Middleburg Humane Foundation Staff_Report_9-26-13-3

7/29/2019 Middleburg Humane Foundation Staff_Report_9-26-13-3

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/middleburg-humane-foundation-staffreport9-26-13-3 1/22

1

Department of Community Development

Staff Report

Subject: Middleburg Humane Foundation – Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPAM13-MA-005); Rezoning (REZN13-MA-004); Category 11 Special Permit to Allow an Animal

Shelter (SPPT13-MA-020); Category 13 Special Permit to Allow an Animal Shelter

(SPPT13-MA-021); Category 13 Special Permit to Allow a Veterinary Clinic (SPPT14-MA-007); Category 1 Special Exception to Allow a Residential Duplex (SPEX13-MA-

023); and a Category 31 Special Exception to Waive the Public/Central Water

Requirement (SPEX13-MA-024)

Date: September 26, 2013

Topic:

The owner, Middleburg Humane Foundation, assisted by the Applicant, Grove Lane LLC, is seeking

to develop the 23.07 acre site for an animal shelter.

Project Update:

The Planning Commission held a work session and Public Hearing on July 25, 2013. TheCommission postponed action for up to 90 days with the public hearing left open. Since July 25,

staff has received an additional Special Permit application for a veterinary clinic (SPPT14-MA-007).

Staff also received text for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a resubmittal dated September

10, 2013, that included a proffer statement, elevations, the applicant’s suggested revisions to thedraft conditions, and revised plans. All of these are attached. Staff also received comments from the

Water and Sanitation Authority (WSA) and Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), and

these are included within the staff report.

Summary of Applications Received:

1. CPAM13-MA-005 - A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to permit an agricultural use within

the Marshall Service District;2. REZN13-MA-004 – Rezoning of approximately 23.0763 acres from R-2/R-4 (Residential) to

RA (Rural Agriculture);3. SPPT13-MA-020 - Category 11 Special Permit to allow an animal shelter (public and quasi-

public);

4. SPPT13-MA-021 - Category 13 Special Permit to allow an animal shelter (commercial);

5. SPPT14-MA-007 - Category 13 Special Permit to allow a veterinary clinic;6. SPEX13-MA-023 - Category 1 Special Exception to allow a residential duplex; and

7. SPEX13-MA-024 - Category 31 Special Exception to waive the public/central water

requirement.



2

Topic Description:

The Middleburg Humane Foundation is seeking to relocate its operations to this 23.07-acre site. The proposal includes an administrative building (main structure) of approximately 12,200 square feet

that will include space for a veterinary clinic, retail shop, grooming/training services and

kennel/shelter services. (Note: the number, location and sizes of the proposed buildings are no longer

shown on the plans and are not proffered, so are not binding). The veterinary clinic will notgenerally be open to the public; it is planned to provide services for shelter animals, a spay/neuter

program and special medical services for the low income client program, although these limitations

are not proffered. The retail shop may be approximately 12’x12’ in order to sell incidental suppliesto shelter customers. The proffer statement limits the use of the site for a humane facility and

ancillary shelter purposes by a non-profit organization with the ability to construct two apartments in

the upper level of the barn or a free-standing duplex structure, for the purpose of housing on- premises staff.

Other likely structures, besides the administrative building and the barn, include three turn-out shedsin the paddock areas, a poultry area, a bunny barn, hay storage, a livestock area and an animal

quarantine area. The barn may be 48’x34’ with eight stalls; two of the eight stalls may be 24’x12’and used to store and sell donated tack.

The Land Use Plan entitled “Concept Development Plan – Middleburg Humane Foundation at

Cunningham Farm” prepared by Urban, Ltd., dated August 2013 and sealed September 6, 2013 is

the only attached plan that is proffered. An area of primary buildings and parking is shown on the plan. “Primary Buildings” are not defined. The remainder of the site is labeled Fields. The Plan

shows three potential access points; one on Salem Avenue extended and two on the future

north/south road. While future streets are shown on the proffered plan, the applicant does not intendto build these, but rather to use the existing access road from Main Street with a Moderate Volume

Commercial Entrance at Main Street directly across from Free State Road. The proffered plan also

shows the approximate location of the proposed fences and potential initial SWM/BMP Facilities. Afuture trail, by others, is shown on the northern end of the site.

The Middleburg Humane Foundation has 13 employees; four work full-time. It also has 80 active

volunteers of whom between two and six are on-site on a daily basis. Proffered hours of operationare Monday through Sunday 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. The owner estimates that care will be provided

for not more than 200 animals per day. The Foundation does not intend to use the facility for

fundraising events, which are normally held off-site. Past events had a maximum of 400 attendeesoff-site. The proposed facility may be used occasionally as an open house for fall stable tours and

other community events, typically only a few times per year. The special events are proposed to have

hours extended beyond 6:30 p.m.

Architectural elevations and building materials entitled “Middleburg Humane Foundation,” prepared

by Franck & Lohsen, Architects, and dated August 27, 2013 (the “Architectural Renderings”) are

also proffered. It is assumed, but not proffered, that these represent the main structure. The buildinghas the appearance of a large barn, with a variety of details and materials (such as wood siding,

board and batten, concrete boards, etc.) allowed. The proffers state that all structures shall be

designed and constructed in substantial conformance with the Architectural Renderings, and shallemploy designs reflecting vernacular agrarian structures typically found in rural areas of Virginia.



