HomeMy WebLinkAbout13-08 CommentsCOUNTY of FREDERICK
Roderick B. Williams
County Attorney
540/722 -8383
Fax 540/667 -0370
E -mail:
rwillia@co.frederick.va.us
November 20, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE — (540) 662 -5793 — AND REGULAR MAIL
Mr. John C. Lewis, PE, CLA
Painter - Lewis, P.L.C.
817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Rezoning Application — 1932 -1958 Senseny Road
Draft Proffer Statement dated July 2, 2008
Dear John:
I have reviewed the above - referenced draft Proffer Statement dated July 2, 2008. It is my
opinion that the revised Proffer Statement dated October 14, 2008 would be in a form to meet the
requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be
legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following:
1. Proffer 1 (GDP) — This states that the applicant proffers the GDP for the purpose
of identifying, among other things, "the location of the principal site access ". As such,
staff should be aware that Proffer 1 speaks only to the location of "principal" site access
and does not actually limit additional access to the site nor, for that matter, does it limit
the type of access (e.gx, whether one or more entrances are °to be right -in, right -out) at any
location where access other than "principal" access might be included.
2. Proffer 4 (Maximum Floor Area) — Staff should be aware that the applicant only
proffering a possible building square footage limitation and is not proffering to exclude
any particular B2 uses of the site. Therefore, the rezoning, if approved, would allow the
site to be used for any B2 use, with the only practical use limitation being what use(s)
could be fit within the particular site, which is approximately 3.93 acres in size and fairly
elongated in shape. Along related lines, l would note that the GDP, unlike some of the
other items included as information in the draft rezoning package, does not actually
identify the structure(s) to be built, or even building footprint(s) /location(s). Also, the
provision concerning allowance of greater building square footage lacks specificity as to
what if any further square footage limit would apply upon the requisite TIA finding.
Staff should be aware as well that any such TIA would be conducted by a consultant of
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601
f 1
6 •
Mr. John C. Lewis, PE, CLA
November 20, 2008
Page 2 '
the applicant's choosing, with no apparent role for the County to address the results of the
TIA.
3. Proffer 7 (Historical Monument) — The proffer does not state a deadline by which
the applicant shall complete construction of the monument.
4. Proffer 10 (Pedestrian Crossing of Senseny Road) —The proffer does not state
who will make the determination that the crossing is required, how the determination will
be made, whether the determination must be made within a particular time frame, and the
time frame within which the applicant must complete the improvement following a
determination of its necessity.
I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable
and appropriate for this specific development, as it is my understanding that that review will be
done by staff and the Planning Commission.
Sincerely yours,
Roderick B. Williams
County Attorney
cc: Mr. Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director, Frederick County Planning and
Development
r
_J
0
Mike Ruddy
From: John Lewis Dclewis @painterlewis.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 11:29 AM
To: Smith, Matthew, P.E.'; 'John Bishop'
Cc: 'Hoffman, Gregory'; 'Baluch, Stephen'; 'Greg Kerr'; cmohn @bowmanconsulting.com,
plemieux @visuallink.com, 'Mike Ruddy'; 'Candice Perkins'; 'Eric Lawrence', 'Funkhouser,
Rhonda'
Subject: RE: Ervin 1932 -1958 Senseny Road Property - VDOT Comments to TIN Rezoning
John and Matt:
Thanks for your responses.
If I understand correctly, the comments are directed at insuring that this project construct
a 4' median, an 11' left turn lane into Orrick, two -11'
eastbound through lanes, and one -11' eastbound right turn lane into the Ervin site. Our
application has committed to all of the foregoing except the eastbound right turn lane. To
construct this turn lane will require the dedication of 19' to 20' of land along the frontage
of the site and as you know, the existing lots are only about 200' in depth. The other
confounding issue is the existing drainage condition in the right of way and I am hesitant to
proffer an improvement that we can't actually construct. I think we may be able to do some
"field designing" at a site meeting that may resolve my concerns.
Can we meet October 13 at 11 AM or November 5 at it AM?
Thanks
John Lewis
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Smith, Matthew, P.E. [mailto: Matthew .Smith @vdot.virginia.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 11:06 AM
To: John Bishop; John Lewis
Cc: Hoffman, Gregory; Baluch, Stephen; Greg Kerr; cmohn @bowmanconsulting.com;
plemieux @visuallink.com; Mike Ruddy; Candice Perkins; Eric Lawrence; Funkhouser, Rhonda
Subject: RE: Ervin 1932 -1958 Senseny Road Property - VDOT Comments to TIA/ Rezoning
John Bishop is correct we did misread the Eastern Road Plan along Greenwood Road. As a
result our comment about the additional right -of -way dedication along.Greenwood can be
deleted. I also agree with John Bishop that if you can adequately show that right turn lanes
are not warranted, then the additional lane and right of way is not an issue along Senseny.
