HomeMy WebLinkAbout19-06 ApplicationDecember 14, 2006
Mr. Patrick Sowers
Patton Harris Rust Associates
117 E. Piccadilly St.
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: REZONING #19 -06, SEEFRIED PROPERTY
Dear Patrick:
This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their
meeting of December 13, 2006. The above referenced application was approved to rezone 27.24
acres from MH1 (Mobile Home Community) District to MI (Light Industrial) District and 48.14
acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to M1 District, totaling 75.38 acres, for industrial land uses.
The subject properties are located west of interstate 81 adjacent to Fort Collier Industrial Park and
Arcadia Mobile Home Park, approximately 1,000 feet east of the intersection of Fort Collier Road (Route
1322) and Brooke Road (Route 1328), and are identified with Property Identification Numbers 54 -A -89
and a portion of 54 -A -91 in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
The proffer that was approved as a part of this rezoning application is unique to this property and is
binding regardless of ownership. Enclosed is a copy of the adopted proffer statement for your
records.
Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding the approval of this
rezoning application.
Sincerely,
1 Y-iLR E
Candice E. Perkins
Planner II
CEP /bad
Attachment
Department o Planning and Development
540/665 -5651
FAX: 540/665.6395
cc: William J. Lockhart, Et Als, 1345 Baker Lane, Winchester, VA 22603
Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Stonewall District Supervisor
John H. Light and Gary Oates, Stonewall District Planning Commissioners
Jane Anderson, Real Estate
Commissioner of Revenue
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000
DERICK
REZONING APPLICATION #19 -06
SEEFRIED PROPERTY
Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors
Prepared: December 7, 2006
Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins. Planner II
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues
concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report.
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 12/06/06 Recommended Approval
Board of Supervisors: 12/13/06 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 27.24 acres from MHI (Mobile Home Community) District to MI (Light
Industrial) District and 48.14 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to M1 District, totaling 75.38 acres
with proffers for industrial land uses.
LOCATION: The properties are located west of Interstate 81 adjacent to Fort Collier Industrial Park
and Arcadia Mobil Home Park, approximately 1,000 feet east of the intersection of Fort Collier Road
(Route 1322) and Brooke Road (Route 1328).
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 54 -A -89 and a portion of 54 -A -91
PROPERTY ZONING: MH -1 (Mobile Home Community) RA (Rural Areas)
PRESENT USE: Vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE:
North: Ml (Light Industrial) Use: Fort Collier Industrial Park
South: MH -1 (Mobile Home Community) Use: Arcadia Mobile Home Park
RP (Residential Performance) Use: Battleview Estates Subdivisions
East: N/A Use: Interstate 81
RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential
West: M1 (Light Industrial) Use: Fort Collier Industrial Park
Rezoning #19 -06— Seefried Property
December 7, 2006
Page 2
PROPOSED USES: Industrial land uses
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property
appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 1328, 1322, 1320, 1323, 1200 and 11. These
routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced.
VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Seefried Rezoning Application dated
October 3. 2006, revised December 5, 2006 addresses transportation concerns associated with this
request. VDOT strongly recommends and encourages the developer to pursue access from the proposed
rezoned property to Route 1323 via the Winchester Pasta Property. Before development, this office will
require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic
flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the
right to comment on all right -of -way needs, including right -of -way dedications, traffic signalization, and
off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right -of -way must be
covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and
surety bond coverage.
Fire Marshal: Plans approved as submitted.
Public Works Department: Impact Analysis Statement: Provide individual detailed discussions
related to the site drainage, environmental features (wetlands, karst geology, etc.) and solid waste
disposal. The latter topic is included in the table of contents, but was not addressed in the detailed
discussion. Impact Analysis Access and Transportation: We applaud the applicant's pursuit of access
through the existing pasta plant property to Brooke Road. We concur that this access represents the
preferred method of ingress /egress to accommodate truck traffic. When this point of ingress /egress has
been achieved, we recommend that the existing 50- foot access easement across the jail property be
vacated. Refer to page 2 of 5 Proffer Statement: We concur with the applicant's offer to construct a
stormwater management pond using an impervious liner to avoid groundwater impacts. We would
further recommend that a synthetic liner be used because of the potential for sinkhole development
which occurred in the adjacent pasta plan stormwater basis. The geotechnical analysis should include
geophysical methods to accurately evaluate and locate potential subsurface voids. The analysis should
be extended to the area or areas proposed for stormwater management ponds.
Frederick County Sanitation Authority: We have the water and sewer capacity and will be able to
provide service to this site.
Frederick Winchester Service Authority: No comments.
Frederick Winchester Health Department: Health Department has no objection to the rezoning
request. Facilities to be served by public water and sewer.
Rezoning 19 -06 Seefried Property
December 7, 2006
Page 3
Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the
proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal
review of the rezoning application by the 1-IRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are
no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in
the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the
Shenandoah Valley does identify a core battlefield within this area, but further research displays that
this parcel has lost its integrity with respect to historic value.
Department of Parks Recreation: No comment.
Winchester Regional Airport: The applicant has not provided comments from the Airport.
Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided that states no residential units
will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school populations upon build -out.
Frederick County Attorney: (Based on November 2006 Proffer) It is my opinion that the proposed
Proffer Statement is generally in a form to met the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning
Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, subject to the following comments: 1. The proposed Proffer
Statement should contain a paragraph setting forth the identity of the owner or owners of each parcel,
and the source of title for their ownership. 2. The first paragraph of the proposed Proffer Statement
states that the proffers "shall supercede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto If
there has been a prior proffered rezoning on either of the properties, a copy of the previously approved
proffers should be provided to me to supplement this review. If there has been no prior proffered
rezoning, the above quoted language should be deleted. 3. In paragraph 1 of the proffers (Monetary
Contribution), 1 would suggest that the word "industrial" be removed from each of the three proffers, so
that the subject monetary contributions will be due upon the issuance of the first building permit on the
property. Since the property is being zoned to an industrial category, the proffer should be due upon the
issuance of the first building permit on the property, without having to make a determination as to
whether the building being constructed is "industrial 4. Proffer 2.1, which states that "Site lighting
shall be constructed in a manner that avoids any negative impacts to adjacent properties is
unnecessarily vague. The proffer should either detail the specifics of the lighting, or add at the end of
the sentence "as determined by the Zoning Administrator 5. In Proffers 2.4 and 2.5, reference is made
to a "future access road Since the proposed Proffer Statement makes no reference to a Generalized
Development Plan, nor any reference to a plat to be made a part of the proffers showing the location of
the future access road, staff needs to determine whether it can reasonably evaluate these two proffers. 6.
