Regular Meeting, August 20, 2013 Work Session, and August 27, 2013 Work Session

WINCHESTER COMMON COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 AGENDA 7:00 P.M.

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

MOMENT OF SILENCE

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

APPROVAL OF MINUTES – August 13, 2013 Regular Meeting, August 20, 2013 Work Session, and August 27, 2013 Work Session

REPORT OF THE MAYOR

REPORT OF THE CITY MANAGER

REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY

1.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS

1.1 CU-13-372: Conditional Use Permit – Request of Morris & Ritchie Associates on behalf of the City of Winchester for a conditional use permit to construct a telecommunications tower at 700 Jefferson Street (Map Number 190-01-3) zoned Education, Institution and Public Use (EIP) District. (REQUIRES ROLL-CALL VOTE)(pages 4-54)

1.2 O-2013-25: Second Reading – AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE 8.523 ACRES OF LAND AT 1900 VALLEY AVENUE, 211 AND 301 WEST JUBAL EARLY DRIVE FROM LIMITED INDUSTRIAL (M-1), HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HR), AND HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (B-2) DISTRICTS TO B-2 DISTRICT WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) OVERLAY RZ-13-196 (Proposed Jubal Square Development Plan) (REQUIRES ROLL-CALL VOTE)(pages 55-87)

1.3 CU-13-422: Conditional Use Permit – Request of Daniel T. Knight, Jr. for a conditional use permit for motor vehicle painting, upholstering, and body and fender work at 427 North Cameron Street (Map Number 173-01-K-1) zoned Commercial Industrial (CM-1) District. (REQUIRES ROLL-CALL VOTE)(pages 88-92)

1.4 O-2013-22: Second Reading – AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND RE- ADOPT SECTION 10-51 OF THE CITY CODE TO INCLUDE AN EXCEPTION FOR BLASTING OPERATIONS RELATED TO CEMETERY BURIAL OF DECEASED HUMAN REMAINS (Reduction of insurance

requirement for blasting at cemeteries) (REQUIRES ROLL-CALL VOTE)(pages 93-96)

1.5 O-2013-24: Second Reading – AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE 44.44 ACRES AT 2410 AND 2416 PAPERMILL ROAD (Map Numbers 272-01-8 AND 291- 02-A-B) FROM INTENSIVE INDUSTRIAL (M-2) DISTRICT TO HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (B-2) DISTRICT RZ-13-289 (Proposed rezoning for the former Federal Mogul property)(REQUIRES ROLL-CALL VOTE)(pages 97-102)

1.6 O-2013-23: Second Reading – AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL SECTION 26-7 OF THE WINCHESTER CITY CODE WHICH WOULD ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER OR OCCUPIER TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO THEIR PROPERTY (with the exception of snow removal) (REQUIRES ROLL-CALL VOTE)(pages 103-108)

1.7 CU-13-361: Conditional Use Permit – Request of Shenandoah Mobile, LLC for a conditional use permit to construct a telecommunications tower at 2633 Papermill Road (Map Number 291-01-7) zoned Commercial Industrial (CM-1) District. (REQUIRES ROLL-CALL VOTE)(pages 109-115)

1.8 R-2013-42: Resolution – Approval of Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (pages 116-137)

2.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS

3.0 CONSENT AGENDA

3.1 O-2013-27: First Reading: ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF THE CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA, IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $27,000,000, TO FINANCE THE COSTS OF CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (pages 138-141)

3.2 O-2013-28: First Reading – AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND RE-ENACT ARTICLES 1, 8, 9, 10, AND 13 OF THE WINCHESTER ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO RESTAURANTS AND ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS. TA-13-146 (pages 142-151)

3.3 O-2013-29: First Reading - AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 41.5 ACRES OF LAND CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 86 PARCELS, EITHER IN FULL OR IN PART, TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT (CE) DISTRICT; SUBJECT PARCELS ARE ADJACENT TO, OR WITHIN 400 FEET OF, THE BERRYVILLE AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY RZ-13-380 (Establishes a Corridor Enhancement District along Berryville Avenue)(pages 152-159)

3.4 O-2013-30: First Reading – AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE 1.295 ACRES OF LAND AT 1720 VALLEY AVENUE (Map Number 231-04-K-8A) FROM HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (B-2) DISTRICT WITH CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT (CE) DISTRICT OVERLAY TO B-2 DISTRICT WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AND CE DISTRICT OVERLAY. RZ-13-292 (Redevelopment plan for the former Coca-Cola plant)(pages 160- 170)

3.5 O-2013-14: First Reading – AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT ARTICLES 18, 21, AND 23 OF THE WINCHESTER ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO SIGNS, VIOLATION AND PENALTY, FEES, AND CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT TA-13-138 (Revision to temporary sign provisions and permit requirements)(pages 171-188)

3.6 R-2013-39: Resolution – Adoption of the Street Maintenance Master Plan to be used as the City’s guide for future street maintenance program (pages 189-212)

3.7 R-2013-40: Resolution – Approval to create a formal policy for Council review and approval of grant applications (pages 213-217)

3.8 R-2013-43: Resolution – Request for submission of application for the SAFER Grant (pages 218-220)

4.0 AGENDA

4.1 Motion to appoint ______and ______as members of the Handley Board of Trustees each to a six year term expiring June 30, 2019

4.2 Motion to appoint ______as the parent representative to the Community Policy and Management Team

4.3 Motion to appoint ______as a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals to an unexpired term ending July 31, 2014

4.4 Motion to appoint ______as a member of the Social Services Advisory Board for an unexpired four year term ending March 31, 2015

5.0 EXECUTIVE SESSION

5.1 MOTION TO CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO §2.2- 3711(A)(7) OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING LEGAL ADVICE AND STATUS UPDATE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY AND LEGAL CONSULTATION REGARDING THE SUBJECT OF SPECIFIC LEGAL MATTERS REQUIRING THE PROVISION OF LEGAL ADVICE BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND MATTERS OF ACTUAL OR PROBABLE LITIGATION

6.0 ADJOURNMENT

C I N I A —IROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: 8/27/13 (work session), CUT OFF I)ATE: 8/21/13 9/10/1 3 (renular rnt

RESOLUTION ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING X

ITEM TITLE: CU-13-372 Request of Morris & Ritchie Associates on behalf of the City of Winchester for a conditional use permit to constructa telecommunicationstower at 700 Jefferson Street 1(Ma Number 190-0] -3,) zoned Education,Institutionand PublicUse (EIP) District.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING: Public hearing for 9/10/13 Council meeting

ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission recommended appro al with conditions

FUNDING DATA: N/A

INSURANCE: N/A

The initiating Department Director will place below, in sequence of transmittal, the names of each department that must initial their review in order for this item to he placed on the City Council agenda.

INITIALS FOR INITIALS FOR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL DATE

1. Planning

2. Emergency Management 3. City Attorney 9?Z/2t’i2 4. City Manager 22— /3 5. Clerk of Council

Initiating Department Director’s Signature:______

4 To: THE From: Alternate vote. See stages Date: OPTIONS: Center. Goal communications City Re: RECOMMENDATIONS: required BACKGROUND: No BUDGET Request Provide Progress RELATIONSHIP Planning funding - - - - attached staff ISSUE: #2 for Approve Approve Consider — Deny City (2013-2014) for

I September August Aaron IMPACT: Conditional L. Honorable Develop Commission upgrades has tower several A. Council is CUP the received Information required. Miller, TO Grisdale, with with site 21, utilization o installation for application tower a years. with High to STRATEGIC CITY — Mayor 2013 will 5, Emergency Use conditions revised the Public and a 2013 information Performing on conditional reflect (Full Director City’s Permit from recommend City of and Safety conditions Update alternate staff COUNCIL PLAN: owned Motorola public cost Members of recommended Management (CU-13-372) of Communications Organization, a relating report use increase. Zoning new safety property approval site permit public n Staff and of is to and attached). City communication the — See Coordinator Goal application Public by safety at Inspections with utilization Council System attached 700 5 the Report ACTION #4 conditions Safety communications Planning Create Jefferson of for from an Communications system a the More alternate Commission as Street. Motorola construction noted Livable that MEMO tower This site has within Solutions City located request been Tower at for of the 700 a All, in at 237-foot staff is Jefferson the Winchester Management part development report of radio the

I Street. on Medical in a 4-2 SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS TOWER ALTERNATE SITE EVALUATION - WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER CAMPUS

THE ISSUE: Provide City Council with requested information relating to the utilizing an alternate location for the erection of the City’s proposed Public Safety Communications Tower. Develop background information based on identified site on Winchester Medical Center Campus.

BACKGROUND: During the Council Work Session of August 27, 2013 Council requested an analysis of an alternate site for the erection of the proposed Public Safety Communications Tower be conducted. Council specifically identified a site on the campus of the Winchester Medical Center be considered in lieu of the proposed site at 700 Jefferson Street. Motorola Solutions, Teltronics, R. L. Kimball and city staff proceeded with the analysis including locating a probable site for the tower on the campus of Winchester Medical Center. Propagation studies were performed to identify the specifications of the tower enabling compliance with the system’s performance standards, consideration of cost differential that may be associated with the alternate site, identification of the impact on project schedule and other items such as zoning were for the alternate site. Attached for review and consideration are the following items: > Cover letter crafted by Motorola Solutions Table 1 created by Motorola Solutions addressing estimated pricing and projected schedule modification. > Aerial view of a selected site located southeast of the Health Professionals Building on the Winchester Medical Center Campus. Propagation map indentifying coverage based on the utilization of the same height tower (237’) as proposed for the 700 Jefferson Street site. > Propagation map based on the minimum required tower specification to provide coverage in accordance with the performance standard (95%-95%). > Zoning specifications addressing tower height at the proposed location. Considerations related to the 700 Jefferson Street site.

BUDGET IMPACT: Utilization of the alternate tower site reflects an estimated project cost increase of $778,910.00.

ZONING CONSIDERATIONS: The Zoning Ordinance has a maximum height for transmitting and receiving towers in the Medical Center district of 100-feet. For either a 237-foot or 450-foot tower a variance would need to be requested through the Board of Zoning Appeals. Additionally, should Council desire to select this location and move forward with the necessary approvals, the Conditional Use Permit process would need to start again from the beginning with a review and recommendation from the Planning Commission before being reviewed in full by City Council. Similar to the EIPdistrict, the Medical Center (MC)zoning district does not have a required “fall zone” distance from the tower structure to adjacent properties.

6 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS/ADJUSTMENTS - JEFFERSON STREET SITE > Supply additional substantial ground level screening at Jefferson Street fence line. Relocate tower structure 75’ north of selected site providing reducing impact on properties located to the south should a full collapse of the tower occur. Remove all existing antennas and associated cabling located on elevated tank. Confine utilization of tower for public safety use.

7 Q MOTOROLA SOLUTiONS

MotorolaSolutons,Inc. Telephone:÷14107126200 7031ColumbiaGatewayDr.,3rdFl. Fax:+1410 7126489 Columbia,MD21046-2289

September 5, 2013

Mr. Dale Iman City Manager City of Winchester 15 N. Cameron St. Winchester, VA 22601

Subject: Antenna site study for the Winchester Medical Center (Valley l-lealth Systems) location

Dear Mr. Iman:

At the direction of City Council, Motorola has prepared a high level performance and budgetary feasibility evaluation of a transmitter site located on the Winchester Medical Center (Valley Health System) campus. None of the required approvals from landowners, federal, state, and city authorities has been obtained or is guaranteed.

Motorola has provided two 800M1-lz voice coverage maps that show the portable radio in-building coverage. The contracted performance standard requires 95%! 95% coverage (95% of the city area at 95% probability).

1. The first propagation study simply relocates the proposed Jefferson Street tower and equipment to the Winchester Medical Center campus. The propagation study shows coverage for 85% of the city using that configuration. 2. The second propagation study shows the minimum tower height at which the required 95% coverage can be provided. A 450 foot tower will be required.

Table I below provides budgetary and schedule estimates to implement the single site P25 trunked public safety radio system described in the Motorola proposal of February 29, 2012, substituting a 450 fliot self-supporting tower at the Winchester Medical Center campus. These are budgetary guidelines to assist the city with the critical issues decision process, not quotes to provide services.

The relocation of the transmitter site from Jefferson Street to the Winchester Medical Center campus will require an estimated additional budget of $778,910 plus land acquisition costs and an estimated minimum project delay (schedule extension) of 368 days if all required approvals are obtained with minimum delay and without the need for additional resources to meet regulatory requirements.

Please note that a decision to use multiple sites will increase costs substantially beyond the proposed single site design. Site connectivity (microwave), simulcast technology upgrade, site acquisition and development, and system redesign will contribute to additional cost increases. If leased sites are substituted in lieu of city owned sites, then recurring lease costs are an additional City consideration.

Thank you, I)giBy gr’- Jansen Pieter-

CPJ017 Da1e 20130905 082943 -0400 Pieter Jansen Project Manager Motorola Solutions, Inc

8 extension NEPA/SHPO Zoning * Budget 1)ocurnentation Coordination, management Site relicensing Tower Tower (additional Engineering extension(s) 1. FCC arwband Narrow Table FAA Columbia, Land 7031 Motorola Concurrent Denied Coljmbia development Frequency approval acquistion Soluhons, Description 450 enhancements 1. MD approval, Estimate 21046-2289 Budget Gateway to — — ft till If Inc. and the waiver approvals task regulatory phases) Dr., Project schedule and 3rd -- A Fl. Schedule task approval $778,910 $281,568 $6,780 $145,987 $17,288 $1,637 $4,237 (assumes $1 $199,973 $5,593 Additional Estimated that 15,847 Cost Impact runs is all concurrently denied tasks 120 for 30 90 90 120 Estimated I)uration to to to Winchester to (days) to occur then 120 120 Denied’ 90 1)ciucd Denied 28 I)enied 14 1)enied impact with in 9 their Medical other Estimated Extension 368 Schedule on Q minimum 40* 60* 30* 120 90 schedule 14 14 Days * * * tasks Center MOTOROLA and tower Tower Additional corridor. requirement electrical. submittal. Site licenses Fall May apply. FAA FCC 1 Self-Supporting time Tel and results Campus pdor ipad plans, zone. not response paintedlCollocationlStrohe budget base Iiarnc). height at approve telco, in Increased RF this size compound height (multiple Transmitter partial Telephone issues. impact design, is height is grounding, Tower Notes unknown. VI doubled. restrictions Fax SOLUTIONS IF or tower +1 +1 Entrance is and strobe). tower, and 1 712 410 410 no not Site 712 fencing additional lighting 800 CUP defined. MW, 6489 6200 may Ml lights re - lz earth fee .1000 Go gk ‘300 A

10 ______r

City of Winchester, VA For Informational Purposes Only

MOTOROLA Single Site Trunked 800MHz Voice System - DAQ 3.4

I I / Valley ealth A nosticenler Sport I

F’ Bank Qpllar nerajBBT • .ous CityHall Winchester• ehaJoirjfudIc(al Cent

Jefferson Watt Towerhfl .7 Kecholdl ltdle School i-ugh ShooL

S.,, ,, I,

Osullivan Fun

‘V

V Antenna Height (Center of Radiation) C Tx = 203ft RX = 223ft U- **Same AGL heights as proposed** **New Jefferson Tower** 250W ERP

The painted areas on the map represent the area q where the City of Winchester, VA will experience “0 the most reliable communication.

VTEQ, USGS, Intermap, 1PC, NRCAN, Esri l

O 0.225 0.45 0 9 Miles Portable Inbound Coverage Worn on Hip wI Swivel Case and RSM I 20dB Building Penetration Loss Over Entire Winchester, VAService Area 1 inch = 0.69 miles crkO67-11 Hydra 4.5.11530 1977631170.1.000.625 11 City of Winchester, VA For Informational Purposes Only

MOTOROLA Single Site Trunked 800MHz Voice System - DAQ3.4

‘Jlar nerajBBT Banl Winchester Rehaàj Center m , l Jefferson Water Tower John Kerr School John HandleHigh School

Osullivan F

Antenna Height (Center of Radiation) 3 Tx 413ft RX = 433ft

C, 250W ERP

F The painted areas on the map represent the area where the City of Winchester, VAwill ‘C experience

C, the most reliable communication.

C. 95%_AREA_MSE.i_PortabIe2_4I EQ. USGS, Intermap, PC, NRCAN, Esn Kong), Esn (Thailand), TomTom, 2013

0 0225 0.45 0.9 Miles Portable Inbound Coverage Worn on Hip w/ Swivel Case and RSM I I I III 20dB Building Penetration Loss Over Entire Winchester, VAService Area 1 inch = 0.69 miles crkO67-11 Hydra 4.5.1153.0 12 1977631170.1.000 6.25 vote. RECOMMENDATIONS: OPTIONS: Planning stages THE No communications BUDGET City required BACKGROUND: Goal To: Progress RELATIONSHIP Re: Request Date: From: funding - - - staff ISSUE: #2 for Approve Approve Deny — (2013-2014) for

Commission I IMPACT: upgrades August Aaron Develop Conditional Honorable has several is CUP the received required. TO Grisdale, with with 21, application for tower a years. to High

STRATEGIC CITY — installation Mayor 2013 conditions revised Use the and Public a Performing on conditional (Full Director City’s Permit recommend City and Safety conditions

staff COUNCIL PLAN: owned public Members of recommended (CU-13-372) of Communications Organization, a report use new Zoning safety property approval permit public is of attached). and communication City — Goal application Public by safety with at Inspections Council System the 700

13 ACTION #4 conditions Safety Planning communications Jefferson Create for Communications system a the More Commission as Street. construction noted that

Livable MEMO tower This within has City request been Tower at for of the 700 a All, in 237-foot staff is Jefferson the Management part report development of radio

the I Street. on in a 4-2 City Council Work Session August 27, 2013

CU-13-372 Request of Morris & Ritchie Associates on behalf of the City of Winchester for a conditional use permit to construct a telecommunications tower at 700 Jefferson Street (Map Number 190-01-3) zoned Education, Institution and Public Use (EIP) District.

REQUESTDESCRIPTION The request is for a 237-foot radio communications tower to be located behind the existing John Kerr Elementary School at 700 Jefferson Street adjacent to the existing elevated water tank. The tower will be of a lattice-style construction.

AREADESCRIPTION r The subject parcel is located on the western terminus of Jefferson Street. The parcel is zoned Education, Institution, and Public Use (EIP) District. The property to the north and east is similarly zoned EIP, and properties on the south, west are zoned Low Density Residential (LR) District. The vicinity is composed of residential, agricultural, and educational uses. On the east is the John Kerr Elementary School, a single family residential property is directly to the south, and the Glass Glen Burnie Foundation property.

STAFFCOMMENTS This request involves the installation of a 230-foot radio communications tower to support a Public Safety Radio Communications System to upgrade the City’s infrastructure and improve the service coverage throughout the community. The main portion of the tower and all antennas will be no taller than the proposed 230-foot height. However, there is a lightning rod and aircraft beacon that will be mounted on the top of the tower, for an absolute height of 237-feet. The Winchester Zoning Ordinance establishes several maximum telecommunications tower heights throughout the City of Winchester; however, the EIP district does not have a maximum tower height.

Part of the requirement of the public safety communications system is a federally mandated upgrade to the existing infrastructure that the City utilizes, and is a time sensitive request as well. The project was supposed to be completed by January 1, 2013; however due to technical issues with the process, the City received a one year extension until 2014.

Motorola responded to a City of Winchester Public Safety Radio Network RFPdated December 15, 2011. This was a competitive procurement. The City asked for four different possible options: Option A—Full 800MHz Trunking Radio Network, Option B—800MHz/VHF Hybrid System, Option C—VHF Compliant System and Option D—Alternative Solutions. Motorola chose to submit a proposal to the City of Winchester under the Option D—Alternative Solutions scenario. This enabled the City to provide a single site 800MHz trunking/VHF system that would meet or exceed the specifications set forth in the City’s

Section

comments

few At

number construction

the

included

firefighters

their technical

The

central

buildings Street

for

when

REP Motorola’s

most

need building

RFP.

cultural

was

the

existing

specifications

areas

current

services

for

likely

All

The

introducing

end

faith

location,

have

economically

alternatives of desired

telecommunications

The

City.

investigated have

location

18-2-1.2

addition,

which

possible

duplicate

limits

sharing

the and

applicant

survey

noted

requirements

order

enter

goal

utilizing

applicant

historic

with

adequate

been

system

the

areas.

the

existing

was

buildings

this

that

(eliminating

was

allows

which

other

certain

space. was

applicant’s

cultural the

means

exhausted

and

additional

City keep

infrastructure,

new

one

the

has

help

microwave.

throughout

and

restrict

For

would

feasible

used

design

required

elevated notes

space

interested for

had

the

present

July

executed

tower

the

example,

for illustrate

cultural buildings

which

with

within

report

the

CUP

tower

always

their

towers,

additional

system

provide

sharing

compliance

and

for

sites

ensures

most

thicker

the

2013

consideration

must

water

the

The

the

no sites

staffs

parties.

any

the

that

letter be into

building,

will

Letter

Winchester

been

City

important

facility

alternative CR1

design

City.

construction

City’s

City. the additional

space

letter

conducted

the

of current

that

tank.

point.

the

sites)

walls

from

(Cultural with

met

the

City.

dated

the

The

budget.

design

on mix

visible,

the

from

demonstrated

generator,

Each

historic

Intent

and

for

vicinity

being

mission

The

resulting

City’s

system

existing

accommodate

alternate

criteria

the

items

City

July

other

Police

communications

proposed

simplistic,

the

Resources

of of proposed

The

and

there

City

able

determine

antenna

will

properties

several

the

of water

applicant,

mentioned

does

than critical,

towers

project monitoring

and

2013

the

would

operational

options

the

alternatives

was

towers.

constructing

not

have

tank

single

able

system

space

proposed

towers

Fire

Inc.),

the

REP.

loss

future

“farm,”

that

public

have

committee

what,

have

surveyed.

City

already

submitted

full

considered

above

and

facilities

it of

transmitter

adverse

Those

numerous

system,

will

throughout

existing

utilize

safety

placement

and

adequate

Council

did

criteria

communication

was

their

tower.

Rescue

important

incorporate

any,

correct

translate

adequate

not

new

requirements,

felt

the

place.

tower solution

its

UPS,

materials,

impact

building

impacts

were

the

instructed

provide

Several

that

alternative

tower portable

departments

site

proper

signal

this

the

antenna,

EIP

and

nomuch into

antennas

utilization

utilizing

coverage

which

deficiency.

simulcast

associated

that

City,

note

district.

manner

exists.

there

photographs

evidence

negotiate

are

when

call

radios

other

penetrate

that

along

would

and

that

eliminates

options

and

based

would

the

follows:

There

higher

has

throughout

this

police

technology

structures

utilization

that

while

with

line.

with

Jefferson

meet

that

in existing

means

several

tower a

good

larger

were

are

were

costs

staff

20db

was

Also,

the

and

the

for

a a 3) The tower height is no more than the minimum to accomplish required coverage.

Originally the height of the tower was designed to be 250-feet. After further analysis, it was determined that a 230-foot tower would be able to achieve the requirements of the updated public safety communications system. There is no maximum height limitation for the EIPdistrict provided in the Zoning Ordinance.

4) The tower construction is of a design which minimizes the visual impact and the tower and other facilities have been camouflaged and/or screened from adjacent properties and rights-of-way to the maximum extent practicable.

The tower is of a lattice-style design, which is necessary for the structural stability of the tower due to the height. The support equipment is proposed to be screened from the public right-of- way by a row of evergreen trees to help minimize the visual impact from the street.

5) The proposal must provide for the retention of existing stands of trees and the installation of screening where existing trees do not mitigate the visual impact of the facility. Such screening must, at a minimum, meet the requirements of Section 19-5-6.4d of the Ordinance. The Planning Commission may recommend and the City Council may require additional trees and screening when the minimum provisions do not mitigate adverse visual impacts of the facility.

The applicant is not proposing to eliminate any trees in the area. The support equipment will be located adjacent to the tower structure, with evergreen screening along the southern property boundary along Jefferson Street.

6) The electromagnetic fields do not exceed the radio frequency emission standards established by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)or standard issued by the Federal Government subsequent to the adoption of this Ordinance.

The applicant will provide the necessary documentation to affirm that the proposal will meet the Federal Government frequency emission standards. Additionally, the tower proposal is undergoing review with the required FAAapprovals for the proposed location and height of the structure. A warning beacon is required to be installed at the top of the tower facility. In the Elecromagnetic Emissions (EME) report submitted to the City, the documentation shows that the proposed EMEfrom the public safety communications tower will not exceed the acceptable exposure limits for the general public.

Staff believes that the proposal meets the requirements outlined in Section 18-2-1.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The request, while proposed to be the tallest telecommunications tower structure in the City, will be the minimum needed in order to accomplish the requirements of the upgraded public safety communications system. Should the structure fail, there are no adjacent residences or occupied structures that are in danger of being in a “fall-zone.” The applicant submitted a drawing that indicates that the proposed fall zone would be largely contained within the subject parcel of 700 Jefferson Street.

RECOMMENDATION

welfare

improvements approval

During

The

Submit

once

their

residents

applicant,

the

August

4-2

equipment

as-built

the

vote,

20,

and

neighborhood.

tower

because

2013

workers

emissions

owner,

meeting,

the

longer

certification

the

use,

The

the

property

neighborhood

recommended

active

Planning

proposed,

after

owner use;

Commission

the

should

nor

shall

approval

facility

remove

injurious

not

forwarded

adversely

subject

operation;

equipment

adjacent

affect

CU-13-372

the

within

the

following

properties

health,

recommending

ninety

conditions:

aey or safety,

(90) days craitec. L. (‘ommunications frequencies utilized :.pcetriirn discussion ‘I provid;n: the alippoli f:’equencies. systems these fhiy two ‘econd invol inlrastrucwre City 1)ciii \Vineliestei, Rouss 15 Mr. Fhe ibm fhe I’he he R. 251 \\ a N. limbrooL Wiich second studje; constriction reculatore e. City f’jmothv of yes first e Mr. ittidie: KiiiN:f iche’isr. Cameron E.isi City of was Jefferson I current Winchester 1 each tuc 1 merieney he was ‘yliulnans. a I ytuds’ ni everal and he I’fccad5k were study Hall l’stIs. state suhect were ‘cr1 dcsi:a V of Winchester A. VA eqUipment was the ins of and research ‘ and issue Street armed such not found (‘onlmiss;on Street 1,0 ci of and ols 22601 the Siy was L!(t) undependable bet to C sio Assoe, mponcnta I to specified the more astiii;ihl: od inns. deteintine esbiblisnment further city I to nniunieatmns Nan’osvbandin: were option. Cnwr by’ that I it ait the ixtended determine ss Public Is was a cry and L. presented Plannino ster— radio the e’abl in i? nidequate c/u/c R that nil to not o:ir re Vs determined UIi,1aflCi.i’i/ prov:Ue need city ll:e based support Kimball bile tieneed Safety communications ulation’; Vs Is cand i.hmcnt the of the ater of ,‘‘ condition Director of Project had en’,atted on w ses d;ites requirements’ a radio on type to Inch service commilnicatioi a tranam lower the die eral and no serve tq.e pertiinin; fl Public that 011,5? of of 01 City’’ cfecision coir;municatons is I xue or desi:’n .\ssoci;iies and a in :‘adio of a Site a i: ( 10(5)11 the tl’rochout an conteptu.il Project the recei\ 211.) S,ifcts the corn Itily condition 55 radio community. u communications to , per. steni to dea:’ii options ic City’s to inuracations’ 8 18 i which rad cli? the ,.‘u,, ide. eomnlaniLition:; cons 25. Radio 2013 sit is’,iutliorized in br ,: VIII’ 05’ the phase desi 1 diit;il Public c0iflfliUniCatiun; did cr1 .1 fir li which Iloin the sy the 0.’ •fl•J. Communications eiimiiiunit’.. stifl Ike to Public ‘n not frequency Cits City of 1 sv the SafeR for trunked \ 5 ss pros ?fl0li aflous the stern ‘O’Oi.id would 1.’mlIiuu(i’ in stein by 300 Sal a el/u! requh’entcnts study id a communication;; a the Comniunieations etv but cost spectrum StOVe Ml that system Reqica: he The redundancs he tower (‘ia’ I I, rather ITic it iull subject ornIflune: efRctis would \ trtiois 55 wits pipe int:itriietiire spectrum AX: cbi;e ii operatins stem scr to which fir Ii determined \k:iiiclieIer :; best he to e id ire stem: of Pioposal o mannsr to by located muli lions system as’;. suit service the and iipr:ide Sstein .l:inuars in w had iple of of City iiicliustcrv:i.aov th 1540) 54O) is the provide tic that the as ( in this l’he that arid City R.FP atos lent 800 currently while ter 542—I 54 .ulticicnt the indicated I. resu!l I 5-42 first probe: e ederal due writild 2013. iuuch while MI VI 95% ridia was pipe the (F 4 lz to of of’ l),ui Respect ‘olui l-’cct”n’m°’ctu I3ulktin in modciutlt Motorola

ciiflifluilieatiOfls

inlonn:tton dscttssions revenue cervices (‘ity

placement regardine Consideration cost the structure in critical additional

I and financial peispective

ci installation that i:verrrtc. in identi

;pecihcations. puce rn l a due desgn alternatives ted manner titullil ii 1mm, ol Council ons v.

lied Cit. thu was t’uliv oud simulcast to

to 65 Stream to as impact. vs Solutions a c: it the this the the of site ).S% City determined Ot reditcrnr iii ill predicti’. the hs sscht of that 1

ttie he on

A antennas reqatne s Vs overall submit is iii probable and a

protect was e federal communit) ut N1,uiti’cr. did It iluhjesiet i As single FeaR” was toss cognizant tow 250 lization been he is equupmeni the uarantee r toss Inc. multiple of not e gisen er er. the orininal econonlicrull) rCumpi the operational

electromagnetic communications a Ii this inuttaicd as that tlie er

ss communications C’oinmunicatrons me need pros ss has need results of as single a wits ill Director

date w design nieaits of ss existing the

determined in asked has pros ide eornmunrcations requfued lhr propacatton th alternatives esamated hr tile an 9%. ssitli it a e to evidence a transmit multiple ide design c .etter additiona instructed

economically of porlablc

in speeiliclution5 riced mIle ol hasiblu ss communications all various

order sharing 05% F. to ( exposure ui Ii tower. necessary to It)

utilize

M. to and

to Commission tower I

receis that lr:uilsrni intent other 20dB ( to studies he in protect 01’ have for ( concerns is comniuncairons tilat spice. model tossers a Vi

the the ( Further cuinsiclercd the iiuulttple 20dB e (FME was nilchesler. ii relating

teasibie an would ens than the al information site ni ‘rtv. recci identified resources associated LCrntti The’ tile crane n I at pre[ërred si toss tower n relating

multiple (FCC ni desien 19 gnu mid

studs. be inasinmnni towers. current arious urn e

to manner ers. ses to speci

it’s met

snes sharing loss

t have acceptable

guarantee Office the 155

while design and towers would consul to to cost lu

Motorola utuluzunu sites rather communications but design The icntsm

e build the tile

uti As tlte the ens riermissihie ii of of germ I pro’. as 01 erection City ization mint, location provide spcctiicstlnns

I within a least ironmenial structural 5750k space on than tdentilied addresses Engineering a result radio no

Solutions iding ruin of Motorola tied enverate. 230 or overall of multiple Winchester or other has the of to tile and sit resnondctto of exposure coverage emereency

communications the Si a

o not m:egrty City operational ubove. design the (‘miner’s tosser 230 consicterirtions r.larkelaotiitc i nurtict. .25rn elevated understand:: ens Solutions uric would Ehe been desires sites soc n

roninental. communications as (Nll’l sites inchiding In

basic arid I I based echnounnv distributed. dent i to pros to communications it each and tank be fundamental

operational pert SUpport :he presented itid including conceptual I. u ssh:nt tied Council pros dmn 01 tosser xs case towers on Mots:oI:i were c RFP ens ills the

aesthetic, the a in

ided LQkJJ ii the anal) i to the I

additional ronnuentu si upport propunseet discussed dcx The potential owes a to lower at hut is cnteri ‘. by design desiun design I iii shuic sis attire aloes lxiii caca 230

and and inn the ce lot 01 is It I // j ;

20 qct• 1T J1

C C I-

C -I 1•

-4 —5

:1 L) - -— -)-.- • - -—-.4-- -. ‘4 9—•C -

-I -1 fl, I 1• -1 21 1 1 (I ...c— C, ii 4’-

‘-s-c.

—--“‘ — / hi ii (I 1I•aI

l. I

-f

k ‘c-, /‘ c’ ‘ .,—, 22 Cl “.— I

r” I

J------

I IA;

ft. ‘I

I 0

For

column

meet

the

Motorola’s

Street dollars.

Also,

technology

need

ensures

would

Motorola

Solutions options: Motorola

decision

System,

Motorola

One

15,

the

central

candidate

2011. wanted

the

lbr

when

location,

most

meet “OPTION

that

duplicate

Option Option

process

RFP

chose

responded

scenario.

Solutions,

location

MOTOROLA

This

goal

most

important

introducing

the

oft/ic

sites

specifications

keep

exceed

which

City

C—VHF

was

A—Full

likely

that

infrastructure,

FOR

reviewed

submit

(eliminating

the

Co,nmissione,c

This

Inc.

will

led

criteria

had

the

competitive

system

present utilizing

NEW

additional

City

(Motorola)

enabled 800MHz be

Compliant

specifications

always

proposal

the

and

able

please,

PUBLIC

design

the

Antenna

selecting

microwave.

additional

the

CITY

Winchester

building,

been

sites

Trunking

City

procurement.

within

utilize

are

RFP.

refer

Response:

System

provide

August

the

into

the

interested

with

SAFETY

set

a OF

simplistic,

the

its

generator,

sites) City’s

Site

City

this

SOLUTIONS

forth “APPENDIX

the

Radio

mission

Public

and

The

WINCHESTER

portable

City’s

a mix 23

site

Determination

and

15,

single

Option

The

antenna

additional

SITE

Winchester

Network,

Safety the

the

budget.

learning

the

2013

critical,

single

monitoring

City radios

Jcffrson

City’s

site

Yes/No,

City

water

“farm,”

Radio

asked

800MHz

transmitter

items -Alternative

would

Option

public

CANDIDATE

RFP.

lank

under

a Why”.

Ave.

system,

for

Network

20db

felt

was

mentioned

about

already have

safely

four

B—800MHz/VHF

trunking/VHF

the

that

the

building

site

addition,

Option

Solutions.

UPS,

different

utilizing

tlic’

proper

RFP

solution

which

incorporate

RADIO above

site

place.

antenna,

dated

which

D—Alternative

call

the

analysis

eliminates

possible

the

that

translate system

design

based

SITES”

December

Jefferson

was

simulcast

would

and

Hybrid

and

one

that

line.

the into APPENDIX C - CANDIDATE RADIO SITES COMMON NAME ADDRESS X/Y GROUND STRUCTURE OWNER AVAILABILITY OPTION FOR NEW COORDINATES ELEVATION HEIGHT PUBLIC SAFETY SITE Yes/No, Why

Timbrook Public Safety 231 East Piccadilly Street 78-9-39.643W 720’ 50 ft tower City of Winchester Ava’iable No. Site wii not meet coverage Center 39-11-5 292 N specfication and would require additional sites to meet specifications. Tower will not structurally support additional antenna system.

Jefferson Water Tower 540 Jefferson Street 78-11-01.80W 866’ 150 Water Tower City of Winchester Ava’abe No. Site ‘: not meet coverage 39-10-48 10 N specification and would require additional sites to meet specifications. (Note this location is best candidate for a new tower to meet the coverage specification sith single site) Frederick Douglas 100W. Cedarmeade Ave. 78-10-53.674W 744’ Land only Winchester Public Available No. Site will not meet coverage Elementary School 39-96.812 N Schools specification and would require ,dditional sites to meet .pecifications. Health 24 Professionals 1775 North Sector Court 78-11-9.427W 866’ 83’ Valley Health Systems Unknown No. Site will not meet coverage Building 39-12-1 066 N specification and would require idditional sites to meet pecifications. North Loudoun Parking 50 East Fairfax Lane 78-9-50,584 W 728’ 728’ Winchester Parking Avarable No. Site will not meet coverage Garage 39-11-16.306 N includes structure Authority .pecification and would require height at roof (NW additional Sites to meet corner) specifications. Winchester City Yards 310 E. Pall Mall Street 78-9-44,721W 702’ Land only City of Winchester, Available No. Site will not meet coverage (Northeast of Spreader pecification and would require Storage Area) idditional sites to meet specifications. 39-10-37.572 N Virginia Avenue Charlotte 550 Virginia Ave. - 78-9-8.052W 712’ Land only Winchester Public Available No. Site will not meet coverage DeHart Elementary Schools (North of School pecification and would require School Parking Lot) additional sites to meet specifications. 39-11-20.829 N John Handley High School 425 Handley Blvd 78-10-41366W 852’ Land only Winchester Pubic Available No. Site will not meet coverage 39-10-42 935 N Schools specification or would require additional Sites to meet specifications Active Living Center/War 1001 East Cork Street 78-9-18.867W 716’ Land on’,’ City of Winchester Available No. Site will not meet coverage Memorial Building 39-10-29826 N specification or would require additional sites to meet specifications. Shentel Stadium 1122 Ralph Shockey 78-9-13.96W 853’ Land only Shenandoah University Unknown No. Site will not meet coverage Drive pecification or woud require 39-9-57.065 N outside city limits ,dditional sites to meet pecifications. Shentel Tower 701 Fairmont Ave 78-10-9.173W 870 201’ National Fruit Products Unknown No. Site will not meet coverage 39-11-57 389 N pecification or would requre ,dditional sites to meet pecifications. 25

Historic

Resource

accordance

The

federal

from

visual

Kiser

DeChard,

of are

eligible

on been

0042), Hawthorne Third

The

visual four

if the

APE Dear

Street

RE: 43760

Geo-Technology

Sterling, Mr. July

review

these

the

noted

file

Andrew

investigations

research

resources

Ms.

1049

26,

determined

Mr.

and

(hr

Battle

effect

Trade

effects

Handley

NRHP;

guidelines

Telecommunications

Architectural

review

for

Preservation

Virginia,

determine

Winchester,

DeChard.

Survey

Technology

the

architectural

Hendricks:

Senior

Tracey

listing

with

(138-0030),

Hendricks,

Center

contributing

the

were

deterniined proposed

were

Willow

was

the

High

Associates,

Winchester

Box

the

materials

Architectural

20166

eligible

McDonald

(Secretajy

conducted

were

Place,

remaining

eligible

Park

6329

Nationwide

Virginia

the

Act Visual

Virginia

School

the

[United

P.G.

determine

Grove

resources

City

Drive,

the

conducted

Norfolk,

NRHP.

Suite

Review

that

proposed

for

available

Inc.

for

the

Hexagon

Effects

(034-0456)

Tower,

%2-

(138-5001)

CULTURAL

Glen

(Virginia

listing

(034-0089),

resources

110

was

States

Historian.

Virginia

Winchester

July

Programmatic

the

Process

Ellen

recorded

Six

Allen,

listed was

r•i’

conducted

any

with

cellular

Survey

www.culturalresources.net

Interior’s

Winchester,

Department

House

23508

Virginia

the

conducted

Department

those

2013.

the

and

have

reference

and

RESOURCES,

effective

VDHR

the

Willow

architectural

Brady,

the

for Historic

NRHP,

installation

telecommunications

site

Phone the

(138-0034),

the

23059

resources

not previously

National

the

Standards

Visual

Agreement

preparation

Virginia

visit

Second

Coca-Cola

of site

been

Proposed

Senior

(757)

Grove to

March

District and

Phone:

the

state

assessment

files

Ellen

[NC.

Historic

626-0558

have

resources

would evaluated

the

six

Battle

interior

the

recorded

(Jacob

and Principal

(804)

Regarding

(Guidelines

for

City project

Bottling

(Figures

resources

2005.

not

Winchester

Guidelines

architectural

adversely

355-7200

Resources the

been

tower

Baker

Fax of

Brady,

{USD1}

were

analysis

resources

Winchester

field

Investigator

Winchester

Historic

area

(757)

Plant

have

1-5;

individually

the

Glen

l”or

within located

House)

survey.

Fax: was

President

626-0564

Historic affect

Table

for

Section

1983]) and

been (138-5004)

{VDHR}

conducting

resources

Burnie

Places

(804)

within

conducted

Archaeology

the

determination

(034-5023)

(034-0090),

these

with

determined

1).

The

355-1520

District

APE 700

/06

evaluated

NRHP)

and

the

(138-0008),

The

2011)

well

purpose

assistance

within

resources.

National

are

JefThrson

Historic

APE

and

Sandra

review

listed

(138-

have

Tall

and

The

that

and

but

not

the

for

in of I-’

- o

______•(-‘

•—

(‘r Figure .---

) ,•—-i

1. Individual ,- .

Architectural ‘.S”’

ç)t Resources 4 Winchester 27

- within

i the

• APE

•t. 1 0.75 CULTURAL CO-V AichIic1LiiI

— for

mi :

)A Visual V hiillci .nchc’.kr RES(IIJRCES

k-. Effects. ___ 8-0030 (dIu.r ‘I 138O06j 8-0(50

(‘034 r

INC I

Figure

‘a

Historic

Districts 3

within

the

APE

for

I Visual

075 C Ci( V

Inc q..TuRAL mi

ui (‘i) eIer Wmnchesier

I Effects. mifer

1-IIsknc RESOURcES, Cellular sli

ml INC. ii’uer

Figure

Battlefields

(First

Winchester

Battlefield) Districts.

} 4 29

c/ within

.i the .

F:rsi

0.75

City

APE of

mi.

Winhcter

Wink

for

hiUlci

Iic’lcr

Visual

13ati1t;c1d

(Ilu1ar

Effects

Towr

Iiwers

Historic

IL,IJ .3

r Figure

Battlefields

(Second

Winchester Historic COLLnI%: -

c’•_. Battlefield) Winchcstcr

I 5

30 Districts.

icdci I ___ k, -,-, /

Winchstcr I - - 0.75 Cit

Second

within I:’,)l mi. of Yincbstcr

Winche-er 4:

butler the

APE

‘Th

r. 7 Cellular f3altiefiefd

k’.. for

lou Visual - -4 ci V-1

Foit Effects Parcel

Districts. Figure

5. Battlefields

;p. (Third —

Winchester

Battlefield) 6 31 y.de/

—T

within the 0.75 Cit

Third , APE nu. ol

WircIiete % / Winchestct .,.

buffer

for T/

.y., Visual tflc4iekI Ceflular

- EfThcts Tower -

Oppequon

Historic L 2

Winchester

(138-0034),

Baker

Ten

Summary

138-5044

138-5013

138-5005

138-0123

138-0098 138-5001

138-0087

138-0078

138-0064

138-0050

034-5023

138-0034

138-0042 138-0024 034-1236

138-0030

034-0456 DIIR

034-0090 138-0013

138-0008 034-0089

architectural

House

No.

(034-5023),

the

(034-0090), Architectural

Table

Winchester

resources

1720

First

(Penn

(Winchester

Winchester

1-louse. Col.

Old

House,

Coca-Cola

Willow

Winchester Third

House, Ridge/West

Building,

and

Handley

(Oppequon

(Thomas

Battlefield

317-21

Penbrook-Cove

Building, I.

Ward

Town

Second

Valley

Winchester

Richard

Hexagon

Central

Property

Glen

Boundary Washington

Battle

Previously

Willow

216

Glen

514

The

Hawthorne Grove

Boscawcn

(Mackey)

Spring)

216

(Selma)

House,

Historic

within

House)

Street

Resources Spring

Bottling

High

Avenue Historic

WPall

338 Amherst

Cook

Winchester

1/Bowers

Little

Burnie Burnie

325-31 of

Third

Boscawen

Train

(Apple

Fort

Battlefield)

(Jacob Grove

House

Byrd

Winchester

Name

Battlefield Amherst

Clifford Increase

School

521

(Federal

House)

Theatre

Parcel)

Mall

the

Farm

Depot),

(Rt

Plant,

District

Recorded

W District

Battle

Street

House

Pie

Hill)

Baker

(138-0008),

APE,

11)

Considered

(138-0042),

Willow

Architectural

Winchester

7 Eligible/Listed

Hawthorne

N N

for

Y N

Grove

Visual

Handley

(034-0456)

Resources

(034-0089),

(138-0030),

NRFTP

Not

NRI-TP

Winchester Not

Not Winchester

Not

Effects

Winchester Not

Winchester Winchester

Not

Winchester NRHP

Not

NRHP

Eligible

Winchester

Not NRHP

Not Eligible

Winchester

Not

Destroyed

Eligible

Evaluated

Eligible

High

Evaluated-

Eligible-

and

within

Assessment

School

Historic

Willow

the

Pri

the

Contributing

APE

mary

Notes

Second

Hexagon

District

(138-5001)

District

Grove

Resource

Battle

138-0042

to 138-0042

138-0042

38-0042

(Jacob

House

and of’

Second

on Federal

Confederate

proposed Hill

east

The

was

and

the Henry

cavalry Confederate

divisions

By briefly

deaths to

General

breakthrough

Gordon,

The Winchester,

Generals Confederate

already

Brigadier

This

On determined probably

that

There

the

Jacob

resources

the

Willow

Wllimi’

Third

Winchester’s

1,500

Union

late

NRHP.

back

outside

(Kennedy

Confederates the

Coca-Cola

three

this

mid-

Baker

DuPont’s

Battle

Union

pushed

Battle

opposition to

Grove/Jacob engaged

Grove

afternoon morning

Russell’s

tower.

