Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09 CommentsTO: Evan Wyatt, AICP FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Director RE: Initial Comments Bishop Amari Rezoning Application DATE: December 31, 2008 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665 -6395 The following points are offered regarding the Bishop Amari Commercial Rezoning Application. This is a request to rezone 2.77 acres from RA to B2 with Proffers. Please consider the comments as you continue your work preparing the application for submission to Frederick County. In addition, please ensure that these comments and all review agency comments are adequately addressed. Land Use. The property is located in the general area covered by the Route 11 North Plan; and the Northeast Land Use Plan. The property is within the SWSA and is generally designated in an area of commerciai land use. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized and should be applied along Route 11 and potentially Charles Town Road. In addition, the adjacent DSA's'should be considered: Transportation This application proposes lane and intersection improvements on Route 11 and Route 761. It may be preferable for this application to also consider median separation of the east and west bound lanes of Route 761 and further delineate the left turn lane into the site. This would appear to be able to be accomplished without any additional right of way or pavement impacts and may also be more cost efficient. An additional area of raised median should be considered adjacent to the right turn lane froth Route 761 to Route 11. The use of raised medians would further define the intersection, safely control turning movements, and significantly benefit pedestrians who may be more prevalent in this area in the future. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Initial Comments Bishop Amari Rezoning Application December 31, 2008 Page 2 A raised median of some sort should also be considered on Route 11 directly across from the proposed right in right out entrance: This would ensure that no left turns can be made into the site from south bound Route 11 such as'is experienced in other locations within the County. The proffered commitment to provide for inter parcel connectivity to the adjacent parcels should be flexible in the location of access points for the adjacent property to the east. It may also be beneficial to identify who would be responsible for connecting the 25' distance between the access drive and the adjacent property. Alternately, a specific location could be determined at this time. This may be helpful with regards to the proffered landscape screen adjacent to this property line. In addition, the property to the east is presently zoned M1. It may benefit the applicant to design the inter parcel connection to minimize any potential conflicts between commercial and industrial traffic. The TIA modeled the intersection of Route 11 and Route 761. This application provides for improvements to the intersection and to Route 11 and Route 761 consistent with the TIA in all locations with the exception of the second north bound through lane at the northbound approach to the intersection of Route 11 and Route 761. The application should evaluate if sufficient right -of -way is available in this location to implement this improvement. Pedestrian accommodations should be further recognized and provided in a coordinated manner internal to the project, to and along Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road, and at the intersection of these roads. Proffer Statement. A Generalized Development Plan has not been provided with this application. A GDP accompanying the Proffer Statement could be used to further clarify the proffered commitments and to address some of the comments identified. The Road Improvement Exhibit is mentioned in the proffers. However, this exhibit, and any GDP, should be specifically proffered in the statement. Additional landscaping in the area identified in proffer 10 is desirable. It should be clarified that this landscaping is in addition to any required landscaping provided to meet parking lot landscaping requirements. In addition, the amount of landscaping should be identified in an effort to avoid potential confusion during future site development. To this end, the application may want to further define the buffer areas adjacent to the public streets similar to the nearby Easy Living example. This may include distance of landscape area, distance of parking lot away from right -of -way, planting schedule etc. Initial Comments Bishop Amari Rezoning Application December 31, 2008 Page 3 Previously, the Board of Supervisors has stated their preference for the developer to deal directly with the local volunteer companies on any direct monetary contribution for their benefit. Any contribution to the County should be designated to the County for fire and rescue purposes. The proffer statement must be signed by the owner /owners of the property. General Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Route 11 and potentially, Charles Town Road. In addition to working with the Applicant in the development of information that would be displayed in the kiosk, the HRAB should also be used to consider the design of the kiosk. Any additional recommendations of the HRAB should also be recognized. One of the existing buildings on the site, the smaller residence located closest to the intersection, is somewhat unique and could be utilized in the redevelopment of the site and could be reflected in the design of the site. The building may provide an opportunity to reflect the areas architecture, could be utilized in conjunction with the proffered plaza area and historic kiosk, or could be a standalone commercial use such as an ice cream stand. The Applicant has proffered to utilize similar development themes and construction materials for all occupied structures. This should also include any gasoline canopies. In addition, the Applicant could consider a theme that is representative of the site, area, and context of the location. The previously noted building may be one choice for guiding such a theme. 1 would suggest an evaluation of the existing mature trees on the property to determine if any can be incorporated into the design of the project. It would be desirable to preserve such examples if possible. Additional comments provided by Mr. John Bishop, AICP I. Access on Old Charlestown Road should be as far back from the intersection with Route 11 as possible. 2. Access on Route 11 should be designed in a manner that minimizes left turns such as a right in right out or possibly a right in right out with left in only. 3. Inter parcel access should be provided. Due to the short distance of frontage and the need to keep this entrance as far north from the intersection of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road as possible, median control will need to instituted on Route 11 to allow for the proposed entrance scenarios. Initial Comments Bishop Amari Rezoning Appiication December 31, 2008 Page 4 4. Right -of -way and participation for improvements to Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road should be provided. 5. Bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be provided along Old Charlestown Road and sidewalks should be included along Route 11. Pending the rezoning it will also be important that linkages for these modes are provided within the site. 6. Right turn lane is included on Old Charlestown Road where it intersects with Route 11. Consider a free flowing right turn lane with yield to through traffic. 7. Since two receiving lanes are proposed along the property frontage, consider marking the right tum lane on Route 11 at Old Charlestown as a right and through. 8. There may need to be some cooperation between this rezoning and the Snowden Bridge Development regarding the proffered signalization of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road if that signal is not in the foreseeable future. Please clarify. 9. It should be noted that the lane configuration depicted does not match the TIA analysis. Once again, please ensure that all review agency comments are adequately addressed. Attachments MTR/dlw Janeary 26, 2009 Mr. Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 1 `.t'indv -lif. Laic W achestcr VA 27602 Dear "ir. Wyatt: RE: Bishop Antari Application Requesting the Rezoning of 2.77 acres from RA to B2 for Commercial Use. Location: .2456 Martinsburg Pike, Winchester, V 4 Property identification Number (PIN): 44 A 43 Current Zoning District: RA (Rural Area) The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the above referenced rezoning proposal during their meeting on January•13, 2009. The l -IRAB reviewed inibrinatiou a.sociated with the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report, the tirginia Department of Historic Resources, as well as information pro- by Dewberry Engineering. Historic Resources Advisory Board Concern:. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540 /665 -6395 The proposal seeks to rezone 2.77 acres of land from RA (Rural Areas) District.to the B2 (Business General) District for Commercial uses. The property is located at 2456 Martinsburg Pike at the rsecnon o`Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) and .01d Charles Town Road (Route 761). The Sloth: of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley- published by the Nauonal Park Service, identifies the Bishop -Aalari Property as being located within the bounds of the Second Winchester Core Battlefield. The property is adjacent to :and that has retained ;finch oh its historic :nteurity and 'is el Se Area, t f(1 i designated as a Development-Sensitive �,nSltlYe CeL. he ;vty(_ alln property to the south %lc Charles Town Road). The Rural Landmarks Survey Report for Frederick ..:.unt Virginia, identifies :'our str' cturea within `he immediate area 0( till subject site, one structure. to located oil -site, and ore on -site structure was recently demolished' Hoover's Auto Exchange #34 -y4'I) —Was located OD. vie has recently been demolished Hoover, BurtonI- icuse(1134.91.3)— located Onsite Jackson, Edgar House (434 -942) Mvon- Hoover House (434 -943) Mr. Evan Wyatt RE: Bishop Amari Application Requesting the Rezoning of2.77 acres from RA to 132 for Commercial Use January 26, 2009 Page 2 The Rural Landmarks Survey does not identify any of these structures as potentially significant, nor do any of the structures qualify for the national or state register of historic places. The applicant has attempted to address the impacts of the proposed development on the surrounding area in the proffer statement: Maximum of 20,000sf of commercial structure area (excluding gasoline pumps). Maximum of 5,000sf of restaurant area (part of the 20,000st). Certain uses are prohibited on the site: communication facilities, truck stops, hotels /motels, organization hotels and lodging, car washes, miscellaneous repair services, motion picture tl L1 cgs, i:t:s'"13r and reereatjrin service goil d r j ig r rz ,i- Ig e s i n i golf, adult retail. All buildings shall be oriented towards Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road The site will have a 2,000sfplaza. The applicant will develop a kiosk that will be located on the plaza area, which will be utilized as an information center for historic features within the community. The applicants will work with the HRAB in the development of the information displayed. The proffers indicate that the site may be developed as a gas station with up to 16 pumps, all of which would be positioned away from the road so as to not be visible. The Historic Resources Advisory Board members raised several concerns during their discussion of this application, including: Limiting Corporate Architecture and limiting designs to the use of local materials and styles'. The Board expressed their desire to see stronger language in the proffers ensuring that locally prevalent architectural materials and styles would be used for the buildings. Members included a request that the applicant consider restricting construction to framed buildings rather than cement. The Board also specifically discussed their concerns regarding the potential construction of trademarked commercial structures that would disrupt the visual integrity of the 'surrounding area. Location of the informational kiosk and plaza: Members expressed their desire to see the plaza located directly across from the McCann property rather than on the corner of Old Charles Town Road and Martinsburg Pike. This would provide a more welcoming location for pedestrians. hi order to shield the potential gas pumps towards the rear of the property the Board recommended that the plaza include a landscape screen orropaque fence. Members expressed their desire that the applicant include proffers not to build a drive through restaurant, as such a layout would be aesthetically detrimental to the battlefield area, just as visible gas pumps would be detrimentai. Kiosk design: Board members discussed possible kiosk designs and agreed to he included in the review of the final kiosk design during site plan approval. Mr. Evan Wyatt RE: Bishop Amari Application Requesting the Rezoning of 2.77 acres from RA to B2 for Commercial Use January 26, 2009 Page 3 After reviewing this information and the applicant's materials and proposals, the Historic Resource Advisory Board voted unanimously to support the Bishop -Amari Rezoning Application, provided that the proffers include the following: 1. Proffer language guiding restricting the materials and architectural styles to be allowed within the project. "c'.- 1 iii Ln la[.guagl' prf.\ c u y),:n ;iGt characteristic of traditional, local architecture. 3. Include drive- thru's iu the proffeied list of excluded uses. 4. Assure that, in addition to requiring that buildings be located immediately alongside i.he roadway, structures will have permeable surface (both doors and windows) along at least [he first floor. In addition to these recommendations, members also acknowledged their agreement with the proffer language outlining the design and installation of a historic information kiosk. Board members were open to and pleased with the applicant's request that HRAB members he involved in reviewing, and approving the final kiosk's content and design. Please contact me with any questions concerning these comments from the HR AB. Sincerely, Amber: Powers :raC�B -BCalf ALP/bad cc: Rhoda 1'iz, HRAB Chair VIA FACSIMILE (540) 722 -9528 AND REGULAR MAIL iVii. LVail Wyatt; llil'i Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Dear Evan: January 15, 2009 Re: Rezoning Application, Parcel Number 44 -A -43, Bishop -Amari Property Proffer Statement dated October 27, 2008 COUNTY of FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722 -8383 Fax 540/667 -0370 E -mail: rwillia @co.frederick.va.us I.have reviewed the above referenced proposed Proffer Statement. It is my opinion that the Proffer Statement 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 A3 Regarding proffered out uses, staff will want to review this list to determine whether the remaining allowed uses are appropriate for the Property. Also, staff will want to determine whether any further definition is appropriate for "Truck Stops which are a subset of SIC 5541(Gasoline Service Stations), including, for example, the types of goods and services offered at the. establishment, how they are offered /marketed, and the faciiities available afthe establishment. 