However since the plan showed right turn lanes we
assume they were required.
Greg Hoffman and I can meet with you on site to discuss the issues.
Greg is on Vacation until next Tuesday, so the meeting will need to be scheduled for after
that.
Matthew B. Smith, P.E.
Residency Staff Engineer
VDOT - Edinburg Residency
14031 Old Valley Pike
Edinburg, VA 22824
Phone # (540) 984 -5615
Fax # (540) 984 -5607 •
•
From: John Bishop [ mailto :Jbishop @co.frederick.va.us]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 9:38 AM
To: 'John Lewis'
Cc: Hoffman, Gregory; Smith, Matthew, P.E.; Baluch, Stephen; 'Greg Kerr';
cmohn @bowmanconsulting.com; plemieux @visuallink.com; 'Mike Ruddy'; 'Candice Perkins'; 'Eric
Lawrence'
Subject: FW: Ervin 1932 -1958 Senseny Road Property - VDOT Comments to TIA/ Rezoning
John;
First, I'm happy to meet on these and any issues as soon as everyone needed can be
coordinated. That's no problem.
There may be some confusion here on the extra lane you noted on Senseny, because I believe
the only thing VDOT is asking for on Senseny Road that you have not already indicated a
willingness to do is a right turn lane, which we have been asking for as well I had
conceded that perhaps a warrant analysis could be done that would prove that this wasn't
needed, however what I received from your office has not convinced me that we should not plan
for a right turn lane at the Orrick light. Why Orrick did not put in a right turn lane, as I
understand it, had more to do with needed length not being available on property they
controlled. We do expect to get right of way for that planned future need as the property in
that area is site planned. As far as your development proffering more than Orrick, I don't
see that as the overall case at all. Senseny is planned to be an urban section. That not
being feasible has not come up before now. As I noted earlier, we are happy to discuss the
issue, however I do not foresee staff backing off on this issue since Orrick has been
following the urban standard on that side of the road.
The issue of the extra lane on Greenwood is, I believe, due to a misinterpretation of the
Frederick County Eastern Road plan, which I have attached. Greenwood Road is planned to be 2
lanes south of Senseny and 4 lanes north of Senseny.
I hope this information is helpful, and I stand ready for a meeting.
John
2
0
John A. Bishop, AICP
Deputy Director - Transportation
Frederick County Planning & Development
107 North Kent St, Suite 202
Winchester, VA 22601
Ph: 540- 665 -5651
F: 540- 665 -6395
jbishop @co.frederick.va.us
I have reviewed the comments from VDOT on the rezoning application.
VODT is asking for an additional lane on Senseny and an additional lane on Greenwood.
I want to avoid building another lane in Senseny. It would mean we would have to dedicate
another 10 feet of ROW and it would reduce the amount of development area dramatically. As
consequence, our proposed development plan will not work on the site. We have completed a
survey of the ROW and it is evident that Orrick Commons did not provide two through lanes
a right turn lane in Senseny Road. Why this rezoning app is being asked to provide more
improvements than Orrick? In addition, I met with Public Works at the site last week to
review some drainage issues. The existing culvert /ditch system is going to make the
installation of an urban road section very difficult if not impossible.
Can we please meet at the site?
Thanks
John
John C. Lewis
Painter - Lewis, P.L.C.
817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120
a
and
3
Winchester, VA 22601
Off.: 540- 662 -5792
Fax.: 540- 662 -5793
Cel.: 540- 323 -5559
From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [mailto: Rhonda .Funkhouser @VDOT.Virginia.gov] On Behalf Of Hoffman,
Gregory
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 3:20 PM
To: jclewis @painterlewis.com; jill @painterlewis.com; Michael.Glickman @phra.com
Cc: Hoffman, Gregory; John Bishop; Smith, Matthew, P.E.
Subject: Ervin 1932 -1958 Senseny Road Property - VDOT Comments to TIA/ Rezoning
The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant
measurable impact on Routes 656 and 657. These route are the VDOT roadways which has been
considered as the access to the property referenced.
VDOT is not satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Ervin 1932 -1958 Senseny
Road Proffer Statement dated July 2, 2008 address transportation concerns associated with
this request. We offer the following:
* The County's Eastern Road Plan calls for Senseny Road to be an
urban four lane, divided road section (two thru lanes in each direction with median /center
left turn lane). Development plan as shown only provides one thru, as the outer lane is a
right turn lane. Development needs to provide an additional east bound thru lane with right
turn lane as required by VDOT design standards. Additional right -of -way will be required at
right turn lane(s).