Rodes,

towards

both

casualties

little

Grover,

Union had

have

General

push 19th

infantry

not

eligible

Gen

left

leaving

General

House

the

against

control,

the

General

1998:

their

back

information

century

(034-0089)

not

Bottling

through

the

Winchester

garrison

Winchester

flank

cavalry

infantry eighteen

The

Robert

and

lost

Winchester

City

VIII

Sheridan

Rickelts,

James

after

men

been

under

original

and

for

original

3 September

the

Baker

Ramseur

Gordon’s

PotNR

over

16). push

Ramseur

leaving

back

Rodes

Greek

the

Corps

the was

the

and

counterattacked

evaluated

eastern

Plant

commanded corps

Winchester.

cannons

Criterion

The

3,600

the

Lee

Wilson

house

(034-0456,)

Battle

(034-5023)

chose

Federals

and Baker

determined

attack

Wilson’s

area

home

and

(Kennedy

Revival

the

Corps

Sheridan

(138—5004),

the

had

arrived

Confederates Battlefield

Division,

ordered along

19 th,

entrance

men,

Getty

defined Russell

site

attack

north individually

(03

assaulted

at family

focused

until

Brandy

press

Sheridan

the

4-0090)

for

moving

lbrm

but

brick

cavalry

the

after

advanced

victorious

Gen.

eligible

less

1998:3

Rodes

Gen.

Architecture

but

height

vulnerable

(Kennedy

the

Early’s

has

Rodes

near

residence.

Confederate

mcI

the

Red

the

his

lbr

dwelling

Gordon

ABPP

than

beyond

Station,

were

Ewell

been

left

across

Milroy.

or began

matter

16,

delayed

men

this

the

Bud

came

the

have

Army

but

eventually

flank

Salmon 1987.

the

stop

criteria

determined

site

1998:3 resource

with

from

Confederate

Run,

that

The

Red

June

Opequon

was

moving

hour

(VDHR

located

clear

been

infantry

from

Milroy

movement

the

remained line.

the

sending

only

order

family

Bud

built

creating

15,

fbr

cost

2001:362).

(Kennedy

western

the

determined

the

Confederate

hill

the

Gordon.

other

Grover’s

1963.

counterattacked,

well

west

Salmon

Site visual

was

Run

pickets

eligible

Creek

combat.

ca.

current

northern

rear

from

opposite

acquired

front.

intact

General

along

over

outside Form).

than

determined

toward

near

side

848,

assessment.

Ewell’s

down

right

Crook’s

2001:362). 1998:315).

open

that

and

XIX

stop

not

Just

house.

near

5,000

Meanwhile

the

Shenandoah

however,

push,

his

the

George

nightfall

were

Winchester,

eligible

the

hole

the

Pike,

before

the

Strasburg

Corps

associated

Hackwood

position,

located

forces

Union

APE

resulting

land

left

canyon

men

resulting

Berryville

advance.

The

easily

for

The

and

Ramseur

make

Crook’s

noon,

for

and

had

Winchester

converged

Sheridan’s

casualties.

east house

drove

joined Valley

remaining

1755

allowing

listing

Generals

closer

overrun.

Captain

possible

with

located

sending

House,

Fisher

Union

of in

stand

Pike.

brief

was

two

was

the

and

the

on to

under

rooms polygonal

keeping

Home

house Hexagon

roof.

The

first

NRHP

local

Hawthorne

187 constmcted

of Hawthorne

first main

foundation.

1816 Hawthorne NRHP

acre

permission

then

just

the

house

according Glen

section

stone

North

proposed

Glen

battlefield Johnson’s

entrenchments afternoon

West

Winchester’s

1743)

1-1

the

Clerk

Hexagon

and

parcel

north

In decade

Frederick

significance

Criterion

Burn

Burnie

springhouse

portion

chimneys

Fort

standing

for

873,

dates

under

plan

supposedly

with

second

House

remove

were

June

the

All,

house

tower

the

division

leaving

is does

the

(138-0030)

The

proposed

the

(138-0008)

the

was

Criteria

family

eligible

Fowler’s

House

present

Winchester

June

held

Winchester

the

Amherst

two-story,

Town

Late

(138-0034.)

floors.

acknowledged

the

not

building

Frederick

2013.

“bad”

for as

surviving

the the

the

original

Virginia.

county

and

Milroy

this

marched

13,

located

strong

records.

well

the

Georgian-

its

retain

19th

attempt

Gravel

seat

house

for

structure

James

and

tower

recommendation,

air. site

spring,

located

architectural

and

1863

The

Street

most

the

justices

of’

five-course

century

building.

finally

County

foundations

about

integrity

fortifications

(VDHR

within

its hexagonal

was

and

James

Hexagon Wood’s

Wall

The

National an

Stephenson’s

The

but

builder

practical,

night

was

architecture

a founder,

retreat

untenable

the

constructed current

the

site

Federal-style

Winchester

530

building

Mode

Court

and

built

Wood, a

The

Site

City

significance.

and

“Office”

June

lay

time

western

Lewis

core

American

that

House,

Amherst

with

likely

was

Cot.

first

before

economical

Form

off

owner,

of Charles

the

west

the

until

position.

14 th

Depot.

Sr.,

from

area

Robert

(VDHR was

Winchester.

Building”

Barnett.

his

one

meetings

James

PotNR

Hexagon

portion

date

ca.

(VDHR

9 central

number

his

who

and at

stone

and

the

daylight

Street

marriage

partially

the

bond

significant

Mr.

its

Town.

181

death

Wood,

from

NRHP

local

Confederate

the

north

After

Site

Wood. yard

earliest

dwelling

Julian

defined

and

chimney

brick

believed

Site

battlefield,

House

few

addition

and

the

853),

Form).

the

level

Confederate

the

to than

influenced

dark, the

lots

heallhliil

Nomination).

June

The Form).

1759.

Glen

structure

ownership

Mary

years

City

residences

rests

city

Frederick

youngest

area

town.

located

under

for

the

2500

has

serving

Glass,

Milroy

present

Louisiana

handbook

The

Burnie.

5 {h

ol’

have

Rutherford

only

Ofl

for

helped

Glen

however

the

ventilators

town,

they

Winchester,

Winchester.

Criteria

Federals

1744

resource

Gen.

Fighting

parts

believes

this

plan

County

son

abandoned

main

corner

built

19th

covered

building

reported

Orson

Burnie

James

cut

The

James

Cot.

first

Brigade

that

battlefield

Edward

approximately

for

century

this

dwelling

off

define

Col.

House

surrendered.

fireplaces

was

log

Court

that

called

an Wood

occurred

popularized

Wood

1738.

Americans.

Milroy’s

Wood,

dates

Virginia.

Built

portion

the

his

building

James

Fowler’s

and

listed

18th-century

“Allegheny”

captured

have

hexagonal

the

was

(organized

part

low

remaining

Opequon,

principal requested is

The

served

from

between

Jr.,

the

located

estate.

Wood,

for

listed

retreat

pitch

been

live-

main

with

The

the

son

The

the

“A the

the

ca.

the

its

the

the as

lifted

obtain

emergency

During

building

Visibility

(VDHR popular

wing

brick

became

architectural was

The

and private

(VDHR

Coca-Cola

noe public endowed noted

significant

the property

architect Avenue

Handley

residential

John

historic

most

(Italianate,

extensions

AME

(Gothic

Notable

houses

Cemetery,

The

which

both

1759. Winchester

most

Coca

constructed

was

wing

Winchester

commercial

recent

Handley

Church

The

the

trust lies

the

for

Site

general

Site

district

contractor

Revival,

High

examples

Evaluation

built

Walter

Cola

impressive

was

communications

Bottling

height area

commercial

the

field

Coca-Cola

within

the

district

and

outstanding

ca.

Form

Historic

bounded

given

Form

boundary

integrity

the

School

(vernacular

west,

Bottling

High

added

west

outside

southwest

view

1875-1880)

school

survey

1974.

Historic

historic

and

history

1854,

and

the

and

small

Plant

based

the

McCornack,

1940-1941.

and

District

side

School Neoclassical

the

of buildings

in (138-5001) bordered

with

NRHP

city

NRHP

expansions

residential

buildings

in the

distribution

Works

portion The

proposed

example

415

the

1960

Handley

City

Valley

(138-5044)

district

industrial

the

District

boundaries

mapped Gothic

few

tower

original

(VDHR

surrounding

education

the

(138—0042)

Nomination). the

Washington,

Nomination). Commonweatlh,

and

building,

within

situated

alterations

Braddock),

central

The

Avenue were

Winchester

300

emergency

the

properties.

Boulevard

Revival, the

however

site

Revival

the

boundary

the

tract.

large,

center

two-story,

approximateLy

Site

school

complex

block

set

east

proposed.

the

project,

fiomn

era.

Neoclassical

business

located

landscape.

following

The

Virginia.

two-story,

district

Form

DC.

The schools

The

1878,

individual

before

The

“Fairmoni”

vantages by

the

communications

were

was

h district The

the the

bill

the

four-bay,

otenboundary northern

was

the

resource

building

Judge

Handley

district

and

east,

Current

428

completed

include

Town

considered

school

original

overall

1720

Braddock,

overlooking

north

the

closing Believed

forty-tive

The used

Revival

brick-veneered,

NRHP

within

Jefferson

John

resources

Virginia.

Wood

Valley

(Georgian,

brick

facilitate

.John

was

Run,

period

was

mapping Loudoun),

High

follows

visual

the

section,

series

Handley

style.

in Nomination).

listed

designed

bottle

during

the

tower

Stonewall

constructed

and

city

building

the

city

Avenue

School

2006.

Handley

be 1923.

Designed

Street

noted

assessment

APE

broad

the

Fairfax

railroad

Handley

blocks

does

under

follows

although

the

82 1830; 1812,

grid

Coca-Cola

significance

the

and

concrete-block

late

Winchester,

viewing

Handley

the

first

Scranton,

not

evaluation.

Jackson’s

park-like

plan,

The

listed

303

Criteria

High

weather

be 19th-century

Winchester,

Davis

with

additions in

rpsdtower proposed

the

line,

High

appear

historic

the

and

was

contributing

size

and

Cleveland,

building

eighty

south,

under

School

proceeds

rear,

Art

High

and

2003

the

311

only

School

conducted

the

and

Pennsylvania

445

Virginia.

balloon

campus

Headquarters

Platt,

Deco

and

Mt.

warehouse

1940-1957

eventually city

one-story,

Criteria

proposed

Fairmont),

reflect percent

Tennyson

School

and

envelopes

Virginia,

privately

Italianate

Fairmont

1758

retains

Hebron

from

Inc.,

one

style,

limits.

Ohio,

site.

was

2012

also

The

and

to the

the

A of

a a

within

resource

Table

lists Coca-Cola

Photographs

Winchester

0034), Grove

the

listed balloon

balloon

The

communications

034-5023

138-0008

034-1236

034-0456

034-0090

034-0089

DHR

proposed

the

balloon

resources

the

(034-0089),

No.

resources

was

number

Table

APE.

Bottling

Winchester

(034-0456)

flown

were

extended

tower

test

Due

Glen

tower

except

with

Willow

Recorded

Third

taken

Ridge/West served

Plant

(Thomas

Battlefield

would

(Opeguon

Penhrook-Cove

Willow

Second

200

Burnie reference

Property

and

Battle

Historic

Willow

Glen

and

overlapping

when

Grove

from

(138-5004)

let

250

House)

provided

Cook

Winchester

Architectural

Burnie

the

Battlefield)

(Apple

Fort

Grove

(Jacob

for

Grove simulate

visible

culTent

(138-0008),

thirty-eight

Winchester

feet,

Name

District

House)

Second

Parcel)

scale

Farm

photo

Pie

Baker

the

within

resources

(Jacob

from

photos

uniaiemeasure quantitative

and

the

height

(138-0042),

Battle

locations

Resources

Numbers.

locations

stability.

the

Hawthorne

the

height

Baker

lgbeLse Photo Eligible/Listed of 36

—

Y-

photos

Y-

Destroyed

defined Y-NRHP

four

Not

resources

Eligible

the

and

Winchester

Eligible

and

within

House)

NHRP-eligible

across

The

Handley

are

proposed

photo

0.75-mile

(138-0030),

location

purpose

referenced

were

APE

the

(034-0090),

numbers

All

19;

closest

within

location

2-6;

elevation

similar

Location

Closest within

elevation

Location

similar

Closest

within

High

visibility

(034-5023),

APE

taken

and

20:

selisupport

Access

APE

24-35

APE

photo

APE resources

APE

Location

School

the

Photo

the

Photo

the

and

where

for

cover

test

Hexagon

street

The

visual

tower

proposed

the

Locations

and

(138-5001)

was

Only

No from

from

Only

19, locations-

12,

possible.

tower.

including

installation.

all

location

Third

Visible

the

visibility.

17,

effects.

the

House

determine

six

emergency

and

resources

Battle

28-33

31-55

23;

27;

17;

34-36. 20,

10;

1-5; 9,

13-14; Table

42 and

14,

and

NRHP

Willow

second

Photo

3-5,

11,13-

(138-

29:

25;

20;

23,

11;

17,

The

not

the

2 # DHR No. Property Name Eligible/Listed Photo Location ‘isiblc Photo # Col. Richard E. Byrd House N- Contributing to 138-0013 (Mackey) I-ID 28 No 16-17 Ward I-louse, 521 S N- Contributing to 138-0024 Washington St 1-ID 31 No 12-13

138-0030 Flawthorne Y-NRI-IP 21; 22; 23 No 25-27; 29 138-0034 Hexagon House Y-NRHP 23 No 24-25 Winchester 1-listoricDistrict 10-13; 138-0042 and Boundary Increase Y- NRHP 28; 31; 32 No 15-17 House, 514 Amherst Street N- C’ontributing to 138-0050 (Sclma) HD 24 No 21; 23 Building, 338 Amherst N- Contributing to 138-0064 Street HD 24 No 22-23 Winchester Little Theatre (Penn Central Train Depot), N- Contributing to 138-0078 317-21 W Boscawen HD 25 No 18; 20 Building, 325-31 W N- Contributing to 138-0087 Boscawen HD 25 No 19-20 N- Contributing to 138-0098 House, 216 W Clifford HD 28 No 15; 17 N- Contributing to 138-0123 house, 216 W Pall Mall St 1-ID 32 No 10-11

138-5001 Flandley High School Y-NIUIP 1; 33-35 No 1-2; 4-5 1-5; 7-9; 11; 13: 14; 17; Only 20: 23; visible 25-3 1; First Winchester Battlefield 1-17; 20-21; from 12, 34-36;38- 138-5005 (Winchester 1/Bowers Hill) N-Not Eligible 23-38 17 & 38 55 Old Town Spring (Federal 138-5013 Spring) N-Not Evalauted 21 No 28-29 Coca-Cola Bottling Plant. 138-5044 1720 Valley Avenue (Rt 11) Y- NRFIP 4-6 No 6-9

During the site visit and balloon test it was determined that the balloon was barely visible from Photo Locations 12, 17 and 19 and visible from Location 28 (Photos 32, 38, 43, and 54). Photo simulations were done from the locations were the balloon was visible (Photos 33, 39, 44, 45). The tower will not be visible the majority of the locations. Two resources Willow Grove (034- 0089), Willow Grove (Jacob Baker House (034-0090) have their primary resources located outside of the APE and public access was not available to the portion of the property that falls within the APE. Photos taken at the same elevation close to the edge of the APE indicate that the tower will not be visible from these two resources. The tower will not be visible from Hawthorne (138-0030), the Hexagon House (138-0034), the Winchester Historic District (138- 0042) or any of the contributing resources to the historic district included those outside the mapping district boundary, Handley High School (138-5001) and the Coca-Cola Bottling Plant (138-5004).

The

House proposed

the

5001) eligible

developed,

NRHP

slightly However,

Burnie

(138-5004). Historic The

topography Willow

APE. The

Battle

located both Civil

First National

The

eligible

listing

Valley 0456)) The

Second other the

Winchester.

Winchester

six

northwest

Third

data

tower

proposed

Battle

battlefields.

War

and

locations

The

(138-0034), on

listed

(138-0008)

NRHP-

located

well

Grove

resources

Battle

for

visible

District

gathered

Winchester

emergency

the

Battle

located

large

Sites

proposed

will

particularly

listing

makes

The

north

properties

Coca-Cola

NRHP.

corner

tower

(Jacob

just

Winchester.

listed

not

Advisory

from

(138-0042),

portions

tower

Winchester

located

boundaries

within during

Willow

the

but

outside

Winchester

the the

tower

falls

not

communications is

the

resources Baker

NRHP.

2009

will

The

located

visible

south will

Hawthorne

located property

Winchester

the

Bottling

few

visible

the

proposed

the

of Commission

east

within

Grove

the

will

not

proposed

NRHP

House

ABPP

Handley

site

the

(034-5023)

APE.

and

for

locations

The

boundary.

south

from

slightly

(034-0456)

east

PotNR

Glen

from

and

visit

two

the

surrounding

Plant

the

(034-0089),

east

visible

slightly

listed

tower

Second

(138-0030),

(034-0090),

evaluated

Historic

The

locations

battlefields

tower

battlefields will

proposed

Bumie

High

indicated,

the

tower

visible

the

and

(138-5004).

was

Glen

within

and boundary.

First

from

the

location

NHRP-

not

City

visible

and

Battle

American

School

location

delined

Burnie

proposed

District will

(138-0008),

from

within

all

area,

Willow Battle be

the

third

the

The tower

the the

that

(PotNR).

(First

battlefields

visible

from

and

have

Winchester

eligible

remainder

Second

(138-5001)

the

Hexagon

battlefield

The

(138-0008),

Winchester

Second

Third

and falls

the

for

the

Battlefield

(138-0042),

the

location.

Grove

northwestern

installation.

Battle

lower

the

Winchester

proposed

within

Third

within

few

from

Hawthorne

City

Battle

resources

adverse

Second

Battle

House

locations

(Jacob of

and

PotNR

and

(Third

the

Battle

the

has

the

the and

located

Protection

The

Virginia

Winchester

Winchester.

tower

Handley

does

the

Museum

property.

Winchester

been

core

(138-0034), Battle

has

corner

will

effect

battlefield

Willow

Baker

Battle

PotNR

(138-0030),

areas

Coca-Cola

within

Winchester

not

such

been

will

recommended

area,

deteimined

Winchester

and

Program

were

fall

High

slightly

House

(138-5005)

Grove

not

area

that

The

recommended

Winchester

boundary

the

Winchester

defined

the

The

(034-5023),

(034-0456),

within

boundaries,

the

defined

tree

Bottling

Second

School

tower

the for

four

Third

(034-0090),

(034-5023).

visible

(034-0089),

Shenandoah

visible

Winchester

(ABPP)

eligible

within

cover

the

Hexagon

the

potential

that

NHRP

will

arid

for

Battle

(138-

but

Third

APE.

Plant

Glen

(034-

from

and

the

are

the

the not

the

lbr

be is

Figure

Map

Key

Showing 14

Location

Photographs.

r I

075 CUlTURAL (i1 Arcliiiecniial oJ nfl. V bi,tI.jr

iiichrsIcj RESOURCES, Resources

Cellular LNC. - lower

President

Ellen

Sincerely,

would

email tower

however

properties

slightly District

Burnie

5004).

visible

telecommunications

properties Baker

District

View 5004),

(Jacob

Conclusions

fY/

will

shed

(138-0008)

within

Baker

House

from

The

ebrady(aculturalresources.net.

(138-0042),

visible

Brady

these

Hawthorne

have

Hawthorne

additional

analysis

tower

the

House)

the

views

(034-0090),

from

NHRP-

APE,

but

will

adverse

tower

1-landley

Handley

(034-0090),

information,

will

(138-0030),

the

not be

determined

few

eligible

not

located

NHRP-

slightly

The

adversely

effect

High

locations

High

Third

The

visible

resources

please

School

ligible

visible School

the

that

700

affect

Third

the

within

Hexagon

Battle

Hexagon

the

from

Jefferson

above

resources

(138-5001)

from

(138-5001)

the

Willow

Battle

proposed

not 15

the

resource.

the

hesitate

resources.

House

remainder

House

Winchester

Second

Street

northwestern

Willow

Grove

Winchester

250

and

(138-0034),

(13

foot

the

contact

(034-0089),

Battle

Should

8-0034),

Grove

Winchester,

recommended

Coca-Cola

the

Coca-Cola

(034-0456),

City

(034-0456),

corner

property.

you

(034-0089),

the

Winchester

have

Willow

Winchester

757-626-0558

Virginia

Bottling

Winchester

Bottling

and

boundary

The

that

any

and

Willow

Grove

NRHP

tower

the

NRHP-listed

questions

(034-5023),

Plant

will Plant

emergency

proposed

Historic

will

not

(Jacob

Grove

listed

(138-

Glen

be or

Motorola

Pieter

Project

August

Please

The

(Point

Exposure

Attached Summary

August

proposed

Jansen

refer

Manager

14,

15,

Point

Solutions,

and

MOTOROLA

2013

the

estimated

antenna

compliance.

the

Microwave),

Motorola

for

document

Inc

regulations

systems

EME

Solutions,

VHF

Electromagnet

“City

and

used

City

compliance:

the

and

inc

Jefferson

and

Winchester,

Low

EME

Winchester,

data.

Band

SOLUTIONS

assessment

(EME) site

anteimas.

Virginia

are

estimated

Assessment

Virginia that

EME

provides

compliant

ASSESSMENT”

the

estimation

with

800

dated

MHZ,

EME PTP

Absorption

measurement The

really

General

Occupational-type

Low

Occupational-type

VHF

General

Occupational-type

General

PTP

Occupational-type

General

800

genera/public

Virginia:

out

The

new

compliance

Executive

computational

using

above

MHz

Band

compliance

antenna

communication

public

MOTOROLA

antenna

needed

the

antenna

Summary

compliance

Rate

distances

methodologies

and

for

exposure

assessment

(SAR)

established

occupational-type

exposure

system

City

from

actual

distances

analysis.

City

the

described

specified

was

under

with

Winchester,

City

measurement

Winchester,

carried

MOTOROLA

SOLUTIONS

respect

are

SAR

exposure

the

Winchester

typically

[1]-[21.

the

out

Locations

August

following.

the

Virginia

FCC

were

Virginia

The

SOLUTIONS

provide

much

the

1/13

antennas

0.31

1.28

1.87

3.0 0.38

42 following

141h

1.0

facing

accurate

0.1

facing

facing 0.2

Jefferson

facing

regulations

FCC

performed

greater m

m m

2013 (9’

EME

(4’

(1’

(6’

regulations

(39”)

(15”) estimation

(4”)

EME

the (8”)

the

and

the

10”)

PUBLIC

2”)

7”)

2”)

table

measure

antennas

Tower

antennas

ASSESSMENT

associated

than

for

ASSESSMENT

[3].

provides

the

those

Site

[1].

However,

the

site

The

for

transmitters,

the

EME

exposure

that

All

All All

the

using

assessment

compliance

locations

would

City

exposure

Ground

SAR

and

Winchester,

relative

actual

compliant

level

compliant

compliant level compliant

level

was

and

distances

predicted

much

the

carried

Specific

the

basic

for to City of Winchester, Virginia - EME ASSESSMENT

complicated to estimate (measurements or electromagnetic simulations) than free-space fields or the equivalent power density. Thus in this case the simpler, practical approach to compute the compliance distance based on the analytical estimation of power density is used. Antenna Site Information

The transmit system at the Jefferson Tower site features four types of transmit antennas in different configurations.

The 800 MHz system features 1 antenna (Sinclair SC479-HL1LDF) installed at 196’ above ground level on the south leg of the tower. It is connected through a 4 dB loss combiner/splitter and a 3.2 dB loss cable, fed by a 6-channel GTR8000 repeater system with 100 W per channel output power. Six RE channels feed the single antenna. Taking into account the mentioned losses and the 50% duty-cycle due to the PTT transmit mode, the forward RE power at this antenna connector is about 57.2 W.

The PTP system features 2 antennas (Cambium 85010089003); one is installed at 163’ and the other at 168’ above ground level on the north leg of the tower. The transmitter is attached directly to the antenna (dish), so the cable loss is negligible. The forward power of the PTP 800 transmitter is approximately 1.0 W.

The VHF system features 1 antenna (Sinclair SC229-SFXLDF) installed at 178’ above ground level on the north leg of the tower. It is connected through a 6 dB loss combiner/splitter and a 1.8 dB loss cable, fed by a 5-channel MTR3000 repeater system with 100 W per channel output power. Five RE channels feed the single antenna. Taking into account the mentioned losses and the 50% duty-cycle due to the PTT transmit mode, the forward RE power at this antenna connector is about 68.8 W.

The Low Band system features 1 antenna (RFS 1142-2BN2) installed at 97’ above ground level on the north leg of the tower. It is connected with a 0.6 dB loss cable, fed by a single channel base station. Taking into account the mentioned loss and the 50% duty-cycle due to the PTT transmit mode, the forward RE power at this antenna connector is about 33 W.

TX Antennas

Sinclair SC479-HF1LDF: Omni-directional antenna, with 9.0 dBd gain, about 6-degree vertical beamwidth, and a 2 degree down-tilt. Data sheet is attached. Cambium Networks 85010089003: Directional antenna, with 37.0 dBd gain, about 2.2-degree vertical beamwidth, no down-tilt. Data sheet is attached.

Sinclair SC229-SEXLDF: Omni-directional antenna, with 6.0 dBd gain, about 17- degree vertical beamwidth, no down-tilt. Data sheet is attached.

RFS 1142-2BN: Directional antenna, with 2.1 dBd gain, about 75- degree vertical beamwidth, no down-tilt. Data sheet is attached.

2/13

MOTOROLASOLUTIONS PUBLIC

general

Applicable

The dependent. M.,lo,,ro.I L1oo0p.4IL.4e. Ger.’,rS,.’-i,no,’n,-.

CliO_

Produd FCC 7 i:

Sp.oilfnurier.

public SihICLAIR Superior 1’. r ‘4 ion.

Sc4N-NFILDFIDOII-f-704nr exposure -

1 Specifications R.’nrrenrnr,r .,:un

r-O.1hn,id,

Exposure In II,r-rr

for and

fr,.4.H particular, AMA Superior 17,44015k? ii-.. 0, 1503 -‘or-i. ren:r-,lopr,’,,.r,r

wrI.’rr’’ro..,,r,kro,rtSr

15.1 limits 1,001 ,.w77.77ru.8,,. or err—--,.. row. 70K 3:0744,

1r,irn,oi.-,’.k Limits

77707

W/m 2

00701r44e17

City [1],

,r’n—.Lfor within fur OArs ‘V

1,01

when

of for er’ 5010 Hf’ awn., 000r.l

4. Winchester,

Air,:

the

MOTOROLA occupational-type 4-ruE. &

,rr4r ‘‘ANDRLw SC-I

74?

expressed frequency rH-,Ir,rr f’r-HL 705- - IM 001) C,-,r,l,r-lr

7.1-F’

SOLUTIONS Virginia

Afllco’l;,’ Anhr-rrrr,i-.

in 3/13

sr-ri,”

band r I.,-nn_r-—..—”

44 =z__ • -

— terms — 2SLr1jr.- — l__ --, --

- exposure. ———-.—————— i -

of SihCiAIR lend,,uonneu7,In’b’ tA:’-,?i’to ‘e,,S,.i’ ‘n ,.-tr.--,o refF.,.e4n.,,rorow

lie EME Aroorrerreed

___ of ,Cf1f-SFX1DFl,’XX.O

.i,.Jrdk,erU operation,

7 PUBLIC

f--I equivalent H. IL’. ,.‘.-.r’ .:‘,‘te.?.?,,i.’.,*W,?4’ .nr.—,,r u.lrq

0, ASSESSMENT aril,r,044 ,.1,. nwln. .,nIr,.,i’,J,oL,e.ikr,,t., 054 •e,..:he.e ,h,--’-,.t.o-.. rr.,,--, 04,14,10 O.ne,.,ru-FI,l,,Ie,,.- foAl ru—,,, e,.,eeI,nb,n.4. furOr,, ‘u—u.. Or 7e., -r-niHoe:,er’J,r.,-o-,-,’,,,nr-,ard

Iron, the

SOIl power Srnria,1 7 rarareIy 7,rrflr 22701 r,.r 1 or- 5 ,.1r 0 -

A’,r.Ao’. limit ?. I kit, o.,.on,,,.. dIll - 7 wirer --—-- .4,77

170101, density, r ruk

efkr is LOw —r r,oirnrlrq —

.4,.-— 1 3.03 17.4101. 77-IL- 07, SCi2’-L Ao.rlron MHZ ‘-V

are

W/m 2 ‘rp.1C,’rlrre0r

erd frequency 71-IF

fr’Or-ira’

for A7Ie1rr7Zrr- the City of Winchester, Virginia - EME ASSESSMENT

Exposure Prediction Models Two different models are employed to perform the exposure assessment. One is relative to exposures at the same level as the antenna and in front of collinear arrays, while the other is for exposure at ground level.

A. Exposure in Front of the Collinear Array Antennas The behaviors of the spatially averaged and the spatial peak equivalent power density in the near radiating field of typical base station array antennas (omni-directional or sector coverage) can be predicted using simple algebraic formulas that depend on a few, readily available antenna parameters, such as directivity, beamwidth, physical length, and the radiated power [2]. The spatial domain where the prediction is valid encompasses the antenna enclosing cylinder (defined as a cylinder centred on the antenna axis, extending as much as the antenna length in height), at distances greater than one wavelength (i.e., outside the reactive near field region of the individual array elements), along all azimuth directions within and outside the main beam, up to the far field.

Fig. 1. Reference frame and notations employed to describe the cylindrical model.

The most frequent application of the method is when exposure is assessed very close to the antenna, within its radiating near field region, where workers may be present for maintenance or other duties and in those cases where an exposure assessment is desired at buildings facing antennas. In those cases it is desirable to avoid large overestimations produced by simpler models that do not take into account the distributed nature of the radiator (but rather model the RF emission as stemming from a source point), while avoiding complex full-wave simulations or other type of modelling requiring in depth knowledge of the antenna structure and operation from an electromagnetic standpoint.

The method in [2] provides reliable predictions as long as scattered fields from objects surrounding the antenna are not significant and electrical beam down-tilt does not exceed 100. In practice, it is important that significant scatterers do not protrude inside the antenna enclosing cylinder, particularly in the main beam, and that pavement reflections do not become relevant.

4/13

MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS PUBLIC

The

endfire,

is:

For

The The

power

employed objects

The

propagation

most

delimit

omni-directional

parameters

above

reference

model

likely

Fig.

density

03dB:

D 71 :

whose L:

W,.(,( 1 :

occurs

conventionally

Electrical

Physical

prediction

Antenna

predictions

Azimuth

regime

Schematic

the

Antenna

are

power

installed

frame

required

the

analytical

illustrated

antenna

down-tilt

arrays,

converts

peak radiating

content

semi-beamwidth

formula

relative

radiated

City

are

the

directivity

the

apply such

prediction

the

length

validity

mostly

typically

angle

from

near

ground-level

Winchester,

does

Fig.

power;

MOTOROLA

prediction

the

(meters);

of field. way

cylindrical

reliable

(unitless);

not

formulas

array

the

becomes

this

formulas

that

the

take

antenna

formula

d formula

Virginia

SOLUTIONS

exposure

LOS

antenna

5/13

into are

the

significant the

distance

for

significant

spherical

the

main

peak

account

=DALcos2 for to

the

radiating

EME

pattern

model

axis

the

following:

the

PUBLIC

beam

gain

spatially-averaged

range

ASSESSMENT

for

spatial-peak

and

the

scattering

adopted

(radians).

can

tilt

(radians);

near

character,

the

formation

angles

relevant

field,

100.

used;

for

from

equivalent

greater

the

because

before

and

assessment.

pavement

analytical

grating

than

the

(1)

the

power

antennas

spatial-peak

100.

lobes

notations

Hence,

density

energy

nearby

near will

where

reflection yielding

installation

pattern,

where

means

antenna This

power

Exposure

type

density

Wrad

while

the

G(6)

s(d)

phase

the

tower

appropriate

exposure

recommended

the

following H

produced

the (2.56).

center

(see

antenna

Ground

the

radiated

antenna

fig.

occurs

expression

47r(H 2

vertical

assumed

2).

gain, City

Level

each

G(O(d))

power,

The

[1].

+d 2 )

height

beamwidth,

the

antenna

factor

Winchester,

MOTOROLA

and

antenna

above

the

‘2.56’

the

G(&)

free

(1_B)+Bcos”

mounting

ground

far-field,

ground

and

space

Virginia

SOLUTIONS

introduced

the

6/13 B

and

level

are

elevation

wavenumber

height.

auxiliary

d simpler

is:

EME

the

PUBLIC

The

gain

enforce

ASSESSMENT

field expressions

parameters

resulting

and

pattern,

point

near-perfect,

distance

the

predictive

which

can

used

effective

from

in-phase

approximated

employed.

equation

shape

antenna

the

(3)

(2)

the

base

ground

for

The

elevation

length

the

by the

public

separately

levels

For

occupational

general ground,

occupational The

power

The

beam

800

Exposure

what

antenna

MHz following

(‘4

0 a)

C ‘I)

and

density

population

showing

match

0.00001

described

Antenna

concerns

0.0001

due

0.001

Assessment

0.01 limit exposure

emits

0.20

table

100

0.1

(in

the

that

W/m 2 ),

[1].

the

beamwidth reports —

exposure

the

for most

___ -

Correspondingly,

(Sc)

the

large

compared

exposure

occupational

City

the

57.2

following

zz*

distance

versus

effective

reported

Antenna

Winchester,

MOTOROLA

the

L level

______

with

The

distance

graph,

same

type

lengths,

following

the

between

the

always

exposure US

Distance

exposure.

resulting

data

height

Virginia

SOLUTIONS

FCC

and

(in

7/13

graph

SC479-HL1

them. sheet:

meters)

least

the

exposure

[ml

reports at

The

the

EME

10,000

least

100

from

compliance

PUBLIC

LDF

factors

3.2m

0.03

antennas,

prediction

limit

the

ASSESSMENT

53,000

the

times

(D02-E5608)

exposure

for

vertical used

the

less

times

distance

each

formula

general

than

antenna

shape

below

terms

1000

antenna

the

public

the

(1)

the

FCC

projection

1.0

antenna

yields

FCC

the

—Socc

PeakS

—Sgp

(SGp)

limit

average

for considered

for

exposure

elevation

general

for the City of Winchester, Virginia - EME ASSESSMENT

1000

100 2

—Peak S 10 S gp a) —Socc a) 00

0.1 0.01 0.1 10 Distance [m]

PTP Antennas

Because these two antennas have identical RE and antenna configurations, one assessment is made to cover both.

The following table reports the effective lengths, and the X, B factors used to shape the antenna elevation beam to match the beamwidth reported in the data sheet:

Antenna 85010089003 L .63m X .5 B .0005

The antenna emits at most 1.0 W. The following graph reports the exposure in terms of the average power density (in 2),W/m compared with the US FCC exposure limitfor the general public (Sep) or for occupational exposure 0(Scc), versus distance d (in meters) from the vertical antenna projection to ground, showing that the exposure level is always at least 82,000 times less than the FCC limitfor the general population [1]. Correspondingly, the exposure is at least 410,000 times below the FCC occupational limit[1].

8/13

MOTOROLASOLUTIONS PUBLIC

for

exposure

For

general what

‘

•

0.01

0.00000

100

concerns

0.00001

levels

0.0001

public

0.001

0.1

0.01

100

0.1

and

exposure

described

City

0.1

for

Winchester,

the

MOTOROLA

the

occupational

same

following

Distance

height

Distance

Virginia

SOLUTIONS

9/13 rp,resulting graph,

type

[ml

[m] the

exposure.

EME

antennas,

100

PUBLIC

ASSESSMENT

the

compliance

prediction

1000

100

distance

formula

—Socc —S

—=‘Sgp

(1)

yields

3.0 m

for

exposure

For

general

occupational occupational

ground, The

power

The

beam

VHF

general

what

antenna

following

Antenna

a. 0

c1 0 a) U,

density

population

0.000001

showing

match

concerns

0.00001

levels

0.000

public

0.001

limit exposure

emits

0.01

table

100

(in

0.1

the

that

W/m 2 ),

[1].

and

[1].

beamwidth

reports

exposure

described

the

most

Correspondingly,

(Socc)

compared

exposure

0.38

City

the

68.8

versus

effective

reported

the

Winchester,

for

the

MOTOROLA

level

with

The

same

distance

occupational

following

in lengths,

following

the

always

height exposure

Distance

data

Virginia

SOLUTIONS

FCC

and

(in

graph,

10/13

graph

sheet: as

meters)

type

least

the

exposure

[ml

the

reports at

resulting

exposure.

5,000 EME

least

antennas,

100

from

PUBLIC

factors

limit

the

ASSESSMENT

27,000

times

the

exposure

for

vertical

used

less

the

compliance

times

general prediction

than

antenna

shape

below

terms

the

1000

public

the

FCC

the

distance

projection

formula

antenna

FCC

the

—Socc

Sgp

limit

(Sep)

average

for

PeakS

(1)

elevation

the

1.87

for

yields m

limit

general

ground,

occupational

The

power

The

beam

Low

antenna

[1].

following

Band

density

C (I)

population

showing

match

1000

Antenna

100

0.1

exposure

emits

table

(in

0.01

the

that

W/m 2 ),

[1].

beamwidth

reports

the

most

Correspondingly,

(S 00 c),

compared

exposure

City

33.0

the

versus

effective

reported

Antenna

B Winchester,

level

MOTOROLA

with

The

distance

0.1

following in

lengths,

the

always

exposure

Distance

data

FCC

SOLUTIONS

Virginia

and

(in

11/13

graph

at sheet:

meters)

least

the

exposure

[m]

reports

at X,

750

least 1

EME

from

142-2BN2

PUBLIC

3.3m factors

0.00

times

limit

the

3,700

ASSESSMENT

the

exposure

for

less

vertical

used

times

the

than

general

below

antenna

shape

the

terms

FCC

public

the

projection

FCC

limit

antenna

the

(SGP)

—Socc

=‘S

for

occupational

average

the

PeakS

elevation

gp for

for

exposure

For

general

what

C..’

0.0000

.00000

0.000

0.01

1000

concerns

0.001

100

levels

0.01

public

100

0.1

0.01

and

exposure

described

City

0.31

at of

Winchester,

the

MOTOROLA

for

the

0.1

same

occupational following

Distance

Distance height

SOLUTIONS

Virginia

12/13 graph,

[mJ

[m] type the

resulting

100

exposure. EME

antennas,

PUBLIC

ASSESSMENT

the

compliance

prediction

1000

distance

formula

—Socc

Sgp

PeakS

(1)

1.28

yields m

[3]

[2]

[1]

References

for

Radiofrequency

pp.

Supplement

Radio

human

United

1997.

Cicchetti

Evaluating

275-290,

Base

States

exposure

and

Station

May

Compliance

Federal

(Edition

Emissions,”

2004.

Faraone,

Antennas,”

radiofrequency

City

Communication

01-01)

Winchester,

MOTOROLA

June

“Estimation

Mobile

IEEE

2001.

electromagnetic

and

FCC

Transactions

Commission,

Portable

SOLUTIONS

Virginia

OET

13/13 the

Bulletin

Peak Devices

fields,” EME

“Evaluating

Power

Electromagnetic

PUBLIC

ASSESSMENT

(Edition

with

OET

Density

FCC

compliance

Bulletin

97-01),

Limits

the

Compatibility,

“Additional

Vicinity

for

(Ed.

with

Human

97-01),

FCC

Cellular

Vol.

Information

Exposure

guidelines

August

46,

and

No.

for 2, ______alw______

__ __ CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: 7/23/13 (work session), CUT2fld OFF DATE: 7/17/13 (81st13 Reading) 9/10/13 ( reading) RESOLUTION / ORDINANCE X PUBLIC HEARING X ITEM TITLE: RZ-13-196 AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE 8.523 ACRES OF LAND AT 1900 VALLEY AVENUE, 211 AND 301 WEST JUBAL EARLY DRIVE FROM LIMITED INDUSTRIAL (M-1), HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HR), AND HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (B-2) DISTRICTS TO B-2 DISTRICT WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) OVERLAY.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval if impacts sufficently mitigated

PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING: Public hearing for 9/10/13 Council mtg

ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION: PlanningCommissionrecommended approval on a vote of 4-2-1.

FUNDING DATA: N/A

INSURANCE: N/A

INITIALS FOR INITIALS FOR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL DATE

1. Zoning & Inspections 2. Economic Development c) /i /i 3. City Attorney 4. City Manager

5. Clerk of Council gePartment Director’s Signature: 7)i 7/13

FORM: JUL 172013

55 CITYATTORNEY ‘W CI1A’TTORNEY

operation

Council

Mr.

The

councilors

Planning

RECOMMENDATIONS:

OPTIONS:

The

generate

existing

enforceable

long-term This

BUDGET

See

BACKGROUND: Vision

Policy Goal

with

RELATIONSHIP a

Square.

THE

Mr.

Re: To:

From:

Date:

suggestion

binding

ordinance

developer’s

attached

project

PUD

ISSUE:

Agenda-

2028-

Approve

Deny;

work

Park

Create

B-2

The

Commission

Park

direct

and

OVERLAY. AVENUE,

(M-1),

DISTRICTS

RZ-13-196

Tim

September

Mayor

revenue

IMPACT: Proffer

regarding

overlay

and

could

proffers

session.

was

presented

Great

project

leave

ensure

staff

CITY

wishes

was

Youmans,

and

School

rezoning

proffer

M-1

HIGH

more and

Statement.

made

generate

from

report

reviewed

existing

neighborhoods

indirect

the

order

zoning

211

that

STRATEGIC

recommended

Members

depicted

mitigate

liveable

funding:

DENSITY

BPOL

impact

conditionally

2013

(updated

AND

Green

to Planning

have

overview

ORDINANCE

fence

B-2

COUNCIL

school-aged

revenue

M-1,

would

proposed

construct

and/or

the

city

the

301

the

DISTRICT

Direction,

B-2

Circle

City

with

July PLAN:

RESIDENTIAL

for

potential

tenants

City

provided

and

WEST

Director

approval

and

required

rezone

reflect

sales

lost.

all

the

140

schools.

Trail

23,

children

Council

create

range

Proposal,

project,

However,

apartment

tax

2013

sign

WITH

7-16-13

construction

JUBAL

impact

8.5

between

zoning

Development

REZONE

asssociated

There

acres

Council

impacting

proffered.

housing

including PLANNED

acknowledgement

(HR),

Decision

version

EARLY

new

ACTION

demand

units

the

were

along

education

place

saves

work

8.523

high-quality

two

AND

choices

and

attendance

with

questions

Plan

fiscal

the

DRIVE

(see

for

sites.

session.

Proffer

UNIT

the

ACRES

commercial

HIGHWAY

south

and

expenses.

commercial

community

impacts

Budget

City

nine

DEVELOPMENT FROM

multifamily

about

Statement)

side

Concerns

the

City

at proffers

Impact’

MEMO

cost

Also,

use

the

adjacent

COMMERCIAL

the

building

LAND

LIMITED

development

schools.

fiscal

August

developed

development

Jubal

were

City’s

have

below)

doing

known

industrial

impact

There

raised

Early

ability

INDUSTRIAL

been

27,

1900

(PUD)

this

elsewhere.

under

2013

work. Drive

statement.

are

included

(B-2)

would

VALLEY

Jubal

realize

B-2 in Council Work Session July 23, 2013

RZ-13-196 AN ORDINANCETO REZONE8.523 ACRES OFLANDAT 1900 VALLEYAVENUE,211 AND 301 WESTJUBAL EARLYDRIVEFROM LIMITEDINDUSTRIAL(M-1), HIGH DENSITYRESIDENTIAL(HR), AND HIGHWAYCOMMERCIAL (B-2)DISTRICTSTO B-2 DISTRICTWITH PLANNEDUNITDEVELOPMENT (PUD) OVERLAY.

REQUESTDESCRIPTION The updated request is to change the underlying zoning on two of the 3 tracts of mostly vacant land along the south side of W. Jubal Early Drive from M-1 and HRto B-2 subject to proffers. An existing light industrial and warehouse structure at 1900 Valley Avenue would be demolished to make way for an apartment complex known as Jubal Square. The request includes requesting PUD overlay zoning on all 3 tracts. PUD allows for consideration of up to 18 residential units per acre; the proposal is for 140 apartment units on 8.523 acres. A community building with outdoor pool is also proposed.