One of the record owners of the Property is shown to be "William J. Lockhart, et als This indicates
more than one owner. However, the Proffer Statement is set up to be signed (on Page 3 of 5) by one
person on behalf of "William J. Lockhart, et als The Frederick County tax parcel information
references Deed Book 934 at Page 658. The document there recorded is an Affidavit showing the heirs
of Delitt Elizabeth Lockhart. That affidavit indicates that Delitt Elizabeth Lockhart dies intestate
(without a will), leaving as her heirs the six persons listed on the affidavit. Presumably, Delitt Elizabeth
Lockhart was the owner of the property, and upon her death the title to the property passed to her six
heirs listed on the affidavit. If this is the case, then each of the owners of the property must sign the
Rezoning Application and the Proffer Statement, unless there is produced a legally sufficient power of
attorney for a person to sign these documents on behalf of one or more of the owners. It should be
Rezoning 19 -06 Seefried Property
December 7, 2006
Page 4
noted that 1 have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and
appropriate for the rezoning of this specific property, or whether other proffers would be appropriate. as
it is my understanding that that review will be done by the staff and the Planning Commission.
Planning Department: Please see attached letter dated November 15, 2006 from Candice E. Perkins,
Planner 11.
Planning Zoning:
1) Site History
The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies all of
54 -A -89 as being zoned A -2 (Agricultural General) and 54 -A -89 as being zoned split zoned A -2
and MH -1 (Mobile 1 -lome Community). With rezoning #14 -83 the remainder of 54 -A -89 was
rezoned from A -2 to Ml -I -1.
The County's agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District
upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989.
The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re- mapping of parcel 54 -A -89 and
all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA District.
2) Comprehensive Policy Plan
The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as
the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public
facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to
protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a
composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County.
[Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1 -1]
Land Use
The site is located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water
Service Area (SWSA). It is not within the limits of any small area land use plan.
The site is within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The
plan shows a portion of this property with a residential designation and the remainder with no
designation. The residential designation reflects the existing MI-I -1 zoning of the site and its
proximity to the existing Arcadia Mobile Home Park. The request to M -1 for this site could be
consistent with the existing use in the area because the majority of the site is surrounded by the
existing Fort Collier Industrial Park and Interstate 81.
Transportation
The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed
industrial and commercial development. This proposed rezoning application does not provide
for this minimum Level of Service.
Rezoning 19 -06 Seefried Property
December 7, 2006
Page 5
1
This proposal calls for up to 1,000,000 square feet of industrial uses on the site, which has the
potential for 5,708 average daily trips. It is noted in the applicant's impact analysis that if the
MH -1 portion of the site were to develop with a by right mobile home park, it has the potential
for 1,044 average daily trips.
Site Access
The proposed development would he accessed off of a new easement that the applicant has
staled they have obtained through the Winchester Pasta Site which would provide the
development with access to Brooke Road. This proposed new easement has not been provided
to or reviewed by staff but the proffers have been revised w state that the project entrance will
he on Brooke Road instead of the easement through the Frederick County Animal Sheller
property. The applicant stated al the December 6, 2006 Planning Commission meeting that
they would vacate the easement through the shelter property.
3) Site Suitability /Environment
It does not appear that the site contains any environmental features that would either constrain
or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes. A small area of
floodplains identified on the northern tip of this property. This will need to be further addressed
at the MDP stage and a wetlands delineation study will be required as well.
The General Soils Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils
comprising the subject parcels fall under the Frederick Poplimento Oaklet soil association,
which is the predominant association on land located along the 1 -81 corridor in the Winchester
vicinity.
4) Potential Impacts
A. Transportation
The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed
industrial and commercial development. This proposed rezoning does not provide that
minimum Level of Service.
A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected
from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. The County's rezoning application
requires applicants to model the worst possible scenario based on the use of the site. As only
accessory office will be allowed with this development, the worst case scenario (industrial use)
was modeled with this application. The TIA did not include all relevant background
information, notably the low background for Rutherford Farm Industrial Park.
The Conclusions from the Transportation impact Analysis (TIA) state that the following are
required:
Route 11 Welltown Road: an additional eastbound left -turn lane, northbound left
turn lane and two (2) southbound left -turn lanes will be required to maintain an
Rezoning #19-06 Seefried Property
December 7, 2006
Page 6
overall level of service "D" or better during 2010 background and build -out
conditions.
Staff Note: It is noted that the identified improvements fail to improve the
intersection above a level of service D. This improvement has not been proffered by
the applicant.
Route 11 Brooke Road: A separate westbound right -turn lane would be required to
maintain overall intersection level of service "C" during build -out conditions.
Staff Note: Proffer 3.1 provides a lump sum of $400,000 to he used for road
improvements. Actual construction of turn lanes has not addressed by the applicant
Route 7 Fort Collier Road: An additional southbound left -turn lane and northbound
left -turn lane will be required to maintain overall intersection level of service "D" or
better during 2010 build -out conditions.
Staff Note: It is noted that the identified improvements fail to improve the
intersection above a level of service D. This improvement has not been proffered by
the applicant.
Brooke Road Fort Collier Road: Traffic signalization would be required to
maintain overall intersection level of service "D" or better during 2010 build -out
conditions for both Scenarios #A and #B. Additionally, southbound left-turn lane
and westbound right turn -lane (should be westbound left -turn lane) would be
required for Scenario #B during 2010 build -out conditions.
Staff Note: Proffer 3.1 provides a lump sum of $400,000 to be used for road
improvements. Actual construction of the signal and turn lanes has not been
addressed by the applicant It is noted that the TIA conclusion states that only a level
service ofD will be provided even with the proposed improvements; this fails to meet
the standard minimum level of service of C.
Staff Note: Sheet 13 of the TIA shows the 2010 Build -out lane geometry and levels of
service. Scenario A and B are shown on this page. Both of the scenarios show all of
the necessary improvements but many of t/tese are not being proffered. A detail of t /te
lane geometry as it would stand if this rezoning were to be approved with the proffers
the applicant has actually committed to has not been provided and it unclear what the
level of service is going to be after 2010 build -out.
Site Driveway #A Fort Collier Road: Traffic signalization along with westbound
left and right turn lanes would be required to maintain overall intersection level of
service "C" or better during 2010 build -out conditions for Scenario #A.
Staff Note: The use of site driveway A has been excluded from the proffers. The
applicant has proffered to use site driveway B.
Site Driveway #B Brooke Road: A northbound right turn -lane would be required to
maintain overall intersection of service "D" or better during 2010 build -out
conditions for Scenario #B.
Rezoning 19 -06 Seefried Property
December 7, 2006
Page 7
Staff Note: Proffer 3.3 guarantees that this improvement will be provided but it will
only obtain a level of service D.
B. Sewer and Water
Sewage from this site will discharge in to the existing Red Bud Run regional pump station
before transmission to the Opequon Wastewater Reclamation Facility. Using a standard rate of
30 gallons per day /employee at 10 employees /acre of industrial property, it is projected that the
proposed development will produce 23,250 gallons of sewer per day. This wastewater pumping
station is currently under improvement by the FCSA.
Water service will be provided by looping from the existing 12 inch line located along the
western property boundary. Water consumption for the property will be roughly equivalent to
the projected sewage generation of 23,250 gallons per day.
