The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-09 Comments & CorrespondenceTO: Finance Department FROM: Pam Deeter, Office Assistant II SUBJECT: Return Of Sign Deposit DATE: July 13, 2009 Please send a check in the amount of $50.00 to: RSA/pd C P-XC 7 /1 1 1(0? MEMORANDUM The amount of $50.00 was deposited in line item #3- 010 019110 -0008. The company named below had a deposit for one sign for Rezoning #02 -09 ABISHOP LLC. The company has returned the sign and is therefore entitled to the return of the deposit. You may pay this through the regular bill cycle. ABISHOP LLC 285 Boggess Lane Winchester, VA 22603 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 Pd by PLANNING Check 71027.00 VARIOUS BALANCE DUE INCLUDES PENALTY /INTEREST THRU THE MONTH 3/2009 +/6 6160 00 CONING O� gNCE 3-010-016160-0002 1 SALE OF AMEND 3- 010 -016160 -0002 SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE 3 010 016010 AMENDMENTS 3 /BOND MAN AGEMEN T FE 016160 00 10/ 3- 010 0 -0043 MFR POSTPONEMENT FEE WnuUN/ BOUNDARY LOVE ADJUST ZONING CERTIFIC ETTE TONING DETERMIN TION LETTER OMPR EHENSIV ATIONNE RIFICATION EPr .19490001 424/2009 iH /LKHS2 54469 'ZASP 0 0 T A X ERICK COUNTY WILLIAM ORNDOFF, JR .0. BOX 225 WINCHESTER SIGN DEPOSITS PLANNING PLANNING MINOR RURAL SU` SITE PLAN kd41OR RURAL BDNISION/ URAL PREVATI SIGN/ ATIOI T VISI CONSOLIDATION ON/ UNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT V MG CERTIPICATION LETTER RNO DETERMINATION 1RREHENSNE p /VERIFICATION LETTER -0 1303 PP 7 J n POLICY AMEND M n R E C E I P T VA 22604 -0225 Principal Previous Balance Being Paid Penalty Interest Amount Paid *Balance Due Ticket Date Register: Trans. Dept Acct# Pd by PI NING Check 71027.00 VARIOUS BALANCE DUE INCLUDES PENALTY /INTEREST THRU THE MONTH 3/2009 uncurl; Po to e, Etc 3-010-016160-0002 /SU 160 0 002 S O ORDINANCE ..,na w J 1095E EAMENDMENTS 2009 3 160 0 010/6 0 DIVISION ORDINANCE 3- 010 -016160 -0010 P OST P 3-010-019110-0043 ND MANAGEMEN -070- /MERRIMANS CHASE 019110 -p04g /RED BUD RU 3- 010 -019110.0042 /SOVEREIGN VILL 3 -010- 019110 0046 RED F 3-010-0191 R 3-010-010_/LYNNEEA N!I 7 -010- 00 50 /CA N 5 019] -0051 I�1T.'R ESTATES-SECTION 3-010-019110-0054/VILLAGE AT HARVEST 3 -010. 019110- 0052/ STEEPLE CHASE HAR VEST RIDGE 3-010-019110-005 LoY 1 �O� 3 -010- 3 -010- BEN BR 3-010-019110-0056/SNOWDEN ED (71? ..50 CONDITIONAL USE P ERMIT GE ay 3, �UBDN1S10N Wg1VER RESE DENTLAL DENTSUBDIVISION/ lg1, SUBDIVISION NO N RESI MAS TEE RR DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN/ RE2 PLAN/ 00006220001 3/24/2009 JKH /LKHS2 54469 1095 50.00 50.00 .00 .00 50.00 00 a• GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 TRANSMIT T AL Project Name: Bishop -Amari Rezoning Final Proffer Statement File No: 4906 Date July I, 2009 To: FC Planning From: Evan Wyatt Attn: Mike Ruddy GREENWAY ENGINEERING Phone: 540 -662 -4185 Copied Fax: 540- 722 -9528 Delivery: Fed Ex U.S. Mail fl Courier Pick Up Other n Urgent For Your Review As You Requested Please Comment Message: Hi Mike, Please find attached the final proffer statement for the Bishop -Amari Rezoning on Route 11 North /Old Charles Town Road and final proffered exhibits that reflect the final revisions agreed to during the June 24, 2009 Board of Supervisors meeting. Please advise me when the County approval letter is available for this project and we will make arrangements to pick it up from your office. Thank you, Evan Hand Delivery and Pick Ups Only: Received By: Please Print Name: Date: 4116: 2 Founded in /971 June 4, 2009 I CHEM ENEMIES, INC. 151 Windy Hill lane Winchester Virginia 22602 Cutshaw Enterprises, LC Attn: Randall Cutshaw P.O. Box 805 Morganton, NC 28680 Dear Randall: RE: Bishop /Amari Property Commercial Entrance and Access Drive I appreciate your willingness to continue to discuss the information pertaining to the Bishop /Amari Property commercial rezoning application 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, which adjoins the Cutshaw Enterprises, LC parcel (tax parcel 44 -A -42) along your western property boundary. The owners are interested in working with Cutshaw Enterprises, LC to establish a shared commercial entrance and access drive that will serve both properties from Old Charles Town Road (Route 761). The purpose of this letter is to request a confirmation signature from the Cutshaw Enterprises, LC Group indicating that you are in agreement to allow the Bishop /Amari Property commercial rezoning application to incorporate information into the project proffer statement for the purpose of establishing a new commercial entrance and access drive consistent with the information depicted on the Bishop -Amari Property Road Improvement Exhibit dated June 2, 2009, which is attached for your information. The owners of the Bishop /Amari Property recognize that they will be responsible for the design and construction costs associated with this improvement, as well as