The latest submitted Development Plan dated March 23, 2013 with updates of April 19, 2013, May 16, 2013 and July 1, 2013 depicts 140 apartment units in six buildings. Four of the buildings are three stories and contain 22 apartments each. The other two buildings are “3/4 split story” and house 26 apartments th th each. The 4 floor is in the form of a small loft in the 3” floor units rather than a full 4 floor. A separate community building housing management and maintenance offices as well as recreational amenities is proposed near the center of the development along with a 2,732 square foot outdoor pool and large patio area. All of the active outdoor recreational facilities and open space would remain private. An access easement would be granted to the City for public use of a segment of the Green Circle Trail that would extend along the 1,200 linear feet of W. Jubal Early Drive.

AREADESCRIPTION The somewhat triangular site comes to a long narrow point on the east end a couple of hundred feet west of Plaza Drive intersection with W. Jubal Early Drive. Two of the three present-day parcels front along the south side of W. Jubal Early Drive a collective distance of approximately 1,200 linear feet. However, the westernmost 60 feet of this frontage is proposed to be severed from the parcel currently known as 301 W. Jubal Early Drive and assembled in with properties at the southeast corner of Jubal Early Drive and Valley Avenue including a vacant parcel known as 1834 Valley Ave and a parcel known as 1844 Valley Avenue containing an existing historic structure known as Montague Hall.

The adjoining properties at 1834 and 1844 Valley Ave are zoned B-2 with Corridor Enhancement (CE) District overlay. A second-hand thrift store is located in the Montague Hall structure. Further south on Valley Ave are three more properties zoned 8-2 with CE overlay that are vacant or contain auto-related commercial uses including the Citgo gas station and convenience store at the corner of Valley Ave and

57 Service Rd (a public street created by VDOTwhen Jubal Early Dr right of way condemnation otherwise severed street frontage to lots in behind the Valley Ave frontage lots). South of Service Rd and adjoining the rezoning tract are three more B-2 (CE)commercial sites that are developed with a used car lot, an ice cream distribution facility, and a vacant restaurant structure.

All of the land bordering the rezoning tract to the south is zoned Intensive Industrial (M-2). Uses include a private roadway connecting to Valley Ave known as Heinz Drive which provides access to multiple sites including the O’Sullivan Calendaring facility. A large metal-sided warehouse structure is situated very close to the property line of the rezoning tract where it narrows down on the east end. The industrialy zoned land adjoining the closest proposed apartment building is lawn area serving as green area near an employee parking lot.

STAFFCOMMENTS

In a letter to the Planning Director dated April 3, 2013, Mr. William N. Park, Manager for the applicant (Bluestone Land, LLC)explains the proposed rezoning and the proposed Jubal Square Apartment Complex project. The application was amended on May 17, 2013 to include a Proffer Statement. The Proffer Statement was further amended on July 16, 2013 as presented at the Planning Commission meeting. A four-page Development Plan titled ‘PLANOF DEVELOPMENT,JUBALSQUAREAPARTMENTS’ dated March 23, 2013 including updates of April 19, 2013 May 16, 2013, and July 1, 2013 is included with the application.

Comprehensive Plan Consistency The Comprehensive Plan Character Map identifies the majority of the subject area as ‘Redevelopment Site’ with a small amount of the eastern area as ‘Commerce Center/Corridor’. Statements in Chapter 11 of the Plan applicable to the Central Planning Area and the South Central Planning Area call for interconnected commercial development which uses Valley Avenue for primary access and also makes use of right-in/right-out access along the north and south sides of Jubal Early Drive. The Housing Objective for the South Central Planning Area calls for mixed use development including mixed dwelling- type residential use in higher density settings. The Comprehensive Plan also calls for increased multifamily development citywide to attract young professionals and empty nesters. The proposed upscale apartments would serve these targeted populations.

The W. Jubal Early Drive corridor has undergone considerable development over the past 26 years since it was constructed in 1992 as a four-lane divided roadway connecting S. Pleasant Valley Rd to Valley Avenue (including the bridge over the CSXRailroad).However, all of the development to date has been nonresidential, including commercial strip development, offices, banks, furniture stores, and industrial use. This is the only residential use proposed to date along Jubal Early Drive, including the stretch west of Valley Avenue that transitions into Meadow Branch Avenue where single-family homes are located in the Meadow Branch North PUD.

Potential Impacts & Proffers The applicant has submitted voluntarily proffers to mitigate potential impacts arising from the rezoning of the property from M-1 and HRto B-2(PUD).This is comparable to the recently denied Racey Meadows Rezoning request HR(PUD)request for 132 apartments which included a Proffer Statement. The Racey Meadows Proffer Statement was structured to address areas including: Street and Access

58 Improvements; Interior Site Circulation; Site Development; Landscaping and Design; Recreation, Density; Phasing; Rules and Regulations; and, Storm water Management.

The July 16, 2013 version of the Proffer Statement foriubal Square includes 9 proffers which are attached. Proffers # 1, and #4-7 are references to the submitted Development Plan. With the exception of the commitment to build the additional 5 feet of width of Green Circle Trail in updated Proffer #7, they do not address any impacts beyond which were already addressed with the mandatory Development Plan itself. Proffers #2&3 assure substantial conformity with submitted building elevations, specifically the elevations of the two buildings that would back up close to W. Jubal Early Drive. These two proffers do mitigate potential negative impacts related to quality of development and specifically the aesthetics of the new structures visible from one of the City’s major east-west transportation corridors. Proffer #8 references rules and regulations to ensure quality of the apartment complex. A draft set of Rules and Regulations was submitted on July 1, 2013. Proffer #9 was added on July 16, 2013 and proposes preferential tenant selection for the twenty 3-bedroom units. It proposes “preference to any person that 1) currently resides in the City of Winchester, or 2) is a student and/or employee of Shenandoah University.” This last proffer attempts to mitigate the impacts of new families with school-aged population impacting public schools.

The Planning Commission required submittal of both a Fiscal Impact Analysis and a Traffic Impact Analysis which are two studies that can be required by the Planning Commission for a PUDrezoning

application per Sections 13-4-2.2k and I of the Zoning Ordinance.

Fiscal Impact Analysis The applicant submitted a Fiscal Impact Analysis on May 17, 2013 titled “Fiscal and Economic Impacts Analysis, Jubal Square Apartments, Winchester, Virginia. The analysis was prepared by S. Patz and Associates, Inc. for Mr. William Park of Pinnacle Construction and Development Corporation. The analysis describes the impacts on City revenue and expenditures generated by the project as compared to revenue and expenditures arising from development allowed under the current B-2, M-1, and HR zoning.

The Fiscal Impact Analysis notes that the 140-unit apartment development would cause an on-site deficit to the City in the amount of $36,000 annually. However, the study projects off-site revenue benefits to businesses totaling almost $8M annually which would create a net revenue surplus of $69,000. Collectively, the project would yield a net revenue surplus of $33,000 per year. A project that incorporates mixed use (residential ANDcommercial) is recommended in the Comprehensive Plan and would have a more positive fiscal impact.

Traffic Impact Analysis A simple 1.5-page Traffic Impact Analysis dated May 1, 2013 has been submitted for review. The study estimates the peak traffic volumes for permitted commercial development on 301 W. Jubal Early Dr such as restaurant, pharmacy and drive-in bank under current zoning. It also estimates peak traffic volume for the two M-1 zoned parcels with uses such as light industrial, warehousing, and manufacturing. The cumulative volumes associated with uses under current zoning are then compared to the estimated traffic volume associated with a 140-unit apartment development. The study concludes that the potential peak volume from typical uses under the existing zoning is about 2.6 times greater than the volume from the proposed development.

59 feet The

the development

signal. particularly signal conditions it also Based The proposed require The adding I In on City, Jubal construct of The Consistent to biking. the of multi-purpose The Station. screen Development

screening along

pooi, house

may

summary,

the bus

the

following

proposed traffic

buildings. recommend south

development

brief

applicant Development

Early

clubhouse

believe Jubal

Jubal

apartment

service.

However,

management

The

Development

the striping

some

Two

the

periods the

difficult

complex

the

of is

impact

would

with first

Drive

applicant

Early

depicted

Service

based

the

other

traffic

adjustments via

the

development

additional

Valley

response One

Plan

The

(bike

floor

the

proposing

restricting

and

based

VoIle Service

and

warrant for Drive existing

Drive when

development

study

create

site

Plan

and

site

buildings on

projections

Comprehensive

and Road/Valley

Avenue

offices

fitness

motorists bedrooms

Plan

Valley has

the

y/Jubal

on provide

the

where

and would

depicts on northbound

does

in do very

pedestrian) Road.

the

proposed

buildings

traffic

restricting

and

feet similar traffic to

left

parking

not

will

the

Avenue. as

center

June

where

updated

back the

close not

Early

outdoor access

the also

well

turn

The

feel of

turning

140

provided, also

southern

and

network

current projections

intersection.

stipulated

investigate

asphalt

situations

28,

Green

these up

have

intersection, backs

as granting

lane apartment City’s that on

left traffic

the have

Plan,

Site

left trail.

between

Valley

2013

Development

part some

the

pool

Recreation

left

turn

adjacent

direct

and

buildings.

signal turns

Circle

Development

will interface up

access trail the

Public an

south

from

memorandum:

and

indoor

Avenue

a close

provided

movements right

potential

interparcel

operate the traffic

the Valley

from

needed 10-foot The

Proffer#

the

access

other

units

Trail

timing

detailed

patio Service

side Services

amenities B-2

O’Sullivan

turn

additional

and proposed

The

There with

Valley

recreation

Service from 60

plan

a back may

where

locations

the

land of

area and

proposed.

wide

to at

impacts

Open six

lane

applicant

and

7. Service

the

Road

the

acceptable

connection

traffic commercial

will

the along convert would

the

Avenue

Director

buildings. The owned

similar

near

Road.

for

public Buffering easement

offered

industrial

Green

M-2

overflow

Space be

Voile

traffic

proposed

onto

developer

up use.

the

study

traffic

Road

be times

the

the Staff

Intensive

the

by developments y/Jubal

via

the

transportation

southbound

Circle

western not

reviewed permitted

Proffer

created

to levels

community Two Service

City, Mr.

development

existing Service near should

site.

turning

during adjoining for

noted parking

now residents

proposing

complex

Pifer

of Trail

has

the Early I

with

the

Industrial do

shown

the

edge

Road

be the

Road,

the

now

the

concrete

Green

onto

into

notes not

for

near

lot

Valley

the signal.

Valley

required

Valley buildings

public

will

building

of in

need

peak

in those project

due any

believe

also

and

other

Jubal construction

in Valley

the approximately

available

the

the the

not

Circle

site.

intersection

Avenue behind

Sheets

balconies to

Avenue.

for

traffic

street

out

proffered

sidewalk

intersection

walking

northwest

inclusion PUD

warrant

at the

Square.

that areas

would

either

Avenue.

and

Evergreen

buffering

Trail

this

traffic

hours the in 3

network,

the

would

may

provided

& of

There

the

time. as

well

on of of

back

into

The to

Citgo

and

the

shown

500-

this

these

traffic

corner

any

that

form

the

are

plan

the

of also depicts the segment of the Green Circle Trail that is called for along the W. Jubal Early Drive frontage.

Storm water Management Storm water management is noted on the front sheet of the Development Plan and simply reads: “All storm water runoff will be directed to existing storm sewers. A new storm water management basin located on-site will control post-development runoff to the historical levels of pre-development for the 2- and 10-year storm events.”

Density The applicant proposes 24 one-bedroom units, 88 two-bedroom units with no den, 8 two-bedroom units with a den, and 20 three-bedroom units. PUDoverlay allows for consideration of up to 18 dwelling units per acre, which in the case of 8.523 acres would translate to a maximum of 153 dwelling units. The applicant is proposing 140 dwelling units. The actual project density comes out to 16.4 units per acre.

Community Rules and Regulations Proffer #8 references rules and regulations for the development. These rules and restrictions will be included with the apartment leases and will ensure that the project meets high standards for maintenance and management of the complex. Proffer #9 spells out guidelines for tenant selection specifically applicable to occupancy of the three-bedroom units.

Project Phasing The applicant has indicated that there is no proposal to phase in the project as part of the PUDrezoning.

Other Issues The applicant has addressed all of the requirements for a complete PUD proposal as spelled out in Section 13-4 of the Zoning Ordinance.

Two letters were sent from Mr. Denis Belzile, President & CEOof O’Sullivan Films to the Planning Director. The first one is dated June 17, 2013 and was received on June 17, 2013. In that letter, concerns are raised regarding the merit of establishing 140 residential units in close proximity to the existing multi-shift industrial operation. Mr. Belzile notes recent expansion at the industrial site and the possibility of further expansion. The second letter was received via email just before the Planning Commission meeting on July 16, 2013 and summarizes discussions that O’Sullivan representatives had with City staff as well as the developer. In that letter Mr. Belzile expresses added concern about the potential adverse impacts of the rezoning.

Emails and letters of support for the project were received on July 9, 2013 from Mr. Craig Stilwell, Executive VP at City National Bank which has a branch bank under construction across the street, as well as an email on July 15, 2013 from Mr. Randy Kremer, President of Rugs Direct.

An email was received on July 15, 2013 from Tracy Fitzsimmons, President of Shenandoah University. In the email, she notes the City’s consideration of requests to build housing in the City. She asks that City Council and staff consider that there are about 3,500 Shenandoah University students being educated on one of the Winchester campuses and that the University currently only has housing for about 915 students on campus.

61 Design Quality Elevations and floor plans have been submitted for this rezoning proposal and the elevations are proffered as contained in Proffers #2 & 3. The site is not situated within any existing or proposed Corridor Enhancement (CE)District. While building elevations and floor plans are not explicitly required for PUDapplications, Section 13-4-2 of the WZO states that the Development Plan shall contain supplementary data for a particular development, as reasonably deemed necessary by the Planning Director. The submitted typical floor plans depict the size and configuration of the various unit types, rd th including the 3 floor units in the larger buildings that include a 4 floor loft.

Six garage bays are provided on the ground floor of each of the four 22-unit buildings. The garages are completely independent of the apartments and have access to an internal hallway as well as to the parking lot via an overhead door. The submitted elevations incorporate brick into the exterior finish on the ground level, but staff has requested that the applicant at least incorporate brick into the upper levels of the two buildings on the elevations that face W. Jubal Early Drive.

RECOMMENDATION

Generally, staff feels that the proposal is consistent with many of the broader elements of the City’s long-term vision to attract more young professionals and empty-nesters to the City. The location of the project relative to the Green Circle Trail and to public transportation makes it attractive for residential development. The proximity to O’Sullivan Films industrial operation makes it less attractive for residential. Consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Development Plan now depicts interconnected commercial along the south side of Jubal Early Drive in this area. The Housing Objective for the South Central Planning Area calls for mixed use development including mixed dwelling-type residential use in higher density settings. The applicant has now committed to constructing the remainder of the travelway needed to support a 10-foot wide multi-modal Green Circle Trail along the subject Jubal Early Drive frontage.

Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request at the May 21, 2013 regular meeting. The request was tabled at the applicant’s request as stated in an email received in the morning of May 21, 2013. The applicant wanted to give the Commissioners additional time to review the revised plans, newly submitted fiscal impact analysis, and proffer statement. The Commission tabled the request18 until the June th18 regular meeting. The applicant subsequently requested further tabling at the June th meeting. The request was acted upon by the Commission at the July th16 meeting in order to comply with time limits established in State Code.

On July 16, 2013, the Planning Commission voted 4-2-1 (Wiley & Shickle opposed, and McKannan abstaining) to forward Rezoning RZ-13-196 to City Council recommending approval because the proposed B-2 (PUD) zoning, supports the expansion of housing serving targeted populations on a Redevelopment Site as called out in the Comprehensive Plan. The recommendation is subject to adherence with the Development Plan titled ‘PLANOF DEVELOPMENT,JUBALSQUAREAPARTMENTS’ dated March 23, 2013 including updates of April 19, 2013, May 16, 2013, and July 1, 2013 as well as the Proffer Statement received on July 16, 2013.

62 City Council may adopt the ordinance as recommended by Planning Commission or disapprove it. If Council is unfavorable to the recommendation made by the Planning Commission, then it should publicly state the reasons. Among the reasons to diaspprove the proposed B-2 (PUD)zoning as submitted are:

The rezoning: {pickany or all ofthefollowing}

a) does not represent a mixed use redevelopment proposal advocated in the Comprehensive Plan; b) is less desirable than the existing B-2, M-1 and HRzoning, particularly given the close proximity of existing industrial use, c) lacks enforceable measures to mitigate potential negative impacts associated with multifamily development, particularly potential impacts on schools associated with 3-bedroom units.

63 AN ORDINANCETO REZONE8.523 ACRESOF LANDAT 1900 VALLEYAVENUE,211 AND 301 WEST JUBAL EARLYDRIVEFROM LIMITEDINDUSTRIAL(M-1), HIGHDENSITYRESIDENTIAL(HR), AND HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL(8-2) DISTRICTSTO B-2 DISTRICTWITH PLANNEDUNIT DEVELOPMENT(PUD) OVERLAY

RZ-13-196

WHEREAS, the Common Council has received an application from Bluestone Land, LLCon behalf of Braddock Partnership and 1900 Valley, L.C.to rezone property at 1900 Valley Avenue, 211 and 301 West Jubal Early Drive from Limited Industrial (M-1), High Density Residential (HR), and Highway Commercial (8-2) Districts to B-2 District with Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay; and,

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission forwarded the request to Council on July 16, 2013 recommending approval of the rezoning request as depicted on an exhibit entitled “Rezoning Exhibit RZ 13-196 Prepared by Winchester Planning Department June 4, 2013” because the proposed B-2 (PUD) zoning, supports the expansion of housing serving targeted populations on a redevelopment site and calls for interconnected commercial development which uses Valley Avenue for primary access and also makes use of right-in/right-out access along the south side of Jubal Early Drive as called out in the Comprehensive Plan. The recommendation is subject to adherence with the Development Plan titled ‘PLANOF DEVELOPMENT,JUBALSQUAREAPARTMENTS’dated March 23, 2013 including updates of May 16, 2013 and July 1, 2013 as well as the submitted proffers received July 16, 2013; and,

WHEREAS, a synopsis of this Ordinance has been duly advertised and a Public Hearing has been conducted by the Common Council of the City of Winchester, Virginia, all as required by the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the said Council has determined that the rezoning associated with this property herein designated supports the expansion of housing serving targeted populations on a redevelopment site and calls for interconnected commercial development which uses Valley Avenue for primary access and also makes use of right-in/right-out access along the south side of Jubal Early Drive as called out in the Comprehensive Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINEDby the Common Council of the City of Winchester, Virginia that the following land is hereby rezoned from the existing zoning designations of Limited Industrial (M 1), High Density Residential (HR), and Highway Commercial (B-2) Districts to B-2 District with Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay:

Approximately 8.523 acres of land at 1900 Valley Avenue, 211 and 301 West Jubal Early Drive as depicted on an exhibit entitled “Rezoning Exhibit RZ-13-196 Prepared by Winchester Planning Department June 4, 2013”.

BE IT FURTHERORDAINED by the Common Council of the City of Winchester, Virginia that the rezoning is subject to adherence with the Development Plan titled ‘PLANOF DEVELOPMENT,JUBAL SQUAREAPARTMENTS’dated March 23, 2013 including updates of May 16, 2013 and July 1, 2013 as well as the submitted proffers received July 16, 2013

64 ______

Bluestone Land, LL.C.

,i,’i Avon Str--t, Suto- :oo CIi_.roii v ‘ Ii-, V,r’,rt,- 1o’; 4’,4 979 1900 F.,x 5 ‘ooo

April 3, 2013

City of Winchester, VA Rouss City Hall Planning and Zoning Department Attn: Tim Vournans, Planning Director ‘C’s 15 North Camerc>n Street Winchester, VA 22601

Re: Application for Rezoning Jubal Squire Apartments 1900 Valley Avenue Tax Map Parcels: 251-01-27. 251-01-31; 251-04-01

Dear Mr. Voumans,

Enclosed far submittal for re.:onin are the complet( d Resoning Application, list of adjacent property owners, d:sclosuri’ of Ri al [‘,irh ‘s in Interest, Plan of Development, ri:nderin of proposed unit:,, and check for $292.00. [hi:. lee i dude. th ri-,oninl applic;ition 1e ($2,800), deposit for two public hearing ‘,in:, ($300), and fe Icr maitin. notic ;to lidjli, ‘nt owners ($25).

Currently, parcel 251-01-27 .:or:ed Ml. P itt :125) -01 ii 5 :o’ii ‘d Ml and HR. Parcel 2l-04-01 is zont d B2. [hi’ application ink:, to ri’son parcels 251-01-27 nd 251 01 3 Ito 92. md then ovi nay a Pl,inned Unit Development District (PUD) .icros:. all threi’ pircm’ls (the “Property”). rhi’ proposed PUD, “Jubal Squ ire Ap1irm nt’,’ will redevelop the exislini, ‘itt’ till a 140 unit multi-family residential dcvilopmt’ni tt,iturinl, in on silt community toter and ri’creat ion,tl am vol tP ‘s. Targ ‘t hour holds for t hr ants in cludi t,r idu: Ii’ sri dent ., young pta fustian. Is, a nd cc viii ‘tin ‘i’s/tm ni ‘stirs. t lit i/

Bluestoni- [arid L L.C.is the rontrict puchm’a r for thi ,ibovi’—ri-f,’renced p,irc’ts BIue’;tanv Lind ,ind ic affiliates (Pinnacle Con’,triiction & Development Corp. arid P,irk Propc’rtie:. M:mnagvmc nt Co LLC)hive xtensivv ‘xpnrii’ncm: in devnlopmi’nt, con’.tructioo, and property m,mnagemt’nt of multi family risideritial -nd comrimi’rci,mlpropertie thruut,houl thi Cnrimcinwisilth of Vir’ini,i

The Propi:rty is cciii d oiitheist of the no rsictlonm of V.:Ilr’yAvi nun (U.S Route 11) md tubal U;mrlyDrive in the Ci’ntr,mlDistrict When dt’Velopin, the pl,mnfor Jub,mlSquare

65 Apartments, the intent was to respond to the 2011 Comprehensive Plan vision for orb in derisily and market demands, while respecting the existing terrain. The Comprebensiv Plan notes that key features for the district include medium and high density housing, and includes the goal of redeveloping prepert in the district to achieve maximum sustainable potential. This planned development would address the Citywide Housing Objoctives by providing moo vibrant, high quality, higher density housing which will include on site professional management. Jubil Square Apartments will also provide the type of apartment unit, and the on site amenities that attract students, young profussioniiR, and empty nesters. These group’. are specified in the Comprehensive Plan as the three demographic growth l,roups to which future housing growth should be aligned

Thu 2011 Comprehensive Plan designates most of th Property as a Rirdev lopment Site, and the remainder of the site as a Commerce Center/Corridor. (Sec exrerpt from Character Map attached). Redevelopment Sites are “thu keys to reinvigorating a neighborhood.” This development plan is conristent with goals er construction of corr part raw projects as a ri usi’ for obsolete industrial properties.

1he Property will be developed in gun ral accord with the Plan of Developmirit Road alignments, building and sidew.ilk bc lion’ . landscaping, 1gridin and utilities depicted on the Plan of Development are conceptual .ind may be adjusted. , Specific lot boundarii and huildiri illur tr:ition hould1 locations shown on he Plan of Devc loprn nt ni’ for purpo’;i of only and : not he construc mlas final. Thu arch’tc’ctur,il rendering included illustrates how sc,ili , teas’, rg nd pidestri in orientation my hi’ chii’ved within tf.i Propi rty, but is nut int,i’ridi ti to represent the spi’cilic form of thi final proctur nor de’,cribi final design r quir(’rnirits

We look forward to working with City ‘tall on this di Vi loprrient. PIt’ i.e contact us if you h lvi’ in cbue’,siori’,

/Sipruiurt Poiji’ [n/In tv’ I

66 Sincerely,

RIuonebnLC)

7WiTli.rnN. P,irk, its Miniger

67 .HAMRIcK iE_ENGINEERING, P.C.

• 1 U I C? C C C c .\ IC C T .c • I. It CC C? I CC CCIC C S

Mii 1,2013

Mr. WWiam N. Park Pinnacle Construction & Development, Inc. 1821 Avon Street, Suite 200 Charlottesvillcr, Vrgirria 22902

RE: Jubal Square Apartments

Dear Mr. Park

Enclosed you will find a trafic; analysis of the proposed Jubal Square Apartments. The traffic analysis was completed using data from the Institute ot Transportation Engineers (lIE; Trip Generation Manua The analysis shows durng the peak hour movements, the e’sting zoninj willproduce approximately 2.6 Imirs more vehice trips per dsy thin the proposed apartment complex, If you souId have any (luoStOflu, or need additonal niormaton, pase feel free to crrnlacl me at your oarest convenience.

S’icore/,

C ,

F3rasi W. Hamr.ck, Jr., P.E

• C :.Cor 1% LCurtI 11111IOCSCI(Rt 612 Cs ‘C?TU, .!I•i82 (‘il C2 • Its 2,H7-tOH

68 JUBAL SQUARE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

Narrative

The following traffic analysis will review potential traffic volumes from tax map parc&n 25 1-041 251-0 1-31 and 251-01-27 The current zonrng of 251-94-1 is ‘Hghway Commercial District or B2. The zoning on this 2 942 acre parcel woukl alow the development of banks, retail stores, restaurants, and other typical commercial uses. The current zoning of 251-01-27 and 251-01-31 is ‘Limited lndustral District” or Ml. The zonng on these two paces tolalng 5.848 acres would allow the development of typical manufacturing and warehouse type facilities. Development condition number 1 willdetermine the potential peak hour traffic volumes usrng the existrig zoning conditions. Development condition number 2 willdetermine the potental peak hour traffic volumes using the proposed land use of the 140 unit Juhal Square apartment complex. All peak hour tralhc volumes wil be detemnened using the Institute cf Transportation Engirmeers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual.

Development Condition Number 1

Tax Parcel 251-04-1 is zoned 8-2. This zoning w.llailow uses such as a phamacy, brink or restaurant. The 2.942 acres s large enough to sUpport a 15,000 s.f. pharmnay with drk’e through window and associated parking, or a 5.000 s.f s1ban with dno through windows and associated parkng, or a 6,000 s.f high turnover restaurant arid assocatect parkng. The peak hour lraff.c volumes for these uses are as fol’ows.

Drive In bank ‘iand use coda 912) AM Peak 31.99/1000 s.f. = 31.99 x 5 = 159.95 PM Peak 53.46/1000 s.f. = 5346 x 5 = 267.30

Pharmacy (land use code 881) AM Peak 7.87!1 000 s.f. = 7 87 x 15 = 118.05 PM Peak 951/1000 s.f. = 9 51 x 15 = 142.65

Restaurant (land use code 932) AM Peak 1353/1000 s.f 1353 x 6 = 81.18 PM Peak 18.80/I 000 s.f. = 18 80 x 6 = 112 30

Tax parcels 251-01-27 and 251-0131 are zoned Ml. This zoning would allow uses lasted in the ITE Manual as laud usra code 110 ‘light industrial”, arid use code 130 ‘.ndustnmaipark’, land use code 140 ‘manufactueng”, or land use code 150 “warehousing” The total acreage of the twoparce s is 5.848 acres

Lijht Industrial (land use code 110) AM Peak 7 96/ace = 7.96 x 5 647 = 46.55 PM Peak 8.77’acm 8.77 x 5.848 = lnduslrcrl Park (land usc’ coda 130) AM Peak 8 29,’acro = 8.29 x 5.848 = 48.48 PM Peak 8 67/acre = 8.67 x 5.848 = 50 70

Mrmnufactur.ng(land use cod? /40) AM Peak 9.30/acre = 9.30 x 5.848 = 54 39 PM Peak 9.21/acre = 9.21 x 5.848 = 53 66

Warehousing (land use code lSc AM Peak 7 96/acre = 8.34 x 5 848 = 48 77 PM Peak 877/acre 8 77x 5848 = 51.29

69 Development Condition Number 1 Continued

A review of the above tratfc volumes ridicules the restaurant and light rrclustriat combination leads to the rninmum park vo ume values of

AM Peak = 81.18 + 46.55 = 127.73 or 128 lr.ps per hou PM Peak 112.80 ‘F 51,29 = 164.09 or 164 t:p per hour

Development Condition Number 2

An application has been made to rezone tax map parcels 251 04 1, 251 01 -3, and 251-01-27 to 02 wIn a PUD overay a(ow.nqa 140 unt apmtrnent complex. The pea< hour traffc volume for this use is as fotows.

Md-rise apt I’I:induse code .223,) AM Pu-ok 0.35/unit 0.35 x 140 = 49.00 PM Enak 0.44/un-i (1.44 x 140 = 61.60

Conclusion

The pntcntal peak hour traffic votunie wth lt-o current zon.nq is 2 61 times greater thor the volume of the proposed use for the NV peak. The potent il peak hour traffe volume with the current zoning is 2 66 t mes (freater thun the volume ot the prnpo%imd use for the PM peak.

70 Wich Winchester, Rouss Valley 5 In Jubal appears restaurant SUBJECT: As TO: DATE: ipirtment FROM: Norili looking requested, 2. 1. Cay Square Avenue, Cameron The Thu approximately proposed Based puez’vices Hall that VA at c. b. a. or complex proposed main this 22601 the Apartments. on light The current not Ba’.ed not Road. traffic periods turning There I Sli June2S,2013 Proposed Tim Perry I have offer similar proposed entrance eel numbers entrance warrant believe additional industrial

Voumans, ster during will on signal. Eisenach, ‘To reviewed development the signal SOD-feet left when the b situations nlill Jubal be following either from to o it will presented Their development the traffic times fInam timing tiaffic However, northbound development traffic the 6,,ii’ Planning Square operate the Public south peak Service of analysis development in’ al/i’ during project:ons in traffic signal these will created comments: it hour other in of in Services ‘niiitl the Apartments

based MEMORANDUM Director in I/i, Road also their the shows traffic the in conditions at analysis a Valley/Jubal would that COy locations very relationship the 1 on Valley/Jubal have onto peak on (‘ii’ analysis provided, Director pivi’i,hn’ Valley would could Service on that similar safe be rain!, access provided 71 southbound traffic Valley lower would with the manner. be Avenue are be Early ii::u,’:,ii lop situations Road/Valley to to the constructed traffic Early hours a accurate. may similar than qua/ill’ the right Valley warrant by signal. traffic ‘ may am intersection. back Hamrick current Valley generated that the in/right iininic,pal traffic I Avenue in r,m?nmiimj require from peak up restricting it intersection other under Avenue, may traffic to Engineering counts, out the hour Service ‘a I via from locations some be i.,’i,’i current on proposed TDD Web,: FAX on lelephonc, Service difficult traffic left There e.istbound I the s Jubal believe idjuttrneiits Road to turns proposed for zoning. of generated Road, are WWW for Early complex the due the from this alo motoests Jubal City, \slliCllCslCi psoposed to Drive (540) (540)662.3351 (540) It to Service the brief wE t from I the Early do 722-0782 667—It and s’a.pov a 5 d. I do recommend restricting parking on the south side of Service Road near the Valley ntersection and adding striping to create a left turn lane and right turn lane for traflic turning onto Valley Avenue.

In summary, based on the traffic projections provided and similar developments in other areas of the

City, I believe the existing traffic network will operate at acceptable levels with the construction of this proposed complex and I do not feel that a more detailed traffic study should be required at this time. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss this mattor in more detail.

72 REZONING EXHIBIT RZ-13-196 PREPARED BY Wt\CHES1ER PT ANNING DEPARThIENT .T(NE 4. 2013

MR , HR •‘ MR 73

EXISTING PROPOSED

\I-I HR LOSING FOR 211 W JUBAI. EARLY DR CONDIIIONAL B-.PUD ZONiNG FOR 211 & 301 W. JUBAL EARLY DR b-2 ZONING FOR 301 W. JU[3AL EARLY DR AND 19’) VALLEY AVE.LESS A0.25ACRE PORTION OF 301 V. JUBAL M-1 ZONING FOR 1)0 VALLEY AVE EARLY DR TO PIE MAiN B-2 WITHOUT PUD OVERT AY L.. POD oerlay : ia

CondtionaI zon,rg Site_ihiming hereby proffers The undersigned condition Any The property (Council) such 2 Property extent West Dated: not Industrial District 3. 2. granled, 1. undersigned undersigned and be Jubal that voluntarily The the with statcm exteriors dBF July Early prepared Early The The Plan July approved shall Owner: all shall Information of shall with (M-1), such development proffers siding Early property exteriors then will Associates, accepting the 1

of /t, Drive be , Apartments [mprovemcnts cut. be 2013, approve Planned Development terms elevations binding by of provide: applicant done these 2013 Braddock applicant, by High Drive proffers materials the will dBF and the and shall of and these in proffers other Density the Tax the Unit be Council upon conditions, dated (Map shall conlbrmity Associates, submitted Type conditions hereby he that, entitled vinyl rezoning who proffers, two (Conditions to Map Partnership buildings Development prepared developed the REZONING be Numbers May Applicant: shall be if 2 Residential (2) is in and substantially applicant proffers h Council the Building Numbers: used acting accordance “Jubal Jubal accepted buildings with 17, be of with shall may dated brick deemed by 8.523 in in 201 251-01-27-A; and this on the be the for become that the Square Hamrick (251-1-27; Early Bluestone and Fronting N1ay in 3 (PUD) RZ-13-1 (HR), behalf REQUEST subsequently or landscaped terms and proffer acres development of this 251-1-27; exterior accordance hieing in with in their withdrawn binding the Apartments 1, the conformance submitted void 74 Rezoning Apartments and of 2013 overlay, and of Virginia City Engineering, legal on 96 event .Jubal statement. the 251-4-1) land Land, finish Highway 251-04-01-A; and conditions Jubal upon of 251-4-1; and substantially owners PROFFER successor with amended and the at Winchester Early shall have then law. with of submitted Type the Request) L.L.C. 1900 Early have Council submitted with the and no development be aft)reinentioned Commercial of In Drive dated this 251-1-31 as 2 two Valley the or the or subsequent no substantially Dr Valley the Building set 251-01-31-A) proffer revised in assigns. effect approves above event Elevations”, of and March with (2) elevations forth confhrmance elevations. the Avenue, buildings LC east

this /eJ whatsoever.

that / described statement. herein, by of City (B-2) Elcvations’, 23, effect. (25 the of the property. the pro in such 2013, of entitled the 211 conh)rmance rezoning, subject Districts prepared applicant from ffer except hieing Winchester rezoning entrance with properly, and The revised These Limited as “Jubal

to ‘7//Ji the Juhal 301 a to by and the the is B- to 4. The maximumnumberof residentialunits willboone hundred fbrty(140).

5. The entrance fromJubaLEarlyDrive will be limitedto right turn in and rightturn out. Secondaryaeccsswill be fromthe ServiceRoad to Valley Avenue(U.S. Route 11).

6. Amenitiesfor the developmentfor use by residentsshall includea communitycenter with pool and fitnessfacility.

7. Uponrequest by the City, Applicantshall dedicatea ten (10’) footwide easementalong Jubal Early Drive frontagefor aeeommodationof the Green CircleTrail to be installedby applicant.The existingnil shall be increasedto ten (10’) foot wide.

8. The apartmentcomplexshalloperate under rules and regulationswhichshallbe generatedand amendedfromtime to time by the ownerof the apartmentcomplexat its sole discretion.The applicantproffers to maintainrules and regulationsin orderto ensure the quality of the apartmentcomplex.

9. The apartmentcomplextenantselection plan guidelinesshall provide: Forthree-bedroomapartmentunits, the residentcriteriawill give prefirence to any person that 1)currentlyresidesin the City of Winchester,or 2) is a studentand/or employeeof ShenandoahUniversity.All applicantswill needto meet the qualiting guidelinesfor rentaL.Uponreceivingan approvedapplication,any applicantthat meets the aforementionedcriteriawill be placed aboveall other applicants. Theplacementon the waiting list will bebased on the date the applicationwas approvedand the tenant fulfilledthe rentalqualificationguidelines,whicheveris later. For example,if a resident from Winchesterapplies tbr an a,artmcnt on June l and they satisfiedthe rental qualifyingridclines on June 30 ‘,the date that they are placed on the waitinglist would be June 30t. Inthis case,they would be placedahead (above)all other approved applicants fromoutsidethe City of Winchester thatwere on the waitinglist for a three- bedroom unit prior to June th30 The assignmentof apartmentswill be basedon the waitinglist, whichwill affordthat units will firstbe made availableto personsthat meet the aibrementionedcriteria.

The conditionsprofferedaboveand in accordancewiththe Plan of Developmentpreparedby HamrickEngineering,datedMarch23,2013, revisedJuly 1,2013, are presentedas a conceptual plan only. The final plan shall be developedafter it hasbeen submitted,reviewedand approved by the City of Winchesterand as the applicantproceedsthroughthe various approvalprocesses requiredby the City of Winchestershall be binding uponthe heirs, executors,administrators, assignsand successors in interestof the applicant and owner.In the eventthe Councilgrantssaid rczoningand accepts these conditions,the profferedconditionsshall applyto the landrezonedin additionto other requirementsset lbrth in the City of WinchesterCede.

Signature page fiulowv

2013,

The

CI’I’Y/COUN STATE/COMMONWEALTH

Its:

By:

OWNER

Braddock

The

2013,

CiTY/COUNTY

S-1A-Th/COMMONWEALTH By:

Its:

Bluestone

IVlanager

foregoing

William

foregoing

by by

William

(251-1-27;

QN Partnership

______

2//,,f,qy

REGISTRATION

instrument

COMM.

11/30,2013

Park

357556

L.L.C. OF

ViRGj

1111/,

EXPIRES

251-4-1)

Park,

NO.

was

Manager

acknowledged

Registration

Notary

Registration

o7ry

BLUESTONE

commission

Public

before

of BRA[)DOCK

Number:

expires:

LAND,

this

•J6

L.L.C

PARTNERS

day

/_f

‘7

HIP. 7 -

The CITY/COUNTY By:

STATE/COMMONWEALTH

2013, OWNER

Date:

Valley

Its:

foregoing

(251-1-31) ______

instrument OF

_____ was

acknowledged

Registration

Notary

commission

Public befbre

Number:

VALLEY

expires:

this

_____day

LC. of ______, ______—

r©ovrr’ RULES AND REGULATIONS

These Rules and Recjulatinns constitute a part of the Lease Agreement and e effective until either changed or modified by written notification. Violation of theses Rules and Regulettons—wilt-— considered a default under the Lease Agreement.

1. Office Hours — The Leasing Office wilt be open daily from A.M. to P.M. p,ng_through each week throughout the year, except on holidays. Hours subject to change without notice You may contact the Leasing Office via c-mw, at via totephone at or via facsimile at

2. Maintenance — Please make your requests by calhnq, emailing, or faxiraj Fm easing office. No charges will be made for repairs or adjustments unless necessitated by he Rositht’t, negligence or mistreatment. Should you experience an after hours emergency, phi ‘rll_ - and our answering service will direct your cal/to the appropri;ife person.

3. Resident MaIntenance — Residents have responsibilities to maintain their apu -nt and is seep the premises in a habitable condtion. Resident agrees to.

A) keep all doors and windows closed during ruin or snow 13) maintain furnace, appliances and fixtures in grent nd ties ‘oti,it repair ‘nrt clean condition reasonable wear and tear excepted: C) use water closet fixtm’r and other plumbing only to a purpo.. ‘or ouch they win n-;tahli’d and not to place sweepings, rubbish. rmig or our art-c ‘ s in such tic 13) unstop and keep all water pipes clear E) not to flush or pour into drains: great. -at litter, a.-, --‘s, sanitary nokmns or tampons, F) curtains, drapes or blinds must be wI - or ‘-reamba, - .‘l facing Street side; G) not store on premises any oxplomimvirs,‘ii - ‘bin fluids or ‘imilcrrmilof an kind, H) not to place an ron safe waterbed or ‘thuH-o-rvy art eti on the promiser wilbout thu writimin consent of the Lessor, and to be liable i—alt ar-sins saused by the placement or movement of any such articles, Resiu must nrnv,,’r Less mth a copy of liabilitymnsurdnse prior to placirrnent of such articles;

I) not Icruse airy alternative 5’ rent moe ,,u - ‘Ida as kerosene or eli-ctrmcspace heat -r.;, J) Resident repr-o-;rbkr for the rirpl.r.cment of .tl tight bulbs, fuses trnd b;ittrli; in pr rn sos K) Report to mmiii -‘-‘rot any and oIl r,hi,.ms v that have caused or may cause permanent cc mmSte to premises. L) Mminmrttr it; to be ‘:Ont,s a -t db’r ‘v,rn a il business hours in Its c,ise of an i’mrrrginr-y.

4. Removal — A, p arbuge roast be properly bagged and placed in dempr;terir or trash chutis at. :‘rovrded. l3oxer; aho,’rl be broken down rind fi,ittencd Do not leave garbage in hmiliwiyr,r;tor pr closets n- on patios or ba “iris

5. Hours — Rirm,t’ gft ‘ntr willnot make my dmsturb.nqno;ses in or around the ;rp irlmint prems’ winch willunreason-r myinterfere with the rights, comforts or conveniences of other ri smdrrntr;ri tan’ cowmen ty The -aurs between 1000 p.m and 800 a m are cnnrr,m’rird 1 quiet hours arid w.I tic’ observed by ii, ‘usdents. Re-dents ire responsible for the behavior of their trimly rind gui sIr;.

6. Keys and — Locks At’ necn’raa;iry.ip.irtrnent keys wi be issued to the Resident at the limit of occupancy. I.,ti’rilmon or replacement of locks or in;lriltation of bolts, knocker-;, mirrors or nor utt’nchrnents on the ottm nterior or exterior o’ any donrr is ‘rohibte. There is no after hour lock-out -rev cc’ 1 .iltor office hours the Ri rirdirot hould noird sri ;tanci’ untockng their miparlmmantIts y should contict a proft’r;smonil locksmith at their nwn expense. If lock cyIndr r repl.mce,mr’nt a required, it shall bit re-keyed to march tire exstnq

7. Notice of Absence. The Resident roust qivo i,er.r.ornotice of ant c.patcd ntxtenctedabsence from the e,r,-d pa in rn rniso; excess of soy (7) dy;. The Resident iqreer that during ny such absence

‘‘MC a;ilL Cu, Regutat on, i--il-OS dxc ;‘ 1 ci 2

78 from the leased premises, the Lessor may enter the premses at times reasonably necessary to protect The premises or any property belonging to the Lessor on the premises.

8. Pets— No pets of any kind will be permitted in the leased premises Without the Lessors prior wrften consent, necessary deposits made and documents signed, 9. Exterior Maintenance to keep public areas clean, safe md ple.isarit looking requires attention by all residents The following must be adhered to

A) signs, advertisements or notices shall not be placed upon any part nt the exterior of the apartment building; B) no article shall be attached to placed or suspended outside or on top of building without prior written consent from Lessor; C) patios, balconies, porches or terraces shall not be used for storapi” iianging laundry or in any other way that will be unsightly or offensive to neighbors or manao’--’nt, 0) the use of outdoor grills is strictlyprohibited, F) residents, their family or guests shall not litter prrrrnisis or obstr.ri di walks, a ‘orwnyi; stairwells or entryways; F) no toys, skateboards or bicycles are permitted in parkino iots, sidewalks or tic .ssyu C) residents under the age of 18 should be appropri,iti’i, “ipemisi’d Residi’nt:, and iheir garcia may not play in parking areas and may not engage in up. ‘‘ ‘ or other act vii-’’, ii’ a could drmrigi. exterior of premises, H) resident shall be liable for assessment o i., ‘- r”i,igr, -‘‘ ffo or Ji”icinq the trees, shrubbery, lawn and grounds for which resid--itis re. -‘sible, I) no item may be hung from or over any OUt.,,i’- “ilings. 10. Storage Facilities — Storage closets are irnished for ‘-‘sidonts use rind mririagrmunt issurnis no responsibility for any toss to property stored, Mrs,, -‘fort recommends fh:ii Ri’aidr,nf obt,iiri insurance coverage for their pen.orial propert 1’’nwn us’ K- ‘- ‘ lnsur,iiico” 11. Motor Vehicles and Related g,L,tinrnieml. 1-her,. will hi’ , limit of -— ci h,cli,’; pi r .ip.irlmi’nt In the case where parking passes are Issued, any sr ,iaes ri-mining en property for soil than !4

hours without a w, I parking , p.isr. be towed at wj-ur expense Violation of hr followirin ml ri and regulations will result in the towing of vehc,ie at Airierii expense:

A.) Nodriving or p i-’ “n ‘.‘ehicles off1oi v-h drivi’ways md pirkirill areas; B ) Washing vehick’. i, ‘‘v’.’ehide ma ‘- Irnanco on prirmirer, iii prohibited, C ) Boats ciirnpi’r, trailer, RVr, me fruckir may riot br parked on prom-sos, 0) Any motor vehicli, wihirut cue license plater or valid state inspect on sticker. w fi flit tires a’ in ii ,,n’;ightty state - a repair stall riot be parked for a pi‘rod ‘xcer ‘ding 72 hours E.) Manaqcrinr’nt may di-’ ignritr’ ‘ othi s special parking p.cr. for i .indic.ipp d, dc’siqnile fire tire’: md dirsrnr’ae- ‘‘ertairi ire-i.; mu“no p.irking.’’ ‘.‘ “ ‘ , F.) ‘--- !nrbik’- , or any other power driven iquipmait m iy nc1 be placed, put mmp;imkict ir,,a,. So prom - ‘-‘; or on the patios or balconies it any Irne’

THt’if: RULFt1- ANn dEC-ULATIONS MAY tIE AfAENDi’D, fROM ]“MI. TO TIMi U°OK ff1-ASONABU; N’ iLL Ot- TFtL ADOPTION OF SUCH tkMLNDMENJ TO ‘1-HI.Rt tgoiNT This is to certify llwe the (ht r’rident(s) roOm.vuct, ri in, und -nt nd md gre to mbdi by ti Prop. dy Ru’i ,mridRegulation’;. IWo undirrat,ind that a violation of ttior’mr Prcp’rty ulr, and Risjuamfion’. is a default under the L mri-Agreement.

