Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 27 2009 Regular Meeting346 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on Wednesday, May 27, 2009, at 7:15 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT Chairman Richard C. Shickle; Vice - Chairman Bill M. Ewing; Charles S. DeHaven, Jr.; Gary W. Dove; Gene E. Fisher; Philip A. Lemieux; and Gary A. Lofton. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Shickle called the meeting to order. INVOCATION Supervisor Dove delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice - Chairman Ewing led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA - APPROVED County Administrator John R. Riley, Jr. stated he had no changes or additions to the agenda. Upon a motion by Supervisor Dove, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the agenda by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye CITIZEN COMMENTS Stephen Pettler, Stonewall District, advised that he appeared before the Board at the May 13, 2009 meeting regarding a conditional use permit application for AT &T and he wanted to address the adoption of the May 13, 2009 meeting minutes. He stated the minutes did not accurately reflect the public record of the meeting, as they did not include Supervisor Lofton's comments and they go beyond the scope of the discussion that was held. He cited the resolution on page 13 denying the application and advised that none of the reasons listed were stated by the Board of Supervisors and the findings were not made in public by the Board. He went on to say AT &T objected to the decision on two grounds: 1. Supervisor DeHaven should have recused himself. Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 347 2. The reasons in the record are legally insufficient. He concluded by saying the resolution does not accurately reflect the statements made on the record and he had transcripts available for the Board to review. Chairman Shickle clarified the issues of concern for Mr. Pettler were Supervisor Lofton's comments and the resolution. Mr. Pettler suggested the resolution be redrafted to reflect what was stated on the records. Chairman Shickle asked Supervisor Lofton if he had reviewed the minutes and if the comments reflected what he said. Supervisor Lofton responded the minutes appeared to reflect his comments, but he would be interested in seeing the full transcript. Chairman Shickle suggested the Board not adopt the minutes tonight in order for Supervisor Lofton to have an opportunity to review the minutes and to allow the County Attorney to review the resolution. Supervisor DeHaven noted a correction on page 3. He stated the date should be 2010 instead 2006. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS There were no Board of Supervisors' comments. COUNTY OFFICIALS COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS APPOINTMENT OF CLINT JONES AS SHAWNEE DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE HISTORIC RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Dove, the Board appointed Clint Jones as Shawnee District representative to the Historic Resources Advisory Board to fill the unexpired term of Virginia B. McClure, said term to expire May 22, 2010. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye APPOINTMENT OF KEVIN CROSEN AS BACK CREEK DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION - APPROVED Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 34 Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Lemieux, the Board appointed Kevin Crosen as Back Creek District representative to the Planning Commission. This is a four year appointment, said term to expire May 27, 2013. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye APPOINTMENT OF ROBERT HESS AS GAINESBORO DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE HISTORIC RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Dove, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board appointed Robert Hess as Gainesboro District representative to the Historic District Resources Advisory Board. This is a four year appointment, said term to expire May 27, 2013. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye ROGER L THOMAS REAPPOINTED AS OPEOU DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION - APPROVED Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman Ewing, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board reappointed Roger L. Thomas as Opequon District representative to the Planning Commission. This is a four year appointment, said term to expire June 14, 2013 The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye MIN LEE NIKI WILSON AND TOOTIE RINKER APPOINTED TO THE WINCHESTER - FREDERICK COUNTY TOURISM BOARD — APPROVED Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 349 Upon a motion by Supervisor Lemieux, seconded by Vice - Chairman Ewing, the Board appointed Min Lee, Niki Wilson, and Tootie Rinker to the Winchester- Frederick County Tourism Board. These are three year appointments, said terms to expire June 30, 2012. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye REAPPOINTMENT OF ANN STANT SHAWNEELAND SANITARY DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, Supervisor DeHaven, the Board reappointed Ann Stant to the Shawneeland Sanitary District Advisory Committee. This is a two year appointment, said term to expire July 13, 2011. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye REQUEST FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE FOR REFUND - APPROVED Administrator Riley advised the Commissioner of the Revenue was requesting a refund for Wheels LT in the amount of $2,879.13. The county attorney reviewed the request and the refund appears to be justified. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman Ewing, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved the refund request. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye COMMITTEE REPORTS CODE AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 350 The Code & Ordinance Committee met on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 at 2:00 P.M., in the First Floor Conference Room, Board of Supervisors Meeting Room, County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. Present were chairman of the committee Supervisor Philip A. Lemieux, Stephen G. Butler and Michael L. Bryan. Supervisor Gary Lofton was absent. Also present County Administrator John R. Riley, Jr.; Deputy County Administrator Jay E. Tibbs; Ellen Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue; Roderick Williams, County Attorney; Rebecca Hogan, Clerk of the Circuit Court; Ann Lloyd, Clerk of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court; and Brenda Vance, Clerk of the General District Court. The committee submits the following: ** *Items Requiring Board Action * ** 1. Proposed Corrective Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 155, Taxation, Section 155 -96, Business License Fees. — Sent Forward for Public Hearing The proposed amendments will bring the text of the Frederick County Code into compliance with the State Code. In addition, the proposed amendment would create a new §155 -96(C) to clarify those activities that are subject to flat rate assessments, irrespective of gross receipt amounts. Upon a motion by Mr. Butler, seconded by Mr. Bryan, the Committee unanimously forwarded this item to the Board of Supervisors for public hearing and recommended approval. (See Attachment.) Upon a motion by Supervisor Lemieux, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved sending the proposed corrective amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 155, Taxation, Section 155 -96, Business License Fee forward for public hearing. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye 2. Proposed Amendments to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 155, Taxation, Increase of Certain Court Fees. — Sent Revised Amendment Forward for Public Hearing The General Assembly enacted legislation during the 2009 session to permit localities to increase certain court fees collected for funding law libraries and courthouse construction, renovation, and maintenance. Regarding the courthouse construction, renovation, and maintenance fee, localities are now permitted to collect a supplemental fee of $3 for the operation of a courthouse that is "not in compliance with the current safety and security guidelines contained in the Virginia Courthouse Facility Guidelines, as certified by the Department of General Services upon application to the Department by the county or city, and which cannot be feasibly renovated to correct such non - compliance." The County Attorney has been advised the Joint Judicial Center meets the requirements to qualify for this supplemental fee and the City Sheriff has requested the City amend its code relative to this fee. Upon a motion by Mr. Bryan, seconded by Mr. Butler, the Committee unanimously forwarded this item to the Board of Supervisors for public hearing and recommended approval. (See Attachment.) Supervisor Lemieux advised since the Code and Ordinance Committee's meeting, it has been brought to his attention, via the County Attorney, that an actual certification from the State as to the Joint Judicial Center's non - compliance with state safety and security guidelines must be received in order for the County to be able to collect the supplemental $3 fee. He presented an Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 351 amended ordinance containing contingency language that makes imposition of the fee effective only upon receipt of the state certification. Upon a motion by Supervisor Lemieux, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved sending the revised version of the proposed amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 155, Taxation, Increase of Certain Court Fees forward for public hearing. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT The Transportation Committee met on May 18, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. Members Present Chuck DeHaven (voting) Phil Lemieux (voting) Dave Burleson (voting) James Racey (voting) Gary Oates (liaison PC) Lewis Boyer (liaison Stephens City) Members Absent Mark Davis (liaison Middletown) George Kriz (liaison PC) Prior to beginning the agenda items, the Committee opted to reorder the agenda as follows: 1. Inland Port Traffic 2. TIA Standards Discussion 3. Secondary Street Acceptance Requirements 4. Other ** *Items Requiring Action * ** 3. Secondary Street Acceptance Requirements (SSAR) Staff briefed the Committee on the issues facing Frederick County with the new SSAR and will be providing a presentation to the Board of the key issues involved. The Committee noted the need for the DRRC to look at the County cul -de -sac length requirements to make sure they are not in conflict with the new standards. Additionally, the Committee noted that staff needs to make clear to the Board in which parts of the County the different levels of connectivity required in the SSAR will apply. Finally, the Committee noted the need for the County to consider how to apply the connectivity requirements in areas currently defined as rural but planned as Rural Community Centers in the Comprehensive Plan. John Bishop, Deputy Director Planning— Transportation, advised the Transportation Committee looked at the Secondary Street Acceptance Standards set forth by VDOT. These standards have been in development since 2007. He noted the basics stayed the same (i.e. still Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 352 need three lots and still has to be a public benefit). He then reviewed the new Connectivity Index introduced by VDOT. This index contains three types: - Compact Type (within Urban Development Area) 1.6 - Suburban Type (outside Urban Development Area, but in MPO or within 2 miles of Urban Development Area) 1.4 - Rural Area Type no index. Per the connectivity index, cul -de -sacs would now be constructed as intersections. In addition, neighboring properties would be required to connect and to have multiple connections. Deputy Director Bishop stated the Board may require a higher standard for connectivity in the rural community center. He noted that previous approvals would be grandfathered as long as the subdivision plan has not expired. For areas that cannot connect to neighboring properties, accommodations are made for topography, incompatible neighboring uses, and those bordered by limited access roadways. Deputy Director Bishop stated there is a conflict between these standards and the Frederick County cul -de -sac length standards. Other changes to the standards include improved bicycle and pedestrian requirements, narrower street requirements, and more drainage options. He concluded by saying the recommended actions are: - Direct Development Review and Regulations Committee to review the cul -de -sac length portion of the subdivision ordinance; - Direct Transportation Committee and CPPS to determine boundaries of the Urban Centers and Rural Community Centers and return recommendations on where to apply the VDOT area types. Chairman Shickle stated there appeared to be two paths to take: 1. Not allow them unless they meet state standards and then have them be taken into the state system. 2. Revisit whether or not to allow streets to be maintained by home owners' associations. Deputy Director Bishop noted the ordinance currently allows for private streets. Planning Director Eric Lawrence advised private streets were allowed in minor rural subdivisions and R -5 communities. Supervisor Dove agreed with Chairman Shickle. He stated he did not know why we approve subdivisions to allow the state to maintain and pay for the roads. He felt the homeowners' associations should pay for road maintenance within the subdivisions. Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 353 Supervisor Lemieux agreed with Supervisor Dove's comments, but would not recommend going down that path until the way homeowners' associations operate is revamped or completely overhauled. Supervisor Fisher agreed with Supervisor Dove. He went on to say street designs needed to be changed to quit requiring the installation of curb and gutter, which caused additional impacts from storm water. He asked if there was any change proposed in street design. Deputy Director Bishop responded that the proposed changes to the design manual have to do with the width of streets. Supervisor Ewing asked if subdivisions were required to have homeowners' associations and if not, then some accommodation would need to be made to deal with the streets within those developments. Deputy Director Bishop responded no, homeowners' associations are not required. Supervisor DeHaven thought it was worthy to continue this discussion and he would like to see the ramifications of allowing both. He went on to say we need to be clear that Frederick County is not going to take over the streets. He concluded by saying the discussion of public versus private streets should be included to get the committees' input. Supervisor Lofton stated he would have to look at both issues together, but he would like to see more discussion. Supervisor Dove suggested sending this item through the appropriate subcommittee and then have a work session with the Board regarding the findings. Chairman Shickle summarized the Board's remarks and stated it was his understanding that the Board was interested in exploring this topic and they would be seeking a recommendation regarding making all subdivision streets private, but they would like to know all of the repercussions of that action. He concluded by saying exploration of this topic was the first step. The Board agreed with the Chairman's summary and direction. ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 1. Inland Port Traffic Staff briefed the Committee on complaints that have been received by Supervisor Ewing regarding heavy truck traffic using Double Church Road to get from Route 277 to Route 522. The Committee discussed the issue and directed staff to coordinate with VDOT to gather additional information and return it to the Committee. Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 3541 2. TIA Standards Discussion Staff updated the Committee and presented a clean draft of the TIA Standards that was a result of additional meetings with representatives from the Top of Virginia Builders Association. One final issue remains for the Committee regarding allowing staff judgment in certain situations to determine whether to require a TIA. Staff noted that this was something the Top of Virginia Builders Association would likely be against, but that they will work with them to try and find acceptable language. 4. Other Mr. Jerry Copp of VDOT briefed the Committee on the 2007 speed study done for Apple Pie Ridge road and how the speed limits that currently exist in that area came to be. He noted that VDOT would like to add one additional speed limit sign and upgrade the existing signs to improve visibility and notification. PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC HEARING - REVISED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #02 -09 FOR LEROY HARRISON TO ENABLE A PROPERTY OWNERSHIP TRANSFER OF AN EXISTING AUTO REPAIR BUSINESS. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 8365 N ORTH FREDERICK PIKE (ROUTE 522), AND IS IDENTI WITH PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 11 -A -52 IN THE GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - APPROVED Zoning Administrator Mark Cheran appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this property is located at 8365 North Frederick Pike in the Gainesboro Magisterial District and was zoned RA (Rural Areas). This is an application to amend Conditional Use Permit #10 -82 to reopen an existing garage. The applicant requested deletion of the following conditions: 1. This is a one -year permit to be reviewed annually by the staff, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors. 2. If the use, occupancy or ownership of the property changes, this conditional use permit shall expire and a new CUP will be required. 