3

The property will be served by public water and sewer for all human use through the Fauquier County Water and Sanitation Authority (FCWSA). Water taps have been secured and are estimated

to be less than five. One well for animal use is sought. Approval of the Category 31 SpecialException is required to allow use of this private well inside of the Marshall Service District. The

applicant is also seeking another well, in addition to the one already on-site. The proffers indicate

that one of the wells will be for animal use with no cross connections to any water supply for human

consumption, and that the well not used to provide water for the animals may be used to provideadditional potable water supply for the use of adjacent properties, if capacity exists. The proffers do

not mention transference of such a well to WSA, and WSA has not yet commented on this new

proffer.

Staff would note that this property was gifted to the Middleburg Humane Foundation in December

of 2012 by Grove Lane LLC. A restriction was placed on the deed that the site must be used “as anon-profit farm shelter, and for no other purpose.” In the event the property should cease to be used

as a non-profit farm animal shelter for a continuous period of six (6) months, the property will revert

in fee ownership to The Luminescence Foundation, Inc.

Location, Zoning and Current Land Use:

The 23.07-acre parcel is located on a private access road to the north of the intersection of Free StateRoad and Grove Lane, behind West Main Street (Route 55) in Marshall. Approximately 13.12 acres

of the site is Zoned R-4, and 9.95 acres is zoned R-2. The site is currently used as agriculture for

farming (hay and cows).

Zoning Map



4

Surrounding Zoning and Current Land Use:

The property is surrounded on all sides by a 122.85-acre parcel owned by Grove Lane LLC. To thesouth and east, the Grove Lane LLC parcel is zoned R-4. To the north and west, the Grove Lane

LLC parcel is zoned R-2. The surrounding property is used as agriculture for farming (hay and

cows). Beyond the Grove Lane LLC property to the south is West Main Street, which is zoned

Commercial–Neighborhood (C-1) and contains a mix of commercial, residential and governmentaluses, including the Marshall Volunteer Rescue - Station 09. Beyond the Grove Lane LLC property to

the east is the Salem Avenue area, which is zoned C-1 and R-4, and contains the Marshall Ruritan

Club, the former Lone Oak Swim Club (now owned by Grove Lane LLC), and residential uses.

Comprehensive Plan/Land Use:

The property is located within the Marshall

Service District. The southern portion of the

site is designated as part of the Salem AvenueCorridor and a small portion of the Western

Gateway. The northern portion of the site isdesignated as Residential (North). In the

Salem Avenue Corridor, the plan calls for amix of uses, primarily residential and

commercial (see sketch to the right). The Plan

specifically calls for the extension of SalemAvenue westward and a new grid of streets

connecting Main Street with existing

subdivisions in the north end of the servicedistrict. In the Residential area, the plan seeks

a variety of housing types interspersed throughout each neighborhood. The plan calls for a grid

network and Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) throughout the Service District. Traditional Neighborhood Design includes a mix of uses, buildings placed close to the street, sidewalks and

street trees. The plan further calls for architecture in keeping with the Piedmont Virginia vernacular.



5

Future Land Use Plan

Environmental and Historic Resources:

There is no floodplain on the site. The property contains two streams, both unnamed tributaries of

Goose Creek. Only the stream in the southwest corner shows up on county maps. However, the

submitted plans do show the other stream on the north end of the site. Staff would note that thestreams are deeply incised. While county maps do not indicate any wetlands, WSSI prepared a

wetlands delineation study in 2011. Wetlands have been identified, and these are shown on the plans

submitted by the applicant to the County.

The site is near to, but outside of, the Marshall National Register Historic District and the Goose

Creek/Cromwell’s Run Rural Historic District. The site is also near to the Strother-Utterback House,more recently known as Molly’s Folly. This 1783 house is on the adjacent Grove Lane LLC property

to the west, but it should be noted that this house was moved to its current location in 1965.



6

Environmental and Historic Resources

CPAM13-MA-005 - Proposed Change to the Marshall Service District Plan:

The owner is not proposing to change the land use designations for its property. Rather, it is

requesting that the Marshall Service District Plan text be amended to permit a rural agricultural usewithin the service district at this location. Since the Planning Commission meeting in July, the

following language has been proposed for inclusion on page 44 of the Marshall Service District Plan

at the end the section titled “a. Residential – North”:

The southernmost portion of the Residential North area, and a portion of the Salem Avenue

Corridor and the Western Gateway, is a suitable location for a humane facility. Such a

humane facility, appropriately sited, designed, and landscaped, would serve the wider agricultural area of Northern Fauquier County. It would also contribute to the strategy of

reducing the residential buildout in this portion of the Service District.

It is important to note that this is not a service district expansion, so many of the criteria used toevaluate Comprehensive Plan Amendments are not relevant to this case.

With any Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission must consider whether a caseis made for any of the following circumstances:

a. Creative Concepts - presentation of innovative approaches to land use not currently

contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan.



7

b. Oversights - the subject property was omitted or misinterpreted in the original plan

review process.

c. Change in Circumstances - there has been a significant change in surrounding land use

since the original plan review process.

d. Goals - the goals of the plan would be better met with the proposed modification, or

better implemented if such amendments are adopted.

e. Hardship - an applicant has a unique hardship on the subject property not identified in

the original plan review process.