H - si 01(r) Sig “i,ituri

‘MG2201. Rules it, -sCi, me’ P’l’ Db.doc Page 5 &

79 - hrnc’er Asyos rue; Square DLI to1Wsii’r ,-row www use PI.riirir; ft,lr it RI? lP ict,vit.es i.rrpoitant For Deir 940 sVirLhertii historic - iCC j fltIi.idi,,(i tc ‘ii V use kr ill ‘rCi.rSta:.h nd 9 ty 14’l lrci’ ..C’tt,iuiCCrtOO.,ill uo flI .944 Norn u-rr w,tIi mow ours (2 or tenant, 01 Sli- nunlcrou. ri 1(1614(6 1.11; 17, pniou; Mr. its V c’ I-it C .rc ho ii ull,’ U, room lot sty Valley ISi sj Soum? whIr- 201:t reuc-is, ‘re 0 “OW ta-cnr Camrrn (cu ihin ,vI i lP’?lit.ii rio pert —Ia) which iotertiI rector cii , ti-;- 96 that titu vrnii’-’ A.12cC).. VA V at I.. lint of hack fliune.’ in Avni i{ tie :y — ol 75 ,cl]n CO!iECiflS of we I prce Iubce the reSiririt —it’ r Lean rezo-rn(, icr CI years the 151(5-; ‘rt aru,irote. Si’i’p( cr01 I) ( vi such br les’.nrn’ - 22(01 r y snisy irs. Wi Squaw :de. rt 110 n’’ aroperty e

Ic SeQ I cr1. AC lw rn 1 Wi ) Cr5 365 od 1 0 on III C.ri frI .e cnrpoy; .f.’ ir iou prososed urr.1 -r,r,t ILl si cr-Is; d’y/Veai yti cub of ro-icern?( side I-JIlt w lot we S a u; -r 1 Is i Ii’ it’ cf iii 409 c’ii.ssi.r-l-rl’28 o --,Ii’ir’Ic? ‘

,vill Iii O’SuLLivan® es-s C IiZ- am) II, o:her Of ii n c-; jwr i 2V2 s,odicon nejolo ti? Isuri- isp n’-crrer SlUr eopardi!e c-rd c- :-ias t’lenr :11091 read ndustr; .6 cL-i and LI .)9L Cii nailIre 7)f’i’J roe rrwnirstit ticci has — i’I 1 0 ‘•‘ 1y (r’,0. liii. t. eCt4 ic. lb. 00 .in ,CI Ill’ 0 or (cc hr I;’ OtiS ifl hr i1d () ii Is FILMS Whik we under nc the need and deurabIty for Winchester to mplemunt mixed-use projectf; wE are, for all the aforementioned rEasons, very concrneh by the neltative impacts that, placing side by side residentia units and a Enanofacturint lacty willgenerate.

We trust that you willgive serious consideraton to our cornmentcEind concerns. We also, respecIuliy, invite you to share this letter wtn the Memoers of the PlsinningCommission and, if you bel eve it is spproprate, with the Membe-s of City Councilas well.

Sincemy,

Denis Belzile ?resident & CEO O’SullivanFilms, Inc.

Administrator.

that

raise

the with

O’Sullivan apartment

with

8-2 interpretation

buffering

would

submitted

installation either

the

use.

the

potential

this

speak

you

Since

Dear

Re: Winchester,

15 Members

Rouss July www.

1944

the

future

have

also

perhaps

rezoning

North

rezoning

have

Mr.

information,

and

these

Surprisingly,

Winchester 16,

Members

RZ-13-196—Jubal

VIiey

PUD

industrial

o’uê,coiu

commercial.

with

City

Youmans

have

previously Members

2013

adverse

any

had

Cameron

property

complex, does

concerns,

the

overlay,

Mr.

Hall

Avenw’,

this

opportunity

and

the

and,

residential an

learned

event

Park,

not

the

could

22601

City

opportunity

City

impact

from

unfortunately,

commercial, the

what

come

minimum,

correspondence,

accomplish

Winchester

While

Street-

stated,

could

increased

Wincheste,,

have

behind

have

of who

City

ordinance.

that

Planning

residential

the

course,

Winchester

for

tenant

with

Square

memorialized

argue

learned

that

Council,

being

found

there

our

Suite

Planning

the

residential

one

O’Sullivan

additional

setbacks

current

preference

but

examine

that.

commercial.

proposed

ordinance

Commission:

because

that

may

proposed

that

318

This

the more

use

even

the

22601

behalf

Planning

their

Department

representatives

what

apartment

well

interpretation

could

partners

about

would

setback

would

the

allowed

rezoning

residential

the is

the

would

issue

that

Comprehensive

insulated

not

mean

proposed

O’Sullivan,

Unfortunately,

S40.6b/.6666

Commission

Planning

record City

the

not

want O’Sullivan

mixed

and

complex,

because

who

regarding

proposed

the

were

that

the

that

such

use

with from

buffering

required

has

and

our

somewhat

proposed

Staff,

use

any

property

the

would

the

look

what

manufacturing

O’Sullivan

advised

separated

approve

letter

expansion the

development

are

property

but

Plan

indeed

plan

all,

because

requirements.

forward

increase

require is

proposal

even

rezoning.

that

encouraging,

from

but

being

for

O 3 SujJjva

also

either

the

have

from

rather

that

adjoins

the

mixed

that

the

put

the

proposed

owners

that

facility. had

different

site

development

not

that

adjoins

the

City

our

setback

commercial

spoken

into

concerned

underlying

all

use

only

us.

that

has

current

would

plant

Zoning

residential,

the

was

result

project,

opportunity

been us

maintaining interpretation

think

with

FILMS

the

file.

and/or

subject

suggested

come

remain

have

B-2

zoning

about

the

some

that

all

there

mixed

the

use

from

met

the

of is

O’Sullivan

President

Denis

Thank

find

inconsistent there

further

Also

living

penetrate

sound

include

plants

oLir

unexpected

For

stated

operations

your

during

environment

difficult

Belzile

you

that

attenuation

think

extra

convenience,

residential

before,

into

Films,

for

make

CEO

thick

recent

would

your

the

use

industrial

understand

Inc.

Winchester,

residential

that

for

walls

attention

the

O’Sullivan.

project

meeting

are

those

Mr. land

with

have

with

certainly

good

Park

why

that

dev&oped

residents

sound

units.

with

residential.

attached

but

these

idea

discussed

borders

continuing

proponents

Mr.

would

deadening

concerns.

the

living Park,

have

the

project

aerial

this

Page

would

between

desirable

those

property to

83 of

property

and

grow.

learned

view

mixed

sound

thick

O’Sullivan

being

that

good

use

that

have

forward,

glass

would

attenuation

part

shows

development,

re-zoned

his

idea

that

plans

and

have

mix

that,

our

would

order

Jubal

for

campus

would

those

components

for

uses

would

future

this

not

but

Early

qualities

think

that

make

apartment

allow

and

not

expansion.

Drive.

are

continue

that

for all

proffered

sound

assured.

the

all

quieter

complex

the

various

so if i ‘i+- vaey ave 2hUL) i - Juugic viaps .1 1 tfl L

To see aI the details that are visibe on the screen, use the “Prinl link next to the map. Go.

hps://mapsgoog1e.com/maps?fq&source=sq&h1=en&geocode=&q= 1944+valley+ave+... 7/16/2013

Forget

Not

(304)

croig.stilwellçityhoIding

Craig

E’cecutivc

our

be and

City

Development

Center

To:

the Tim

Planned Mr. Subject: A

Sent:

Wilt,

From:

‘lease

To:

Subject:

Sent: Will

From:

positive

city

late

express

support

proposal

the

spam

Youmans:

‘[email protected]’

National

769

attractive

Moore

arrival

let

Tuesday,

and

previous Stilwell,

5tilwcll

project

Urban

way

Letter

Vice

1L13 our

pool.

for

calls

Bank

know

Corporation.

support I

Presidet

the

Development

Craig

understand

gateway

July

the

consistent

for

vote

Support

lubul

PIng

esthetics currently 09,

you

the

for

2013

Square

Comm

development

would

corn

the

this

that

with

project

rezoning

developing 12:38

believe

area

Apartments.

work

the

Tim

Tuesday,

FW:

Will

any city

within

urea

comprehensive

session

Voumans

Letter

these

Moore

the

requisted

additional

Jubal

considering

vicinity

July

the

brunch

upscale

packet.

Square

city,

Support

09,

inIorm,itinn

bank

2013

and

William

plan

apartments

Valley

Apartments

rezoning

across

12:54

developed

believe Avenue

Park

regarding

the

request

will

and

street

the

comprised

and

contribute

Richard

Jubul

the

Jubal

our

from

city.

Square

project,

Early

Park

Pinnacle

this

140

the

proposed

Drive

and

Apartments

havu

luxury

economic

Construction

Pinnacle

further

designed

Winchester.

units

development.

information

Construction

will

vitality

with

our

also

facilitati’

new

of community

Specifically,

contribute

the

reg;irdin

brunch

ira, writing

to in Tim Youmans

From: Randy Kremer [rkremerRugsDirect comj Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 413 PM To: plngdeplciwinchester vaus’ Cc: Randy Kremer Subject: Attention: TimYoumans Mr. Youmans,

lam writing you on the behalf of Pinnacle Construction and The PiferCompanies in support of the Jubal Square Apartments. I have reviewed the Concept Plan and personally visited one of the Pinnacle facilities in Harrisonburg, VA.Ifeel the JubstlSquare Apartments would be a great addition to our community for various reasons,

1. The land is currently zoned M-1. Do we really want more light industrial at that location? I think it would better serve our community as a mix of residential and retail and potentially generate more revenue. 2. The LuxuryApartments will bring higher income resident to our area which has been a stated goal of our Council. It is the type of development that will be more likelyto attract young professionals. Which, as a business owner of a technotogy/ecommerce company, we desperately need in this community. 3. The project looks great! It will definitely enhance the view of one of our central corridors and serve to hide, the not so attractive industrial buildings behind it. 4. We all know ‘Studies” can be manipulated but the Net Benefit of this Project seems to be a win/win for our community.

I certainly do not know all of the financial implications this site would bring to our community but I am hopeful that you and your team will find ways to make projects like the Jubal Square Apartments work in our community.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this project.

Sincerely,

Randy

Randy Kremer President Rugs Direct 116 Featherbed Lane Winchester, VA 22601 Phone: 540-545-7797 Fax: 540-662-0063 Email: rkremerruqsdirect.corn Web: www.rucisdirc’ct.com

Confidentiality Notice This electronic message and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged information belonging to the sender or intended recipient. This nforrnation ,ritcnthd c,uiyfor ho use of the rersons or entit,e’, named therein. If you are not the nt, oded ‘im pant or the or employeer, sponsibli to d,liverth message to tire intended recpient, you art’ her, by notify d tb t any disclosure, copyny. ue, dstr,bntiøn, or takny of y 0y0 in re! ann’ on the contorts of th,s informoton ,s tr.ctly probbited. if you have received this transm sOon in error, please immediately advise the sender by reply email and deirl,’ tb’ m’r”i fron, your system. Think you for your cooper ItiOn.

Cor

540-6h5-4841

Winchester,

President

Shenandoah

Tracy

1460 of

about As

privately

Many

process--

Dear

Tim

To:

Subject:

Sent:

From:

whons

you

writing

Youmans

University

John

915

Fitzsiminons,

thanks.

consider

owned

Tim

about housing

Monday,

Fitzsirnmons

students of

and

University

considering

Youmans:

Tim,

you

3500

hope

Drive

the

22601

for

July

“on

university

students

Ph.D.

possibilities,

are

that

Tracy

15,

john

campus”

know

being

requests

2013

you

willinghom

[tfltzsim@suedul

owned

that

are

Wnchester

143

educated

both

the

hope

Winchester.

PM build,

——

City

enjoying

would

that

develop

Council

one

you

certainly

siimnicrtimc,

Additional

will

our

and

bear

renovate

Winchester

City

-2-

weleoniel

in housing

su’itf

mind

housing

are

campuses.

that

options

the

Winchester.

have

process

4,000

total, to

——

campus

and

students

currently

will

for

increasingly

students

Shenandoah

only have

whether

housing

(Jniversity,

the for (Planning) 4. Initiating 3. 2. The department 1. FUNDING Planning ADVISORY Approval Public INSURANCE: PUBLIC and STAFF (CM-I) CU-13-422 ITEM CITY Clerk Zoning City City body initiating hearing COUNCIL TITLE: District. Attorney Manager RECOMMENDATION: Commission of and with Department AU NOTICE Received Council that Request DEPARTMENT DATA: fender RESOLUTION for conditions BOARD Department must l2O3 N/A 9/10/13 -

- CITY work MEETING of AND N/A recommended initial Director’s Daniel m RECOMMENDATION: at Council Director HEARING: 427 PROPOSED their

T. OF North Knight, OF: Signature: meeting review approval

will WINCHESTER Cameron 9/10/13 8/27/13 ORDINANCE Jr. place in CITY for with order a INITIALS below, Street (ricni1nr ‘ (work conditional APPROVAL conditions COUNCIL 88

o this for I/f’ ,-.“-- (‘Map session), in rnt) sequence item - Nunthe’r use FOR AGENDA PUBLIC permit to eplaced be 173-01-K-i)

of VIRGINIA DISAPPROVAL INiTIALS CUT for transmittal, motor HEARING ITEM OFF on vehicle zoned the FOR DATE: the City Commercial names X painting, /2’ Council 8/21i13 I! g:/i, DATE of

upholstering, ) each agenda. Industrial ,/,i2

Council

report.

Planning

RECOMMENDATIONS:

OPTIONS:

BUDGET condition

establish applicant

storage

Staff

BACKGROUND:

RELATIONSHIP The

N/A

Clark THE

repair

Date:

Re:

From: To: - -

funding

request

met

ISSUE:

Streets

Approve

Deny

operations

forwarded

vehicle 1

August28,

Will

CU-13-422

(Map

Honorable

Commission

the

with

intends

IMPACT:

vehicles

that

the

CITY

Moore,

repair

required.

the

Number

with

application

painting,

effect

that allow

applicant

the

awaiting

low

converted

and

Mayor

revised

conditions

2013

Planner

Request

STRATEGIC

and

request

require

was

volume

for

173-01-K-I)

restoration

COUNCIL

upholstering,

staff

the

and

recommended.

conditions

repair

lower

Members

operation

recommend

CUP.

auto

Daniel

pre-application

its

recommended

PLAN:

operations.

8/27/13

zoned

level

service

there

and

Knight,

Commercial

(See

body

work

City

approval

the

use

stated no

The

building

basis

Council

staff

ACTION

opportunity

and

session;

consisting

Jr.

main

the

for

with

report

fender

and

Industrial

issue

Planning

issue

conditions

conditional

subsequently

the

for

work

for

revisions

with

one

additional

identified

screened

(CM-i)

Commission

storing

corner

427

MEMO

use

were

noted

received

District.

North

information).

all

storage

permit

staff

noted.

vehicles

within

the

Cameron

was

for

the

intensive

onsite.

motor

the

inside.

request

staff

Street

The

and

A to

topography.

Cameron

west

Cameron The

shows

generally

properties, for

operations

STAFF

services

mix

zoning.

offices,

Land except

model

side

property.

family

business. commercial

the

pending The

level

recently AREA

level, The

north that

Streets

REQUEST Commercial August

upholstering,

CU-13-422 Council

his

auto

space

north

subject

(rear),

request

to require

letter is

subject

COMMENTS

approximately

DESCRIPTION

and

residential

dwelling

railroad

for

North

currently

the

The

27,

offices

restoration,

Work

for

St,

St. used

involve

mechanical

includes

DESCRIPTION

The

Land

the

east

have

particularly

and

dated

south

2012

plus

the

property light

Request

property

property,

The

Industrial

Cameron

converted

for

and

old

Session

CUP.

railroad

club,

are

somewhat

and

been

lower

this

storage

remaining

vacant

manufacturing

types

allow

the

August

freight

the

body

zoned

taxi

office,

a a

which

including

rescue

request,

2500sf contractor,

directly

and

renovated custom

mix

identified

east,

level

with

(CM-i)

property

St,

and

for

operation.

Daniel

non-conforming

and

with

building,

CM-i.

land

bathroom,

isolated

the

auto

inoperable

800sf

consists

2013,

potential

mission,

of fender

CSX

CM-i

directly

church

to was

countertop

body

District.

the

directly

shop

lower

site

historically

service

the

Snapp

use.

storage,

railroad

The

Knight,

the

most

vacant

and

used

opposite

from The

plan

work

work,

comprised

west

area,

fronting

across

level

lower

for

and

applicant

Land

vacant

approximately

vehicles.

B-i

Foundry

upper

for use

Jr.

those

single

dust,

and

the

painting,

accessed

storage

zoned

for

427

consisting

from

the

warehouse

along

moving

having

odor,

of a

outlines

building.

North

conditional

building

the

properties areas.

small

mechanical

from

noise

greater

subject

north

3300

businesses.

Loudoun

Cameron

his

reception one

building.

The

Land

and

square

and

desire

existing

the

containing

use

potential

property.

lower

vibration.

work,

St.

south

Street

permit

the

Further

feet.

Otherwise,

area,

level

overhead

corner

use

and

west

impacts

(Map

commercial

for

the

also

well,

the

Additionally,

upholstering.

sketch

motor

isolated

intensive

lower

Number

the

accessed

due

door N.

ssto uses

mix

south Cameron

vehicle

floor

neighboring

level

facing

from

uses

the

173-01-K-i)

the

repair

such

from

are

plan

These

including

surrounding

uses

and

painting,

west

and

the social

operations

provided

operations

HR-i

Clark

building

include

the

zoned a

welfare

injurious

recommending

neighborhood.

neighborhood

modified

corner

For The

RECOMMENDATION accommodate

the

previously

The

closed

vehicles

shop the

would

Staff

its

All

outside

Hours

All

future.

alley

applicant

August

conditional

met

area.

enclosed

inoperable

service

ieyard). side

during be

awaiting to

will

(Kern

with

required.

persons

obtained

storage

property

The

operation

20,

not

will

operations.

and

intends

nor

the

approval

Ln)

applicant

2013

use

adversely

vehicles

repair.

need

repair

proposed

residing

applicant

all

shall

While

permit

detrimental

the

sides;

meeting,

2008

shall

improvements

because

work

rear,

acknowledges

work

and

the

The

affect

motor

permitted;

and

such,

uses

working

any

there

property

the

applicant

with a

remain

the

himself

the

pre-application

earlier

any

approved,

vehicles

Planning

order

public

the

use,

health,

vehicles

and no

includes

valid

Building

the

than

outlines

suitable

subject

his

welfare

awaiting

first,

Commission

proposed,

neighborhood

obtain

neighborhood.

safety

for

7am

letter

finding

awaiting

the

but

Official basis

his

area

small, to

and

the

repair

building’s

indicates

intended

this

Certificate

injurious

must

welfare

and

should

onsite

service

requirement

elevated

forwarded

permit

later

shall

determined

nor

determine

The

the

not

hours

made

orientation

will

than

recommendation

shall

store

persons

property

off-street

possibility

adversely

detrimental

contained

Occupancy.

CU-13-422

that

7pm,

for

and

required

any

that

operation

the

within

residing

the

seven on

changes

properly

parking

affect

overhead

within

proposal

the

improvements

off-street

adding

Variances to

the

days

public

lot

City

the

necessary

building,

screen

area

the subject

working M-F,

(setback

housed

Council

door

as 1-2

health,

week.

welfare

shop

accessed

parking

submitted

8am

were

employees

inoperable

to:

which

inside

area.

and

safety

remain

the

area

5pm.

from

shall

the

or in

Danny

Si consideration

will

employees

M’

‘t

pursue

Pursuant

Dear

Aug

ncer

intended

reman

niy

•

Mr.

ely,

Knight

2013

desire at

Custom

Selling

engine

Restoring

Youmans,

427

ccsed

your

business

Jr.

some

and

restored

rebuildng

airbrush

get

meron

request,

classic

orcn’.pt

point

this

hours

not

cars

business

work

cars

the

attention

the

are

via

necess.rv,

Winchester,

for

I’:

interfere

internet

futre

t lc.vinq

Monday

custc’ves.

motorcycle

openatTc’nal

once this

/5”

is or

—

tenor

Friday

matter.

rgi

brougnt

the

whch

public

squirts

parts

upholstery

business

soon 8

includes

vie

for

as auctions —

services

possible.

has

and

body

steady

custom

T here

and

repair

appreciate

workflow

business

may

designed

and

paint,

and

activities

and

possibility

income.

mechancal

thank

intend

you

The

adding

for

o’.:erhaut,

bay

your

door 1-2

Revised:

Initiating

6. 4.

5. 2.

The N/A

department

INSURANCE:

FUNDING

1. N/A

ADVISORY PUBLIC

Approve

operations

STAFF ITEM

Ordinance

____Fire

Clerk

City

City required

______

initiating CITY

______

TITLE:

Manager

Attorney

Finance/Risk

September

RECOMMENDATION:

Department

NOTICE

to related

RESOLUTION

Council

that

& DEPARTMENT COUNCIL/COMMITTEE

recommended

DATA:

amend

Department BOARD

CITY

Rescue

Afkv

must

28,

AND

and

Cemetery

initial

Director’s

Management

Department_

2009

RECOMMENDATION:

re-adopt

Director

HEARING:

PROPOSED

their

burial Signature:

review

WINCHESTER,

section

ORDINANCE

will

place

N/A deceased

MEETING

CITY

10-51

order

Mary

INITIALS

below,

APPROVAL COUNCIL

for

human

Blowe,

the

this

OF:

City

APPROVED

sequence

item

FOR

remains.

Finance

Code

July

PUBLIC

AGENDA

16,

DISAPPROVAL

Director

INITIALS

placed

VIRGINIA

include

transmittal,

2013

HEARING

ITEM

FORM:

CUT

the

exception FOR

the

City

OFF

names Council /_

“

Date

DATE:

for

DATE

-O/3-? of C

?—/

blasting

each

lt-r agenda. further than RECOMMENDATIONS: Marshall remains OPTIONS: BUDGET carrier Exception: limit Cemetery cemetery create THE BACKGROUND: RELATIONSHIP To: Date: relating Re: From: of $5,000,000, ISSUE: a to provided liability.

to 1 Julyl6,2013 may Ordinance Mary Honorable more not ensure so IMPACT: to blasting An

Add CITY less staff carry be Blowe, applicant livable This City that permiffed this that often TO provided began City insurance at change Mayor insurance staff the No exception STRATEGIC the Mt. Finance City than Staff for budget blasting

to COUNCIL has requested Hebron Staff for and to its research blasting for once have in bana obtain all. been operations Director is recommends blasting Members to the impact required operations Cemetery a the been PLAN: presented combined year. operations $2M the existing permit to requirement asked necessity are of is the before With adequate City from shall the with conducted City. single with code to 94 related Council this

proposed ACTION a review $5M be insurance a of permit section: relating limit change, request inspected this and to to on the $2M. of cemetery limit. can they document its $5M. requirement in to to we be privately the We are insurance and decrease can This issued. amount comfortable spoke burial approved

work MEMO as created owned submitted. for the with of with of Mt. deceased $2,000,000 insurance by our a property our with Hebron hardship the insurance community this Fire human amounts and reduced rather for the to AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND RE-ADOPT SECTION 10-51 OF THE CITY CODE TO INCLUDE AN EXCEPTION FOR BLASTING OPERATIONS RELATED TO CEMETERY BURIAL OF DECEASED HUMAN REMAINS

WhEREAS, Section 27-97 of the Code of Virginia authorizes municipalities to adopt fire prevention regulations that are more extensive in scope than the Statewide Fire Prevention Code; and

WHEREAS. the City of Winchester has adopted the Statewide Fire Prevention Code with such amendments in Section 10-51 of the Winchester City Code; and

WhEREAS, the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code only requires a level of $500,000.00 minimum insurance for blasting operations; and

WHEREAS, Common Council had previously, at the request of the Fire Marshal, approved an Ordinance to increase the insurance requirements of Section 3301.2.4 of the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code to require a level of $5,000,000.00 as minimum required blasting insurance; and

WHEREAS, Mount hlebron Cemetery has requested an exception to this amount for blasting operations associated with cemetery burial of deceased human remains as such blasting operations have been represented to utilize a minimum of explosive charge, are conducted tinder relatively controlled conditions, and are believed to be less likely to cause significant damage to

Iifi. or property: and

WHEREAS, such blasting operations by Mount 1-lebronCemetery have been conducted in the City of Winchester for a considerable period of time with no known instances of claims against the City arising from such operations; and

WHEREAS, the City has confirmed with its insurance company (VML) that Mount Flebron’s request for an exception for blasting related to cemetery burial of deceased human remains is not unreasonable and unlikely to result in excessive exposure upon the City of Winchester; and

WhEREAS, it is the belief of Common Council that the adoption of said exception is in the best interests of the City.

NOW TIIERLIORE BE IT ORDAINED that Section 10-51 of the Winchester City Code is hereby amended and readopted to include the thllowing exception:

SECTION 10-51. AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS TO THE VIRGINIA STATEWIDE FIRE PREVENTION CODE. Pursuant to Code of Virginia, 27-97, the City is empowered to adopt fire prevention regulations that are more restrictive or more extensive in scope than the Statewide Fire Prevention Code provided such regulations do not allect the manner of construction, or materials to be used in the erection, alteration, repair, or use of a building or structure, including the voluntary installation of smoke alarms and regulation and inspections

95 thereof in commercial buildings where such smoke alarms are not required under the provisions of the Code. The Cityhereby adopts the Statewide Fire Prevention Code with the following amendments:

[..remaining portions of ordinance remain unaltered...]

Change Section 3301.2.4 to read: 330 1.2.4 Financial responsibility. Before a permit is issued as required by Section 3301.2, the applicant shall file with the city a certificate of insurance which shows that the applicant has general liability insurance in the amount of at least $5,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage provided by an insurance company authorized to sell insurance in Virginia by the VirginiaStateCorporation Commission.CommercialGeneralLiabilityis to include bodily injury and property damage, personal injury and advertising injury, products and completed operations coverage. The City of Winchester must be named by endorsement to the policy as additional insured and provided a copy prior to the event. Certificate holder: City of Winchester, 15 N. Cameron Street, Winchester, VA 22601. This insurance policy shall become available for the payment of any damage arising from the acts or omissions of the applicant, his agents, or his employees in connection with the permitted activity. The applicant shall ensure that the insurance policy is in effect at the time of the commencement of the activities authorized by the permit, and remains continuously in effect until such activities are completed.

Exception: An applicant for blasting operations related to cemetery burial of deceased human remains may be permitted to obtain a permit with insurance in the amount of $2,000,000 rather than $5.000.000. provided its operations are conducted on its privately owned property and further provided that the blasting operations shall be inspected and approved by the Fire Code Official not less often than once a year.

96 CUT __

1’)

PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AGENI)A ITEM

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: 7/23/13 (work sssion OFF DATE: 7/17/13 SI h1d 8/13/13(1 Reading) 9/10/13 (2 reading)

RESOLUTION ORDINANCE X PUBLIC HEARING X

ITEM TITLE: RZ-13-289 AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE 44.44 ACRES OF LAND AT 2410 AND 2416 PAPERMILL RD (Map Numbers 272-01-8 AIVD291-02-A-fl) FROM INTENSIVE INDUSTRIAL (M-2) DISTRICT TO IIIGl-IWAY COMMERCIAL (B-2) DISTRICT

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval

PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING: Public hearing for 9/10/13 Council mtg

ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission recommended approval.

FUNDiNG DATA: N/A

INSURANCE: N/A

INITIALS FOR INITIALS FOR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL DATE

1. Economic Development 7Th 2. City Attorney 7/ 7J.2..c? 3. City Manager 4. Clerk of Council

Initiating Department Director’s Signature: (Planning) [uw PPROV ASTOFORM: 200 J - CIT’ATNEY 97

The

First

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Planning

OPTIONS:

See

BUDGET

corridor The

BACKGROUND: compatible

Winchester -Short

nuisances,

industrial

consistent

Goal ceased

THE

RELATIONSHIP

Proactively

To:

Date:

Re: From: >

Ordinance

current attached

Reading

ISSUE:

Approve

Deny;

Term

Grow

operations

which

August28,

2416 Tim

INDUSTRIAL

RZ-13-289

Mayor

Commission

nature

IMPACT:

with

such

with

rezoning

community.

M-2

CITY

Challenges

Youmans,

leave

was

staff

the

PAPERMILL

would

was

the

and

rezoning

commercial

or zoning

uses

Economy

held

report

existing

other

recommendation

reviewed

Members

2013

44.44

not

STRATEGIC

Highway

could

unanimously

(M-2)

Planning

ORDINANCE

and

mix

COUNCIL

uses

the

M-2

acres

proposed

also

DISTRICT

well

Opportunities

8/13/13 by

property

that

Commercial

residential

(Map

zoning

City

Council

very

Director

with

are

PLAN:

recommended

underutilized

Council

Numbers

regular

well

commercial-oriented

likely

the

in limits

place

uses

introduce

REZONE

Comp

#2:

its

HIGHWAY

its

meeting.

7/23/13 allow

Attracting

create

272-01-8

marketing

ACTION

industrial

Plan.

approval.

for

additional

44.44

nuisance

work

COMMERCIAL

commerce

proximity.

AND

businesses

ACRES

travel

land

session

uses

291-02-A-B)

heavy

and

where

that

area

the

which

and

MEMO

that

addition

truck

are

(B-2)

Federal

LAND

area.

revitalizationhinfill

forwarded;

are

primarily

traffic

FROM

DISTRICT

right

not

Mogul

onsite

along

2410

particularly

for

INTENSIVE

the

recently

AND this Council Work Session July 23, 2013

RZ-13-289 AN ORDINANCETO REZONE44.44 ACRESOF LAND AT2410 AND 2416 PAPERMILLRD (Map Numbers 272-01-8 AND 291-02-A-B) FROM INTENSIVE INDUSTRIAL(M-2) DISTRICTTO HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL(B-2) DISTRICT

REQUESTDESCRIPTION The request is for the City to rezone underutilized Intensive Industrial (M-2) land to Highway Commercial (B-2) to support economic redevelopment of the property in a manner more compatible with the major commercial development extending along both sides of S. Pleasant Valley Road in the general vicinity.

AREADESCRIPTION The land to the north is zoned CM-i and contains retail and restaurant uses along S. Pleasant Valley Rd and contractor establishments along Abrams Creek Drive. Land to the east across Pleasant Valley Rd is zoned B-2 and CM-i and contains major commercial retail and restaurant development. Land immediately to the south is zoned M-2 and contains a wholesale plumbing supply and showroom establishment. Land further to the south is zoned CM-i and contains commercial uses. Land across the railroad to the west is zoned B-2 and contains commercial uses. Land further to the west is zoned HR and contains multifamily use.

STAFFCOMMENTS City staff believes that B-2 zoning of the Federal Mogul property will better result in development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan than the current M-2 zoning. The industrial use by Federal Mogul (formerly Abex) has ceased. Redevelopment of the site with. The proposed B-2 zoning would allow for uses more compatible with major commercial use along most of S. Pleasant Valley Rd and more harmonious with the residential uses in close proximity to the west.

Relation to Comprehensive Plan

Chapter 4: Economic Sustainability Citywide Economic Development Objective #9: “Proactively redevelop property where needed to achieve maximum sustainable potential.”

99 Chapter 9 — Future Development The Character Map identifies: - The northern part of land as Civic/Institutional or Park. This is the portion of land not likely to be redeveloped due to environmental issues and required, ongoing monitoring of the industrial landfill site. - The southern part of land as Commerce Area Revitalization/Infill. This is the developable portion of the site where future commercial use is envisioned.

Chapter 11— Southeast Planning Area Environment: “...mitigate documented hazards at the Abex site along the west side of S. Pleasant Valley Rd.”

Relation to the Strategic Plan

Goal 1: Grow the Economy Short Term Challenges and Opportunities #2 “Attracting businesses that are right for the Winchester community.”

The current M-2 zoning of the property limits its marketing to uses that are primarily of an industrial nature or other uses that are likely to create nuisance and which are not particularly compatible with commercial or residential uses in close proximity. In addition to onsite nuisances, such uses could also very well introduce additional heavy truck traffic along this corridor which would not mix well with commercial-oriented travel in the area.

RECOMMENDATION At its July 16, 2013 meeting, the Planning Commission forwarded RZ-13-289 to City Council recommending approval as depicted on an exhibit entitled “Rezoning Exhibit RZ-13-289, Prepared by Winchester Planninp Department, May 22, 2013” because the request is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which calls for Commerce Area Revitalization/lnfill on the developable portion of the site.

100 AN ORDINANCETO REZONE44.44 ACRESOF LANDAT 2410 AND 2416 PAPERMILLRD (Map Numbers 272 -01-8 AND 291-02-A-B) FROM INTENSIVEINDUSTRIAL(M-2) DISTRICTTO HIGHWAYCOMMERCIAL (B-2) DISTRICT

RZ-13-289

WHEREAS,the Code of Virginia provides that one of the purposes of Zoning Ordinances is to facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community; and,

WHEREAS,the adopted Comprehensive Plan calls for Commerce Area Revitalization/Infill on the developable portion of the Federal Mogul site and the Winchester Strategic Plan to grow the economy as part of the long term vision for the City of Winchester; and,

WHEREAS,the adopted Comprehensive Plan includes a citywide economic development objective calling for the City to proactively redevelop property where needed to achieve maximum sustainable potential; and,

WHEREAS, intensive industrial use of the Federal Mogul site has ceased and the predominant land use along South Pleasant Valley Road is commercial, rather than industrial; and,

WHEREAS,the Planning Commission resolved at its June 18, 2013 meeting to initiate the rezoning of this land; and,

WHEREAS,the Planning Commission forwarded the request to Council on July 18, 2013 recommending approval of the rezoning as depicted on an exhibit entitled “Rezoning Exhibit RZ-13-289, Prepared by Winchester Planning Department, May 22, 2013” because the request is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which calls for Commerce Area Revitalization/Infill on the developable portion of the site; and,

NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINEDby the Common Council of the City of Winchester, Virginia that the following land is hereby rezoned from the existing zoning designation of Intensive Industrial (M 2) District to Highway Commercial (B-2) District:

Approximately 44.44 acres of land at 2410 and 2416 Papermill Road as depicted on an exhibit entitled “Rezoning Exhibit RZ-13-289, Prepared by Winchester Planning Department May 22, 2013”.

101 REZOMNG EXHIBIT RZ-13-2H9 PRrP\RF) BY WTNCHFSTER P A\\G DF.pRTNIrxT 1av 2u1. 102

PROPOLD

M-2 LOj\(j FOR 2110 A\D2 116 P ERMLL k()r\D 8-2 ZONING FOR 2410 ANI) 211(’ PAPLR\IILL RUM) -AoI3- 3L. ‘-?oi -3

PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM

CITY COUNCIL/COMMITTEE MEETING OF: July 23, 2013 CUT OFF DATE:

RESOLUTION X ORDINANCE X PUBLIC HEARING X iTEM TiTLE: Proposed Sidewalk Master Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of resolution and ordinance. PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING: NA ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION: NA FUNDING DATA: See attached.

INSURANCE: NA

INITIALS FOR INiTIALS FOR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL DATE

1. Finance

2. City Attorney

3 City Manager

4. Clerk of Council initiating Department Director’s Date

-) PPROV TOFORM

Revised: September 28, 2009 103

show

construct

currently the

poor

BUDGET

plan

prepared

City

appropriating

one

BACKGROUND:

project

Specifically,

RELATIONSHIP

THE

Re:

Date:

To:

From:

new

made.

current

Council’s

condition

the

ISSUE:

sidewalks

to the

priority

Proposed July

Perry Honorable

need

sidewalks

the

provide

IMPACT:

City

highest

backlog

FYI

Policy

CITY

attached

23,

significant

direction

and

for

Presentation

and

Eisenach,

Council

budget,

at 2013

the

significant

priorities

need

Making

Sidewalk funding

along

Agenda

Mayor

framework

Over

STRATEGIC

approximately

cost

Sidewalk

(Council

has

provided

funding

there

COUNCIL

Public

every

the

and

improvements

mechanisms.

responded

when

and

resources

Item

Master

approximately

replaced.

past

Members

Work

City

Master

and

the

Services consideration

$830,000

looking

#5:

the

PLAN:

six

past

$24

street

Plan

guidance

Session)

years,

Develop

Strategic

for

Plan

million

few

this

Director

sidewalks

where

addition,

budgeted

Goal $9.5

City

sidewalks

for

years

the strong

104

for

City

Plan,

Council

services

million,

ACTION

the

City

Sidewalk

none

the

construction

for

desire

Council’s

Create

proposed

for

City’s

has

would

the

sidewalk

has

currently

the

funded

sidewalk

where

Public

constructed

future.

Master

for

been

sidewalk

cost

consideration. improved

for Sidewalk

improvements.

they

exist.

Services

identified

approximately

construction.

existing

Plan

multiple Livable

feel program

MEMO

approximately

These

with

sidewalks

Master

improvements

Department

sidewalks

revenue

City

policy

City

The

large

There

$75

for

Plan.

future

residents

goal

response

directions,

All.

figures

sources.

million

that

22.7

has

years.

need

are

this

miles

to In

SIDEWALK

would

Council

started of

never the

Section

levels

such

million,

sidewalk The

However, in

General The

Revenue

needed. complete. A

herein.

in This

previously

During there Approximately

Since

improvements

estimated

significant

Approximately

The

existing

replaced

maintaining

poor

proposed

locations

5-year

proposed

as City

includes

take really

may

MASTER

economic

condition.

the

repeal

26-7

general

This

Fund, be

sidewalks

will

replacements

The

currently

Sharing

since

aggressive

plan

that

cost

change,

existed.

amount

Over

past

been

where

5-year

need

take

plan

sidewalk

primary

sidewalk

5-year

Section

5-year

the

that

action.

the

64 of

50%

the

obligation six

the

PLAN

replacing

conditions

enforced,

sidewalk over

Funds.

construct major

includes

Should

miles

Utility none

maintains

City

would

plan

years,

current

5-year

plan

this

plan poor

program

funding

26-7

the

per

SUMMARY

replacements

important

Code

for

of repairs.

currently

Fund

total

City

years

both

will

will approximately

the

bonds

condition

existing

sidewalks

both

improvements

year

need

especially

period,

sidewalk

are

these

approximately

necessary

requires

complete

sources

the

require

sidewalk

Council

(including

cost

sides

difficult

sidewalk

which

for

The

replacing

exist.

City

replace

sidewalks

would

AND

other

update

existing

construction

miles

would

and

estimated

during

average

the

wish

Code.

would

that

approximately to

105

every

adjacent

an significant

22.7

RECOMMENDATIONS:

replacements

forecast

revenue

constructing

property

construct

all

sidewalks, possible

average

have

this

need

115

sidewalk

the

for

are

sidewalks

Attached

street

miles

expedite

approximately

Sidewalk

the

cost

annual

funded

miles

the

been

past

has

sources

amount

owner

their

existing

Stormwater

where poor

curb

the

for

$24

replacements

been

projected

approximately

sidewalks

new

constructed

this

and

basis.

primarily

replacinglrepairing

new

property.

future

years.

existing

condition

Master

million.

recommended

approximately

none

will

gutter

proposed

sidewalks

schedule,

developed

the

sidewalks

sidewalks.

funding

and

responsible

construction

Utility),

Since

currently

million

have sidewalks

Plan,

and

required.

This

and

meet

the

within

is the

$1.1

ordinance

additional

where

approximately

drainage

the

that

been

and

projected

need

provision

and

successfully

General

this

that $75

exist.

the

funding

million

City

are

particularly

within

all

for

state

constructed.

need

none

presented

million.

City

has

currently

the

sidewalks

that

funding

The

Fund.

the

funding

has

the

will

for

are

costs

$24

City.

be the

OPTIONS

RECOMMENDED

Adopt

Not

Adopt

removal). Approve

maintenance the

current

adopt

FOR

the

attached

CITY

the proposed

proposed

attached

requirement

ACTIONS

proposed

COUNCIL:

the

resolution

ordinance

public

resolution

FOR

resolution that

sidewalk

CITY

the

adopting

repealing

and/or

property

COUNCIL:

and/or

adjacent

ordinances

ordinance the

106

Section

owner

ordinance.

Sidewalk

their

26-7

with

occupier

presented.

Master

property

modifications.

City

Plan.

Code

(not

responsible

including

which

would

for

snow

physical

eliminate

or ice AN ORDINANCETO REPEALSECTION26-7 OF THE WINCHESTERCITYCODE WHICH WOULD ELIMINATETHE REQUIREMENTFOR THE PROPERTYOWNER OR OCCUPIERTO BE RESPONSIBLEFOR THE MAINTENANCEOF THE PUBLICSIDEWALKADJACENTTO THEIR PROPERTY

WHEREAS,Section 26-7 of the CityCode specifies that the property owner or occupier is responsible for the physical maintenance of the public sidewalk adjacent to their property; and

WHEREAS,this section of City Code has proven to be impractical and it is the desire of City Councilfor the Cityto be responsible for the maintenance of all public sidewalks, with the exception of snow and ice removal.

NOW, THEREFORE,BEIT ORDAINEDthat Sections 26-7 of the Winchester CityCode is hereby repealed in its entirety and re-enacted to read as follows:

*ftII SECTION26—7. AflJi’ A1iIf CII REPEALED.

(a) Evcryowner or occupier of lots or parts of lots abutting on existing streets in thc city shall cause the existing sidewalks and driveway entrances to be paved, rcpavcd, or repaired at the expense of such owner or occupier. n rw.,.’ nt (b) The-,DUbIIC works fl shall notify the - owners or occupiers of lots or parts of lots abutting on existing streets to pave, rcpavc, or repair the sidewalks when rcquireu. aucn notice shall be by registered or certified letter sent to such owner or occupier at his fact known address or served by a member of the police department. If, after diligent inquiry, no address can be found for such owner, such letter shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the property. (c) In the event an owner or occupier or either of them shall neglect or refuse to pave, rcpave, or repair the sidewalk when required pursuant to this section, the council may have such sidewalk paved, repaved, or repaired and recover the expenses therefor before the general district court or thc circuit court, and in all cases where a tenant is required to pave in front of the property used in his occupation, the expenses of the paving so done shall be a good offset against so much of the rent as he shall have paid toward such paving, but no tenant shall be required to pay more for or on account of such paving than such tenant may owe at the time of the commencement of such work or as may become due to the end of his tenancy. (d) No owner or occupier of a lot or lots in front of which paving has been laid shall be requircu1 rcpav. . sidewalk, .. wnriir part-t e’” --.. cxpcr” often than once in five (5) years; provided, further, that the expense for such paving, ft4 rcoainr excess of the peculiar benefits resulting to such abutting land. (Code 1959, §22-21.3; Ord. of 6-14 73) (e) Curb ramps shall be constructed at intersections for use of handicapped persons. No ramps shall bc required for curbs in place on January 1, 1975; however, ramps shall be required on all replacement of such curbs adjoining sidewalks at interscdions leading to

107 ______

crosswalks. Such ramps shall comply with the Virginia Department of Transpoftatio&s Road and Bridge Standards. This section shall not apply where finalized plans for rcplaccmcnt of curbs had been advertised for bid, contracts awarded, and work commenced prior to June 30, 197-5.(Ord. No.04295,9 1295)

Ordinance No.

ADOPTEDby the Common Council of the City of Winchester on the day of 2013.

Witness my hand and the seal of the Cityof Winchester, Virginia.

