Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-09 CommentsMike Rud From: Mike Ruddy Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 11:13 AM To: 'Patrick R. Sowers' Subject: Burns Rezoning Hi Patrick, Rod has reviewed your revised proffers submitted yesterday and has offered the following comments. Rod has recommended some language changes, so as to make clear that the !County is in no way changing the obligations of the Walgreens property and that the County is not making any commitment with respect to acceptance of Martin Drive. Below are his additions in bold underline and his deletions in bold Thanks. Mike. 1.5 Primary means of access to the Property shall be provided by an inter - parcel connection to and from the area located west of the Property in the general location depicted on the GDP. Said connection shall provide access to the Property via Valley Mill Road through the adjoining property and shall align with the interparcel connector provided per Proffer 1.4 for RZ #03 -09, " Walgreens — Dairy Corner Place" as approved by Frederick County on August 12, 2009. The interparcel connection shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certifioate o f occupancy building ep rmit for any building constructed on the Property. (See 1 on GDP) Nothing! herein shall obligate the County or any person to provide such access or to make arrangements or assist in providing such access. The Applicant acknowledges that, until access to Martin Drive can be achieved pursuant to Proffer 1.6. the Property would not be capable of use for any purpose constituting a change from its current use. 1.6 Access to Martin Drive from the Property shall be prohibited until such time that Martin Drive is accepted by Frederick County for public road purposes or until all properties located along Martin Drive are zoned for commercial use. The location of any future access to Martin Drive and any improvements and /or right of way necessary for Martin Drive and Valley Mill Road to make said connection shall be subject to review and approval by Frederick County and VDOT. Nothing herein shall obligate the County to accept Martin Drive for public road purposes prior to or upon VDOT indicating that Martin Drive meets applicable VDOT standards for acceptance into the state secondary road system and that VDOT will accept Martin Drive into the state secondary road system. 9 Mike Ruddy From: Wayne Lee [Leew @frederick.k12.va.us] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 10:57 AM To: Mike Ruddy Cc:_ -_ AlOrndorff -- Subject: -_ - - Burns Property Rezoning Mike, Please accept the following statement: I am writing as a member of staff of Frederick County Public Schools. FCPS staff was approached by the applicant with a request to place a trail or sidewalk along the front of the Dowell 7. Howard Center property. After some discussion with the applicant's engineer, a mutually agreeable solution to the trail was reached. FCPS staff is supportive of the idea of placing a trail in the public right -of -way along the entire frontage of the Dowell J. Howard Center. Final decisions about the trail and dedication of right -of -way rest with the - - -- School - Board. - - We do note.County Planning staff's comment that pedestrian facilities should be located across the Burns Property frontage and connect to the proffered Walgreens trail. We defer to their opinion as to what the proper solution to pedestrian circulation in the area should be. We still hold previously stated concerns about traffic congestion on Valley Mill Road. We think that the eventual solution to our concerns lies in the Eastern Road Plan. In the near term, the applicant's proposal, when combined with the Walgreens - Dairy Corner Place road improvements, will partially address those concerns. The remaining concern is the increased difficulty in turning left out of Dowell 7. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Wayne Kenneth Wayne Lee, Jr. CZA -- Coordinator of Planning and Development Frederick County Public Schools 1415 Amherst Street P. 0. Box 3508 Winchester, VA 22604 -2546 leew@frederick.kl2.va.us (office) 540- 662 -3889 x88249 (fax) 540- 662 -4237 (cell) 540 -533 -3745 1 r� Mike 0 From: Ronald A. Mislowsky [Ronald.Mislowsky @phra.com] Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 3:14 PM To: orndorfa @frederick.kl2.va.us Cc: Patrick R. Sowers; Mike Ruddy Subject: Burns Rezoning Attachments: Burns rezoning fcps 2- 19.pdf Mr. Orndorff, Please find the attached request that the right -of -way dedication at Dowell J. Howard on Valley Mill Road be placed on the next Building and Grounds Committee meeting agenda for consideration. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Ronald A. Mislowsky V.P., Office Manager Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 P 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 www.phra.com 1= redereck County Public Schooft O to ensure all students an excellent education' I .inll 9 7 7 010 K. Wayne Lee, Jr. CZA . Coordinator of Planning and Development . leew @frededck.k12.va.us V L January 26, 2010 Mr. Michael T. Ruddy Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Burns Property Rezoning (RZ-07 -09) Dear Mike, Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the Burns property rezoning at the Board of Supervisors meeting two weeks ago. I'd like to convey to you some additional thoughts on the subject from the School Board. Even though they have expressed some doubts about dedicating a strip of land in front of the Dowell J. Howard Center for a sidewalk (because of the unexpectedly wide right -of -way there), the School Board is not opposed to this rezoning. They view development of the area as a benefit to Frederick County, providing transportation improvements, better access to goods and services, improved neighborhood walkability, and an increased tax base. However, there are a couple of issues the School Board considers important: • Having sidewalk in front of the school will mean extra snow and ice clearing work for the Dowell J staff, taking both time and money that could be used for other purposes. • The additional traffic to and from the business(es) located on the Burns property would make more difficult the movement of buses left out of the school, even with the proposed improvements to Valley Mill Road. While addressing this issue at the moment is problematical, the eventual relocation of the Valley Mill Road /Routs 7 intersection as shown in the Eastern Road Plan will do so in 15 or 20 years. Please be aware that before the Buildings and Grounds Committee can comment on any Ideed or easement for a sidewalk, they would need to see the document and details. If you have any questions or comments, you can contact me at leewno frederick.kl1va.us or 540- 662 -3888 x88249. Sincerely, K. Wayne E-er;, Jr., ZA Coordinator of Planning and Development Cc: Mrs. Patricia Taylor, Superintendent of Schools Mr. Al Omdorff, Assistant Superintendent for Administration Mr. Patrick Sowers, PHR &A Mr. Ron Mislowski, PHR &A 1415 Amherst Street w Jrededck.kl 2.va.us 540- 662 -3889 Ext. 88249 P.O. Box 3508 540 - 662 -4237 fax Winchester, Virginia 22604 -2546 s of FREDERICK and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 TO: Patrick Sowers FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Director RE: Initial Comments — Bums Rezoning Application DATE: December 11, 2008 The following points are offered regarding the Burns Commercial Rezoning Application. This-is a request to rezone 1.26 acres from RA to B2 with Proffers. Please consider the comments as you continue your work preparing the application for submission to Frederick County. The comments reiterate the input that has previously been provided on this request. 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 7 Corridor Plan. The property is within the UDA and SWSA and is generally designated in an area of commercial land use. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized, even though this site does not have visibility onl Route 7, and should be applied along Valley Mill Road. I General. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Valley Mill Road. Landscaping, lighting, and building layout and form should be carefully planned to ensure that this is achieved. An approach may include locating the buildings on the property to the front of the site, Valley Mill Road, and limiting the amount of parking in front of the buildings in favor of providing more parking internal to the sight. Address the buffer and screening of adjacent residential properties including those across Martin Drive. A sensitive approach to this that is tailored and builds upon the County's current requirements may be warranted. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 • Initial Comments — Bums Rezoning Application December 11, 200&- - Page 2 Transportation. This application proposes a lane improvement to Valley Mill Road but no improvements to Martin Drive, and no participation in recognition of the impacts to the overall transportation network. In particular, the TIA modeled intersection of Valley Mill Road/I- 8I/Route 7. The long range transportation planning efforts in this area focus attention on a relocated connection of Valley A /Iiil Road with Route 7 at Getty Lane. This application should recognize the long range transportation planning efforts in this area, and should focus on the entrance to Martin Drive, Martin Drive, Valley Mill Road, and an enhanced interparcel connection to the adjacent properties, and potentially back down to Route 7 via Martin Drive. More detail should be provided regarding Martin Drive and its intersection with Valley Mill Road. Martin Drive is an existing State Road that does not meet current street standards. Consideration should be given to improving Martin Drive to a public street standard that meets all current standards. In general, this Application fails to provide for any substantial transportation improvements and does not address the transportation impacts associated with this request. Staff had previously commented in our review of the adjacent properties' request that the application is encouraged to think beyond just providing a simple connection to the adjacent parking lot. The adjacent property, currently under review for a rezoning, should be considered in relationship to this one for the purpose of access and improvements to Martin Drive, including a potential internal connection back down to Route 7. It is evident that this project would further deteriorate the level of service at the exiting intersections in the vicinity of this site, most specifically the intersections of Route 7 with 1 -81 and Valley Mill Road. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that new development does not deteriorate the level of service at intersections or roads. It seeks to ensure that it maintains or improves the level of service at impacted roads or intersections. Please understand that an acceptable level of service to Frederick County, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. Based upon the above scenario, the TIA describes improvements that are necessary to achieve an acceptable level of service. None of these improvements will be in place or guaranteed to be provided prior to the development of this site. 0 0 Initial Comments — Burns Rezoning Application December 11, 2008 - Page 2 Transportation. This application proposes a lane improvement to Valley Mill Road but no improvements to Martin Drive, and no participation in recognition of the impacts , to the overall transportation network. In particular, the TIA modeled intersection of Valley Mill Road/1- 8I/Route 7. The long range transportation planning efforts in this area focus attention on a relocated connection of Valley Mill Road with Route 7 at Getty Lane, 1 This application should recognize the long range transportation planning efforts in this area, and should focus on the entrance to Martin Drive, Martin Drive, Valley Mill Road, and an enhanced interparcel connection to the adjacent properties, and potentially back down to Route 7 via Martin Drive. More detail should be provided regarding Martin Drive and its intersection with Valley Mill Road. Martin Drive is an existing State Road that does not meet current street standards. Consideration should be given to improving Martin Drive to a public street standard that meets all current standards. In general, this Application fails to provide for any substantial transportation improvements and does not address the transportation impacts associated with this request. Staff had previously commented in our review of the adjacent properties'I request that the application is encouraged to think beyond just. providing a simple connection to the adjacent parking lot. The adjacent property, currently under review for a rezoning, should be considered in relationship to this one, for the purpose I of access and improvements to Martin Drive, including a potential internal connection back down to Route 7. It is evident that this project would further deteriorate the level of service at the exiting intersections in the vicinity of this site, most specifically the intersections of Route 7 with I -81 and Valley Mill Road. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that new development does not deteriorate the level of service at intersections or roads. It seeks to ensure that it maintains or improves the level of service at impacted roads or intersections. Please understand that an acceptable level of service to Frederick County, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. Based upon the above scenario, the TIA describes improvements that are necessary to achieve an acceptable level of service. None of these improvements will be in place or guaranteed to be provided prior to the development of this site. I 0 • Initial Comments — Burns Rezoning Application December 11, 2008 Page 3 Pedestrian accommodations should be provided in a coordinated manner internal to the project, to and along Valley Avenue, and Martin Drive. On recent rezonings, other projects have contributed additional funding for t improvements in the general area of their requests. This has been done in recognition of the need to address the broader transportation improvements in the developing areas of the County in addition to the specific improvements they may be proposing. Such an approach should be considered with this request relative with the scale of this request. Proffer Statement. ' A Generalized Development Plan has not been provided with this application. A GDP accompanying the Proffer Statement could be used to address some of the comments identified. Any proffered limitations should be directly related to the analysis provided in the Impact Analysis, in particular, the TIA. The application proffers 12 square feet of unlimited commercial land uses. The TIA models a 3,500 square foot fast food restaurant with drive through. This discrepancy should be considered when evaluating the impacts of this request and the proffer statement. This proffer statement provides for a 12,000 square foot commercial development. The monetary contributions aimed to offset the impact of development should be carefully evaluated to ensure they are relative to the proposed development. The proffer statement must be signed by the owner /owners of the property. Once again please ensure that all review agency comments are adequately Attachments MTR/bad 0 COUNTY of FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722 -8383 Fax 540/667 -0370 VIA FACSIMILE (540- 665 -0493) AND FIRST -CLASS MAIL Mr. Patrick Sowers Pal 1111 Pal: is Rust & Associates 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester. VA 22601 E -mail: November 24, 2008 rwillia @co.frederick.va.us Re: Bums Property - Proposed Proffer Statement dated September 4, 2008 Dear Patrick: 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: Proffer 1.1 - Staff should be aware that the TIA accompanying the proposed Proffer Statement assumes development of the site "to include a 3,500 square foot fast -food restaurant with drive- thru ", (TIA, p. 1), but that the Proffer only excludes development of the site with building floor area exceeding 12,000 square feet. Proffer 1.3 - The Proffer does not indicate when the inter - parcel connector for access to and from the area located west of the subject properties will be provided. The area n. located west oI the subject properties is currCIIIly zoned iu , v;Gul ltacr- 2,areci 3:,wsS is provided to the adjacent property(ies) as currently zoned RP or would inter - parcel access only occur on rezoning of the adjacent property(ies)? Proffer 1.4 - The Proffer provides for the design and construction of an additional lane for Valley Mill Road across the frontage of the subject properties (the word "Property" in the second line of the Proffer is misspelled and this should be corrected), but does not provide for the dedication of any additional right -of -way. Staff should determine whether such construction is feasible given the current width of the right -of -way. The second and third pages of the proposed Proffer Statement contain a header that reads "Walgreens - Dairy Cotner Place ". The header should be changed to refer to the correct rezoning. 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601 F Patton Harris & Associates Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. landscape Architects_ NOV 1 6 2009 L I 16 November 2009 Mr. Michael Ruddy, AICP Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 N Kent St, Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601, RE: Burns Property — Valley Mill Road Rezoning Application; Revised Proffer Statement —11 /16/09 P"P \ 1 1 Dear Mike, Please find attached an executed version of a revised proffer statement dated c ° "' ° aArE: November 16, 2009 for the Bums Property — Valley Mill Road rezoning application. Chantilly- Th revisions to the proffer statement since the application was presented to the Viaawin OFFICES: Planning Commission on October 7, 2009 are as follows: crantlly c"arloOesvlue 1. All Valley Mill Road improvements provided by the approved Walgreens- Erede,cksourg Dairy Comer Place rezoning application located adjacent to the Burns Hardsonbura Property must be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Leesburg Nsovi News for any structure on the Bums Property. These improvements includes the Norfolk turn lanes for Valley Mill Road at the Route 7 intersection i and ensures that Winchester Valley Mill Road will accommodate any traffic generated by the site. Woodbridge 2. Per the commitment made at the October 21 Planning Commission meeting, Lnzoan,oaiES. the proffer statement now includes a trail across the Property frontage with Chantilly Valley Mill Road. This will extend the trail proffered Iby the adjacent Fredericksburg Walgreens site. Mzxvtnno OFFICES. 3. Per the commitment made at the October 21 Planning Commission meeting, Baltimore the proffer statement also includes a sidewalk along the Property frontage with Columbia Valley Mill Road. Frederr,k 4. In keeping with our discussions regarding the unclear ownership of existing cern,onrov,n Martin Drive, we have revised the proffer statement to utilize the interparcel Hollywood Hunt Volley . connection to the Walgreens site as the primary means of access to the Property. Access to Martin drive would only be permitted under two Willi.nspat scenarios: (1) When Martin Drive is accepted by Frederick County for public PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE road purposes, or (2) At such time that all properties along Martin Drive are Allentown zoned for commercial uses. Under either scenario, the location of the T 540 667.2 139 entrance, the improvements to Martin Drive and Valley Mill Road, and the F 540.6e5 0495 right of way necessary to make the connection would be subject to Frederick 117 East Plccadul sheet County and VDOT approval. We feel this approach ensures that, should the Suite 200 circumstances allow the Martin Drive connection to occur, the connection and Winchester, VA associated improvements are completed to the satisfaction of the County and 22601 VDOT. 0 0 5. To help ensure the proffered off site sidewalk across the frontage of Dowell J Howard is constructed in a timely fashion, the proffer statement has been revised to require the 10' right of way dedication necessary for the construction of the sidewalk to be dedicated by Frederick, Schools within 180 days of the Date of Final Rezoning. This approach also ensures that the Applicant would be able to construct the sidewalk prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy per the proffer statement. 6. The Generalized Development Plan has been revised in accordance with the revised Proffer Statement. PH If If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please feell free to call me at R l ( 540) 667 -2139. Sincerely, PATTON HARRIS RUST & ASSOCIATES iz Patrick R Sowers, AICP Enclosure Patton Harris 0t & Associates • Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. bandscope Architects. 11 September 2009 Mr. Michael Ruddy Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 N Kent St, Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Burns Property —Valley Mill Road Rezoning Application; Response to Comments +� P � + i Dear Mike, To accompany the application submission for the Burns Property Valley Mill made ColPOa♦ *E� Road rezoning, I have provided below a response to all comments by review ch'ntilly agencies. Our responses are as follows: VIIGINIR O'llas'. - chantill P7rrznin�andl7 eze1`onmerct (MikeRuddy,AICP) chc rottesvle Fredericksburg 1, The property ir located in the general area covered by the Route 7 Corridor Plan. The Harrisonburg properly is within the UDA and SWISA and is generally designated in an area of Leesburg commercial land use. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should Newport News be recognized, even though this site does not have visibility on Route 7, and 'should be applied Norfolk Winchester along ValleyMill Road. I Woodbridge The proposed B2 rezoning is in accordance with the business corridor LMQI mars. chourdly expectation. Fredericksburg 2. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the p facilitate M.InANO OFncer. Balnmare n unproved cor °ridor appearance along Valley Mill Road. Landscaping, ligh 9, and building layout form be carefully planned to ensure that this is achieved An approach columbia Frederick and should may include locating buildings on the property to the front of the site, Vall6v Mill Road, and Germemown limiting the amount ofparking in front of the buildings in favor ofproviding more parking Houywaad internal to the site. Hunt Volley Williomsporl The Applicant has proffered street trees along the Valley NO Road frontage o PENNS,lcANIA orace the Property. As an end user has yet to be identified and the site is limited in Allentown size, the Applicant has not proffered a layout plan but has instead proffered a r 540.667.2139 materials design palette to ensure that any building constructed on the F 540.665.0493 Property will be aesthetically pleasing. 117 East Pkcodilly Street Suite 200 Winchester, VA - 22601 SEP 1 1 2009 s Mr. Patrick Sowers • November 24, 2008 Page 2 o By way of a general observation, staff should be aware that the TIA indicates that there are no "planned" background developments located in the vicinity of the subject properties. (TIA, p. 7.) Staff will need to ascertain the accuracy of this assumption. The County's GIS mapping shows a VDOT right -of -way, which appears to be of approximately 20 feet in width, bisecting tax map parcel 54-A-1 12Q, one of the properties that is the subject of the proposed rezoning. This right -of -way is tax map parcel 54- A -112B in the County's records. The status of this right -of -way may need to be resolved in conjunction with the proposed rezoning. Item 7 of the proposed Rezoning Application needs to include tax map parcels 54F -A -30 and 54F -3 -A1 as adjoiners. 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, Roderick B. Williams County Attorney cc: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director, Department of Planning and Development ® • 3. Address the bz #er and screening of adjacent residential properties including those across Martin Drive. A sensitive approach to this that is tailored and builds upon the County's current requirements may be warranted. We feel the proffered building design materials ensure that the building will not have detrimental impacts to the neighboring properties. Additionally, the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance will require a minim k foot buffer between the Property and the residential lot located to the north . 