* Extend Senseny Road median to Orrick Commons intersection.
* The County's Eastern Road Plan calls for Greenwood Road to be an
urban four lane, divided road section (two thru lanes in each direction with median /center
left turn lane). Development plan as shown only provides one thru, as the outer lane is a
right turn lane. Development needs to provide additional right -of -way dedication to
accommodate future road section and right turn lane.
* Sidewalk is shown off right -of -way and as such will not be
maintained by VDOT.
* Easements should be provided for inter - parcel connectivity to
4
adjoining parcels. •
•
Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing
entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation
Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right -of -way
needs, including right -of -way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway
improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right -of -way must be covered
under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee
and surety bond coverage.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment.
Gregory T. Hoffman, Supervisor
Virginia Department of Transportation
Edinburg Residency — Land Development
2275 Northwestern Pike
Winchester, VA 22603
Phone #(540) 535 -1824
Fax #(540) 535 -1846
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http: / /www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.4/1751 - Release Date: 10/27/2008
10:44 PM
5
COUNTY of :FREDERICK
Department of Public Works
540/665 -5643
FAX: 540/678 -0682
i
AUP 1 4 2008
August 13, 2008
Mr. John Lewis
Painter — Lewis, P.L.C.
1817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120
Winchester, Virginia 22601
RE: 1932 — 1958 Senseny Road — Rezoning Comments
Frederick County, Virginia
Dear John:
We have completed our review of the proposed rezoning and offer the following
comments:
1. Refer to A. Site Suitability, page 1:
We concur with your statement that the proposed sites are suited for rezoning to the
Business General District. Based on the proposed development plan, we anticipate that
all of the existing single family dwellings and associated accessory buildings will be
demolished. A note should be added to the site plan to indicate that asbestos inspections
and demolition permits will be required prior to demolishing these structures.
2. Refer to F. Drainage, page 5:
Drainage will be a big concern for the proposed site development. Every effort should be
made to divert drainage away from the residential dwellings located behind and to the
south of the proposed development. It should be noted that the Department of
Conservation and Recreation will require the implementation of best management
practices (BMP) to manage storm runoff. The design of the stormwater management
facilities should include an evaluation of an existing culvert which crosses under Senseny
Road and connects to the stormwater system associated with the Orrick Commons
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000
1932 —1958 Senseny Road R* ping Comments
Page 2
August 13, 2008
development. It appears that this culvert is located in front of parcel 65 -A -214 and could
possibly be used as a discharge point for a future BMP.
I can be reached at 722 -8214 if you should have any questions regarding the above
comments.
Sincerely,
(j I
Harvey E. rawsnyder, Jr., Y.E.
Director of Public Works
HES /rls
cc: Planning and Development
file
T:Araargent \RhondaATEMPCOMMENTS \1932- 1958SENSENYRDREZCOM.doc
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665 -5651
FAX: 540/665 -6395
TO: John Lewis
FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP
Denuty Director
RE: Rezoning Notes— 1932 -1958 Senseny Road, Ervin Development
2 nd Effort
DATE: September 4, 2008
The following additional points are offered regarding the 1932 -1958 Senseny Road,
Ervin Development Rezoning application. Please consider them as you continue your
work preparing the application for submission to Frederick County.
1932 -1958 Senseny Road, Ervin Development Rezoning — Additional Rezoning Notes.
General.
This property is located in a developing area that contains a number of established
residential properties. Special consideration should be provided to ensure that the impacts
to the adjacent residential properties are considered.
Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate
improved corridor appearance and the sensitive integration of the project into the
surrounding community. Landscaping, lighting, and building layout and form should be
carefully planned to ensure that this is achieved. Such design elements should seek to
exceed those provided on other similar developments to ensure that this project fits in
with the surroundings and context of this particular location. This could be done in
context with the historical character of the property.
Transportation.
Proffer 2.b. addresses the design and construction of a right turn lane along the site's
frontage to provide access to the site. This improvement should be considered the second
lane improvement to Senseny Road that implements the ultimate U41) design section for
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000
• 1932 -1958 Senseny Road, Ervin Development Rezoning — Preliminary Rezoning
Comments
September 4, 2008
Page 2
Senseny Road per the County's Eastern Road Plan. The design shown on the GDP
provides for this. A right turn lane /taper should be evaluated at the sites main signalized
entrance.