Deputy Clerk of the Common Council

108 CITY OF WINChESTER, VIRGINIA

PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: 8/27/13 (work session), CUT OFF DATE: 8/21/13

9/1- 0/13 (rcu1ar rntfr

RESOLUTION ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING X

ITEM TITLE: CU-13-361 Request of Shenandoah Mobile, LLC for a conditional use permit to construct a telecommunications tower at 2633 Paperniill Road (Map Number 291-01-7,) zoned Commercial Industrial(CM-i) District,

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING: Public hearing for 9/10/13 Councilmeeting

ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions

FUNDING DATA: N/A

INSURANCE: N/A

INITIALS FOR INITIALS FOR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL DATE

1. Zoning /2. 1/3 2. City Attorney

3. City Manager 4. Clerk of Council

Initiating Department Director’s Signature: -)- )13 (Planning) II

APPROVEDASTOFORM:

TTNEr 109 tower. removal Council Staff Planning RECOMMENDATIONS: OPTIONS: A construction No BUDGET be information). contains property proposed network The equipment, RELATIONSHIP THE BACKGROUND: N/A To: From: Re: Date: request vacant - - - - funding request recommends ISSUE: Approve Approve Approve Deny forwarded of to zoned August Will construct CU-13-361 Honorable owner an Commission equipment. IMPACT: was of the increase is at existing

the CITY of is an Moore, required. the existing to received a Commercial with with with wishes active application 28, new TO construct Anderson a the inclusion Mayor 2013 telecommunications capacity revised an conditions 92’ Planner Request STRATEGIC tower recommended request Two user. 92’ to additional tower

from COUNCIL keep tower. and a panel of should conditions This Industrial Roofing and the new of which at the as Members the Shenandoah its tower’s applicant antennas provide condition recommended 100’ additional existing PLAN: be 8/27/13 was and approval (CM-i) evaluated monopole tower continued of deemed Sheet 4G to tower requiring on City work condition services construct District. Mobile, 110 with that at Metal

Council ACTION by by session for tower, 2633 structurally tower conditions presence CounciL the possible removal Works, LLC to requiring a Papermill Planning along the new will with for citizens (See be in of future tower insufficient Inc. a as the with conjunction removal conditional the removed noted Road Commission property. additional staff associated existing in use,

on MEMO order report within (Map Winchester. of to although by the use support with 92’ to condition the Number for the antennas existing upgrade permit tower the applicant. additional staff it the will proposed The 29 requiring to report. 92’ its initially and 1-01-7) site The

That

similar

The

including

that

The

services

not performed

proposed

support

The

operations. STAFF

and

Douglass

side

both

south

home

vacant

the

business The

immediate

wireless The

and

AREA

CM-i.

land The

REUUEST telecommunications

CU-13-361 September

Industrial

City

the

specifically

applicant

site

“(t)his

TGlFriday’s.

local

request

property

sheet

subject

request

sides

Council

COMMENTS

are

request park.

DESCRIPTION

existing

Anderson

commercial

The

the

to the

contains

Pleasant

communications

and

Elementary

UAW

the

DESCRIPTION request

tower

of (CM-i)

and

metal

south

the two

subject

beverage

north,

10,

was

property,

Land

Request

also

outlines auto

conditional

citizens

made

address

tower.

determined

hall. to

Pleasant

application

2013

antennas

the

The

denied

business

Roofing

construct

Valley

includes

discusses

District.

east,

service

made

property

parcel.

existing

the

immediate

Further

CSX

property

distributor tower

Shentel’s

light

along

the

2004

Shenandoah

and

Valley

due

east

structural

and

railroad

Winchester

use

subject tower.

and

uses.

suitability

weight

that

The

and

collocate

other is

south,

±92’

with

prior

contains

equipment new

Sheet

vacant,

permit

2633

the

necessary

property north

desire

the

Further

and

tower

the

surrounding

existing

possibilities to

has

runs

100’

such

analysis

north

closing

existing

Metal

opposite

Papermill

replacement

collocating Mobile,

west

zoned

mobile was

on of

but

been

a contains

along

monopole

that

roofing

that

the

his

the

rental

upgrade

subject

granted

±92’

Works,

the

subject

letter

the

tower’s

tower

the

water

was

the

accomplish

the

LLC

operations

the

that

Road

mapping

originally rear for

railroad.

dated

tower

tower,

Inc.

its in

were

tank cannot

111

the

continued

(Map

the

2004

network

recent

conditional

property.

approved

current

July

the

considered guy

the

and

along

crew

Number

for

support

the

constructed

this

property,

wires.

desired

development,

listing

Shentel

Federal

use

2013.

time

refused

with

tower

increase

site

use

291-01-7)

the

for

indicated

associated

coverage. its

‘

plan.

with

permit

the

Mogul

array

to and

site

structural current

collocate 2633

capacity

climb

property the

Land

including

used

location

zoned

site

Papermill

equipment

EIP-zoned

antennas

While

the

would construct

condition,

for

further

analysis

two

and

the

Commercial

for

tower.”

two-way

the the

cellular

provide

collocation, sale,

northeast

Rd.

sites

and

Frederick

able

analysis

was

that it

the

did

equipment,

radio

antennas

1.-.-

was

north.

note

Panera

did a

Commission

additional

Staff

welfare

improvements

recommending

neighborhood.

neighborhood

modified

For

RECOMMENDATION tower

its

considered

The

conditional

however

tower

railroad

viewsheds

equipment

been

The

District.

its

additional

its

suitability

evaluated

suggested

proposal

August

new

August

conditional

provided

and

Removal

Submission

The

once

Submission

Staff

ROW.

will

the

tower

condition

residents

its

equipment

than

through

applicant,

deliberated

array

use

27,

condition:

approval

the

20,

for

tower

not

includes

continued

nor

that

self-supporting,

from

approval

2013

permit

of is

the

2013 lattice

future

equipment

the

use

adversely

including

proposed

associated

the

requiring

itself

and

the

Planning

several

neighborhood.

permit

work

favorable

detrimental

tower

meeting,

as-built

removal

compound

existing

for

structures

use

bond

CUP

workers

presence

the

because

collocation

session,

this

six

affect

would not

surrounding

owner,

process,

guaranteeing

removal Commission

site

emissions

(6)

100’

±92’

monopole

matter,

proposed

the

consideration

the

longer

the antennas

Shentel’s

are

plan

need

approved,

the

Council Planning

tower

site

The

conjunction

those

public

use,

health, however

proposed

height,

has

property

neighborhood

but

in plan;

recommendation

certification the

properties

this

for

design,

and

requiring

been

active

removal

welfare

did

forwarded

antennas

Commission

existing

proposed,

removal.

safety

tower.

the

determined.

the

proposed

was

City

finding

not

owner

submitted

would,

with

use;

maximum property.

which given

112

Council.

include

guy

±92’

However,

after and

located

the

and,

nor injurious

must

facilities

the

welfare

This

assist

shall

should

at is

wires

forwarded

cabling

tower

proposed

the

generally

request

the

the least

construction

for

A allowable

remove

subject

injurious

consistent

future

top

for

facility of the

not

condition

made

evaluating

should

there

the

initially,

should

persons from

support.

property

improvements.

adversely

construction

considered

far

CU-13-361

the

equipment

collocation

that

its

for

the

no rear

with

regular

tower.

adjacent

consideration

residing

the

operation;

use

other

the existing

considered.

following

its

vacant

affect

the

proposal

improvements impact

recommendation.

cease.

new

the external-mounted

less

meeting

within

Photo

current

conditions

properties Council

site,

tower

the

this

proposed

objectionable

conditions:

working

new on

simulations

health,

ninety

adjacent

The

tower

active

viewsheds.

user

agenda

submitted

tower

the

tower, in

(90)

CM-i

could

safety,

the

user

the

this

site,

with

should

days

2004

have

the

and

The

an or Www.svjrshstm’jcw wmoori’@ci.winche’.ti William Fax: Phone: Planner Will Thinks, passed preliminary Commission tower There Subject: To; Kevin, Cc: Sent: 510.667.1253 Winchester, From: Winches Kevin fencing, I:xicii with a agreement Subject: Will Cc: To: Hi 12 Sent: From: revenue Will— N. 540.722.3618 Rick Kevin proceeding; is to Moore Washin;ton Wednesday, five 540.667.2117 along. J. Will - M. a etc. Leonard City be Wi MclKi.’w hr cell request McKow f;eni’rating Moore D Moore stiff with constructed asked are Public did of inc \ tower The A Winchester, report a get in for so, going [rno’L’ter.vLH company 22601 meeting/public staff August place. adj $5h-cit Schools your no, LYi.1.’ source, to to to before it we notice Thanks the hc directly check FDES 14, a who don’t VA property Commission At 2013 the to brokers that for hive hearing Wednesday, Will RE: Kevin Rick adjoining Planning 12:54 touching time, on cell Moore Leonard a McKew with Papermill deals problem tower is PM is the Tue Commission attached. property WPS base. August for Board iidj 8/20 with cell to Rd to see was Just owners. towers FD[S at 14, it, Please next 3pm. if providing 2013 across briefed you 113 in week lit 2 have 352 hopes years the eknow me on for the PM any the railroad of al;o ii normal concerns conditional health/safety encouraging the if you tricks School City have related requirements from use Board a any

aspects, CL) cell permit

rrp-’ F Frederick to input

tower IL entered the end to that

request.

E i4L relating on allow Douglass was into you

school CU comfortable - for would a to Our marketing

a 1 property setbacks, ES. —— 100’ like The cell as

Valley

facility

antenna

contacted

presented

Roger

established

existing

When

required

proposed

Anderson

important

build

tower

(the

Shentel

provide

Shenandoah

Dear

Re:

Winchester,

Rouss City

15 Mr.

addition

well

so,

North

report

Aaron

limited

Road

and

Rodriquez

establishing

Shentel

new

equipment.

site

Winchester

City

Shenandoah

state-of-theart

for

had

2633

and

the

Site

Grisdale:

network

future

Cameron

for

allow

and

for

Grisdale,

the

was

tower

Hall

the

attached)

request

denied

Mobile,

will

Papermill

structural

use

must

placement

proven

location

originally

sale

22601

placement

allow

that

site

telecommunications

of to

Federal

Contact

Street

add

our

Director

thru Mobile,

upgrade

LLC

will

operational

location,

portion

the

Sprint

Due

Road.

report

selected

request

new

management

selected

accommodate

(Shentel’)

Mogul

property

was

the

continue

LLC

antenna

and

prepared This

this

Zoning

the

made

Site

wireless

the

at wireless

—

regarding

improve

Shentel and

extreme

that

property Tower

area

the

!.i”7n

parcel

‘S

quisuwii

will

with

and

facilities

has

the

arid

time

and (

Anderson

upgrading

for

provide

the

(nJ!,(JcloI

K’rinr

facility

note

service

786

July

equipment

has

Ed rear

that

which

been

the

behind

Inspections

failure

the

antenna

is und

114

Duncan

that

owned —

use

negotiated

existing

coverage

request

use

the

South

I’irijirI

fi,i

2013

established

540

Sheet

the

very its

rate,

his

originally

the

operation

Sht’ni

of search

wireless

the

wireless

and

335—0030

parcel

the

business.

water

concentrated

Pleasant

D’viInpim’ni

tower

was

Shentel

citizens

our

Metal

Anderson

Tire

with

equipment

water

for

lease

existing

denied

abutting

tank

capacity

since

Outfitters,

location

areas

network

parcel,

2004,

tank.

Additionally

Valley

service.

alternate

left

agreement

the

2004.

Sheet

due

site

and

load

the

Federal

with

service

contact

and

cities,

City

platform

2712

that

increase

railroad

Since

required

Rodriquez

Metal

the

location

limited

failed

the

contact

with

Mogul

alternative

Winchester.

South within

was

closing

located

for

this

Works

tracks.

capacity

Darwin

made

size.

our

was

the

was

Pleasant

241%.

keep

was

Inc.

The area

area

even

This

the

than

with

this

and to Mr. Aaron Grisdale, Director Zoning and Inspections Jul 2, 2013 Page 2

made regarding a parcel at 2509 Papermill Road that was for sale and with Dixie Distributing located on South Pleasant Valley Road. After evaluations of the locations of the parcels, lack of interest of the property owner and our RF teams review of the various locations, it was determined that the proposed site best meets the needs of Shentel and it is felt to be the best fit and have the least effect on the surrounding properties.

A photo simulation packet depicting a ‘simulation” of how the proposed tower with antenna will look in the location have been included in the package submitted with the Conditional Use Application.

I have been working closely with our consultant, BL Companies, for the historical review process to determine if this site has any effect on historical structures or properties in the ar. As of the date of this letter, the final report has not been received but is expected any day. I will submit the final report as soon as received. Shentel has also submitted the application to the FAA to determine any height issues, but on our initial review, no issues are expected

The electromagnetic fields for this Site will not exceed the radio frequency emission standards established by the American National Standards Institute or standards issued by the Federal Government, and willnot adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed Site. We feel that keeping this Site in operation and actually improving the coverage/capacity in this area willbe a benefit to the citizens of Winchester and is in line with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.

Please contact me at (540)335-0030 should you have any questions

Sincerely yours, .2 i

Site Acquisition and Project Development Contractor for Shentel Attachments as

115

Revisecf

Initiating

department

The

INStTR4NCE:

FUNDING

Committee ADVISORY

Services

public

PUBLIC ITEM

STAFF

Clerk

City

AU&

Received

initiating

CITY

comment

Manager

Attorney

TITLE:

92013

Department

Policy

eptember

RECOMMENDATION:

NOTICE

Council that

and

DEPARTMENT

RESOLUTION

DATA:

COUNCIL/COMMITTEE

Department

BOARD

CITY

Northern

must

N/A Board

Approval

and

28.

N/A AND

hold

Directof

initial

have

2009

RECOMMENDATION:

Shenandoah

public

Director

HEARING: of

PROPOSED

their

discussed

Consolidated

hearing

review

WINCHESTER,

will

Approval

ORDINANCE

and

Valley

place

Authorize

September

CITY

MEETING

recommend

order

Annual

INITiALS

below,

Regional

for APPROVAL

116

COUNCIL

for

submission

The

Performance

this

10th,

OF:

the

City’s

Commission’s

sequence

item

FOR

2013.

attached

August

AGENDA

PUBLIC

Community

and

HUD

DISAPPROVAL

INITIALS

27,

placed

proposal

CAPER

VIR(;INIA

transmittal,

Evaluation

Housing

HEARING)(

2013

ITEM

Development

for

CUT

the

FOR

the

purposes Report

City

Community

OFF

names

Council

(CAPER)

DATE:

Dhte

DATE

receiving

each

agenda.

Iv.. .1

OPTIONS:

BUDGET

our

Development

BACKGROUND:

City

RELATIONSHIP

basis.

submit

Performance

THE

Partnership,

Re:

Date:

From: To:

Consolidated

for

ISSUE:

to all.

The August

Evaluation

Tyler 1

Honorable

IMPACT:

the

Council

CITY

Emergency

City

Recipient

and

Block

Schenck,

27,

Plan.

Department

Evaluation

The

may

Grant

Report

Mayor

Winchester’s

2013

The

STRATEGIC

CAPER

The

jurisdictions

approve

Grants

adoption Shelter

COUNCIL

and

CAPER

Report

HOME

Members

includes

Coordinator

Housing

Adoption

PLAN:

disapprove

Housing

(CAPER)

the

funds

submitted

Community

CAPER

and of

summary

Our

City

were

and

for

Urban the

117

describing

the

Persons

allocations

Council

Project

ACTION

has

used

Consolidated

Development

CAPER

HUD

and

Development

Specialist

impact

evaluation

with

annually

our

carry

are

AIDS/H

use

out

used

Annual

Block

for

(HUD)

the

federal

MEMO

their

how

Grant,

City’s

goals

Performance

help

program

review.

our

Consolidated

funds

create

budget.

and

HOME

Community

funding

objectives

and

more Investment

annual

must

Annual

livable in

Annual

Consolidated

Evaluation

community

every funds

this

her

duly

year;

must

Resolution

Performance

SECTION

THEREFORE

WHEREAS,

appointed

Report

and

prepare

Annual

signifying

and

expand

the

agencies

and

Evaluation

Performance

deputy,

has

City

The IT

The

submit

RESOLVED

satisfactorily

economic

its of

City

Mayor,

adoption

that

Winchester

adoption

Report

directed

Manager,

receive

Consolidated

Evaluation

opportunities;

presiding

followed

THE

this

U.S.

the

has

desires

the

attest

Resolution

CITY

his

U.S.

Report

Department

RESOLUTION

developed

City

Annual

officer,

designee,

HUD

COUNCIL

thereto. Department

118

Council

and

receive

pending

requirements

Performance

shall

hereby

Consolidated

HUD

directed

serve

Housing

final

the

THE

Housing

authorized

funds

City

public

CITY

for

and

provisional

and

the

submit

Annual

Winchester,

Evaluation

comment.

and

Urban

develop

WINCHESTER,

creation

Urban

affix

the

Performance

Development

approval

Consolidated

Report

his

viable

Development.

and

the

her

document.

urban

(CAPER)

the

City

FOLLOWS:

and

signature

(HUD) Clerk,

Winchester,

Rouss

Wirchster

North

the

Council

comment

time

begin

RECOMMENDATION

drawn amount

Region

development

FINANCIAL

period.

HUD,

This

the

available

data

Regional

SUBJECT August

City

programmed

City

Cameron

use

for

year,

public

Hall

from

the

For

through

Per

has

Council. regular of

the

14,

period

Commission

CAPER 22601

HOME

the

“To

the

program

public

the

been

HUD

Street

2013

the

comment

activities

provide

CAPER

IMPACT

the

recommendation

for

current

meeting

regular

form

requirement.

obligated

representing

funds

use

must

year

voice

period

during

safe,

the

agreement

HOME

the

while

CDBG

due responsible

2012,

the

quality

their

Tuesday

vibrant,

made

Consolidated

SUMMARY

City

specific

Program

Members

City

24.7%

and

$2,158,474.93

HUD

opinion

August

and

available

with

sustainable

life

City

staff

CDBG

September

Winchester

any

for

projects,

the

Year

staff

regarding

our

the

compiling

other

later

Annual

City

the

responsible

for

through

allocations

citizens

total

community

2013.

that

than

public

was

community and

119

10,

and

Council funds

Performance

Winchester,

the

and

available

September

approximately

2013

and

September

surrounding

may

comment

while

topic

economic

and

for

available.

submitting

proceed

also

compiling

development

striving

7:00

while

for

28,

partners.”

and the

attend

during

housing

Northern

2013.

meeting

2013.

$543,648.69

The

with

Northern

performance

Evaluation

constantly

program

and

the

remaining

give

Resolution

resources

This

15-day

and

Prior

submitting

Winchester

Website:

TDD:

Telephone:

FAX:

the

Shenandoah

verbal

Shenandoah

community

improve

years.

provides

Report

15-day

was

public

data

submission

$1,615,126.24

made

comments approval

www.winchesterva.gov

spent

The

performance

City

(CAPER).

public

comment

ample

Valley

full

Valley

and

(540)

and

to to

723-0238

722-0782 667-1815 1*11:

Fifth

General

I’iiL%

The

during

drawn

years

surrounding

$2,158,474.93

the

available

and

This

loincludes also

Action

information

the

Although

CAPER

the

part

The

This

executed

overview Program

Executive

The

year

Executive

Homeless

Assessment

following close - -

84 City

federal

report,

Consolidated

Program

from

Program

Plan

grantee

the

module

2012.

document of

for

53.4

184% development

10.1%

through

18.1%

of administered

Winchester,

Community

HUD

funding,

order

though related

for

Northern the

sale

Year

summary

throughout that

Prevention

The

Questions was

addressing

Summary

Year

fiscal

representing

description

the

Year

Annual is

full

must

Administration

and

Economic

available

Homeownership

specific

income

Rental

Summary

including

includes

2013.

regular

Shenandoah

optional

year,

the

amount

subsidies

CAPER

separately, Development

submitted information

Virginia

the

The

CDBG,

Report

CAPER

Fifth

and

progress

Performance

submit

Activities

affordable

eligible

compliant

for

annual

DevelopmenflRevitalization

narratives

local

Rapid

the

24.7%

September

one-year

the

has

CPMP

the

and

housing

for

major

Executive

but

accomplishments

and

been

Valley

the

in HOME,

homebuyers; expenditure

community

includes

first

the

Activities Northern

allocations,

including HUD.

Re-housing

Block

meeting

housing

the

Area

CDBG

encouraged.

the

rehabilitation,

Fifth

Evaluation

obligated

and

Program

updated

Region

28,

initiatives

use

year.

with

CAPERs

Grant

total

goals

Agency

are

community

HOPWA,

2013

Shenandoah

including and

objectives

rental

and

development

Consolidated

Summary

Narrative

funds

and

programs.

the

through

(CDBG)

funds

optional.

HOME

community

accomplishments

Report

for

and

Support

met

rehabilitation,

other specific

are

Financial

development

available.

the

Consolidated

direct

and

through

development

required

identified

Activities

and

Program

regular

objectives:

and

2012 federal

120

(CAPER)

Valley

program

funding

projects,

you

Responses

down

response:

development

highlights

HOME

ESG

Program

The

implementation

Annual

HOME

Region.

dollars

new

Summary

accomplishments

and choose

payment

from

area:

includes

Year

the

remaining

the

Investment

and activities

grantees

rental submitted

goals

construction

2008

and

Year

through

the

City

Planning

approximately

needs

Performance

that

and

CDBG

City

achieved a

development

Consolidated

summary

$1,615,126.24

This

Winchester.

CAPER

Report

closing

complete

recovery

the

of Partnerships

the

were

must

HUD

Winchester,

allocations

CAPER

report

the

are

City

Regulations.

CDBG

through

single

City

cost

incorporated

$543,648.69

questions

proposed

and

(PR26).

contains

respond

all

Plan

Winchester

ae than later

and

family

assistance

and

activities

(HOME)

it,

use

rental

and

state

programmed

and

surrounding

programs

HOME

provide

homes

summary

Evaluation

2012

assistance

Version

other

into

was

CDBG

undertaken

Programs

The

and

that

and

days

Programs,

spent

each

Annual

available

local,

single

including

program

funding

region

for

after

brief

2.0

and

state

use

in as

Fifth

projects

The

Assistance

Downpayment

Homeownership

Totals Development

Homeownership

additional

the

CAPER

status

Taylor

Below,

original

continue

In working

and

Program

Jurisdiction

the

general,

HOME

chart

Activity

timeliness

b. a.

Leveraging

Affirmatively

Describe of

Describe

Program a.

2012

update

Hotel

the

are

timelines

were

with

above

meeting

its

$28

resources.

How

needs.

How Identify

Identify

Provide

and

following If

Program for

Provide

reporting

Describe

currently

the

work

Program

Section

Year

partner

experiences.

supplemented

for applicable,

for

among

NSVRC,

each

shows

objectives.

each.

matching

proposed. Federal

every

Development:

Other

Year

the

develop

Goal

along

charts

organizations

108

19 Year,

underserved

Resources

progress

actions

subrecipients

CAPER

the

goal

time

the

manner

as Furthering

summary

period.

breakdown

Loan

CAPER

indicate

most

activities

HOME

the

and

Actions

administrator

$507,777.00

$ an

$125,000.00

with

resources

and

accomplishments

explain

and

55,000.00

160,000.00

167,777.00

project.

City

requirements

annual

narrative

Obligated

cases,

taken

General

anticipated

funding

that

variety

objective.

identified

and

develop

Winchester

obtaining of

work

not funding

which

Fair

needs.

why

summaries sub-grantees.

HOME

Strategic

impediments

invested.

from

only

program

the

Questions

other

overcome

for

Housing:

project

HOMEI2

HOME11

HOMEO9,

complete

provided

progress

the

Programs

funding

the

re-assumed

CPD

HUD

were

funding

“other”

describe

that

implementation

recipient

match

Plan

This

through

formula

that

HOME1O,

leveraged

$ includes

attaining satisfied.

121

sources.

works

response:

Source

effects was

schedule.

obligation

continues

were

goals

administration

public

fair

the

Action

would

projects not

initiated,

for

HOME11 clearly

grant

Current

CDBG

schedules

housing

met,

the

active

made

other

and

impediments

that

articulate

Plan

change

and

but

underway

goals

estimates

funds

June

projects

private

will

that

the

that

area

HOME

public

towards

Units

choice.

taken

30,

CDBG

the

and

are

expectations

for spent

2013, in completed

its

for

Complete

Programs

HOME

realistic

the

improvement

resources

completed

and

funds

objectives

program

2012

identified.

a meeting

total

address

Program

private

expended

and

according

descnbed

Program

for

grant

which

feasible. $

accomplishments

Version

each

2012.

399,616.00

30,496.00

87,867.80

113,475.20

167,777.00

leveraged

the

new

for

Expended

oversaw

obstacles

activities

address

Year

year

2012

All

goals the

result

the

this

in and

2.0

an the a

Apartments

Toms

Fifth

Williams

Johnson

School

Rental

criteria

committed

can

Owner

assistance

Winchester,

non-profit

Assistance

HOME

Home

Totals

funding.

Owner housing

been

the Though

Clients properties

qualified

2012

HOME

Frederick, assistance

Program and

first-time

Network

Downpayment 9

County

Homeownership

2011 $72,132.22

Development.’

assistance.

It homeownership

Jurisdiction

units

should

Activity

waiting

Activity

downpayment

Brook

able

Action

Program

Repair

occupied

and completed

Housing

funds

applying funding

Occupied

have

qualified

projects

conditions.

potential

Additionally,

(BRHN)

(NSP).

organization

homebuyers.

the

Shenandoah

can

list,

last

Clarke,

were

noted working

access

were

Plans

been

assure

low

City

Assistance

but

year

This

home

Rehabilitation for

are

opportunities

income

buyers. development

continued

within

recaptured

assist

homebuyers.

Home

completed

Year

allocated

completed.

that

frequently

completed

and

first

Goal

Frederick,

2009,

Goal

there

HOME

on recapture

with

Winchester

many

repair (certified

households

the

closing

schedule,

mortgage

the

and

HOME

homeowners

Repair:

CAPER

home

the

was

balance

$125

project

financial

the

Warren

remains

and

they

213,782.00

NSVRC

50,000.00

170,000.00 demand

120,000.00

the

Page

were

included

projects

The

cost

Obligated

provided

eligible

CHDO) homebuyer

and

Obligated

repair

Habitat

spring

HOME

and

000.000

timely reprogrammed

funding

clients

are

specifically

budget

remaining

assistance.

created

and

Development:

Counties

assistance

continue

a surrounding

funds

was

unable

program

for

include

buyers.

challenge 2013.

that

Repair

for

fashion

throughout

Warren.

Shenandoah

public

through

the

and

awarded

Humanity

assistance

BRHNs

coordinates

from

units

HOME1O HOME11

interested

HOME

HOME1O,

activities

time

Program

Blue

operators

units

and

due

comment

secure

qualified

Community

for

struggle

result

People,

one

Frederick

USDA

program

the

$2.5million

to use

Ridge

are

and

CHDO

Counties.

program

the

financing

budget.

Northern

region

significant

undertaken

home

administered

sold.

often

buyers.

Incorporated

with

new

period BRHN

122

contract

Source

Program

Housing

Source

various

purchasing

County,

identify

Housing

have

for

our

construction

repair

through

homeownership

and

have

Shenandoah

the

not

acquire,

CHP

tried

partner

households

obstacle

term

stages

time

and

Network

Year

assistance

substantial

case

Partners

receive

begun

(also two

People,

Habitat

scope

the

restrictions

home

2013

purchase

agencies

rehabilitate

receive

providers

and

partner

regional

CHDO

will

new

BRHN,

working

program

Valley.

(CHP)

interested

potential for

through Inc.

loan

continue

Units

amendment

development,

Units

construction

downpayment

another

Humanity

low

the

certified)

foreclosures.

there

level.

also

with

this

Page

the

Finding

identifying

and

downpayment

income

Complete

timeliness

successes.

2012.

Complete

the

units

program

provided

qualified

project

are

sell

Help

pre-purchase

Neighborhood

County.

provide

coordinates

that

applicable

Blue

many

homeowners

and

foreclosed

Winchester-

approximately

the

with

interested

and

meet

Some

under

has

and

The

qualifying

clients

downpayment Program

Ridge

assistance

$ close

homebuyers To

$49,595.00

closing

assistance.

Housing

Version

213,782.00

125,000.00

99,595.00

50,000.00

insufficient

secured

program

NSVRC

date,

have

Expended homes

Rental

home

counseling

Expended

properties

Housing

and

Stabilization

and

Frederick

living

Years

cost

identify

eligible

not

repair

total

that

2.0

of in

Fifth

completed

and The

redevelopment

Expected

seniors.

Rehabilitation

County).

People,

occupied funding

been

2011.

school

Review The

NSVRC

People,

Alms Apartments

Totals

Anderson

Apartments

Garden

Jurisdiction

accessible

Johnson

Toms

Program

approved

House

The

into

Inc.

Finally,

allocated

and

When

Inc.

worked

project

Brook

project

also

early development

March

and

Williams

Project

for

low

completed

for

People,

on completion

initiated

40 one

School,

all

Year

September

income

the includes

rental

the

residents.

rental

Apartments

2013

project

Mauertown,

Clarke

Inc.

State

site

CAPER

located

apartments.

units

with

utilization

housing

completed

the

$ development

loan)

(pre

work

50,511.30

2012.

and

Management

2014.

414,293.30

County

25,000.00

Interior

spring

Rehab

Berryville/Clarke

funding

residents

Shenandoah

The

VA.

additional

development

the

with

and

The

This

HOME

units

pre-development

(rehab

Anderson

2014,

from

exterior

Community

Team.

project

(see

project,

benefit

subsidy.

HOME

Consortium

the HOME

the

photos

County

projects

project

County

accessibility was

project

Federal

Garden People

when

low-

Housing

The

below)

kicked

is 4

123

photos

and

loan

will

Virginia. a

complete

Inc.

funding

Apartments

Home

project

Program

redevelopment

moderate-income

provide

off

was

for

Housing

features

Partners

below).

Loan

architecture

for

was

initiated

The

May,

will

Year

rehabilitation,

Bank

project

completed

Group

units

create

were

(CHP).

accessible/energy

2011

2012,

project

were

locompleted. also

June

and

purchased

with

14-16

Atlanta.

elderly

three

Woodstock,

rehabbed in

engineering

intended

2012

the

early

affordable

and well

initiation

Historic 0

and

Shenandoah

the

January

disabled

efficient as

included

VA property

The

convert

CDBG

rental

Tax

(Shenandoah

the

energy

the

project

2013

rental

individuals.

$ $

Credits

Version

Alms

and

units.

County

the

Environmental

25,000.00

383,782.00

30,000.00

June

community

and

efficient

was

HOME

units

House

have

fully

with

for 2.0 Fifth typically

development Citizen identify The estate the play 1. the The resources process regional time The projects members responsible by certified Program No first-months’ families

Northem Financial Managing Shenandoah 1. Serilce income Assistance Faithworks purpose rental Tenant For Rental Jurisdiction Total Tenant HUD HCSPB regional organizations Winchester NSVRC an 2012, Provide Northern staff and Activity Describe professional Program assistance community important Based not for and and data or to Based organizations Agencies: of Shenandoah members work to Assistance HOME TA move comprehensive the the will expanded more for Housing employment Year address also provide and rent

related Participation Alliance Shenandoah Consultants with HOME assuring program a receive Rental City into CDBG appointed than role to were (TBRA) actions funds summary development

Year the and assigned 5 locally qualified Council policy to 25 25 and affordable

safe, in for Goal its CAPER monthly. Consortium. and Valley provided to Assistance an homelessness, an were was informing the funding membership verification Shelter Community Community program CAPER

additional Process additional and decent and non-CHDO direction Valley a HOME appointed taken to applicants, to allocated region. committee regionally participate provide

$ $ Community housing of financial needs and Managing

planning $ (SAS) 42,032.00 42,032.00 Regional and and Obligated in citizen programs Additionally, (TBRA) as HOME and to representative during the Services to shaping affordable organizations Housing within affordable a to needed. direct review will and include and to Community conducted City assistance appointed Faithworks in identify Commission also Development allocation community regular emergency the comments. of rental maintains requirements. progress Policy the the the Winchester, be a Development HCSPB City, housing. HOME12 housing representative HOME affordable providing from assistance members housing Process conference last in to Development Board Incorporated, for make Program build of compliance development is assistance. a members 2013 Programs. 5 124 program and funded year Faithwork’s responsible local (HCSPB). recommendations capacity quality Source Frederick, TBRA housing of community to to Orqanizations response: Social calls Year advisory from to precariously continue projects. Committee direct in a to standards with Faithwork’s faith-based ensure with Staff the and 2012. priorities families and the TBRA Services HOME The Warren regulations. Northern NSVRC committees other service services local members community this HCSPB Committee NSVRC program Program (CDC) (HQS) housed, in for and in program, and Continuum compliance Virginia department. would non-profit, Shenandoah the delivery staff allocation 19 19 Shenandoah to other Units Shenandoah works continues attend Region. whose compliance better to NSVRC development provided in or qualify members Administration. Grantees. review and pursuing homeless Critical Complete for with of regular to inform of primary The a housing Care In currently support and applicants to local new NSVRC progress security with Valley. Program Counties. work meet for HCSPB Community additional NSVRC the Page (C0C), trainings organization needs, individuals community purpose units programs Version a fund with program as has staff NSVRC deposits tenant $ of $ Counties. based

Year $ continues needed, selected. a 39,475.00 39,475.00 staff funded known CHDO

The two Expended allocation local provided to is 2012, review based and to full on in is and real- 2.0 as the but to

Fifth

focused

System with

completed

(VCEH). of

The

Members

Program

Institutional

participation

NSVRC

1. City there

has

accomplishments

regarding

Two

2013),

CAPER Winchester

City

CDBG Tool.

Citizen

NSVRC

Program *please

2. Jurisdiction

the

major

also

Council

structures

Council

Describe

categories

ensure

Uniform

economic

property

information

organizations.

and

have

objectives.

implementation

income

demonstrates

disallowed

returned

this

farms

displacement

are

acquisition,

within

undertaken

and

the

been

first

reporting steps

require

low-

Relocation

those

nature

benefit

of development,

Act

education.

one

persons

disallowed,

Version

nonprofit

housing notices

parcel.

and

being

each

special

that

the

where

1974,

period

the

their

Act

to 2.0 Jurisdiction

d. Total amount to be reimbursed and the time period over which the reimbursement is to be made, if the reimbursement is made with multi-year payments.

10. Loans and other receivables a. List the principal balance for each float-funded activity outstanding as of the end of the reporting period and the date(s) by which the funds are expected to be received. b. List the total number of other loans outstanding and the principal balance owed as of the end of the reporting period. c. List separately the total number of outstanding loans that are deferred or forgivable, the principal balance owed as of the end of the reporting period, and the terms of the deferral or forgiveness. d. Detail the total number and amount of loans made with CDBG funds that have gone into default and for which the balance was forgiven or written off during the reporting period. e. Provide a List of the parcels of property owned by the grantee or its subrecipients that have been acquired or improved using CDBG funds and that are available for sale as of the end of the reporting period.

11. Lump sum agreements a. Provide the name of the financial institution. b. Provide the date the funds were deposited. c. Provide the date the use of funds commenced. d. Provide the percentage of funds disbursed within 180 days of deposit in the institution.

12. Housing Rehabilitation — for each type of rehabilitation program for which projects/units were reported as completed during the program year a. Identify the type of program and number of projects/units completed for each program. b. Provide the total CDBG funds involved in the program. c. Detail other public and private funds involved in the project.

13. Neighborhood Revitalization Strategies — for grantees that have HUD-approved neighborhood revitalization strategies a. Describe progress against benchmarks for the program year. For grantees with Federally-designated EZs or ECs that received HUD approval for a neighborhood revitalization strategy, reports that are required as part of the EZ/EC process shall suffice for purposes of reporting progress.

Program Year 5 CAPER Community Development response:

1. a. Theuse ofCDBGfundsforthe rehabilitationoftheTaylorHotelandestablishmentofa pocketparkcoexists withthe City’sprimaryobjectiveto establisha suitablelivingenvironment.Completionofthisprojectwill createa publicgreenspace ina lowincomeneighborhoodthatwillincreasetheoveralllivingenvironment, hencemeetingthe City’scoreCDBGobjective. b. Notapplicable c. TheCDBGTargetAreahas been thelocallydesignatedarea wherethe majorityofCDBGfunded site specificprojectswilloccur. The TaylorHotel,whichis locatedinthe CDBGTargetArea,willhosta public pocketparkthatwillbe availableforallcommunityresidents,especiallythose insurroundingneighborhoods that have beenclassifiedas low-income.Also,thesefundshaveassistedinthe rehabilitationofa

Fifth Program Year CAPER 14 Version 2.0

133 Jurisd cti on

condemnedpropertythatposeda potentialsafetyhazardto the manypedestrianstraversingthe neighborhood.

2. a. TheSection108Loanreceivedin2012ispartofthe neighborhoodbasedefforttoeithereliminateslumsor reduceblightortakeproactivestepsto revitalizea neighborhood.TheCity’sprioritizationofprojectsfor CDBGfundingdisplaysrecognitionthatthereare limitedresourcesavailabletocreatethe mostsignificant impactpossibleina neighborhood.Cityleadershopethat,inthefuture,projectsfundedwithCDBGwill havea ripplingeffectonthe overallqualityofthe neighborhoodswhereprojectsoccur.

3. a. TheCity’suse ofgeneralfundsanda Section108Loanforthe publicgreenspace andthe rehabilitationof theTaylorHotelmaximizeouravailableresources. Byusingthisapproachandpromotingcontinuedpublic investment,the Cityintendsto initiatefurtherblightabatementbyvestedpartiesina CDBGTargetArea. b. TheWinchesterCommunityDevelopmentCommitteereviewsand makesrecommendationstothe City CouncilregardinganyrequestsforCDBGfunding.Thecommitteemembersreviewallproposalsand considertheirconsistencywiththe City’sobjectivesidentifiedinthe ConsolidatedPlanandthe localpriorities fortheprogramyear. TheCityCouncilreviewsallrecommendationsforpotentialprojectsto be fundedwith CDBGbeforeprojectapproval. c. TheCitydidnothinderConsolidatedPlanimplementationdueto thefactthat thecreationofa publicpark andrehabilitationoflargedilapidatedpropertyalignwiththe City’sstated ConsolidatedPlanobjectiveof strengtheningcommunitiesthroughthe removalofblightedproperties.

4. a. Notapplicable b.Notapplicable

5. a. Thepropertywas unoccupiedpriorto itsacquisitionandhadnodisplacementimpactoncommunityresidents. b. Notapplicable c. Notapplicable

6. a. Notapplicable b. Notapplicable c. Notapplicable

7. a. Notapplicable

8. a. Notapplicable b. Notapplicable C. Notapplicable d. Notapplicable

9. a. Notapplicable b. Notapplicable c. Notapplicable d. Notapplicable

10, a. Notapplicable b. Notapplicable c. Notapplicable

Fifth Program Year CAPER 15 Version 2.0

134

Fifth

*Please

Specific through

Consolidated

Program

*please

Non-homeless

mainstream

the

Neither

Antipoverty

Program

1. 13.

12.

Jurisdiction

11.

2012,

poverty

Grantees

Overall

families).

Identify but - - - - -

living

a. C.

Describe

a. d.

b. a.

e. d.

Program

coordination

Not

the Not

Not

the

Not

also

VIEW

General

Housing

TANF

Food

Medicaid

require

City,

applicable

level.

applicable

NSVRC applicable

applicable

Year applicable

applicable

programs

Year

Plan

below

refer

Assessment

HOPWA

Stamps

actions

nor

should

actions

with

Relief However,

Year Choice

continued

with

the

supportive

CAPER

the

intended

the

CAPER

specific

the

Strategy

HOME

the

CAPER

Voucher

taken

HOPWA

Special

Non-homeless

demonstrate

poverty

each

taken

local

Objectives

working

actions

Consortium

Non-homeless

Antipoverty

Continuum assist

Program

Relationship

Table

the

housing,

during

address

level.

Departments

families

address

develop

Needs

Special took

the

through

the

Care.

specific

living

(including

Strategy

those

Needs.xls

special

Needs

Special

last

assessment

This

persons

Social

action

HOPWA

the the

135

year

also

Table

workbook.

needs

margin:

response:

Services

CAPER

Needs

persons

included

and

2012

non-homeless

Funds

families

reduce

the

response:

and

Needs.xls

persons

reduce

the

with

development

living

region

the

Goals

the

HIV/AIDS

special

number

continued

workbook.

poverty. number

that

IDIS

and

needs

are

the

Objectives

persons

20 and

reports

not

operate

13-2017

the

persons

Version

their

homeless

regional

living

numerous

the

below

level 2.0 Fifth 2. Jurisdiction that This a. f. e. d. c. a. b. HOPWA progress Program ii. That Grantee That i. That and conjunction That strategies; with to That That resources community-based persons national housing affordable HIV/AIDS includes: should serve (1) Project (6) (5) (4) (3) (2) Grantee (1) their funding. HIV/AIDS community through community community-wide community progress they Year A community including their emergency prevent the programs, bodies, planning activities, Collaborative the A individuals A What planning number A conducted of How housing be living for Narrative brief the goal description brief brief each families are and Accomplishment value use housing are accomplished CAPER families. grant and low-income with other housing of community-wide Grantees summary description description matched AIDS with is their homelessness; project of making of and activities with document development increasing Community of strategies strategies being including partnerships housing or HOPWA and persons management are or or residences resources non-profits services using HIV/AIDS; their families other Drug efforts of organizations clients, short-term and met. how sponsor HIV/AIDS at the made should with of persons and families; to HOPWA by related accomplishing of funds Assistance of efforts living all cash or project the local identify produce with Overview or the ensure your through advocates, HOPWA Overview providing were toward advisory related housing cost, between are rental and demonstrate: materials availability strategies and oversight resources including jurisdiction, planning with related rent, living housing supportive that organization, funds 17 creating used sponsors 136 finally, operating a and the and funding assistance; services meeting a Programs, HIV/AIDS broad activities mortgage assist body an with comprehensive State needs and supply in Ryan programs identified support provided strategies and Federal, reference of executive and of conjunction models HIV/AIDS; overview are other project service persons its to decent, and cost the White public of in-kind related the broken create need, homeless selected or persons actual facility HOPWA local for by resources goals State, including and utility area to are sponsor summary CARE needs consultations living safe, volunteers those of and contributions, any comprehensive with community supportive governments down innovative units meeting the and of based local, living payments goal assistance Act the and appropriate of with service, facilities HOPWA coordination range/type activities for objectives by of persons planning (1-5 estimated for affordable and housing, with housing HIV/AIDS persons three or HUD’s services involved strategies providing Version plan; pages) by the other funded to HIV/AIDS and such and living types: is other housing with name of for with and as and 2.0 in in Jurisdiction

(2) The number of units of housing which have been created through acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction since 1993 with any HOPWA funds (3) A brief description of any unique supportive service or other service delivery models or efforts (4) Any other accomplishments recognized in your community due to the use of HOPWA funds, including any projects in developmental stages that are not operational.

iii. Barriers or Trends Overview (1) Describe any barriers encountered, actions in response to barriers, and recommendations for program improvement (2) Trends you expect your community to face in meeting the needs of persons with HIV/AIDS, and (3) Any other information you feel may be important as you look at providing services to persons with HIV/AIDS in the next 5-10 years b. Accomplishment Data i. Completion of CAPER Performance Chart 1 of Actual Performance in the provision of housing (Table 11-1 to be submitted with CAPER). ii. Completion of CAPER Performance Chart 2 of Comparison to Planned Housing Actions (Table 11-2 to be submitted with CAPER).

Program Year 5 CAPER Specific HOPWA Objectives response:

NSVRCdoes notcoordinateoradministerHOPWAfundingas partofthe ConsolidatedorAnnualActionPlan. Accomplishmentsunderthiscategoryare reportedintheVirginiaCAPER.

Include any CAPER information that was not covered by narratives in any other section.

Program Year 5 CAPER Other Narrative response:

NotApplicable.

Fifth Program Year CAPER 18 Version 2.0

137 ______

CITY OWI4CHESTER, VIRGINIA

PROPOSEI) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM

CITY COUNCIL Work session: _August 27, 2013_ CUT OFF DATE: CITY COUNCIL first reading Tuesday September 10. 2013 CITY COUNCIL second reading/public hearing Tuesday October 8, 2013

RESOLUTION ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING

ITEM TITLE: Ordinance authorizing the issuance and sale of general obligation public improvement bonds of the City of Winchester, Virginia. in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $27 Million, to finance the cost of certain capital improvement projects. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve as recommended PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING: Separate notice in paper by finance/public hearing Oct.8 ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION: N/A FUNDING DATA: N/A INSURANCE: As required The initiating Department Director will place below, in sequence of transmittal, the names of each department that must initial their review in order for this item to be placed on the City Council agenda.