2. Proffers B1, B2, and B4 The Proffer Statement should indicate, for Proffers BI and B2, that the Road Improvement Exhibit is attached. Also, for all three Proffers, a better defined final completion date for the proffered improvements, such as, by the time of issuance of the first building permit or by the time of issuance of the occupancy permit, rather than "during the development of the first Site Plan approved for the Property would be appropriate. 3. Proffers B5 and D The phrase "at the time of building permit issuance for the first Site Plan approval on the Property" or similar phrase)-may be somewhat ambiguous and cumbersome, in terms of defining a triggering event. It may be better simply to state it as "prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Property 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Mr. Evan Wyatt, AICP January 15,2009 Page 2 4. Proffers section C generally In several of the Proffers throughout this section, the term "occupied commercial structures" appears. I would suggest that the mere term "structures" is likely to suffice in most if not all instances. Otherwise, the basis for treating whatever structures that may be not "occupied" or not "commercial" differently is unclear. 5. Proffers C1 and C10 The factual premise in Proffer C10 (screening between parking areas and public streets) appears to be at odds with the restriction in Proffer CI (no parking between building frontages and public streets). It may be helpful if the Applicants clarified that they intend to provide the landscaping along the public streets even though Proffer C 1 prohibits parking between the building frontages and the_public streets. Also, it would be appropriate for Proffer C10 to state a deadline by which the screening is to be completed. 6. Proffers C2 and C3 It would be appropriate for each of these two Proffers to state a deadline by which the items (plaza and kiosk) are to be completed. 7. Proffer C9 Regarding freestanding business signs, some of the proffered height or size limitations may be the same as (or possibly less restrictive than) the limitations that already apply by ordinance. See County Code 165 -30(G) (H). It may be best to clarify that the proffered limitations specifically refer to those signs that are subject to the general catch -all limitations of 165- 30(G)(7) (H)(7). 8. The Proffer Statement and the Application will both, of course, require signatures from both owners or the submission of powers of attorney from both owners. 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: Ms. Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner, County of Frederick TO: Evan Wyatt, AICP FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, MCP Deputy Director RE: DATE: December 31, 2008 Land Use. Transportation Initial Comments Bishop Antari Rezoning Application COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/ 665 -6395 The following points are offered regarding the Bishc =p /;marl i orrunerci,l R.,zoni' Application. This is a request to rezone 2.77 2c'r s from ILA to B2 with Proffers. Please consider the comments as you continue your wort: preF aring il';', appiic:itiorn i1i�r submission to Frederick County. In addition, picase ens. re that these4corinicni; and all review agency comments are adequately addressed. The property is located in the general area covered by the Route 11 North Plan; and the Northeast Land Use Plan. The property is' within the SAV S.A. and is gener illy designated in an area of coninlercia r land use. The busines. cciridor ccpecta *ions of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized and should be applied along Route 11 and potentially Charles Town Road. In addition, the adjacent DSA's'should be considered, This application proposes lane :aid intersection improitehinis on Route 11 and Route 761. It may be preferable for this app ication to also conlbidcr median separation of the east and west hound lanes of Rothe 761 and further delmeiiie the left turn Tan:: into the site. This would appear to be able to he accomplished r+ i tl ut airy additional righi of cagy or pavement impacts and nut also bC more e si epic' err (1p additional area C i raised median should be considered adlaL'eill to the 1'ip,l ?r. CUturn lnn'� from iv3 UA" 761, t0 Route 11 e i i The use of raised inea:rans woul:i.further define the inkiiteclion, safely control turning movements, and significantly benetifpeciestrians v,ho may be. more prevalent in ibis area in the future. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Initial Comments Bishop Amari Rezoning Application December 31, 2008 Page 2 A raised median of some sort should also be considered on Route 11 directly across from the proposed right in right out entrance. This would ensure that no left turns can be made into the site from south bound Route 11 such as`is experienced in other locations within the County. The proffered commitment to provide for inter parcel connectivity to the adjacent parcels should be flexible in the location of access points for the adjacent property to the east. It may also be beneficial to identify who would be responsible for connecting the 25' distance between the access drive and the adjacent property. Alternately, a specific location could be determined at this time. This may be helpful with regards to the proffered landscape screen adjacent to this property line. In addition, the property to the east is presently zoned Ml. it may benefit the applicant to design the inter parcel connection to minimize any potential conflicts between commercial and industrial traffic. The TIA modeled the intersection of Route 11 and Route 761. This application provides for improvements to the intersection and to Route 11 and Route 761 consistent with the TIA in all locations with the exception of the second north bound through lane at the northbound approach to the intersection. of Route 11 and Route 761. The application should evaluate if sufficient right -of -way is available in this location to implement this improvement. Pedestrian accommodations should be further recognized and provided in a coordinated manner internal to the project, to and along Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road, and at the intersection of these roads. Proffer Statement. A Generalized Development Plan has not been provided with this application. A GDP accompanying the Proffer Statement could be used to further clarify the proffered commitments and