The landscaped raised median shown in Senseny Road should be extended to the
signalized intersection accessing the site and should provide for an appropriate length
turn lane and pedestrian crossing accommodation. It is preferable that the GDP closely
reflects what would be provided with the ultimate improvement of Senseny Road. This
would also assist in limiting uncontrolled turning movements from the Senseny Road
right in right cut entrance.
With regards to the design and construction of improvements to Greenwood Road,
proffer 2.d. should provide for a more defined restriction on the turning and site access
movements. Expanding the curb bump -outs and raised median, and raising the entrance
splitter feature where striped on the GDP, would further define these movements.
Proffer 2.e. addresses the construction of a full access commercial entrance aligning with
the existing Orrick Commons entrance. The GDP shows the entrance offset from Orrick.
Please try and align the entrances on the GDP. The addition of a small median similar to
that provided at Orrick alone may help achieve this alignment as would a slight
adjustment to the west. Also, at this entrance the pedestrian accommodations should be
extended to the eastern property line.
Proffer 9. addresses inter parcel circulation and access. It is anticipated that
redevelopment may occur on the property to the south of this parcel along Greenwood
Road. Inter - parcel circulation and access should be a greater consideration in this
location.
Proffer Statement.
Proffer 4. Maximum Floor Area, is problematic in how it is written. I would suggest that
you consider rewriting the proffer as follows: "The Applicant agrees to limit the gross
commercial floor area that will be built on the 3.93 aces to 25,000 square feet °. The
additional language should be eliminated as it is tied to a future evaluation of the
development's impact outside of a rezoning process. Alternately, base the current
application and how the impacts will be addressed on the ultimate build out of the site.
The previous request for the rezoning of this property provided for the potential
relocation of the Greenwood Road commercial entrance to the south of its identified
location in the future. This may warrant continued consideration to relieve the impacts
along Greenwood Road.
MTR/bad
CVS Pharracy - Route 657, Fredew. County Page 1 of I
I Fries
From: John Lewis Dclewis @painterlewis.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 10:29 AM
To: 'Jill Fries'
Cc: david @ervindevelopment.com
Subject: FW: CVS Pharmacy - Route 657, Frederick County
From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [mai Ito: Rhonda. Fun khouser @VDOT.Virginia.gov] On Behalf Of Smith, Matthew, P.E.
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 9:44 AM
To: John Bishop
Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E.; Hoffman, Gregory; jclewis @painterlewis.com; Candice Perkins
Subject: CVS Pharmacy - Route 657, Frederick County
This email serves as a follow -up to our on site meeting on November 5, 2008 to discuss the right turn lane
off Senseny Road into CVS. Based on this meeting, VDOT is in agreement that the outer lane of the urban
four lane divided road section can be used as a shared thru and right turn lane for this development. This
decision was made after discussions of modifying the western entrance on Senseny to a right in only and
Bring the design so this movement is more channelized and unobstructed. Please note, this eliminates
previous rezoning comment of requiring additional right -of -way for a dedicated right turn lane.
Should you have any further questions, please contact me.
Matthew B. Smith, P.G.
Re.ridenci StujjEngineer
VDOT - Edinburg Residency
rr,.„ nu,,.
1quo Ul vane ,KU
Edinburg, VA 22824
Phone # (540) 984 -5615
Fax # (540) 984 -5607
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http: / /www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 /Virus Database: 270.9.6/1797 - Release Date: 11/19/2008 8:58 AM
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http: / /www.avg.com
Version: 8.0. 175 / Virus Database: 270.9.6/1797 - Release Date: 11/19/2008 8:58 AM
11/24/2009
Er'sin 1932 -1958 Senseny Road PrOrty - VDOT Comments to TIA/ Rezolo Page l of 2
Fries
-rom: Funkhouser, Rhonda [ Rhonda .Funkhouser @VDOT.Virginia.gov] on behalf of Hoffman, Gregory
[Gregory. Hoffman @VDOT.Virginia. gov]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 3:20 PM
To: jclewis @painterlewis.com, jill @painterlewis.com; Michael.Glickman @phra.com
Cc: Hoffman, Gregory; John Bishop, Smith, Matthew, P.E.
Subject: Ervin 1932 -1958 Senseny Road Property - VDOT Comments to TIN Rezoning
The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable
impact on Routes 656 and 657. These route are the VDOT roadways which has been considered as the
access to the property referenced.
VDOT is not satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Ervin 1932 -1958 Senseny Road Proffer
Statement dated July 2, 2008 address transportation concerns associated with this request. We offer the
following:
. The County's Eastern Road Plan calls for Senseny Road to be an urban four lane, divided road section
(two thru lanes in each direction with median /center left turn lane). Development plan as shown only
provides one thru, as the outer lane is a right turn lane. Development needs to provide an additional
east bound thru lane with right turn lane as required by VDOT design standards. Additional right-of-
way will be required at right turn lane(s).
Extend Senseny Road median to Orrick Commons intersection.
. The County's Eastern Road Plan calls for Greenwood Road to be an urban four lane, divided road
section (two thru lanes in each direction with median /center left turn lane). Development plan as
shown only provides one thru, as the outer lane is a right turn lane. Development needs to provide
additional right -of -way dedication to accommodate future road section and right turn lane.
Sidewalk is shown off right -of -way and as such will not be maintained by VDOT.
. Easements should be provided for inter - parcel connectivity to adjoining parcels.
Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs,
drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review.
VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right -of -way needs, including right -of -way dedications, traffic
signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right -
of -way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an
inspection fee and surety bond coverage.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment.
?ory T. Hoffman, Supervisor
:,�, hda Department of Transportation
Edinburg Residency — Land Development
10/28/2008
Er , in 1932 -1958 Senseny Road Pr0rty - VDOT Comments to TIA/ Rezo4 Page 2 of 2
2275 Northwestern Pike
W �
chester, VA 22603
e #(540) 535 -1824
Fax #(540) 535 -1846
No virus found in this Incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http: / /www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 /Virus Database: 270.8.4/1751 - Release Date: 10/27/2008 10:44 PM
10/28/2008
John Lewis
-, ® From: Michael C. Glickman [Michael. Glickman @phra.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 8:15 AM
To: John Lewis
Subject: FW: Ervin - Senseny Road Property TIA - VDOT Review Comments to 08/26/08 Submittal
Just received these.
Michael C. Glickman, PE
Director of Transportation Planning
Patton Harris Rust & Associates
P 888.616.8286
C 540.421.5685
E Michael.Glickman @phra.com
- - - -- Original Message -----
From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [mailto: Rhonda .Funkhouser @VDOT.Virginia.gov] On Behalf Of Smith,
Matthew, P.E.
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 9:16 AM
To: Michael C. Glickman
Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E.; Short, Terry; John Bishop
Subject: Ervin - Senseny Road Property TIA - VDOT Review Comments to
08/26/08 Submittal
VDOT has the following comments regarding the subject TIA:
* For 2010 Background Scenario, AM Synchro file used pm +pt
phase for DEL, while PM and Sat Synchro files used pm phase. Also, AM and Sat Synchro
\_.
files didn't use overlap phase for NBR, but PM file used overlap phase.
* Pass -by trips were assigned to Site Dr. #2 and #3, but
not for Site Dr. #1, please explain.
* Pass -by trips should be removed as they pass a site
entrance, not at up /downstream intersections leading to the proposed development. Please
revise.
* Referencing Figure 6 on Page 12, 30% of the site
generated trips are from the east, west, aiiu north; and 10% trips are from the south.
However, the trip distribution volumes illustrated on Figure 7 are different than these
percentages. For example, volumes at Site Dr. 41 should be 17(36)[32], trips at Site Dr.
#3 should be 50(108)[95], and trips from the north and west at Rte. 656 /Rte. 657 should be
50(108)[95]. Please revise.
* For the 2010 Build -Out scenario, many through movement
queues are longer than the left -turn and /or right -turn pocket lane lengths, which means
that the 95th percentile back of queue of the through movement may be longer than the turn
lanes provided /proposed.
For example, the EST movement at Rte. 656 /Rte. 657 PM has a cueue of 657 ft, and the
distance between Rte. 656 /Rte. 657 and the upstream intersection is 670 ft. With the
short left -turn and right -turn pocket lane lengths the through movement queue may be
longer than 654 ft, as a result the queue may spill back to the upstream intersection.
Should you have any comments, do not hesitate to call.
Matthew B. Smith, P.E.
Z Residency Staff Engineer
VDOT - Edinburg Residency
14031 Old Valley Pike
1
0
Edinburg, VA 22824
Phone # (540) 984 -5615
Fax # (540) 984 -5607
i s
is
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http: / /www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.7.0/1695 - Release Date: 9/22/2008 4:08 PM
is
` Emergency Vehicle Access Hydrant Location Fire Lane Required
Not Identified Not Identified No
Siamese Location Roadway /Aisleway Width Spacis:l Hazards
Not Identified Not Identified No
Emergency Vehicle Access Comments
Access Comments
Additional Comments
Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Sig , rature /!