costs associated with preparing the easement agreement that will provide all applicable terms for construction, ingress /egress, and maintenance of this improvement. Additionally, the owners of the Bishop /Amari Property recognize that the construction of the new commercial entrance and access drive located on the Cutshaw Enterprises, LC parcel cannot occur until both parties have executed the easement agreement. On behalf of the owners of the Bishop /Amari property, 1 would like to thank you for working with us on this development proposal. I have provided signature lines on the second page of this document for all members of the Cutshaw Enterprises, LC to confirm the accuracy of the information in this letter. Please contact me if you have any questions, or when the signed letter is available and we will make arrangements to pick it up. Sincerely, aft Evan Wyatt, .MCP Greenway Engineering Project 444906 Engineers Surveyors Planners Environmental Scientists Telephone 540- 662 -4185 FAX 540-722-9528 wwwgreenwayeng.com The Cutshaw Enterprises, LC signatures on this page confirm that the information in this letter is acceptable. i 1 0 �1 Verlo V. Cutshaw Ida Aileen Whittaker Cutshaw Janice F. Neff 1 Alan W. Cutshaw f adeae At, etutitcu Randall S. Cutshaw Dianna Cutshaw Project #4906 2 Mike Ruddy From: Rod Williams [rwillia @co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 4:46 PM To: 'Mike Ruddy' Subject: RE: Bishop -Amari rezoning Mike, I have now reviewed the revised proffer statement dated April 16, 2009 and have just one new comment. Concerning the timing of the increased monetary contribution for a convenience mart with gas pumps in Proffer B7, it may be advisable to add the underlined language: prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit associated with the development of the first Site Plan approved for the Property, or, with respect to the increased contribution for a convenience mart with qas pumps, prior to such time as a convenience mart with qas pumps is operated on the property, if not at the time of issuance of initial occupancy permit, [remainder same] I recommend this just to provide clarity in the event that the initial use is not a convenience mart with gas pumps. Also, is it necessary to define the use by SIC (5411/5541)? Beyond that, the revised proffer statement appears to address my previous comments, other than that I note that would still conclude, with respect to Proffer C9, that the ordinance limits on signage remain more restrictive than the proffered limits. Rod Roderick B. Williams County Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (540) 722 -8383 Facsimile: (540) 667 -0370 E- mail: rwillia(a co.frederick.va.us From: Rod Williams [mailto:rwillia @co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 9:20 AM To: 'Mike Ruddy' Subject: Bishop -Amari rezoning Mike, I had the opportunity to review the PC agenda materials for this over the weekend. I do have some remaining comments: Proffer A3 (original comment 1) Evan's response letter says that staff does not recommend additional commercial use restrictions. My original comment concerned whether "Truck Stops" was a sufficiently well- defined item, in terms of one of the prohibited uses. Proffer B6 While some of the preceding proffers do cover completion of road improvements, I do not see that, to the extent necessary, Proffer B6, re dedication of right of -way, states a deadline for making the dedication. Rod Proffer C10 (original comment 5) Concerning timing itompletion of the screening, Evan says that this will be a bonded site plan item. I just want to draw this to your attention for your confirmation regarding any need for an actual deadline in the proffers. Proffers C2 C3 (original comment 6) The deadline for the Applicants to "develop" the plaza area and the kiosk is still "during development of the first Site Plan approved for the Property This still seems less definite than it could be. Proffer C9 (original comment 7) Regarding signs, I do not necessarily agree that the proffered restrictions are more restrictive than the County Code. In particular, it seems that there may be an issue as to any sign on Old Charles Town Road, which, in the Comp Plan, looks like it is still "local" at the relevant point. Freestanding business signs along roads other than arterial or collector roads and to be located in zoning districts other than RA are limited to 50 square feet. County Code 165- 30(H)(7)(c). Also, and I simply did not notice this before, but as to number, the property has less than 1,200 linear feet of road frontage combined and therefore would appear to be entitled to just one sign, County Code 165 30(J)(4). Finally, I have a concern about the nature in which the rezoning materials are signed. The title to the Property is in the name of Gregory A. Bishop and Thomas Amari, as joint tenants with rights of survivorship, Instrument Number 