1 4. This application proposes a lane improvement to Valley Mill Road but no improvements to /0 Martin Drive, and no participation in recognition of the impacts to the overall transportation network. In particular, the TIA modeled intersection of Valley Mill Road i I -81 /Route 7. The revised proffer statement provides for the widening of Martin Drive. Additionally, the revised proffer statement provides for widening of Valley Mill Road across the Property frontage necessary to provide a left turn lane on Valley M ll Road to access Dowell J Circle. Improvements to Valley Mill Road at the intersection with Route 7 necessary to accommodate background traffic and traffic generated by the site will be implemented as part of the recently approved rezoning application for the adjacent Walgreens parcel. 5. The long range transportation planning efforts in this area focus attention on a relocated connection of Vally Mill Road =tb Route 7 at Getty Lane. The proposed rezoning would not impact the ability to implement the long range transportation plan for Valley Mill Road and Getty Lane. ,The proposed transportation proffers aim at addressing the impacts of the subject 1.26 acre rezoning. 6. This application should reccgnitie the long range transportation planning eorts in this area, and should focus on the entrance to Martin Drive, Valley Mill Road, and an enhanced inter arcel connection to the adjacent properties, and potentially back down to Route 7 v a Martin Drive. More detail should be provided regarding Martin Drive and its intersection witb Valley Mill Road. Martin Drive is an existing State Road that doer not meet current street standards Consideration should be given to improving Martin Drive to a public street standard that meets all current standards. The revised proffer statement improves the Valley NO Road frontage of the Property while proposing no direct access to Valley Mill Road. The proffer statement also provides for the improvement of existing Martin Drive to State standards. Additionally, the proposed entrance on Martin Drive has been located as far away from the Valley Mill Road intersection as possible to ensure no conflicts between vehicles entering /exiting the site and traffic on Martin Drive. Lastly, the interparcel connection proposed for the Property will allow access to and from the adjacent Walgreens parcel and the future connector • ! road from Valley Mill to Martin Drive /Route 7 planned as part of the adjacent parcel. 7. In general, this Application fails to provide for any substantial transportation improvements and does not address the transportation impacts associated with this request. We feel the revised proffer statement adequately mitigates the transportation impacts associated with the rezoning. Improvements to Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive will provide for a safer traffic system for existing traffic as well. S. Staff had previoiuy commented in our review of the adjacent properties' request that the application is encouraged to think beyond just providing a simple connection to the adjacent parking lot. The adjacent property, currenty under r�vzew for a re�omng, should be considered in relationshp to this one for the purpose of access and improvements to Martin Drive, including a potential interiml connection back down to Route 7. The adjacent rezoning was approved with an internal connection back down to Route 7 and the proposed interparcel connection aligns with the planned connection for the adjacent property. 9. It is evident that this project would further deteriorate the level of service at the existing intersections in the vianrity of the site, most specifically the intersection of Route 7 with I -81 and Valley Mill Road. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that new development does not deteriorate the level of service at intersections or roads. It seeks to ensure that it maintains or improves the level of service at impacted roads. or intersection.- Please understand that an acceptable level gf service to Frederick County, as , denifed in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. Background traffic alone requires the same improvements at the intersection of Route 7 /Valley M 0 Road/I -81 ramps. The improvements to Valley Mill Road will be accommodated by development of the adjacent property. The Applicant has focused on improvements to Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive across the Property frontage. The Valley NO Road improvements include the addition of a left turn lane that will provide a safer movement for vehicles that turn onto Dowell J Circle. The Applicant has focused the transportation proffers on Martin Drive and Valley NO Road as these are the two most impacted roadways. For reference, vehicle trips generated by the rezoning on Route 7 represent just 0.4% of the total build -out traffic. • road from Valley Mill to Martin Drive /Route 7 planned as part of the adjacent parcel. PT4 7. In general, this Application fails to provide for any substantial transportation improvements and doer not address the transportation impacts associated with this request. We feel the revised proffer statement adequately mitigates the transportation impacts associated with the rezoning. Improvements to Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive will provide for a safer traffic system for existing traffic as well. 8. Staff had previousyl commented in our review of the adjacent properties' 'request that the application is encouraged to think beyond just providing a simple connection to the adjacent parking lot. The adjacent propery, currently under review for a rezoning, should be considered in relationship to this one for the purpose of access and improvements to Martin Drive, including a potential internal connection back down to Route 7. The adjacent rezoning was approved with an internal connection Iback down to Route 7 and the proposed interparcel connection aligns with the planned connection for the adjacent property. 9. It is evident that this project would further deteriorate the level of servJ at the existing intersections in the vidnity of the rite, most pecificaly the interrection of Route 7 with I -81 and Valley Mill Road. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that new development does not deteriorate the level of service at intersections or roads It :reeks to ensure that it maintains or improves the level of service at impacted roads or intersection.. Please understand that an. acceptable level of service to Frederick Count', as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. Background traffic alone requires the same improvements at the intersection of Route 7 /Valley Mill Road/I -81 ramps. The improvements Ito Valley Mill Road will be accommodated by development of the adjacent property. The Applicant has focused on improvements to Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive across the Property frontage. The Valley Mill Road improvements include the addition of a left turn lane that will provide a safer movement for vehicles that turn onto Dowell J Circle. The Applicant has focused the transportation proffers on Martin Drive and Valley Mill Road as these are the two most impacted roadways. For reference, vehicle trips generated by the rezoning on Route 7 represent just 0.4% of the total build -out traffic. 0 10. Based upon the above scenario, the 77A describes improvements that are necessary to achieve an acceptable level of service. None of these improvements will be in place orguaranteed to be provided prior to development of this site. Plans for improvements to Valley Mill Road associated with the adjacent Property are proceeding currently. Background traffic analysis indicates that the improvements required for Route 7 and the I -81 off ramp are not created by the proposed rezoning. As traffic generated by the rezoning would be only 0.4% of the build -out traffic on Route 7 and only 1.2% of the trips on the I -81 off ramp, we feel the proffer package mitigates the impacts of the rezoning. PRA 11. Pedestrian accommodations should be provided in a coordinated manner internal to the project, to and along 1 /alley Mill Road, and Martin Drive. The revised proffer statement provides for the construction 'of an off -site sidewalk across the full property frontage of the Dowell J Howard property located across Valle Mill Road. This off site sidewalk will connect from Dowell J Circle to the existing sidewalk located along the south side of Valley Mill as depicted on the GDP. 12. On recent rezonings, other projects have contributed additional funding for tran.5bon2ation improvements in the general area of their requests. This has been done in recognition of the need to address the broader transportation improvements in the developing areas of the County in addition to the specific improvements they may be proposing. Such an approach should be considered with this requnest relative to the scale of this request. The Applicant has chosen to focus on built improvements in place of a monetary contribution. VDOT has approved this approach for the proposed rezoning. 13. A Generalized Development Plan has not been provided nntb this application. A GDP accompanying the Proffer Statement could be used to address some of the comments identified. A detailed GDP has been provided with the revised Proffer Statement. 14. Any proffered limitations should be directly related to the analysis provided in the impact analysis, in particular the TIA. The revised proffer statement limits development to the maximum trip count that was studied as pan of the TIA. By proffer, no site plan could be approved for the Property if the use exceeds the maxim trip count of 1,516. • 0 15. The application proffers 12,000 square feet of unlimited commercial land uses. The TIA models a 3,500 square foot fast food restaurant uitb drive through. This discrepancy should be considered when evaluating the impacts of this request and the proffer statement.. As stated in the response to comment 14 above, development of the property is limited to a maximum trip count... This ensures that the property is developed in conformance with the TIA and allows flexibility in square footage should a low traffic generating user such as office choose to locate on the site. P� A 16. The proffer statement provides for a 12,000 square foot commercial development. The ��+ � monetary contributions aimed to offset the impact of development should be carefully evaluated to ensure they are relative to the proposed development.. The proposed monetary proffers for sheriffs office and fire and safety purposes of `x1,000 /each are in keeping with the recently approved rezoning for the adjacent property which was more than 3 times larger than this proposed rezoning. It is important to note that the rezoning itself would create a positive fiscal impact from tax revenues associated with the commercial use of the Property. 17. The proffer statement must be signed by the owner /owners of the property. A notarized signature has been provided on the proffer statement by the property owner. 