1 Yes J. Neal Tide I
J
From:LIFESAFE
01/2008 16:34 M217 P.001 /001
®
"
/ U i�d rtr�
q
�N
w,
J �
Control number
Date received I: itu nwiewed Date Rows: d
RZOB -0008
7/8/2008 7.1' /2008
Project Name
Applica:,;
1932 -1958 Senseny Road
Ervin D, Mkopment/Pzimer- Lewis, PLC
Address
City 'tale Zip ApplicarI Panne
817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120
Winchester 'rA 226,'1 540 - 662 °92
Type Application
Tax ID Number Fire Distri: t Rescue District
Rezoning
55 -A -196 18 18
Current Zoning
Election Distric
RP
Recommendations Red Bud
Automatic Sprinkler System
Automatic Fire Alarm System Residential Sprinkler System
No
No No
Other recommendation
` Emergency Vehicle Access Hydrant Location Fire Lane Required
Not Identified Not Identified No
Siamese Location Roadway /Aisleway Width Spacis:l Hazards
Not Identified Not Identified No
Emergency Vehicle Access Comments
Access Comments
Additional Comments
Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Sig , rature /!
1 Yes J. Neal Tide I
J
, P
Department of Public Works
FAX: 540/678-0682
`�li lf+ rly i iil'
August 13, 2008
Mr. John Lewis
Painter — Lewis, P.L.C.
1817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120
Winchester, Virginia 22601
RE: 1932 — 1958 Senseny Road — Rezoning Comments
Frederick County, Virginia
® Dear John:
We have completed our review of the proposed rezoning and offer the following
comments:
1. Refer to A. Site Suitability, page 1:
We concur with your statement that the proposed sites are suited for rezoning to the
n.. ' r 1 t. Ro od nn tho "OnoS.°.'� dP Aln nt nlan .ye anhq]nn1P that
"Usmess veneraa Dina u p. r pm . , ,.....
all of the existing single family dwellings and associated accessory buildings will be
demolished. A note should be added to the site plan to indicate that asbestos inspections
and demolition permits will be required prior to demolishing these structures.
2. Refer to F. Drainage, page 5:
Drainage will be a big concern for the proposed site development. Every effort should be
made to divert drainage away from the residential dwellings located behind and to the
south of the proposed development. It should be noted that the Department of
Conservation and Recreation will require the implementation of best management
practices (BMP) to manage storm runoff. The design of the stormwater management
facilities should include an evaluation of an existing culvert which crosses under Senseny
Road and connects to the stormwater system associated with the Orrick Commons
107 North Kent Street ' Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000
1932 —1958 Senseny Rod Rezoning Comments
Page 2
® August 13, 2008
development. It appears that this culvert is located in front of parcel 65 -A -214 and could
possibly be used as a discharge point for a future BMP.
I can be reached at 722 -8214 if you should have any questions regarding the above
comments.
Sincerely,
i'.
iIJJW Lt rrV, 1 t
Harvey rawsnyder, Jr., P.E.
Director of Public Works
HES /rls
cc: Planning and Development
file
1
T:\rsargent\RliondakTENIPCOMMENTS\1932-1958SENSENYRDREZCOM.doe
s
F
Rezoning Comments
Frederick County Sanitation Authority
Mail to:
Frederick County Sanitation Authority
Attn: Engineer
P.O. Box 1877
Winchester, Virginia 22604
(540) 568 -1061
Hand deliver to:
Frederick County Sanitation Authority:
Aun: Engineer
315 Masker Road
Stephens City, Virginia
Applicant: Please Elf out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the
Sanitation Authority with their review. Attach a copy of your application form, location
map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent inf(Irmation.
Applicant's Name: eyyll7 z)e e.1 172 `12i Telephone: 5R/O
Mailin <a Address: c (c poo,*f_L&Q /S_
Cel Utc��rsreh
VA �r
Location of property: T � �� F SFCf7O� � � 5 5i� �Z-z A d
�17 �f��encloacr' r�cP �G�4 i r� �5 -y)y /Vcj0 ,1i %r�,zt
Current zoning: fCP Zoning rcquestecL : Acreage: a 1 J
*
Sanitation Authority Coimncots:
__..._ -- --- 6
a
Sanitation Authority Signature S- Date: Zlollt�v Notice to Sanitation N4 - Please Return This Form to the Applicant
23
0
Rezoning Comments
0
Frederick-Winchester Service Authority
Mail to:
Pred -Mine Service Authority
Alto:.Iesse W. IAQal'fett, Fy :CCntive Director
P.O. Box 43
Winchester, Virginia 22604
(S40) 722 -
Hand deliver to:
Fred -Nine Service Aufhorit3
Atm:Jesse NV.ivloffetl
107 North Kent Slicer
Winchester, Virginia
Applicant: Please till out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the
= red -Winc Service Authority Nvith rl,eirievie.w. Attach a copy ofyour application form, locatiol
map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent information.
