Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-07 Application0 I November 20, 2009 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 117 E. Piccadilly St. Winchester, VA 22601 RE: REZONING 412 -07, OPEQUON CROSSING PIN: 55 -A -210 Dear Patrick: 0 Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540 /665 -6395 This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of November 18, 2009. The above - referenced application was approved to rezone 70.15 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District, with proffers, for up to 325 single family attached and single family detached dwelling units (no more than 170 single family attached dwelling units). The property is located south of the existing terminus of Eddy's Lane (Route 820), approximately 2,400 feet south of Route 7 and 1,650 feet west of Opequon Creek, in the Red Bud Magisterial District. The proffer statement, dated April 10, 2007, with final revision date of November 18, 2009, that was approved as a part of this rezoning application is unique to the above referenced 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, ,tit w ,�_ It-, Michael T. Ruddy Deputy Planning Director MTR/bad Attachment cc: Philip A. Lemieux, Red Bud Magisterial District Supervisor Christopher Mohn, Red Bud Magisterial District Commissioners Jane Anderson, Real Estate Commissioner of Revenue The Canyon, c/o Dave Holliday, 420 Jubal Early Dr., Ste. 103, Winchester, VA 22601 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 REZONING APPLICATION #12 -07 OPEQUON CROSSING Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: October 5, 2009 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director PROPOSAL To rezone 70.15 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District, with proffers. LOCATION The property is located south of the existing terminus of Eddy's Lane (Route 820), approximately 2,400 feet south of Route 7 and 1,650 feet west of Opequon Creek. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 10/21/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Opequon Crossing rezoning application, while generally consistent with future land use designations of the Comprehensive Plan, does not fully address the goals of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan, as described in the staff report. The Planning Commission should pay particular attention to the transportation impacts, the environmental impacts, and the capacities and capabilities of community facilities needed to serve the proposed land uses. At this time, the road improvements identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan are not fully addressed in the application. Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any issues raised by the Planning Commission, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning Commission. 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. • 40 REZONING APPLICATION 912 -07 OPEQUON CROSSING Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: November 9, 2009 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director PROPOSAL To rezone 70.15 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District, with proffers. LOCATION The property is located south of the existing terminus of Eddy's Lane (Route 820), approximately 2,400 feet south of Route 7 and 1,650 feet west of Opequon Creek. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE 11/18/09 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The Opequon Crossing rezoning application, while generally consistent with future land use designations of the Comprehensive Plan, does not fiilly address the goals of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan, as described in the staff report. The Planning Commission evaluated the transportation impacts, the environmental impacts, and the capacities and capabilities of community facilities needed to serve the proposed land uses. At this time, the road improvements identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan are not fully addressed in the application, in particular, the east west collector road. By a majority vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning with the proffers submitted by the applicant. Subsequent to the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Applicant has revised their Proffer Statement. The new Proffer Statement, dated November 9, 2009, includes the following changes: • The clarification of the timing and size of the proffered recreation center building (3,000 square feet minimum) and community swimming pools (3,500 square feet minimum). Further clarification could explicitly state that the square foot size is for the building footprint and the minimum surface area for the swimming pool shall be the surface area of the water. • An additional area of trail internal to the development. • The potential right -of -way dedication of up to 120 feet for the east -west collector road. • Minor modifications to the phasing, width of right -of -way reserve in the western part of the property, and the alignment of the said reserve. Please see the enclosed letter from Mr. Patrick Sowers dated November 9, 2009 describing the revisions. 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. ® 0 Rezoning 412-09 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 2 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 Planning Commission: 10/21/09 Board of Supervisors: 11/18/09 Action Recommended approval Pending PROPOSAL To rezone 70.15 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District, with proffers. LOCATION The property is located south of the existing terminus of Eddy's Lane (Route 820), approximately 2,400 feet south of Route 7 and 1,650 feet west of Opequon Creek. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Red Bud PROPERTY ID NUMBER 55 -A -210 PROPERTY ZONING RA (Rural Areas) PRESENT USE Agricultural /Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE North: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural South: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential (Twin Lakes) East: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential (Haggerty) West: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential (Fieldstone Heights) PROPOSED USES Up to 325 single family attached and single family detached dwelling units (no more than 170 single family attached dwelling units). (4.6 units per acre). • 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Frederick County Transportation: Please see additional remaining Frederick County Transportation Comments provided by Mr. John Bishop on page 10 of this report Virginia Department of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 7, 659 and 820. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property. VDOT is not satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the revised Opequon Crossing rezoning application dated November, 2008 address transportation concerns associated with this request. Specifically, VDOT has the following concerns: 1. The analyst coded the Synchro files assuming a 45 mph speed limit for Route 7, but our database shows the speed limit as 55 mph. At 55 mph, the Department would not likely allow a permissive left turn movement. Coding the movement as Protected and raising the travel to 55 mph, degrades the LOS, therefore requiring additional mitigation. We suggest the following turn lane configurations at the Route 7 /Haggerty: WB (1 left, 2 tlu EB (2 thru, 1 right), NB (1 left, 1 right). 2. A turn lanes analysis should be conducted at Haggerty Dr. /Site Drive 2. 3. An alternate roadway connection (either through a new Valley Mill Road or Fieldstone, Section 2 /Channing Drive connection) is needed for this development to access areas west and south. Without this alternate roadway connection, all trips will be forced to use Primary Route 7 back to Winchester to access schools, shopping, etc. The existing single lane bridge on Valley Mill Road will not accommodate increased traffic flow. This single lane bridge will be difficult to upgrade /replace due to right -of -way, historical and environmental concerns. 4. Due to the close proximity to Northern Virginia, there is a public need for a park and ride facility in this area. This development will certainly increase the need for park and ride commuters. Dedicated right -of -way and/or monetary contributions should be considered for a park and ride facility. 5. inter- parcel roadway connections should be provided to adjacent properties. 6. Future Valley Mill Road connection from Point B to Point Cis not mentioned in the proffers. Generalized Development Plan should be revised to show B to C right -of -way as a dedication to Frederick County rather than a reservation. 7. Additional right -of -way is needed on the East -West Collector Roadway at any intersection requiring right turn lanes. A UD -4 with right turn lanes, without sidewalk, requires a minimum of 100' of right -of -way. Fire Marshall: Plan approval recommended. Department of Inspections: No comments at this time. Comments shall be made at site plan submittal. Department of Public Works: The revised rezoning application dated February 23, 2009 has adequately addressed our previous comments. We anticipate that any future master development plans will include a wetlands analysis and a detailed discussion of aproposed stormwater management plan. Frederick - Winchester Service Authority: No comment. Sanitation Authority Department: There should be adequate sewer and water capacity to serve this project. Rezoning 412 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 4 Department of Parks & Recreation: 1.Opequon Crossing is proposing a total of 325 units and would require 11 recreation units. 2. Item 3.1: The Parks and Recreation Department would need to review the design of the recreation building for appropriateness as a "recreation amenity ". 3. Item 3.2 & 3.3: The proffer contribution would appear to meet the Development Impact Model. 