to address some of the comments identified. The Road Improvement Exhibit is mentioned in the proffers. However, this exhibit, and any GDP, should be specifically proffered in the statement. Additional landscaping in the area identified in proffer 10 is desirable. It should he clarified that this landscaping is.in addition to any required`landscaping provided to meet parking lot landscaping requirements. In addition, the•amount of landscaping should be identified in an effort to avoid potential confusion during future site development. To this end, the application may want to further define the buffer areas adjacent to the public streets similar to the nearby Easy Living example. This may include distance of landscape area, distance of parking lot.away from right -of -way, planting schedule etc. General Initial Comments Bishop Amari Rezoning Application December 31, 2008 Page 3 Previously, the Board of Supervisors has stated their preference for the developer to deal directly with the local volunteer companies on any direct monetary contribution for their benefit. Any contribution to the County should be designated to the County for fire and rescue purposes. The proffer statement must be signed by the owner /owners of the property. Particular effort should he made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Route 11 and potentially, Charles Town Road. In addition to working with the Applicant in the development of information that would be displayed in the kiosk, the HRAB should also be used to consider the design of the kiosk. Any additional recommendations of the HRAB should also be recognized. One of the existing buildings on the site, the smaller residence located closest to the intersection, is somewhat unique and could be utilized in the redevelopment of the site and could be reflected in the design of the site. The building may provide an opportunity to reflect.the areas architecture, could be utilized in conjunction with the proffered plaza area and historic kiosk, or could be a standalone commercial use such as an ice cream stand. The Applicant has proffered to utilize similar development themes and construction materials for all occupied structures. This should also include any gasoline canopies. In addition, the Applicant could consider a theme -that is representative of the site, area. and context of the location. The previously noted building may be one choice for guiding such a theme: i would suggest an evaluation of the existing mature trees on the property to determine if any can be incorporated into the design of the project. It would be desirable to preserve such examples if possible. Additional comments provided by Mr. John Bishop, AICP 1. Access on Old Charlestown Road should he as.far back from the intersection with Route 11 as possible. 2. Access on Route 1.1.should be designed in a manner that minimizes left turns such as a right in right out or possibly a right in right out with left in only. 3. Inter parcel access should he provided. Due to the short distance of frontage and the need to keep this entrance as far north fromthe intersection of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road as possible. median control will to instituted on Route 11 to allow for the proposed entrance scenarios. Initial Comments Bishop Amari Rezoning Application December 31, 2008 Page 4 4. Right -of -way and participation for improvements to Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road should be provided. 5. Bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be provided along Old Charlestown Road and sidewalks should be included along Route 11. Pending the rezoning it wilialso be important that linkages for these modes are provided within the site. 6. Right turn lane is included on Old Charlestown Road where it intersects with Route 11. Consider a free flowing right turn lane with yield to through traffic. 7. Since two' receiving lanes re proposed -along the property frontage, consider narking the right turn lane on Route 11 at Old Charlestown as a right and through. 8. There may need to be some cooperation between this rezoning and the Snowden Bridge Development the proffered signalization of Route 11 and Old Charlestown Road if that signal is not in the foreseeable future. Please clarify. 9. It should be noted that the lane configuration depicted does not match the TIA analysis. Once again, please ensure that all review agency comments are adequately addressed. Attachments MTR/dlw Founded in 1971 March 18. 2009 Frederick County Planning Department Attn: Mike Ruddy, Deputy Director 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Bishop -Amari Martinsburg Pike Commercial Property Rezoning Review Agency Comment Response Letter Dear Mike: GREENWAY ENGINEERING, INC. 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 VDOT Comment March 12, 2009 As requested, 1 have prepared a comment response letter to identify the various matters considered by the Applicant during the review agency comment period for the referenced rezoning. 1 have incorporated information in response to each review agency item within this letter to assist you with this matter. Please note the following: Our team has been working with VDOT throughout calendar year 2008 to determine all issues necessary to mitigate the impacts associated with this project. We have conducted multiple meetings with the VDOT review team, including field meetings along the Martinsburg Pike corridor to determine appropriate geometric design parameters and improvements to existing conditions including the provision of a second thru lane and continuous right turn lane on Martinsburg Pike, a future left turn lane, a free flowing right turn lane and raised median on Old Charles Town Road. Additionally, an inter- parcel access drive, 5 -foot wide pedestrian sidewalks, and right -of -way dedication satisfactory for the future development on an urban four -lane divided road section on Martinsburg Pike has been provided. This effort has resulted in a positive comment from VDOT for the build out of this property. FCSA Comment November 11, 2008 Our team has been working with the FCSA Engineer to discuss various matters to ensure that water and sewer demands are met for this project. A 16 -inch water line adjoins this site, which has adequate volume and pressure for the proposed commercial development. The proposed commercial development has been modeled for sewer demand and the property owners have worked with the Easy Living Associates property owners to obtain permission to extend sanitary sewer from this site to their approved pump station, which Project 4928S/EAW Engineers Surveyors Planners Environmental Scientists Telephone 540- 662 -4185 FAX 540- 722 -9528 www.greenwayengmm 1 will direct effluent to the existing sewer force main. The FCSA Engineer noted that the sewer lines shown on the Water and Sewer Lines Map were inaccurate; therefore, this map has been amended to reflect current conditions. FWSA Comment November 17 2008 The proposal for public sewer service will direct effluent to the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Facility. FWSA has provided an approved comment for this rezoning request. Building Inspections Comment November 21, 2008 A paragraph entitled Existing Conditions has been incorporated into the March 16, 2009 Impact Analysis