In this case, the applicant believes that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is compatible

with the Comprehensive Plan and is warranted due to the creative transition this use provides from

the commercially designated uses between Salem Avenue and Grove Lane/West Main Street to thefuture residential development on the surrounding Grove Lane LLC property. The owner further

believes that as compared to a residential use, the proposed land use also better implements thefollowing goals from the Marshall Service District Plan:

• Goal #1 – Provides an agricultural related use within the service center for thesurrounding community;

• Goal #5 – Maintains an agricultural related use as the underpinning of the local culture;and

• Goal #20 – Provides environmental balance and sustainability by reducing landdisturbance and increasing open space.

In evaluating the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the adopted Marshall Service District Plan is a

key consideration. As noted earlier in this report, in the Salem Avenue Corridor, the plan calls for amix of uses, primarily residential and commercial. The Plan specifically calls for the extension of

Salem Avenue westward and a new grid of streets connecting Main Street with existing subdivisions

in the north end of the service district. In the Residential area, the plan seeks a variety of housingtypes interspersed throughout each neighborhood.

A number of more general policies in the plan both promote and discourage the proposed use. Three

of these are included in the Applicants’ Statement of Justification and are already noted above.

Among others:

• Areas designated as service districts are designed to accommodate the highest densityresidential, commercial, and industrial uses in the County.

• The service districts should also provide sufficient land for future commercial andindustrial growth and for public facilities such as schools, roads, and parks.



8

• In the year 2050, Marshall will be known as “The Town That Works.” It will be theservice center for the surrounding agricultural community, where agriculture and

history-based tourism underpins the local economy and culture.

• If Marshall’s ultimate build-out is to be reduced to 5,000 residents, while maintainingthe policy direction for mixed use in the Main Street and Salem Avenue corridors and

TND incentives in the residential neighborhoods, it will be necessary to reduce the by-right residential development potential on the periphery of the town. The most likely

areas for such reductions are on the undeveloped northern periphery in the Residential –

North neighborhood, and in the Residential – East neighborhood where significant

undeveloped land remains.

• Identifying viable institutional uses for some of the residentially zoned land in theResidential – North and Residential - East neighborhoods also would reduce the sheer

number of potential residential units.

When considering in-fill development within service districts, the Planning Commission should also

consider the effects on adjacent properties; methods in which the in-fill development may be buffered to alleviate interface problems with adjacent properties; and whether development is

occurring in a consistent, orderly manner. This is an unusual case because the immediately

surrounding property is undeveloped. The Planning Commission must assume that the surroundingneighborhood in the future will be composed of by-right development consistent with the R-4 and R-

2 zoning regulations. The applicant has applied for a Preliminary Plat for a portion (Windy Hill

Foundation) of the Grove Lane LLC site, and the Commission will likely review this plat nextmonth. The applicant has also provided a Conceptual Plan of how the wider Grove Lane LLC

property will develop (see attached), but this is not a proffered document and all details have not

been formulated. (Buffering of adjacent properties is considered in the rezoning analysis below.) As

to the orderly development of the service district, this again is an unusual case; the applicant is

seeking to allow an agricultural use within the service district. Had the applicant sought a ruraldesignation on the edge of the service district, the boundaries could have been correspondingly

reduced.

The transportation network is also an important consideration in the review of a Comprehensive Plan

Amendment. While the roads surrounding the site (which are shown on the plans) are consistent withthe Comprehensive Plan, they are not a part of this site and the applicant and owner are not intending

to build any of these roads. The roads and trails are discussed in greater detail in the rezoning

evaluation below.

A Comprehensive Plan Amendment requires a fiscal impact analysis of the proposed use. In this

case however, staff did not require this analysis as an agricultural use has a lower financial impact onthe county than the currently zoned residential use.

REZN13-MA-004 - Proposed Rezoning to Rural Agriculture:

The applicant is seeking to rezone the property currently zoned Residential (R2 and R4) to Rural

Agriculture (RA). By-right RA uses include a livestock farm, cattle feed lot, greenhouse, etc.



9

However, as noted above, the proffer statement limits the use of the site for a humane facility andancillary shelter purposes by a non-profit organization with the ability to construct two apartments in

the upper level of the barn or a free-standing duplex structure, for the purpose of housing on- premises staff.

In the last staff report, greater detail on the building locations and landscaping was sought. The

location of the buildings is still general. Proffers now require that open off-street parking and loadingareas be constructed no closer than 25 feet from any lot line of residentially zoned property and to be

screened in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Also, not less than 15% of the

Area of Primary Buildings and Parking on the proffered plan shall consist of tree canopy sufficientto comply with the coverage requirement of Z.O. §7-603(1)(b).

As noted previously, the proposed zoning is not consistent with the adopted plan, so the applicant isseeking to change the language in the Marshall Plan to support this use. Given the surrounding

residential zoning, staff strongly suggests that the applicant considers proffering enhanced

landscaping and setbacks to mitigate the impacts of an animal shelter on future neighbors. Providingthe sidewalks and street trees called for in the plan would also serve to continue the proposed pattern

of Traditional Neighborhood Design and give continuity to the streetscapes.

The Marshall Plan calls for architecture in keeping with the Piedmont Virginia vernacular. Asdescribed previously in this report, elevations and design proffers are now included.

