Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-24 BOS Staff Report REZONING #10-24 Winchester East at Opequon Crossing (Riggleman-Gross) Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: August 4, 2025 Staff Contact: M. Tyler Klein, AICP, Senior Planner Executive Summary: Meeting Schedule Planning Commission: 12/18/2024 Planning Commission: 01/15/2025 Action: Work Session Action: Recommended Denial Board of Supervisors: 02/12/2025 Board of Supervisors: 02/26/2025 Board of Supervisors: 03/12/2025 Board of Supervisors: 08/13/2025 Action: Postponed by Applicant Action: Postponed by Applicant Action: Postponed by Applicant Action: Pending Property Information Property Identification Number (PIN) 65-A-194B & 65-A-195 Address 2737 & 2747 Senseny Road, Winchester Magisterial District Red Bud Acreage +/- 91.7-acres* Zoning & Present Land Use Zoning: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Residential/Agricultural Proposed Zoning RP (Residential Performance) District Adjoining Property Zoning & Present Land Use North: RP (Residential Performance) District Land Use: Residential/Open Space South: Rural Areas (RA) District Land Use: Residential East: Clarke County Land Use: Clarke County West: RP (Residential Performance) District Land Use: Residential (single-family detached) Proposed Use This is a request to rezone two (2) parcels totaling +/-91.7-acres from the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District to the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District with proffers to develop up to 319 single-family residential housing units. *A recent physical survey of the property conducted by the applicant indicates that the two properties contain approximately 100.53 acres. Positives Concerns The proposed rezoning implements Plan policy specific to “residential” land uses on The Plan envisions residential land uses outside and east of Route 37 to be rural area Page 2 of 11 portions of the property west of future Route 37, and where the Plan envisions new residential growth within the limits of the UDA and SWSA which encompass the subject parcels. A significant portion of the site around the Opequon Creek is preserved for open space and recreation (trail) with public access proffered enabling connections to other public access trails in the vicinity. This open space reservation serves to provide a natural buffer to rural areas in Clarke County to the east and implements Plan policy specific to natural resource conservation and preservation. Inter-parcel access to adjoining neighborhoods (Canyon Road/Senseny Glen) is proffered as well as required by County Ordinance and the timing of the connection (80% of total occupancy) ensures adequate circulation is in place prior to this inter-parcel connection to minimize traffic impacts. The proffer statement fully implements Capital Impact Model (CapIM) monetary contributions for residential housing types, addressing capital impacts to county services for schools, fire and rescue services, and parks and recreation. To address impacts on adjoining residences, the proffer statement restricts the hours of operation for construction activities, including deliveries, on the property from 7AM to 7PM Monday through Friday and 9AM to sunset on Saturdays. residential in character. This serves to provide a transition area to the Opequon Creek and to the well-established rural character of adjacent Clarke County. The applicant’s proposal shows residential in that area that is denser in nature than what the Plan envisions. The proposed two-lane section of the future major collector roadway (Proffer 7) is only to be provided to the first intersection serving the residential land bays within the development and not to the limits of development adjoining the Opequon Crossing community as would be typically expected. This leaves a significant gap to create/complete a road connection between Senseny Road and Hallowed Crossing Lane (and ultimately Route 7) as identified in the Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study. Staff notes that since the Planning Commission action in January 2025 the applicant has submitted a master development plan (MDP) application to the County to utilize transfer of development right (TDR) credits to develop 289 residential units. Portions of the subject properties are identified in the County’s Comprehensive Plan as eligible receiving properties for TDR. Should the property develop utilizing TDR, there would be no proffered conditions included. Page 3 of 11 Review Agency Comments: Review Agency Comment Date Comment Summary Status Frederick County (FC) County Attorney July 30, 2025 Legal form. Frederick Water October 11, 2024 “The application's Impact Statement is silent on proposed water and sewer demands. The applicant will need to ensure that adequate water distribution and sanitary sewer conveyance and treatment system capacity is available to achieve the projected build-out of the project. It is the applicant's responsibility to design, acquire easements, and construct the extensions of water and sewer services necessary to satisfy their proposed demands. The Proffer Statement does acknowledge the applicant's responsibility to extend services and construct a pump station to ultimately convey sanitary flows to Frederick Water's sanitary sewer system.” See attached letter. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) November 26, 2024 See attached letter. Comments addressed. FC Public Works September 30, 2024 “A comprehensive review shall be performed if a site plan is submitted in the future.” FC Fire Marshal October 1, 2024 “All fire department access roads, fire lane markings, water supply needs, and other applicable development shall meet the criteria of the current addition of the Frederick County Fire Prevention Code in future developments.” Frederick Park & Recreation October 1, 2024 “Referenced recreation areas are not shown on GDP. A shared use path (10’) along Senseny Road frontage and a recreation trail providing creek access along Opequon Creek are recommended.” Comments partially addressed. Page 4 of 11 Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) October 18, 2024 See attached letter. Comment addressed. Frederick County Public Schools September 3, 2024 See attached letter. Frederick-Winchester Health Department September 26, 2024 “This office has no objections to the proposed rezoning.” Clarke County – Department of Planning