Statement to acknowledge the Building Inspections comments pertaining to necessary inspections and permits prior to the demolition of existing structures on the subject properties by the Applicant. Public Works Comment January 27, 2009 Item 1 The Impact Analysis Statement has been revised to address the disposition of drain fields and well serving the existing residential structures when the site is developed for commercial land use. Item 2 The Impact Analysis Statement has been revised to expand on soil types to identify the underlain karst geology and to identify that geotechnical analysis will be required to determine the existence of features and mitigation of those features prior to the development of the site for commercial land use. Item 3 The Impact Analysis Statement has been revised to ensure that existing drainage structures are analyzed to verify their adequacy to accommodate the storm water management design during the Site Development Plan review process. Winchester Regional Airport Comment February 3, 2009 The Executive Director of the Winchester Regional Airport has identified that there are no impacts and has provided an approved comment for the rezoning request. Fire and Rescue Comment November 17, 2008 The Assistant Fire Marshal has provided an approved comment for the rezoning request. Project 4928S /EAW Clear Brook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Comment A complete rezoning application packet was provided to the Clear Brook Fire Chief on November 10, 2008. Greenway Engineering has been unsuccessful in efforts to obtain formal comments from this review agency. The Planning Department has determined that it is appropriate to proceed with this rezoning application based on the approved comment received from the County Assistant Fire Marshal. Historic Resources Advisory Board Comment January 26, 2009 The HRAB recommended that the Applicant proffer language guiding materials and architectural styles that reflect local architecture in the area of the project, prevent corporate trademarks, exclude drive -thrus and orient buildings along Old Charles Town Road that include doors and windows on the first floor of structures facing the roadway. The Applicants' proffer statement provides design standards that attempt to address several of these recommendations as follows: Proffer C(1) requires building placement along Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road and prohibits parking lots and travel aisles between these structures on the public streets. This proffer is intended to ensure that the viewshed from Old Charles Town Road is oriented towards structures. The prohibition of parking lots and travel aisles between these structures on the public streets will ensure that drive -thrus are not visible from the viewshed along Old Charles Town, but does not specifically prohibit drive -thru development if creative design can accomplish this. Proffer C(5) restricts building materials and requires that these materials are utilized on all building walls and roof systems. Greenway Engineering conducted an inventory of all existing land uses on Martinsburg Pike between Interstate 81 Exit 317 and Exit 323 to determine local architecture of the area. This analysis determined that the primary building materials for the majority of residential, church, government (post office) and commercial land uses were brick walls and shingled gabled roofs; however, the commercial rooflines were predominately flat with parapet walls. Additionally, heavy commercial land uses were predominately metal building or concrete block, which have been prohibited by the proffer statement. Therefore, the building materials proffered are consistent with existing local architecture within the geographic area of the County. There is not a proposed commercial user at this time; therefore, it is not practical to proffer specifics such as door and window treatments at this time. Proffer C(6) and C(8) are provided to address the screening of mechanical equipment and gasoline canopies to ensure that the viewshed from Old Charles Town Road is protected. Proffer C(9) is provided to further reduce signage from the recently adopted County sign ordinance. This new ordinance was determined appropriate by the County and the Project 4928S/EAW business community; therefore, further restrictions to signage should be viewed as a positive design commitment by the property owners. Proffer C(3) is provided to assist in recognizing the local history of the area, as well as other community information that will be beneficial to travelers and residents of the community. Greenway Engineering has worked with the HRAB Chair to determine the appropriate design standards for this kiosk. County Attorney Comment January 15, 2009 Item 1 The Planning Department does not recommend the restriction of additional commercial land uses above those proffered by the property owners. Item 2 The proffer statement has been modified to incorporate the revisions recommended by the County Attorney. These revisions are reflected in Proffer Sections B(1). B(3), and B(6) of the March 16, 2009 Proffer Statement. Item 3 The proffer statement has been modified to incorporate the revisions recommended by the County Attorney. These revisions are reflected in Proffer Sections B(7), and D of the March 16, 2009 Proffer Statement. Item 4 The proffer statement references occupied commercial structures to differentiate commercial structures from structures that could potentially accommodate gasoline canopies and gasoline pumps. Item 5 The proffer statement provides landscaping in addition to the required parking lot landscaping should this be necessary to screen parking lots from the public street, as well as additional landscaping between the inter parcel access drive and tax parcel 44- (A)-42. This is only a 2.7± acre site; therefore, the landscaping features will be provided on the Site Plan for the future commercial development. The installation of the landscaping associated with the inter parcel access drive will be identified on this site plan as a requirement and will be installed following the development of the inter- parcel access drive to ensure the viability of the landscaping materials. The County will require site improvements to be bonded; therefore, the County is protected and has assurance that this landscaping will be provided. Item 6 The proffer statement has been modified to incorporate the revisions recommended by the County Attorney. These revisions are reflected in Proffer Sections C(2) and C(3) of the March 16, 2009 Proffer Statement. Item 7 The proffered signage requirements is Proffer Section C(9) are more restrictive than those provided in Section 165 -30(G) and 165- 30 -(H) of the Frederick County Code. Project 4928S/EAW 4 Item 8 This Proffer Statement and the Special Limited Power of Attorney documents have been signed by the property owner and notarized. The Rezoning Application has been signed by the property owner and Greenway Engineering as the applicant. County Transportation Planner Comment December 31, 2009 Item 1 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes the commercial entrance on Old Charles Town Road at the eastern most portion of the subject property as permitted by the County Code. Item 2 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes a right in/right -out access only on Martinsburg Pike and does not allow for left turn movements at this access point. Item 3 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes an inter parcel access drive. Section B(5) of the Proffer Statement further describes this improvement to ensure construction and accessibility from adjoining properties. Additionally, Section B(2) of the Proffer Statement provides assurance for median control on Martinsburg Pike if deemed necessary by VDOT and the County. This language is acceptable to the Planning Department. Item 4 The proffered Right of Way Dedication Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes right -of -way necessary to accommodate the planned improvements to Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road, which has been determined to be acceptable to VDOT. Item 5 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes five foot sidewalks along Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road. The planned bicycle and pedestrian facility along Martinsburg Pike will be located on the west side of the corridor. Item 6 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes a free flowing right turn lane on Old Charles Town Road, as well as a raised median at the intersection with Martinsburg Pike. Item 7 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 identifies that the proposed lane striping plan will be approved by VDOT. Item 8 The Bishop -Amari property is providing a significant amount of road improvements to accommodate the future needs identified by VDOT and the County at great expense to the project. This 2.7± acre project site cannot sustain the additional burden of funding traffic signalization that is already proffered by the Snowden Bridge project. VDOT has the authority to execute the traffic signal agreement for the traffic signalization proffered by Snowden Bridge and have this improvement installed should warrants exist in advance of impacts created by the Snowden Bridge project. Project 4928S /EAW 5 Item 9 The Bishop -Amari property is providing a significant amount of road improvements to accommodate the future needs identified by VDOT and the County at great expense to the project. The only recommended improvement that has not been proffered by this project involves the second northbound travel lane on Martinsburg Pike to the south of the intersection with Old Charles Town Road. The 2.7± acre project site cannot sustain the additional costs associated with the second northbound travel lane that is south of the project site. County Planner Comments December 31, 2008 Land Use The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan have been met through the transportation improvements provided by the 2.7± acre project site. Extensive design standards have been proffered to mitigate impacts to the DSA located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road. Transportation Item 1 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes a free flowing right turn lane on Old Charles Town Road, as well as a raised median at the intersection with Martinsburg Pike. Additionally, Section B(2) of the Proffer Statement provides assurance for median control on Martinsburg Pike if deemed necessary by VDOT and the County. This language is acceptable to the Planning Department. Item 2 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes a right in/right -out access only on Martinsburg Pike and does not allow for left turn movements at this access point. Additionally, Section B(2) of the Proffer Statement provides assurance for median control on Martinsburg Pike if deemed necessary by VDOT and the County. This language is acceptable to the Planning Department. Item 3 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes an inter parcel access drive. Section B(5) of the Proffer Statement further describes this improvement to ensure construction and accessibility from adjoining properties. Item 4 The Bishop -Amari property is providing a significant amount of road improvements to accommodate the future needs identified by VDOT and the County at great expense to the project. The only recommended improvement that has not been proffered by this project involves the second northbound travel lane on Martinsburg Pike to the south of the intersection with Old Charles Town Road. The 2.7± acre project site cannot sustain the additional costs associated with the second northbound travel lane that is south of the project site. Item 5 The proffered Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009 establishes five foot sidewalks along Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road. Project 4928S/EAW 6 Proffer Statement Item 1 The Applicant has proffered a Road Improvement Exhibit dated March 16, 2009, which provides for the major infrastructure commitments associated with the development of the 2.7± acre project site. There is not a know commercial user at this time; therefore, the only additional information that could be gleaned from a GDP is the general location of parking lot area and building area. The proffer statement commits to building placement along the public roads and prohibits parking lots and travel aisles between these building and the public streets. Therefore, the ultimate design of this project site should be acceptable at this level of the process. Item 2 Additional detail regarding landscaping has been provided in the proffer statement. Item 3 The proffer statement has been revised to direct the proposed monetary contributions to the County and specifies that these will be for the purpose of County Fire and Rescue services. Item 4 This Proffer Statement and the Special Limited Power of Attorney documents have been signed by the property owner and notarized. The Rezoning Application has been signed by the property owner and Greenway Engineering as the applicant. General Item 1 The Proffer Statement provides extensive design controls for structural materials, rooflines, screening of gasoline canopies, lighting and signage that have been proposed to mitigate viewshed impacts, particularly along Old Charles Town Road. Item 2 Greenway Engineering has worked with the HRAB Chair to determine the appropriate design of the historic information kiosk, which has been incorporated into Proffer Section C(3). Item 3 The older existing residence on the subject site will be demolished when this site is developed commercially. The location of this structure is in conflict with the future development of the property and the age and construction of the structure does not lend itself towards rehabilitation and relocation within the project site. Item 4 Consideration will be given to develop the canopy of the gasoline pumps with similar materials used in the occupied structure rooflines if gasoline pumps are realized on the project site and this meets all applicable development codes. Item 5 The few mature trees located on the 2.7± acre site are situated centrally to the site and will be removed as they will be in conflict with required parking and travel aisle areas associated with the commercial development. Project 4928S /EAW 7 I hope that this comprehensive comment response letter for all review agency comments is beneficial in explaining the information that has been incorporated into this project, as well as the reasons for exclusion of some