18. Once again, please ensure that all review agent' comments are adequately addressed. Acknowledged. T/irpinutDela<rrtnzent ofT>ans aztrtian (Lloyd Ingram) 1. VDOT is sati,Fed that the transportation proffers offered in the Burns Property — Vally Mill Road Retioning Application dated August 18, 2009 address transportation concerns associated with this request. Acknowledged. Vr)vchesterReZii21a 4ir (Serena R. Manuel) On bebalf of the I Viachesier Regional Airport, we have reviewed the referenced rezoning proposal and determined that the proposal will not impact operations at the Wincbester port Acknowledged. Wi • • 15. The application proffers 12,000 square feet of unlimited commercial land uses. The TIA models a 3,500 square foot fast food restaurant with drive through. This discrepancy should be considered when evaluating the impacts of this request and the proffer statement.. As stated in the response to comment 14 above, development of the property is limited to a maximum trip count. This ensures that the property is developed in conformance with the TTA and allows flexibility in square footage should a low traffic generating user such as office chose to locate on the site. /� 16. The proffer statement provides for a 12,000 square foot commercial development. The \ monetary contributions aimed to offset the mrpact of development should be ( carefully evaluated to ensure they are relative to the proposed development.. The proposed monetary proffers for sheriffs office and fire and safety purposes of $1,000 /each are in keeping with the recently approved rezoning for the adjacent property which uas more than 3 times larger than this proposed, rezoning.. It is important to note that the rezoning itself would create a positive, fiscal impact from tax revenues associated with the commercial use of the Property. 17. Thep roffer statement must be coned by the owner /owners of the propevzy A notarized signature has been provided on the proffer statement by the property owner. 18. Once again, please ensure that all review agent' comments are adequately addressed. Acknowledged. VvginiaDeiaztnzezzt oTiaizsortatian (Lloyd Ingram) 1. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Burns Property — Valley Mill Road Retioning Application dated August 18, 2009 address transportation concerns associated with this request. Acknowledged. nelaesterRegio (Serena K Manuel) On behalf of the Wivuhesfer Regional Ai port, we have reviewed the referenced rezoning proposal and determined that the proposal will not impact operations at the Winchester Acknowledged. • • Historic Resoarrres Aarvisoa-go rrd (Amber Powers) Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not rignicantly impact historic resources and it is not rrecessa y to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no signicant historic structures located on the property nor are there any possible historic districts in tbe'vicinity. It was also noted that while the National Park Service Study of the Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does identify core battleeld within this area, the site's existing condition is such that there is little remaining value to any preservation effort.. P A Acknowledged. Frederick CortntyAtto77rey - Williams) Proffer 1.1 — Staff should be aware that the TIA accompanying the proposed Proffer Statement assumes development of the site "to include a 3,500 square foot fast-food restaurant with drive -thru" (TIA, p. 1), but that the Proffer only exclude development of the site with building floor area exceeding 12,000 square feet. The proffer statement has been revised to limit development to a rraxirn of 1,516 vehicle trips as modeled in the TIA for a 3,500 square foot fast -food restaurant. 2- Proffer 1.3 — The Proffer does not indicate when the inter-Parcel connector'for access to and from the area located west of the subject properties will be provided The area located west of the subject properties is currently Zoned RP; would inter-parcel access bel provided to the adjacent prnperty(ies) as currenty Zoned RP or would inter-parcel access only occur on rezoning of the adjacent propery(ies)? The inter- parcel connection would be provided prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on the Property. Rezoning of the adjacent properties for B2 uses was approved by Frederick Cou ty on August 12, 2009 as RZ 03 -09. 3. Proffer 1.4 — The Proffer provides for the design and construction of an additional lane for Valley Mill Road across the frontage of the subject properties (the word `Propery" in the second lure of the Proffer is misspelled and this should be corrected), but does not provide far the dedication of any additional right of way. Staff should determine whether such construction is feasible o very the current width of the right of way. Per revised proffer 1.5, any needed right of way would be determined at time of site plan and dedicated by the Applicant. 0 0 4. The second and third pager of the proposed Proffer Statement contain a header that reads "U%algreens — Dairy Corner Place" The header should be changed to refer the correct re -Zoning. Addressed by revised proffer statement. 5. By way of a general observation, staff should be aware that the TIA indicates that there are no `planned" background developments located in the viciniy of the subject properties (TIA, p. 7) Staff will need to ascertain the accuracy of this assumption. �� � /� The TIA was prepared in accordance with the scoping session held with LPL l VDOT. A growth rate was applied to existing traffic to determine background traffic volumes. 6. The County's GIS mapping Tows a VDOT right -of -way, which appears to he of approximatey 20 feet in width, hisecting tax m,n5 parce154 A -1122, one of the properties that is the subject of the proposed rezoning. This right -of -way is lax map parcel 54-A- 1 12B in the County's records. The status of this right- of-way may need to he resolved in conjunction with the proposed rezoning. A survey performed by PHR +A depicts the boundaries for the three parcels totaling 1.26 acres. There is no 20 foot right of way encumbering parcel 54 -A 112Q, only a sewer easement. 7. Item 7 of the proposed Re{oning Application needs to include tax map parcels 54F-A-30 and 54F-3 A 1 as adjoiners. These adjoiners have been added to the application. Fredenek Coar>itl De pazzmerztolPzrb Works (Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E.) 1. Refer to Impact Analysis, page 1: Expand the discussion to include the disposition of the three (3) ngle family dwellings. The dwellings appear to have been constructed prior to 1978 and will require asbestos inspections prior to receipt of demolition permits. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. 2. Defer to Access and Transportation, page 1: Expand the discussion to include the interparcel connection referenced in the Wlalgreen s rezoning application. Also, discuss the impact on Martin Drive and the need for zrpgrades if this road is used for ingress / egress. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. • • 4. The second and third pages of the proposed Proffer Statement contain a header that reads 'Wagreens — Dairy Corner Place ". The header should be changed to refer the correct rezoning. Addressed by revised proffer statement. 5. By way of a general observation, staff should be aware that the TIA indicates that there are no `planned" background developments located in the vicinity of the subject properties (TIA, p. 7) Staff will need to ascertain the accuracy of this assumption. The TIA was prepared in accordance with the scoping session held with PH RA VDOT. A growth rate was applied to existing traffic to determine background traffic volumes. 6. The County's GIS wrapping shows a VDOT right -of -way, which appears to be of approximately 20 feet in width, bisecting tax mab parcel 54-A- 112Q, one of the properties that is the subject of the proposed rezoning. This right -of -way is tax map parcel 54 A- 112B in the Couno's records. The status of this right -of -way may need to be resolved in conjunction with the proposed rezoning. A survey performed by PHR +A depicts the boundaries for the three parcels totaling'1.26 acres. There is no 20 foot right of way encumbering parcel 54 -A 112Q, only a sewer easement. 7. Item 7 of the proposed Rezoning Application needs to include tax map parcels 54F-A-30 and 54F - 3 Al as adjainers. These adjoiners have been added to the application. Frederick Cozrz I De�a,tnzem ofPztblic works (Harvey E. Straw snyder, Jr., P.E.) 1. Refer to Impact Analysis, page 1: Expand the discussion to include the disposition of the three (3) single famzy dwelkngs. The dwellings appear to have been constructed prior to 1978 and will require asbestos inspections prior to rece pt of demolition permits. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. Refer to Access and Transportation, page 1: Expand the discussion to include the inter connection referenced in the Walgreen's rezoning application. Also, dis us the impact on Martin Drive and the need far upgrades if this road is used for ingress/egress. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. 0 0 Sewage Conveyance and Water Supply, page 2: It appears that the existing dwellings are served by public water. However, the existence of public sewer along Martin Drive is questionable. Verify with specific references to existing sewer lines that public sewer service is available with the re -Zoning boundaries. A field survey conducted by PHR +A located the 8" sewer line that is located within Martin Drive adjacent to the Property. This sewer linei gravity feeds north behind the 220 Seafood Restaurant where it connects with the Abrams Creek Interceptor. P "R , 1` 4. Storm Dr- ainage: Add a section to discuss stormwater management. We I recommend that �[ consideration be given to a regional facility that will serve the Burns Propery as well as the Walgreen s site. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. 5. Refer to the Proffer Statement, Site Development, paragraph 9.2: Expand the reference to the one entrance on Martin Drive to include required in provements to upgrade Marlin Drive to accommodate the Vieginia Department of Transportations requirement.. I Proffer 1.9 of the revised Proffer Statement addresses this Frederick Neal) Plan approval recommended. Acknowledged. Frederick County Sa>rit tzo>z A>stl arty Qohn Whitacre) Sewer and Water are available to this site. There is adequate sewer and wateri capacity to serve this site- Acknowledged. Frede>ck - W.'>zchesterHealth De- iart>nent As brag as no wells or septic .ystems are impacted either on prropery or neighboring properties; no objections. Acknowledged. 0 0 Frederick COLul De�ian>nent ofParks andRecreation (Matthew Hott) No comment. Acknowledged. Frederick I1ncheste1 esnfce A1mhority aesse Moffett) No Comments. + Acknowledged. 1 1 Frederick Conntyj'1zs2ectz22zzs Rohn Trenag) No comment required at this time. Comments shall be made at site plan submittal phase. Acknowledged. Frederick CountyPubA7 Schools (Wayne Lee) We have reviewed the Burns Rezoning application, and are concerned about the increase in traffic volume that this change of use willgenerate. It is already dicult for school buses to tuna left out of the Dowell J. Howard Center, and we expect that this commercial use, with an entrance onto Martin Drive, will increase that dzculty. We see ibis issue being related more to trait volume than to stacking at the Valley Milll Berryville Turnpike intersection. The Applicant is providing frontage improvements to Valley Mill Road to address traffic impacts of the development. Additionally, the interparcel connection to the Walgreens tract will allow for access to Valley Mill Road and Route 7 without sending traffic across the Dowell J. Howard Center entrance or exit. I hope that these responses aid in the review of the application by Frederick County Staff as well as the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please feel free to call me at (540) 667 -2139. Sincerely, PATTON HARRIS RUST &,) &OCIATES Patrick R Sowers, AIC' 0 0 Frederick Courzt DeDaztrrzcrct o {Parks andRecreation (Maubew Hott) No comment Acknowledged. — - Frederick Vv chesterSenYi7e AWthontv eMoffett) No Comments. PT-TRA Acknowledged. Frederick CouvztylnszZectiazzs (john Trenary) No comment regxred at this time. Comments shall be made at site plan submittalAbase Acknowledged. Frederick C o4 M Public Schools (Wayne Lee) We have reviewed the Burns Rezoning application, and are concerned about the increase in trafc volume that this change of use will generate. It is already dicult for school buf es to turn left out of the Dowell J. Howard Center, and we expect that this commercial use, witb an entrance onto Martin Drive, will increase that difficulty. We see this issue being related more to traffic volume than to stacking at the Valley Mill /Berryville Turnpike intersection. The Applicant is providing frontage improvements to Valley Mill Road to address