Applicant's Name: GV I) DZv6.iDRWnt Telephone:
•
N aihng Address: c1 d 1
Fi7 (arl�zi� .� �i "i ��S
Location of properly:
C1ra C Ev �[ &ad (V41 AQ k b5 1) soo l h��ff y1 !�1�
Current zoning: �l' Zoning requested: �� Acrcaec: 3' /�
0
Cr^�I'I�CIC- eiiiii OIi ':j''S
W I � ��� �Yl/✓ —_
I'1'i;C�- ` \�InC Ser VICe ; \lltil )1'It ;'g
Signature L& Date: �
- tit �IQV
-- V
Notice to Fret) -Wine Service Authority -
--
Please Return Form to Applicant
31
0
flail to:
Frederick- NVinchester Health Department
Attn: Sanitation 13ngi1) Cer
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
(540) 722 -3490
0
Fland deliver to:
Frederick- WiuchesterHcalth Departmem
Attn: Sanitation Engineer
107 North Kent Street
Suite 201
Winchester, Virginia
Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the
1"7ccierick- Winchester Health Department with their review. Attach a copy of you
application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other
pertinent information.
Applicant's Name: C-(ry'ln 0- � 7�z /7t I`elephone: S4 '7
Nfailine Address: C/o pute—V lCJ7S�Lc -/Ur _tom -._t Lys
CJi 2C - 16Lr 4
Location of property: ��/1ff1
f <.� [)�
�✓1 S�i2
�Jc�fY( L'�f �!/c /fe �i5 7
oni -1 67r c- cU KI AiaCO
/
_. —J - -_
/ I ,- ✓a�P�
/I
r✓� �� /DP
'-�- u
Current zoning: _ -�( Loningrequested; t3 Acreage:
-�'
.
I rederici: wiociiasrer Fieaiiir i3ep:u hncnt's Couuncuts: 0 G
y /
0A / { SAS
L
t�Q C 'CC�1�1 �D
(Cr T�
_�-...- ...__�1 �lnll;: .�irn_::i
_. —J - -_
/ I ,- ✓a�P�
/I
r✓� �� /DP
tom ; `� ' ��° `
i;zF��
�ci� Ltil clhd C
- kue
L,� �f ��hl ��
-- - -- �- - -- - J - -t =
s� ,,� s l s ,�� ��;r :,,��
,�,g�,
Henith Dept. Signature S Dale:
-Al
Notice la Health lYepartmenl - Please 1 turn This Form to the Applicant
24
' t
Frederick - Winchester Health Department
�fAt,
07- 25- 08:09:11AM: •
•
Fa .+.rie .5406622:.'- # 1/
Rezoning Comments _
Winchester Regiomal Airport
Mail to:
Winchester Regional Airport
Aun: Executive Director
491 Airport Road
Winchester, Virginia 22602
(540) 662 -2422
fl and deliv to:
Wirnchester Regional Airport
f.tm: Executive Director
4 /.irporl Road
CPt. l;45, off of Rt. 522 South.i
G1'i1whester, Virginia
Applicant: Please fill out the information as accuratel t' as possi )lr in order to assist
'Winchester Regional Airport with their revieuv. Attach a copy of your application
location snap, proffer statement, impact analysis, a�ud -,my other pertinent inforn
ie
run,
t i out.
Applicant's Name: Dun 0'z'i16Ic>Pmellf _ Telephone: 07U'��� 7 7C/5
Mailing Address: C/v 2t /_ f tE ' .11 4 h/1-
Location ofproperty:
_ a
Current coning: eP Zoning requester: _ _ Acreage:: J
�........1 A:..�....41.. (�.. - .....fin.....
Winchester Regional Airport's (�
Signature & Date:
Notice to Winchester Regional Airport - fleas- Return form to Applic�
28
07- 25- 06109:11AM: • P. .r — =_ :54066223 "s # 2/ 2
EP REMO&
_Z`c 99 WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT
sFwwG TMt
491 AIRPORT ROAD
TOP OF WGINA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 -
q� (540) 662 -2422
July 25, 2008
Jill Fries
Painter - Lewis, P.L.C.