of these matters. It should be apparent that the Applicants have made a significant effort in incorporating the majority of these suggestions into the development information and development program that will provide high standards for a small commercial site that will mitigate viewshed impacts to the DSA area located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this information, or if I may provide you with any additional information at this time. Sincerely, 3 Evan Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering Cc: Greg Bishop Tom Amari Review Agencies Project 4928S/EAW 8 Founded in 1971 November 17, 2008 McKee Butler, P.L.C. Attn: Ed Yost 112 South Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Bishop /Amari Sewer Easement and Pump Station Access Dear Ed: I appreciate your willingness to continue to meet with me and discuss the information pertaining to the Bishop /Amari Property Sanitary Sewer Study prepared by our firm. As you know, Greg Bishop and Tom Amari own a 2.7 -acre parcel (tax parcel 44- ((A)) -43) at the intersection of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road across from the Easy Living Mobile Home Park and the Westfield Business Park. The owners are interested in rezoning this property as a commercial corner and will need to provide public sewer to the property. The purpose of this letter is to request a confirmation signature from the Easy Living Associates Group indicating that you are in agreement to grant a utility easement across your property for the purpose of extending a sewer line from tax parcel 44- ((A)) -43 that will connect to the future pump station designed on your property. The owners of the Bishop /Amari property recognize that this easement would be established solely for tax parcel 44- ((A)) -43 and that they are not entitled to have others join into this project. Additionally, the owners of the Bishop /Amari property recognize that your confirmation signature is to agree to grant this easement once all applicable terms are negotiated. On behalf of the owners of the Bishop /Amari property, I would like to thank you for working with us on this development proposal. Please contact me if you have any questions, or when the signed letter is available and we will pick it up. Sincerely, GREENWAY ENGINEERING, INC. 151 Windy Hill lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 0 Evan Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering Easy Living Asso es Signature Project #4906 1 2( y/D a Da le Easy Living Associates' signature above confirms that the information in this letter is accurate. Engineers Surveyors Planners Environmental Scientists Telephone 540- 662 4185 FAX 540 -722 -9528 www.greenwayeng.com 1 GREENWAY ENGINEERING, INC. 151 Windy 1 -fill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 April 27, 2009 Frederick County Planning Department Attn: Mike Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: RZ #02 -09 Bishop -Amari Property Proffer Statement Amendments Dear Mike: The purpose of this letter is to provide you with information identifying the revisions that have been prepared for the referenced rezoning application based on comments received during the April 15, 2009 Planning Commission public hearing. Proffer Statement Information (Page 1) Section A Land Use Restrictions (Page 2) Section B Transportation Enhancements (Page 2 -4) The rezoning application number (RZ #02 -09) and the proffer revision date (April 16, 2009) has been provided. Item 2 has been revised to clarify that if the site is developed to include a convenience store with gasoline pumps, it will be limited to 8 pumps resulting in a maximum of 16 fueling positions. Item 1 has been revised to provide for the new date for the Road Improvement Exhibit (April 16, 2009). Item 3 has been revised to provide for the new date for the Road Improvement Exhibit (April 16, 2009). Item 5 has been revised to specify that the inter parcel parking access drive easement for adjoining properties will be limited to provide access to Old Charles Town Road (Route 761). File #4906/EAW Engineers Surveyors Planners Environmental Scientists Telephone 540- 662 -4185 FAX 540- 722 -9528 www.greenwayeng.mm 4 -27 -09 Item 5 has also been revised to provide Frederick County with the option of determining if tax parcel 44- ((A)) -42 is entitled to connect to the inter- parcel parking access drive based on the future site plan to is submitted for that property. Item 6 has been revised to clarify at what point in the development process the right -of- way dedication will occur. This language was created through collaboration with Matt Smith, VDOT Assistant Resident Engineer. Item 6 has also been revised to provide for the new date for the Right -of -way Dedication Exhibit (April 16, 2009). Item 7 has been revised to increase the monetary contribution assistance towards the future Brucetown Road /Hopewell Road project. The monetary contribution has been increased to $10,000 with an increase to $25,000 if the site is developed to include a convenience store with ga's pumps, as this land use accounts for 80% of the projected traffic volume generated by this site. Section C Site Design Controls (Page 4 -6) Item 2 has been revised to clarify when the plaza area will be constructed, as well as the responsible party for maintenance of this improvement. Item 3 has been revised to clarify when the kiosk will be constructed, as well as the responsible party for maintenance of this improvement. Item 10 has been revised to provide specifications for the landscaping enhancements that will be utilized to mitigate parking lot viewsheds from the public streets. Please find attached the revised proffer statement for the May 20, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, as well as a copy of the proffer statement that identifies these revisions with bold and italic text for your review. I would appreciate it if you would include this letter as part of the information that will be provided to the Planning Commission members for their agenda. Please contact me if you need any additional information at this time. Sincerely, File #4906 /EAW Evan Wyatt, AICP Greenway Engineering Cc: Rod Williams, Frederick County Attorney 2 4 -27 -09 Bishop -Amari Rezoning- Route 11, Frederick County Evan Wyatt From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [Rhonda.Funkhouser @VDOT.Virginia.gov] on behalf of Hoffman, Gregory [Gregory.Hoffman VDOT.Virginia.gov] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 3:15 PM To: Evan Wyatt Cc: Hoffman, Gregory; Smith, Matthew, P.E.; Copp, Jerry; Eric Lawrence; mcheran @co.frederick.va.us; John Bishop Subject: Bishop -Amari Rezoning- Route 11, Frederick County Page 1 of 1 The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 11 and 761. These route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Bishop -Amari Rezoning Application dated March 5, 2009 address transportation concerns associated with this request. 