Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-04 ApplicationApril 19, 2004 Mr. Evan Wyatt Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 RE: REZONING #01 -04, SHEPARD PROPERTIES Dear Evan: This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of April 14, 2004. The above referenced application was approved to rezone 1.17 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General). The subject property is located on the west side of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), approximately 1,500 feet south from the Airport Road (Route 645) intersection, and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 64 -A -14 and 64 -A -15, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The proffers that were approved as a part of this rezoning application are unique to these properties and are binding regardless of ownership. Enclosed is a copy of the adopted proffer statement for your records. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding the approval of this rezoning application. Sincerely, CMM/bad Christstper M. Molm, AICP Deputy Planning Director 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 E cc: %vlichael and Cheryl Shepard A. Harrington Smith, Shawnee District Supervisor yerry Copp, VDOT Resident Engineer Xane Anderson, Real Estate —Al* "e Gray, Planning Development em: William C. Rosenberry and Robert A. Morris, Shawnee Planning Commissioners FILE COPY REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To he completed by Planning Staff.. Zoning Amendment Number PC Hearing Date 62 Fee Amount Paid g'S c Date Receive i 4/0 7 BOS Hearing Date r3 //o I 7 The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: Greenway Engineering Telephone: (540) 662 -4185 Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 2. Property Owner (if different from above) Name: Michael Cheryl Shepard Telephone: (540) 662 -6854 Address: 179 George Drive Winchester, VA 22602 3. Contact person if other than above Name: Evan Wvatt 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map Plat Deed to Property Verification of taxes paid Telephone: (540) 662 -4185 Agency Comments Fees Impact Analysis Statement Proffer Statement PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING 64- ((A)) -12 Minnie Nesselrodt, Et Als Agricultural RA District 64- ((A)) -18 Manfred G. Kokorsky Unimproved RA District 64C ((A)) -12 Commonwealth of Virginia Right -of -way RA District 64C- ((A)) -13 13A Residential Unimproved RP District 64C- ((A)) -16 Residential RP District Michael Shepard Cheryl Shepard 5. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: 6. A) Current Use of the Property: B) Proposed Use of the Property: 7. Adjoining Property: Unimproved Office /Commercial In i4 q /5 &-REFi/ wary efu e-, tJ CEP I it-) G 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact located based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route number): The 1.17 -acre site is located on the west side of Front Royal Pike, approximatley 1,500 feet from Airport Road (Route 645). Access to the subject site will occur off of Front Royal Pike. Acres Current Zoning Zoning Requested 1.17 RA District B2 District 1.17 Total Acreage to be rezoned Information to be Submitted for Capital Facilities Impact Model In order for the Planning Staff to use its capital facilities impact model, it is necessary for the applicant to provide information concerning the specifics of the proposed use. Otherwise, the planning staff will use the maximum possible density or intensity scenario for the proposed Zoning District as described on Page 9 of the application package. 8. Parcel Identification/Location: Parcel Identification Number 64- ((A)) -14 64-((A))-15 Single Family homes: Non Residential Lots: Districts Magisterial: Shawnee High School: Millbrook Fire Service: Millwood Middle School: James Wood Rescue Service: Millwood Elementary School: Armel 10. Zoning Change: List the acreage included in each new zoning category being requested. 11. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Townhome: Multi- Family Mobile Home: Hotel Rooms: Office: Service Station: Retail: Manufacturing: Square Footage of Proposed Uses Restaurant: Warehouse: Other 12. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right -of -way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the bet of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s): Owner (s): Date Date: zz 1'22 D¢ This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. rd In witness thereof, I (weh a r -(our) hand and seal this 73 day of JCtlliktt2i 200 4-; %as Ckt id A aj`- Planning Office, County of Frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone 540- 665 -5651 Facsimile 540- 665 -6395 Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We) (Name) 1Chnei S. 5 hepareL CVwryL A S Sh?lltd (Phone) 540 (oSCA (Address) 1 Co r c r v W 10C kes-Fe r V0_, ZZ co Q 2 the owner(s) of all those trac or parcels of and "Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by O3ococsoO Clef 14-) Instrument No. 0.3r an ei act e4 Page (c4 19- A Parcel: c 4- Lot: IS Block: A Section: Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) 6 reeAlls En3ivtcttl (Address) 1 51 \Ai ncly Lovle L0 t'1r.ine5 Vo 22-60 Z_ To act as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including: My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: Subdivision Site Plan Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia and is described as Rezoning (Including proffers) Conditional Use Permits Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) (Phone) 54° 2- -q 185 Stale of Virginia, City Count, f Frerle -rfrk_ Te :wit: 1, D o L. N l e l ISO a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument and who is (are) known to me, person lly appeared before me an as acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this23' ay ofJQrw J, 200 4c t.t2, I .