traffic impacts of the development. Additionally, the interparcel connection to the Walgreens tract will allow for access to Valley Mill Road and Route 7 without sending traffic across the Dowell J. Howard Center entrance or exit. I hope that these responses aid in the review of the application by Frederick County Staff as well as the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please feel free to call me at (540) 667 -2139. Sincerely, PATTON HARRIS RUST & "CIATES Patrick R, Sowers, AlCp 0 FredAck County Publf Schools Q ... to ensure all students an excellent education I K. Wayne Lee, Jr. CZA . Coordinator of Planning and Development . leew @frederick.k12, March 19, 2010 Mr. Michael T. Ruddy Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Burns Property Rezoning (RZ- 07 -09) Dear Mike, At their meeting on Tuesday, March 16, 2010, the School Board approved a boundary line adjustment to provide an additional 10 foot of right -of -way for Valley Mill Roadlacross the entire frontage of the Dowell J. Howard Center. The additional right of way is intended to contain a sidewalk to be installed by David and Svetlana Burns, the developers of the property across Valley Mill Road. It is the School Board's understanding that dedication of the additional right -of -way and construction of the sidewalk will be done at the Burns' cost and at no cost to the public. The School Board is willing to provide additional right -of -way because development of the area is a benefit to Frederick County, providing needed transportation improvements, improved neighborhood walkability, and an increased tax base. The property owners should be aware that the School Board, through its Buildings and Grounds Committee, will need to review and approve the plat and deed of dedication and any associated details. If you have any questions or comments, you can contact me at leew2frederick.kl2.va.us or 540- 662 -3889 x88249. Sincerely, K. Wayne Lee, Jr., CZA Coordinator of Planning and Development Cc: Mr. Al Orndorff, Assistant Superintendent for Administration Mr. Patrick Sowers, PHR &A 7 MAR 2 2 2010 Ft PyT FL W, 1415 Amherst Street wv Jrederick.kl 2,va.us 540 - 662-3889 Ext, 88249 P.O. Box 3508 540- 6624237 fax Winchester, Virginia 22604 -2546 .S County 9 ub ?c Schools to ensure all students an excellent education JAN 2 7 9 010 K, Wayne Lee, Jr. CZA . Coordinator of Planning and Development . leew @tredenck.kl2,Va.us I L January 26, 2010 -- - -- Mr. Michael T. Ruddy Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Burns Property Rezoning (RZ- 07 -09) Dear Mike, Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the Burns property rezoning at the Board of Supervisors meeting two weeks ago. I'd like to convey to you some additional thoughts on the subject from the School Board. Even though they have expressed some doubts about dedicating a strip of land in front of the Dowell J. Howard Center for a sidewalk (because of the unexpectedly wide right -of way there), the School Board is not opposed to this rezoning. They view development of the area as a benefit to Frederick County, providing transportation improvements, better access to goods and services, improved neighborhood walkability, and an increased tax base. However, there are a couple of issues the School Board considers important: • Having sidewalk in front of the school will mean extra snow and ice clearing work for the Dowell J staff, taking both time and money that could be used for other purposes. • The additional traffic to and from the business(es) located on the Burns property would make more difficult the movement of buses left out of the school, even with the proposed improvements to Valley Mill Road. While addressing this issue at the moment ,is problematical, the eventual relocation of the Valley Mill Road /Route 7 intersection as shown in the Eastern Road Plan will do so in 15 or 20 years. Please be aware that before the Buildings and Grounds Committee can comment on any, deed or easement for a sidewalk, they would need to see the document and details. If you have any questions or comments, you can contact me at leew @frederick.kl2.va.us or 540- 662 -3888 x88249. Sincerely, Y Wayne Jr., ZA Coordinator of Planning and Development Cc: Mrs. Patricia Taylor. Superintendent of Schools Mr. AI Orndorrr, Assistant Superintendent for Administration Mr. Patrick Sowers, PHR &A Mr. Ron Mislowski. PIIR &A 1415 Amherst Street w .frederick.02.va,us 540- 662 -3889 Ext. 88249 P.O. Box 3508 540- 6624237 fax Winchester, Virginia 22604 -2546 0 4. Patrick R. Sowers Prom: Ingram, Lloyd [ Lloyd.Ingram @VDOT.virginia.gov] ent: Friday, September 04, 2009 7:50 AM To: Patrick R. Sowers Cc: John.Bishop, Ingram, Lloyd Subject: Burns Property - Valley Mill Road The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a measurable impact on Route 659. This route is the VDOT roadway which a las been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Burns Property - Valley Mill Road Rezoning Application dated August 18, 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. Lloyd A. Ingram, Transportation Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Edinburg Residency - Land Development 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, Virginia 22824 0 hone #(540) 984 -5611 tax #(540) 984 -5607 J Emergency Vehicle Access Comments Access Comments Additional Comments Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Yes J. Neal Signature 1t,(fry,��1�Q� Title ____...... /fS3�Cc __.. From:LIFESAFE 10115/2008 16:09) #431 P.002 /002 • Y C Ay 3` `L F i . is x €t 3 ' S C.+ t �e Control. number I Date received_ Date reviewed Dale Revised Rz OE -00;3 10/10/2008 10/1512008 Project Name Applicant Burns Property Patton Harris Rust & Associates Address City State Zip Applicant Phone 117 E. Piccadilly St., Suite 200 Winchester VA 22601 540 -667 -2139 Type Application Tax ID Number Fire Disiricl Rescue District Rezoning 54- A- 112D,etc. 18 18 Current Zoning Election District 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/Aisieway Width Special Hazards Not Identified Not Ide-Wed No Emergency Vehicle Access Comments Access Comments Additional Comments Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Yes J. Neal Signature 1t,(fry,��1�Q� Title ____...... /fS3�Cc __.. 0 0 COUNTY.of_FREDERICK Department Public Works 540/665 -5643 FAX:.540 /678 -0682 October 27, 2008 Mr. Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates, p.c. 117 E. Piccadilly Street E Winchester, Virginia 22601 f RE: Rezoning Application for the Burns Property — Intersection of Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive, Red Bud Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Dear Mr. Sowers: • We have completed our review of the rezoning application for the Burns Property and offer the following comments: 1. Refer to Impact Analysis, page 1: Expand the discussion to include the disposition of the three (3) single family dwellings. The dwellings appear to have been constructed prior to 1978 and will require asbestos inspections prior to receipt of demolition permits. 2. Refer to Access and Transportation, page 1: Expand the discussion to inIclude the inter - parcel connection referenced in the Walgreen's rezoning application. Also, discuss the impact on Martin Drive and the need for upgrades if this road is used for, ingress /egress. 3. Sewage Conveyance and Water Supply, page 2: It appears that the existing dwellings are served by public water. However, the existence of public sewer along Martin Drive is questionable. Verify with specific references to existing sewer lines that public sewer service is available within the rezoning boundaries. 4. Storm Drainage: Add a section to discuss stormwater management. We recommend that consideration be given to a regional facility that will serve the Burns property as well as the Walgreens' site. 5. Refer to the Proffer Statement, Site Development, paragraph 1.2: Expand the reference • to the one entrance on Martin Drive to include required improvements td upgrade Martin Drive to accommodate the Virginia Department of Transportation's reqirements. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Burns Property Rezol g Comments Page 2 October 27, 2008 .. I can be reached at 722 -8214 if you should have any questions regarding the above comments. Sincerely, l Y ceh� F l� Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr. r Director of Public Works HES /rls cc: Planning and Development file E is .E. TArsargent \Rhonda \TE \1 PCORINI ENTS \RURNSPROPVA EEEYNIIEERD& MARTINDRREZCON.doc 0 Frederick County Department of Inspections • 0 the Rezoning Comments Burns Property Mail to: Frederick Co. Dept. of Inspections Attn: Director of Inspections 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665 -5650 Applicant's Name: Mailing Address: Location of Property: Drive. Current Zoning: RP Hand deliver to: Frederick Co. Dept. of Inspections Attn: Director of Inspections Co. Administration Bldg., 4`�' Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Patton Harris Rust & Associates c/o Patrick Sowers 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 0 Phone: Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: I Department of Inspections Comments: _ ' �A � \�..9 R1 P'AO s ® CC rM e IY4 OCT t. C 2008 / �O /UBURWORK &INSPECTIONS Inspections Signature & Date: Notice to Dept. oflSpections — Please Return is Form to the Applicant I lu% • 0 • Rezoning Comments Burns Property Frederick County Sanitation Authority Mail to: Hand deliver to: Q w 19 Frederick Co. Sanitation Authority Frederick Co. Sanitation Authori Attn: Engineer Attn: Engineer P.O. Box 1877 315 Tasker Road OCT 10 200 Winchester, VA 22604 Stephens City, VA 1�6 (540) 868 -1061 1 r:r+Q A Applicant's Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Phone: (540) 667.2139 c/o Patrick Sowers Mailing Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 i Location of Property: 'rhe Property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive. Current Zoning: RP Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: 1 Sanitation Authority Comments: SEI�1'EiQ �- W,e! .j .3R, A!/411_9dZF 7"0 7Wis 517.E Tim 56 W, i¢ J`Y 7'o SFR V/` 7;W5 SITE Sanitation Authority Signature & Date: z 0. T2:;�8 Notice to Sanitation Authw'i — Please Return This Form to the Applicant 0 14 0 • Rezoninlz Comments Burns Property Frederick- Winchester Service Authority Mail to: Hand deliver to: Fred -Wine Service Authority Fred -Wine Service Ant Attn: Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director Attn: Jesse W. Moffett P.O. Box 43 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22604 Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 722 -3579 Applicant's Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Phone: c/o Patrick Sowers Mailing Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester. VA 22601 Location of Property: The Property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Valle Drive. Current Zoning: RP Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: I Fred-Winch e ter Service Authority's Comments: V1(? �at&ii�aQl� FWSA Signature & Dater /VV IC1,V4 Notice to Fred -Wine Service Authority — Please Return This Form to the Applicant 18 L] 0 0 Rezoning Comments Burns Property Frederick — Winchester Health Department 0 Mail to: Frederick - Winchester Health Dept. Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 722 -3480 Applicant's Name: Mailing Address: Location of Property: Drive. Current Zoning: RP Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: 1 and Martin Frederick — Winchest r Heal h Department's Comments: S Jt 1-0 u4,L Or +[ 5 ft( 4- 1 r al r o Health Signature & Date: , O Notice to Health Department— Please Return This Form to the Applicant RECEIVED OCT 101008 Hand deliver to: Frederick - Winchester Health Dept. Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent St., Suite 201 Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 722 -3480 Patton Harris Rust & Associates c/o Patrick Sowers 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Phone: 15 • E 0 Rezoninjz Comments Burns Property Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation Mail to: Frederick County Dept. of Parks & Recreation 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665 -5678 Hand deliver to: Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation Co. Administration Bldg., 2 nd Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Applicant's Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Phone: c/o Patrick Sowers Mailing Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: The Property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive. Current Zoning: RP Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: 1.26 I Dept. of Parks & Recreation Comments: NO COMMENT Parks Signature & Date: Notice to Dept. of Parks & Recreation — Please Return This Form to the Applicant 12 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540 /665 -6395 October t4, 2008 Patrick Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates 1i� Pi t..P S inn E. P c .,�,.,ets, �ai�. �,,., Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Request for Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Comments Burns (Walgreens) Property: PINS # 54- A -112Q, 54- A -1 12D, and 54-A-1 12P Dear Mr. Sowers: • Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the property nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that while the National 4Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does identify a core battlefield within this area, the site's existing condition is such that there is little remaining value to any preservation effort. Thank you for the chance to comment on this application. Please call if you have any questions or concerns. 11 Sinrarely, Amber Powers Planner I ALP /bad E 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 • Rezoning Comments Burns Property Winchester Regional Airport Mail to: Winchester Regional Airport Attn: Executive Director 491 Airport Road Winchester, VA 22602 (540) 662 -2422 Hand deliver to: Winchester Regional Airport Attn: Executive Director 491 Airport Road Winchester, VA Applicant's Name: Patton Harris Rust & Associates Phone: c/o Patrick Sowers Mailing Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 Location of Property: Drive. Current Zoning: RP Zoning Requested: B2 Acreage: 1.26 li Winchester Regional Airport's Comments 4 a C GAzib 0 Winchester Regional Airport Signature & Da Notice to Winchester Regional Airport - Piease Return This Form to the lApplicant I • T7 0 WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT 491 AIRPORT ROAD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 (540) 6622422 October 22, 2008 Patrick R. Sowers Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester. Viroinia 22601 Re: Rezoning Comments Burns Property Redbud Magisterial District Dear Mr. Sowers: On behalf of the Winchester Regional Airport Authority, we have reviewed the • referenced rezoning proposal and determined that the proposal will not impact operations at the Winchester Airport. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration in the continuing safe operations of the Winchester Regional Airport. Sincerely, a, R c� Sere, a 1. Manuel Executive Director E 0 P atrick R. Sowers �J - Ovbject: Walgreens and Burns Rezonings - - - -- original Message---- - From: Wayne Lee [ mailto :Leew0frederick.kl2.va.us] Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 10:38 AM To: Patrick R. Sowers Cc: Al Orndorff; Patricia Taylor Subject: RE: Walgreens and Burns Rezonings Patrick, Here is our comment for the Burns Rezoning: We have reviewed the Burns Rezoning application, and are concerned abo traffic volume that this change of use will generate. It is already d buses_ to turn left out of the Dowell J. Howard Center, and we expect t use, with an entrance onto Martin Drive, will increase that difficulty being more related to traffic volume than to stacking at the Valley Mi Turnpike intersection. Here is our comment for the Walgreens Rezoning: the increase in ficult for school t this commercial We see this issue /Berryville FCPS requests that the applicant revisit its Traffic Impact Assessment to assess how many drivers will adopt Valley Mill as their eastbound route to avoid rush hour traffic on Berryville Turnpike. It is already difficult for school buses to turn left out of the Dowell J. Howard Center, and we expect that this commercial use will increase that difficulty. We do see that the Walgreens Generalized Development Plan contemplates an additional left turn lane from Valley Mill Road onto Berryville Turnpike, and think that ill be of benefit to us. However, we do not think it will ease the difficulty of left rns out of Dowell J. Howard Center. We see this issue being more related to traffic volume than to stacking at the Valley Mill /Berryville Turnpike intersection. We also see the proposed entrance on Dairy Corner Place, but think that this entrance will not completely offset the change in driver behavior we anticipate. Thank you for working with us and the opportunity to comment. Thanks Wayne Kenneth Wayne Lee, Jr. CZA Coordinator of Planning and Development Frederick County Public Schools 1415 Amherst Street P. 0. Box 3508 Winchester, VA 22604 -2546 leew @frederick.kl2.va.us (office) 540- 662 -3889 x88249 (fax) 540- 662 -4237 (cell) 540 -533 -3745 (direct connect) 187 *51 *10627 1 i E 0 COUNTY of FREDERICK TO: Patrick Sowers Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/665 -6395 FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Director RE: Initial Comments — Burns Rezoning Application DATE: December 11, 2008 The following points are offered regarding the Burns Commercial Rezoning Application. This is a request to rezone 1.26 acres from R_A to B2 with Proffers. Please consider the comments as you continue your work preparing the application for submission to Frederick County. The comments reiterate the input that has previously been provided on this request. 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 7 Corridor Plan. The property . is within the UDA and SWSA and is generally designated in an area of commercial land use. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized, even though this site does not have visibility on Route 7, and should be applied along Valley Mill Road. General. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Valley Mill Road. Landscaping, lighting, and building layout and form should be carefully planned to ensure that this is achieved. An approach may include locating the buildings on the property to the front of the site, Valley Mill Road, and limiting the amount of parking in front of the buildings in favor of providing more parking internal to the sight. is Address the buffer and screening of adjacent residential properties including those across Martin Drive. A sensitive approach to this that is tailored and builds upon the County's current requirements may be warranted. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 r • • 0 Initial Comments — Burns Rezoning Application December 11, 2008 Page 2 Transportation. 0 This application proposes a lane improvement to Valley Mill Road but no improvements to Martin Drive, and no participation in recognition of the impacts to the overall transportation network. In particular, the TIA modeled intersection of � Valley Mill Road /I -81 /Route 7. The long range transportation planning efforts in this area focus attention on a relocated connection of Val Mill Road with Route 7 at Getty Lane. j This application should recognize the long range transportation planning efforts in this area, and should focus on the entrance to Martin Drive, Martin Drive, Valley Mill Road, and an enhanced interparcel connection to the adjacent properties, and potentially back down to Route 7 via Martin Drive. More detail should be provided regarding Martin Drive and its intersection with Valley Mill Road. Martin Drive is an existing State Road that does not meet current street standards. Consideration should be givenito improving Martin Drive to a public street standard that meets all current standards. Staff had previously commented in our review of the adjacent properties' r quest that the application is encouraged to think beyond just providing a simple connection to the adjacent parking lot. The adjacent property, currently under review for a rezoning, should be considered in relationship to this one for the purpose of access and improvements to Martin Drive, including a potential internal connection back down to Route 7. In general, this Application fails to provide for any substantial transportation improvements and does not address the transportation impacts associated with this request. It is evident that this project would further deteriorate the level of service at the exiting intersections in the vicinity of this site, most specifically the intersections of Route 7 with I -81 and Valley Mill Road. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that new development does not deteriorate the level of service at intersections or roads. It seeks to ensure that it maintains or improves the level of service at impacted roads or intersections. Please understand that an acceptable level of service to Frederick County, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, is a level of service C. Based upon the above scenario, the TIA describes improvements that are necessary to achieve an acceptable level of service. None of these improvements will be in place or guaranteed to be provided prior to the development of this site. Initial Comments — Burns Rezoning Application • December 11, 2008 Page 3 Pedestrian accommodations should be provided in a coordinated manner internal to the project, to and along Valley Avenue, and Martin Drive. } On recent rezonings, other projects have contributed additional funding for transportation improvements in the general area of their requests. This has been done in recognition of the need to address the broader transportation improvements in the developing areas of the County in addition to the specific improvements they may be proposing. Such an approach should be considered with this request relative with the scale of this request. Proffer Statement. A Generalized Development Plan has not been provided with this application. A GDP accompanying the Proffer Statement could be used to address some of t e comments identified. Any proffered limitations should be directly related to the analysis provided in the Impact Analysis, in particular, the TIA. • The application proffers 12,000 square feet of unlimited commercial land uses. The TIA models a 3,500 square. foot fast food restaurant with drive through. This discrepancy should be considered when evaluating the impacts of this request and the proffer statement. i This proffer statement provides fora 12,000 square foot commercial development. The monetary contributions aimed to offset the impact of development should be carefully evaluated to ensure they are relative to the proposed development. i The proffer statement must be signed by the owner /owners of the property Once again, please ensure that all review agency comments are adequately addressed. Attachments MTR/bad • 0 • COUNTY of FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney VIA FACSIMILE (540- 665 -0493) AND FIRST -CLASS MAIL Mr. Patrick Sowers Faiiun'izai_a Rust'& Associates 117 East Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 540/722 -8383 Fax 540/667 -0370 E -mail: November 24, 2008 rwillia @co.frederick.va.us I Re: Burns Property - Proposed Proffer Statement dated September 4,1 2008 Dear Patrick: 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 Zong Ordinance and the�Code'of Virginia; and would be legallysufficienf as a m proffer* . statement, subject to the following: • Proffer 1.1 - Staff should be aware that the TIA accompanying the proposed Proffer Statement assumes development of the site "to include a 3,500 square foot fast -food restaurant with drive- thru ", (TIA, p. 1), but that the Proffer only excludes development of the site with building floor area exceeding 12,000 square feet. • Proffer 1.3 - The Proffer does not indicate when the inter - parcel connector for access to and from the area located west of the subject properties will be providedf The area located west`ot the subject properties is currently zoned RP; -; ?buld alC. ws -bc- provided to the adjacent property(ies) as currently zoned RP or would inter - parcel access only occur on rezoning of the adjacent property(ies)? Y Proffer 1.4 - The Proffer provides for the design and construction of an additional lane for Valley Mill Road across the frontage of the subject properties (the word "Property" in the second line of the Proffer is misspelled and this should be corrected), but does not provide for the dedication of any additional right -of -way. Staff should determine whether such construction is feasible given the current width of the right -of -way. •, The'second'and third pages of the proposed Proffer Statement contain a header that reads "Walgreens - Dairy Corner Place ". The header should be changed to refer to the correct rezoning. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 Mr. Patrick Sowers November 24, 2008 Page 2 Y By way of a general observation, staff should be aware that the TIA indicates that there are no "planned" background developments located in the vicinity of the subject properties. (TIA, p. 7.) Staff will need to ascertain the accuracy of this assumption. The County's GIS mapping shows a VDOT right -of -way, which appears' to be of approximately 20 feet in width, bisecting tax map parcel 54- A -1 12Q, one of the properties that is the subject of the proposed rezoning. This right -of- -way is tax map parcel 54- A -112B in the County's records. The status of this right- of -w l y may need to be resolved in conjunction with the proposed rezoning. Item 7 of the proposed Rezoning Application needs to include tax map parcels 54F -A -30 and 5417-3 -A1 as adjoiners. 0 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, A Roderick B. Williams County Attorney cc: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director, Department of Planning and Development L Patton Harr *Rust & Associates Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Laedscope Archilecls. 11 September 2009 Mr. Michael Ruddy Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 N Kent St, Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 • RE: Burns Property — Valley Mill Road Rezoning Application; Response to Comments P"R \ Dear Mike, it JIL To accompany the application submission for the Bums Property — Valley Mill co"O'R E, Road rezoning, I have provided below a response to all comments made by review ceonli agencies. Our responses are as follows: VIFGINIA 011ICE5: Chantilly Chorlouesvi Ile Flederlcksburg Harrisonburg Leesburg Nevspoo INIev s Norfolk W'mchester Woodbridge LABORATORIES. Channu Fredericksburg MARYLAND OFFICES, Baltimore Colombia Frederick GermantoNm Hollywood Honi Valley Wllllamsporr PENNSYLVANIA ONHIE AII.O'D T 540 667 2139 F 540 665 0493 117 East Piccadilly Street Suite 200 W'mchester, VA 22601 Plan1 andDelo�i�nent Ruddy, AICP) The proper y is totaled in the general area covered by the Route 7 Corridor Plan. The properly it within the UDA and SWISA and is de generally ignated in an area of commercial land use. The buDineii corridor e%pectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognised, even !bough this site doer not bare risibility on Route 7, and should be applied along Valley 11dil1 Roar(. The proposed B2 rezoning is in accordance with the business corridor expectation. 2. Particular ellort should be made to proride for enhanced desgn of the project to fa litate improved corrzdor rppearrurce along Valley Mill Road Landscaping, lgbting, and building layout and form should he caizfilly planned to ensure that this is achieredi Art approach may indnde /orating bnildurgs on the property to the front of the site, Valley Mill Road, and limiting the amonnl of parking in front of the buildings in favor ofproviding more parking inlernallo the jis The Applicant has proffered street trees along the ValleyMa Road frontage of the Property. As an end user has yet to be identified and the site is limited in size, the Applicant has not proffered a layout plan but has instead proffered a materials design palette to ensure that any building constructed on the Property will be aesthetically pleasing. '4 ! SEp 1 1 2009 Ll P! s i 3. Address the hnffer and screening o% adjacent residential properties including Chore across Martin Drive. A sensitive approach to this lbat is tailored and builds upon the County's current requirements rrmy be warranted. We feel the proffered building design materials ensure that the building will not have detrimental impacts to the neighboring properties. Additionally, the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance will require a minimum 50 foot buffer between the Property and the residential lot located to the north. 4. Tbis application proposes a lane improvement to Valley Mill Road but no improvements to P�� l� Martin Drive, aed no partuiipalion in recognition of the impacts to the overall tran.portation 1\1 A network-. In particrdar, the 7A m 7odeled in of tersection Valley lllill Roadll -SIl Route 7. The revised proffer statement provides for the widening of Martin Drive. Additionally, the revised proffer statement provides for widening of Valley Mill Road across the Property frontage necessary to provide a left rum lane on Valley Mill Road to access Dowell J Circle. Improvements to Valley Mill Road at the intersection with Route 7 necessary to accommodate background traffic and traffic generated by the site will be implemented as part of the recently approved rezoning application for the adjacent Walgreens parcel. 5. The long rcnrgc Iranspor'lation plaruung e)orn in Ibis area focus attention on a relocated connection of Vai(ey Mill Road with Roule 7 al Getty Lane. The proposed rezoning would not impact the ability to implement the long range transportation plan for Valley Mill Road and Getty Lane. The proposed transportation proffers aim at addressing the impacts of the subject 1.26 acre rezoning. Tbis application should recognise the long range transportation planning e#orts in this area, and should focus on the entrance to Mardis Drive, Valley Mill Road, and an enhanced interparcel connection to the ar jacenl properties, and potentially back down to Ronde 7 via Martin Drive. illore detail should be provided regarding Martin Drive and its intersection with Valle tl2ill Road. Alar7irr Drive is an existing State Road that does not meet current street itandal(L Codesideratinn sbodld beg iven to improving Martin Drive to a public street standard that nrcet.s all current e7andarrls. The revised proffer statement improves the Valley Mill Road frontage of the Property while proposing no direct access to Valley Mill Road. The proffer statement also provides for the improvement of existing Martin Drive to State standards. Additionally, the proposed entrance on Martin Drive has been located as far away from the Valley Mill Road intersection as possible to ensure no conflicts between vehicles entering /exiting the site and traffic on Martin Drive. Lastly, the interparcel connection proposed for the Property will allow access to and from the adjacent Walgreens parcel and the future connector 0 road from Valley Mill to Martin Drive /Route 7 planned as part of the adjacent parcel. In Seneral, Ibis Application /hilr to piaoide for any substantial traniporlation improvements and sloes not address the tran,rporlalion nnpacb' associated with this request. We feel the revised proffer statement adequately mitigates the transportation impacts associated with the rezoning. Improvements to Valley Mill Road and Martin Drive will provide for a safer traffic system for existing traffic as well. P�n S . Sta(j had pirviars� comnrented m nur review of the adjacent properties' request that the 11 �f � application is ennrao coed to think beyond jest pivviding a simple connection to the adjacent parking lot. The aelaeern/ property, currently under review far a re .Zoning, ihould be considered in ealatioeuhip to this one far the purpose of access and improvements to iWartin Delve, inducting a poteuhal internal nvnneclion bark down to Route 7. The adjacent rezoning was approved with an internal connection back down to Route 7 and the proposed interparcel connection aligns with the planned connection for the adjacent property. 9. 11 is evident that This proied would finther deteriorate the level of senwe at the evisling intersections in the vicinity ollhe site, omst epee litany the intersection of 7 with I -81 and 1 /(/lly Nfill Road TI)e Comprebensive Plan seeks to ensure that stew development does not deteriorate the level ol sendce a/ intersections or roads. Lt seeks to ensure that it maintains or im_prones the level ol service at iorpacted roads or iulersectioru. Please understand lbat an acceplable level o/ service to Frederick County, as identified in the Comprehen.ure Plan, is a level of ienvice C. Background traffic alone requires the same improvements at thl intersection of Route 7 /Valley Mill Road /I -81 ramps. The improvements to Valley Mill Road will be acconmtodated by development of the adjacent property. The Applicant has focused on improvements to Valley Mill Road and'Martin Drive across the Property frontage. The Valley Mill Road improvements include the addition of a left turn lane that will provide a safer movement for vehicles that turn onto Dowell J Circle. The Applicant has focused the transportation proffers on Martin Drive and Valley Mill Road as these are the two most impacted roadways. For reference, vehicle trips generated by the rezoning on Route 7 represent just 0.4% of the total build -out traffic. 10. Based upon the above scenario, /he 7711 desoibes inrpromments dial air necessar to acbieve an acceptable lereI o/ .rerrdce. NTone of lbese improvements will be in place orguaranleed to be provided prior to development q/ lhis iite. Plans for improvements to Valley Mill Road associated with) the adjacent Property are proceeding currently. Background traffic analysis indicates that the improvements required for Route 7 and the I -81 off ramp are not created by the proposed rezoning. As traffic generated by the rezoning would be only 0.4% of the build -out traffic on Route 7 and only 1.2% of the trips on the I -81 off ramp, we feel the proffer package initigates the impacts of the rezoning. P R t 11. Pede_rtrian aaonrmodoliorr.r sholikl be provided in a coordinated manner internai to /he project, to and along Valley t1 Lill koad, and ildarlin Drive. The revised proffer statement provides for the construction of an off -site sidewalk across the full property frontage of the Dowell J Howard property located across Valley Mill Road. This off site sidewalk will connect from Dowell J Circle to the existing sidewalk located along the south side of Valley Mill as depicted on the GDP. 12. On recent retionina, other pioje is have con /ributed additional funding for trtimportation improveoran /.r in "hegc»eral area rf lbeir requests. This has been done in recognilion of the need to a ddie.0 the broader trarupala /ion improvements in the developing areas of the County in addiliau to lbe rpedfic impraueneeuU they ma, be proposing. Such an approach should be ururlder with lhii ncgll l relative to the scale of this request. The Applicant has chosen to focus on built improvements in place of a monetary contribution. VDOT has approved this approach for the proposed rezoning. i I 13. A Generalised Developmeul Plan has nol been provided nwil this appllcdt n. A GDP craxinrparrying Me Proper Slaler»e»l toulyd be med to adelmo some of the com l ienl.i identified A detailed GDP has been provided with the revised Proffer Statement. 14. Ar0y progeied liruilations sboold be directly related to the analysis prorided in the inbacl cr»alysis, in parliadar, the O -A. The revised proffer statement limits development to the maximum trip count that was studied as part of the TIA. By proffer, no site plan could be approved for the Property if the use exceeds the maximum trip count of 1,516. 4 15. The application projfeis 12,000 squae feet of unlimited commercial land uses. The T/A models a 3,500 ;quae fool )hsl food restaurant with drive through. This discrepant' should he considered wBen eralualing the uupads of this request and the prof er statement.. I As stated in the response to continent 14 above, development of the property is limited to a maximum trip count. This ensures that the property is developed in conformance with the TIA and allows flexibility in square footage should a low traffic generating user such as office choose to locate on the site. P� n /� 16. 