3. Entrance must be relocated as shown. Zoning Administrator Cheran advised the Planning Commission recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. Outside storage limited to less than five vehicles and screened by an opaque fence. 3. Limited to the applicant and one employee. 4. All repair activities shall occur entirely within the enclosed structure. 5. The applicant will be limited to repairing only five vehicles at a time. 6. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new conditional use permit. He concluded by saying Mr. Harrison was present to answer any questions. Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 355 Leroy Harrison, applicant, stated he wanted to get the garage ready and hoped to save some people a little money. He went on to say he was comfortable with the proposed conditions. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Dove, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved Conditional Use Permit #02 -09 with the changes as listed. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — CHAPTER 165 ZONING ARTICLE X BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, SUBSECTION 82A DISTRICT USE REGULATIONS. REVISIONS TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADD VETERINARY CLINICS AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE B1 (NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS) ZONING DISTRIT. - APPROVED Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised the County received a request to add Veterinary Clinics as a permitted use in the B1 (Neighborhood Business) Zoning District. Currently, the Zoning Ordinance allows veterinary offices as a permitted use in the B2 (Business General) and B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning Districts, and as a conditional use in the RA (Rural Areas) and RP (Residential Performance) Zoning Districts. The proposed ordinance revision would add "Veterinary Services for Animal Specialties" (SIC 0742) to the B1 Zoning District uses. This revision is intended to only allow: animal and pet hospitals, veterinarians for pets and veterinary services, but excludes any type of livestock services and requires that all animals and activities be kept within the enclosed primary structure. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed amendment. Chairman Shickle asked why staff picked a by right for this use in BI instead of conditional use permit. Senior Planner Perkins responded the by right choice was made because B 1 was closer in structure to the B2 and B3 Zoning Districts than the RP (Residential Performance). Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 356 There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Vice - Chairman Ewing, the Board approved the ordinance amendment. WHEREAS, an ordinance to amend Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Subsection 82, District Use Regulations, was considered by the Planning Commission and the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) during their regularly scheduled meetings; and WHEREAS, the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) recommended approval of this amendment on January 22, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance adoption on May 6, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance adoption on May 27, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the adoption of this ordinance to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in good zoning practice; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Subsection 82, District Use Regulations is amended to add Veterinary Services for Animal Specialties (excluding horses) with all activities and animals kept within a fully enclosed primary structure (SIC 0742), as a permitted use in the 131 (Neighborhood Business) District. This amendment is described on the attachment This ordinance shall be in effect on the day of adoption. § 165 -82. District use regulations The following tables describe the business and industrial zoning districts in Frederick County, the intent of those districts and the uses allowed in each district. Standard Industrial classification numbers are provided for particular uses to assist the Zoning Administrator in classifying uses. Determining whether a particular use should be classified under a particular category remains subject to interpretation on the part of the Zoning Administrator. A. Neighborhood Business District. The intent of this district is to provide small business areas to serve the daily household needs of surrounding residential neighborhoods. Uses allowed primarily consist of limited retailing and personal service uses. Business uses in this district should be small in size and should not produce substantial vehicle traffic in excess of what is usual in the residential neighborhoods [Amended 4 -10 -19911 B1 Allowed Uses Veterinary Services for Animal Specialties (excluding horses) with all activities and animals kept within a fully enclosed primary structure Food stores Apparel and accessory stores Drugstores Miscellaneous shopping goods stores Finance, insurance, and real estate offices Personal services, except the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 0742 54 56 591 594 72 Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 357 Industrial launderers 7217 Funeral homes and crematories 726 Car washes 7452 Videotape rental 784 Medical offices 801, 802, 803, and 804 Child day -care services 835 Civic, social, and fraternal organizations 864 Public buildings - Public utility distribution facilities - Business signs - Signs allowed in § 165 -30B [Amended 2 -13 -20081 - Freestanding building entrance signs [Added 2 -13 -20081 - Electronic Message signs [Added 2 -13 -20081 Multi - tenant complex signs [Amended 2 -13 -20081 - Residential uses which are accessory to allowed - business uses Parks - Churches - Restaurants [Added 12 -9 -1992] 5812 Art dealers, art supplies and art framing - [Added 4 -24 -19951 Fire stations, companies and rescue squads - [Added 10 -27 -19991 Tobacco stores [Added 1 -10 -20011 5993 Accounting, auditing, and bookkeeping - [Added 1 -10 -20011 Health clubs no larger than 10,000 square feet 7991 [Added 2 -22 -2006] The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye OTHER PLANNING ITEMS DISCUSSION — OUTDOOR LIGHTING — REFERRED BACK TO STAFF Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised that outdoor lighting is currently regulated under the nuisance element of the Zoning Ordinance ( §165 -35). Over the past few years, staff has encountered multiple new developments consisting of office buildings, shopping centers, and industrial sites that have had excessive lighting and have resulted in complaints about the lighting sources, levels, and height of the fixtures. Staff has successfully worked with property owners to shield or replace fixtures that have created issues, but this occurs after the property owner has installed the lighting. She advised the drafted lighting standards are intended to address lighting at the beginning of the process, during the site planning and design process, prior to fixture installation. Once implemented, these standards should avoid lighting complaints and the resulting additional Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 358 expense for the property owner to replace previously installed fixtures. She went on to say the Board discussed this item at its October 22, 2008 and expressed concerns over lighting sources and the basis for the proposed lighting levels, issues regarding canopy lighting, as well as concerns over whether the Sheriff's Department was comfortable with this ordinance. Senior Planner Perkins stated the ordinance was revised to be in conformance with the standards outlined by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA), as recommended by a lighting engineer. The canopy lighting portion was revised to require that light sources be completely shielded from public rights -of -way or adjacent properties. She concluded by saying the Planning Commission recommended this item be sent forward to the Board with a favorable recommendation. Supervisor Lofton asked if someone had to replace an existing light fixture that is not allowed under the ordinance, must they replace all of their light fixtures with approved lights in order to comply or can they replace the one fixture. Senior Planner Perkins responded the fixture could be replaced with the same kind, as long as all of the fixtures were not being replaced. Supervisor DeHaven stated he was pleased with the work that had been accomplished, but was still concerned about height and proximity to other uses. He asked if the ordinance could be constructed so these standards could be applied to conditional use permits. Supervisor Fisher stated he had some concerns including the height requirements, special lighting for recreational parks (e.g. baseball fields), and there were no minimum standards in certain areas. He also asked if there were some standards for commercial areas which were specified by law enforcement. Chairman Shickle asked if the B -2 wording could be made clearer. He stated that he assumed the ordinance permitted mounted lights, not hand -held or vehicle mounted. Senior Planner Perkins stated the Airport did not want to see any high intensity beams. Director Lawrence responded the Zoning Ordinance applied to land and not vehicles or persons. County Attorney Roderick Williams reiterated the Zoning Ordinance did apply to land and he would be reluctant to file a zoning charge under this ordinance for a person or vehicle involving a hand -held or vehicle mounted light. Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 Chairman Shickle stated the ordinance allows a light fixture to be mounted on a pole at 35 feet in the RA District. He wanted to know if it could be mounted at 35 feet on a building in the RA District since pole lights are allowed at that height. In section B. 4, Chairman Shickle suggested the word "site" be changed to "property line ". In Section D. 1. a), Chairman Shickle suggested staff specify "other areas" (e.g. other areas of the parking lot). In Section D. 2, Chairman Shickle asked what was meant by "sign area ". Finally, in Section F. 1, Chairman Shickle asked if that should include private rights -of -way. In response to a question regarding residential dusk to dawn lights, Senior Planner Perkins advised that staff meant to exclude residential dusk to dawn lights from the ordinance. Chairman Shickle asked if a permit was not required then how would the County respond to complaints? Senior Planner Perkins responded that she sees this ordinance applying to commercial and industrial sites, but not residential. She went on to say an electrical permit would be required for commercial and industrial sites. Senior Planner Perkins stated she could add the word "timers" to Section F. 3. She again stated this ordinance was not intended to get involved with residential lighting. Chairman Shickle stated he thought the intent was on, but the meaning needed to be clarified. Supervisor DeHaven suggested staff be given an opportunity to address these issues and bring this item back. DISCUSSION — RECORDATION OF PROFFERS — (RESOLUTION #068 -09) - SENT FORWARD FOR PUBLIC HEARING Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised the Zoning Ordinance does not contain standards as to how proffer statements should be written and does not require that proffers be recorded once accepted by the Board of Supervisors. Staff was requested to draft an ordinance that addressed these items. The recordation requirement has been developed due to concerns expressed regarding proffers not showing up when title searches are performed on properties. She went on to say staff has prepared a revision to the ordinance that contains requirements for the legal form of proffer statements and a requirement that approved proffers be recorded with the Frederick County Clerk of the Circuit Court. The proposed amendment would address the legal form of proffers: - Requirement that proffers be in a form suitable for recordation; Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 360 - Require the proffer statement define the owners of the subject property and shall be signed by all parties involved; - Once proffers are accepted by the Board of Supervisors they are to be recorded within 10 days. The Planning Commission was supportive of this proposed amendment. Upon a motion by Supervisor Dove, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved sending this item forward for public hearing. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Department has been directed to prepare modifications to Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Conditional rezoning, pertaining to the addition of a requirement for the legal form of proffer statements and the recordation of proffers. WHEREAS, the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) recommended approval of this amendment on February 26, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the draft ordinance on May 6, 2009 and recommended that a public hearing be held; WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that in the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice, directs the Frederick County Planning Commission hold a public hearing regarding amendments to Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Conditional rezoning, pertaining to the addition of a requirement for the legal form of proffer statements and the recordation of proffers. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REQUESTED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the Frederick County Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to consider revisions to Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Conditional rezoning, pertaining to the addition of a requirement for the legal form of proffer statements and the recordation of proffers. Passed this 27 day of May, 2009 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (MPO) STUDY Elisabeth Fetting, KFH Group, appeared before the Board regarding this item. She presented the WinFred MPO Transit Plan. She began by providing an overview of the major tasks. She then reviewed the conceptual plan, which included priorities expressed by the Board of Supervisors: - Countywide demand response transportation service; - Enhanced focus on commuter services and park and ride availability; - Provide local corridor service between Winchester and Middletown, serving Stephens City and the Lord Fairfax Community College; Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 1361 - Extend Winchester Transit's fixed route network to include nearby developing areas of the County. o Route 7 /Berryville Avenue Extension; o Valley Avenue to Cross Creek Village; o Amherst Route to Wal -Mart; o Apple Blossom Mall route extended to Virginia Employment Commission/522 South Corridor; and o Northside Route to Rutherford Crossing. Supervisor Dove asked if the City of Winchester was getting money that could be used to fund transit in Frederick County. Ms. Fetting responded that was correct; however, there could be only one recipient for this funding, which in this case is the City. She went on to say the County could either work with the city or do its own transit service. Supervisor DeHaven stated the Board took steps to provide transit service when it entered a cooperative partnership with the Shenandoah Area Agency on Aging. He suggested the Board look at moving that partnership forward. Chairman Shickle stated Frederick County needed to take a position and it either needed a recommendation from the Transportation Committee or to hold a dialogue at this level. Supervisor DeHaven suggested the Board try to work with the existing agency and the program already in place. Vice - Chairman Ewing stated at some future date the Board did need to revisit the transit issue. Supervisor Fisher stated the short term direction was fine, but what happens in the long term? He went on to say there were sufficient population numbers in need of transportation. Supervisor Lofton stated there was a disparity in the county between needs and usage. BOARD LIAISON REPORTS There were no Board liaison reports. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no citizen comments. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS Supervisor Fisher stated if we are going to have conditional use permits then they should be conditional. He went on to say why we got away from it, he did not know, but it seemed to make sense to him that "if the use, occupancy or ownership of the property changes, this conditional use permit shall expire and a new CUP will be required ". He concluded by saying he felt some of these conditional use permits should actually be a rezoning. Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09 362 Supervisor Lofton recognized the students from the Government 12 Service Learning program who were in attendance. ADJOURN UPON A MOTION BY SUPERVISOR EWING, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR DOVE, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED. (8:10 P.M.) Richard C. Shickle Jo . Riley, Jr. Chairman, Board of Supervisors Cl , Board of Supervisors Minutes Prepared By: Jay bs Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors Minute Book Number 34 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/27/09