The Marshall Plan calls for a grid network throughout the Service District and specifically calls for the extension of Salem Avenue westward and a new grid of streets connecting Main Street with

existing subdivisions in the north end of the service district. These roads are shown bordering the

Middleburg Humane Property. The owner and applicant are not intending to construct these roads.Staff is concerned that these roads may not get built. The applicant is only intending to provide a

gravel driveway to the site until the roads are constructed by others.

The Marshall Plan calls for Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) throughout the Service

District. Traditional Neighborhood Design includes buildings placed close to the street, sidewalks

and street trees. As with the roads, the owner and applicant are not intending to provide the

sidewalks and street trees.

A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is not required for this development; the anticipated traffic counts

are too low. Staff would point out that the applicant has agreed to prepare a TIA for the entire GroveLane LLC Property, and will be including the Middleburg Humane site in this TIA.

The Marshall Plan and the Connections Plan show trails in this area. Trails are shown bordering the property, but the owner and applicant are not intending to provide these. See Parks and Recreation

comments below on the location of these trails.

The Marshall Plan calls for a regional study of stormwater management. This site could be part of aregional stormwater plan. The Marshall Plan also seeks to go beyond merely protecting key

environmental resources included in the Zoning Ordinance (floodplains, wetlands, steep slopes), and

seeks to carefully integrate environmental features into new development. Improving and protectingthe streams would be consistent with these goals. The applicant has proffered to maintain a 35 foot



10

undisturbed stream valley buffer measured from the stream bank for the interior of the Property. Inconnection with such stream valley buffer, the Applicant proffers to construct a fence adjacent to

such buffer, provided that such fencing shall be constructed on the approximate interior line of such buffer. While well–intentioned, this proffer needs clarification. Additional fencing, to the extent

necessary to secure animals on-site is also proffered.

Additional proffers not already noted above cover animal and medical waste and are further analyzed below with the relevant Special Permits.

Special Exception Analysis:

The Special Permit and Special Exception applications must comply with General Standards for Special Permits and Special Exception Uses, found in Section 5-006, of the Fauquier County Zoning

Ordinance.

5-006 General Standards for Special Permits and Special Exception Uses

In addition to the special standards set forth hereinafter for specific uses, all special permitand special exception uses shall also satisfy the following general standards:

1. The proposed use shall be such that it will not adversely affect the use or

development of neighboring properties. It shall be in accordance with the applicable

zoning district regulations and the applicable provisions of the adoptedComprehensive Plan. The location, size and height of buildings, structures, walls and

fences, and the nature and extent of screening, buffering and landscaping shall be

such that the use will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and/or

use of adjacent or nearby land and/or buildings or impair the value thereof.

The applicant is seeking a Comprehensive Plan Amendment as part of this suite of applications. The surrounding properties are planned for residential and mixed-use, and all are zoned residential. Anagricultural use, particularly one involving animals, is not typically promoted in a Service District.

As stated elsewhere in this report, the county will need a strong assurance that the project would not

negatively affect surrounding residential properties.

2. The proposed use shall be such that pedestrian and vehicular traffic generated will not

be hazardous or conflict with the existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood

and on the streets serving the site.

The pedestrian and vehicular traffic, estimated at 32 vehicle trips per day, associated with the

proposed use are low and will not conflict with the surrounding neighborhood. The owner and applicant are not proposing to build any roads or trails. The county will need assurance that these

will be built.

3. In addition to the standards which may be set forth in this Article for a particular

category or use, the BZA and Board may require landscaping, screening, yard

requirements or other limitations found to be necessary and appropriate to the proposed use and location.



11

Given the unusual request for an agricultural use involving animals within a service district, the

Planning Commission will want to carefully consider landscaping, screening, setbacks and other restrictions to ensure compatibility with the neighborhood.

4. Open space shall be provided in an amount at least equal to that specified for the

zoning district in which the proposed use is located.

Open space is not required with the proposed use.

5. Adequate utility, drainage, parking, loading, and other necessary facilities to serve the

proposed use shall be provided. Low impact development techniques are encouraged

by the County and shall be incorporated into the site and facility design when deemedappropriate by the applicant after consultation with appropriate county officials.

Parking and loading requirements shall be in accordance with the provisions of

Article 7.

All required facilities will be evaluated at the Site Plan stage.

6. Signs shall be regulated by the provisions of Article 8, except as may be qualified inthe Parts that follow for a particular category or use. However, the BZA and the

Board, under the authority presented in Section 007 below, may impose more strict

standards for a given use than those set forth in this Ordinance.

No signs are proposed at this time. All signs must conform to the Zoning Ordinance. Given this

agricultural use in a service district, the Planning Commission may want to reflect upon signsallowed in the RA District to see if these are applicable in this location.

7. The future impact of a proposed use will be considered and addressed in establishinga time limit on the permit, if deemed appropriate. Existing and recent development,

current zoning and the Comprehensive Plan shall be among the factors used in

assessing the future impact of the proposed use and whether reconsideration of the

permit after a stated period of time would be necessary and appropriate for the protection of properties in the vicinity and to ensure implementation of the

Comprehensive Plan.

No time limit is proposed.

8. The proposed use shall be such that air quality, surface and groundwater quality andquantity, are not degraded or depleted to an extent that would hinder or discourage

the appropriate development and/or use of adjacent or nearby land and/or buildings or

impair the value thereof.

The proposed well must meet County and Health Department standards. Conditions have been

proposed to address this. The applicant has proffered fencing along the streams and the disposal of

animal and medical waste. The Planning Commission should consider mitigation of the deeplyincised streams.



12

9. Except as provided in this Article, all uses shall comply with the lot size, bulk

regulations, and performance standards of the zoning district in which located.

The use complies with applicable standards of the proposed RA Zoning District.

5-100 CATEGORY 1 RESIDENTIAL USES

5-106 Standards for Duplex Dwellings

1. Such a structure shall not be located on a lot smaller than twice the minimum lot sizefor conventional developments in the zoning district wherein the lot is located.

The minimum conventional lot size in the proposed RA District is two acres. Two times that is four

acres. The site is 23 acres and meets this standard.

2. In any sensitive situation or those involving any possible detriment to the character of

an existing community or subdivision, approval shall not be granted unless it can beassured that such problems shall not result. In a location where such a use is

otherwise appropriate, conditions may be necessary and shall be imposed which will

further preclude adverse impacts, such as the following:

Architectural features of the structure shall conform with the single family character of the neighborhood (e.g., no additional front door, no second garage).

Staff has very little information about the proposed duplex, other than that it is presumed to be in the

Area of Primary Buildings and Parking. The proposal does not include enough detail to evaluatethis standard. The proffers do state that all structures shall be designed and constructed in

substantial conformance with the Architectural Renderings, and shall employ designs reflecting vernacular agrarian structures typically found in rural areas of Virginia.

5-1100 CATEGORY 11 PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC USES

5-1101 Additional Submission Requirements

In addition to the submission requirements set forth in Section 001 above, all applications for Category 11 public uses shall be accompanied by a statement by an official or officer of the

governmental body who shall be present giving the exact reasons for selecting the particular

site as the location for the proposed facility, including any alternatives considered.

The Middleburg Humane Foundation has a quasi-governmental function as it is used by Fauquier

County Government for some animal rescue. The site was recently donated to the foundation, which

operates its current 4-acre animal shelter on Whiting Road, immediately north of the Marshall Convenience Site. If the Planning Commission is supportive of the commercial shelter use (see

below), then it makes sense to provide the limited public services at the same facility.



13

5-1102 Standards for All Category 11 Uses

In addition to the standards set forth in Section 006 above, the following standards shall

apply:

1. For public uses, it shall be concluded that the proposed location of the special

permit/special exception use is necessary for the rendering of efficient governmental

services to residents of properties within the general area of the location.

In order to recommend approval of this Special Permit, the Planning Commission must determine

that the use renders efficient governmental service to the surrounding area. The Commission could make this finding if it concurs with the owner that an animal shelter at the center of a large

agricultural community is appropriate.

2. In or abutting the Rural and Residential District, all open off-street parking andloading areas shall be no closer than 25 feet from any lot line and shall be effectively

screened.

This has been made a proposed condition of development.

5-1300 CATEGORY 13 COMMERCIAL BUSINESS AND PERSONAL SERVICES

5-1301 Additional Standards for Kennels

1. The minimum lot size requirement shall be two (2) acres, except in the R-1 zoning

district, where the minimum lot size shall be twenty (20) acres.

The property is 23 acres and meets this standard.

2. a. In all zoning districts other than R-1/Residential, no structure for the confinement,

care or breeding of dogs, and no associated structure shall be located closer than

75 feet to any lot line, except that this requirement shall not apply to structureswhich are completely enclosed, adequately soundproofed, constructed, and

maintained so that there will be no emission of odor or noise detrimental to other

properties in the area.


b. In the R-1/Residential zoning district, all dog confinement areas and dog runs

shall be located within enclosed structures, adequately soundproofed, constructed,and maintained so that there will be no emission of odor or noise detrimental to

other properties in the area, and no such structure shall be located closer than 200feet to any lot line.

Not applicable.

3. All dogs shall be kept in pens designed and maintained for secure confinement.



14

This is included in the proffer statement.

4. In consideration of an application for a permit, the BZA shall take into account the

numbers and kinds of dogs proposed to be kept and the characteristics thereof and

may prescribe conditions with respect thereto.

The Statement of Justification notes that “care will be provided for 25-30 dogs, 40 cats, and 15

equine. The total number of all animals on a normal day will be around 50, but may increase to 100

in emergency situations.” The Planning Commission may want to consider this as the upper limit.The applicant is now suggesting a condition that allows care for not more than 200 animals per day.

The Planning Commission may wish to discuss this number further.

5. Maximum of ten (10) dogs per acre.

The site is 23 acres and theoretically could support 230 dogs. However, in staff’s view, much of the site will be used for other animals, so 230 is too high of a limit. See analysis above.

6. Waste from operations must be collected and contained so as not to pollute the

environment.

The Health Department has suggested that the waste from all animals be handled and disposed of by

meeting all standards and regulations required of dog waste. The applicant is proffering to containand dispose of animal waste in conformance with the nationally recognized set of methods or

standards equal to or exceeding those promulgated by the US Department of Agriculture

Conservation Service or similar agency or organization, or as may be recommended by a professional management service and approved by the Zoning Administrator.

5-1302 Additional Standards for Veterinary Clinics

1. All such facilities shall be within a completely enclosed building, such building being

adequately soundproofed and constructed so that there will be no emission of odor or

noise detrimental to other properties in the area.