7 he proffer statement' prorides for a 12,000 square foot commercial development. The ��� A nronetaq conl/nihrtionr.r aimed to offrel the impoel ofderelopment should he carefully eraluated o en3lae they me relating to /he proposed derelopmeal.. The proposed monetary proffers for sheriffs office and fire and safety purposes of $1,000 /each are in ]seeping with the recently approved rezoning for the adjacent property which was more than 3 times larger than this proposed rezoning. It is important to note that the rezoning itself would create a positive fiscal impact from tax revenues associated with the commercial use of the Property. 17. 7 be pra(er.datement nut be si,ned /�y the orrnerf owrten of the properly. A notarized signature has been provided on the proffer statement by the property owner. 18. Once again, please ensure tha/ all) eiiex agency coomrents are adequately addressed.. Acknowledged. Pzrni�tioDe�imYme�rt o Timrs� a�Tntio z (1_loyd Ing)-m) 1. VDOT h .1arliified that /he tramporlolion pro(ferr offered in the Burrs Property — Valley tldill Road Retonarg Application datedAngnst 1S, 2009 address transportation concerns aa:rocialed with this request. Acknowledged. t izc/>esterRe�rotralflii�ott (Serena R Manuel On behalf of the l Phithesler Regional Ahporl, we bare reviewed the referenced refoning proposal and deternnned Mal the proposal will not lmpacl operations at the IlinchesterAirport. Acknowledged. 5 • IYISIOIZr Resatnres A�fiasovyBonrd (fl tuber Power) Upon review of the proposed re onin;, it appear- that the proposal does not sigi #icantl impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the retioaiig application by the HR/1B. According to the Rural 1zandlna/'ks Survey, there are no sgnificant historic structures located our the propeNy nor are there aay possihle historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that while the INatio al Par k.Service SOaa�� of the Civil Wlar Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does identrf) core battlefield within this area, the site J ' existing condition is such that there is little remaiwliN ralne to ary presenwlion effort. P R A Acknowledged. Frederick CotartYAlLO7rey Ihilliauu) 1. Proj)er 1.1 — Stn// .should be aware that the TIA accompanying the proposed Projjar Statement assumes development of the site "to incbade a 3,500 square foot fastfood restaurant wttb dive- thin° (0/1, p. 1), but tbal the Proffer only eschides development of the .site with bailaling floor area exceeding 12,000 square feet.. The proffer statement has been revised to limit development to a maximum of 1,516 vehicle trips as modeled in the TIA for a 3,500 square foot fast -food restaurant. 2. Pro/Jer 1.3 — The Pro(Ji does not indicate when the itdet parcel connector far access to and f - o n the area located west o/ the subject tooperlies will be ptowded. The area lotaled welt of The sadject propetlies is nanen /) toned RP; would inter-parcel access be prodded to the aajacenl ptoperiy(ies) as cnnwntly tiorved RI or would inter-parcel access only occur on retionarg ofthe aq�acent propet ? The inter- parcel connection would be provided prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy for any building constructed on the Property. Rezoning of the adjacent properties for B2 uses was approved by Frederick County on August 12, 2009 as RZ 03 -09. 3. Proffr 1. =1 — Ths Ptn(ler pivm(L;r ficr the design and construction ol'an additional lane fitr Valley tldill Road ano.s:r the /montage o% the subject properlies (the word `Tropet/y" in the second line ()/ /he Prn#er it misspelled and thin should be corrected), but does not provide for the dedication f any odebtional tight of way. Saaff should determine whether such rotutrrrctiott is feasible giwett the cuneut width of the tight of way. Per revised proffer 1 S, any needed right of way would be determined at time of site plan and dedicated by the Applicant. C 0 0 4. The second and (bird pcigatr o/ Me plopoJed Prolfir Statement catlain a header that reads `V'a /.)near — Dairy Caner Place ". The header should be changed to refer the caret! mZoning. Addressed by revised proffer statement. S. 13y way o% agelmed obeerrudion, S 161Y sbould be aware that the TIA indicator I that there are no `planned" benkgraund deivlopmeuls located in the rncinity of the subject properlies (1IA, p. 7) Sta%f will need to am erlain the aauraey o% this assumption. PH / � VDOT. A The TIA was prepared in accordance ndth the scoping session held with n R \ growth rate was applied to emsting traffic to determine background traffic volumes. 6'. The Connty'.r GIS mapping shows a VDOT right -of -way, which appears to be of approximately 20 feet in width, bi.w6lmg tax map parcel54 A -112 , one of the properlies Mal i.r the snbjed of the proposed ietioning. Thtf right- of -wal is lax nuip parrel34 -A- 11213 in the Coun�))'.r retails. The .rlatzrs o% Lhir right -of -way Wray need to be resound in conjnndion will.) lbe propo.'ed rctionilrg. A survey performed by PHR +A depicts the boundaries for the three parcels totaling 1.26 acres. There is no 20 foot right of way encumbering parcel 54 -A 112Q, only a sewer easement. 7. Item 7 o/ the proposed Re:�ouuig Application needs to include tax reap parcels 54F-A-30 and 34F -3 A/ as adjoioerr. These adjoinets have been added to the application. Frederick Co1aNVDZii�Ilnrelllg1A66&' 11701;& (1- t(in)ny E. Strawinyder, Jr., P.F.) 1. Re1e1 to Impact A1161y.rir, page 1: Fvpiand the discussion to include the di.pojition of the three (3) single jamijy dwellings. 'I he dwelluros appear to bave been construded prior to 1975 and will inquire asberlo.r in �pedions prior to receipt of denultion permits. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. 2. Ruler to Access and 'Ilewrpoliation, pure 1: Eypand the daicussion to include the inlerpanel connection relerene'ed in Me II%algreen'.r retioniiig applicalion. Also, discuss the impact on !Martin D1iae and the need %or rpgmdes if this road is used for ingresr /egress. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. 7 3. Sewage Conveyance and IVater Supply, page 2: Il appears that the existing dwellings are seared by public, water. Ilowever, the eviflonce of public sewer along Martin Drive it questionable. Verify will) specific iefermr es to existing sewer lines that public sewer service is available )ilia the rezoning borin(lane.J: A field survey conducted by PHR +A located the 8" sewer line that is located within Martin Drive adjacent to the Property. This sewer line' gravity feeds north behind the 220 Seafood Restaurant where it connects with the Abrams Creek Interceptor. as well as the P n n F. Storrs Drainage: Add a section to di, -zou stornnvaler management. U' /e recommend that R � consideration be given to a regional fcuzlity /1)(// will see the Burns Prer rvopty Walgreen'.r site. The impact statement has been revised accordingly. 5. Refer to the Proffer Stateuent, Site Development, paragraph 1.2: Expand the rference to the one entralue wr lllarlin Drive to include required improvements to upgrade Martin Drive to a, murnrodale the Viginia Department of Transportation's requirements. Proffer 1.9 of the revised Proffer Statement addresses this comment. Frederick CortntvFire 41- ITsln l(Jell ey Neal) Plan approval recommended. Acknowledged. Frederick County Sr>ritatiotd A»tl otzty (John Ehuacre) Sewer and I alei are available to thi:r site. There is adequate sewer and water sapacily to serve this site. Acknowledged. Frederick - IP/inchesterHerrlth Departirie>it As long or no wells or WPli, .gulcnz.r are iorpacted either on properly or neighboring pro , perties no obieclio.f. Acknowledged. • 0 Frederiek CountvDepdrtinent ofParks atrdRecreatian (Matthew Hoit) No commons. Acknowledged. Frederick V> zchesterSerUrceA >rthotztv (jeueMojJeui) No Comments. P R Acknowledged. l�l Frederick CozlWXlvrsPections (John Trenag) No comment re�uirerl at thz.r time. Comment ,ball be made al rite plan submittal phase. Acknowledged. Frederick Co4wxPllhlIc Schools orlayne Lee) Irle have reriewed the Buiu.r Retionin� application, and we concerned about the increase in iraific volume that this change of use will generate. It ii already dilfhultfir school buses to turn left out of the Ooirell f. Howard Cenler, and we expect that this commercial use, with an entrance onto Martin llrire, will increaee that di/jicnity. IVe see this issue being related more to traffic volume than to itack - -in; at the Valley Adilll Bcn3lmlle Turnpike inlerrection. The Applicant is providing frontage improvements to Valley Mill Road to address traffic impacts of the development. Additionally, the interparcel connection to the Walgreens tract will allow for access to Valley Mill Road and Route 7 without sending traffic across the Dowell J. Howard Center entrance or exit. I hope that these responses aid in the review of the application by Frederick County Staff as well as the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please feel free to can me at (540) 667 -2139. Sincerely, PAATTO HARRISRUST & t!Sl CIATES Patrick R. Sowers, AICP Frederick County Public Schools �Ca y am. ycaierct cau<a:� The Board: FREDERICK COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHOOL BOARD ACTIONS MARCH 16, 2010 • Approved the amended agenda; • Approved the personnel actions as recommended by the Superintendent; • Approved the consent agenda, which included the following items: (1) minutes 2, 2010, Board meeting; (2) minutes from the March 8, 2010, Board worksessio resolution honoring the Millbrook High School Girls' Basketball Team for win AA Division 3 State Championship; and (4) 17 requests to use school property; • Approved a boundary line adjustment to provide an additional 10 foot of right Valley Mill Road in front of the Dowell J. Howard Center; • Approved donating Bus A -3 to the Frederick County Fire and Rescue • Voted to purchase three school buses from Commonwealth Bus Sales at a total using federal stimulus funds; im the March (3) a ig the Group way for of $281,996 • Approved the S517,710 bid from Don Largent Roofing to put anew roof on Robert E. Avlor Middle School; • Voted to surplus the greenhouse at James Wood Middle School; • Approved the minutes from the Buildings and Grounds Committee meeting held on March 12, 2010; • Approved the minutes from the Instructional Committee meeting held on March 15, 2010; • Amended its meeting calendar to hold a budget worksession on March 26, 2010, at 7:30 a.m.; • Amended its meeting calendar to move the May 4, 2010, meeting to May 6, 2010. Frederick County Public SS an c•abn: emrtai >� The Board: FREDERICK COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHOOL BOARD ACTIONS MARCH 16, 2010 • Approved the amended agenda; • Approved the personnel actions as recommended by the Superintendent; • Approved the consent agenda, which included the following items: (1) minutes from the March 2, 2010, Board meeting; (2) minutes from the March 8, 2010, Board worksession; (3) a resolution honoring the Millbrook High School Girls' Basketball Team for winning the Group AA Division 3 State Championship; and (4) 17 requests to use school property; • Approved a boundary line adjustment to provide an additional 10 foot of right of way for Valley Mill Road in front of the Dowell J. Howard Center; • Approved donating Bus A -3 to the Frederick County Fire and Rescue Department; • Voted to purchase three school buses from Commonwealth Bus Sales at a total cost of $281,996 using federal stimulus funds; • Approved the $517,710 bid from Don Largent Roofing to put anew roof on Robert E. Aylor Middle School; • Voted to surplus the greenhouse at James Wood Middle School; • Approved the minutes from the Buildings and Grounds Committee meeting heldlon March 12, 2010; • Approved the minutes from the Instructional Committee meeting held on March 15, 2010; • Amended its meeting calendar to hold a budget worksession on March 26, 2010, at 7:30 a.m.; • Amended its meeting calendar to move the May 4, 2010, meeting to May 6, 2010.