5) Proffer Statement Dated October 3, 2006, Revised November 9, 2006, November 30,2006
and December 5, 2006
1. Monetary Contribution
$15,000 for fire and rescue
$3,000 for Sheriff's Office
$2,000 for general governmental purposes
2. Site Development
Development shall not exceed 1,000,000 square feet of gross floor area and
office uses shall only be permitted as an accessory use to industrial uses
Stormwater management pond facilities shall be lined with an impervious
surface to avoid groundwater impacts
The future access road shall be built to VDOT standards and have a minimum
pavement width of 26 feet.
Street trees located a maximum of 50 feet apart shall be provided on both sides
of the future access road.
A geotechnical analysis shall be prepared and submitted to Frederick County for
any industrial structures prior to site plan approval.
3. Transportation
Within 120 days of rezoning approval, the applicant shall bond for off site road
improvements in the aggregate amount of $400,000. This funding is available
for Frederick County to utilize for local roadway improvements at the County's
sole discretion. If at the end of two years from rezoning approval this funding
has not been requested then the bond shall cease and a cash payment made to
Frederick County in the amount of $400,000 for the County's use for roadway
improvements.
Staff Note: The applicant has not addressed the following transportation
improvements called for in their TLA:
Roule 11 /Welhown Road Improvements
Rezoning #19 -06 Seefried Property
December 7.2006
Page 8
Westbound right -turn lane at the intersection of Route 1 /Brooke Road. (needed
to maintain level of service C).
Additional southbound left -turn lane and northbound left -turn lane at the Route
7 /Fort Collier Intersection. (maintains only a level of service D)
Signalization of the Brooke Road /Fort Collier Road Intersection (maintains
only a level of service D)
Southbound left -turn lane at the Brooke Road /Fort Collier Intersection for
Scenario #B.
Staff Note: It is noted that many of the improvements modeled in the applicants TIA
will only result in a level of service D if the improvements were implemented and
therefore fails to meet the required level of service C
As stated in proffer 3.1 the applicant is providing a bond in the amount of $400,000
for road improvements and the only actual road improvement the applicant is
constructing themselves is the northbound right turn lane at the site driveway's
intersection with Brooke Road as indicated in proffer 3.3. It would be up to the
County and VDOT to utilize the funds for the construction of the necessary
improvements. Generally it is the responsibility of the applicant to wholly construct
and fund their necessary road improvements. 11 is also unclear what the total amount
necessary for the signalization and turn lanes will amount to and whether the
$400,000 will actually cover the improvements needed by this application.
A direct connection between the Property and Fort Collier Road shall be
prohibited.
The project entrance will be located on Brook Road, the Applicant shall
construct a northbound right turn lane on Brooke Road at the project entrance
prior to occupancy of the first industrial building.
Staff Note: Per the TIA conclusions, if Scenario #B is used a southbound
left -turn lane and a westbound right turn -lane would be required for the
intersection of Fort Collier Road and Brook Road in addition to the needed
signalization and a northbound right turn lane on Brooke Road at the project
entrance. While the applicant has addressed the northbound right turn lane
at the project entrance the southbound left -turn lane and westbound right
turn -lane at the Brooke Road/Fort Collier Road intersection have not been
addressed.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 12/06/06 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
While the land use proposed in this application is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Policy
Plan, as described in the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan, this application fails to
address and mitigate the transportation impacts associated with the proposal. Elements of the rezoning
Rezoning 19 -06 Seefried Property
December 7, 2006
Page 9
application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address the
goals of the County. Specifically, the applicant should be mitigating the impacts identified in their TIA
and the proffers should be worded to ensure that after two years have passed the developer is not
released from all proffered transportation improvements. The applicant should be prepared to address
theses issues.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 12/06/06 MEETING:
The staff expressed concern that the applicant's projected TIA and mitigation efforts fell short of the
County's LOS "C" expectations and reflected a LOS of D or below at some areas. The staffquestioned
whether the $400,000 proffered for road improvements was sufficient for the signalization and turn
lanes necessary to implement the improvements identified in the applicants TIA. It was noted that
construction of road improvements are typically the applicant's responsibility and that the only
improvement the applicant is actually constructing is a turn lane at their site entrance and it is
questionable whether the County could get other necessary off -site improvements not mentioned in the
proffers. Staff also noted that while the land use proposed is generally consistent with the
Comprehensive Policy Plan, the application fails to address and mitigate transportation impacts in the
TIA and through proffers.
Regarding the staff's comments concerning LOS issues, the applicant stated that this project will be a
small percentage of the overall traffic in this area and by the Year 2010, many of these intersections will
be at a LOS "E" and "F" even without this proposed project. The applicant stated that the $400,000
will improve the intersections directly around their site; however, it may also seed a grant application
from the County and VDOT for potential industrial access funds, possibly doubling the original amount
to $850,000. In response to a Commissioner's question about the cap on square footage, the applicant
replied that it was because of the transportation issues. Although the ITE produces 5,700 tpd in the M1
Lone, the applicant said they have not experienced that amount in previous M 1 -zoned projects; he said
traffic from this site will be a third or less of that number. Because of the need for industrial use in the
County, a Commission member suggested that the cap on square footage be removed and a
signalization agreement be put in place at Brook Road and Fort Collier Road. The applicant stated they
were in negotiations to purchase a cross easement for access out to Park Center Drive, which would
alleviate the need for a signalization agreement at Brook Road and Fort Collier Road. Because of the
different entrance alternatives, the applicant was uncertain what locations they should be putting the
money into. The applicant noted that if the money was doubled with matching funds, improvements
could be done in a number of different locations, depending on the need.
Although concern was expressed among the Commission about the uncertainty of the background and
build -out LOS, they did like the concept of the proposal to provide funds directly to VDOT and
allowing VDOT to determine where the service is needed, instead of the applicant committing to a
specific intersection. The Commission also requested that the applicant provide language for a plat of
extinguishment for the 50 -foot right -of -way connection across the jail property to Fort Collier Road, if
that connection would not be needed.
Mr. Lloyd Ingram of VDOT stated that because of the 5,700 vehicle trips per day possible and the
considerable background traffic, VDOT preferred the flexibility of the availability of funds rather than
Rezoning 1419-06 Seefried Property
December 7, 2006
Page 10
identifying specific locations for improvements. Mr. Ingram said VDOT was uncertain whether the
amount would be sufficient or not, but they would pursue economic development funding. He
commented that as the project develops, VDOT will have a better idea about the amount and geometry
of traffic. Mr. Ingram favored the idea of accessing Park Center Drive, which would alleviate traffic
going through Fort Collier. However. he did not think the connection would necessarily eliminate the
need for a signal at the intersection of Brook and Fort Collier roads.
Mr. John Bishop. the County's Transportation Planner believed the signalization agreement would
probably be needed for the intersection of Brook Road and Fort Collier. without the Park Center
connection, particularly because of the number of turning movements already occurring through the
intersection.
There were no public comments.