October 8, 2024 See attached letter. Comments partially addressed. Planning & Zoning Staff Analysis: Comprehensive Plan Conformance: The Comprehensive Plan (adopted November 2021) and the Senseny/Eastern Frederick Urban Area Plan (SEFUAP) provide guidance on the future development of the subject property. The Plan identifies the subject properties as “residential” and “rural areas.” The subject properties are also within the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and the Urban Development Area (UDA), enabling a request for a residential rezoning. The Area Plan states: “Outside of the urban centers described above, the residential land uses in the Senseny/Eastern Frederick study area are defined in three main categories: • R4 – these are generally reflective of our existing residential densities at approximately 4 units per acre. • R6 – these are slightly higher residential densities at approximately 6 units per acre (this is generally attached house development). • Higher density residential – these are generally multifamily and a mix of other housing types with densities of approximately 12-16 units per acre (this density is necessary to accommodate the anticipated growth of the County within the urban areas and is essential to support the urban center concept identified in the Comprehensive Plan and this study). The residential land uses outside and east of Route 37 are envisioned to be rural area residential in character. Route 37, to the north and east of Route 50, may generally be considered as the boundary between the urban areas and rural areas within this study area. This provides a transition area to the Opequon Creek and to the well-established rural character of adjacent Clarke County.” The rezoning proposes “single family residential (attached and/or detached)” in areas identified for future “residential” land uses. However, the generalized development plan (GDP, dated 02/24/25) also identifies “single-family residential” in areas planned to remain “rural” (i.e. those areas east of future Route 37 and the planned transition area to the Opequon Creek and Clarke County). In this respect, the proposed rezoning is not fully consistent with the adopted Plan policy as it pertains to future land use compatibility east of future Route 37. However, it may otherwise Page 5 of 11 be appropriate to develop the site as “residential” given the surrounding/existing residential neighborhoods to the north, west and south and if impacts are sufficiently mitigated. The Area Plan also identifies “Natural Resources” around Opequon Creek. The Plan states: “Within the Senseny/Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan, effort should focus on the creation of greenways, stream valley parks and stream buffers around waterways, while taking into account environmentally sensitive areas. Pedestrian facilities should be constructed that connect these features to other public facilities. Many such examples have been identified on the accompanying map. Environmental corridors should be incorporated with all development activities to ensure safe movement and protection of species and future development within the study area should take into account the natural resources located on and around their property.” The proposal includes the use of the Opequon Creek watershed for recreational purposes, including a 6-foot (FT) wide natural surface trail (Proffer 2.2 and GDP) with public access. Transportation & Site Access: The Plan identifies transportation improvements in the vicinity of the subject properties, including the future Route 37 bypass (“major arterial roadway”) which bisects the subject properties (north/south). Senseny Road (Route 657) is identified as an “improved major collector,” and future multi-use trails planned along Senseny Road and Future Route 37. The proffer statement and the GDP include right-of-way (ROW) reservation for future Route 37 (104’) and additional widths as required, and construction of two (2) lanes from Senseny Road to the first intersection serving the development. Additionally, the rezoning proposal addresses the future widening of Senseny Road to an “improved major collector” and the Plan identified 10’ multi-use trails. Inter-parcel connectivity to the west is provided via Canyon Road through the Senseny Glen subdivision. Page 6 of 11 The proposal generally implements Plan policy specific to future right-of-way dedication for Route 37 and improved Senseny Road. It is anticipated that development of up to 319 single-family residences will create additional vehicle traffic impacting on the existing network (Senseny Road, Greenwood Road, Channing Drive). The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA, revised March 4, 2025), which studied up to a maximum of 380 units (40 SFD & 340 SFA/TH), notes: “All study intersections operate at an acceptable level of service and queues with and without the addition of the proposed development. Based on the capacity and queueing analysis results, the proposed development will not have a substantial impact on the surrounding transportation and roadway network. Therefore, no improvements are recommended to mitigate the traffic generated by the proposed development.” The TIA study intersections included Senseny Road and Twinbrook Circle/Senseny Glen Drive (existing), Woodrow Road/Canyon Road and Channing Drive (existing), and Senseny Road and proposed site entrance (future). The rezoning promotes a more near-term solution that is contained in the Board of Supervisors endorsed Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study (EFCTS, January 2025. A graphical representation of the project identified on the subject properties (#4), projected costs, and project analysis taken from the study is included below for context. Page 7 of 11 The proffer statement includes partial construction (660+/- linear feet) of a two-lane portion of the EFCTS identified collector roadway, from Senseny Road, north to the first intersection/point- of-access to the residential land bay. However, this proposal while implementing a segment of the identified major collector roadway on the subject properties between Senseny Road and Route 7 (via Hallowed Crossing Way/Opequon Crossing) would still leave a significant gap in the transportation network between the completed section and the current terminus of Hallowed Crossing Way, and completion of the ultimate link between the two roadways. This segment would need