4. Item 3.6: The trail system should provide connectivity to adjoining subdivision, facilities and be consistent with the 2007 Winchester Frederick County MPO Bicycle /Pedestrian Network. Health Department: Health Dept. has no objection if public water and sewer are provided. Winchester Regional Airport: Neither the location or the elevation ofthis site requires a 7460 -1 to be filed with the Federal Aviation Administration; however, it does lie within the air space of the Winchester Airport. Due to its proximity to the airport, property owners may experience aircraft fly- over noise from aircraft entering into or departing the flight pattern from the North. Special considerations will not be requested by the Winchester Regional Airport. Frederick County Public Schools: The cumulative impact of this project and other projects in various stages of development in eastern Frederick County will necessitate future construction of new schools and support facilities to accommodate increased student enrollment. We estimate that the 155 single family detached units and 170 single family attached units in this development will house 43 high school students, 37 middle school students and 70 elementary school students. In order to properly serve these 144 students, Frederick County Public Schools will outlay $5,546,000 in capital expenditures and $1,567,000 annually in operating costs. We note the proffered amounts of $20,265 per single family detached unit and $14,268 per single family attached unit, which match the current development impact mode. Thank you. In this area of the County, we use the larger transit buses with a student capacity of 78. We are strongly concerned about the connection of Haggerty Boulevard to Route 7. For safety, the connection needs to be either signalized or have a crossover capable of providing refuge for a transit bus. Our concern stems from the heavy volume of high -speed traffic currently on Route 7, particularly during the morning rush hour, which poses a significant safety issue for buses running from existing housing to existing schools. The location of the Haggerty Boulevard intersection in Berryville Canyon across from the Route 37 ramps could compound the problem with sight distance issues and a complex environment for drivers to interpret. Frederick County Public Schools is concerned about all land development applications. Both capital expenditures and annual operating costs are increased by each approved residential development. Historic Resources Advisory Board: The HRAB considered the rezoning proposal during their meeting of May 15, 2007. The HRAB reviewed information associated with the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report The subject parcel is the site of the Adams Farm House (DHR #34- 397) and is in close proximity to several other structures, including Valley Mill Farm (DHR #34 -108) which is on the National and Virginia Registers of Historic Places. Other properties in close proximity to the proposed rezoning project are the Route 659 House (DHR 434 -396), the Haggerty House (DHR 434 -398) and the Carter- Lee - Damron House (DFIR #34- 1150). Although only the Valley Mill Farm property is listed as potentially significant, the HRAB did have several suggestions to mitigate the impact of the proposed development on the cluster of historic structures in this area. Both the Haggerty House and the Carter - Lee - Damron House are located on adjoining properties which were recently rezoned for residential uses similar to this proposal. The Carter- Lee- Damron House, on the Toll 0 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 5 Brothers "Twin Lakes" property, will be utilized as a recreational element for that development. The application states that the applicant proposes to construct a residential development of 155 single family homes and 170 townhomes. The HRAB feels that this proposed development can address the following issues in an effort to mitigate impacts on historic resources: Architectural Documentation: The HRAB felt that there is a need to document and research the historic significance of this property. The HRAB suggested documenting the house and any out - buildings for their historical significance, including (but not limited to) researching and identifying past owners /occupants, significant application of building materials, and architectural features associated with the time period of construction, etc. The HRAB felt that photographs of the interior and exterior of the buildings should also be taken to visually document the Adams Farm House. Buffers and Screening: The HRAB suggested an increased buffer along the shared property line with the Valley Mill Farm property (PIN 55 -A -165). The HRAB acknowledged the existing woodlands on the Valley Mill Farm Property as well as the topography of the area as natural screening, but felt that the applicant could provide additional pine trees in this area to help mitigate the impact of this new development on the view shed of the Valley Mill Farm since it is on both State and National Registers. Development Name: Due to the fact that the Back Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County already recognizes an areas as the "Historic Opequon Village" and that the Historic Opequon Village area is indicated in the Comprehensive Policy Plan as a possible historic district, the HRAB felt that the applicant could consider renaming this development project to maintain the integrity of the potential historic district and eliminate confusion that the new development is a historic area. Attorney Comments: Please see attached letter dated March 26, 2009 from Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney. Planning Department: Please see attached correspondence from Michael Ruddy, AICP dated July 2, 2007 and March 12, 2009. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the property with the A -2 Agricultural classification. The County's A -1 and A -2 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 the subject property and all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA (Rural Areas) District. This rezoning application was originally submitted to the County on two occasions during 2007. At that time, theApplicant determined that the Application was not in the appropriate form to proceed and wanted additional time to work on the Application. Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 6 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. I -1J Land Use The parcels comprising this rezoning application are located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. In addition, the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use map designates the general area in which the Opequon Crossing property is located for residential land uses. The average overall residential density of the Urban Development Area should not exceed three units per acre. More specifically, the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that properties which contain less than one hundred acres, but more than ten acres, should not exceed 5.5 units per acre. With the more urban densities envisioned for development in the UDA, the Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that special effort is made to provide the infrastructure necessary to accommodate the desired land uses and densities. This application would enable a residential density of 4.6 units per acre. As land is developed in the eastern portion of the Urban Development Area, the Comprehensive Plan identifies the preservation of the stream valleys as environmental open space as an important goal that contributes to the protection of flood plains and water quality and provides a continuous system of green open space. The goals of the Comprehensive Plan also include protecting the natural environment from damage due to development activity, avoiding development in environmentally sensitive areas, and the identification and protection of important natural resources. A balanced approach to providing necessary transportation infrastructure in the area of the proj ect and promoting the protection of sensitive environmental areas and features is warranted and should be achieved with this application. Transportation The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan provides the guidance regarding future arterial and collector road connections in the eastern portion of the County by identifying needed connections and locations. Plans for new development should provide for the right -of -ways necessary to implement planned road improvements and new roads shown on the road plan should be constructed by the developer when warranted by the scale, intensity, or impacts of the development. Existing roads should be improved as necessary by adjacent development to implement the intentions of the plan (Comprehensive Plan 7 -206). Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 7 Valley Mill Road is identified as an improved major collector road in the County's Eastern Road Plan. In addition, Valley Mill Road is shown as being relocated to a new location and alignment. Relocated Valley Mill Road runs through this property. In 2005, modifications to the County's Eastern Road Plan occurred in the vicinity of this project. The modifications were completed in recognition of the changing traffic patterns in the area, the recently approved Haggerty project which provided for a new Spine Road parallel to future Route 37, and the need to avoid the historically and environmentally sensitive areas in the vicinity of the one lane bridge over Abrams Creek. The adjacent Haggerty property recognizes the comprehensively planned alignment of Valley Mill Road and furthers its construction. Valley Mill Road is designated as a major collector road that traverses south of its existing location, providing a new crossing ofAbram's Creek, and connecting with the Haggerty project and the Spine Road in the vicinity of future Route 37. Ultimately, a connection will be made to Route 7 at the location previously determined as part of the Haggerty project, directly opposite the future on and off ramps of future Route 37. This location is immediately west of the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Facility. This approach furthers access management goals along Route 7. New development in the Urban Development Area should only be approved when roads and other infrastructure with sufficient capacity have been provided. The Comprehensive Plan identifies that a level of service "C" should be maintained on roads adjacent to and within new developments and that traffic analysis should be provided by the applicants to ensure that needed road improvements are identified in order to maintain or improve upon the level of service. In some cases, new development may need to contribute to the provision, construction, or improvement of roads that are not adjacent to the development. In such cases, developments should contribute their fair share costs of road improvements, needed to accommodate the traffic generated by a particular development. Site Access and design. Access to this project is designed to be from the adjacent Haggerty project and ultimately Route 7. Additional access to the site will be from Eddy's Lane. No recognition has been provided in the TIA for the relocation of Valley Mill Road and the vehicle trips that may be projected to traverse this property with the completion of this significant element of the County's Eastern Road Plan. The potential dedication of fight-of-way for the future location of Valley Mill Road relocated is included as a commitment in the Proffer Statement. Future construction of a two lane portion of a small section of this road is included. However, nothing beyond this commitment has been made to further this important element of site access has been provided. Inter parcel access has been identified in one location to the south providing access to the Twin Lakes project. A potential inter parcel connection to the Fieldstone property to the west has been offered. No additional design of the internal road network has been provided with this application and no additional inter parcel connections have been pursued. The potential use of Eddy's Lane as an access point to this parcel without the completion of the relocation of Valley 0 0 Rezoning # 12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 8 Mill Road should be carefully considered. Any additional vehicle trips utilizing the existing one lane bridge over Abrams Creek should be avoided. 