYYYYYY 'Y•ti`YY•YYY M
i
•
•
•
•
•
i ORNDORFFY JOHN MITCHELL
C PAMELA SEABRIGHT
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTERv VA.
• ORNDORFF9 JOHN MITCHELL
PAMELA SEABRIGHT
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTER, VA.
•
i ORNDORFFt JOHN MITCHELL
S PAMELA SEABRIGHT
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTER9 VA.
i ORNDORFFP JOHN MITCHELL
E PAMELA SEABRIGHT
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTER, VA.
•
• ORNDORFFt JOHN MITCHELL
E PAMELA SEABRIGHT
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTERv VA.
i
22601
22601
2260±
2 2 6 0 l
i ORNDORFFi JOHN MITCHELL
E PAMELA SEABRIGHT
RT. 1 BOX 187
WINCHESTER♦ VA.
22601
•
i
•
i
.
i
.
.
.
i
•
•
BAUSERMAN9 JOSEPH C.
& THELMA L.
RT. 1 BOX 196
WINCHESTER• VA.
22601
•
BAUSERMAN, JOSEPH Co
.
& THELMA L.
RT. 1 BOX 196
WINCHESTER# VA.
•
22601
•
i
BAUSERMAN9 JOSEPH C.
•
E THELMA L.
RT. 1 BOX 196
WINCHESTER9 VA.
•
22601
.
i
BAUSERMAN9 JOSEPH Co
•
& THELMA L.
RT, 1 BOX 196
WINCHESTER9 VA.
.
22601
•
•
4AAJ.AAAAA 4AJ.AAAJ•AA.4AA±RAJ. .1.AA•4 di.W J.
YYY`••YYYYYMY•t•Y Y"`h`A^YYYYY YYYYYI`YY'N
•
64COOA000000000000400
NO NAME OR ADDRESS ON
FILE
-----------A+4 M. A.I4r +4 .M1 d.A J.
Y YYMY9`Y YYYYYYYrY-NYY'I`T YYYYYYYYMY YY
•
•
i
i
•
ASHBY• HOWARD JUNIOR
f LILLY M.
RT. 1 BOX 185
WINCHESTER• VA.
• ASHBYt HOWARD JUNIOR
& LILLY M.
RT. 1 BOX 185
WINCHESTER, VA.
ASHBYs HOWARD JUNIO".
& LILLY M.
RT. 1 BOX 185
WiNCHESTERr VA.
ASHBYv HOWARD JUNIOR
£ LILLY M.
RT. 1 BOX 185
WINCHESTERs VA.
22601
22601
22601
22601
#
WAAJ.AdJ.�AJrW..II�.>. W...Ad. A..bAW AW WJ.WAAA-.f. .A J. .
Y YMY YYMMY^/`Y MY YM'i•M YY YMY YYM•MY 9•YMY'M•'f•
b A00000000000045E
AAME
•
OR ADDRESS ON FILc
•
�rMYY;`MM MYMMMYrYYM'•f`•.`MM YMYYYM•r Yh•MYY
•
•
•
!
•
#
•
•
i
• a. A..AiA AAw{. AAA AAAW A-d. J. J.AA AA AJ.
YYN•YYYYYMY YN•�YMY YYYYN•N•Y N`N•N•MN` MYM.
64000A0000000000004.58
NO NAME OR ADDRESS ON FILW�_^��v
YYMY^Wf••1•�YM MMY f•M YYY YY Ai•Y MAI•'AI••APMMf•'�`M��Y
• NESSELROOTY J. H. C LENA
C/O NESSrELRODTt LENA
RT. 1 BOX 200
WINCHESTERt VA.
22601
NESSELRODT, J. H. £ LENA
C/O NESSELRODTi LENA
RT. i BOX 200
WINCHFSTERs VA.
22601
NESSELRODTi J. H. E LENA
C/O NESSELRODTv LENA
RT. 1 BOX 200
WINCHESTERt VA.
• 22601 .
• NESSELROOTP J. H. E LENA
C/O NESSELRODT, LENA
RT. 1 BOX 200
WINCHESTER♦ VA.
• 226i1
• YY YYYYY'AY•Y'Y•YMY MMAs`YYY•Y "WI`YY%P 'PY N• rr vn•YY
64QfiDA00000000000045D
NIPAME OR ADDRESS ON FILE
• MY Y^Ai`•AY•M----f--- - YYM PYN�MNM PYMY^�•^YM •