050012933, yet we only have a POA from Mr. Amari and Mr. Amari has signed the application and proffer statement as "Manager We either need Mr. Bishop's signature(s) or, if Messrs. Bishop and Amari have an LLC or similar entity, then they need to convey the Property to that entity. Otherwise, I do not see that we have a petition for rezoning by the owner, as opposed to a Board or PC- initiated rezoning. See County Code 165 -8(C). Roderick B. Williams County Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (540) 722 -8383 Facsimile: (540) 667 -0370 E -mail: rwillia(co.frederick.va.us 2 John Bishop From: Evan Wyatt [ewyatt@greenwayeng.com] Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 5:03 PM To: jbishop @co.frederick.va.us; mruddy @co.frederick.va.us Subject: Bishop -Amari Attachments: emailback7.jpg; Bishop -Amari Proffer Statement 4 -16 -09 Bold and Italic Revisions.doc Hi John and Mike, I have attached an updated version of the April 16th proffer revision that includes additional revisions to Section B(5) and B(7) based on our meeting this afternoon. Please look this over and give me your thoughts as soon as possible so we can agree at the staff /consultant level. Following that, I will need to get Greg and Tommy to agree before you share any of this information with Gary Richard; therefore, please wait until I have advised you that Greg Tommy are willing to commit to this version of the proffers. I spent time this afternoon with the engineering staff and learned the following that I wanted to share with you regarding the Route 11 raised median discussion: 1) The right -in /right -out entrance design cannot be reduced with the introduction of the raised median, as we have to comply with the minimum commercial entrance design standards for roads with a 35mph or greater speed limit. The only potential cost savings would be to eliminate the pork chop; however, VDOT would need to agree that this could be converted to striping. 2) The existing pavement section on Route 11 is between 31.5 32 feet; therefore, the addition of a four foot raised median running from our northern property line to the stop bar at the 11/761 intersection would require the applicant to establish the raised median adjacent to the existing suicide lane. This means that the entire pavement design proposed by our project would shift an additional four feet into the project site. Therefore, we would lose more land and be hit with an additional improvement cost to the Route 11 corridor that was not reduced at all by reductions in the right -in /right -out entrance. Additionally, we would lose an additional 1,400 sqft of property to right -of -way dedication, which further impacts the bottom line for this project as there would be even less land to sell for development purposes. Please think about Proffer B(2) and the entire raised median issue with these factors in mind. The current proffer is acceptable to VDOT and was not an issue of concern that was raised by the Planning Commissioners. If this does become a factor for approval, I would ask that you support a reduction in the Brucetown /Hopewell monetary proffer so Greg and Tommy aren't getting hit from both sides. I would like to think that Gary would be willing to favorably consider a monetary proffer that is consistent with what was accepted at Greenwood /Senseny ($25K) if there is a raised median improvement that is added to the project. Let's try to have a follow up tomorrow if possible. I don't want to compromise the May 20th PC meeting for Greg and Tommy because this got more complicated than we discussed last night. Thanks again, Evan GREEP11WAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Phone: 540 662 -4185 Fax: 540-722-9528 Visit us on the web at www.greenwaveng.com to leam about exciting new services offered by Greenway Engineering: Laboratory Services, Water Sewer, Maintenance Monitoring, ESA Phase I, Wetlands and more. L Mike Ruddy From: Rod Williams [rwillia @co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 9:20 AM To: 'Mike Ruddy' Subject: Bishop -Amari rezoning Rod Mike, I had the opportunity to review the PC agenda materials for this over the weekend. I do have some remaining comments: Proffer A3 (original comment 1) Evan's response letter says that staff does not recommend additional commercial use restrictions. My original comment concerned whether "Truck Stops" was a sufficiently well defined item, in terms of one of the prohibited uses. Proffer B6 While some of the preceding proffers do cover completion of road improvements, I do not see that, to the extent necessary, Proffer B6, re dedication of right of -way, states a deadline for making the dedication. Proffer C10 (original comment 5) Concerning timing of completion of the screening, Evan says that this will be a bonded site plan item. I just want to draw this to your attention for your confirmation regarding any need for an actual deadline