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 3/20/2009 GINIA■ is Control number 8200 0018 Project Name Bishop -Amari Property Address 151 Windy Hill Lane Type Application Rezoning Current Zoning RA Automatic Sprinkler System No Other recommendation Emergency Vehicle Access Not Identified Siamese Location Plan Approval Recommended Yes Emergency Vehicle Access Comments Access Comments Additional Comments Date received 11/102008 Tax ID Number 44 -A-43 City Winchester Automatic Fire Alarm System No Hydrant Location Roadway /Aisleway Width Not Identified Reviewed By J. Neal Applicant Greenway Engineering Fire District 13 Recommendations Date reviewed 11/17/2008 State Zip VA 22602 Signature Title Rescue District 13 Residential Sprinkler System No Fire Lane Required No Special Hazards No Date Revised Applicant Phone 540- 662 -4185 Election District Stonewall RECEIVED NOV 1 7 2008 GREENWAY ENGINEERING Mr. Evan Wyatt, AICP Greenway'Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia,22602 HES/ris Cc: Planning and. Development file January 27, 2,009 Sincerely, Director of Public Works 107 North Kent Street Winchester,_ Virginia. 22601 -5000 COUNTY_of_FREDERICK Department :of:Publit. Work 540/665 -5643 FAX:I540/678 -0682 RE: Rezoning,Application for the Bishop -Amari Property Frederick County Virginia Dear Evan: We have completed our review of the rezoning application for the Bishop Amari property and offer the following comments:. 1. Refer to Suitability'of the Site: Expand the discussion to. include.a detailed description of the site with,specifc.references to the existing dwellings, existing well locations, if applicable, and existing drainfields. Any wells and/or drainfields should be located on the aerial overview plan. Future designs should address the disposition of these items in accordance with health department criteria. 2. Refer to Other Environmental Features: This discussion should be.expanded to include the fact that the site is underlain by karst limestone with the potential for sinkhole development: The existence of sinkholes should be included with the master development plan or site plan design, Whichever occurs first. 3. Refer to Site Drainage: During the site plan design phase, it Will be necessary to verify the adequacy of drainage structures (culverts and ditches). associated with the intersection of Route 11 and. Route 76.1. This evaluation shall be accomplished in conjunction with the analysis of the design of the onsite BMP facility. 1 can be.reached at 722 -8214 if you should have any questions regarding'the above comments. Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E. /1 Department of Inspection's Comments: a c iA i i a8 Public Works Signature Date: t Notice to Department 1 nspections Please This Form to the Applicant Rezoning Comments Frederick County Department of Inspections Mail to: Frederick County Dept. of Inspections Attn: Director of Inspections 107 North Kent Street' Winchester, Virginia, 22601 (540) 665-5656 Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Current zoning: RA District Acreage: 2.77± acres Hand deliver to: Frederick County Dept. of Inspections Attn: Director of Inspections County Admiinistratioit' Bldg., 4' Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia ppii I $l eae fi mformahonfas a cuir ate Iygas possible;in order to assist the,, -u !cYrW riii ynn m t a e y 9 +TM a c E .nor t 4 R i3T e r+ i r F eparlment I nspectionsh ;with their review rAttach a copy of yourapphcation form, Telephone: 540- 662 -4185 Location of property: Northeast corner of the Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11) and the Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) intersection. Zoning requested: B2 District NOV 2 1 REF RECEIVED If existing structures have a change of use or are removed, a building permit is required. Change of Use from Residential to Commercial on existing structures shall comply with the 2006 Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, The 2006 International Existing Building Code, and ICC /ANSI A117.1 -03 for accessibility Asbestos inspections shall be required for any demolitions and/or renovations Sanitation Authority Comments: Tis#546 /S 40 /o'' wAtze4 L /y,.' .14og/C of -5 W/$TF/m 1-!4 74:: .4Ga,v r O!D ealAWIt5TOkme AS THERE /S No gCwe4 /4- 7# /5" /}/3E4 Tie, f to G/y,ES 5d0w4v m,, r#$ ii, eiio/1rf,C 11 4/4:S s 48,414 rMb'F Date: Seri Nor' esv /4/ VWAza Sanatation Authority Signature Notice to Sanitation Authority /yOY 09 Please Return This Form to the Applicant RECEIVED NOV 1 3 2008 -1. 4 -qb GREENWAY ENGINEERING Rezoning Comments Mail to: Frederick County Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer P.O. Box 1877 Winchester, Virginia, 22601 (540) 665-1061 Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Frederick County Sanitation Authority Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Current zoning: RA District Acreage: 2.77± acres MI? Hand deliver to: Frederick County Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer 315 Tasker Road Stephens City, Virginia Y Iicant q ease fill out the mfoi mattonas accurately as possible m order to assist the I 'k; Nr rr>i '.a r Yfar ul' 1 v r i t Y '�4 r`Ir P .i r Samtation Au tllortty wuli their review tAttaeh copyof your application form,]ocatronima e F i dh rte 1. tyh 4 W�d� r 5s�� -r ��'i `4r' i 1' i t4 i u i proffer statement; Impact analysts, and any Telephone: 540- 662 -4185 Location of property: Northeast corner of the Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11) and the Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) intersection. Zoning requested: B2 District Fred -Winc Servic Authority's Comments: no Cooftpaebl NOV 1 q 2008 UHLLNVVAY ENGiNEERiNG Fred- Winc Service Authority's Signature Date: Wv� 1Ar1ta8 Notice to Fred-Winc Service Authority Please Return This Form to the Applicant Rezoning Comments Frederick Winchester Service Authority Mail to: Fred -Winc Service Authority Attn: Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director P.O. Box 43 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (540) 722 -3579 to l k. 1 i4 t' 8 2 1 t• Ap phc,ant y fill out the information a l sacc wately a5�po orde toass�st the�r c Fredercck W in c hester Service Authority wi their reucew �rAttach i Stcopy of Your a pp hca tton 1 14 k� i h r fly I t r e 3 Fr F .L bh t p p M. p; p d�any o ±tnformat�on form lgc ri�ffer statement an_ Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering Mailing Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Hand deliver to: Fred -Winc Service Authority Attn: Jesse W. Moffett 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia Telephone: 540- 662 -4185 Location of property: Northeast corner of the Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11) and the Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) intersection. Current zoning: RA District Acreage: 2.77± acres Zoning requested: B2 District February 3, 2009 Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Re: Rezoning Comment RA to B2 Bishop -Amari Property Stonewall Magisterial District Dear Mr. Wyatt: We have reviewed the proposed Rezoning application and determined that the proposed rezoning will not have an impact on operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. While the proposed site lies within the airport's airspace, it does fall outside of the airport's Part 77 close in surfaces. Thank you for your continued cooperation and consideration in the continuing safe operations of the Winchester Regional Airport. Sincerely, 5 Serena R. Manuel Executive Director WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT 491 AIRPORT ROAD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 (540) 662 -2422