(fr My Commission Expires: Eelovi vt( J 2-1, 2 Notary Public O =was eornini55iimed a. ado farzcas Dorwrxl -J REZONING APPLICATION #01 -04 SHEPARD PROPERTIES Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Public Hearing Prepared: April 5, 2004 Staff Contact: Christopher M. Mohn, AICP, Deputy Planning Director This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. As this application proceeds through the legislative review process, the method(s) of resolution for each issue proposed by the applicant(s) and/or recommended by the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors will be stated in the text of this report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 03/03/04 Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 04/14/04 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone two parcels totaling 1.17 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business General) District. LOCATION: The properties are located west and adjacent to Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), approximately 1,500 feet south from the intersection with Airport Road (Route 645). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER(S': 64 -A -14 and 64 -A -15 PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE: RA (Rural Areas) District, Unimproved ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING PRESENT USE: NORTH: RA (Rural Areas) District, Agricultural, SOUTH: RA (Rural Areas) District, Unimproved EAST: RP (Residential Performance) District, Residential WEST: RA (Rural Areas) District, Unimproved PROPOSED USE: General commercial and/or office land uses. REZ #01 -04, Shepard Properties Page 2 April 5, 2004 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT): The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 522. This route is the VDOT roadway which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the rezoning application dated December 8, 2003 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, Sixth 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. County Attorney: Proffers appear to be in proper form. Fire Marshal: Parcel size in relation to the allowable uses do not present significant changes to emergency response. Plan approval recommended. First Responder Millwood Fire Rescue Company: Proper hydrant coverage. Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA): No comment. Frederick Winchester Service Authority (FWSA): No comments. County Engineer /Public Works: The impact analysis should address stormwater management under "site drainage It should be noted that onsite stormwater management will be difficult, if not impossible, if the two parcels are developed at different times. Planning Staff Connnent: The applicants have addressed the County Engineer comment by providing additional stormwater management information in the Impact Analysis Statement. Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not impact historic resources. The Rural Landmarks Survey and the Comprehensive Policy Plan do not identify any battlefields or significant historic structures either on or adjacent to the subject properties. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for the Shepard properties is in conformance with the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan and the proposed zoning is compatible with airport operations. It appears that this rezoning will not have an impact on operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. REZ #01 -04, Shepard Properties Page 3 April 5, 2004 Planning Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcels as being zoned R -1 (Residential Limited). The parcels were re- mapped from R -1 to A -2 (Agricultural General) pursuant to the County's comprehensive downzoning initiative (Zoning Amendment Petition #011 -80), which was adopted on October 8, 1980. The County's agricultural zoning districts were subsequently combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re- mapping of the subject property and all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA District. 2) Site Suitability The subject properties do not contain any environmental features or constraints that would either hinder or preclude site development. In particular, the site does not include any areas of steep slopes, flood plain, or wetlands /hydrologic soils. The General Soil Map of the Soil Survey of Frederick County, Virginia indicates that the soils comprising the subject parcels fall under the Weikert Berks Blairton soil association, which is the predominant association on land located east of Interstate 81. It is noted that the Weikert- Berks- Blairton soil association presents some limitations to site development due to a seasonal high water table, depth to bedrock, and slope. The management of such characteristics must be demonstrated through the site engineering process associated with subsequent development applications for the proposed project. It is noted that the majority of the site is wooded. As reported in the Impact Analysis Statement, the wooded areas consist principally of mature pine trees with an understory of deciduous vegetation. 3) Comprehensive Policy Plan The subject properties are located wholly within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The properties are included within the boundaries of the South Frederick Land Use Plan (SFLUP), and are more specifically located within the SFLUP Central Area. The subject parcels are contained within an area planned for mixed use development. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6 -42.9) The SFLUP promotes mixed use areas as an alternative to the single use development pattern that has typified land use within the UDA. Indeed, the mixed use areas are envisioned to consist of residential and commercial components that are integrated through a multi -modal transportation system. To ensure the desired mix of uses, the SFLUP stipulates that the REZ #01 -04, Shepard Properties Page 4 April 5, 2004 residential component of a mixed use area comprise no more than 75% of the total land area. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 6 -42.4, 6 -42.5) Planning Staff Comment: Although not a mixed use proposal in itself, it is reasonable to recognize the applicants' request as consistent with the SFLUP, as the commercial use of the subject parcels will contribute to the mixed use development pattern envisioned by policy. The applicants have endeavored to enable future integration of the site with the larger mixed use area by proffering pedestrian access easements that will allow linkages to adjoining parcels. It is noted that careful evaluation of future development proposals for the mixed use area will be necessary to ensure that any existing commercial uses on the corridor are effectively incorporated into an overarching design scheme. Potential Impacts a) Transportation As noted in the Impact Analysis Statement, the guidelines concerning maximum use intensities included with the County's rezoning application identify 21,361 square feet of retail use(s) as the most intensive land use possible on one acre of B2 zoned land. Given this assumption, the most intensive development outcome possible on the subject parcels would be 24,992 square feet of retail use(s). To project the traffic impacts associated with such a land use scenario, the applicants employed trip generation data for shopping center facilities published in The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 6 Edition. The trip generation figures provided for shopping centers are 42.92 average vehicle trips (VPD) per 1,000 square feet of floor area on weekdays and 49.97 VPD per 1,000 square feet of floor area on Saturdays. The projected traffic generated by the applicant's proposal would therefore range between 1,072 VPD (weekdays) and 1,248 VPD (Saturdays). VDOT research indicates that the daily volume on Front Royal Pike between Papermill Road (Route 644) and Millwood Pike (Route 50/17) is 14,000 VPD. The projected traffic generated by this rezoning application would thus increase average daily traffic volumes on the referenced segment of Front Royal Pike by 7.66% and 8.91% on weekdays and Saturdays, respectively. The segment of Front Royal Pike serving the subject parcels is comprised of four (4) travel lanes (dual north south) and a center turn lane. The applicants have proffered that access to the properties will occur through a shared entrance on Front Royal Pike. The applicants have further proffered to install a right turn/taper lane on Front Royal Pike to facilitate site access. VDOT Comment: The application to rezone these properties appears to have little measurable impact on Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South), which is the state route providing access to the site. VDOT is satisfied that the transportation proffers offered with this rezoning application, dated December 8, 2003, address transportation concerns associated with this request. b) Historic Resources c) Water Sewer REZ #01 -04, Shepard Properties Page 5 April 5, 2004 Planning Staff Comment: The addition of trips to public roads is acknowledged as a discernable impact of all new development. However, as per VDOT's comment above, Front Royal Pike should be able to adequately accommodate the trip.generation projections associated with this application. Staff concurs with VDOT that the improvements proffered by the applicant are sufficient to address the transportation impacts of the proposed rezoning. The Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey does not identify any potentially significant historic resources on the site of the proposed rezoning. Moreover, according to the National Park Service's Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, the subject site is not included in any battlefield study area and does not contain any core battlefield resources. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is authorized to serve the subject site with public water and sewer due to its location within the UDA and S W SA. The FCSA is the agency responsible for the operation and maintenance of the public water and sewer system to include the Diehl Water Plant and Parkins Mill Wastewater Treatment Facility, which are the primary treatment facilities that will serve the commercial use(s) of the properties. It is noted that the FCSA chose to offer no comment concerning the impacts of the proposed rezoning on the public water and sewer system. At maximum possible build -out, the applicant projects that the proposed commercial area will consume approximately 4,998 gallons per day (GPD) of water and generate an average daily sewage flow of 4,998 GPD. The applicant has indicated that water service for the project will originate from the Diehl Water Plant via the 20 inch primary distribution main that runs adjacent to the site. The applicant notes that sewage originating from the site will be conveyed to the Parkins Mill Wastewater Treatment Facility for treatment. Sewage conveyance is expected to occur via an existing 8 inch sewer line located on the east side of Front Royal Pike that will be extended to the site. As an alternative, the applicant notes that an existing 8 inch sewer line located on the west side of Front Royal Pike may be used for conveyance should future development result in its extension from its current terminus north of the site. The applicant indicates that the Parkins Mill Wastewater Treatment Facility possesses adequate capacity to accommodate the sewage flow projected with this proposal. Specifically, it is stated that this facility has a hydraulic capacity of 2.0 MGD and is currently experiencing average sewage flows of 1.0 to 1.2 MGD. REZ #01 -04, Shepard Properties Page 6 April 5, 2004 5) Proffer Statement Dated December 8, 2003 A) Site Access 1. The applicants have proffered to provide a shared entrance for access to the two parcels from Front Royal Pike. The applicants have further proffered to install a right turn/taper lane on the south bound side of Front Royal Pike to facilitate site access. The applicants have proffered to establish ten -foot wide pedestrian access easements to enable linkages with the properties located immediately south and north of the site. The establishment of the easements is proffered to occur during the site plan phase of the development process. Planning Staff Comment: It