2. In a Residential or Rural District, the facility shall have direct access to a road

designated as a major collector (or higher) in the Comprehensive Plan unless the

Board of Zoning Appeals finds that the type and amount of traffic generated by the

facility is such that it will not cause an undue impact on the neighbors or adverselyaffect safety of road usage.

Neither Salem Avenue extended, nor the proposed north/south road adjacent to this site, aredesignated as a major collector (or higher) in the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, in order to

approve this Special Permit, the Board of Supervisors would need to make a finding that the type

and amount of traffic generated by the facility is such that it will not cause an undue impact on the

neighbors or adversely affect safety of road usage. Projected traffic, as noted above, is very low.



15

5-3100 STANDARDS FOR WAIVING REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM

AND CENTRAL WATER SYSTEM

5-3100 Standards for Waiving Requirement for Public Water System and Central Water

System

The requirements of Section 7-501 and 7-502 for a public water system and central water system may be waived to permit construction on a private central water system or

individual wells on individual lots where:

1. The Fauquier County Water and Sanitation Authority refuses in writing to operate the

proposed system or the applicant demonstrates to the Board that the provision of a

public or central water system is technically or economically infeasible.

The applicant has requested a private well for non-potable use as a water source for the animals.

The WSA understands that the applicant proposes to use a well solely for agricultural purposes and does not intend to connect the well to the Authority’s water system or any of the two structures to be

located on this site. Therefore, the WSA has stated that this usage is permissible under the Authority’s Operating Code. Proffers now address this issue.

2. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed central water system or individual wells

on individual lots will not damage the wells of adjoining parcels or interfere with

future development of adjoining parcels. This demonstration will be based on theresults of a hydrogeological report and testing as outlined in Chapter 18 of the

Subdivision Ordinance.

Properties within the Marshall Service District are primarily on public water. The FCWSA noted

that the well proposed by the Humane Society is in the vicinity of the Lawrence Well, a well of the

Marshall Water System. Any interconnection between the Humane Society’s well and the Lawrence

Well may diminish the available water in Marshall. The Authority recommends that the well betested as a part of a yield and drawdown test to ensure that the Authority’s Lawrence well, that

supplies Marshall, is not adversely affected. A condition requiring the hydrogeological report and

testing as outlined in Chapter 18 of the Subdivision Ordinance has been prepared.

3. Where a private central water system is proposed, the applicant has sufficient

financial resources and a business plan to insure the successful operation of thesystem for a period of at least ten years, adequate provisions will be made to provide

for the continued successful operation of the system, and the system will be deeded to

a homeowners association with all necessary authority and easements to operate thesystem in perpetuity.

Not applicable.



16

Agency Comments:

Staff and appropriate referral agencies have reviewed the application and have the followingcomments.

Zoning

1. The subject property is split-zoned to the Residential District, 2 Dwelling Units/Acre (R-2)

and Residential District, 4 Dwelling Units/Acre (R-4).

Noted.

2. Section 7-501.3 allows for a private well for animal use only as a Special Exception use inthe R-2, R-4 and RA Districts.

3. Section 3-301 Residential Uses (Category 1), use 5 (Dwelling Duplex) allows a duplex as a

Special Exception use in the R-2, R-4 and RA Districts.4. Section 3-313 Commercial Business and Personal Services (Category 13), use 1

(Kennel/Animal Shelter) allows an animal shelter as a Special Permit use in the RA District.5. Section 3-311 Public and Quasi-Public Uses (Category 11), use 4 (Animal Shelter) allows an

animal shelter as a Special Permit use in the RA District.

All Special Exception and Special Permit applications have been submitted.

6. Section 5-006 General Standards for Special Permits and Special Exception Uses applies to

the subject property. Zoning Staff defers to Planning Staff in the compliance assessment of

these standards. Zoning Staff does note that a site plan approval is required for the AnimalShelter use at which time parking, loading and landscaping will be evaluated.

7. Section 5-3100 Standards for Waiving Requirement for Public Water System and Central

Water System applies to the subject property. Zoning Staff defers to Planning Staff in thecompliance assessment of these standards.8. Section 5-106 Standards for Duplex Dwellings applies to the subject property. Zoning Staff

defers to Planning Staff in the compliance assessment of these standards.

Standards have been evaluated by Planning Staffing this staff report.

9. Section 15-1301 Additional Standards for Kennels applies to the subject property. ZoningStaff defers to Planning Staff in the compliance assessment of these standards. Zoning Staff

notes that an area shown as proposed Dog Training Events is located closer than 75 feet to

the property line. Standard 5-1301.2a requires that no structure for confinement, care or

breeding of dogs shall be located closer than 75 feet to any lot line. Staff recommends thefollowing condition to satisfy this standard “no structure for confinement, care or breeding of

dogs shall be located closer than 75 feet to any lot line.”

A condition addressing this issue has been drafted.

10. Section 5-1101 Standards for All Category 11 Uses applies to the subject property. ZoningStaff defers to Planning Staff in the compliance assessment of these standards. Zoning Staff



17

notes that the proposed parking lot shall be located no closer than 25 feet from any lot lineand shall be effectively screened. This will be evaluated with the site plan.

To be addressed at the Site Plan stage.