Commission members said they would not be in favor of the project without the signalization
agreement; they were interested in seeing the signalization agreement as well as the $400,000
contribution. A motion was made, seconded, and unanimously recommended to approve the rezoning
with the suggested inclusion of a signalization agreement for the intersection of Brook Road and Fort
Collier Road and eliminate the cap on the square footage for the project.
(Note: Commissioners Morris, Light, and Ours were absent from the meeting.)
Following the required public hearing, a decision regarding this rezoning application by the
Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately
address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors.
Frederick County, VA
Location in the County
Map Features
0 Application
IS Lakes /Ponds
-y- Streams �s
Topography (5' interval) OW
c- Buildings eie
Streets
Primary
Secondary
Terciary
AGF Districts
ID South Frederick District
Double Church District
Red Bud District
Rezoning
REZ 19 06
Application
Seefried
Property
Parcel ID:
54 -A -89
54 -A -91
Zoning
B1 (Business, Neighborhood District)
B2 (Business, General District)
B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District)
EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)
HE (Higher Education District)
M1 (Industrial, Light District)
M2 (Industrial, General District)
MH1 (Mobile Home Community District)
MS (Medical Support District)
R4 (Residential, Planned Community District)
R5 (Residential Recreational Community Dist
RAZ (Rural Area Zone)
RP (Residential Performance District)
Location in Surrounding Area
o 125 250 500eet
Frederick County, W
Location in the County
Map Features
CO Application Long Range Land Use
fS Lakes /Ponds Rural Community Center
Streams Residential
Topography (5' interval) Business
Buildings Industrial
Streets Institutional
4 11''i Primary qSr' Recreation
Secondary Historic
'1.. Terciary 65 Mixed -Use
AGF Districts ea Planned Unit Development
South Frederick District
Double Church District
CD Red Bud District
Rezoning
REZ 19 06
Application
Seefried
Property
Parcel ID:
54 A 89
54 -A -91
Location in Surrounding Area
Frederick County, VA
Location in the County
Map Features
CO Application
$3 Lakes /Ponds
v-- Streams
Topography (5' interval)
Streets
4 Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
AGF Districts
South Frederick District
Double Church District
Red Bud District
4.17 411re
4
Location in Surrounding Area
0 125 250 500
eet
Rezoning
REZ 19 06
Application
Seefried
Property
Parcel ID:
54 A 89
54 -A -91
�To'becompleted)by Pldnnrng Staff T� x tioti 3
tot Amoun rA mou€
FtrPard t /Q/o
l yr.
Zonmg�AmendmentNumber DatelRecerved�y.r�ll� /S/�a6,
tP timeanngDiite /t t s BOSlHeanugto ate
The following information shall be provided by the applicant:
All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of
the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester.
1. Applicants:
Name: Seefried Properties, Inc. Telephone: (703) 354.5511
Address: 5350 Shawnee Road Suite 350
2. Property Owner (if different than above)
Name: William J. Lockhart et als
Address: 1345 Baker Lane
Winchester, Virginia 22603
Name: Arcadia Mobile Park, Inc.
Address: 1345 Baker Lane
Winchester, Virginia 22603
3. Contact person(s) if other than above
Nance: Patton Harris Rust Associates
c/o Patrick Sowers
Address: 117 East Piccadilly Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application.
Location Map
Plat
Deed of property
Verification of taxes paid
Alexandria, Virginia 22312
REZONING APPLICATION FORM
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
X
X
X
X
Telephone: (540) 662.0723
Telephone: (540) 662.0723
Telephone: (540) 667.2139
Agency Comments
Fees
Impact Analysis Statement
Proffer Statement
X
X
X
X
1
Acres
Current Zoning
Zoning Requested
27.24
MI -I -1
MI
48.77
RA
M I
76.0
Total acreage to be rezoned
5. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to
rezoning applications.
Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned:
William J. Lockhart et als Seefried Properties, Inc.
Arcadia Mobile Park, Inc.
6. A) Current Use of the Property: Vacant/Wooded
13) Proposed Use of the Property: industrial
7. Adjoining Property: SEE ATTACHED.
8. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance
from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers).
The Property is located West of I -81 adjacent to the Fort Collier Industrial Park
and Arcadia Mobile Horne Park approximately 1000 feet East of the intersection
of Fort Collier Road and Brooke Road.
In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the
applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the
planning staff will use the maximum possible density of intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning
District as described on page 9 of the application package.
9. Parcel Identification /Location: Portions of tax map parcels 54 -A -89 and 54 -A -9I
Magisterial: Stonewall
Fire Service: Round Hill
Rescue Service: Round Hill
Districts
High School: Millbrook
Middle School: James Wood
Elementary School: Stonewall
10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested.
2
Name
Property Identification Number (PIN)
Address
Name:
Property
Winchester Pasta, LLC
54 -A -36J
P.O. Box 2080
Winchester, VA 22604
Name:
Property
Fort Collier Group, LLC
54 -A -36N
6231 Leesburg Pike, Ste 600
Falls Church, VA 22044
Name:
Property
Northwestern Regional Jail Authority
54 -A -92B
141 Fort Collier Road
Winchester, VA 22603
Name:
Property
Goodman, T. P. Susan M.
54 -A -87A
707 N Commerce Ave
Front Royal, VA 22630
Name:
Property
Lockhart, Robert S.
54 -A -89B
1441 Baker Lane
Winchester, VA 22603
Name:
Property
Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation
54 -A -89C
P.O. Box 897
New Market, VA 22844
Name:
Property
Name:
Property
Name:
Property
Name:
Property
Name:
Property
Name:
Property
Name:
Property
Name:
Property
Adjoining Property Owners
Rezoning
Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the Planning Commission and the Board
of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property
abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public
right -of -way, a private right -of -way, or a watercourse from the requested property. The
applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the
parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of
Revenue. The Commissioner of the Revenue is located on the 2 floor of the Frederick County
Administrative Building, 107 North Kent Street.
4
Single Family Home
Non Residential Lots
12. Signature:
11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed:
Number of Units Proposed
Townhome Multi Family
Mobile Home Hotel Rooms
Square Footage of Proposed Uses
Office Service Station
Retail Manufacturing
Restaurant Flex Warehouse
Other
Applicant(s) :Ctin c Y Q ,4T
Date
1,000,000
I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County
Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick
County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site
inspection purposes.
I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front
property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of
Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right -of -way until the
hearing.
I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to
the best of my (our) knowledge.
7
3
Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We)
Special Limited Power of Attorney
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.va.us
Department of Planning Development, County of Frederick, Virginia,
107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone 540 -665 -5651 Facsimile 540- 665 -6395
(Name) William J. Lockhart (Phone) 540.662.0723
(Address) 1345 Baker Lane, Winchester, Virginia 22603
the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land "Property conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by
Deed Book 934
on Page 658 and is described as
Tax Map Parcel 54 -A -89 Subdivision:
do hereby make, constitute and appoint:
(Name) Patton Harris Rust Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139
(Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601
To act as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and
authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described
Property, including
X Rezoning (including proffers)
Conditional Use Permits
Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final)
Subdivision
Site Plan
My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered
conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or
modified.