3) Site Suitability /Environment The Opequon Crossing site has been identified as a site typical of the Martinsburg Shale Region with steeply eroded side slopes and reasonably level plain areas. This is an accurate identification that presents challenges when planning the development program for this property. Abram's Creek is located immediately north of the northern property line and generally parallels this property line. A pond is located central to the eastern portion of the property. These features and their associated slopes, natural drainage ways, and floodplains warrant particular attention and provide an opportunity for enhanced protection of the riparian corridor. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the preservation of the stream valleys as environmental open space as an important goal that contributes to the protection of flood plains and water quality and provides a continuous system of green open space. By current County definition, this project contains relatively small areas of steep slopes. However, protection of the integrity of the pond, environmental open spaces, and the riparian areas south of Abram's Creek, especially during the construction phases, remain a concern and should be a greater consideration of this application and as part of the proffer statement. The site contains areas that are heavily wooded. The application proposes development of a greater intensity in the reasonably level wooded areas and offers areas that will be set aside for environmental and open space purposes. A greater amount of consideration should be provided to incorporating the protection of areas of mature woodlands into the design of the project to assist in their preservation and create desirable areas of open space. It would be appropriate for the application to more thoroughly address the preservation of the existing tree lines and wooded areas as a desirable buffer to the surrounding properties. The preservation of these existing trees within a buffer area should be guaranteed in the proffer statement. Disturbance should be avoided. The HRAB reviewed this request and provided several comments. The subject parcel is the site of the Adams Farm House (DHR #34 -397) and is in close proximity to several other structures. The Applicant has modified the name of the project and has addressed the more substantial comments in the application. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation Traffic Impact Anal The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for this project, dated September 8, 2006, projected that the development of 155 single family detached residential units andl70 single family attached residential units would generate 3,029 vehicle trips per day. The report was developed with access to the site provided via a single site driveway along the proposed Haggerty Connector Road that will serve as a connection between the site and Route 7. 0 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 9 The report concludes that the traffic impacts associated with the Opequon Crossing project are acceptable and manageable. Staff had previously expressed concerns regarding the scope and validity of the TIA prepared for this application. Please refer to the comments provided by Mr. Bishop and by VDOT. No consideration has been given to the property's location and relationship to the County's Eastern Road Plan. In particular, the relocation of Valley Mill Road, the Spine Road, and the additional volumes that would be projected to utilize this comprehensively planned road network. In addition, no consideration has been provided for the impacts on existing Eddy's Lane, the one lane bridge over Abrams Creek, and the existing intersection of Valley Mill Road and Route 7. It is recognized that the Applicant provided an updated TIA for this location. However, the noted concerns remain. Transportation Program. The Generalized Development Plan for Opequon Crossing delineates the general public road system that will serve the residential development. Primary access to the site is from a proposed connection to the adjacent Haggerty property and indirectly to Route 7, and via Eddy's Lane. One connection with the "Twin Lakes property has been identified. Minimal additional detail has been provided regarding the internal street system serving this project and providing connectivity to the adjacent property, in particular to the south. An additional potential connection location has been identified to the Fieldstone property to the west. It must be recognized that the adjacent Fieldstone property does not recognize this connection. Only at such time such a connection is agreeable to both parties would it be appropriate to pursue such connectivity. The location of the relocated Valley Mill Road has been correctly identified on the GDP. However, the application fails to adequately address this most significant element of the County's Eastern Road Plan. It should be expected that construction of the road should occur consistent with the typical section clearly demonstrated in the County's Eastern Road Plan. In addition, the required standard road efficiency buffer should be provided per the County's Zoning Ordinance rather than per the applicant's defined landscape buffer. It is expected that any application for rezoning addresses the design and construction of a road located on their property that is an element of the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. Simply providing a reserve area for the future construction by others would not typically meet expectations and the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. In summary, the Applicant's transportation program provides for the following: • Construction of two lanes of this major collector road for a distance of approximately 400 feet and prior to the 100` building permit • The reservation for future dedication of an 80 foot wide reserve area within the property. The latest proffer increases the potential right -of -way dedication to 120' 0 0 Rezoning 912 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 10 $1,000 per single family attached dwelling and $2,000 per single family detached dwelling that are to be utilized for road improvements to alleviate transportation problems in the general vicinity of the property. Please note that this monetary contribution is even less titan it was when this request was originally submitted in 2007. At that tine the contribution was $3,000 and $5,000 respectively. The Application does address the construction of the access to Route 7 by the adjacent Haggerty prior to the issuance of any building permits on this property. However, no recognition is provided to the very important Spine Road connection previously proffered to the south of the Haggerty project. A commitment was made to ensure this connection would be in place in a timely manner and commensurate with a number of building permits for the Haggerty project. The addition of more permits from the Opequon Crossing project would place additional impact on the proposed roads without the implementation of this improvement. The final proffer statement adequately addresses this concern. Omitted from the transportation program are any additional accommodations for pedestrian circulation and potential multiuse trails that would provide access internal to the project and ultimately to the adjacent residential developments. The comments offered by the Department of Parks and Recreation relating to this effort have not been addressed. Greater effort should be made in designing and providing a trail system with linkages to open space to the satisfaction of Parks and Recreation. This should be done at the time of rezoning rather at the time of MDP. This would then ensure its planning is coordinated with the overall transportation improvements and its completion secured through the proffer statement. The final proffer statement adequately addresses this concern. The (ollowinp additional transportation TIA- related comments are provided by Mr. Bishop, Frederick County Transportation Planner. Aside from a right -of -way dedication, this proposal does not address the Eastern Road Plan connection to Valley Mill Drive. It is important to recognize that the Eastern Road Plan needs to be implemented in this area in order to create a sustainable transportation network. Accessing Route 7 as the only means for residents of this development to reach goods and services degrades the function of Route 7 as an Arterial highway. The proffer of $1,000 per multi family unit and $2,000 per single family unit is well below the standards which have previously been followed for offsetting transportation impacts in Frederick County. While 1 recognize and empathize with the challenges of today's market, those challenges do not lessen the impact of new residential development on Frederick County roadways. The results of the TIA's study of the intersection with Route 7 do not alleviate my concerns about the impacts to Route 7 as it approaches 1 -81. Due to the distances involved, it was deemed excessive to have this development scope their traffic impacts that far. However, it is clear from what is being proposed that that congested area is where the residents of this Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9. 2009 Page 11 development will need to go for goods and services, thus adding to a traffic situation that is already unacceptable. Please consider this issue when reviewing the points above. The Applicant's transportation program is insufficient in addressing the transportation impacts of the project and furthering the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Sewer and Water The Opequon Crossing rezoning proposal is estimated to require approximately 65,000 gallons per day of water usage and approximately 65,000 gallons per day of wastewater. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority will serve the property and the wastewater flow from the site will go to the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant. Recent planning efforts have identified that evolving nutrient reduction regulations promulgated by Virginia's Bay Program will have a significant impact on thepernuitted waste water capabilities of Frederick County. Requests for land use modifications should be evaluated very carefully in light of the evolving nutrient loading regulations. C. Community Facilities The comment provided by the Frederick County Public Schools should be carefully considered when evaluating the application. The schools evaluation anticipated that the proposed 155 single family homes will yield 26 high school students, 20 middle school students, 36 elementary school students; and 170 townhouses will yield 16 high school students, 16 middle school students, and 32 elementary school students, which totals 146 new students upon build -out. Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving this area having student enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity for a school. The cumulative impact of this project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped residential lots in the area, will necessitate the future construction of new schools facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The impact of this rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the approval process. The Frederick County Development Impact Model is a tool that is used to identify the capital costs associated with various types of development proposals presented to the County. The projected costs to Fire and Rescue, Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, Library, Sheriffs Office and for the Administration Building have been calculated and provided to the applicant for their consideration. The DIM projects that, on average, residential development has a negative fiscal impact on the County's capital expenditures, as such, all rezoning petitions with a residential component submitted after July 1, 2009 will be expected to demonstrate how the proposal will mitigate the following projected capital facility impacts: Single family dwelling unit $21,664 Town home dwelling unit $15,441 Apartment dwelling unit $13,005 The Applicant has proffered the appropriate amount per single family detached dwelling unit and per single family attached townhouse dwelling unit. 0 0 Rezoning 412 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 12 No rezoning should be approved unless the net impacts on community facilities are positive, or if the negative impacts can be adequately addressed through proffers or some other means. A request for a rezoning may be turned down even though all fiscal impacts appear to be addressed (Comprehensive Plan 8 -262). 5) Proffer Statement —Dated April 10, 2007; Last revised September 24, 2009 (Final Revision Dated November 9, 1009 is summarized in the Erecutive Summary). A) Generalized Development Plan The applicant has provided a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of the street providing access to the project, residential land use areas, and open space and reservation areas within the Opequon Crossing development. The GDP may be utilized to a greater extent to more clearly address the sensitive environmental features on the property and the buffering of the adjacent residential uses. B) Land Use The applicants have proffered to limit to the total number and type of residential units to allow up to 325 single family attached and single family detached dwelling units. Up to 170 single family attached townhouse units would be permitted. Multi family dwelling units are prohibited. The applicant has proffered a phased introduction of the residential units over a minimum three year period from the date of final rezoning with the potential for up to 109 units per year. Staff note: This phased approach does very little to realistically address the intent of phasing the issuance of building permits. The intent of phasing is to ensure a timed integration of new development in a manner that would enable the timely provision of the public facilities necessary to serve the new development. It may be more desirable to have the annual allocation occur on consecutive years following the approval of the master development plan for this project and enable the construction of a smaller number of units. Regardless of the phasing approach, the comments relating to the impacts to the Frederick County Public Schools in this area of the Urban Development Area should be recognized. Recognition of recently approved projects in the vicinity of this proposal should also be considered when evaluating the phased inclusion of new residential units into this area of the community. C) Transportation The Applicant has proffered the reservation of an 80 foot wide reserve area for the future dedication of an 80 foot right of way within the property to accommodate the future construction, by others, of the Valley Mill Road relocated major collector road. (120' has since been proffered). The Applicant has proffered the construction of two lanes of the major collector road from point A to point B on the GDP for a distance of approximately 400 feet, prior to the 100 °i building permit. 0 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 13 The Applicant has proffered $1,000 per single family attached dwelling and $2,000 per single family detached dwelling that are to be utilized for road improvements to alleviate transportation problems in the general vicinity of the property. Please note that this monetary contribution is even less than it was when this request was originally submitted in 2007. At that time the contribution was $3,000 and $5,000 respectively. The Applicant has proffered that no building permits will be issued for the property until such time that the property has access to Route 7 via the future Haggerty transportation network. D) Recreational Facility The Applicant has proffered to design and build a recreation building in this project. Please recognize that no definition of what the building is, or design depicting the recreational building, has been provided. Past experiences would indicate the importance of being more specific in this regard. Recreational units may be required by ordinance based upon the ultimate housing types utilized in this project. The final proffer statement adequately addresses this concern. E) Monetary Contribution The Applicant has proffered a total of S21,664 per single family detached dwelling unit and $15,441 per single family attached townhouse dwelling unit to offset the capital costs associated with this request. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 10/21/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Opequon Crossing rezoning application, while generally consistent with future land use designations of the Comprehensive Plan, does not fully address the goals of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan as described in the staff report. The Planning Commission should pay particular attention to the transportation impacts, the environmental impacts, and the capacities and capabilities of community facilities needed to serve the proposed land uses. At this time, the road improvements identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan are not fully addressed in the application. Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any issues raised by the Planning Commission, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF THE 10/21/09 MEETING The staff reviewed the proposal with the Commission and noted that the unresolved issues remaining included transportation impacts, trail and sidewalk improvements with additional connections to Parks and Recreation's satisfaction, and recreational facility definition and design. It was noted that a previous issue regarding the timing of improvements by others had been resolved. Transportation concerns remaining included the reduction of cash contributions compared to the previous application submittal; that eastbound traffic would be forced to use Route 7 or access Valley Mill Road via a single - lane bridge as a result of an incomplete east -west connector; the absence of language indicating the proposed trail system will be available for community access; and an 80 -foot right -of -way limitation on the east -west collector and absence of language involving the county in determining appropriate right- 0 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 14 of -way. The applicant stated that all HRAB comments had been addressed including a revised project name, provision of a year - around screen adjacent to Valley Mill Farm, and documentation of the Adams House and other existing structures. The applicant noted that traffic generation for the revised project submittal decreased from 3,000 tpd to 2,658 tpd from the previous version, according to TIA seeping, resulting in a LOS `B" for this project; the intersections required to be seeped were determined by VDOT and not the applicant; $480,000 was being proffered for infrastructure improvements. The applicant proffered to build two lanes of the ultimate four -lane divided cross'section of the East -West Collector from point A to B as indicated on the GDP; and, from point B to C, the applicant provided a reserve area for the ultimate right -of -way necessary to make the connection to Valley Mill Road. The applicant noted that the language indicates an 80 -foot width and, if V DOT requires additional right -of- way, up to 100 feet can be provided; the applicant agreed to modify the proffer language to include the County in this determination, as requested by the staff. The applicant stated that zoning ordinance requirements for the road efficiency buffer between the residential units and the major collector roadway will be followed; no modified road efficiency buffer has been provided within the proffer. The applicant noted that the project provides the right -of -ways for all new roads and for the east -west connector in accordance with the Eastern Road Plan; it provides inter - parcel connectors to adjoining properties, and provides access through Eddy's Lane. The applicant pointed out that their failed attempt to acquire an inter - parcel connection to Fieldstone was not a result of a lack of cooperation, but because the developers of Fieldstone had already marketed and sold residential units as a private development without a through street and additionally, considerable infrastructure had already been installed. The applicant stated that the project included a pedestrian sidewalk system within the development, as well as a trail system. The applicant also proffered that the spine road must be completed before any building permits are issued. The applicant commented that suggesting additional off -site road improvements when traffic impacts have been mitigated and when the project will be operating at a LOS "B" did not seem to be in- keeping with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. There were no public comments during the public hearing. Commissioners had questions regarding the spine road when Route 37 is constructed through the area. It was noted that approximately 750 feet of the spine road would transition to become two lanes of Route 37. Route 37 would sever the spine road connection to the south, but it would become an underpass for the east -west connector. Commission members were concerned about the off -site transportation impacts that would ultimately result from this project. Commission members were sensitive to the long -range transportation and infrastructure needs in this area, but believed some expectations exceeded what could reasonably be expected from this particular project. It was recognized that the applicant had made efforts to address those needs, although they expressed disappointment that the cash contribution had decreased. A Commission member believed this project highlighted the need for a county transportation model which could equitably show what individual projects were responsible for regarding off -site and cash contributions. • Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing November 9, 2009 Page 15 By a majority vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning with the proffers submitted by the applicant. The majority vote was: YES: Mohn, Triplett, Kriz, Madagan, Wilmot, Ruckman, Manuel, Ambrogi, Crosen, Unger NO: Oates (Note: Commissioner Thomas was absent from the meeting.) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE 11/18/09 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The Opequon Crossing rezoning application, while generally consistent with future land use designations of the Comprehensive Plan, does not fully address the goals of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan, as described in the staff report. The Planning Commission evaluated the transportation impacts, the environmental impacts, and the capacities and capabilities of community facilities needed to serve the proposed land uses. At this time, the road improvements identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan are not fully addressed in the application, in particular, the east west collector road. By a majority vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning with the proffers submitted by the applicant. Subsequent to the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Applicant has revised their Proffer Statement. The new Proffer Statement, dated November 9, 2009, includes the following changes: • The clarification of the timing and size of the proffered recreation center building (3,000 square feet minimum) and community swimming pools (3,500 square feet minimum). Further clarification could explicitly state that the square foot size is for the building footprint and the minimum surface area for the swimming pool shall be the surface area of the water. • An additional area of trail internal to the development. • The potential right -of -way dedication of up to 120 feet for the east -west collector road. • Minor modifications to the phasing, width of right -of -way reserve in the western part of the property, and the alignment of the said reserve. Please see the enclosed letter from Mr. Patrick Sowers dated November 9, 2009 describing the revisions. 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. 55 A 1656 MCHALE MATTHEW CHARLI 55 A 165 AFALLEV MILL FARM LC ° 0 i w �f �n •- o n o Z 0 U Q 55 A 210 THE CANYON j% ; Opequon Crossing W ' �"i, Rezoning Reques VP�c�y. REZ # 12 - 07 70 acres RA to R' (325 residences a '$ PIN: 55 -A -210 Current Zoning Ma s y va o 55 A 209 TOLL VA IV LP �NFS OgFR<00k CO�MNN /ryASSOC • AUjrE CT A �. 55 'A 212 THE CANYON LC Q U N 2 N O ¢ Q h U I I I I I I / I / I If I I nnc, MRuddy Fwm.m 4 4 _�_ Nn x.mam. ffimm F)Bypsv l��iiinx PI IPvnva lntluOnvlinvmbv pW tln) MS(INVOWtII[nl Nnan) AN(AINbIFUPPen paMl 1 O R¢IA]Ope9�nCmseln0.U33EU9 Pl pniew \el[Xmmwtl ffirrinl•lAl ryavarmrv54wnmrve ffirr1n1 \6 (InticaAl(:mml PnrNl S0.tl(PShcmWllbntl CnmmuvXx quM1 PIINUNmrhl VertamvnrtpCrNl �x \ � PRrvn UmrvXipmmlAm Px lOUeneE r:enenr WrMU • IIY. (NI[X�r Etlunrlm ryWSrvN • AIIn (AIVEYr llnmry C'mrvvwlry P6uisrl- PS(NdfmlxlRmervYevr!'emmunlh Ur+rr4r1 �Nxa c, 0 250 500 1,000 Feet ��TI1 Map f)xumeN..Fv 1 IocPlo( Mps 00D91HFZ120i UpequonCmssing_Ofl2809 rtixtl)9128 /200B— 0 0 Rezoning #12 -09 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 2 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. Action Pending Pending PROPOSAL To rezone 70.15 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District, with proffers. LOCATION The property is located south of the existing terminus of Eddy's Lane (Route 820), approximately 2,400 feet south of Route 7 and 1,650 feet west of Opequon Creek. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Red Bud PROPERTY ID NUMBER 55 -A -210 PROPERTY ZONING RA (Rural Areas) PRESENT USE AgriculturaINacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RP (Residential Performance) East: RP (Residential Performance) West: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Agricultural Use: Residential (Twin Lakes) Use: Residential (Haggerty) Use: Residential (Fieldstone Heights) PROPOSED USES Up to 325 single family attached and single family detached dwelling units (no more than 170 single family attached dwelling units). (4.6 units per acre). Reviewed Planning Commission: 10/21/09 Board of Supervisors: 11/18/09 Action Pending Pending PROPOSAL To rezone 70.15 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District, with proffers. LOCATION The property is located south of the existing terminus of Eddy's Lane (Route 820), approximately 2,400 feet south of Route 7 and 1,650 feet west of Opequon Creek. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Red Bud PROPERTY ID NUMBER 55 -A -210 PROPERTY ZONING RA (Rural Areas) PRESENT USE AgriculturaINacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RP (Residential Performance) East: RP (Residential Performance) West: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Agricultural Use: Residential (Twin Lakes) Use: Residential (Haggerty) Use: Residential (Fieldstone Heights) PROPOSED USES Up to 325 single family attached and single family detached dwelling units (no more than 170 single family attached dwelling units). (4.6 units per acre). 0 0 Rezoning 412 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Frederick County Transportation: Please see additional remaining Frederick County Transportation Comments provided by Mr. John Bishop on page 10 of this report: Virginia Department of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 7, 659 and 820. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property. VDOT is not satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the revised Opequon Crossing rezoning application dated November, 2008 address transportation concerns associated with this request. Specifically, VDOT has the following concerns: 1. The analyst coded the Synchro files assuming a 45 mph speed limit for Route 7, but our database shows the speed limit as 55 mph. At 55 mph, the Department would not likely allow a permissive left turn movement. Coding the movement as Protected and raising the travel to 55 mph, degrades the LOS, therefore requiring additional mitigation. We suggest the following turn lane configurations at the Route 7/Haggerty: WB (1 left, 2 thru), EB (2 thru, 1 right), NB (1 left, 1 right). 2. A turn lanes analysis should be conducted at Haggerty Dr. /Site Drive 2. 3. An alternate roadway connection (either through a new Valley Mill Road or Fieldstone, Section 2 /Charming Drive connection) is needed for this development to access areas west and south. Without this alternate roadway connection, all trips will be forced to use Primary Route 7 back to Winchester to access schools, shopping, etc. The existing single lane bridge on Valley Mill Road will not accommodate increased traffic flow. This single lane bridge will be difficult to upgrade /replace due to right -of -way, historical and environmental concerns. 4. Due to the close proximity to Northern Virginia, there is a public need for a park and ride facility in this area. This development will certainly increase the need for park and ride commuters. Dedicated right -of -way and/or monetary contributions should be considered for a park and ride facility. 5. Inter - parcel roadway connections should be provided to adjacent properties. 6. Future Valley Mill Road connection from Point B to Point C is not mentioned in the proffers. Generalized Development Plan should be revised to show B to C right -of -way as a dedication to Frederick County rather than a reservation. 7. Additional right -of -way is needed on the East -West Collector Roadway at any intersection requiring right turn lanes. A UD -4 with right turn lanes, without sidewalk, requires a minimum of 100' of right -of -way. Fire Marshall: Plan approval recommended. Department of Inspections: No comments at this time. Comments shall be made at site plan submittal. Department of Public Works: The revised rezoning application dated February 23, 2009 has adequately addressed our previous comments. We anticipate that any future master development plans will include a wetlands analysis and a detailed discussion of a proposed stormwater management plan. Frederick - Winchester Service Authority: No comment. Sanitation Authoritv Department: There should be adequate sewer and water capacity to serve this proj ect. Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 4 Department of Parks & Recreation: 1.Opequon Crossing is proposing a total of 325 units and would require 11 recreation units. 2. Item 3.1: The Parks and Recreation Department would need to review the design of the recreation building for appropriateness as a "recreation amenity". 3. Item 3.2 & 3.3: The proffer contribution would appear to meet the Development Impact Model. 