INITIALS FOR INITIALS FOR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL DATE

5. City Attorney

6. City Manager

7. Clerk ol Council

Initiating Department [)irector’s Signature: / ) - Date ewe ‘. Mary Blowe. Finance Director C\

Revised: September 28, 2009 138 sale there RECOMMENDATIONS: OPTIONS: however, service issuance BUDGET would choose n Poors) and with budget and THE case create market BACKGROUND: RELATIONSHIP Re: To: Date: From: • • • • • • • of Council the ISSUE: an is be JJC Vesta Maintenance John Corridor Hope Emergency bond a that to and

from

no 1 August issuance Ordinance elementary Mary Honorable more would there paid fit IMPACT: reason Improvements prior The require have

Kerr CITYCOUNCILACTION on in representatives Drive this Phone Blowe, back livable to are Enhancements October be In 27, City to Elementary list: the decided TO of the to Extension City Communication around fees the to bonds Mayor 2013 over Facility System school. The bonds. could utilize existing STRATEGIC City Finance FY issue issuance Staff associated 1 a Staff City 2014 8 th that for (page to and $1,700,000 twenty utilize this (page debt along (page will and finance (page School bond all, has Director his recommends Members (page budget method need 238 of particularly in receipt a fall debt year 249) with 238 PLAN: System this payments. pooled with an 264) those (page of would 238 to annually amount the being term. our of general budget) and this of meet of budget) of City program With our financial projects. 239 (page City pay be the program. budget) objective paid There 139 The with funds not Manager an of obligation for adoption this Council those 238 off, budget) optimal to approximate twenty our such are We advisors change, exceed on With so of 1, extra rating seven can October to budget) presented we as of debt years. time the upgrade this fees. the would choose we $27 agencies have possible to City’s for total Virginia ordinance can 28, receive Million a been be several City debt to etpayments debt 2013.

work MEMO strong able fund (Moodys’ projects Public closely school a issuance. with to to new projects those GO proceed structure our School facilities, watching rating. listed bond and that community City to for Standard with ratings, in Authority, we be

the

The I this Staff the in the funded the debt debt this to

authorized

Circuit

and

resolutions. and exceeding

connection

the

with

authorized

WINCHESTER,

improvements

system

including extension,

improvement

such

premium. City

form,

other

Court

WHEREAS,

manner

improvements,

(but

and

renovation

funds

with

executed

years

bonds

This

The

aggregate

The

not

Pursuant

and

directed

PROJECTS

FINANCE

PRINCIPAL

THE GENERAL

ORDINANCE

the

any,

issuing

issued

ORDAINED

VIRGINIA:

limited

joint

[3onds

Clerk

ordinance

City.

from

may

l3onds

the

and

CITY

the

and

the judicial

Common

finance

principal such

interest their

Common

shall

road.

to)

equipping

see

the

THE

shall

Bonds.

available,

sold

OBLIGATION

the

one

shall

manner

dates,

City

AMOUNT

AUTHORIZING

center

the

Common WINCHESTER,

COSTS

general

bear

street

general

Council

amount

aeeffect take

Council

Charter

which

costs

immediate

bear

THE

and

such

improvements

public

finance

and

obligation

interest

obligations

its

not

Council.

may

and

NOT

date

the

COMMON

sold

certain

PUBLIC

ftLll

CERTAIN

immediately.

school

to the

140 sidewalk

filing

the

following

costs

hereafter

exceed

fihith

City

THE

VIRGINIA,

Public

public

such

one

capital

improvements,

dates,

(collectively,

of’

and

collaboration

desires

IMPROVEMENT

the

$27.000,000

rate

ISSUANCE

improvements,

EXCEED

CAPITAL

certified

Finance

provide

projects:

improvement

COUNCiL

credit

mature

City

improvement

Project

rates,

series

shall for

issue

Act

copy the

the

and AN

emergency

the

with

IMPROVEMENT

S27,000,000,

appropriate

“Project”);

AND

acquisition,

general

such

payment

of’

bonds

provide

AGGREGATE

irrevocably

such

1991,

the

maintenance

projects

pay

this

BONDS

such

time

THE

SALE

City

time

obligation

(the

costs

ordinance

communications

there

funds,

denominations

or resolution

construction,

for

Attorney,

‘Bonds”)

principal

CITY

pledged.

incurred

are

times

the

together

facility

hereby

in public

City.

and

the

not

is in ____- ______

Ordinance No. -2013.

The Lindersigned Clerk of the Common Council of the City of Winchester, Virginia, hereby certifies that the foregoing constitutes a true and correct extract from the minutes of a regular meeting of the Common Council of the City of Winchester, Virginia, held on the day of 2013. and of the whole thereof so far as applicable to the matters referred to in such extract.

WITNESS my signature and the seal of the City of Winchester, Virginia. this day of .2013.

(SEAL) Clerk of the Common Council, City of Winchester. Virginia

141 O 13 42

PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: 8/27/13 (work session). CUT OFF DATE: 8/21/13 9/10/13 (1t Reading) 10/8/13 (2 Readine/Puhlic Hearino

RESOLUTION ORDINANCE X PUBLIC HEARING X

ITEM TITLE: TA-13-146 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND RE-ENACT ARTICLES 1, 8,9, 10, AND 13 OF TI-IE WINCI-IESTER ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO RESTAURANTS AND ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval.

PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING: Public hearing for 10/8/13 Council mtg

ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission forwarded without recommendation

FUNDING DATA: N/A

INSURANCE: N/A

The initiating Department Director will place below, in sequence of’transmittal, the names of each department that must initial their review in order for this item to be placed on the City Council agenda.

INITIALS FOR INITIALS FOR DEPARTM ENT APIROVAL DISAPPROVAL DAT1

1. Planning 2. City Attorney ‘, t_) 3. City Manager 252Q 4. Clerk of Council

)artment Director’s Signature: 8/21/3

142 f.tFrom: No BUDGET This City have noise entertainment The restaurant called restaurant As Council Dance response THE Goal BACKGROUND: To: RELATIONSHIP Progress restaurants Publicly Date: Re: funding noted and proposed proposal #3 ISSUE: their control for Hall Continue which sponsored State (2013-2014)

IMPACT: f Text August Aaron in Honorable to creation enforcement s.However, use. and and is the and City is required. will departments Amendment ordinance called use, allowing TO already Nightclub City Grisdale, Revitalization entertainment Council’s 21, not of STRATEGIC text CITY then Strategic — Mayor 2013 for a affect Night “Vibrant codified amendment authority for revisiting the will Director for and desire Club (TA-13-146) and and background the Entertainment create uses of Plan, the COUNCIL PLAN: establishments. Historic current Ordinance agencies Members Downtown” in to of creation Nightclub of where Chapter this modify a their to Zoning distinction ordinance Old clarify — enforcement music that a Entertainment provision of of Town, business the 17 Establishment and regulations and City a have the of or existing new Inspections City between “Growing Goal entertainment Council is Zoning 143 oversight ACTION of a or use Code, powers result #4 the restaurant regulations, and Entertainment Create Establishments Ordinance code. a classification Economy.” and restaurant of as of currently the part a the their (Full that More evolves Downtown Winchester by of n make and staff is laws MEMO the Livable This eliminating that available clearly Establishment. will from report and Strategic text is apply. City continuously Strategic subordinate ordinances. a a amendment Police to distinction attached.) restaurant for the ahof each Plan, All, will definitions Plan Management which continue For to the operated between use adopted serves the

instance, I various has to of an as to in as by a a

vote.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Planning OPTIONS: - -

Approve Approve

Deny

Commission

the

with

application

conditions

revised

and

recommend

conditions

recommended

approval

by with

144

the

conditions

Planning

Commission

noted

within

the

staff

report

a 4-2 City Council Work Session August 27, 2013

TA-13-146 AN ORDINANCETO AMEND AND RE-ENACTARTICLES1, 8, 9, 10, AND 13 OF THE WINCHESTERZONING ORDINANCEPERTAININGTO RESTAURANTSAND ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS

REQUESTDESCRIPTION This publicly sponsored text amendment is to clarify the Zoning Ordinance and make a distinction between restaurants and entertainment establishments.

STAFFCOMMENTS Currently, the Zoning Ordinance allows for restaurants that evolve into establishments where some form of entertainment, live or otherwise, takes place after 10:00 p.m. by allowing for a conditional use permit within certain zoning districts in the form of Nightclubs.

City Council, as part of their Downtown Strategic Plan, has called for revisiting the Nightclub regulations and as part of the Strategic Plan has called for creation of a “Vibrant Downtown” and “Growing Economy.” This text amendment serves as a response to City Council’s desire to modify the existing regulations, by eliminating the definitions of Dance Hall and Nightclub and the creation of a new use Entertainment Establishment.

These proposed changes will create a distinction between a restaurant that is continuously used as a restaurant, and allowing for background music or entertainment that is clearly subordinate to the restaurant use. However, for uses where a business or restaurant evolves at some point of their operations away from food service to an entertainment use, then the Entertainment Establishment classification will apply.

In the several commercial districts where restaurants and nightclubs are currently permitted (B-i, B-2, CM-i, PC), Entertainment Establishments will be permitted by-right as long as the building containing the use and its parking facilities are located at least 200-feet from a residentially zoned parcel. If the business or parking lot are located within the 200-feet buffer, then the establishment will be required to seek a conditional use permit through the City Council with a recommendation from the Planning Commission.

The proposed text amendment also establishes several minimum standards that all Entertainment Establishments must adhere to, regardless if the business is permitted by-right or with a conditional use permit.

This proposal will not change the requirement for a business to comply with other existing local and state departments and agencies, such as alcohol compliance issues with Virginia Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC),collection and payment of taxes with the Commissioner of Revenue and Treasurer’s offices, and criminal issues with the Winchester Police Department. Each department and agency still maintains their existing enforcement mechanisms should the establishment violate their requirements and laws.

145

recommendation

RECOMMENDATION

During

their

August

and

20,

adoption

2013

meeting,

this

text

the

amendment. Planning

146

Commission

forwarded

the

amendment without RESOLUTIONADOPTING AN ORDINANCETO AMEND AND RE-ENACTARTICLES1, 8, 9, 10, AND 13 OF THE WINCHESTERZONING ORDINANCEPERTAININGTO RESTAURANTSAND ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS

TA-13-146

WHEREAS,the Code of Virginia provides that one of the purposes of Zoning Ordinances is to facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community; and,

WHEREAS,in the Winchester Strategic Plan, a vibrant downtown and growing economy were called out as part of the long term vision for the City of Winchester; and,

WHEREAS;the Zoning Ordinance currently provides for restaurants, nightclubs, and dance halls; and,

WHEREAS,the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment will modify the use classifications of restaurant and create a new classification of “Entertainment Establishment”; and,

NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVEDthat the Winchester Common Council hereby adopts the following text amendment as it represents good planning practices by providing an opportunity for a vibrant downtown as well as allowing for reasonable review of entertainment uses in close proximity to residential zones:

147

1-2-79.1

1-2-79

1 SECTION

are

repealed change.

Ed.

Note:

68.1 proposed

28.1

ORDINANCE

od with Words

simply

1-2.

ORDINANCE

The

for

following

DEFINITIONS.

defined

shall

involving

hour

ESTABLISHMENT,

facilities;

permitted.

incidental

licensure grocery

music

consumption

delicatessens,

public

includes, dispensed

035

RESTAURANT:

dancing

NIGHT Repealed.

provides

DANCE

due

enactment.

such

beverages

2001)

not

AMEND

ctrikethrough

for

PERTAINING

CLUB:

entertainment

the

more,

uses.

HALL:

and

between

text

include

private

without music

concession

requirements

restaurant

and

for

Repealed.

fact

cover

convenience

represents

are

AND

Existing

consumption

becomes

Any

dinner

accessory

that

and

public

another

theaters,

establishment

clubs.

provided

ENTERTAINMENT:

the

limitation;

RE-ENACT

building

are

other

space

patrons

stands

theaters,

hours

ordinance

establishment

occurs

proposed

RESTAURANTS

pursuant the

This

omitted

site);

retail

Draft

charge

for

bowling

for

excerpt

the on

principal of

definition

for

ARTICLES

lunchrooms,

dancing.

which,

DEFINITIONS

after

snack

consumption

athletic

4 TA-13-146

pubs,

stores;

ARTICLE

restaurant’s

from

language

for

which

—July

for

to off

,JL

p.m.

alleys, 11:00

148

Code orovicies

repeal.

the

admission

bars for

that,

use

Article

soda

this

AND

and

venue

(9/12/89,

16,

catering

activities,

excludes:

compensation,

premises.

during

p.m.,

and

stadiums,

excerpted

that

2013

cafeterias,

cover

fountains,

ENTERTAINMENT

Virginia

Words

as 1

primary

a.m.

4ivc

where

refreshment

of 10,

the

with

regular and

businesses

that

Case

charge

the

not

bakeries;

(11/13/01,

AND

Any

primary

that

event

any

arenas,

or entertainment,

text. Zoning

function

included

time

coffee

and

35.1-25.

basis

without

place

food

are

facility

dining

for required

advertising.

bed-and-breakfast

(where

stands

boldfaced

use.

Ordinance

02,

and

shops,

Case

THE

ESTABLISHMENTS

the

here

sic,

other

beverages

exempt

dancing,

business

Ord.

Entertainment

for

defined

The

accommodations

WINCHESTER

business’

Karaoke,

food

and

cafes,

during

not

No.

separately public

term 01

and

that

These

admission

from

06,

implied

and

023

wherein

herein

taverns,

clearly

are

prepared

underlined

restaurant

Dis, is

any

operations,

recreation

Ord.

typically

subject

venues

state 89)

facilities;

and

ZONING

one and/:

No.

fcc,

foods

of be

for to

SECTION

10-1-43

SECTION

9-2-8

9-1-45

SECTION

8-2-4

SECTION

8-1-52

SECTION

10-1.

9-2.

9-i.

8-2.

8-1.

USES

USE

USES

USE

street

property,

Entertainment

such

from establishment

street

Nightclubs

property,

Entertainment

such

establishment

from

Nightclubs

street

property,

Entertainment

REGULATIONS.

REQUIRING

establishments

parking

residentially

and

measured

COMMERCIAL

area

or area

Establishments,

area

dance

Establishments,

dance

Establishments,

HIGHWAY

the

CONDITIONAL

the

CONDITIONAL

CENTRAL

zoned

where

off-street

the halls.

off-street

halls.

the

from

the

from

residential

property,

residential

property, COMMERCIAL

Entertainment

the

Entertainment

the

INDUSTRIAL

BUSINESS

the

ARTICLE

located

ARTICLE

parking

entertainment

located

parking

entertainment

structure

located

USE

structure

USE structure

149

PERMIT

zone

PERMIT

zone

DISTRICT

tleast at

measured

area

measured

area

DISTRICT

containing

DISTRICT

property

least

containing

Establishments,

least

property containing

Establishments,

property

will

the

200

will

200 the 200

B-i

from from

residential feet

line.

residential

CM-i feet

line.

feet

line.

B-2

the

conducted

the

from

the

from

establishment

located

structure

located

structure

zone

residentially

outdoors.

less

property

containing

than

or than

the

zoned

200

zoned

200

zoned

line,

off

off-

the

feet the

feet

and and SECTION10-2. USES REQUIRINGA CONDITIONALUSE PERMIT.

10-2-3 Nightclubs and dance halls. Entertainment Establishments, located less than 200 feet from a residentially zoned property, as measured from the structure containing the establishment or the off-street parking area to the residential zone property line, and such establishments where the entertainment will be conducted outdoors.

ARTICLE13

PLANNEDDEVELOPMENT

SECTION13-2. PLANNEDCOMMERCIALDISTRICT— PC

13-2-3.16 Entertainment Establishments, located at least 200 feet from a residentially zoned property, as measured from the structure containing the establishment or the off- street parking area to the residential zone property line.

SECTION13-2-4 USES PERMITTEDWITH A CONDITIONALUSE PERMIT.

13-2-4.5 Nightclubs and dance halls. Entertainment Establishments, located less than 200 feet from a residentially zoned property, as measured from the structure containing the establishment or the off-street parking area to the residential zone property line, and such establishments where the entertainment will be conducted outdoors.

ARTICLE18

GENERALPROVISIONS

Section 18-24 Entertainment Establishments

All entertainment establishments must meet the following minimum standards. Failure to maintain compliance shall result in the operation being declared in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. If an establishment desires to deviate from any of these standards, a conditional use permit shall be required.

18-24-1 General Standards

18-24-1.1 All exterior doors and windows must remain closed during operating hours.

18-24-1.2 No more than three criminal police calls, as determined by the Chief of Police, may be attributable to the establishment within a thirty day continuous period; after which private security shall be required in a manner approved by the Chief of Police.

150

18-24-1.4

18-24-1.3

The

regulations

a.m.

Hours

11:00

business

the

following

p.m.

operation

per

shall

and

Chapter

Fridays

comply

day.

Sundays

and

with

Winchester

Saturdays

with through

151

applicable

Thursdays

shall

City

not

Code,

noise

occur

shall

and

amended.

outside

not

maximum

occur

outside

8:00

sound

a.m.

level

until

8:00

2:00 a.m. I CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: 8/27/13 (work session), CUTfld OFF DATE: 8/21/13 9/10/13 (1St Readinc 10/2/13 (2 readin

RESOLUTION ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING X

ITEM TITLE: RZ-13-380 AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 41.5 ACRES OF LAND CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 86 PARCELS, EITHER IN FULL OR IN PART, TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT (CE) DISTRICT; SUBJECT PARCELS ARE ADJACENT TO, OR WITHIN 400 FEET OF, THE BERRYVILLE AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval

PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING: Public hearing for 10/8/13 Council mtg

ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission recommended approval.

FUNDING DATA: N/A

INSURANCE: N/A

INITIALS FOR INITIALS FOR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL DATE 1. Zoning /z f 2. City Attorney - 3. City Manager (2- 4. Clerk of Council

Initiating Department Director’s Signature: fr.i) 3 (Planning)

152

City

Reading.

Planning

RECOMMENDATIONS:

OPTIONS: the

heritage

This

access

BUDGET

See

BACKGROUND:

City This

Goal

THE

RELATIONSHIP

Enhancement

Re: To:

From:

Date:

general

Council

Gateway

attached

4: ISSUE:

Approve

Deny;

corridors

Create

tourism-based

overlay AVENUE

Tim

CONTAINING

PARCELS

BE September

RZ-13-380

Mayor

Commission

city-initiated

IMPACT:

welfare

reviewed

INCLUDED

CITY

leave

Youmans,

staff

Beautification

District

rezoning

and

zoning

leading

RIGHT-OF-WAY

report

Berryville

ARE

Members

STRATEGIC

the

rezoning

the

unanimously

that

2013

Ilveable

APPROXIMATELY

economic

will

Planning

ORDINANCE

into

ADJACENT

COUNCIL

request

community

was

THE

promote

recommended

Ave

the

created

city

CORRIDOR

City

local

High

without

Director

establish

development

PLAN:

for

recommended

work

the

Council

TO,

and

Priority

all

aesthetic

attracting

gateway

session

City

national

REZONE

the

ENHANCEMENT

Planning

WITHIN Policy

153

PARCELS,

boundaries

Council

ACTION

character

beautification

visitors

approval.

Historic

APPROXIMATELY

Agenda

August

400

Commission

2005.

and

EITHER

Winchester

FEET

and

27,

Action the

generating

(CE)

functionality

called

2013

Berryville

OF,

for

DISTRICT;

MEMO

THE

FULL

and

for

District.

41.5

business

13-2014

forwarded

Avenue

BERRYVILLE

Strategic

ACRES

major

SUBJECT

will

PART,

Corridor

through

promote

tourist

Plan

for

LAND

TO First Council Work session August 27, 2013

RZ-13-380 AN ORDINANCETO REZONEAPPROXIMATELY41.5 ACRESOF LANDCONTAINING APPROXIMATELY86 PARCELS,EITHERIN FULLOR IN PART,TO BEINCLUDEDINTHE CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT(CE) DISTRICT;SUBJECTPARCELSAREADJACENTTO, OR WITHIN400 FEETOF, THE BERRYVILLEAVENUERIGHT-OF-WAY.

REQUESTDESCRIPTION This publicly sponsored rezoning request is to apply the Corridor Enhancement (CE) District to approximately 41.5 acres (part or all of 86 parcels) comprising land along Berryville Avenue, a key tourist entry route connecting to Exit 315 of Interstate 81 and designated as Virginia State Route 7 Corridor. The standards and guidelines for the Berryville Avenue CEOverlay District were unanimously approved by Council on April 12, 2005, and are intended to protect and promote major tourist access routes in the City.

AREADESCRIPTION The area of this rezoning begins on the east at the intersection of 1-81 and Berryville Avenue and continues westward along both sides of Berryville Avenue to N. Pleasant Valley Road...

The underlying zoning of the affected area is a mix of Highway Commercial, B-2 and Medium Density Residential, MR District. Most of the north side of the corridor east of Dunlap Street and all of the south side of the corridor east of Elm Street is in commercial use. The corridor includes commercial uses along both sides of the corridor at the west end between Pleasant Valley Road and the intersection of Virginia Avenue. The remaining land, mostly along the south side, is zoned MR and is mostly in single-family residential use.

The following table lists the parcels that are to be rezoned and the approximate affected acreage: Number Range Street Tax Map ID Affected Current Proposed Acreage Zoning Zoning 370 Battle Ave 175-05- -16 0.353 B-2 B-2(CE) 617 National Ave 195-01-A-lA 0.148 MR MR(CE) 250 N. Pleasant Valley Rd 195-01-A-lB 0.021 MR MR(CE) 300 N. Pleasant Valley Rd 175-05- -4 0.330 8-2 B-2(CE) 301 -317 N. Pleasant Valley Rd 175-05- -2-3 0.326 8-2 B-2(CE) 340 N. Pleasant Valley Rd 175-05- -A 3.362 B-2 B-2(CE) 702 Virginia Ave 175-04- -9-10 0.519 MR MR(CE) 603 Woodland Ave 175-02-R-124 0.189 8-2 B-2(CE) 615 Woodland Ave 175-02-R-125 0.170 8-2 B-2(CE) 601 Berryville Ave 195-07-S-133C 0.374 8-2 8-2(CE) 62S Berryville Ave 195-07-5-1330 0.116 B-2 B-2(cE 645 Berryville Ave 175-02-R-123B 0.207 8-2 B-2(CE) 649 Berryville Ave 175-02-R-123A 0.172 B-2 B-2(CE) 671 Berryville Ave 175-02-A-2 0.176 8-2 B-2(CE> 675 Berryville Ave 175-02-A-3 0.180 MR MR(CE) 678 Berryville Ave 175-04- -8>A 0.400 MR MR(CE) 679 Berryville Ave 175-02-A-4 0.156 MR MR(CE) 680 Berryville Ave 175-04--7A 0.158 MR MR(CE> 682 Berryville Ave 175-04- -6 0.130 MR MR(CE) 683 Berryville Ave 175-02-A-S 0.160 MR MR(CE) 684 Berryville Ave 175-04--S 0.160 MR MR(CE) 687 Berryville Ave 175-02-A-6 0.184 MR MR(CE) 691 Berryville Ave t175-02-A-7 0.189 MR MR(CE)

154 695 Berryville Ave 175-02-A-8-9 0.313 MR MR(CL) 702 Berryville Ave 175-01- -3 0.183 MR MR(CE) 703 BerrviIte Ave 175-02-8-10 0.201 MR MR(CE 707 BerryviHe Ave 175-02-B-il 0.207 MR MR(CE) 710 Berryville Ave 175-01- -2 0.482 B-2 B-2(C8) 711 BerryviHeAve 175-02-8-12 0.212 MR MR(CE) 712 Berryville Ave 175-01- -18 0.230 8-2 B-2(CE) 715 Berryvifle Ave 175-02-8-13 0.200 MR MR(CE) 719 Berryville Ave 175-02-8-14 0.182 MR MR(CE) 723 Berryville Ave 175-02-8-15 0.221 MR MR(CE) 726 -744 berryville Ave 175-01- -1A 1.693 8-2 8-2(CE) 727 Berryville Ave 175-02-8-16 0.262 MR MR(CE) 731 Berryville Ave 175-02-8-17 0.174 MR MR(CE) 735 Berryville Ave 175-02-8-18 0.218 MR MR(CE) 739 Berryville Ave 175-02-6-19 0.224 MR MR(CE) 743 Berryville Ave 175-02-8-20 0.206 MR MR(CE) 747 Berryville Ave 175-02-8-21 0.225 MR MR(CE) 748 Berryville Ave 175-01- -1C 0.344 B-2 B-2(CE) 800 Berryville Ave 176-07- -1A 0.720 6-2 B-2(CE) 802 -822 Rerryville Ave 176-07- -10 (partal) 0.262 8-2 8-2(CE) 803 Berryville Ave 175-02-C-22 0225 MR MR(CE) 807 Berryville Ave 175-02-C-23 0.225 MR MR(CE) 811 Berryville Ave 175-02-C-24 0.223 MR MR(CE) 815 Berryville Ave 176-04-C-25 0.223 MR MR(CE) 819 Berryville Ave 176-04-C-26 0.222 MR MR(CE) 823 Berryville Ave 176-04-C-27 0.222 MR MR(CE) 826 Berryville Ave 176-07- -18 0.404 8-2 B-2(CE( 827 Berryville Ave 176-04-C-28 0.223 MR MR(CE) 828 Berryville Ave 176-07- -1C 0.669 B-2 B-2(CE) 831 Berryville Ave 176-04-C-29 0.221 MR MR(C6) 835 Berryville Ave 176-04-C-30 0.220 MR MR(CE) 836 906 Berryville Ave 176-06- -8 1.730 8-2 B-2(CE) 839 Berryville Ave 176-04-C-31 0.109 MR MR(CE) 903 Berryville Ave 176-04-0-32 0.220 MR MR(CE) 907 Berryville Ave 176-04-0-33 0.217 MR MR(C6) 911 Berryville Ave 176-04-0-34 0.214 MR MR(CE) 914 Berryville Ave 176-07- -2C 0.651 B-2 B-2(CE) 915 Berryville Ave 176-04-0-35 0.211 MR MR(CE( 919 Berryville Ave 176-04-0-36 0.208 MR MR(CE) 923 Berryville Ave 176-04-0-37 0.205 MR MR(C6) 927 Berryville Ave 176-04-D-38 0.200 MR MR(CE) 928 Berryville Ave 176-07- -3 1.195 8-2 B-2(CE) 929 Berryville Ave 176-04-0-39 0.195 MR MR(C6) 943 Berryville Ave 176-04-0- 41>A 0542 8-2 B-2(CE) 1000 Berryville Ave 176-03- -1 0.502 8-2 B-2(CE) 1003 Berryville Ave 176-04-E-43 0.837 8-2 B-2(CE) 1010 Berryville Ave 176-03- -2 0729 8-2 B-2(C8) 1019 Berryville Ave 176-04-E-47 0.230 8-2 B-2(CE) 1041 Berryville Ave 196-08-E-3 0.159 8-2 B-2(CE) 1042 Berryville Ave 176-03- -6>A 0.967 8-2 8-2(CE) 1100 Berryville Ave 176-03- -17-18 0.364 8-2 B-2(CE) 1107 Berryville Ave 196-08-8-2 0.768 8-2 B-2(CE) 1109 -1139 Berryville Ave 196-08-E-A 2.173 B-2 B-2(CE) 1110 Berryville Ave 176-03- -19 0.191 6-2 B-2(CE) 1124 Berryville Ave 176-03- -20>A 0.970 8-2 B-2(CE) 1141 Berryville Ave 196-08-8-B 5.225 8-2 B-2(CE) 1200 -1202 Berryville Ave 177-02- -11 0.370 8-2 B-2)CE) 1208 Berryville Ave 177-02- -13 0.927 6-2 B-2(CE) 1217 Berryville Ave 196-08-8-47 0.510 8-2 B-2(CE) 1327 Berryville Ave 196-11- -1 (partial) 0.047 8-2 B-2(CE) 1333 Berryville Ave 196-11- -4 0.588 B-2 B-2)CE) 1351 Berryville Ave 197-02- -78 (partial) 0.662 8-2 B-2(CE) 1365 Berryville Ave 197-02- -7A 1.338 6-2 B-2(CE)

155

either

benefits

CITIZEN

Planning Shopping

During a

in Avenue

rear

between

traffic

Generally

overlay

the

detailed sheds

the

DEVELOPING the

outlining

standards

site THE

units. Corridor

residentially-used

taken

overlay

for

Street,

The

Gateways guidelines.

order

corridors COMMENTS

separately

the

June its

informational

Continue

3-hour

businesses

which

Berryville

Planning

features;

DISTRICT

Comprehensive

work

district.

strong

control

the

place

the

District

district,

Cedar

except

COMMENTS

27”

guides

Commission

review

determine

the

Enhancement

Center

partly

the

speaking,

leading

standards

July

include:

fronting

long

sessions

zoning

platted

to include:

support

Revitalization

road

Office

standards FROM

Historic

zoning.

THE

Avenue

efforts. it

Creek

2013,

provisions

public

where

along

the

any

meet

but

open

does

parcel

meeting

and into

for

BOUNDARY

the

land.

owners

building

commercial

proposed

the

numerous

the

parking

and THE

Grade,

City

and

Millwood

the

Plan

public

Two

not the

information

house

Old

the

Corridor

the

corridor

well

the

(i.e.

Overlay

proposed

optimal

and

opposition

The

2013

PLANNING

Council

corridor.

guidelines

goal

change

citywide.

Town.

Eastgate calls

northernmost

held

inquired commercial

City’s

where orientation,

and

hearing

lot that

guidelines

attached

Historic

exterior

the

Retreat,

comments

for

at which

Avenue,

parcel

lots,

Districts

portions

extents

core

Council

Creating

adopted

ran the

the

affected two

session,

Approximately

guiding

Long

Shopping

about to

are

DEPARTMENT

held

although

from

overlay

City’s

underlying

historic

Berryville

includes:

Old

map

the

out

changes

the

buildings.

specific

already

Fairmont

John

roof

section

has

provide

the

were

what

Town.

specific

front.

the

5-8pm.

staff

parcels.

Planning

the

depicts

website.

Strategic

August

previously

Commission’s

district

Center treatments,

Silvers

district

Pleasant

physical

district

existing to or

the

Avenue

received

adopted,

includes

Only

One

zoning

Along guidelines

Avenue,

Livable

new

Berryville

overlay

the

156 Valley

Invitations

zoning

20,

Commission

There

(i.e.

and

attendees

Plan

the

property

along

fairly

construction

specific

form

Valley

the

physical

approved

2013.

Hampton

the

utilizing

that

the regarding

Gold’s

the

City

wall

front

but

Avenue

which

zoning

couple

meant

monthly

north

and

Avenue

objectives

shallow

this

also

shopping

Berryville

regulates

Loudoun

for

One

treatments,

were

boundaries

owners development

portion

came

Gym,

development,

regulations

called

corridor.

carefully

which

and

All.

request.

side

for

Inn

has

combination

homeowner

infrastructure

booklet

mailed

and

work

along

inquiries,

Another

Districts

homeowners.

etc.)

out

not

center

Street,

Square

expressed

for

land

the

Cork

generally

Valley

July

mixture

the

sessions.

been

studied

Four

This

City

the

has of

and

offering

out

overlay

for

review

use.

along

Street.

15,

the

for

sign

Apple

goal

and

but Shopping

south to

land

Gateway

Avenue

placement

as process

citizens

spoke

building

adopted

large

2013

Valley

that

district.

improvements

Some

opposition

extends

well

the

standards

National

nobody

key

Invitations

the

rezoning

use,

One

commercial

Valley

situated)

side

Other

the

general

goal

expanse

characteristics

were

tourist

are

spoke

exhibits

included

Avenue,

examples

aesthetics

zoning,

support

expressed

yet

Center Beautification

Strategic

Booklets

July

back

expressed

Square is

available

Avenue.

mailed

Berryville

either.

and

has to

mechanical

overview

10th

entry

Districts

Enhance

the

that

during

included

and

Amherst

the

and

not

attend

parking

the

Plan

and

the

out

The

view

has in

is of the and planning At recommending RECOMMENDATION business unrelated its designated promotes August owners practice. concerns 20, the local approval 2013 spoke aesthetic about (HW) meeting, at because the crime and character public National the in the the Commission hearing. request and area Historic functionality and is Winchester consistent speed forwarded 157 of of traffic a with major District, Rezoning the on tourist Berryville Comprehensive and RZ-13-380 as access such, Ave. corridor to represents No City Plan Berryville Council and leading good protects Ave into AN ORDINANCETO REZONEAPPROXIMATELY41.5 ACRESOF LANDCONTAININGAPPROXIMATELY86 PARCELS,EITHERIN FULLOR IN PART,TO BEINCLUDEDINTHE CORRIDORENHANCEMENT(CE) DISTRICT;SUBJECTPARCELSAREADJACENTTO, OR WITHIN400 FEETOF, THE BERRYVILLEAVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY.RZ-13-380

WHEREAS,the Planning Commission resolved at its July 16, 2013 meeting to initiate the rezoning of this land as a publicly sponsored rezoning; and,

WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the City to protect and promote the aesthetic character and functionality of major tourist access corridors leading into the local and national Historic districts; and,

WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the City to promote the general welfare of the community by attracting visitors and generating business through heritage tourism-based economic development and enhance the overall appearance of the City’s corridors, while improving access along the corridors through increased walkability and interconnectivity; and,

WHEREAS,the Planning Commission has studied the existing physical development, land use, zoning, topography, and view sheds of the Berryville Avenue Corridor from Pleasant Valley Road to the Eastern City Limits and has identified properties along the Berryville Avenue Corridor from Pleasant Valley Road to the Eastern City Limits that are suitable for inclusion in the Corridor Enhancement District; and,

WHEREAS,the City held a Public Information Meeting on July 15, 2013, pertaining to the proposed Berryville Avenue CE District.

WHEREAS,the Planning Commission forwarded the request to Council on August 20, 2013 recommending approval of the rezoning as depicted on an exhibit entitled “Proposed Berryvilie Ave CE District, Draft 2 - 7/16/13” because the request is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which calls for guiding the physical form of development along key tourist entry corridors leading into the City’s core historic district by utilizing a combination of standards and guidelines; and,

NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED by the Common Council of the City of Winchester, Virginia that the following land is hereby rezoned to establish Corridor Enhancement (CE)District:

APPROXIMATELY41.5 ACRESOF LANDCONTAININGAPPROXIMATELY86 PARCELS,EITHERIN FULLOR IN PART,SUBJECTPARCELSBEINGADJACENTTO, OR WITHIN 400 FEETOF, THE BERRYVILLEAVENUERIGHT OF-WAYas depicted on an exhibit entitled “Proposed Berryville Ave CEDistrict, Draft 2 - 7/16/13”

158 Proposed Berryville Ave CE District Draft 2- 7/16/13 159

(Planning)

Initiating

department

The

INSURANCE:

FUNDING

ADVISORY

Planning

PUBLIC

Public

Approval Number

STAFF (PUD)

RZ-13-292

ENHANCEMENT ITEM

CITY

Clerk

City

Zoning

initiating

hearing

AND

COUNCIL

Manager

TITLE:

Attorney

231-04-K-84)

CITY

RECOMMENDATION: Commission

Department

NOTICE

Council

that

DEPARTMENT

proffered

DATA:

AUG

for

BOARD Department

RESOLUTION

ATTORNEY ORDINANCE

must

DISTRICT

N/A

10/8/13

(CE)

CITY

MEETING

AND

N/A

recommended

initial

Director’s

FROM

DISTRICT

RECOMMENDATION:

2013

Council

Director

HEARING:

OVERLAY

PROPOSED

their

HIGHWAY

Signature:

OF:

mtg

review

REZONE

OVERLAY

approval will

______

WINCH

9/10/13

8/27/13

ORDINANCE

place

COMMERCIAL

CITY

order

1.295

INITIALS

proffered.

below,

( 1 st

(work APPROVAL

160

COUNCIL

ACRES

for

B-2 Readinn)

ESTER,

this

session),

DISTRICT

sequence

(B-2)

item

FOR

PUBLIC

LAND

AGENDA

10/8/13

DISTRICT

WITH

VIRGINIA

DISAPPROVAL

INITIALS

placed

CUT

transmittal,

HEARING

PLANNED

1720

ITEM

WITH

reading)

OFF

VALLEY

the

FOR

DATE:

CORRIDOR

the

City

UNIT

names

E23

AVENUE

Council

8/21/13

DEVELOPMENT

DATE

each

agenda. (Map

commence

applicant

Council

City

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Planning

development.

OPTIONS:

This

professionals

BUDGET See

Vision

BACKGROUND:

Goal

feet

with

The

Goal

RELATIONSHIP

Proffer THE

Mr.

Re: Date: To:

From:

Council

Drew

attached

mixed

project

PUD

ISSUE:

2028-

Approve

Deny;

commercial

inquired

Statement.

Create

Grow

Commission

has

AVENUE OVERLAY

DISTRICT

Tim DISTRICT

RZ-13-292

September

Mayor

IMPACT:

Scallan

overlay

work

use

reviewed

Great

amended

leave

will

staff

CITY the

depicted

Youmans,

including

rezoning

about

and

generate

Economy

wishes

report

use

existing

neighborhoods

(Map

order

STRATEGIC

WITH

the

recommended

Members

ways

liveable

the

estimate

2013

new

request

Planning

Number

ORDINANCE

direct

Proffer

COUNCIL

B-2

conditionally

proposed

required

CORRIDOR

PLANNED

construct

existing

high-quality

ensure

city

completion

and

place.

Statement

with

PLAN:

for

City

work

231-04-K-8A)

Director

approval

building

Development

indirect

that

all

Council

UNIT

rezone

session

range

multifamily

ENHANCEMENT

the

revenue

known

work

REZONE

DEVELOPMENT

apartment

add

proffered.

months

.3 housing

161

Plan

FROM

acres

Proffer

August

ACTION

development

and

undertaken

The

and

1.295

thereafter.

units

create along

choices

HIGHWAY

Bottling

27,

(CE)

proffers

committing

and

ACRES

2013

the

(PUD)

geared

between

DISTRICT

Works

east

and

timely

have

demand

COMMERCIAL

side

AND

forwarded

to to

MEMO

(former

been

manner.

empty a

4,567

LAND

for

OVERLAY

Valley

year

included

commercial

Coca-Cola

and

nesters

DISTRICT

period

for

Avenue

8,049

response,

1720

(B-2)

First

and

square

VALLEY

Building).

Reading.

binding

young

B-2

B-2 the

corner

The

lot

Enhancement

1726

along the

adjoining

for

between

three

public

feet

The

AREA

second

apartments

addition,

street

structure The

acres.

story consideration

would

space.

approval the

The

REQUEST

OVERLAY

231-04-K-8A)

DISTRICT

August

RZ-13-292

Council

part

193

commercial

north.

adjoining

site

along

situated

submitted

east

Valley

request

Roberts

public

DESCRIPTION

street space)

rights

feet

be The

story

has

Valley 27,

the

Work

paint

side

which

The

and

the

Valley

converted

OVERLAY

DESCRIPTION

Ave

existing

are

streets. its

2013

two

within

Coca-Cola

further

would

vacant

apartments

(CE)

Street

revised

site

the

store/apartment

FROM

main

Session

Ave

way Development

space.

depicted today

ORDINANCE

Valley

Aye,

development

on-site

zoned

establish

District

also

north,

and

ground

along

It to

property

frontage

40-foot

HIGHWAY

application

but

adjoins

converted Option

the extends

Avenue.

the property

B-2

retail

Bellview

B-2

parking

are

overlay.

single-story

Roberts

residential

east.

poorly

south

PUD

floor

the

DISTRICT

actually

with

proposed

right

Plan

use

Burton

options.

237

warehouse

Proffers

would COMMERCIAL

building

about

the zoning

REZONE

and

spaces

Ave.

office

Corridor

depict

and

defined

dated

Street

feet

the

fronts

south apartment

used

the

WITH

way

units

Avenue

the

high

220

consist

and

above

over

Option

eight

are

August

1.295

and

car

remainder

well

per

bay

PLANNED

space

some

included

the

Burton

the

(8)

acre;

(B-2)

ACRES

warehouse

use

existing

would

two-story

retail

14 2013

162

known

the

apartments

DISTRICT

Street.

parallel

with

UNIT

the

space

consist

warehouse

rear proposal

(updated

B-2

LAND

this

space.

DEVELOPMENT

structure

apartments

(CE)

Floor

parking

‘The

WITH

rezoning.

the

and

zoning

Four

plans

Bottling

1720

proposed

for

structure

CORRIDOR

southwest

8,049

8/20/13)

apartments

spaces

(including

16-18

VALLEY on

dated

The

six

the

square

Works.’ (PUD)

the

within

additional

applicant

apartment

retail

northern

depicts

August

ENHANCEMENT

part

Coca-Cola

newly

AVENUE

1720

and

AND

feet

space

the

PUD

Valley

5,678

created

the

adjoining

ground-floor

warehouse

allows

units

2013

asking

(Map

and

commercial

DISTRICT

property

existing

building.

square

Avenue

four

submitted second

for

Number

for

(CE)

public

1.295

(4)

feet along All

(MR). Density Burton of request. At

owner use 13-1-4.1 allows

minimum preclude STAFF permitted

Valley In 2013

The Renovation’. Rezoning

also

Economic by Citywide Citywide

Citywide

The

property

Planning requiring It apartments.

1.295

also

development citizens

letter

the comprehensive

protecting Use

proposed

version

applicant unlikely

for COMMENTS Ave (Omni Avenue

Residential

situated

Land

of acres

other

“Employ

“Protect “Promote development professionals

when the Exhibit Design

Design

Housing to

without

Commission to Development the is

public

participating

the

the zoned

LC) across establish of

Planning

that

land

LLC) Zoning

submitted upscale

5 significant the

the

in size,

Planning considered

Objective

Objective ‘A’ at

significant education. New

the (HR) the

Objective

decent explains bordering

B-2

applicant

1650 Development Valley

“

plan

the

lots

The

Ordinance.

16-18

PUD that

PUD and Commission Urbanism

(CE) meeting. and

industrial

proximity in

Valley proposed calls

Director

voluntary

Project

private Ave

affordable

Appendices,

Comp #1:

retirees.” #2:

zoning. is

overlay contains

single-family and the

the

public

#6:

units

can

the more

for

Ave

proposed

contains invitation,

Principles

Generally,

loft-styled Plan show Staff Commerce the rezoning

title

Plan

will architectural

dated

and

compatible PUD

zoning. to

Comprehensive

immediately proffers

apartment

west

housing,

create

public recommend is

advised

(updated transit

that private Potential

the

‘Proposed

May detached.

mixed

rezoning

considerably

tract

but is

The in

Coca-Cola

the

strict apartments

input zoned

Center/Corridor

negative

new

31,

stop

particularly

the subsequently

architectural

with

mitigate resources

Proffer

use impacts use to

Impacts to

2013,

adherence

development

the meetings.

applicant

on and Commercial

and 163

8/20/13) MR Land

the consistent

and

the

Plan

the plant

impacts

south

Statement

City

the

below and

Mr.

north

Comprehensive

from would single-family

potential

across

Consistency

such

Valley

proposed

Council Proffers J.A. is contains

and

would declined.

In is serve

this reuse

identified across

the

in with

as serve zoned

titled

try

general

Scallan, Roberts

and

Avenue

historic

the

Apartment

rezoning impacts

5-acre was

targeted

produce what incorporating

redevelopment.”

form

these Burton single-family

“Conceptual

work

Coca-Cola mixed

use. Medium

approve

However,

last

the

as co-owner

Plan

resources

bus

minimum

Land arising of

to a revised

with targeted

appear

proposed Plan

use Avenue.

populations

Key

unnecessary

route.

school-aged

than

the Complex,

Density

the

plant.

project.

advocates

Site the

waiver

east

from

Site New

and

homes the

that

called

owner

populations.

Zoning

That the

the

be with

north

Layout

applicant

Residential the

In which

Urbanism

Coca-Cola

improve/change

of zoned

The

positive

such

August

City.”

Chapter

and

out children hardship

property

the

rezoning

the

Ordinance

across

August

the

could

in Plan,

rezoning

5-acre

High following:

couple

Section

(1720

20th young

impacts.

The while mixed

4 Plant

and — be

site

the

The

translate

allows The

cleaning

maintenance

that

Roberts

maintenance

building sanitary

Commission

Concerns

Storm

fewer

The

impervious

consider

common

shine

end.

patios

units

Buffering

Sections two The

appeal

bedroom a

Option

total

actual

applicant

building.

applicant

Planning

studies

Staff

for

water into

spaces

for

Street

for

does sewer

consideration

the

providing

about

project

with

13-4-2.2k

has

two

includes

has

the 18

young units

that

asphalt

public

maximum

management

crews

that

proposes

The

Valley

and

than

units.

that

Commission

been

issues

suggested

ground

the

sewer

main

for not

density

main

three-year

will

the

can

professionals

the

Coca-Cola

hearing.

additional

are

and

Avenue

and

Option

provided

proposing

are

will

four total

continue

two-bedroom

backups floor

previously

zoned

that

aware

concrete

maximum

actually

required

comes

that

will

did

The

serves

the

side

bedroom

in cycle,

dwelling

the

single-family includes

private

need

any

not

the

were

connected

and

Zoning

City

out

screen

the

units.

apartments

connected

coverage

proposed

connect

the

dwelling

but require

the

recreational

empty-nesters.

addressed,

Engineer

issues

raised

the

units,

Site

patios

windows.

patios

units.

properties

The

other

Storm

Recreation

13.9

Ordinance.

north

some

one-bedroom

year.