In witness thereof, I (we) have have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this r 11 day of Ar01y 200 in
Signature(s) ‘44,
4 C t..
State of Virginia, City o y of 1/34 CQ 3 ,To -wit: W 1 A m Lo ,¢rl.j r
a M,
P1 a`hl pa Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction:
aforesaid, certify hat the person (s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before
Y P O g b g P Y PP
and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this 1 k k day of 1\i614: 1\i614: 20�0
_i .t �l-7 My Commission Expires: 3 5 /fLrzi Z 7
Notary Public
Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We)
9
Special Limited Power of Attorney
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.va.us
Department of Planning Development, County of Frederick, Virginia,
107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone 540 -665 -5651 Facsimile 540 -665-6395
(Name) Arcadia Mobile Park, LLC (Phone) 540.662.0723
(Address) 1345 Baker Lane, Winchester, Virginia 22603
the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land "Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by
Deed Book 350 on Page 481 and is described as
Tax Map Parcel 54 -A -9I Subdivision:
do hereby make, constitute and appoint:
(Name) Patton Harris Rust Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139
(Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, Virginia 22601
To act as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place, and stead with full power and
authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described
Property, including
X Rezoning (including proffers)
Conditional Use Permits
Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final)
Subdivision
Site Plan
My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered
conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or
modified. Q ,ti'L /Vn�/. 200 day In witness thereof, I have hereto set my (our)) hand and seal this Signature(s) /1/000 Lns-'
State of Virginia, City/ ounty f (A Ppf C et- Cpl ,To wit:4 J I f 4mi 1
1, L:1A M te pa Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction
aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared be me
and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this day of cif :200 6_r:
4 c.c.! j My Commission Expires: 31 C7-1 f-i ko y 7 001
Notary Public
12/04/06 15:54 FAX 14355297996
Nov 30 06 04:17p
11/ LO! LOUD SO
WILLIAM J. T. JR
ZIONS SALINA
540 -699 p.2
t .IIIFD POWER OF AfTOB.NEY
KNOW nrniEKSY T} sEpR£SENTS:
tat jeatiA L Ark ISOri -haves. de 'nren and appointed. era by.
t ese,p,®mu, to.maLe. mtsuttata appoint tictim l J Ltd/Mira:. f w' mic and
.ta vad- amomGr.atnc ad tanyi.plare and-stcod-:b �.any dyed or otter daeu®enta and
weave asp' pace -ads e£asleniladeai m the mall olinatcertain5msperty do cribe'i' s sue'
.1..ragoatr Ptsjoes j/
.md.to moire nil =Ca-Saw tr'• ••r^+ o c. ooC-atith all
z it j ii At !C2$roh 9 —v.nc i nt3 ry 4 2 5 o a L i /Pilo
-end m aa, e•>>a_xa. mas=s: end tinge tti Tt=katt°a •o the fie oCtd.cnl ...cute as 1 mitda
or room do-irootmg- pCSOnalty rato-1 Lete20` FEW enteoO1th aluawh+l acts rinse by my said
of tee
by virtue Letwi This I�dcdYoavQ� an disability
of
OF
o Mtm�
CRY F' Ji md-
,q C370-4-4 hit—obey Pita" is sea for -s. s win
d
j.• r_� emsssia. do tmx y Y .Lam. W Tt 3 h whose same is
i
d�
it Attm a t�rur °f 1-
2006 has personally eFP°anr
befdae me sea aelmowledge Vte myo State eeI jurisdiction
14' dC7 of :'.C35.
Gfvm tudKrar 00 i
my arcataisaaa-acsata-- 1 ap
NOTARY PUBLIC
MRZtCRAPNE
Isswwt Main
Salila.Llte6. 84654
My Oymmtntn-EwprOs
January 27, 2007
STATE OF UTAH
N(atary Public
a 002
Dec 05 2006 1:32PM Brack Cabinet Inc.
Dec 01 OS IC: 3 a
LIMEZED POWEMOPAIVOIRNEY
raiOW MPH BY THESSIPRESENTS:
jayt gRatg banana g--.--.tutad appolmad. am! by
do aS oanatheac Mstraii Azar iLackW.gr 171 ray ana and
artinactibralat4 glow atatteadaastatanx ether don:ma and
aioaFfe _paaaeatts of rata ralstrai iota aakiiethat caluthaportmany trasealatai seaaasaaadasar
Lat-Wieurreaepeary
said tainece all ia .--...7ersisuccostaeasi theassef. wilt An
-r i fird A Ch 6 11-a s '"40 4 7 1 zoo ep
pnevostaeet:
audio
et ;add
strait
allaaahaeartals, manna eadthiagatatratastannabavaintasait real emu" es I egad
iiatiesieramasny, Gad Lhariab y ather lad icarnof all lawthl niabielata_by =or aid
virtue /a& This Limitaallfirvaa ad'AROaneyaballaia acasedana Olt dbabillity atthe
elairenmeammaThrav—aC.---darcl--
No-rHA Lu--crotA_
ot 4114 to-wit
ESif Ett&L, a. PA racalossy Put ttd fit to Sae* sod
alianaaid. datuacabpaaaa vbat —3-0 wits= nes 6
the einegokilL Linzitncivielefnoris4Cdall endtr
pancandlyappaared baSceseraa aaaladcassalarticd tba aanaaistarca Sate and ).din
undervar
126
dant r
2006.
expos Conirdssion Sqtmbra2Ore
9104297625
201:16-
v.
P a
p. 2
KNOW AI- i -.A6@V 9jF NwER OF ATTORNEY
PNIS:
ThiL 4 R.d
La.cmade.
Thew foe�4. do maks comyu� ®8- *dPaisit ra �O'tt�d a 7 and a_
7 T 1.
b'ntsl Cwn<Y. torts.. sefar ��.slaice and Banat r a a:� any d tod
'ecc+vc -s.q °od.er offer document,
Dc°°utb °!na[e aclaQ>le m the 'sales of that tv� Azad
—TA l i yy OM lr o eci?sY r otten. alai y sad ene.ciar,ca c ot s .21 r
�a md- a°e +.anC0aiL0.sxa1. wfm a77
te t at rascals other aedd4ir
macrs and thane la¢Ladenio a�
nCCOakttde if �S a-ay. ands >��ha of`�W arts dame by Itrs car
ihY oiaate lat>a� and tatoEppp alt Law -itd acts done by m
�f.
aL f'do'tr oEAttataey shall +tot tenniaee m diamility nFdae
WITTilbsztlFsc Yamae aadatW_da(r-
Hof
STATE OP
WILLIAM J. LOCKHART, JR
11/38 /zoee IS:la FAX S40 667 517!