4. Item 3.6: The trail system should provide connectivity to adjoining subdivision, facilities and be consistent with the 2007 Winchester Frederick County MPO Bicycle/Pedestrian Network. Health Department: Health Dept. has no objection if public water and sewer are provided. Winchester Regional Airport: Neither the location or the elevation of this site requires a 7460 -1 to be filed with the Federal Aviation Administration; however, it does lie within the air space of the Winchester Airport. Due to its proximity to the airport, property owners may experience aircraft fly- over noise from aircraft entering into or departing the flight pattern from the North. Special considerations will not be requested by the Winchester Regional Airport. Frederick County Public Schools: The cumulative impact of this project and other projects in various stages of development in eastern Frederick County will necessitate future construction of new schools and support facilities to accommodate increased student enrollment. We estimate that the 155 single family detached units and 170 single family attached units in this development will house 43 high school students, 37 middle school students and 70 elementary school students. In order to properly serve these 144 students, Frederick County Public Schools will outlay $5,546,000 in capital expenditures and $1,567,000 annually in operating costs. We note the proffered amounts of $20,265 per single family detached unit and $14,268 per single family attached unit, which match the current development impact mode. Thank you. In this area of the County, we use the larger transit buses with a student capacity of 78. We are strongly concerned about the connection of Haggerty Boulevard to Route 7. For safety, the connection needs to be either signalized or have a crossover capable of providing refuge for a transit bus. Our concern stems from the heavy volume of high -speed traffic currently on Route 7, particularly during the morning rush hour, which poses a significant safety issue for buses running from existing housing to existing schools. The location of the Haggerty Boulevard intersection in Berryville Canyon across from the Route 37 ramps could compound the problem with sight distance issues and a complex environment for drivers to interpret. Frederick County Public Schools is concerned about all land development applications. Both capital expenditures and annual operating costs are increased by each approved residential development. Historic Resources Advisory Board: The HRAB considered the rezoning proposal during their meeting of May 15, 2007. The HRAB reviewed information associated with the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report The subject parcel is the site of the Adams Farm House (DHR #34- 397) and is in close proximity to several other structures, including Valley Mill Farm (DHR 434 -108) which is on the National and Virginia Registers of Historic Places. Other properties in close proximity to the proposed rezoning project are the Route 659 House (DHR #34 -396), the Haggerty House (DHR 934 -398) and the Carter- Lee - Damron House (DHR #34- 1150). Although only the Valley Mill Farm property is listed as potentially significant, the HRAB did have several suggestions to mitigate the impact of the proposed development on the cluster of historic structures in this area. Both the Haggerty House and the Carter- Lee - Damron House are located on adjoining properties which were recently rezoned for residential uses similar to this proposal. The Carter- Lee- Darnron House, on the Toll r 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 5 Brothers "Twin Lakes" property, will be utilized as a recreational element for that development. The application states that the applicant proposes to construct a residential development of 155 single family homes and 170 townhomes. The HRAB feels that this proposed development can address the following issues in an effort to mitigate impacts on historic resources: Architectural Documentation: The HRAB felt that there is a need to document and research the historic significance of this property. The HRAB suggested documenting the house and any out - buildings for their historical significance, including (but not limited to) researching and identifying past owners /occupants, significant application of building materials, and architectural features associated with the time period of construction, etc. The HRAB felt that photographs of the interior and exterior of the buildings should also be taken to visually document the Adams Farm House. Buffers and Screening: The HRAB suggested an increased buffer along the shared property line with the Valley Mill Farm property (PIN 55 -A -165). The HRAB acknowledged the existing woodlands on the Valley Mill Farm Property as well as the topography of the area as natural screening, but felt that the applicant could provide additional pine trees in this area to help mitigate the impact of this new development on the view shed of the Valley Mill Farm since it is on both State and National Registers. Development Name: Due to the fact that the Back Creek Magisterial District of Frederick County already recognizes an areas as the "Historic Opequon Village" and that the Historic Opequon Village area is indicated in the Comprehensive Policy Plan as a possible historic district, the HRAB felt that the applicant could consider renaming this development project to maintain the integrity of the potential historic district and eliminate confusion that the new development is a historic area. Attorney Comments: Please see attached letter dated March 26, 2009 from Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney. Planning Department: Please see attached correspondence from Michael Ruddy, AICP dated July 2, 2007 and March 12, 2009. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the property with the A -2 Agricultural classification. The County's A -1 and A -2 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 the subject property and all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA (Rural Areas) District. This rezoning application was originally submitted to the County on two occasions during 2007. At that time, theApplicant determined that the Application was not in the appropriate form to proceed and wanted additional time to work on the Application. 0 0 Rezoning 412 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 6 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 parcels comprising this rezoning application are located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. In addition, the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use map designates the general area in which the Opequon Crossing property is located for residential land uses. The average overall residential density of the Urban Development Area should not exceed three units per acre. More specifically, the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that properties which contain less than one hundred acres, but more than ten acres, should not exceed 5.5 units per acre. With the more urban densities envisioned for development in the UDA, the Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that special effort is made to provide the infrastructure necessary to accommodate the desired land uses and densities. This application would enable a residential density of 4.6 units per acre. As land is developed in the eastern portion of the Urban Development Area, the Comprehensive Plan identifies the preservation of the stream valleys as environmental open space as an important goal that contributes to the protection of flood plains and water quality and provides a continuous system of green open space. The goals of the Comprehensive Plan also include protecting the natural environment from damage due to development activity, avoiding development in environmentally sensitive areas, and the identification and protection of important natural resources. A balanced approach to providing necessary transportation infrastructure in the area of the project and promoting the protection of sensitive environmental areas and features is warranted and should be achieved with this application. Transportation The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan provides the guidance regarding future arterial and collector road connections in the eastern portion of the County by identifying needed connections and locations. Plans for new development should provide for the right -of -ways necessary to implement planned road improvements and new roads shown on the road plan should be constructed by the developer when warranted by the scale, intensity, or impacts of the development. Existing roads should be improved as necessary by adjacent development to implement the intentions of the plan (Comprehensive Plan 7 -206). 0 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 7 Valley Mill Road is identified as an improved major collector road in the County's Eastern Road Plan. In addition, Valley Mill Road is shown as being relocated to a new location and alignment. Relocated Valley Mill Road runs through this property. In 2005, modifications to the County's Eastern Road Plan occurred in the vicinity of this project. The modifications were completed in recognition of the changing traffic patterns in the area, the recently approved Haggerty project which provided for a new Spine Road parallel to future Route 37, and the need to avoid the historically and environmentally sensitive areas in the vicinity of the one lane bridge over Abrams Creek. The adjacent Haggerty property recognizes the comprehensively planned alignment of Valley Mill Road and furthers its construction. Valley Mill Road is designated as a major collector road that traverses south of its existing location, providing a new crossing of Abram's Creek, and connecting with the Haggerty project and the Spine Road in the vicinity of future Route 37. Ultimately, a connection will be made to Route 7 at the location previously determined as part of the Haggerty project, directly opposite the future on and off ramps of future Route 37. This location is immediately west of the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Facility. This approach furthers access management goals along Route 7. New development in the Urban Development Area should only be approved when roads and other infrastructure with sufficient capacity have been provided. The Comprehensive Plan identifies that a level of service "C" should be maintained on roads adjacent to and within new developments and that traffic analysis should be provided by the applicants to ensure that needed road improvements are identified in order to maintain or improve upon the level of service. In some cases, new development may need to contribute to the provision, construction, or improvement of roads that are not adjacent to the development. In such cases, developments should contribute their fair share costs of road improvements needed to accommodate the traffic generated by a particular development. Site Access and design. Access to this project is designed to be from the adjacent Haggerty project and ultimately Route 7. Additional access to the site will be from Eddy's Lane. No recognition has been provided in the TIA for the relocation of Valley Mill Road and the vehicle trips that may be projected to traverse this property with the completion of this significant element of the County's Eastern Road Plan. The potential dedication of right -of -way for the future location of Valley Mill Road relocated is included as a commitment in the Proffer Statement. Future construction of a two lane portion of a small section of this road is included. However, nothing beyond this commitment has been made to further this important element of site access has been provided. Inter parcel access has been identified in one location to the south providing access to the Twin Lakes project. A potential inter parcel connection to the Fieldstone property to the west has been offered. No additional design of the internal road network has been provided with this application and no additional inter parcel connections have been pursued. The potential use of Eddy's Lane as an access point to this parcel without the completion of the relocation of Valley 0 9 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 8 Mill Road should be carefully considered. Any additional vehicle trips utilizing the existing one lane bridge over Abrams Creek should be avoided. 