116 South Stewart Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Rezoning Comments
1932 —1958 Senseny Road
Redbud Magisterial District
Dear Ms. Fries:
The above referenced proposal was reviewed. While the proposed devi:lopment
lies within the airport's Part 77 surfaces and airspace, it appears that the
proposed site plan should not impact operations at the Winchester Regi: nal
• Airport.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration in the continuing safe
operations of the Winchester Regional Airport.
Sincerely, (�
Serena R. Manuel
Executive Director
2008 - Jul -31 09:07 rederick County Public Schob 5406624237
Rezoning Comments
Superintendent of Frederick. County Pttblie Schools
,,,
Mail to;
Predericic County Public Schools
Attn: Superintendent
P.O. Box 3508
Winch%ter, Virginia 22604
(540) 662 -3888
Hknd d eliver to:
TrecleriA County Public Schools
Attn: Superintendent
,school Administration Building
1415 Amherst Su eet
Winchester, Virghria•
Applicant: Please ill out.the infoniieition as acetfrately as possiUle.in order to assist the
5uperintcndent ofPuUlic Schools with iris tevieu�. AL'Uach a copy oEyow• application for nr,
location map, proffer statement•, impact analpsis, and nny other pertinent informatioi .
Applicant's Name: - Vl/ [ Telephone:7L�
MailingAddress: Yp
location of
�l'L'9 �l��z�'1(AIC�I" n'?(� 1, A- �XG�S�� S� UC[��' • . --
Current zoning: K-P Zoning requested: � `� •• _. Acreage: ' - 9 3
--
Superintcudeni at raulic Sci;ouls
Superintendent's Signature & Datc:
Notice to School Superintendent - Please Return Tllis, form to the Applicant
0
22
3/3
11/20/2000
13:09 570370
FREDERICK 0NTY GOV
PAGE 02/03
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Roderick B. Williams
County Attorney
540/722 -8383
Fax 540/667 -0370
E -mail:
r,vilh
November 20, 2008
VIA I; ACSIMILE — (540) 662 -5793 — AND REGULAR MAI
Mr. John C. Lewis, PE, CLA
Painter - Lewis, P.L.C.
817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Rezoning Application— 1932 -1958 Senseny Road
Draft Proffer Statement dated July 2, 2008
Dear John:
I have reviewed the above - referenced draft Proffer Statement dated July 2, 2008. It is my
opinion that the revised Proffer Statement dated October 14, 2008 would be in a form to meet the
requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance acid the Code of Virginia, and would be
Iegally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following:
I. Proffer I (GDP) —This states that the applicant proffers the GDP for *.le purpose
of identifying, among other things, "the location of the principal site access ". As such,
staff should be aware that Proffer I sneaks only to the loc ation of " nrincinal" site acer�cc
and does not actually limit additional access to the site nor. for that matter. does it limit
the type of access (e.g., whether one or more entrances are to be right -in, righe =out) at any
location where access other than "principal' access might be included,.
2. Proffer 4 (Maximum Floor Area) —Staff should be aware that the applicant only
proffering a possible building square footage limitation and is not proffering ;o exclude
any particular B2 uses of the site. Therefore, the rezoning;, if approved, woul: allow the
site to be used for any B2 use, with the only practic :d use limitation being whz:t use(s)
could be fit within the particular site, which is approximately 3.93 acres in siz., and fairly
elongated in shape. Along related lines, I would note that the GDP, unlike some of the
other items included as information in the draft rezoning package, does not acually
identify the structure(s) to be built, or even building footprint(s)/location(s). Also, the
provision concerning allowance of greater building squam footage lacks spec:`Scity as to
what if any further square footage limit would apply upon the requisite TIA finding.
Staff should be aware as well that anv such TIA would be conducted by a consultant of
107 North Kent Street • Winchester. Virginia 22601
11/20/2008 13:09 570370
Mr. John C. Lewis, PE, CLA
November 20, 2008
Page 2
FREDERICK aNTY GOV
PAGE 03/03
the applicant's choosing, with no apparent role for the County to address the results of the
TIA.
3. Proffer 7 (Historical Monument) — The proffer does not state a deadli ie by which
the applicant shall complete construction of the monument.
4. Proffer 10 (Pedestrian Crossing of Senseny Road) —The proffer does not state
who will make the determination that the crossing is required, how the determination will
be made, whether the determination must be made within a particular time frame, and the
time frame within which the applicant must complete the improvement following a
determination of its necessity.
I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable
and appropriate for this specific development, as it is my understanding that that revi?w will be
done by staff and the Planning Commission.
•
Sincerely yours,
Roderick B. Williams
County Attorney
cc: Mr. Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director, Frederick County Planning aad
Development