Environmental

1. Although the Statement of Justification called for fencing both streams, only the northern

stream has a fence and a buffer. It is highly recommended that the southern stream be

provided with a buffer and fencing. The parking lot by the administrative building isapproximately 5 feet from the stream. The stream is deeply incised, so it could pose a safety

risk with the parking lot that close and no fencing provided. Also, a vegetated buffer area

would help protect the stream from parking lot runoff. Applicant should keep in mind that thestream has been identified as waters of the U.S., so any impact would require a permit from

USACE.

A proffer now addresses the stream buffer.

2. The Salem Ave cul-de-sac is shown in an overlapping location with the southern horse field

and its fencing. What is the anticipated construction time for the two structures?

The applicant will need to address this timing.

3. It is recommended that a minimum of 1 acre of field per horse be provided to avoid denuding

the fields of vegetation. The loss of vegetation will increase soil erosion and degrade water

quality in the stream.

The applicant is now requesting 200 animals per day, with no detail on the type of animals. Based

on the environmental comment, the Planning Commission may want to consider a further limit.

4. Is the overhead electric line crossing the parcel to remain or is it to be removed or relocated?

To be addressed at Site Plan stage.

5. Based on the Fauquier County Soil Survey and the Interpretive Guide to the Soils of

Fauquier County:a. 56.1% of the soils are rated as prime cropland

b. 25.1% of the soils are rated as secondary cropland

c. 0.2% of the soils are rated as prime pastured. 18.5% of the soils are rated as secondary pasture

e. 12.7% of the soils are rated as “Good” for general development using central water

and sewer.

f. 46.1% of the soils are rated “Fair” for general development using central water andsewer.

g. 10.5% of the soils are rated “Poor” for general development using central water and

sewer



18

h. 30.6% of the soils are rated “Very Poor” for general development using central water and sewer.

Information for the applicant.

6. Based on the USDA, NRCS web soil survey for Fauquier County:

a.

86.7% of the soils are rated as Prime Farmland b. 5.3% of the soils are rated as Farmland of Statewide Importance

Information for the applicant.

7. What is the anticipated water usage from the proposed well?

The applicant is asked to supply this information to help guide the decision on the Special Exception

for the private well.

Health Department

The Health Department has no problems with the waste from all animals being handled and disposed

of by meeting all standards and regulations required of dog waste. Dog and cat waste are very hardto process. The on-site well can be used for the animals but no cross connections on service can be

made. The well water must not be connected in any way to the existing water supply. It is also

recommended that a water test be done on the existing well supply.

Proffers now address animal and medical waste. Proposed conditions address water quality and

quantity.

Department of Fire Rescue and Emergency Services

This office does not oppose the Comprehensive Plan/Rezoning/Special Exception/Special Permit

applications. No items noted at this time.

Department of Parks and Recreation

The Department’s comments regarding the overall project, Grove Lane, of which this application is a

part, were submitted in November 2012; excerpts of which follow:

• Facility quality – The department would strongly urge that any facilities constructed conformto any existing departmental design standards in order to assure their long-term usefulness.

• Future viability – The department requests an opportunity to review and comment on thecovenants of the homeowners association to provide for continued maintenance of the

recreational facilities, limited usage by the department, etc. HOA requirements should not

apply to the department.

• The department would also like to recommend that issues related to ownership, construction,

maintenance, etc. for any recreational facilities and related open space be resolved prior to



19

plat approval. Trails that are to be HOA maintained and open to the public should beincluded as a condition for plat approval.

• Recreation facilities should be constructed as part of the development site work, not during

construction of the actual residences and should be built as each phase is built.

• Any easements that cross or coincide with recreational sites including trails shall besubordinate to parks and recreation easements and/or rights.

• Please note that the department recently adopted the first initial guidelines for trail standards.See the attached guidelines.

These comments are primarily associated with residential development on the Grove Lane LLC

property. Trail related comments are relevant though as the plans show Future Trail (By Others) on

the north end of the Middleburg Humane site. It is unclear when and by whom this trail will beconstructed and who will maintain it.

Further comments specific to this phase:

• The most important element of this parcel from a recreational perspective is the provision of trail connections. Trail connections discussed previously are not included on these plans.

Those connections should include the following, at a minimum:

o All along Salem Ave. a trail running the length of the main North South road with an

outlet to the Northern boundary of the property

o And a trail running the length of the East West connector from the North South roadto the pool site

o These should be trails rather than sidewalks to accommodate multi-modal

transportation needs.

Parks and Recreation is seeking a trail along both the northern and southern border of this

property. The proposed plans show a Future Trail (By Others) on the northern border of the site.

The applicant preferred this northern location to a trail along Salem Avenue in order to keep a further distance between pedestrians/cyclists and the animals that will be fenced south of the stream

in this location. Parks and Recreation is seeking to connect public facilities such as a school and

pool site, which may be provided as part of the development of the wider Grove Lane LLC property.

• It is important that the connections discussed at the previous meetings of the overall projectregarding trails contained within this parcel be planned and implemented.

Described above.

GIS

The private access road off Grove Lane will need to be named. It will be serving at least 4 addressed

structures. Street names should be agreed upon by Middleburg Humane Foundation and Grove LaneLLC. Please submit name suggestions to the GIS Department for review.



20

Information for the applicant and owner.