Robert L. _Tomes III
1
itniadicom l rI� t�^�^� P Azad foe the Stale and
armed m Ora tMeam hared£ aTti£ at iLdX�Y'i kr 1 lf— /�amae
name is
2006 has d- bcebt poawr°fpaomef_dtad or -t
PQ.c, fl$6 PA�cmt wW ack d es'
'aromaid_ �'Lr°'rti Sate and jm;,,d{ceoo
Gina masies M1o:irhadabia
F t� zoo6
Myeassnah
Z C 66CL- Z.o4OFS
Notary
540 -662 -1799
aue1911E94 P 2
efr 1dVHM001 r men
p.1
12/04/2006 18:13 FAX 3046455348 AMfRICAREDCROSSbOSLO
WILLIAM J.•KHART, JR
IacTSD POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW AW'isfEN11Y-THESRPRESENTR
That 4 liWfrti R /IL. taocXtsgre isaserrudiscomiskomid and
lLnc w dtr.Int*, -0 jpjcty at+iltst ,f LocKA4- o4tTrt
lawful smororty. fad ma and in m ne_ ;Lade msdataad._to -sign me/ daaad ac atbaa d
leotivc aw'- Pdsdsof lc- ielatilis m thc o f that a n a mummy dread an
trod bamlx as Lee
tpr M.p SO -A -it
auwarsosaisagtis sign.saek �aad
and to do en such OthecaCW.. amd Im9trga ia to mµals o:Laeid amt
R
00010 1f oodog otiooii7ly aiidTbeaeby nay and onatfaei sl[ la+fvl aaam done
rasummy by viiMit Lemur This 1imieed-Poser rcre Amaaney_dhall ttoca pa an
pdoaioaX
WITNESS
STATE OE (E/ (�A.
si am aaad saal_thla
54.2 -1799
CTIY/COutroF
_.a -P -mo d for 4x
7 urisdicti aaridltietsiikarbraitipt amptle Thar
sialasattn *Pr 4h. 1t4+7 awai eA Payer s dand 4 ;60
2006 ham prmlty iirmit Sam aid
afatesai
Sir �.s+ ety l• Pr.:s «4 F V of 40X:ra 2006.
Da C ia6aapaaa (2-X Q.
/11 .+.&k. C a
1------
1 ar .aa orFaeu`ts -7_
fl l� 'STAT�p57lSRI01Rw
G _5F PHICLIF$ 1
National Bank t
0 .:9na467 1
mscahlor.m:•rcleyenatYvV vini 1
Pea ADM P, 2916 I
end by,
true and
and
.ter reaporry
f .it .11
theaamm
at might
ray
said
sty arctic
S tate egad
p.1
RI 001/001
WILLIAM J. LOCKHART, JR 540 -662 -1799
WCED-POWV$t -OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN SY THFSPPRESEN15:
That 1 Pre EKT 5 ye/Niter -have made comsdened and appointed. and by.
linenpniacrash.domelon, cons6a+xe-aadrappoint- if riff AA; r knelt ThmATtea. my true and
lawful arromeyrfer- mc-a,t -jn name. p1a c aodstead. to sign any deed he other documents_sad
any Re relative io theezila_ fti"aEcasain Property deirnsionl as sesainataii
Lo ckikdr" a eery
it". sad to melce all z car cy lraonfr asagpmvns and_c nvcyances then of with an
TRx /Y r sit- EW--
neressonrenvernints,t l-aaonsrniedge and deliver tlsesame;
and to do all such other-acts; mamas analtbinga -sai d real retain as insight
or could do if acting personally, and l hereby rstiP, and nonfat nll_Iaudid acts done by my said
attorney byvitmchaaraet Thiertimited POW= of Attprry:ton- gat terminate on disability of the
Principal. f
WIfNES.S ttieixDaw=ne a
awd se+ldus
STATE OF U f»l -I.0
CITY/COUNTY OF LO /it l i p to-wit:
I. 1 YI gl,le Vn'Lti a blotaty. Public -in_sad _far-the State and
L C
jurisdiction afor[aeid<do hezebjscstifylhat i �-fY 3 /l�f 1 ��l�� whams. acme is
signed to the Sategoing.Limited Power of Attorney dated. h tday.oL t C- e. r d�c
2006 boa :cad acknoartadgincltbe asite rnte and jurisdiction
aforesaid_ M
GiiViaumdtsmy'Limd this Saq:ti•: 'trf/
`wc1T 2006.
my caastvissina j 3 1— CA
teary
EAL)
p2
<9 u
Planning Commission:
Board of Supervisors:
REZONING APPLICATION #19 -06
SEEFRIED PROPERTY
Staff Report for the Planning Commission
Prepared: November 21, 2006
Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins. Planner II
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues
concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report.
Reviewed
12/06/06
12/13/06
Action
Pending
Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 27.24 acres from MI -11 (Mobile Horne Community) District to M1 (Light
Industrial) District and 48.77 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to M1 District, totaling 76.01 acres
with proffers for industrial land uses.
LOCATION: The properties are located west of Interstate 81 adjacent to Fort Collier Industrial Park
and Arcadia Mobil Home Park. approximately 1,000 feet east of the intersection of Fort Collier Road
(Route 1322) and Brooke Road (Route 1328).
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 54 -A -89 and a portion of 54 -A -91
PROPERTY ZONING: MH -1 (Mobile Home Community) RA (Rural Areas)
PRESENT USE: Vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE:
North: MI (Light Industrial)
South: MI -I -1 (Mobile Home Community)
RP (Residential Performance)
East: N/A
RA (Rural Areas)
West: MI (Light Industrial)
Use:
Use:
Use:
Use:
Use:
Use:
Fort Collier Industrial Park
Arcadia Mobile Home Park
Battleview Estates Subdivisions
Interstate 81
Residential
Fort Collier Industrial Park
Rezoning 19 -06 Seefried Property
November 2I, 2006
Page 2
PROPOSED USES: Industrial land uses
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property
appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 1322, 1328, 11 and 7. These routes are the
VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is NOT
satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Seefried Property rezoning application dated
October 3. 2006 addresses transportation concerns associated with this request. The Traffic Impact
Analysis supporting this rezoning request identified the following intersections as needing
improvements to mitigate the additional traffic generated: Route 11 /Welltown Road: An additional
eastbound left -turn lane, northbound left -turn land and two southbound left -turn lanes will be required
to maintain an overall intersection level of service "D" or better during 2010 background and build -out
conditions. Route 11/ Brooke Road: A separate westbound right -turn lane would be required to
maintain overall intersection level of service "C" during 2010 build -out conditions. Route 7 /Fort
Collier Road: An additional southbound left -turn lane and northbound left -tum lane will be required to
maintain overall intersection level of service "D" or better during 2010 build -out conditions. Brooke
Road /Fort Collier Road: Traffic signalization would be required to maintain overall intersection level
of service "D" or better during 2010 build -out conditions for both Scenarios #A and #B. Additionally.
southbound left -turn lane and westbound right -turn lane would be required for Scenario #B during 2010
build -out conditions. Site Driveway #A/Fort Collier Road: Traffic signalization along the westbound
left and right -turn lanes would be required to maintain overall intersection level of service "C" or better
during 2010 build -out conditions for Scenario #A. Site Drive #B/Brooke Road: A northbound right
turn lane would be required to maintain overall intersection level of service "D" or better during 2010
build -out conditions for Scenario #B. The proffers do not address any offsite roadway improvements.
Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance
designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip General Manual, Sixth Edition for
review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right -of -way
dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work
performed on the State's right -of -way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued
by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage.
Staff Note: VDOT has not provided comments on the proffer.slalemem revised on November 9, 2006.
Fire Marshal: Plans approved as submitted
Public Works Department: Impact Analysis Statement: Provide individual detailed discussions
related to the site drainage, environmental features (wetlands, karst geology, etc.) and solid waste
disposal. The latter topic is included in the table of contents, but was not addressed in the detailed
discussion. Impact Analysis Access and Transportation: We applaud the applicant's pursuit of access
through the existing pasta plant property to Brooke Road. We concur that this access represents the
preferred method of ingress /egress to accommodate truck traffic. When this point of ingress /egress has
been achieved, we recommend that the existing 50- foot access easement across the jail property be
Rezoning #19 -06 Seefried Property
November 21, 2006
Page 3
vacated. Refer to page 2 of 5 Proffer Statement: We concur with the applicant's offer to construct a
stormwater management pond using an impervious liner to avoid groundwater impacts. We would
further recommend that a synthetic liner be used because of the potential for sinkhole development
which occurred in the adjacent pasta plan stormwater basis. The geotechnical analysis should include
geophysical methods to accurately evaluate and locate potential subsurface voids. The analysis should
be extended to the area or areas proposed for stormwater management ponds.
Frederick County Sanitation Authority: We have the water and sewer capacity and will be able to
provide service to this site.
Frederick Winchester Service Authority: No comments.
Frederick Winchester Health Department: Health Department has no objection to the rezoning
request. Facilities to be served by public water and sewer.
Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the
proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal
review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are
no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in
the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the
Shenandoah Valley does identify a core battlefield within this area, but further research displays that
this parcel has lost its integrity with respect to historic value.
Department of Parks Recreation: No comment.
Winchester Regional Airport: The applicant has not provided comments from the Airport.
Frederick County Public Schools: Based on the information provided that states no residential units
will be part of the rezoning, there will be no impact to the school populations upon build -out.
Frederick County Attorney: The County Attorney has not commented on the proffers.
Planning Department: Please see attached letter dated November 15. 2006fi•om Candice E. Perkins.
Planner 1/.
Planning Zoning:
1) Site History
The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies all of
54 -A -89 as being zoned A -2 (Agricultural General) and 54 -A -89 as being zoned split zoned A -2
and MH -1 (Mobile 1 -Tome Community). With rezoning #14 -83 the remainder of54 -A -89 was
rezoned from A -2 to M1 -I -1.
Rezoning #19 -06 Seefied Property
November 21, 2006
Page 4
The County's agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District
upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989.
The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re- mapping of parcel 54 -A -89 and
all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA District.
2) Comprehensive Policy Plan
The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as
the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public
facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to
protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a
composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County.
[Comprehensive Police Plcin, p. 1 -1]
Land Use
The site is located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water
Service Area (SWSA). It is not within the limits of any small area land use plan.
The site is within the limits of the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The
plan shows a portion of this property with a residential designation and the remainder with no
designation. The residential designation reflects the existing MI-I -1 zoning of the site and its
proximity to the existing Arcadia Mobile Home Park. The request to M -1 for this site could be
consistent with the existing use in the area because the majority of the site is surrounded by the
existing Fort Collier Industrial Park and Interstate 81.
Transportation
The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed
industrial and commercial development. This proposed rezoning application does not provide
for this minimum Level of Service.
This proposal calls for up to 1,000,000 square feet of industrial uses on the site, which has the
potential for 5,708 average daily trips. It is noted in the applicant's impact analysis that if the
MH -1 portion of the site were to develop with a by right mobile home park, it has the potential
for 1,044 average daily trips.
Site Access
As indicated in the applicant's Impact Analysis Statement under the Access and Transportation
section, the proposed entrance into this project has not been determined. There are currently
two alternatives indicated, Scenario A and Scenario B. Scenario A would utilize a 50' access
casement that connects the property to Fort Collier Road through the new Frederick County
Animal Shelter site which is currently under construction. Scenario B is a proposal to obtain a
means of access through the existing Winchester Pasta site which would provide this site with
access onto Brooke Road. It was Planning Staffs understanding that Scenario B would be
utilized and obtained prior to this application being submitted for public hearing. At this time
the only access through this site is through Scenario A.
Rezoning 1419-06 See fried Property
November 21,2006
Page 5
3) Site Suitability /Environment
It does not appear that the site contains any environmental features that would either constrain
or preclude site development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes. A small area of
floodplains identified on the northern tip of this property. This will need to be further addressed
at the MDP stage and a wetlands delineation study will be required as well.
The General Soils Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils
comprising the subject parcels fall under the Frederick- Poplimento- Oaklet soil association,
which is the predominant association on land located along the 1 -81 corridor in the Winchester
vicinity.
4) Potential Impacts
A. Transportation
The Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for Level of Service Category C or better for proposed
industrial and commercial development. This proposed rezoning does not provide that
minimum Level of Service.
A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for this application using composite data collected
from other studies in the area as well as actual traffic counts. The County's rezoning application
requires applicants to model the worst possible scenario based on the use of the site. As only
accessory office will be allowed with this development, the worst case scenario (industrial use)
was modeled with this application. The TIA did not include all relevant background
information, notably the low background for Rutherford Farm Industrial Park.
The Conclusions from the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) state that the following are
required:
Route 11 Welltown Road: an additional eastbound left-turn lane, northbound left
turn lane and two (2) southbound left -turn lanes will be required to maintain an
overall level of service "D" or better during 2010 background and build -out
conditions.
Staff Note: li is noted that the identified improvements, fail to improve the intersection
above a level ofservice D. This improvement has not been proffered by the applicant.
Route 11 Brooke Road: A separate westbound right -turn lane would be required to
maintain overall intersection level of service "C" during build -out conditions.
Staff Note: Proffer 3.1 indicates that this improvement will he provided, however it
contains a time limitation of two years from the issuance of the first certificate of
occupancy. See analysis of proffer statement
Route 7 Fort Collier Road: An additional southbound left -turn lane and northbound
left -turn lane will be required to maintain overall intersection level ofservice "D" or
better during 2010 build -out conditions.
Rezoning 19 -06 Seefried Property
November 21, 2006
Page 6
Staff Note: This improvement has not been proffered by the applicant.
Brooke Road Fort Collier Road: Traffic signalization would be required to
maintain overall intersection level of service "D" or better during 2010 build -out
conditions for both Scenarios #A and #B. Additionally, southbound left -turn lane
and westbound right turn -lane (should be westbound left -turn lane) would be
required for Scenario #B during 2010 build -out conditions.