Planning

two-bedroom

Development

lots

and

applicant

office

units

The

units

where

Water for

Fiscal

one-bedroom

than

and

that

warehouse.

(on

water

and

the

nearby

along

Density

amenities.

Screening

but all

the

applicant

completely

the

per won’t

per

face

use

Utilities site

Commission

roots,

and

Impact 4

164

possible.

can

result,

first

1638

Management

units

notes

the

back

acre.

acre,

Sewer

units,

and

property

since

Open

and

units,

floor

there

north

the The

—

Analysis

would

the

officials

has

side

Staff

which affected

that

handled

units

1644

the

and

Buffering

proposing

The

separate

gets

Space

main

applicant

apartments

obsolete

been

haven’t

of for

side

owners

one-bedroom

the

proposed

had

with

applicant

Roberts

cleaned

the

investigated

nor

parking

two-bedroom

industrial

during

the

depicted

desirable

PUD

suggested

building)

main dens,

Beliview

been a

during

industrial

case is

Traffic

maximum

rezoning

increased

quarterly.

proposing

mixed

the

has

lot

than

and

issues.

the

4”

along

loft

units

the

time

gets reduced

that

Ave

these

1.29

Impact

cast

avoid

building,

what

the

use

use.

apartments

units.

one-bedroom

July

application

the

with

routine

the

sewer

The

acres

some

The will

iron

Roberts

concerns.

the the

site

having

16,

Analysis

boundary

the

applicant

PUD

dens,

dwelling

require

6”

main.

including

would

southeast.

Coca-Cola

2013

semi-private

flows

plan

amount

root

main

overlay

root

headlights

will

per

and

which

review. (east)

The

Planning

City

from

units

many

units. instead

the

one-

for

are 4 The

rezoning. (or

Variances

and City

does conditions use.

The

various addressing

window bed the where Elevations the Appropriateness. so floor

deemed Development

Generally, five RECOMMENDATION long-term At use

the with recommending The populations (with Section

other

all

applicant

its residential

rooms. Council.

submitted applicant While

building

proposed acres include

Planning

plans

exterior

the

August

revisions

applicable,

the

unit

walls

nonresidential

13-1-4.1 necessary

from

Development

the

pertaining

have is vision

design

PUD staff

are

types

Variances

into a

likely,

size. has

has

20, allowing

modifications proffer Development Commission Plan

elevations. use B-2 the

not

called of provision been feels

approval

not

greater

2013

submitted The

and quality.

especially

August

(CE)(PUD) of

Board

explicitly shall in

attract

the

indicated

the

that

the

provided

introduction

out the the were

for

meeting,

use)

the

Plan

Zoning contain

that

compliance

existing

current

for

subject

The The the 20,

location in natural Planning

recommends more

use, Zoning

previously

will will

Plan

on updated titled required the

zoning,

this effect.

2013)

proposal

site submitted

that

Ordinance the

remain supplementary

the be maintenance

Comprehensive

young

does

economy,

to nonconforming 1.295-acre

ensure

light

Conceptual is

of Appeals

there subject

Valley Director.

the

Planning

situated

supports

with

floor the

for doors

not

approved

into

vacant

professionals

proffers

that

typical that PUD

consistent is retail

the

Avenue

to include

plans

any Project the

will that

and

site

Design

Other allow within

City Commission

CE architectural review and applications,

mixed

Site

longer space.

otherwise

proposal

not

data

windows floor

some

for

is Plan.

standards by

structure

Council

elevation. a operation

Layout acceptable 165

the

Phasing a

Issues need

the guality this statement the

with

use for 1.295

and

and plans

The than

The

Proffer

BZA Valley

rezoning

and to

all to many

approval

and approve

empty-nesters windowless

Plan,

forwarded floor particular

recommendation

acre so the

integrity Section

and depict

phase

be of

for

the

There

the long

even

Statement

Ave the

detailing approved apartment

of common

Rezoning

guidelines. plans

proposed

PUD

expansion

proposal,

the

removal

in the

5,678 a

of as

Corridor

13-4-2

though are

waiver

development, the

because

Rezoning a show the

broader

corridors size

the

proffers

covenants,

project

spaces,

to for

Exhibit

PUD

dated

medical

Certificate of

use.

and

of historic

While

8,049 it numerous and

the

Enhancement

is the

the

overhead

the

rezoning elements osn serving housing

based

configuration

RZ-13-292

considerably

City. there

and

August ensuring as

the proposed

‘A’

WZO

applicant building square

5-acre

and

structure

as part

restrictions,

dated

some

Proffer Staff

upon of

reasonably are

skylights

states

general

doors

of 20, is

feet

minimum

adherence

proffers approved

feels to

elevations

August the windowless

(CE)

commercial

adherence the

2013

has

Statement

City

of less that

of will

PUD

targeted

preserved office

City’s

District

that

and shown the

and

retail

because than

Council

the

2, bring

per

the by

2013

and

zoning.

that

strict

compatible

adherence

with

would

the

Comprehensive

produce

unnecessary

Plan than

166

hardship

that

which

that

could

would

preclude

permitted

development

without

the

that

PUD is Planning

Winchester To Rouss 15 May

overlay The Avenue land Please

two The To to units commercial parking significant Winchester

In 0-2 successful a contribute Yours If ic!La..rn Please

(202) Mn.

wide

approved,

whom North line allow

accomplish

proposed

pl,in

bath zone

31st

and

City A.

S44-6500

faithfully,

allow with

feel variety

for

of spaces

Sca

20]i residential Dept.

Cameron

buildings also

and

will

Hall

approximately

adaptive

historic

greatly 1720

VA may free

the

space. the

this

includes

5 make

“Community

plan

of this

22601

and

one comprehensive

(ext. to

concern,

iccit maximum

Valley

letter

plan

potential

Street

that

not contact

identity”

for

mix

extensive

Additionally apartments the

bedroom

reuse

700)

will

the significant

only

Avenue of housed

best

4,600 serve

units

transform

projects

Planned

our

renters allowable

possible

landscaping one

Choice”

the

team

the

in as

plan square

this

site

the

major bath. a

building

including

in respectfully former

the

Unit

request

the for

should project

the

in use improvement

City

first

feet

the Development

The existing

tourist

providing City

PUD

as of

Coca

floor

and

you City

the

will

young

Winchester. part proposed

maintaining of

the

request

artery historic Cola

eighteen

Winchester. have

contribute of

historic

,ind

of 167

City

Winchester

professionals

providing

dwelling

the

unique

Bottling

any

consists

apartments

Council

2200 Washington fabric 1720 increase

improved

structure

Valley

Planned

total

further

1720

the

residential

units Valley

Wisconsin

ok at Works

the of

of historically apartments

this

Valley

Avenue

on the the

and

questions.

allow Unit comprehensive

site

into

per

retail

will development

site Avenue

existing allowable

retirees.

Avenue

acre. plan

Development that a

experience

a 20007

but

parking Avenue

vibrant

spare

Planned

significant

true

including

locution.

also

LLC

building.

LLC

density fronting “industrial

spaces

NW,

exciting

will

plan

is Unit

the that

the

façade

overlay

Suite “respect

of goal

stock

Development and

on two

would

owner

place

apartments

loft

Valley

100

as bedroom

of for

style”

the

making

street that

appeal

the

will

site

to The Bottling Works RZ-13-292 REZONING REQUEST PROFFER (Conditions for this rezoning request)

Tax Map Number: 231-04-K-8A

Owner: 1720 Valley Avenue LLC Dated September 4, 2013

Property Information: The undersigned applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Council of the City of Winchester approves the rezoning of 1.295 acres of land including existing buildings at 1720 valley Avenue from B-2 (Highway Commercial) to B-2 with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay then the development and adaptive reuse of the existing buildings will be completed in conformity with the terms and conditions as set forth below, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently revised by the applicant due to constraints and requirements of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources or the United States Department of the Interior. In the event that the rezoning is not granted these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn. These proffers shall be binding on the applicant and their legal successor and assigns.

Improvements 1. The property will be developed and landscaped substantially in conformance with the Development Plan, dated August 2, 2013/revised August 20, 2013 and the Building Plans, dated August 2, 2013. The site will be improved to include parking, storm water management and green space landscaping maintained by a landscape contractor. The Building Plans depict the style and character of the interior spaces.

2. The facades of the existing buildings will be developed substantially in conformance with the submitted Elevations, dated August 2, 2013, that depict the style and character of the design. The development will preserve the historic facades of the original 1940s Coke building while adding fenestration and other surface treatments to the more recent facades to improve their character. These improvements will make the newer facades more compatible with the historic Coke building and the new interior uses. The improvements on the facades include but may not be limited to stucco, glass entry systems, metallic panels, entry canopies and appropriate lighting.

3. The materials and methods used in the adaptive reuse of the existing building will conform to the rigorous standards and practices as described in the United States Secretary of the Interior’s Rehabilitation Standards for Historic Buildings.

168 4. The maximum number of residential units shall be limited to 18. The units will be a mix of 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom units. There will be no 3 bedroom units.

5. The maximum amount of rentable commercial/retail space will be 8,049 Sq. Ft.

6. The residential apartments will be constructed to a high standard of finish and designed to express the industrial style of the building. The units will be loft like spaces with high open ceiling spaces, exposed steel framing, exposed concrete floors and industrial stairs.

7. The interior of the commercial/retail space will meet the standards of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources and the US Department of the Interior to qualify for their Historic Preservation Certification program and will reflect the industrial character of the building.

8. The residential and commercial/retail space will be operated under a set of rules and regulations developed by the Owner to ensure a safe, high quality environment for all tenants. These rules and regulations may be amended by the Owner from time to time at its sole discretion.

9. The construction phase of the project will commence within 24 months of the PUD approval. The construction of the project is estimated to require 12 months.

These proffers are offered in conjunction with the Development Plan, dated August 2, 2013/revised August 20, 2013, Building Plans and Building Elevations dated August 2, 2013. If the rezoning is approved by the City Council a full set of construction plans will be developed from these design documents and submitted for review and approval by the appropriate departments of the City of Winchester. If the plans are approved by the reviewing City departments these proffered conditions will apply to the rezoned land and existing buildings and be binding upon the applicant, their successors and assigns.

Applicant:

______1720 Valley Avenue LLC By Mr. John Eichberg Managing Member

169 R[:z()JNIN(; EXIlIBI’!’ RZ-13-292 PREPARI- D BY WINCI-IFS I FR PLANN]G DEPARTMEST AUGUST O. u13

HR 170

‘I

EXISTING PROPOSE

B-. (pi1t CE ZONING I OR I 2O VALLEY AVENUE CONDITIONAL B-2 (PUD’p.it CE ZONING EOR 1 O VALLEY A\INTI

PUD overlay L1 CE oerla, * Co’dt’onaI z’ng

(Zoning Initiating

‘.‘.. 4.

The

department

INSURANCE:

FUNDING

ADVISORY

Planning

Approval.

PUBLIC STAFF TA-13-138

AND ITEM

**ptiblic

WINCHESTER CITY

e0e

Clerk

City

Planning

City initiating

CORRIDOR

COUNCIL

TITLE:

Manager

Attorney

and

RECOMMENDATION:

Commission

hearing

Department NOTICE

,‘

Council

0’

that

DEPARTMENT

DATA:

Inspections) RESOLUTION

Department

BOARD

ZONING

ORDINANCE

must

N/A on

ENI-IANCEMENT.

10/8/l3**

MEETING

AND

N/A

recommended

initial

Director’s

RECOMMENDATION:

ORDINANCE

Director

HEARING:

PROPOSED

their

OF:

Signature:

review

AMEND

approval.

will

ORDINANCE

(Revision

9/10/13

PERTAINING

place

CITY

AND

order

INITIALS

below,

(first

(regular APPROVAL __—

171

REENACT COUNCIL

IelJJ))orcIry

for

reading)

this

X TO

meeting),

sequence

item

SIGNS,

FORM

FOR

sign

ARTICLES

PUBLIC

AGENDA

10/8/13 to

provisions

VIOLATION

DISAPPROVAL

INITIALS

placed

CUT

transmittal,

(second

HEARING

18, ITEM

cnidperinif

OFF

21,

reading/public

23,

the

AND

FOR

DATE:

the

AND City

reqalirelnents,.)

PENALTY,

names

Council

14.2

9/04/13

DATE

hearing)

each

THE

agenda. FEES,

help four

provisions allocation

signs

This

Council.

number of

Council

September

During

Chamber

conversations,

Shenandoah

June well

public Council

the

BACKGROUND: This

The

THE

RELATIONSHIP

language

To:

Re: From:

Date:

temporary

the

its

City.

signs

make

version

proposed

text

members,

proportional ISSUE:

11,

first

concerns

hearing,

the

provided

considered

The

Aaron

September

0-2013-14,

Honorable

2013.

amendment

allows

per

were

pertaining

week

temporary

the

Council

policy

Commerce.

CITY

temporary

signage

Valley,

property.

ordinance

2013

Zoning

the

staff

Grisdale,

After

maintained who

and

for

direction

agenda

text

August,

work

this

one

Mayor has

held

recommendations

the

then

to 10,

and

Zoning

hearing

signs

STRATEGIC

that

Update

correlates

Ordinance

amendment,

temporary

The

sign

item

temporary 2013

amount

sessions prepared

The

easier

meetings

COUNCIL

other

Director

provided

item

and

staff

per

from

previously

proportional

Text

permit

eliminate

during

Chamber

concerns

property.

interested

Members

submitted

the

Amendment

text

City

changes signs,

read

with

frontage feedback

the

sign

PLAN:

provisions

their

Zoning

Draft

August

amendment

Gateway

the

included

2018

from

provided

and

the

per

fees,

April

these

local

permit

the

Chamber

understand.(Full 50-feet

and

City

several

includes

Goal

20 th

and

version.

the

23 were

172

and

revised

(TA-13-138)

businesses.

amount

Beautification

groups.

maximum

the Inspections

Council

ACTION

public

and

comments

requirement,

proposed

will

work

penalties.

removed,

local

updated

the

27 th

public

Two

modify

draft

street

“Create

Commerce,

session,

aforementioned

entities

this

lot

size, tables

—

text

street

staff

frontage

Temporary

proposed

the

for

was

and

the

item

consider

staff.

required

amendment

result

and

the

existing

and

were zoning

report

included.

frontage

was

Museum

major

MEMO

allocation

held

businesses

and

ordinance

included

Livable

discussed

attached).

setback,

Signs

text

these

revisions

Zoning

set

alternate

entrance

with

The

public

amendment

incorporate

City

meetings

maximum

the

proposed

Ordinance

and

with during

temporary

with

maximum

this

hearing

desired

for

allocation

corridors

height

changes

draft

Council. All”

the

and

some as

the

of of BUDGET IMPACT: No funding is required.

OPTIONS: - Adopt the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Decline to adopt the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment

RECOMMENDATIONS: Planning Commission and staff recommend approval.

173 City Council September 10, 2013

TA-13-138 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT ARTICLES 18, 21, 23, AND 14.2 OF THE WINCHESTER ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO SIGNS, VIOLATION AND PENALTY, FEES, AND CORRIDORENHANCEMENT.

REQUESTDESCRIPTION This publicly sponsored text amendment is to serve as a refinement of the existing temporary sign ordinances, and provide clearer standards pertaining to size, number, and duration of display for such temporary signs. Additionally, the amendment will provide for a temporary sign permit requirements for some commercial signage as well as shorten the appeal period for sign violations.

STAFFCOMMENTS Presently, the Zoning Ordinance is vague when setting standards for temporary signs throughout the City. Many classifications of signs do not have a maximum size, limit for the number or time duration limitation. This proposed amendment seeks to provide clearer standards for temporary signs, while still allowing flexibility for individuals, groups, and businesses to conduct outside advertising on site.

The major changes include: - Establishing maximum size, setback requirements, duration limitations, height and allowable number of sign standards for several classifications of signs. - Creating and modifying definitions of several types of signs to make the Zoning Ordinance easier to interpret for citizens and business owners. - Creation of a requirement for a temporary sign permit for several classifications of temporary commercial signs. - Shortening the appeal period for temporary sign violations from 30 days to 10 days. - Clarify standards for electronic message board signs, specifically as to the frequency of message changes.

As the Zoning Ordinance is currently constituted, enforcement of temporary signs is time and labor intensive. Absent a temporary sign permit requirement, there is no staff check or review on proposed temporary signage or trigger to initiate conversations between a business owner and staff to discuss regulations. When staff does identify a sign violation, the current appeal period of thirty (30) days results in a significant lag between notice of violation and resolution; with a shortened appeal period of ten (10) days, staff can more quickly initiate other enforcement measures such as civil penalties or court action, if needed. The changes proposed within the amendment will allow for expedited enforcement of such violations.

As part of City Council’s Strategic Plan, the “Vision 2028” includes the establishment of Winchester as “a Beautiful, Historic City and a Hometown for Families.” Having clear sign standards is important for the creation of a beautiful City, by creating harmonious neighborhoods and proportional sign standards. Furthermore, the Winchester Comprehensive Plan calls for Winchester to be a “Community of Choice” and reducing sign clutter and improving the overall appearance of the community can contribute towards that goal.

174 Lastly, the proposed amendment will benefit businesses by continuing to allow for a variety of options and flexibility for conducting as needed temporary advertisements, thus resulting in a growing economy.

UPDATEFor Council Work Session 8/20/13; City Staff has had discussions with several businesses and organizations including the Chamber of Commerce regarding this temporary sign ordinance. As a result of the concerns that were voiced during Council’s public hearing as well as the questions and concerns brought up during these other discussions, staff has proposed a few revisions to this text amendment. Earlier in August, staff provided a copy of the updated zoning text amendment to the Chamber of Commerce to solicit comments and feedback from the revisions. Staff believes that this draft of the text amendment balances the input received from the local community as well as the steps needed to bring the City’s Zoning Ordinance closer in line with Council’s Strategic Plan. Specifically the changes include:

- A change to exempt government signs from the requirements of the sign ordinance; such signs include but are not limited to street signs, highway markers, and traffic control devices. (Section 18-8-2.4) - Adding language to ensure that political campaign signs are only installed on private property with the consent of the property owner. (Section 18-8-12.2c) - Adding language to special event signs to allow for them to be located on public property with approval of the City Manager or his designee. This was to ensure there is no conflict with special event signs that may be placed on the public right-of-way along the Loudoun Street Mall with special approval. (Section 18-8-12.2e) - A change to signs for outdoor sales of merchandise to allow for a temporary sign for outside vendors and outdoor display of merchandise associated with a permit on the Loudoun Street Mall. (Section 18-8-12.2f) - Allowing for a temporary “OPEN” business flag sign affixed to the building. Such signs may not exceed 15 square feet. (Section 18-8-12.2i) - Adding language to allow for development banners to be affixed to poles inside of a commercial shopping center or medical campus, provided such signs do not exceed 6 square feet. (Section 18-8-12.2j) - Adding clarifying language that incidental price or advertising signs, such as the small signs on the top of a fuel pump or a price sign on a vehicle or other merchandise does not require a sign permit. (Section 18-8-12.2k) - A change to the allocation of portable signs on a property from one sign per street frontage to one sign per business; with the caveat that no more than two signs be located within 100-feet of each other within the limits of the development, similar to the current regulations for permanent directional signs. This change will allow greater flexibility on larger parcels that contain numerous business tenants. (Section 18-8-12.3c) - Increasing the number of temporary sign permits that can be issued per year from three to four; and changing the allocation from permits per property, to permits per business/tenant. (Section 18-8-12.3) - Adding a classification of signs for regional tourism destinations. This will allow for unique properties that serve as a regional draw for tourists, such as the Museum of Shenandoah Valley and the Winchester Frederick County Visitor Center, to display advertisements for special events/displays. (Section 18-8-12.3e)

175 - Clarifying the definition of a “Portable Price or Advertising Sign” to eliminate the inclusion of portable flag signs, since they are already prohibited elsewhere in the Ordinance. (Section 18-8- 18.17) - Clarifying the definition of “Temporary Sales Sign” for special temporary permitted sales events such as fireworks or Christmas tree sales; and clarifying that these signs do not include the temporary signs in the Primary and Secondary Assessment districts. (Section 18-8-18.19) - Changing the proposed temporary sign permit fee from $40 to $25 per permit. (Section 23-8-12)

Update For Council Meeting 9/3/13: During the Council work sessions on August th20 and 27 this item was discussed with Council. Council provided direction to eliminate the permit requirement, consider an alternate allocation of temporary signage that is proportional to the amount of lot frontage and set a maximum number of temporary signs per property.

This version of the text amendment, Draft 7, includes the aforementioned revisions desired by Council. The temporary sign permit provisions were removed, and an allocation of temporary signs proportional to the amount of frontage on a public street was included. The proposed allocation allows for one temporary sign per 50-feet of public street frontage with a maximum of four signs per property. If a property has multiple street frontages then each frontage will be included in the calculation. If a property does not meet the required 50-foot frontage requirement, they will be permitted to have one temporary sign.

The previously included maximum size, required setback, and height provisions were maintained from the previous version. Two tables were included in this draft to help make the ordinance easier to read and understand. Lastly, a provision was included to keep minimum spacing on site. The proposed spacing requirement is tied to the speed limit of the street that the property fronts upon. If the posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour or less, the spacing required will be 50-feet. For streets with a higher travel speed and higher speed limit the spacing requirement will be increased to 75-feet.

RECOMMENDATION

During their April 16, 2013 meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval and adoption of this text amendment because it represents good planning practice by providing for reasonable standards for temporary signs while allowing flexibility for citizens and businesses to conduct temporary advertisements and announcements.

176 RESOLUTIONADOPTINGAN ORDINANCETO AMENDAND REENACTARTICLES18, 21, 23, AND 14.2 OF THEWINCHESTERZONING ORDINANCEPERTAININGTO SIGNS,VIOLATIONAND PENALTY,FEES,AND CORRIDORENHANCEMENT.

TA-13-138

WHEREAS,the Code of Virginia provides that one of the purposes of a Zoning Ordinance is to facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community; and

WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance sign provisions have been established in order to ensure that signs are appropriate to the land, building, or use to which they are appurtenant and are adequate, but not excessive, for their intended purpose; and,

WHEREAS,the proposed Ordinance amendments will provide clearer established parameters for the size, location, and duration of display for temporary signs; and,

WHEREAS, in order to facilitate a dynamic and thriving community, uniform sign standards will allow for flexible opportunities for businesses, individuals, and other entities to communicate with the community.

NDW, THEREFORE,BEIT RESOLVEDthat the Common Council of the City of Winchester hereby adopts the following text amendmenth cihi bcoi rf’ctivnr :y (90) days following ditnocpiuii:

177 AN ORDINANCETO AMEND AND REENACTARTICLES18, 21, 23, AND 14.2 OF THEWINCHESTER ZONINGORDINANCEPERTAININGTO SIGNS, VIOLATIONAND PENALTY,FEES,AND CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT.

TA-13-138

DRAFT7—9/3/13

Ed. Note: Thefollowing text represents excerpts of the Zoning Ordinance that are subject to change. Wards with strikcthrough are proposed for repeal. Wards that are boldfaced and underlined are proposed far enactment. Existing ordinance language that is not included here is not implied to be repealed simply due to the fact that it is amitted from this excerpted text.

WINCHESTERZONING ORDINANCE

ARTICLE18

SECTION 18-8. SIGNS. 18-8-1 INTENT.The intent of this Article is to establish limitations on signs in order to ensure irsufe that they are appropriate to the land, building, or use to which they are appurtenant and are adequate, but not excessive, for their intended purpose. Any widespread display of outdoor advertising is considered inappropriate to the character and sound development of the City, and it is intended by this Article that the streets and highways in the City shall not be made available for such display. 18-8-2 PERMITREQUIRED.A sign permit shall be required before a sign is erected, altered, or relocated, except as otherwise provided herein.

18-8-2.1 Applications . Each application for such permit shall be accompanied by plans showing the area of the sign; the size, character, and design proposed; the method of illumination, method of fastening such sign; the name and address of the sign owner and of the sign erector. Fees for sign permits shall be in accordance with the schedule of fees for building permits as adopted by the CityCouncil. Asign permit shall become null and void ifthe work for which the permit was issued has not been completed with a period of six (6)months after the date of issuance of the permit., Deleted: The Zoning Administrator shall promulgate an application form for 18-8-2.2 Permit Exceptions . A permit shall not be required for the following; but such signs applicants to comply with this subsection. A shall be subject to any and all applicable provisions of this Ordinance: complete temporary sign permit application a. Any permanent sign four (4) square feet or less in area. submitted to the Zoning Administrator shall be declded.epon no later than ten 1O) b. Repainting without changing wording, composition, or color, or minor business days following submission. nonstructural repairs. c. Changing the wording or facc of a sign that was erected in accordance with the provisions of this Article. d. Temporary signs,and signs painted on or hung behind windows as permitted.....-r Deleted: provided in Section 1-8-12.2. in all districts under Section 18-8-12, except as provided in this Ordinance. (10/09/01, Case No. TA-01-05) e. Signs indicating the location of a community garden or market garden, provided that such signs shall not exceed four (4) square feet in area and

178 shall not exceed six (6) feet in height. Such signs may include information, identification, and sponsorship reference, (10/12/10, Case TA-10-418, Ord. No. 2010-51)

18-8-2.3 Unless otherwise provided for within this Ordinance, all signs, temporary or permanent, shall be set back from the front property line by a minimum of five (5) feet, except within the B-i and RB-i districts.

18-8-2.4 The requirements of this section shall not apply to any permanent or temporary signs issued or installed by the state, local government, any political subdivision thereof, or the employees or agents of such entities.

18-8-11 SIGNSPERMITTEDINTHEHW DISTRICT.No permanent sign shall be erected or altered in the Historic WinchesterjH District until a Certificate of Appropriateness has been issued by the Zoning Administrator or Board of Architectural Review, unless otherwise provided in this Ordinance. These signs are subject to the provisions of Article 14 and design guidelines as may be adopted by the Board of Architectural Review, Signage shall not be internally illuminated. Roof mounted signs, banners, and pennants are prohibited, with the exception that one sign provided in Section 18-8-12.2 maye installed per property in accordance with the provisions of that Section. (9/11/01, Case TA-01-02, Ord. No. 029-2001; 3/8/05, TA-04-08, Ord. No. 007-2005)

18-8-11.1 SIGNS PERMITTEDIN THECEDISTRICTS.No sign shall be erected or altered in one of the Corridor Enhancement (CE)Districts until a Certificate of Appropriateness has been issued by the Planning Department, unless otherwise provided in this Ordinance, and which Certificate of Appropriateness shall be issued upon conformity with all the provisions and design criteria of Article 14.2 of this Ordinance.

18-8-12 SIGNSPERMITTEDIN ALLDISTRICTS.The following signs shall be permitted in all districts. Unless otherwise indicated, Temporary Signs and signs painted on or hung behind windows shall not rcguirc a sign permit. The area of any sign shall not be included in computing the aggregate sign areas specified for individual districts. (9/11/01, Case TA-01-02, Ord. No. 029-2001)

18-8-12.1 Temporary Signs, which shall be non-illuminated, and are limited to the following types:

18-8-12.2 The following temporary signs may be installed by-right without.fee or Certificate of - -. f’’Deleted: a temporary sign permit. Appropriateness, provided the sign is installed in accordance with the size, location, and duration standards outlined in this section. No setback from property lines shall be required for any signs permitted in this section: a. Construction Signs, which identity the architects, -‘- contracto One sign per

179 individual or firm involved with construction is permitted, and each sign shall not exceed four (4) square feet in area for a single family residential project and sixteen (16) square feet for any other project, and shall be removed immediately following the completion of the project. b. Real Estate Signs, advertising the sale, rental, or lease of the premises, or part of the premises on which the signs are displayed. Signs shall not exceed four (4) square feet in area on residential properties or sixteen (16) square feet for non-residential properties and shall be removed immediately after sale, lease or rental. One sign per street frontage is permitted. On properties two (2) acres or larger, residential signs may be up to twelve (12) square feet and non-residential signs may be up to a maximum of thirty-two (32) square feet. c. Political Campaign Signs, announcing the candidates seeking public political office and other data pertinent thereto. These signs shall be confined within private property, erected only with the consent of the owner of the private property, and removed within fourteen (14) days after the event for which they were made. d. Street Banners, advertising a public entertainment or event, if specifically approved by the City Council and only for locations designated by the City Council, during and for fourteen (14) days before and after the event for which they were made. e. Signsadvertising only the name, time and place of any bona fide fair, carnival, festival, bazaar, horse show, or similar event, when conducted by a public agency or for the benefit of any civic,fraternal, religious, or charitable cause: provided that all such signs shall be removed within five (5) days after the last day of the event to which they pertain. Such signs may be installed in the public right-of-way only upon approval by the City Manager or his designee. gf. Signs advertising storage of materials and supplies or display of merchandise for sale or rent shall be permitted but shall not be visible from off-site, except for one temporary sign up to twelve (12) square feet may be used as part of an outdoor vendor or outdoor display of merchandise permit as provided for in Section 18-7 of this Ordinance. (10/17/95, Case TA-95-04, Ord. No. 053-95) g Signs advertising an on-site yard sale. One such sign may be placed upon the property for which the yard sale is taking place and may be up to a maximum of eight (8) square feet. Such signs may be placed on site three (3) days before the sale, and must be removed upon completion of the sale. h. Non-commercial Signs. One such sign may be placed upon a property. If a residential property contains more than one unit, one sign per residential unit is permitted. Such signs shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet, have a height of not greater than four (4) feet, and must be freestanding and not affixed to a wall, fence, structure, vehicle, or landscaping.

180 i. Open Business Sign. One such flag sign not to exceed fifteen (15) square feet may be affixed to the building that bears the word “OPEN” or other words depicting the nature of the business. Should the flag contain any corporate logo or text, the sign will not meet this definition. Such signs may only be on display during the operational hours of the business. j, Development Banner. Banners identifying the name or simple announcement of a commercial center, medical campus, or similar development, provided that such signs do not exceed six (6) square feet and are securely affixed to a building or pole on private property. k. Incidental Price and Advertising Signs, any temporary advertising sign less than two (2) square feet in area. One such sign may be affixed to the product being advertised. For service establishments, a maximum of one sign may be affixed to a gasoline or petroleum fuel pump.

Table 1R-R-12.2 Formatted: Underline Construction Signs .,ection 18-8-12.2a None 1 per individu- Formatted: Centered, Space After; 0 pt, Line spacing; single Real Estate Signs See Section 18-8-12.2b None 1 per Street frontage ,,,‘, Formatted: Underline, Font color; Background Political Campaign Signs None None Street Banners None None None 1matted Underline Civic/FraternalJCharitable None None None ‘“‘: \‘,\ Formatted: Underline, Font color; Background Event Sign

- Formatted Table Signs Advertising None None None S Storage/Display of Formatted: Underline Merchandise Formatted: Underline, Font color; Background Yard Sale 8SF None Underline, Font color; Background Non-commercial Signs 12SF 4 feet 1 per residential unit 1 Open Business Sign 15SF None 1 per business Formatted Table Development Banner Qfl None incidental Price or 2SF None None Advertising Sign

18-8-12.3 The following commercial temporary signs shalbe permitted in the in the R-1RO-1, Deleted: require approyal of a temporary sign permit and payment of applicable fee M-1, M-2, PC CM-i. and districts. The number of permitted signs shall be per Section 23-8 of this Ordinance prior to directly proportional to the amount of public Street frontage for that proertv. If a placement on a property. No more than three temporary sign permits shall be issued per property has multiple public street frontages, each frontage shall be included in the property during a twelve (12) month period sign calculation. Unless otherwise provided, one (1) temporary sign may be installed per fifty (50) linear feet of public street frontage, with a maximum of four (4) temporary signs er proertv. Each permitted temporary sign may be up to a maximum of sIxteen (16) square feet in size and four (4) feet in height unless affixed to the face of a building. For properties that do not meet the fifty (50) linear foot requirement for a temorarv sign, one temporary sign meeting the aforementioned

181 Temporary Temporary Temporary Advertising Portable Identification 18 8 12.2 Price Tr,;r,, 18-8-12.4 Sales Business Banner Signs Signs or temporary each requirements miles on a. — b. c. d. e. Table a. Signs !flS a Street other per 18-8-12.3 ______jemporary Temporary affixed and sign display Section Temporary;nlc’ Portable permanent than than tourists days Article a more Primary this announcements, aPP advertisements. Regional square Permanent Directional hour regional 16SF 16SF 25SF 16SF 16SF signs, for with roved be section per four three and shall than properties or to on 14.2, feet a a 18—7 and and i5LII. then price Tourism less, maximum speed no (4) tho tern dipjay tourism be two (3) banner Business Signs, building-mounted Signs. a - the Secondary fl larger and feet. permitted. no facit regional and p area acres or orar (2) limit general two fronting Such each signs, advertising advertising as Signs, a no Such of such destination than advertising •y nor distance of that defined, Identification of temporary fongtr a event signs sign thirty tourism building greater as four signs Downtown signs twenty-five Two If public - routinely on - defined the may shall 4 4 building Must (4) than a of (30) signs, provided special signs shall are feet

feet Street property or signs, seventy-five than for destination feet

or signs be freestanding be days, be forty-five on in

an the be Signs provides on may Such Assessment twenty-five in exempt with affixed (25) display,,nd exhibits, Section shall

existing on display height. purpose each frontage(s) except be during signs display a square 182 be speed placed shall (75) to

(45) sign information from 18-8-18.19 located No a

no freestanding events, shall for sign. of feet (25) review

days Districts does feet. mean for having longer limit more the signs making on allows be Such miles for no within

and See properties See temporary

2 1 2 — not or requirements of For permitted a that per per and longer properties permitted than a

pr9vid twenty-five property similar and/or signs permitted for Section Section exceed

are per the height public approved business

sign approval fifty multiple thirty hour

limited purposes than must structure sale (50) containing exhibits of two 18-8-12.3 18-8-12.3 ten to

that larzer frontln in the (30) no under ç5pn of event (25) be feet

the (10) of

to (2)

no more: of a

one for of • • ., -‘ -

.,f ; ‘. ‘, .-

f” ,

I formatted:

L — single single Formatted: single Formatted: Formatted: Formatted Deleted:; ionaievents qpemngs, Deleted: tenanLand ______provided 8-2, (4)feetunlessaffinedtoapermanent One no Deleted: feet, eyceed permittedr building a and temporary enceeding a Deleted: one than upon. Deleted: B-i, Deleted: Deleted manimum building more M.1, may 11) sign 8-2, four twetve Table Space Space Not Space siuteenji6l for or than CM-I, may..beperrnitted.per be that M-2, special (4) or an Sigpsadvertismgrand SuperscriptJ AmauimumofonejiLsigs event each sign freestanding shall with each shall permitted of [12) freestanding feet After After: Alter: area ten such business CM-I, forty-five ______M-1, permit Street each be be sign sales (10) in of signs uyre square permitted the permitted height, 0 and 0 0 and siuteen shall sign days..pr pt, the or pt, to pt, shall sign The Subscript feet sign (45) M-2 are be similar PCdtricts, sign Line Line Line bein.g..no property not feet and be on is sign on structure. (15) days. districtsq in attached In pole. enceed required. month. spacing: spacing: business spacing. display dispjayjor limited n the shah square area., The larger fronts RB-i, not for A to to or signs shall be permitted within one hundred (100) feet of each other within the limits of the development except signs required by a public authority for recognized traffic management needs. For commercial centers greater than fifty thousand square feet in floor area and Higher Education (HE-i) District uses, additional directional freestanding signs not exceeding thirty (30) square feet in area and six (6)feet in height shall be permitted within off- street parking areas when such signs provide directional assistance for multiple destinations. For Medical Center (MC)District uses, additional directional freestanding signs not exceeding seventy two (72) square feet in area and ten (10) feet in height shall be permitted within off-street parking areas when such signs provide directional assistance for multiple destinations. A sign permit shall be required. Such additional signs shall be limited to a single unifying logo representative of the development and text on a solid color background and shall be oriented so as to limit primary viewing to persons already on site and not to persons traveling on public and/or private streets provided in lieu of public streets. (1/9/97, Case TA-97-1i, Ord. No. 034-097; 6/9/98, TA-98-02, Ord. No 016-98; 9-9-08 Case TA-08-06, Ord. No. 2008-39) b. Wall or freestanding signs, not exceeding a total of fifty (50) square feet in area nor eight (8) feet in height and not internally illuminated, for the identification of a subdivision or Planned Development or one freestanding sign not exceeding fifty (50) square feet in area nor eight (8) feet in height and not internally illuminated for the identification of an apartment complex containing at least 50 apartment units and covering at least three (3) acres of ground, if located at an entrance to said subdivision, Planned Development or apartment complex. If a said apartment complex fronts upon more than one public street, then one additional freestanding identification sign not exceeding twenty-five (25) square feet in area shall be allowed at a separate entrance. (3/11/97, Case TA-96-08, Ord. No. 007-97; 9/11/01, Case No. TA-01-02, Ord. No. 029-2001) c. Names of buildings, dates of erection, monumental citations, commemorative tablets, and the like when carved into stone, concrete, or similar material or made of bronze, aluminum, or other permanent type construction and made an integral part of the structure. d. Institutional signs setting forth the name or any simple announcement for any public, charitable, educational, or religious institute, located entirely within the premises of that institution. Freestanding signs shall not exceed twenty-five (25) square feet in area. e. Signs painted on or hung behind windows. f. Menu boards shall be permitted in the B-i, B-2, CM-i, M-1, and PC districts for drive-through establishments provided such signs shall be designed and oriented so as to limit primary viewing to persons using drive through facilities and menus shall be displayed only on the drive through standing space side. (3/8/94, Case TA-93-09, Ord. No. 005-94) g. Community Signs, after a finding that such signs are consistent with the provisions of Sections 13-2-1.la and b of this Ordinance. The intent of this

183 section is to permit a limited number of signs at the entryways to the community where multiple noncommercial messages are presented in a planned, orderly manner. Such signs shall not exceed 15 feet in height nor 150 square feet in sign area. No signs permitted under this section shall be more than 1,500 feet from the nearest exit ramp and no two signs shall be within 500 feet of each other. A sign permit shall be required. (10/8/96, Case TA-96-06, Ord. No. 026-96)

18-8-13 SIGNSPROHIBITEDINALLDISTRICTS.The following types of signs are prohibited in all districts: 18-8-13.1 Any sign that obscures a sign display by a public authority for the purpose of giving traffic instructions or directions or other public information. 18-8-13.2 Any sign within the triangular area at the street corner of a corner lot described in Section 18-12 of this Ordinance. 18-8-13.3 Any sign that consists of strings of light bulbs or illumination devices such as LEDs. 18-8-13.4 Any sign or device, other than pennants or banners whether or not any such device has written message content, of which all or any part is in motion by any means, including fluttering, rotating, or other moving signs set in motion by movement of the atmosphere, including but not limited to pennants, propellers, discs, and similar devices. This shall not apply to the hand of a clock or a weather j!gvane of a national, state or local government, or signs in Section 18-8-12.2i. 1 18-8-13.5 Any sign, except official notices and advertisements, which is nailed, tacked, posted, or in any other manner attached to any utility pole or structure for supporting wire, cable, or pipe, or to any tree on any street or sidewalk or to public property of any description. 18-8-13.6 Outdoor advertising signs. 18-8-13.7 Moored balloons, inflatable signs, or other floating signs that are tethered to the ground. 18-8-13.8 Any sign with a minimum clearance of less than eight (8) feet above a walkway or sidewalk or less than fifteen (15) feet above a driveway or alley. (7/10/90, Case TA 90-04, Ord. No. 026-90)

18-8-14 ILLUMINATION. 18-8-14.1 The light from any illuminated sign shall not cause direct glare into or upon any building or property owner other than the building or property to which the sign may be related. 18-8-14.2 No sign shall display flashing or intermittent lights, or other lights of changing degrees of intensity, brightness or color, except a sign indicating time or temperature, with changes alternating on not less than five (5) second cycle when such time or temperature sign does not constitute a public hazard, in the judgment of the Zoning Administrator. 18-8-14.3 Neither the direct nor reflected light from primary light sources shall create a traffic hazard to operators of motor vehicles on public thoroughfares. 18-8-14.4 Signs for developments in the Highway Commercial, B-2 District that include multifamily units, per Section 8-2-20, shall not utilize any internal illumination.

184 External illumination, if any, shall be provided in a down-cast manner or shielded to prevent direct lighting of windows in multifamily units. (9/13/05, Case TA-05-02, Ord. No. 025-2005) 18-8-14.4 Electronic Message Board Signs shall not change message with a greater frequency than once every sixty (60) seconds in order to prevent traffic hazards to operators of motor vehicles on public thoroughfares, with exception of time or temperature changes per Section 18-8-14.2.

18-8-18 DEFINITIONS. 18-8-18.1 Area of Sign The entire area within a circle, triangle, parallelogram, or trapezoids including the extreme limits of writing, reproduction, emblem, or any figure of similar character, together with any frame or other material or color forming an integral part of the display or used to differentiate the sign from the background against which it is placed, excluding the necessary supports or uprights on which such sign is placed. On double-faced signs, only one (1) display face shall be measured in computing total sign area where sign faces are parallel and are at no point more than two (2) feet from one another. 18-8-18.2 Maintenance. The replacing or repairing of a part or portion of a sign made unusable by ordinary wear, tear, or damage beyond the control of the owner or the reprinting of existing copy without changing the wording.

18-8-18.3 Outdoor Advertising Sign . A freestanding or building mounted sign bearing a message which is not appurtenant to the use of the property where the sign is located, and which does not identify the place of business where the sign is located as the purveyor of merchandise or services upon the sign, except signs permitted off-premises for Commercial Centers, as defined and except for directional signs per Section 18-8-18.11. Such signs may also be referred to as billboards or poster panels. (1/9/97, Case TA-97-11, Ord. No. 034-097)

18-8-18.4 Prolecting Signs . A sign attached to and perpendicular to the building wall. 18-8-18.5 Any structure, display device, or representation which is designed or used to advertise or call attention to any thing, person, business, activity, or place and painted, printed, constructed, and displayed in any manner whatsoever out of doors for recognized advertising purposes. However, this shall not include any official court or public notices nor the flag, emblem, or insignia of a government, school, or religious group when displayed for official purposes.

18-8-18.6 Temporary Sign . A banner, pcnnant, poster, or advertising display constructed of cloth, plastic sheet, cardboard, wallboard, or other like materials, intended to be displayed for a limited period of time, and not permanently attached to a building, e4-the ground, or other structure. Only temporary signs provided in Section 18-8- 12.2 may be constructed utilizing wood materials and may be securely affixed to the ground to prevent being set in motion by the atmosphere.

18-8-18.7 Wall Sign . A sign affixed directly to or painted on or otherwise inscribed on an exterior wall or parapet and confined within the limits thereof of any building and which projects from that surface less than twelve (12) inches at all points.

185 18-8-18.8 Roof Line. Either the edge of the roof or the top of the parapet, whichever forms the top line of the building silhouette. Where a building has several roof levels, this roof or parapet shall be the one belonging to that portion of the building on which the sign is located. (3/8/94, Case TA-93-09, Ord. No. 005-94>

18-8-18.9 Roof Sign . A sign erected on the roof of a building. Roof signs shall not project above the roof line. (3/8/94, Case TA-93-09, Ord. No. 005-94) 18-8-18.10 Community Sign. A sign identifying the community and/or recognized historic and/or cultural resources therein provided such signs are situated within or visible from major tourism corridors directly connecting from limited access highways. Signs may include uniformly sized and shaped emblems, logos, insignias or simple nameplates of any civic, fraternal, charitable or religious organization based in the community. (10/8/96, Case TA-96-06, Ord. No. 026-96)

18-8-18.11 Directional Sign . A wall or freestanding sign in or primarily oriented toward a parking lot to identify entrances, exits, and divisions of the lot into sections, and to control vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the lot. In cases where a property owner agrees to close an existing driveway connecting directly to a street to permit shared access per Section 18-6-3.6 of this Ordinance or where an off-premises entrance from the public street in lieu of a direct connection is recommended by a public authority, one (1) off- premises directional sign bearing the name or simple logo of the commercial activity shall be permitted at the connection to the street. (1/9/97, Case TA-97-11, Ord. No. 034-097)

18-8-18.12 Inflatable Sign. A sign capable of being expanded by air or other gas and used on a temporary or permanent basis to advertise a product or event.

18-8-18.13 Monument Sign. Afreestanding sign permanently installed on the property. The base of a monument sign is as wide as or wider than the main sign face. A monument sign is built on-grade in such a manner that the sign and the structure are an integral part of one another.