VDOT

Following are our review comments of the first submittal of the above-referenced special exceptions,

special permits, and comprehensive plan amendment, and dated May 17, 2013, with a Fauquier

County, date-received stamp of May 23, 2013. Each of these applications has a preliminary site plan associated with it and since the content of the site plans are virtually the same as to VDOT’s

interests, these comments apply to each of the types of applications.

As discussed at the TIA Scoping Meeting for the Cunningham Farm property, the Humane

Foundation intends to utilize the existing farm road “as-is”, more or less, until such time that a

permanent, public road is constructed by others across the parcel’s frontage. There are notes to thiseffect on the plans. A commercial entrance, adequate for the Humane Foundation’s use, is to be

constructed where the current farm lane connects onto Rte. 55, Grove Lane.

1. The site plan labels the proposed entrance onto Rte. 55 as being a VDOT, CG-11 entrance,

which would be paved and have curb and gutter along the edge of pavement radii. For thiscase, a Moderate Volume Commercial Entrance (VDOT Road Design Manual, Fig.4-15, p.

F-106) could also be utilized, which would be paved but would not require curb & gutter.This could be an advantage if the ultimate future entrance necessitated removal and

reconfiguring of the entrance installed at this time.

Incorporated into proffered plan.

2. At the entrance onto Rte. 55, the entrance radii are currently listed as 25’, which is theminimum radius for such an entrance. Due to anticipated horse trailer usage, the entrance

radii should be increased to 35’, and preferably should be 50-feet.

Incorporated into proffered plan.

3. Likewise, the radii at the entrances of the Humane Foundation onto the future entrance road

and onto Salem Avenue should be increased to 35’ or 50’.


4. The site plan indicates the easement for a turnaround, assumed to be temporary, at the

“Primary Entrance.” This should be further explained or detailed. Also, according to the

topography provided, the existing farm lane departs from the proposed right-of-way and runsacross the frontage of the Foundation, precluding the installation of the two site entrances

shown. This should be clarified.


5. There is a cul-de-sac shown on the extension of Salem Avenue, which overlaps onto the

southeast corner of one of the “horse fields”; this cul-de-sac also appears on the Windy Hilltownhouse plans. The coordination of the cul-de-sac and the horse field should be clarified.



21

Applicant will need to address.

WSA

The Authority has two comments at this time. First, while no application has been filed with the

Authority for the use of an “existing agricultural well,” we are aware that the applicant proposes touse a well solely for agricultural purposes and does not intend to connect the well to the Authority’s

water system or any of the two structures to be located on this site. Therefore, this usage is

permissible under the Authority’s Operating Code.

Proffers limit the private well to use by the animals.

Second, the well proposed by the Humane Society is in the vicinity of the Lawrence Well, a well of

the Marshall Water System. Any interconnection between the Humane Society’s well and the

Lawrence Well may diminish the available water in Marshall. The Authority recommends that thewell be tested as a part of a yield and drawdown test to insure that the Authority’s Lawrence well,

that supplies Marshall, is not adversely affected.

Conditions have been drafted to address this issue.

Planning Commission Action on July 25, 2013:

The Planning Commission discussed this item at its work session and held a public hearing. The

applicant and eight members of the public spoke at the hearing. One member of the public was

concerned with animal waste disposal. A nearby resident was concerned with traffic. All otherssupported the Middleburg Humane Foundation in its effort to relocate to this site. The Planning

Commission left the hearing open and postponed action.

Summary and Recommendations:

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission hold a second public hearing. Staff has reservations

about approving these applications without an understanding of the development of the surrounding property, including the schedule of road and trail construction. Should the Planning Commission

wish to recommend approval, staff has prepared a number of conditions related to the Special

Permits and Special Exceptions. (Note: Some of the previously proposed conditions are nowcontained in the proffer statement.) Conditions are listed below.

1. The site shall be developed in general conformance with the information and drawings submittedwith the Special Permit and Special Exception applications, except as specifically modified by

the conditions below or as may be necessary to meet Zoning Ordinance requirements.

2. Care shall be provided for no more than 200 animals per day.

3. The owner shall work with the John Marshall Soil and Water Conservation District to

develop a riparian buffer plan. Based on this plan, fencing and associated plantings shall beinstalled on the property before the building occupancy permit is issued.



22

4. No structure for the confinement, care or breeding of dogs, and no associated structure shall be located closer than 75 feet to any lot line, except that this requirement shall not apply to

structures which are completely enclosed, adequately soundproofed, constructed, andmaintained so that there will be no emission of odor or noise detrimental to other properties

in the area.

5. The veterinary clinic shall be within a completely enclosed building, such building beingadequately soundproofed and constructed so that there will be no emission of odor or noise

detrimental to other properties in the area.

6. The applicant shall demonstrate that any proposed well will not damage the wells of

adjoining parcels, including but not limited to the Lawrence Well, or interfere with future

development of adjoining parcels. This demonstration will be based on the results of ahydrogeological report and testing as outlined in Chapter 18 of the Subdivision Ordinance.

7. A water test with results satisfactory to the Health Department shall be carried out on anywell before it may be used.

8. Abutting Residential Zoning Districts, all open off-street parking and loading areas shall beno closer than 25 feet from any lot line and shall be effectively screened.

Middleburg Humane Foundation Staff_Report_9-26-13-3

Documents

Transcript of Middleburg Humane Foundation Staff_Report_9-26-13-3