Staff Note: Proffer 3.2 indicates a partial funding of the required signalization in the
amount of S75,000 will be bonded and if the signal is not constructed within two years,
the applicant will be released from all obligations. See analysis of proffer statement
The turn lames have not been proffered by the applicant. This 77A conclusion stales that
only a level service of D will be provided even with the proposed improvements: this
fails to meet the standard nininrunr level of service of C.
Sheet 13 of the TIA shows the 2010 Build -out lane geometry and levels of service.
Scenario A and 13 are shown on this page. Both of the scenarios show all of the
necessary iniproi'e;nenis bit! many fthese are not heingproffered. A detail of/he lane
geometry as it would stand if this rezoning were to he approved with the proffers the
applicant has actually committed to has not been provided and it unclear what the level
of service is going to be after 2010 build -out.
Site Driveway #A Fort Collier Road: Traffic signalization along with westbound
left and right turn lanes would be required to maintain overall intersection level of
service "C" or better during 2010 build -out conditions for Scenario #A.
Staff Note: This improvement has not been proffered by the applicant.
Site Driveway #B Brooke Road: A northbound right turn-lane would be required to
maintain overall intersection of service "D" or better during 2010 build -out
conditions for Scenario #13.
Staff Note: Proffer 3.4 guarantees that this improvement will be provided.
B. Sewer and Water
Sewage from this site will discharge in to the existing Red Bud Run regional pump station
before transmission to the Opequon Wastewater Reclamation Facility. Using a standard rate of
30 gallons per day /employee at 10 employees /acre of industrial property, it is projected that the
proposed development will produce 23,250 gallons of sewer per day. This wastewater pumping
station is currently under improvement by the FCSA.
Water service will be provided by looping from the existing 12 inch line located along the
western property boundary. Water consumption for the property will be roughly equivalent to
the projected sewage generation of 23,250 gallons per day.
Rezoning #19-06 Seefried Property
November 21. 2006
Page 7
5) Proffer Statement Dated October 3, 2006, Revised November 8, 2006 and November
9,2006
1. Monetary Contribution
$15,000 for fire and rescue
$3.000 for Sheriffs Office
$2.000 for general governmental purposes
2. Site Development
Development shall not exceed L000,000 square feet of gross floor area and
office uses shall only be permitted as an accessory use to industrial uses
Stormwater management pond facilities shall be lined with an impervious
surface to avoid groundwater impacts
The future access road shall be built to VDOT standards and have a minimum
pavement width of 26 feet.
Street trees located a maximum of 50 feet apart shall be provided on both sides
of the future access road.
A geotechnical analysis shall be prepared and submitted to Frederick County for
any industrial structures prior to site plan approval.
3. Transportation
Within 120 days of rezoning approval, the applicant shall bond a westbound left
turn lane at the intersection of Brooke Road and Fort Collier Road. This lane
will be constructed within 180 days of receiving written notice from the
County /VDOT. If formal request for the improvement is not made within 2
years of issuance of the first certificate of occupancy of the Property, the
Applicant shall be released from the bond and shall not be liable for the turn
lane.
Staff Note: Regarding the intersection of Brook Road and Fort Collier, the
applicant has not addressed the need for the southbound left turn lane. Also, the
timing element of this proffer is completely inappropriate. 1f only a portion of
the property is developed with a small use, the improvement might not be called
for al that lime. If the remainder of the property is developed after the two year
time period and the improvement is called for, as proffered the developer would
have no responsibility for the improvement.
Staff Note: Per the TIA conclusions, ifScena i io #B is used, a southbound le�l-
turn lane and a westbound right turn -lane would he required for the intersection
of Fort Collier Road and Brook Road in addition to the needed signalization.
While the applicant has addressed the westbound right turn -lane the southbound
lei -turn lane has nol been addressed.
Within 120 days of rezoning approval, the applicant shall post a bond in the
amount of $75,000 for partial funding of a signal at the intersection of Brooke
Road and Fort Collier Road. If said traffic signal is not constructed within 2
years of the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the Property, the
Applicant shall be released from the bond and shall not be liable for said
Rezoning #19-06 Seefried Property
November 21, 2006
Page 8
improvement.
Staff Note: The light that this proffer is calling for is needed because of this
proposed development and the applicant is only proposing a portion ofthe light.
The 2010 background traffic shows this intersection with a level ofC or Netter,
but as indicated on the 2010 build out conditions this intersection would require
the intersection of Fort Collier and Brooke Road to he signalized to maintain a
level of D or better. Generally with partial, funding the proffer states that the
amount will be provided to VDOT within a certain amount of days after
requesting the finals, not a bond; this proffer has no caveat for requesting the
finds. Also, if the remainder of the money for the signal is not acquired within
two years, the 875,000 is released from the bond and the developer is not
responsible far the payment.
A direct connection between the Property and Fort Collier Road shall be
prohibited.
Staff Note: Given this proffer, it is unclear why TIA Scenario #A is even under
consideration. ,Scenario #A is a direct connection from this properly to Fort
Collier Road: clarification on the meaning of this proffer is needed.
Staff Note: Concerning the use of scenario A, to maintain a level ofservice C,
signalizalion of this intersection along with westbound left and right turn lanes
would be required. The applicant has not addressed this.
If the project entrance is located on Brook Road, the Applicant shall construct a
northbound right turn lane on Brooke Road at the project entrance prior to
occupancy of the first industrial building.
Staff Note: Since direct access to Fort Collier Road is prohibited by proffer 3.3
then Brook Road is the only option for access. Proffer 3.4 should be revised to
take out "if
Staff Note: The applicant has not addressed the, following transportation improvements called
for in their TIA:
Route I I/Welltown Road Improvements
Westbound right -turn lane at the intersection of Route 11 /Brooke Road. (needed
to maintain level ofservice C)
Additional southbound left -turn lane and northbound left -turn lane at the Route
7 /Fort Collier Intersection. (maintains only a level of service D)
Signalization fin the Scenario #A entrance onto Fort Collier Road.
Westbound left and right turn lane on Fort Collier Road for Scenario #A.
Southbound left -turn lane at the Brooke Road /Fort Collier Intersection for
Scenario #B.
Rezoning 19 -06 Seefried Property
November 21, 2006
Page 9
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 12/06/06 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
While the land use proposed in this application is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Policy
Plan, as described in the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan, this application fails to
address and mitigate the transportation impacts associated with the proposal. Elements of the rezoning
application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address the
goals of the County. Specifically, the applicant should be mitigating the impacts identified in their TIA
and the proffers should be worded to ensure that after two years have passed the developer is not
released from all proffered transportation improvements. The applicant should be prepared to address
theses issues.
Following the requirement for a public hearing, a recommendation
by the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors concerning this rezoning
application would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately
address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission.
SEEFRIED PROPERTY
ZONING BOUNDARY
FREDERICK COUNTY, V /RC /N/A
TOTAL AREA
75.38 AC.
Patton, Harris, Rust Associates
117 E. Picadilly St. Winchester, Virginia 22601
VOICE (540) 667 -2139 FAX: (540) 665 -0493