3) Site Suitability/Environment The Opequon Crossing site has been identified as a site typical of the Martinsburg Shale Region with steeply eroded side slopes and reasonably level plain areas. This is an accurate identification that presents challenges when planning the development program for this property. Abram's Creek is located immediately north of the northern property line and generally parallels this property line. A pond is located central to the eastern portion of the property. These features and their associated slopes, natural drainage ways, and floodplains warrant particular attention and provide an opportunity for enhanced protection of the riparian corridor. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the preservation of the stream valleys as environmental open space as an important goal that contributes to the protection of flood plains and water quality and provides a continuous system of green open space. By current County definition, this project contains relatively small areas of steep slopes. However, protection of the integrity of the pond, environmental open spaces, and the riparian areas south of Abram's Creek, especially during the construction phases, remain a concern and should be a greater consideration of this application and as part of the proffer statement. The site contains areas that are heavily wooded. The application proposes development of a greater intensity in the reasonably level wooded areas and offers areas that will be set aside for environmental and open space purposes. A greater amount of consideration should be provided to incorporating the protection of areas of mature woodlands into the design of the project to assist in their preservation and create desirable areas of open space. It would be appropriate for the application to more thoroughly address the preservation of the existing tree lines and wooded areas as a desirable buffer to the surrounding properties. The preservation of these existing trees within a buffer area should be guaranteed in the proffer statement. Disturbance should be avoided. The HRAB reviewed this request and provided several comments. The subject parcel is the site of the Adams Farm House (DHR #34 -397) and is in close proximity to several other structures. The Applicant has modified the name of the project. However, the more substantial comments have not been addressed by the application. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation Traffic Impact Analysis. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for this project, dated September 8, 2006, projected that the development of 155 single family detached residential units and170 single family attached residential units would generate 3,029 vehicle trips per day. The report was developed with access to the site provided via a single site driveway along the proposed Haggerty Connector Road that will serve as a connection between the site and Route 7. 0 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 9 The report concludes that the traffic impacts associated with the Opequon Crossing project are acceptable and manageable. Staff has concerns regarding the scope and validity of the TL4 prepared for this application. Please refer to the comments provided by Mr. Bishop and by VDOT. No consideration has been given to the property's location and relationship to the County's Eastern Road Plan. In particular, the relocation of Valley Mill Road, the Spine Road, and the additional volumes that would be projected to utilize this comprehensively planned road network. In addition, no consideration has been provided for the impacts on existing Eddy's Lane, the one lane bridge over Abrams Creek, and the existing intersection of Valley Mill Road and Route 7. Transportation Program, The Generalized Development Plan for Opequon Crossing delineates the general public road system that will serve the residential development. Primary access to the site is from a proposed connection to the adjacent Haggerty property and indirectly to Route 7, and via Eddy's Lane. One connection with the Twin Lakes property has been identified. Minimal additional detail has been provided regarding the internal street system serving this project and providing connectivity to the adjacent property, in particular to the south. An additional potential connection location has been identified to the Fieldstone property to the west. The location of the relocated Valley Mill Road has been correctly identified on the GDP. However, the application fails to adequately address this most significant element of the County's Eastern Road Plan. It should be expected that construction of the road should occur consistent with the typical section clearly demonstrated in the County's Eastern Road Plan. In addition, the required standard road efficiency buffer should be provided per the County's Zoning Ordinance rather than per the applicant's defined landscape buffer. It is expected that any application for rezoning addresses the design and construction of a road located on their property that is an element of the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. Simply providing a reserve area for the future construction by others would not typically meet expectations and the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. In summary, the Applicant's transportation program provides for the following: Y Construction of two lanes of this major collector road for a distance of approximately 400 feet and prior to the 100"' building permit • The reservation for future dedication of an 80 foot wide reserve area within the property. e $1,000 per single family attached dwelling and $2,000 per single family detached dwelling that are to be utilized for road improvements to alleviate transportation problems in the general vicinity of the property. Please note that this monetary contribution is even less than it was when this request was originally submitted in 2007. At that time the contribution was $3,000 and $5,000 respectively. Rezoning #12-07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 10 The Application does address the construction of the access to Route 7 by the adjacent Haggerty prior to the issuance of any building permits on this property. However, no recognition is provided to the very important Spine Road connection previously proffered to the south of the Haggerty project. A commitment was made to ensure this connection would be in place in a timely manner and commensurate with a number of building permitsfor the Haggerty project. The addition of more permits from the Opequon Crossing project would place additional impact on the proposed roads without the implementation of this improvement. Omitted from the transportation program are any additional accommodations for pedestrian circulation and potential multiuse trails that would provide access internal to the project and ultimately to the adjacent residential developments. The comments offered by the Department of Parks and Recreation relating to this effort have not been addressed. Greater effort should be made in designing and providing a trail system with linkages to open space to the satisfaction of Parks and Recreation. This should be done at the time of rezoning rather at the time of MDP. This would then ensure its planning is coordinated with the overall transportation improvements and its completion secured through the proffer statement. The following additional transportation TIA- related comments are provided by Mr. Bishop, Frederick County Transportation Planner. Aside from a right -of -way dedication, this proposal does not address the Eastern Road Plan connection to Valley Mill Drive. It is important to recognize that the Eastern Road Plan needs to be implemented in this area in order to create a sustainable transportation network. Accessing Route 7 as the only means for residents of this development to reach goods and services degrades the function of Route 7 as an Arterial highway. The proffer of $1,000 per multi family unit and $2,000 per single family unit is well below the standards which have previously been followed for offsetting transportation impacts in Frederick County. While I recognize and empathize with the challenges of today's market, those challenges do not lessen the impact of new residential development on Frederick County roadways. The results of the TIA's study of the intersection with Route 7 do not alleviate my concerns about the impacts to Route 7 as it approaches I -81. Due to the distances involved, it was deemed excessive to have this development scope their traffic impacts that far. However, it is clear from what is being proposed that that congested area is where the residents of this development will need to go for goods and services, thus adding to a traffic situation that is already unacceptable. Please consider this issue when reviewing the points above. The Applicant's transportation program is insufficient in addressing the transportation impacts of the project and furthering the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. 0 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 11 B. Sewer and Water The Opequon Crossing rezoning proposal is estimated to require approximately 65,000 gallons per day of water usage and approximately 65,000 gallons per day of wastewater. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority will serve the property and the wastewater flow from the site will go to the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant. Recent planning efforts have identified that evolving nutrient reduction regulations promulgated by Virginia's Bay Program will have a significant impact on the permitted waste water capabilities of Frederick County. Requests for land use modifications should be evaluated very carefully in light of the evolving nutrient loading regulations. C. Community Facilities The comment provided by the Frederick County Public Schools should be carefully considered when evaluating the application. The schools evaluation anticipated that the proposed 155 single family homes will yield 26 high school students, 20 middle school students, 36 elementary school students; and 170 townhouses will yield 16 high school students, 16 middle school students, and 32 elementary school students, which totals 146 new students upon build -out. Significant residential growth in Frederick County has resulted in the schools serving this area having student enrollments nearing or exceeding the practical capacity for a school. The cumulative impact of this project and others of similar nature, coupled with the number of approved, undeveloped residential lots in the area, will necessitate the future construction of new schools facilities to accommodate increased student enrollments. The impact of this rezoning on current and future school needs should be considered during the approval process. The Frederick County Development Impact Model is a tool that is used to identify the capital costs associated with various types of development proposals presented to the County. The projected costs to Fire and Rescue, Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, Library, Sheriffs Office and for the Administration Building have been calculated and provided to the applicant for their consideration. The DIM projects that, on average, residential development has a negative fiscal impact on the County's capital expenditures, as such, all rezoning petitions with a residential component submitted after July 1, 2009 will be expected to demonstrate how the proposal will mitigate the following projected capital facility impacts: Single family dwelling unit $21,664 Town home dwelling unit $15,441 Apartment dwelling unit $13,005 The Applicant has proffered the appropriate amount per single family detached dwelling unit and per single family attached townhouse dwelling unit. No rezoning should be approved unless the net impacts on community facilities are positive, or if the negative impacts can be adequately addressed through proffers or some other means. A request for a rezoning may be turned down even though all fiscal impacts appear to be addressed (Comprehensive Plan 8 -262). 0 0 Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 12 5) Proffer Statement — Dated April 10, 2007; Last revised September 24, 2009 A) Generalized Development Plan The applicant has provided a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of the street providing access to the project, residential land use areas, and open space and reservation areas within the Opequon Crossing development. The GDP may be utilized to a greater extent to more clearly address the sensitive environmental features on the property and the buffering of the adjacent residential uses. B) Land Use The applicants have proffered to limit to the total number and type of residential units to allow up to 325 single family attached and single family detached dwelling units. Up to 170 single family attached townhouse units would be permitted. Multi family dwelling units are prohibited. The applicant has proffered a phased introduction of the residential units over a minimum three year period from the date of final rezoning with the potential for up to 109 units per year. Staff note: This phased approach does very little to realistically address the intent of phasing the issuance of building permits. The intent of phasing is to ensure a timed integration of new development in a manner that would enable the timely provision of the public facilities necessary to serve the new development. It may be more desirable to have the annual allocation occur on consecutive years following the approval of the master development plan for this project and enable the construction of a smaller number of units. Regardless of the phasing approach, the comments relating to the impacts to the Frederick County Public Schools in this area of the Urban Development Area should be recognized. Recognition of recently approved projects in the vicinity of this proposal should also be considered when evaluating the phased inclusion of new residential units into this area of the community. C) Transportation The Applicant has proffered the reservation of an 80 foot wide reserve area for the future dedication of an 80 foot right of way within the property to accommodate the future construction, by others, of the Valley Mill Road relocated major collector road. The Applicant has proffered the construction of two lanes of the major collector road from point A to point B on the GDP for a distance of approximately 400 feet, prior to the 100 building permit. The Applicant has proffered $1,000 per single family attached dwelling and $2,000 per single family detached dwelling that are to be utilized for road improvements to alleviate transportation problems in the general vicinity of the property. Please note that this monetary contribution is even less than it was when this request was originally submitted in 2007. At that time the contribution was $3,000 and $5,000 respectively. The Applicant has proffered that no building permits will be issued for the property until such time that the property has access to Route 7 via the future Haggerty transportation network. • • Rezoning #12 -07 — Opequon Crossing October 5, 2009 Page 13 D) Recreational Facility The Applicant has proffered to design and build a recreation building in this project. Please recognize that no definition of what the building is, or design depicting the recreational building, has been provided. Past experiences would indicate the importance of being more specific in this regard. Recreational units may be required by ordinance based upon the ultimate housing types utilized in this project. E) Monetary Contribution The Applicant has proffered a total of $21,664 per single family detached dwelling unit and $15,441 per single family attached townhouse dwelling unit to offset the capital costs associated with this request. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR 10/21/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Opequon Crossing rezoning application, while generally consistent with future land use designations of the Comprehensive Plan, does not fully address the goals of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan as described in the staff report. The Planning Commission should pay particular attention to the transportation impacts, the environmental impacts, and the capacities and capabilities of community facilities needed to serve the proposed land uses. At this time, the road improvements identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan are not fully addressed in the application. Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any issues raised by the Planning Commission, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning Commission. Following the requirement for a public [rearing, 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. 1 REZONING APPLICATION FORM SEP 2 5 2009 • FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA L To be completed by Planning Staff Fee Amount Paid $ /D Dd'^ Zoning Amendment Number Date Received PC Hearinfa Date In 1) I IAQ BOS Hearing Date l / /fQ A`3 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: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Telephone: (540) 667.2139 c/o Patrick Sowers Address: 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester Virginia 22601 • 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: The Canyon c/o Dave Holliday Telephone: (540) 667 -2120 Address: 420 Jubal Early Dr, Suite 103 Winchester, VA 22601 3. Contact person(s) if other than above Name: Patrick Sowers Telephone: (540) 667.2139 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location Map X Plat X Deed of property X Verification of taxes paid X Agency Comments X Fees X Impact Analysis Statement X Proffer Statement X • 0 • 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: The Canyon, LC David B. Holliday 6. A) Current Use of the Property: AgriculturalNacant B) Proposed Use of the Property: Residential 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 South of the existing terminus of Eddvs Lane (Rt 820) approximately 2,400 feet South of Route 7 and 1,650 West of Opeguon Creek. 40 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: Parcel Identification Number: 55 -A -210 Districts Magisterial: Fire Service: Rescue Service: Red Bud Greenwood Greenwood High School: Middle School: Elementary School: Millbrook James Wood Redbud Run 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 70.15 RA RP 70.15 Total acreage to be rezoned LJ 2 0 0 • 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family Home 155 Townhome 170 Multi- Family Non - Residential Lots Mobile Home Hotel Rooms Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office Retai 1 Restaurant Service Station Manufacturing Flex - Warehouse Other 12. Signature: 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 acc mpanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) know] dge. Applicant(s) Date r r� U [e1 0 Adjoining Property Owners — Opequon Crossing 1 J 0 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 Kenl .Street. Name Address Property Identification Number (PIN) Name: Toll VA IV LP 21630 Ridgetop Cir Ste 130 Property #: 55 -A -209 Dulles, VA 20166 Name: Toll VA IV LP 21630 Ridgetop Cir Ste 130 Property #: 55 -A -211 Dulles, VA 20166 Name: Alicia F. Grey 1201 Bonaventure Ave Property #: 55 -4 -4A Green Cove Springs, FL 32043 Name: The Canyon, LC 420 W Jubal Early Dr Ste 103 Property #: 55 -A -212 Winchester, VA 22601 Name: Valley Mill Farm LC 8705 C Street Property #: 55- A -165D Chesapeake Beach, MD 20732 Name: Arcadia Development Co. P.O. Box 5368 Property #: 55 -A -181 San Jose, CA 95150 Name: Property #: Name: Property #: Name: Property #: Name: Property #: Name: Property #: Name: Property #: Name: Property #: Name: Property #: • 0 0 CO 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 Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) The Canyon LC (Phone) 540.667.2139 (Address) 420 Jubal Early Drive Suite 130 Winchester VA 22601 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 Instrument Number: 06006113 and is described as Tax Map Parcel 55 -A -210 Subdivisi do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates (Phone) 540.667.2139 O .ddress) 117 E. liccadilly 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 l (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including X Rezoning (including proffers) _ Conditional Use Permits X 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. ( mil In witness thereof, 1 (we) h 4Xe hereto set my (oX�nd and seal this day of Signature(s) - - - State of Virginia, City/County of �� I �� To -wit: _ - -- , It cIv c�l1r—� 1 I a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction c aforesaid, rtify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me _ and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this day of Ik 64_e ,�:- My Commission Expires: - - -- Jotary P&4 3(03q-3 0 0 Frederick County, Virginia REZONING APPLICATION MATERIALS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE OPEQUON CROSSING Red Bud Magisterial District ® Revised September 2009 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust &Associates 117 E. Piccadilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone: 540-667-2139 Fax: 540-665-0493 P H A •