18-8-18. 14 Electronic message board sign. A sign displaying characters or images that move or change, caused by any method other than physically removing and replacing the sign or its components. This includes a display that incorporates technology to allow the sign face to change the image, such as any display that incorporates LED lights manipulated through digital input, “digital ink” or any other method or technology that allows the sign face to present a series of images or displays.

18-8-18.15 Construction Sign. A sign depicting the name or logo of a contractor, engineer, architect, or other individual or business that is involved with a construction, renovation, or demolition project.

186 18-8-18.16 Real Estate Sign. A sign advertising the sale, lease rent of the property upon which the sign is located.

18-8-18.17 Portable Price or Advertising Sign. A sign that is not permanently affixed to the ground, building or a structure, designed to be on display for a limited period of time. Such signs include sandwich board signs, moveable chalkboard signs, and other signs of a similar nature. These signs shall not include any signs provided under Section 18-8-12.2.

18-8-18.18 Yard Sale Sign. A sign advertising a yard sale, garage sale, estate auction, or similar private sale of personal property and located upon the property where such sale is occurring.

18-8-18.19 Temporary5ales Sign. A temporary sign advertising a temporary sales event as .. Deleted: E,,ent permitted by the Administrator, such as Christmas trees, fireworks, or similar sales event placed upon the property where such event is occurring. Such signs shall not include portable signs permitted in the Primary or Secondary Assessment districts, nor events sponsored by the Old Town Development Board or City of Winchester.

18-8-18.20 Non-commercial Sign. A sign utilized for a non-commercial purpose. Such signs shall not include real estate, construction, or yard sale signs.

SECTION18-19. HOME OCCUPATIONS.(10/11/83, Case 83-06, Ord. No. 034-83)

18-19-S Ayard sale shall be considered a permitted home occupation, subject to the following:

18-19-5.2 Each yard sale may be held a maximum of two consecutive days, and only during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. One two (2) square foot on premises sign advertising the yard sale may be displayed during the hours of 8:00 am. to 6:00 p.m. on the day(s) of the sale. (3/8/94, Case TA-94-01, Ord. No. 006-94)

ARTICLE21 VIOLATIONAND PENALTY

21-2-2 The appeal period for violations of this Ordinance pertaining to the following uses shall be ten (10) days, pursuant to §15.2-2286:

a. Any violation of Sections 18-8-12.1 through 18-8-12.3, pertaining to temporary Jgn. b. Any violation of Sections 18-g-5 through 18-9-5.4, pertaining to yard sales. c, Any violation of Section 18-12, pertaining to visual obstructions.

187 14.2-6

14.2-6.6a 14.2-6.6 14.2-7 14.2-7.6

14.2-7.6a 14.2-8 14.2-8.6 14.2-8.6a 14.2-9 14.2-9.6 14.2-9.6a

AMHERST

CORRI gs installed SJfls Roof prohibited, BERRYVILLE

signs signs Sirs 12.2 Roof 12.2 Roof FAIRMONT NATIONAL signs Roof 12.2

Any temporary

may

may mounted,

mounted may

mounted

mounted should should

should

DORS

violation

per

STREET,

AVENUE with

AVENUE,

AVENUE

not not

installed

installed not

property installed

CORRI

signs,

portable,

events.

the

be be

CEDAR

used, used,

used,

CORRIDOR exception

banners, Section

banners, banners, DOR

AND

MILLWOOD

per

and

accordance

with

property ENHANCEMENT property CREEK property

VALLEY

ARTICLE

temporary

18-17,

and

the

the the

that

GRADE,

AVENUE,

pennants AVENUE pennants exception pennants exception

exception

one

pertaining

with

14.2

accordance

sign signs,

AND

the

DISTRICT

AND CORRIDORS

are

provided

that

that that

provisions

PLEASANT

prohibited,

NORTH

well

one one

with

one with

with

mobile 188 —

sign sign in

sign

the the

the

banners

Section LOUDOUN

VALLEY

storage

provided

provided provisions

provisions

portable that portable

portable

Section.

and 18-8-12.2

RD/CORK

units

STREET

in in and

and and in

pennants

Section

that

temporary that temporary

temporary

and

may

STREET CORRIDORS

Section.

are 18-8- 18-8-

18-8-

be no 23-8-12 12/13/94, TA-02-07, Case Deleted: (10/8/02, Portable TA.99-Oa, Case Case Cr4. SECTION and TA-94-10, No.024-2002)5 TA-02-07, Ord. temnOpajy No. 23-8. Ord 029-99; Ord. FEES. sign No. No.024.2002)11 (10/13/99, 10/9/02, 029-94) or sign when 11 Case

Revised:

Initiating

department

INSURANCE: ADVISORY

The

1. FUNDING PUBLIC

STAFF

ITEM

CITY

Clerk

City

Finance

initiating

TITLE:

Manager

Attorney

COUNCIL/COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATION:

September

l)eparlment

NOTICE

Council that

DEPARTMENT

DATA:

RESOLUTION

BOARD

Department

CITY

must

Proposed

28.

AND

initial

Director’s

See

RECOMMENDATION:

2009

attached.

1)irector

HEARING:

PROPOSED

their

Street

Si 1

review

WINCHESTER,

Maintenance

will

Approval

ORDINANCE

MEETING

place

CITY

order

APPROVED

INITIALS

below,

APPROVAL

COUNCIL Master

189

for

CITY resolution.

OF:

this

ATTORNEY

August

Plan

sequence

AS item

FOR

PUBLIC

AGENDA

20.

FORM:

DISAPPROVAL

INITIALS

2013

placed

VIR(;INIA

transmittal,

HEARING

ITEM

CUT

the

FOR

OFF

the

City

names

DATE:

Council

8%’

c/i

I)ate

DATE

of each

i43

agenda. /

funding

even

BUDGET

repaving.

City’s

Council’s for

desire

Public

maintenance

receive BACKGROUND: directions,

Specifically,

RELATIONSHIP

THE

Re:

To:

Date:

From:

repaving

ISSUE:

street

for

Services

will

the

August 1

Proposed

Perry

Honorable

consideration.

IMPACT:

improved

funding

project

have

most

maintenance

streets.

CITY

order Policy

Presentation

Eisenach,

Department

City

20,

emphasis

priority

for

major

than

Street

street

Agenda

Mayor

2013

streets

STRATEGIC

the

response

$900,000/year

The

impact

COUNCIL

most

Public

streets

Maintenance

program

and

(Council

maintenance

and

within

current

was

and

has

Item

goal

funding

recent

Members

Services

on consideration

selected

prepared

within

the

#5:

Work

PLAN:

FY14

the

City

this

future

survey

mechanisms.

Develop

will

City’s Master

the

Council’s

Session)

plan

budget,

Director

the

two

appropriating

City

years.

Goal

City

residents

overall

required attached

190

years.

Plan

City

Council

ACTION

the

there

Street

be direction

provide

residents

Create

budget.

proposed

maintained

City

Street

Maintenance

significant

future

$900,000

the

Council

the

provided

single

completed

Maintenance

framework

Street

years.

has

funding

budgeted

Livable

City

MEMO

Maintenance

level

Master

This

responded

the

service

and

desired

Strategic

the

December

level

City

Master

Plan

for

guidance

past

for

that

street

with

Master

proposed

Plan

All.

few

should

Plan,

this

residents,

2011,

policy

for

years

for

strong

the

Plan.

the

City the

STREET

future

expected

some

cost

year

Fund

Fund Sharing

projected

repaving

the

program.

poor volumes,

system A

repaving.

arterial

has

During service

approximately

The

City.

priority

significant

proposed

street

streets

order

MAINTENANCE

recommended

very

street

declined.

City

condition

due

where

streets

This

liquid

the

streets.

where

FY2015

Funds

level

three

important

program repaving

currently

and

per

The

repaving

the

figure

period

keep

City

funding

feasible

3-year

asphalt

amount

can

desired

year.

current

years

The

future

and

from

plan

10.4

the

and

combination

residents.

all

change does

—

per

between

that

maintains

Highway

street majority

will

approximately

program

VDOT.

lane

limitations

and

MASTER

FY2016

and

physical

year,

the

all not

funding necessary

help

this

ensure

complete

the

miles

recognizes

fairly

paving

expected

streets

roadways

City

include

2005

amount

of the

extend

The

Maintenance

overall

approximately

repaving

condition

quickly

PLAN

from

pursue

that will

updated

projected

average

the

plan

primary

and

within

streets

and

alleys.

the

street

costs

the

within

that

help

2012,

SUMMARY

has

million

average

and below

required

the

and

life physical

191

the

state.

physical

each

the

funding

the

for

classification

Fund,

been

residents,

the

implement

past

City

the

221

the

City

per

paving.

City

the

can

year.

street

City

annual

The

$720,000

City

developed

condition

the seven

recommended

year.

source

condition

has

asphalt

12.7

implement “catch

AND

economic

lane

inspected

estimated

repaved

City’s

the

good

Street

basis.

lane

years

The

miles

used

significant

(arterial, RECOMMENDATIONS:

crack

up”

City

pavements

and

General

which

projected

physical

miles

primary

conditions,

all repaving

the

The

should

has

all

every

$870,000,

funding

sealing

its

select

streets

public

amount

average

the

collector,

proposed

been

physical

street

backlog

Fund,

based

year

street

funding

condition

streets

repave

within

the

will

from

program

streets

remains

especially

repaving

respectively.

and

streets

need

repaving

the

condition

10.4

3-year

the

7.8

within

sources

local),

streets

that

within

and

Revenue

City’s

General

City.

lane

prioritized

lane

for

the

remain

the

level

the

over

traffic

the

miles

are

in a

3- City

OPTIONS

RECOMMENDED

Approve

Either

FOR

adopt

the

CITY

ACTIONS

attached

COUNCIL:

not

adopt

resolution

FOR

the

CITY

proposed

adopting COUNCIL:

192

resolution.

the

Street

Maintenance

Master Plan.

Resolution

street

future

hereby

WHEREAS,

street

NOW,

Street

WHEREAS,

and

City

maintenance

repaving

street

Maintenance

THEREFORE,

adopts

Council

No.

City

Goal

properly

maintenance

dayof

the

efforts

staff

APPROVAL

Street

efforts.

one Master

—

Al)OPTED

______,2013.

maintaining

have

and

Policy

Maintenance

program.

the

THE

Plan;

prepared

RESOLVED

Witness

intended

Agenda

City’s

RESOLUTION

and

the

COMMON

STREET

the

highest

my a

streets

Item

Master

Street

Common

hand

THAT:

MAINTENANCE

priorities;

used

within

Plan

Maintenance

and of

193

The

Council

the

COUNCIL

the

City

City’s

and

seal

City

framework

used

Master

strategic

the

has

Winchester

MASTER

the

City

been

the

City

Plan

and

plan

City’s

identified

Winchester

which

PLAN

Common

guide

calls

Winchester,

www.

Winchester,

guide

‘H)D

North

Rouss

prioritizes

for

540-667-1

winchesterva.

for

540-722-0782

Council

developing

the

Cameron

residents

future

City

the

City’s

Virginia.

future

_th

815

Flail

22601

Street

a gov

Wiiichster—

Street

pservices%&1€€Z

Maintenance

City

Draft:

Winchester 8/11/13

194

Master Plan

Street

Arterial

street classifications

The

currently

(VDOT)

Figure

This

contained

Existing

significant

that

Plan

responded

maintenance

Introduction

includes

•

Policy

•

the

City

document

should

recently

Carry

Examples:

Serve

Serves

Highest

Maintenance

most

based

Street:

Strategic

maintains

Street

Each

Agenda

responsible in

follows:

funding

Policy

the

receive

recent

the

significant

traffic

adopted

the

are:

this

street

has

longest

City

Strategic

major

Pleasant

Network

type

strong

Direction,

arterial,

the

Plan

been survey

#5:

approximately

Master

the

volume

streets

for

centers past

classified

trip

amount

most

Develop

Goal

prepared

desire

street

City

Valley

maintaining

Plan.

collector,

desires

Plan

few

corridors

was

City

emphasis

Council

#4:

Project

for

years

Road,

selected

residents

activity

is,

221.5

intra-area

improved

the Create

Street

its

and

address

Draft

contains

for

all

Jubal

within

location,

Virginia Priority,

195

lane

the

within

street

local.

completed

Maintenance

Early

residents

public

travel

this

street

miles

the

The

Department

paving.

the

and

goal

and

Drive,

following

streets

definition

City maintenance

its

Livable

streets

and

two

usage.

etc.

December

Funding

the

addition,

policy

within

years.

Master

goal:

single

which

City

for

Transportation

The

agenda

each by

the

City

Mechanism.

for

City

three

2011,

are

the

appropriating

Plan

City

All

type

Council

service

shown

Strategic

the

and

Page

that

has

in 1

Street

with

much

weather. Asphalt

particularly

Street

years The

table

The

Local

Collector

•

street

high breakdown

Maintenance

below.

Street:

Through

Serves

Examples:

Collects

Examples:

neighborhoods,

Provides

Maintenance

roadways

VDOT

traffic

Freeze

Street:

classifications

when

quickly

primarily

and

traffic

volumes

land

and

the

Streets

deteriorate

Tevis

than

length

should

Master

access

thaw

asphalt Classification

from

movements

commercial,

Techniques

Collector

Street,

residential

Arterial

and

within

Total

Local

access

cycles

local

Plan

and

residential

each

updated

over

significant

Shawnee

nearing

the

traffic

streets

are

type

are

time

streets

abutting

City

and

especially

Draft

discouraged

of circulation

neighborhoods

the

and

primarily have

industrial Drive,

196

reflect

street

amount

Length

that

end

channels

land

not

etc.

destructive

have

within

current

221.5

148.3

been

due

48.3

24.9

(lane

within

areas

its

truck

only

useful

the

updated

miles) to

conditions.

vehicle

residential

the

traffic

City

few

life.

asphalt

arterial

cars

usage

Arterial

will

shown

numerous

each

deteriorate

pavement,

system

and

streets

day.

Page

the 2

Street

estimate

streets

For

Estimating

method

City.

program

used

northern

Asphalt

outside

streets

Due asphalt

The

There

asphalt

comparison

the

purposes

•

two

frequently

Maintenance

Asphalt

Reconstruction Chip

Slurry

City

Crack

Patching

are

the

in-house

overlays.

that

contractor.

overlays

streets.

the

generally

street

Virginia

recommended,

several

for

higher

the

Sealing

approximate

Future

will

Sealing

long

Overlay

future

this

maintenance

the on

These

help

are

volume City

maintenance

some

much

term

report,

Master

recent

other the

Street

extend

where

crews

include:

parts

primary

shorter

Street

however,

needed

number

street

years

the

Plan

traffic

Repaving

complete

feasible

methods

the

following

maintenance.

techniques

than

and

the

focus

types, life

basis.

that

and

country,

lane

have

since

Draft

the

used

the

Needs All

197

cycle

this

cycle

miles

not

vast

this

pavement.

asphalt that

relative

cycle

City most

have

report

Slurry

lengths been

length

majority

that

implement

can

within

length

cost

not

overlays

importance

cost

the

seals

for

been

used

effective

City for

the

effective

repaving

and

patching

the

repaving

City

are

should

for

used

crack

chip

primary

completed

maintaining

are

maintenance

for

often

arterial

local

were

seals,

sealing

repave

patching

arterial

use

City

tool

streets.

used

while

streets

Page

each

the

used

and

an 3 Street the of The actual when that

would History including: year If desired the these City table the to repaving originally Maintenance streets be keep during by streets

actual of below repaved truck

the Street Classification the Classification that frequency the residents: frequency Collector Collector Arterial constructed. is Arterial summarizes traffic Street Total Street City Local Total Local found approximately have

period Repaving Master streets volumes, been in for in 2005 Appendix the Plan the in repaving repaved good thru table drainage street every Total Repaving Cycle 2012. physical 1. 2005 above Draft during each Repaved repaving 22.3 37.42 17.07 Lane 198 221.5 62.3 7.87 Length issues, 25 20 15 - Figure street 2012 was years (years) this condition Miles that for achieved, and same 2 may on is the has average, a vary Repaved period. and map Repaving Avg. quality been (2005—2012) Lane each Lane at Each on which Number 4.68 0.98 2.13 a 5.93 10.4 3.22 7.8 1.25 completed numerous It Miles A service street Miles of per Year should detailed Needed shows the Year of of in street level be the factors the within listing Page noted City 4

Street

based

Determining

Priorities the

be over

year

physical

amount

eight

While

within

mentioned repaving

maintained

City’s

easy

an (10.4

Maintenance Traffic

priority, overall Arterial

years,

Street

frequently

the

general,

extended

repaving.

condition. is

the

program

streets

City

below

lane

for

City

previously,

ascertain

Volumes 62.3

Classification

the

following

priority

streets

followed

did

Selecting

that

miles)

the

priority

than

total

will

the

period

accomplish

during

level

Master

carry

This

for

average

continue

are

from

local

lane

criteria:

arterial

desired

for

repaving.

that

repaving

the

Street

(arterial,

traffic

local

the

miles

Plan

time

selecting

major

all

highest

past

number

a residential

streets

numbers

streets.

significant

the

will

that

get

for

deficit

eight

Collector

expected

collector,

streets

worse

mean

volume Draft

the

utilizes

Repaving

are

average years

199

above

lane

streets.

streets

the

amount

within

that

approximately

and

within

streets

local)

miles

has

major

street,

that

the

traffic

that

the

7.8

been

the

that

average

City’s

the

streets

have

and

are

lane

City

repaving

the

City

and

focus

need

most

the

repaved

residents.

higher

and

miles

2.6

the

are

need

within

physical

lane

have

arterial

important

maintained

during

the

per

the

each

the

highest

miles

repaved

the

year,

City’s

condition

priority

the

City

repaved

streets.

year

highest

per

streets

this

past

Pages

will

each

will year

good

not

of As

Street

frequency

approximately

current

this

Based

can

Liquid

The

including:

Costs

priority condition

should

•

make

report,

cost

Maintenance

Volume

Striping

Manhole Asphalt

asphalt

Current

Width

when The

for

Physical

prices)

for

this

than

Street

actual

difficult

repave

repaving

22.3

noted

determining

unit

prices

average

$900,000

milling

needs of

physical

would

Condition

adjustments

street

truck

years

physical

cost,

arterial

Repaving

that

Master

can

due

lane

required

estimate

traffic

cost

condition

the

per

approximately

fluctuate

the

mile

determined

some

condition

street,

total

Plan

its

year

the

priorities

$90,000

street

the

Street

instances cost

but

significantly,

street

long

average

the

classification

Draft

above,

per

each

for

$20

repave

200 term

arterial

can

repaving.

lane

million.

local

street

for

vary

the

costs

all

even

mile

street

Street street

City

based

and

for

Utilizing

has

the

within

taken

should

repaving.

higher

repaving.

will

may

been

streets

into

the

have

multiple

traffic

estimated.

same consideration

average

spending

For

worse

the

overall

volumes.

factors,

year,

purposes

City

physical

repaving

Page

(at

which

higher

of 6

Street

the

Due

Based

The

For

fund

The

Funding

addition

•

state

the

City

following

sidewalk

Street

Snow/ice Maintenance

Street

Traffic

Street

Sidewalk

Asphalt

Curb

all on

Highway

current

receives

these

•

Sources

simply

these

trees

median

sweeping

signs

lighting

Collector/Local

signal Arterial

gutter

street

patching

are

replacements

maintenance

removal

rates,

fiscal

Maintenance

annual

not

and

maintenance

the

maintenance

Master

for

and

repaving,

mowing/maintenance

Streets:

year,

adequate

the

primary

pavement

Street

drainage

funding

total

the

Plan

Streets:

and

Fund

these

funding

amount

to activities,

Repaving

markings

each

system

meet

brief

funds

Draft

$10,970

$18,684

year

sources

the discussion

201

maintenance

the

funding

state

are

from

approximate

$2.8

also

per

that

funding

the

will

lane

million

lane

used

are

state

each:

be:

available

mile

will

for:

$900,000

per

for

Street

year

$2,802,000.

received

annual

the

maintenance.

City

Page

need

from 7

Street

Appendix

detailed

plan

Based

Proposed

$130,000

repaving.

Revenue

sewer

program.

projects

repaved

Over

replacement

The

repaving.

the

for

funding

street

for

future.

City’s

the

Maintenance

VDOT

City’s

mains

City’s

street

listing

are

sharing

the

past

repaving.

General

for

3-year

state

expected

Revenue

Utility

General

the that

priorities

part

projects.

the

six

Street

repaving

funds

current

the

years,

current

Revenue

are

Fund

Street

Master

the

Therefore,

repaving.

specific

Fund

very

Sharing

developed

administered

has

the

overall

continue

fiscal

FY2014

the

old

one

Sharing

Repaving

been

City

Plan

streets

Funds

conclusion

and

year

potential

project.

supplemental

has

developed

budget,

herein

need

funds

(FY2014),

completed

play

Draft

Plan

VDOT to

202

As supplemental

for

the

repaved

key

there

the

and

street

repaving.

the

General

replaced,

funding

role

numerous

utility

another

City

are

presented

repaving,

each

still

will

replacements,

Fund

the

sources

funding

utility

year

funding

many

receive

City’s underground

providing

replacement

proposed

will

source

found

existing

Figure

overall

source

approximately

each

necessary

for

repaving

water $500,000

utility

for

3-year

street

Page

Street

and

8 is

Street

funding

The

complete

summary

•

proposed

following

General

Highway

Maintenance

focused

included

condition

program.

average

recognizes than The

year

the

implement.

plan

over

what

the

focus

3-year

are

than

Fund

the

Maintenance

will

street

and

the

has

that

the

maintain

arterial

the

Average

proposed

Fiscal

the

complete

Master

plan

been

the

3-year

the primary

2016

2014

2015

Year

repaving

necessary

The

10.4

three

Year

City’s

streets,

(and

City

completed

all

Per

following

Plan

lane

plan.

Fund

3-year

and

City

guiding

has

plan

years.

repaving

miles

average

streets

the

Lane

significant

help

program

significant

Streets

are

Repave

Draft

subsequent factors

3-year

This

12.3

12.7 14.3

11.7

Miles

efforts the

203

the

average

repaving

amount

City

proposed

12.7

plan:

good

number

backlog

shown

the

“catch

over

lane

years)

that

condition.

past

proposed

Estimated

significantly

Repaving

Cost

the

miles

primary

1,100,000

$900,000

$950,000

up”

$983,000

several

the

will

residential

needed

streets

past

for

following

require

3-year

The

its

street

several

funding

years

street

each

plan

poor

streets

significant

plan:

repaving

have

table:

year

years

sources

repaving

Page

are

and

per 9

Street

Summary

repaving

Fiscal summary

•

2016

2015

2014

The

streets.

Maintenance average

7.8

recommended

During

City

condition

The

streets

State

prioritized

proposed

Year

order

lane

plan

majority

should

City

and

Revenue

the

within

physical

miles

the

currently

and presented

____

Recommendations

period

keep

General

repave

3-year

system

estimated

Master

the

amount

repaving

Sharing

$720,000

$870,000

all

Streets

condition

670,000

between

City.

maintains

street

service

approximately

where

Fund

Plan

the

funding

the

This Funds

per

the

paving

roadways

10.4

level

table

2005

year.

figure

combination

Maintenance

past

approximately

all

(VDOT)

Highway

lane

desired

sources

Draft

the

plan

Fund

and

below.

$100,000 $100,000

seven

10.4 As

204

100,000

does

miles

within

streets

has this

2012,

lane

and

for

years

not

been

amount

the

within

expected

miles 221.5

the

include

Street

State

Sharing

has

developed

City

proposed

City

street

(VDOT)

been

lane

$130,000 $130,000

$130,000

the

Revenue

repaving

repaved

alleys.

below

streets

Funds

good

City

classification

miles

the

3-year

which

the

has

physical

each

per

residents,

Total

City’s

declined.

public

average

year,

Street

year.

$1,100,000

based

$950,000

Page

Funding

900,000

arterial

the

on 10

Street

Maintenance

pavements

program to

It The

by costs

economic

and

funding

FY2015

limitations City’s

3-year

three

repaving

in complete

(arterial,

significant

ensure

poor

City

the

recommended

very

that

physical

for

General

years

street

repaving

residents.

and

condition

source

sources

the

important

paving.

collector,

program.

that

conditions,

and

from

the

within

and

FY2016

condition

3-year

amount

Master

the

average

Fund,

future

used

program

are

recognizes

the

Street

projected

and

the

physical

that

Street

projected

state.

and

Plan

especially

where

City.

local),

projected

select

the

funding

repaving

all

is Revenue

—

some

12.7

repaving

necessary

condition

streets

The approximately

City that

traffic

feasible

the

lane

streets

Draft

estimated

the

pursue

will

the

will

the

streets Sharing

205

within

volumes,

miles

program

cost

the City

need

General

$720,000

can

required

and

help

all

help

Highway

has

for

the

funding

Funds

streets

change

liquid

implement

street

the

repaving.

is and

extend

City

million

remain

Fund

significant

updated

and

City

from

current

asphalt

Maintenance

remains

from

repaving

fairly

implement

due

the

$870,000,

“catch

per

inspected

VDOT.

priority The

the

quickly

life

year.

crack

physical

backlog

and

funding

plan

over

up”

General

level

the

The

annual

the

The

sealing

respectively.

every

Fund,

and

will

the

overall

condition

primary

its

asphalt

expected

proposed

primary

Page

streets

Fund

future

Street

year

the

basis.

can

11 in

206

Street

(\.s

Existiiig

per

N’laiii(eiiaiiee

Winch Uiy 0 —

— ‘j)(

750

Street

F’i&i.irc

ARTERIAL COLLECTOR

50c

Y1’

Pcter-)

\Viiilicstcr

(‘lassiIlcatioflS)

Network

N’Iastci Mdli City ol \ViIWIlestCr Street,Manitcnaiice Master Plan

Figure2 Streets PaVed

2OO5—2()12

7O CO Winch cster

207 208

2009

2008

2007

2007 2007

2007

2006

2005

Year

Woodstock

Pleasant

Street

Jubal

Patsy

Roosevelt

East

Cameron

Braddock

Woodland

Boscawen

Orchard Millwood

Franklin

Fairmont

Amherst

Loudoun

Peyton

Mosby

Loudoun

Valley

Cork

Valley

North

Allen

Kent

Taft

Ohio

Beau

Pine

Kern

Elm

Lane Repaved

Cline

Early

Valley

Lane

Street

Woodstock

Pleasant

Medical

Featherbed

Jubal

Jubal East

Jubal

Braddock

Parkview

Fairmont

Weems

Piccadilly

Amherst

Orchard

Franklin

Wilson Watson

Loudoun

Wyck

Valley

Cork

Pine

Kent

Kent Repaving

Pine From

Elm

Lane

City

Early Early

Early

Valley

Circle

Valley

Lane

Appendix

Winchester

History

Woodstock

Pleasant South

209

Weems

Papermill

East

Piccadilly

Papermill

Smithfield

Piccadilly

City

Boscawen

End

Entrance

Braddock

Gerrard

City

Orchard

Franklin

Watson

Adams

Lewis

l81 Cork

End

Elm

Kent

End Kent

City

Lane

(east)

Limit

Since

Limit

Valley

Limit

Lane

2005

Length

10,810

2,100

8,030

1,570 6,350

1,760

1,960

4,800

1,770

1,600

1,820

1,655

3,555 1,160

5,900

3,080

4,575

2,880

1,190 2,790

900

710

630 640

790

360

305

555

620

675

675 420

(ft)

Travel

Lanes

2 4

2 2

2 4

2 2

Paved

Miles

Lane

14.98

0.80

0.59

0.67

3.04

0.74

8.31

2.41 0.34

0.61

0.27

0.24

1.34 3.64

0.30

1.38 0.24

0.12

0.14

0.21

0.63 0.23

0.44

0.26

0.16

2.23

2.71

8.19 0.45

2.79

1.35

1.17

1.09

1.73 1.06

2012

2011

2010

2010 2010

2010

2009

Cedar

Pleasant

Papermill

Baker

Fairfax

West

Smithfield

Featherbed

Pall

East

National Highland

Berryville

Fremont Amherst

Amherst

Virginia

Millwood

Piccadilly

Cameron

Weems

Liberty

Gerrard

Cork

Kent

Loudoun

Valley

iames

Gray

Kern

Creek

Kent

Ross

Mall

Street

Lane

Valley

Lane

Valley

Road

Grade

Pleasant

Woodstock

Washington

Smithfield

Woodstock

Cameron

Jubal

Cameron

Pall

City

Berryville

Fremont

Piccadilly

Virginia

Braddock

Cameron

Braddock

Purcell

Liberty

Liberty Gerrard

Weems

Wood

Valley

Loudoun

Baker

Kern

Kent Valley

Valley

Kern

Kent

Mall

Limit

Early

Valley

Entrance

Woodstock Pleasant

210

Town

West

Featherbed

Smithfield

Millwood

Smithfield

Shawnee

Parkview

Piccadilly

Roosevelt

City

National

RRTracks

National

National East

RRTracks

City

Conway

Fairfax

Gerrard

Wood

James

Baker

Kern

Kent

l-81

End

Limit

Lane

Limit

Lane

Run

Valley

MSV

Lane

Total

5,430

1,760

1,215

1,200

1,290

1,980 3,470 4,500

1,200

2,255

1,100

4,750

2,160

2,720

1,200

1,340

1,750

600

900

330

600

825

950

820

750

835

470

685

430

515

590

645

530 300

1 2

2 2

1 2 4

2 4

62.34

14.11

10.89

0.23

0.23 4.11

0.67

0.17

0.23

0.06

0.31 0.45

0.49 0.31

0.36

0.38

0.28

0.45 0.42

3.41 0.85

1.31 0.32

7.38

1.17 0.52

0.18 0.22 0.33

3.60 0.20

0.20

0.82

0.24

0.11

0.45

0.51

2.06 1.33

Vanceright Seldon

Dalton

Circle

Miller

Superior

Longview Baldwin

Broadview

Imperial

RoyalSt Grace

2ndStreet Summit

Pleasant

Jubal

1st Washington

Battaile Millwood

Hawthorne

Shawnee

Jackson

Papermill

Pleasant Armistead

Merrimans

Euclid

Breckinridge Sheridan

Miller

Meadow

Featherbed

2015

Street

2014

Early

Street

Ave

Valley

Ave

Dr Branch

Cir

Lane

Seldon

Miller

Longview

Handley

Baldwin

Paperm

Papermill

PapermillRd

Papermill

PapermiliRd Shawnee Amherst

Papermill

Handley S.

Pleasant

Cedarmeade

Papermill Adams

Armistead

Valley

Meadow

Cork Valley

Meadow

Handley

Pleasant

Loudoun

ill

From

Valley

Branch Branch

City

3-year

Appendix

Seldon

End Meadow

End

Longview

Bruce

End Summit

Imperial Summit

Imperial

End Summit

Jubal

End

City

Boscawen

End

Harvest

City

Cedarmeade

Woodstock

Breckinridge

Merrimens

Handley Seldon

Handley

Pennsylvania

Winchester

Paving

Tracks

Limit

Early

Branch

2 Plan

211

Length

(ft)

2930

1215

2270

1100

4025

1370

1230

3500 2770

1330

1950 3825

1120

3500

4150

3500 3950

2400

1300

1400

1525 1200

1300

1400

475

350 790

860

790

580

765

800

Travel

Lanes

2 2

Miles

Lane

14.34

11.70

0.18

0.13

0.33

0.30

0.46

1.11 0.22

0.30

0.42

0.86

0.29

0.52

0.50

0.47 0.30

0.74

0.42

1.05

1.33 2.90

1.52

0.49

0.91

1.33 2.99 058

0.49

0.53 0.53

1.33 0.45

1.57 0.49

Smithfield Armour

Woodland

Woodstock

Elm

N Green

Baker Whitlock

Hart Whitlock

Bond

Cameron

Cork Tevis

Stewart

Kent

Handley

FY2016

Loudoun

Lane

Dale

Ave

Lane

Valley

Kern

Berryville

Fairfax Smithfield

Berryville

Pleasant Cameron Jefferson

Berryville S.

Kent

Kent Valley

Bond

Braddock

Handley

Loudoun

Ave

Valley

City

Woodland

City

End SLoudoun

Elm S

Pine Whitlock

SLoudoun Southwerk Academy

Baker

Kent

Bellview Boscawen

Loudoun

Tracks

Limit

Limit Limit

212

2190

5820

1240

2240 2600

1465

1685

2770

2325

2570

1210

1950

840

415

810

800

835

570

2 2

12.25

0.83

0.47

0.32

0.85 0.55

2.20 0.64 0.98

0.16 0.30

0.31 0.32

0.22

0.46 0.88

0.74

097 1.05

,Received

Revised:

Initiating

7. 3.

5. 2.

department

The

INSURANCE:N/A FUNDING

ADVISORY PUBLIC

STAFF

ITEM

RESOLUTION

City

CITY

Clerk City

•.-

initiating

Attorney

TITLE:

Manager

RECOMMENDATION:

September

2013

Department

COUNCIL/COMMITTEE

NOTICE

Council

that

DEPARTMENT

DATA:

BOARD

Department

must

Resolution

28,

AND

N/A

initial

Director’s

RECOMMENDATION:

2009

ORDINANCE

Director

HEARING:

PROPOSED

establishing

their

Signa

review

will

Approval

MEETING

place

N/A

policy

CITY

order

INITIALS

below,

br APPROVAL

213

COUNCIL

resolution

PUBLIC

for

Council

N/A

OF:

this

sequence

August

item

approval

FOR

HEARING

AGENDA

20,

DISAPPROVAL

INITIALS

placed

transmittal,

2013

grant

ITEM

applications

CUT

DISCUSSION

the

FOR

OFF

the

City

names

DATE: Council ______

______

DATE

Date

each

08/13/13

agenda. X

will

financial

directed

primary

less

governing

Session

BACKGROUND:

Goal

applications.

RELATIONSHIP

THE

Re: To:

Date:

From:

the

costly

ISSUE:

“Activity

The

accept All

All approved positions

reviewed

All

Grants

All July

Council. addressed

—

concern

desire

the

and

match

8-20-2013

Resolution

Dale

Honorable

grant

grants

grants Develop

City

body

but

23,

grant

requiring

City

CITY

regular

Manager

approval

after

Reports”

and

Iman,

that

which

reviewed

yet

2013

requirements

awards

Council

with

Manager

approved

City

the TO

require

continue

review

provide

Mayor

establishing

high

grant City

resolutions City

shall

meeting

local

following

STRATEGIC

regards

and

Council

resolution

other

behalf

inform

expires

Council

match

Manager

performing

approved

Council

COUNCIL

and

funding

and

City

means

prepare

shall of

prior

insure

the

approve

guidelines

Council

prior

shall

resolution

Members

the

excess

for

grant

acceptable a

establish

City

Work

also

City

part policy

personnel

PLAN:

Common

organization

Council

submission

that

reviewed

authorize

prior

making

applications

authorizing

Session

$25,000

policy

Winchester.

the

for

established

proper

resolution

with

annual

Council.

submission

City

policy

Council

and

the

all

Council.

for

of which

214

commitment

City

approved

grants

requirement

said

the

budget

Council

checks

ACTION

grant

regarding

has

Manager

submission

application.

Council

approval

all

awarded

that

process not

reviews

by Following

grant

the

and

been

that

City

policy

application

discussed

“do shall

the

balances

the

approved

Council applications

the

Council

apply

that

all

City

not

City grant

application

review

the

things

require

continue

would

for

include:

discussion

MEMO

applications

Winchester

are

the

necessary”

soon grants. and

soon

additional

annual

made

shall

funding be

noprtd The incorporated.

current

thereafter

approval

both

thereafter

be more

budget;

through

aware

reviewed

the

This

action

apply

practice

efficient

Work

position

Council

shall

possible. of

regular concern

for

possible.

and

grant

City

and

local

and the

review

RECOMMENDATIONS:

OPTIONS:

important preparation.

resolution.

attendance/presentation

Council of The

(5) administrative

BUDGET

developing

hours

recommended

adoption

Adopt

Continue

Make

and

Action

projects

IMPACT:

approval

This

staff

changes

the

and

Memorandum

addition

high

with

the

new

attached

time

and

that

staff

above

the

performance

proposed

and/or

for

grant

issues.

Council

time

Council

status-quo.

each

resolution

referenced

Council

applications.

additions

required

(CAM);

grant

adopt

policy

members

organization.

Work

application.

and

reviews

the

will

policy

process

policy.

the

free

attached

Session

are

will

proposed by

215

required

The

significantly

City

grant

Council

The

and

resolution

current

Manager

process

Council

applications

policy.

and

review

practice

reduce

creating

staff

involves

meeting;

and

time

thus

City

the

involves

act

the

Attorney;

formal

and

contributing

amount

concentrate

preparation

the

agenda

approximately

policy

proposed

staff

for

the

Council

goal five

resolution

supports

attached

BE WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

NOW

WHEREAS,

the

policy;

adopting

FURTHER

THEREFORE

and,

City

RESOLVED

Council

the

proposed

acknowledges

desires

RESOLVED

supportive

that

grant

the

streamline

that

policy

RESOLUTION

the

grant

the

will benefits

216

City

the

research

remain

its

Council

entirety;

grant

grants

and

approval

full

and,

provide

the

awards;

force

City

process

upon

and,

the

Winchester

the

City

adoption

adopting

Winchester.

hereby

the this

Guidelines All

Scope

This

performance

monitoring This

applications

contributing

The

Rationale efficiency

Purpose Grant

City

policy purpose

policy

through

The

All

departments

Council All

reviewed funding

application

budget;

rnsrequiring Grants

All

additional

Submission

apply

while

grant

grants

promotes

will

City

and

while

obligations

significantly

the

regular

this

shall

Manager

for

eotn associated reporting

continuing

approval

and

that

which

reviewed

action

decreasing

and

goal

position

policy

soon

and

the

approved

require

“Activity

provide

Process

reviewed

soon

divisions required

by strategic

shall

resolutions

thereafter

local

developing

and

reduce

City

Council’s

thereafter

insure

inform

grant

positions

streamline

match

Council

approved

funding

Council.

Reports”

and

are

maximization

Council

and

the

awards

that

with

Grantors

shall

the

approved

required

in a

amount

need

resolution

possible.

high

Reporting

for

after

excess

proper

City

grant-funded

also

the

resolution

possible.

personnel

other

part

performance

the

Council

City

are

authorize

behalf

review

checks

grant

administrative

adhere

authorizing

satisfied

$25,000

means

grant City

217

the

prior

Winchester’s

Requirements

with

and

Council

expires

programs

annual

and

all

revenue

the

acceptable

organization.

which

per

a act

grants

this

balances

City

requirement

submission

the

grant

budget

shall

prior

procedure.

and

of Manager

has to

and

submission

the

awarded

grant

Winchester.

the

obligations.

to staff

not

are

proposed

ensures

process

submission

reviewed

Council.

City

application

been

incorporated.

time

that

to said

and

“do

the

that

the

shall

approved

required

application. resolution

improves

and

all

City

deliverables

application of

not

things

process

approved

continue

grant

require

Winchester

financial

thus

necessary”

process

the

shall

improve

annual

and

City

grant be _____

City of Winchester,Virginia

PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM

CITY COUNCIL/COMMITTEE MEETING OF: August 22. 2013 CUT OFF DATE:

RESOLUTION X ORIMNANCE PUBLIC HEARING

ITEM TITLE: FY 2013 Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Grant (SAFER) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of City staff that Council approves our request to apply for the 2013 SAFER grant. If funding is not received through this grant effort, we willinclude this request during the normal course of the budget process.

PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING:

ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION:

FUNDING DATA: The only general fund request would be for some associated pre employment hiring costs. Grantees must maintain operational staffing are the level that existed at the time of award as well as the SAFER-funded Staffing for the two-year SAFER Grant Period of Performance.

INSURANCE:

The initiating Department Director will place below, in sequence of transmittal, the names of each department that must initial their review in order for this item to be placed on the City Council agenda. The Director’s initials for approval or disapproval address only the readiness of the issue for Council consideration. This does not address the Director’s recommendation for approval or denial of the issue.

INITIALS FOR INITIALS FOR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL DATE

1. Finance 2. 3.

5. City Attorney

6. City Manager 7. Clerk of Council

‘? I itiatin hartment Director’s Signature: ‘/9 Ieceft,c / Date °4U& 2220,3 APPROVEDASTOFORM:

218

for

during

OPTIONS:

RECOMMENDATIONS:

general

Staffing

maintain

BUDGET

year reduced

allow firefighters.

Objectives

THE

BACKGROUND:

RELATIONSHIP receive

Manager

To:

(SAFER) Re:

From:

Date:

the

used

staffing

ISSUE:

the

increased

2013

basis.

covered City

The

Efforts

City Application

City grant

Salary

for

fund

funding

for

operational

city

August

Allen

Staffing

Honorable

IMPACT:

has

normal

the

would

must

cost

four

SAFER

August

plan.

funding

performance

CITY

request

responsible

The

should

prepared

and

two-year

Baldwin,

years

22,

staffing

new if

maintain

course for

and

The

have

grant.

deadline

benefit

The

deadline

grant

uniforms

30,

grant.

Mayor

staffing

Adequate

2013

for

STRATEGIC

firefighter

when

would

guidelines

general

SAFER Federal

2013.

Fire

the

made

for

This

for

positions

period.

cost

request

COUNCIL

the

and

application

August

awarded

the

are city

for

Chief

funding

and

fire

all

Fire

budget

for

Winchester

fund

Members

Grant

pre-employment

recommendation

the

positions

the funds

SAFER

hire

and

two

for

personal

are

(No

change

hiring reimbursement

PLAN:

and

30,

for

level

2013

request

some

new

years,

emergency

Period

where

process.

for

City

one

not

2013.

Emergency

follows:

the

grant

e firefighters new

that

firefighters this

from

Staffing

Goal

protective

received

funds

year

Fire

City

associated

while

approximately

for

City

needed

existed

grant.

Performance.

and

the

after

Council

hiring

funding

of needed

219

—

for

responses.

for

Develop

Response

through

City grant

ACTION

Rescue

Winchester

the

each

within equipment

the

continue

Adequate

cost

pre-employment

the

staff

years;

would

grant

salaries

performance

are

for

year

$400,000

(testing,

time

this

assist

Department,

that

salary

currently

Grant

High

days performance

Funding

these

grant

(PPE)

Fire

Council

implement

and

covered

with

award

Preforming

and

physical,

(SAFER)

increased

items

for

effort,

and

benefits

being

period

and

seeking

from

staffing.

benefits)

salary

hiring

approves

under

MEMO

Rescue

Emergency

are

the

period

awarded

the

well

etc...)

this

100%

from

City

considered

initial

and

approval

costs.

will

the

years).

council

Additional

grant

This

ends.

Organization

our

Department

include

DHS

during

direction

benefits.

the

physicals

the

request

Response

would

Grantees

SAFER-funded endorsed

Funding

from

grant.

the

change

this

staffing

benefits. of

council

The

quarterly

allow

two

are

request

the

for

would

apply

Grant

multi-

must

from

only

year

also

four

City

will

for to

day

Resolution

necessary

the

City

record

support

maintaining

providing

funds

public;

and

Grant

software. of

Winchester

regular I,

and

day

iardware

Karl

Fire receipt

the

received

management

ADOPTED

to WHEREAS,

______,

WHEREAS,

and

NOW

Programs

importance session

same

Virginia

Winchester,

documents

assist

No. of

Van

apply

Witness

Fire

the

variety

funding

adopted

THEREFORE

2013-.

Diest,

submitted would

required

and

with

for

for Fire

the

system

2013

2013.

Rescue

to the

the

if the

Deputy

the

funding

Virginia

the

hand

critically

_____day

Incident

emergency

execute

the

records

Winchester

Common that

2014

the

used

Winchester

Common

software;

grant

would

and

2014

the

Common

Clerk

the

for

Virginia

this

does

and

need Reporting

Winchester

the

following

VFIRS

purchase

services

the

grant

selected,

Council

Fire

documentation;

seal

Council

and

hereby to

the

Fire

RESOLVED,

Fire

Co,uicil

Fire

maintain

and

application.

place

T-Tardware Common

220

Deputy

Kari

System

the

and

hardware

and

recognizes

ieand Fire Resolution

and

Rescue

Incident of

support

prevent

2013.

City

application

the

Rescue

authorizes

Rescue

records

Clerk

Van

the

City

of and

Department

Council,

Grant.

Rescue

Reporting

that

the

City

Dies!

Winch

2014

the

electronic

support

Department

and

loss

the

with

the application

Winchester

the

importance

true

Department

ester,

Hardware

hereby

protect

Winch

Common

the

City

the

System

and

our

life

seeking

grant

Virginia

record

Manager

ester,

cerqfy

the

current

exact

and

for

Council

2014

Council

Grant

and

privacy

committed

public

property

assembled

approval

the

awarded management

the

cop)’

Department

authorizes

electronic

Hardware

this

sign

VFIRS

safety

and

one

the

all

to in