to be completed by others, potentially Frederick County, and may require state and/or federal transportation dollars that are yet to be secured. Unless fully County funded, the timeframe to secure funding, design and construct the remaining segment is estimated to be a minimum of 6-8 years. This timeframe is highly variable and dependent upon successful grant applications that have not yet been developed or approved for submission by the Board of Supervisors. Outside of the EFCTS, this potential project has not been scoped, designed, or proposed for funding. Capital Impacts & Levels-of-Service (LOS): When evaluating capital costs of new residential development, the County projects per unit costs through the Capital Impact Model (CapIM). The model has been designed to project fiscal impacts that may result from land use change decisions. The Board of Supervisors updated the County’s adopted Capital Impact Model on October 9, 2024. Cash proffer categories (per the Code of Virginia) are limited to public safety facilities, school facilities, and parks and recreation facilities. On the following page is the projected capital impact by unit type from the County’s adopted Capital Impact Model (CapIM) for single-family detached and attached units. Page 8 of 11 Single-Family Detached (SFD) Single-Family Attached (SFA) The applicant has proffered $17,322 per single-family detached (SFD) unit and $15,596 per single- family attached (SFA) unit. As proffered (7/23/25), the rezoning fully implements CapIM monetary contributions for proposed residential housing types. The proposed 319-unit residential development is projected to generate up to 120 students (60 elementary school children; 26 middle school schoolers and 35 high schoolers). The current public schools’ level of service (LOS, August 2025) for facilities that would serve the proposed development are as follows: Page 9 of 11 Public Schools Level of Service (LOS)* School Current Enrollment (2023) Program Capacity (2020) % (CapIM) % (with proposed development generated students)** Greenwood Mill Elementary School 590 696 84.63% 93.3% Admiral Richard E Byrd Middle School 817 900 90.44% 93.6% Millbrook High School 1,563 1,341 116.33% 119.1% *CapIM Output – July 2025 **Planning and Development staff generated Note: The LOS analysis above reflects a point-in-time (2025). It does not include pipeline projects (unbuilt residential units) generating new students in the vicinity of the above schools, future redistricting of school service areas, or capital project planning, such as the 4th high school, that may alleviate strain on school capacity. Proffer Statement, Generalized Development Plan (GDP), & Impact Analysis: Proffer Statement (Revised 7/13/2025) Staff Comment Proffer 1 – Land Use No comment. Proffer 2 – Parks and Recreation No comment. Proffer 3 – Proffer Payments No comment. Proffer 4 – Creation of Homeowners’ Association No comment. Proffer 5 – Water and Sewer No comment. Proffer 6 – Historic Resources No comment. Proffer 7 - Transportation The proposed two-lane section of the future major collector roadway (Proffer 7) is only to be provided to the first intersection serving the residential land bays within the development Page 10 of 11 and not to the limits of development adjoining the Opequon Crossing community. This leaves a significant gap to create/complete a road connection between Senseny Road and Hallowed Crossing Lane (and ultimately Route 7) as identified in the Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study. Proffer 8 – Exclusion of Public Property from Proffers No comment. Proffer 9 – Severability No comment. Proffer 10 – Binding Effect No comment. Proffer 11 – Escalator Cause No comment. The generalized development plan (GDP) revised July 23, 2025, is included below and reflects proffered improvements, open space and residential land bays. Page 11 of 11 Planning Commission Summary from 12/18/24 Work Session The Planning Commission held a work session at 6p.m. on Wednesday December 18, 2024, to discuss the proposed rezoning application with staff and the applicant and their representatives (Commissioners Kerns & Tripplet absent). Issues discussed for the applicant to address prior to the public hearing: the need to complete the planned road connection between Senseny Road and Hallowed Crossing Way (and ultimately Route 7) of which only a portion is proffered to be completed, monetary contributions (including the proposed “credit” for future ROW) to offset anticipated capital impacts, particularly to public schools, and revisions to transportation proffers regarding site access and circulation (including inter-parcel connection to Canyon Road/Senseny Glen). Planning Commission Summary from 01/15/25 Regular Meeting The Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 16, 2025 at their regular meeting. The topics discussed by the Planning Commission included: the timing of transportation improvements and completion of the proposed “parkway” between Senseny Road and Route 7, the availability of public utilities and impact of new residential development of water resources, impacts to county facilities, particularly schools, and the escalator clause included in the proffer statement. The applicant noted the importance of the ROW dedication for future Route 37 and partial completion of the “parkway” on the subject properties as the “first step” to making a connection between Senseny Road and Route 7 and alleviating traffic in this area of the County. Thirteen (13) members of the public spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning, including the HOA President of Senseny Glen. The public comments cited concerns with water resources, safety along roadways, traffic, and County infrastructure not keeping pace with development, particularly public schools. The Planning Commission voted 8-2-1 to recommend denial of the proposed rezoning (Commissioners Aikens & Dehaven – no; Commissioner Bottorf – abstain; Commissioners Kozel & Triplett - absent). Staff would note the revised proffer statement (7/23/25) and GDP (7/23/25) are slightly different from the proffer statement presented to the Planning Commission in January 2025. The July 2025 proposal includes more residential units, and a lesser commitment to partial construction of the major collector roadway (future Route 37). Following this public hearing, staff are seeking a decision from the Board of Supervisors on this Rezoning application.