is noted that the applicants have not committed to the installation of pedestrian facilities within the referenced easements. The responsibility for future construction of such facilities is therefore uncertain. Staff acknowledges the difficulty in determining the appropriate location for inter parcel pedestrian connections in advance of development proposals for the adjoining parcels. However, without the commitment of the applicants to construction of such facilities, it is possible that the connections necessary to integrate the site with the remainder of the planned mixed use area will not materialize. It is noted that Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South) is identified for short-term development of bicycle facilities in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Indeed, the County has adopted the Bicycle Plan for the City of Winchester and Frederick County as a guide for the development of non motorized facilities. Such non motorized systems are considered integral to the creation of a complete networked transportation system for Frederick County and the City of Winchester. (Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 7 -3, 7 -14, 7 -17) B) Corridor Appearance 1. The applicants have proffered to install enhanced landscaping along the frontage of the site consistent with a conceptual landscape plan that is included with the proposed Proffer Statement. The proffered landscaped area will include an earth berm and a variety of plant types to ensure seasonal color along this portion of the Front Royal Pike corridor. The applicants have proffered that no more than two (2) freestanding business signs will be installed on the site, with no more than one (1) such sign on each of the constituent parcels. Moreover, the applicants have proffered to limit the height of freestanding business signs to a maximum of twenty (20) feet. Planning Staff Comment: The Zoning Ordinance does not limit the number of freestanding business signs permitted on a commercial site, although such signs must be separated by a distance of at least 50 feet. Given the relatively small size of the subject site, it may be appropriate to consider combining the freestanding signage REZ #01 -04, Shepard Properties Page 7 April 5, 2004 possible for each constituent parcel into a single monument style freestanding sign serving the site as a whole. It is noted that the Zoning Ordinance permits freestanding signs on commercial property to reach a maximum height of 35 feet. The height limitation proffered by the applicants therefore represents a 15 -foot reduction in permitted sign height on the subject site. C) Land Use Restrictions The applicants have proffered to prohibit the following land uses that would otherwise be permitted on B2 zoned land: SIC 483 SIC 49 SIC 551 SIC 552 SIC 555 SIC 556 SIC 557 SIC 559 SIC 701 SIC 704 SIC 7542 SIC 7832 Radio and Television Broadcasting Stations Electric, Gas and Sanitary Facilities, Excluding Offices Motor Vehicle Dealers (New and Used) Motor Vehicle Dealers (Used Only) Boat Dealers Recreational Vehicle Dealers Motorcycle Dealers Automotive Dealers, Not Elsewhere Classified Hotels and Motels Organization Hotels and Lodging Car Washes Motion Picture Theaters Adult Retail Uses D. Monetary Contribution for Fire and Rescue Services The applicants have proffered to contribute the sum of $200 to the County of Frederick for fire and rescue services. The applicants have proffered to provide this contribution at the time of building permit issuance for the first structure developed on the 1.17 acre site. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY ACTION OF THE 03/03/04 MEETING: There was discussion between the Commission, the staff, and the applicant regarding how stormwater management would be accomplished for the two parcels. The applicant's representative explained their intentions to construct a single stormwater facility, with the capacity to accommodate the entire 1.17 acre site. It was further noted that this facility would be designed and installed with the site plan for the first development proposal for the site, should the two parcels develop independently of each other. The applicant's representative addressed staff's comments regarding a lack of commitment to construct pedestrian/ bicycle facilities. Because a final decision had not been made on the chosen route for future facilities, the applicant believed the best course of action was to simply provide the ability for connectivity through their property at this time. REZ #01 -04, Shepard Properties Page 8 April 5, 2004 A concern was also raised about the available capacity of the Diehl water plant and the possibility of overloading problems at both the Parkins Mill and the regional plant. Overall, members of the Commission believed the plans submitted were well thought out and were comfortable with the proffers proposed by the applicant. There were no public comments. By a majority vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning, with the proffers as submitted by the applicant. The majority vote was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE): Triplett, Kriz Ours, Light, Unger, Watt, Straub, DeHaven NO: Gochenour (Commissioners Thomas, Morris, Rosenberry, and Fisher were absent from the meeting.) STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 04/14/04 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The proposed rezoning is a request to rezone two parcels comprising 1.17 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (Business General) District to accommodate general commercial and /or office land uses. Although planning staff has offered comment concerning pedestrian and bicycle facilities as well as signage, no significant issues have been identified concerning the requested rezoning. Moreover, no issues of significance were raised by any other review agency. The subject properties are located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and the request generally conforms with the applicable policies of the South Frederick Land Use Plan (SFLUP).