in the proffers. Proffers C2 C3 (original comment 6) The deadline for the Applicants to "develop" the plaza area and the kiosk is still "during development of the first Site Plan approved for the Property This still seems less definite than it could be. Proffer C9 (original comment 7) Regarding signs, I do not necessarily agree that the proffered restrictions are more restrictive than the County Code. In particular, it seems that there may be an issue as to any sign on Old Charles Town Road, which, in the Comp Plan, looks like it is still "local" at the relevant point. Freestanding business signs along roads other than arterial or collector roads and to be located in zoning districts other than RA are limited to 50 square feet. County Code 165- 30(H)(7)(c). Also, and I simply did not notice this before, but as to number, the property has less than 1,200 linear feet of road frontage combined and therefore would appear to be entitled to just one sign, County Code 165 30(J)(4). Finally, I have a concern about the nature in which the rezoning materials are signed. The title to the Property is in the name of Gregory A. Bishop and Thomas Amari, as joint tenants with rights of survivorship, Instrument Number 050012933, yet we only have a POA from Mr. Amari and Mr. Amari has signed the application and proffer statement as "Manager We either need Mr. Bishop's signature(s) or, if Messrs. Bishop and Amari have an LLC or similar entity, then they need to convey the Property to that entity. Otherwise, I do not see that we have a petition for rezoning by the owner, as opposed to a Board or PC- initiated rezoning. See County Code 165 -8(C). Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 1 County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (540) 722 -8383 Facsimile: (540) 667 -0370 E- mail: rwillia(a�co.frederick.va.us 2 Founded in 1971 1 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 TRANSMITTAL Project Name: Bishop -Amari Rezoning Proffer Statement File No: 4906 Date June 9, 2009 To: FC Planning From: Evan Wyatt Attn: Mike Ruddy GREENWAY ENGINEERING Phone: 540 -662 -4185 Copied Fax: 540- 722 -9528 Delivery: Fed Ex U.S. Mail 171 Courier Pick Up Other Urgent For Your Review As You Requested Please Comment Message: Hi Mike, Please find attached the revised proffer statement and exhibits for the Bishop -Amari property, which provides for the relocated entrance on Old Charles Town Road and additional off -site corridor funding commitments. This information should be incorporated into the information for the June 24, 2009 Board of Supervisors meeting. Please advise me if you need any additional information at this time. Thank you, Evan Hand Delivery and Pick Ups Only: Received By: Please Print Name: Date: JUN 1 0 2009 Time: Project Name: File No: Date To: FC Planning Attn: Mike Ruddy Copied Founded in 1971 GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Bishop -Amari Property Rezoning 4906 April 28, 2009 From: Evan Wyatt TRANSMITTAL GREENWAY ENGINEERING Phone: 540- 662 -4185 Fax: 540- 722 -9528 Delivery: Fed Ex U.S. Mail fl Courier Pick Up Other Urgent N For Your Review N As You Requested Z Please Comment APR 2 8 2009 Message: Hi Mike, As discussed, I have provided an updated proffer statement to address the comments from the April 15, 2009 Planning Commission meeting; an updated Road Improvement Exhibit; a comment response letter dated April 27, 2009 and a copy of the revised proffer statement that identifies the new information with bold and italic text. This information is being submitted for you to begin your work for the May 20, 2009 Planning Commission agenda. I am providing the tabling waiver /fee information to the owners and will provide this information to you in advance of the advertisement notice once they have had an opportunity to discuss this with Chuck DeHaven. Please let me know if you need anything else at this time. Thank you, Evan Hand Delivery and Pick Ups Only: Received By: Please Print Name: Date: Time: -�1 Attn: Mike Ruddy Copied Founded in '971 To: FC Planning GREENWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 T R A N S M I T T AL Project Name: Bishop -Amari Commercial Rezoning: Route 11 North File No: 4906 Date March 20, 2009 From: Evan Wyatt GREENWAY ENGINEERING Phone: 540- 662 -4185 Fax: 540- 722 -9528 MAR 2 0 2009 Delivery: Fed Ex U.S. Mail fl Courier Pick Up Other Urgent fl For Your Review As You Requested M Please Comment Message: Hi Mike, Please find attached the completed rezoning application information necessary for the filing of the Bishop -Amari Commercial Rezoning at the intersection of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charles Town Road. Please schedule this project for the April 15, 2009 Planning Commission Agenda and contact me if you need any additional information at this time. Thank you, Evan Hand Delivery and Pick Ups Only: Received By: Please Print Name: Date: Time: