Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 27 2009 Work Session027 A Work Session of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on Monday, July 27, 2009, at 12:00 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. BOARD MEMBERS 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. OTHERS PRESENT Planning Commission members Charles Triplett, George Kriz, Gregory Unger, H. Paige Manuel, Christopher Mohn, Gary Oates, Brian Madagan, Kevin Crosen, Roger Thomas, June Wilmot, and Lawrence Ambrogi; Comprehensive Plan and Programs Committee members Marjorie Copenhaver, Jim Golladay, and Robert Morris; John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator; Eric Lawrence, Director of Planning and Development; Michael Ruddy, Deputy Director of Planning; Senior Planner Candice Perkins, Kris Tierney, Assistant County Administrator; Rod Williams, County Attorney; and Bev Dellinger, Secretary. Chairman Shickle called the meeting to order and turned the presentation over to Director Lawrence. Director Lawrence welcomed everyone to the meeting. The two CPPA amendments will be discussed and a decision on whether they merit further study will be made. The Planning Commission has seen some of the ordinance amendments, but the Board of Supervisors has not seen them yet. One thing has been added to the agenda. This item is in response to some comments staff received last week at the Board meeting, so we will talk briefly on the floodplain ordinance because it is time sensitive. 2009 COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN AMENDMENTS (CPPA) Deputy Director Ruddy stated there were originally three requests accepted by the June 1, 2009 deadline; however, request #01 -09 of Opequon Crossing was withdrawn by the applicant. #02 -09 NEWTOWN COMMERCIAL — BACK CREEK ACTION: NO FURTHER STUDY The first request is the Newtown Commercial request for the inclusion of 79.1 acres into the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Deputy Director Ruddy stated that the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC) discussed the future about how additional properties in that area could potentially come together. There was also discussion Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 028 about some of the questions to be answered regarding the transportation in that area; however, given current activity that has taken place in the Stephens City area, the CPPC felt it was not appropriate to move the request forward at this time. Deputy Director. Ruddy asked for comments and questions. Vice - Chairman Ewing asked how close the SWSA is to that area. Deputy Director Ruddy responded that the site is adjacent to the SWSA, only because it is adjacent to Town of Stephens City. The existing SWSA follows the train tracks and basically covers the Route 11 corridor in that location and then picks up the existing recently annexed Town of Stephens City. This is the Russell Property and, obviously, they're proposing an expansion in that area. Supervisor DeHaven stated he believes we need an agreement with the railroad which would show two other future crossings, which does not seem to be realistic. Obviously the one at Burtonsville we are agreeing to close. The transportation system needs work before we entertain adding acreage for development. Chairman Shickle stated there is a recommendation before us not to pursue this request and he asked if there is anyone who thinks that recommendation should not be accepted. There were no comments. #03 -09 ROCK HARBOR — BACK CREEK ACTION: FURTHER STUDY Deputy Director Ruddy noted that in recent years, conditional use permits have been approved for the golf course and its expansion. This request from Rock Harbor is for the inclusion of 259.43 acres into the SWSA to accommodate the addition of a convention center with initial capacity of 500 people. In addition to the convention center, the applicant would like to have extended -stay accommodations, as well as some golf course related residential homes. This particular request is not covered by an existing land use plan. The CPPC's review got very positive feedback specific to the convention center and the commercial land uses aimed at enhancing the County's and the project's economic development to the community. The discussion around the residential land uses evolved into more detail. We have an urban development concept and a SWSA concept and the initial approach will be to address the rural area zoning classification and seek to get some allowance for residential in association with the golf course community within the RA zoning district. Traditionally, the County has included Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 029 any residential land uses on public water and sewer within our urban development area, the R5 and perhaps the R4 zoning districts are ones that could be tailored to accommodate that. A similar analogy could be what occurred with the MS district with a particular type of residential allowance that could be a consideration in association with the golf course community. Mr. Ruddy stated that generally the recommendation that came back from the CPPC was that this request warranted additional consideration and study by the CPPC with a specific consideration of how to best address the residential component if that component is appropriate in this location. Chairman Shickle asked if the housing at the Lutheran Home would be considered Lutheran Home owned. Deputy Director Ruddy answered that is a continuing care retirement community permitted use within the MS District and individual lots are not permitted — ownership is a single entity. He stated that Mr. Evan Wyatt of Greenway Engineering can explain what is being proposed. The details that go along with this type of residential ownership have not been determined, but they have an approach in mind. Mr. Wyatt said the answer to Chairman Shickle's question is yes; the CCRC housing is owned by National Lutheran Home and it's a good parallel to this request. When Greenway and the Perry's, owners of the property, talked about the potential of having residential use on the property to support the golf course, the Perry's were not interested in fee - simple lots that are sold on state - maintained streets. They are looking for gated, private streets, with no lots created. The units are going to be owned and operated by the Rock Harbor Golf Course. They are trying to attract the unique market that wants to live and play on a golf course. Part of the fee structure to move into one of those units, would cover membership fees and food service. Chairman Shickle asked if the user of the housing would be a long -term user, for their life time, or would they be weekly or even daily. Mr. Wyatt responded it could be long -term or it could be structured on a yearly lease. This is to provide an opportunity to support the golf course because greens fees don't sustain it. The SWSA expansion request seemed to be a reasonable way to get there without having to work the urban development area of that portion of the County. Chairman Shickle asked if Mr. Wyatt anticipates a rezoning. Mr. Wyatt responded definitely; this is the first step in a long process. Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 030 Chairman Shickle asked Mr. Wyatt to elaborate, because there are so many questions, on why this request should move forward. Mr. Wyatt stated that for this specific type of residential, this is not the normal process to get there. So procedurally, how does the County want to proceed with this request? If the County chose to do this as an urban development area expansion, it is pretty straight forward, but there would still need to be a zoning district determination on how the County would want to proceed. Mr. Wyatt has talked with some of the Planning Commissioners and Supervisors, and they seem to think there is more protection afforded to the County by just going with the SWSA approach. Chairman Shickle asked if the convention center is a much more traditional application or is it likewise as complicated. Mr. Wyatt believes the convention center and the extended stay lodging could be easily dealt with as a SWSA expansion, but it is the year -round residential concept where everybody has a different idea. Chairman Shickle asked if there is a need for SWSA expansion other than the residential housing and the convention center. Mr. Wyatt responded yes; there's a short time need. When Rock Harbor was approved, they were given the opportunity to expand up to around 24,000 square feet of retail, restaurant and clubhouse. They have a limiting factor with water and sewer, which this request would take care of immediately. For the longer term, to do a convention center and any sort of residential, it would need to be on public water and sewer. Mr. Morris asked if the public provisioning of water in any way would be used to water fairways and greens. Mr. Wyatt responded it would be way too expensive to purchase water to irrigate; they currently have the use of the quarry beside them. When they set up their irrigation system, they set it up with sprinkler heads and valves necessary to convert and use the gray water application if necessary. Commissioner Thomas asked what kind of density are they looking at for age- restricted housing. Mr. Wyatt noted that the graphics within the agenda package show general location areas where they could be. The number of persons that Rock Harbor was thinking they would need to Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 031 make this work is about 200. Mr. Wyatt isn't sure what that equates to in units. Mr. Thomas asked if they are looking at developing a golf course overlay district, similar to the MS District. Mr. Wyatt answered yes; the County can approach it in that way. Mr. Thomas asked if Mr. Wyatt sees the overlay district as being allowable in any RA area outside of the UDA or restricted in some way. Mr. Wyatt stated that is the County's call, but if you were going to do it, the application would logically be an overlay that would be for RA zoned property within the SWSA so you eliminated a great part of the County that's zoned that way. Concerning transportation, Mr. Wyatt stated that if they got to the point where they were processing a zoning application in whatever form it is, the traffic study would dictate what they could and could not do. It may well be that some of that would have to be put on the sideline until the interchange was constructed. Supervisor DeHaven asked if the residential they're considering is single family detached, owned, leased or time - shared. Mr. Wyatt responded they have talked about two types of housing. One would be properties that are adjacent to or somewhat visible from Roscommon. There is a concept called the "great house" containing four units, and it's architecturally disguised to look as a comparable house in Roscommon. Some that are going to be only visible to golfers is more of the condominium -type unit. There has really not been any discussion about single family detached. They want the golf course to be what people see as the primary function of the property. Supervisor DeHaven asked if the market were to change, would those units ever be anything but rental units. Mr. Wyatt said it is set it up so that the Rock Harbor owners are the risk takers; they are not envisioning state streets so VDOT doesn't have the maintenance requirement, the school system won't be impacted because they're envisioning age- restricted, where the owners own and operate the units. Supervisor DeHaven's concern is how we manage to construct it without opening up the rest of the County to similar type uses that are not necessarily based to support other desirable ones. Mr. Wyatt stated that what he believes he's been hearing is that they would like there to be a way to do this without setting up a R5 zoning on this property because if it would go under, Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 032 then the County is sitting there with a zoned parcel and being pressured to do something different with it. Supervisor Dove stated he thinks the concept is a great idea with the land owner willing to be the owner of the units rather than having fee - simple lots. Commissioner Oates expressed concern for the UDA, between business and residential; we have already added the CCRC and the MS. This is potentially another type of housing that is going to be able to leap frog over the UDA into the SWSA and he is worried about the impact that is going to have on commercial and industrial land. Commissioner Mohn likes this concept overall. The key is to overcome some of the issues with the housing. The housing is an intricate part of the business enterprise. Commissioner Mohn thinks balancing the multiple components between the ordinance and the overlay is the credible path. Commissioner Thomas thinks the concept is interesting. The County will have the ability to have some controls by doing the overlay district. We are putting residential housing in an RA area, but do we want to make the land, by putting it inside the UDA, so valuable that there is a future incentive to switch the use to something else. Putting it inside the SWSA gives Commissioner Thomas some concern because the water use for the residential, convention center and restaurant parts is probably 50,000 to 75,000 gallons a day. But if we're looking at a potential 300,000 gallons a day to irrigate a golf course, he would like to see a restriction. Commissioner Unger could see this as a positive thing. They could use the gray water they have and not send it back to the sewer plants. The part of the year that they don't use water to irrigate the golf course, possibly they could be selling it back to the County. He has talked to the Sanitation Authority about that, but he has not talked to the Perry's. Commissioner Kriz stated that this is an ideal time to take a look at where we are going to have a convention center that is relatively close and it is one of the things that the tourism people say that they get requests for. That is one thing that this project would bring. Chairman Shickle asked Mr. Wyatt if he knew to what extent the owner of the property would be willing to assure that the reason they did this project this year, would be memorialized some time because it is long enough that some of the players will not be here. Somebody in the future is going to be guessing why the SWSA was extended and to what extent is the landowner willing to lock that in. Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 033 Mr. Wyatt stated it is a long -term process. Most of the players will still be here in that window and that is when your Comp Plan amendment is really the critical key because it says in essence if they decided to breed a small -area land use plan over this property, we would come in after this current group is gone with a rezoning and it was different, you would have your Comprehensive Plan to fall back on as the basis for denial of that rezoning. Chairman Shickle was looking for the land owners' willingness to go with that commitment. Mr. Wyatt thinks they feel that having the convention center is a great thing for everybody, them and the County, and that the extended stay lodging is a win -win because it creates a market for them and gets people to come in from out of town. And the year -round residential is really the revenue source that helps sustain the golf course in the off months. Chairman Shickle stated that if the owner or the subsequent owner might say that the Comp Plan did not really mean that, it was just an idea. Mr. Wyatt responded that's where the Board can say we stand by our Comp Plan or there is going to be a review of the formal minutes of these proceedings to verify what the intention was. Vice - Chairman Ewing thinks the overlay is the way to go rather than the UDA. We'll have more control and assurance that the land use is going to be adhered to. Chairman Shickle favors looking at it and studying it, but he does believe it's too early to do it. To the extent that there is still infrastructure needed for the Round Hill SWSA, he favors anything that happens to further that goal It was a unanimous decision to move this request forward for further consideration. The consensus of concern is housing, and the credible alternate to UDA expansion is an overlay district. SENSENY ROAD AREA LAND USE STUDY INTRODUCTION. Deputy Director. Ruddy stated that the Community Area Plan group of the CPPC has starteda study of the Senseny Eastern Frederick Urban Land Use Plan. The area is about 10,000 acres on the eastern side of the County, covering basically everything from the Route 7 corridor south to the Route 50 corridor, from Winchester City boundary out to the Clarke County line and Opequon Creek. He noted that this study area includes the Route 7 and Route 50 Business Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 034 Corridor Plans which were both adopted in 1994 and includes the Red Bud and Shawnee Districts, and a small portion of Stonewall District. A variety of different things will be implemented in this area, such as approaches to Neighborhood villages and urban centers, in an effort to address some things that are called for in our Comprehensive Plan. This will be an opportunity to deal with underdeveloped portions of the County and large areas of undeveloped land to promote a land use plan which addresses the growing needs of this part of the community. Deputy Director Ruddy pointed out two things that need attention: the airport support area and the Frederick County landfill support area. Transportation is a key component in this location. There are a lot of community facility things that need to be addressed with regards to middle schools, park land, environmental issues, and natural resources. This also gives us a location where we could consider evaluating and implementing the transfer of development rights effort. This study is a good effort that we will be getting into over the next few months going into late fall, early winter. Chairman Shickle asked Deputy Director Ruddy what the task looks like. Is it like the other land use plans? Deputy Director Ruddy stated it's very significant as we get the chance to implement a lot of things that we have been talking about and it is in an area where there is a significant amount of population. Chairman Shickle thought this was one of the bigger challenges. DRAFT CHANGES TO THE FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT - DISCUSSION Senior Planner Perkins stated that at last week's Board meeting, the draft changes for the floodplain ordinance were discussed and she has made some changes in response to comments received from the Board. At the Board meeting, the major text change was in the permit and application requirements. She referred everyone to the hand -out, where the changes are underlined, given at the start of this meeting. One concern is the terminology of uses and activities and what that covers. She changed that to "all development and all construction activities ", and that runs throughout Section A and Al. Another change was to give the Zoning Administrator approval discretion to permit development and /or construction activities within a floodplain when a permit is not required. If these changes are appropriate, the ordinance will go to the Planning Commission for a hearing and then to the Board. There were no comments, so this revised ordinance amendment will move forward. Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 035 REVISED SECONDARY USE STANDARDS — DISCUSSION Senior Planner Perkins stated that M1 changes were discussed at a Board meeting that fell back to the secondary use standards that were approved in December 2008, regarding accessory retailing in the industrial districts. This is to address some concerns regarding the OM, Ml and M2 Districts. The restriction is that no more than 15% of the gross floor area can be dedicated to retail, not to exceed 2,000 square feet. This will put back into the ordinance the opportunity for accessory retailing in the industrial districts. There were no comments regarding secondary use standards. This revised ordinance amendment will move forward. REVISIONS TO 165 -27 FOR PARKING LOT STANDARDS — DISCUSSION Senior Planner Perkins stated this is meant to revise parking standards contained in the existing ordinance which requires excessive parking and a lack of flexibility for adjustments, as well as there are no provisions for low impact development techniques or the curb and gutter requirements. This revision covers changes to the off - street parking spaces, new sections for changes of use for developmental parking adjustments, requirements for commercial parking of vehicles within residential districts, revisions to the surface materials for parking lots, revisions to the curb and gutter, and raised islands. This proposed revision would allow sites in the B3, OM, M1 and M2 districts to use header curb where they don't need them for stormwater management purposes. There is also a provision to allow the Zoning Administrator to eliminate curb and gutter and modify the landscape islands within the SWSA for developments which choose to use low impact development techniques. There are provisions to the parking setbacks and definitions that correspond to any changes. Chairman Shickle asked about parking requests for shopping center strip -style large and the small type. Senior Planner Perkins said with the strip mall, we would take individual uses that were proposed in a building and determine what the parking could be. This allows them to use a blanket parking calculator so that anything can go in and we are not breaking up into retail, restaurant, and /or office uses. Chairman Shickle asked if this would end up with less parking. Senior Planner Perkins responded yes. Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) V: Chairman Shickle asked about mining and other uses; was there a reason why staff thought they were not providing enough parking? Senior Planner Perkins stated we are just trying to consolidate the similar uses into one. Chairman Shickle asked if some flexibility is built in and say "as needed ", but it is not specified, if somebody did not have enough parking but they had done what was required, would they basically have to provide more parking, and what would be the baseline? Senior Planner Perkins answered we would fall back to whatever is stated in the table for their use and as part of the adjustment, they would be required to have an area where they could accomplish the parking. They may not have to build it, but they would still have to have an area. The original plan would show how much they would have to have total, based on our tables. They would then submit their parking adjustment study to the Zoning Administrator and it would be reduced as needed, but they would still have to show the additional spacing and how they could provide them. Supervisor Fisher asked about automotive. He stated for service parking, there has to be designated parking spaces, but would we require display areas for new vehicles to be striped according to our current parking requirements, as well as islands at the end of the road. He asked Senior Planner Perkins to look into this because, normally, dealers do not adhere to this requirement anyway. There were no additional comments and this ordinance revision will move forward. REVISIONS TO 4144 -18, 19 AND 33 FOR SIDEWALKS, PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS AND STREETLIGHTS - DISCUSSION Senior Planner Perkins stated this is a subdivision ordinance amendment. The revision being proposed to 144 -18 Sidewalks is a requirement for sidewalks along existing streets and the requirement for the two foot wide grass strip. This ordinance currently requires that sidewalks be placed along proposed streets when an application is submitted but you do not always get sidewalks along existing streets unless they have been proffered. This revision will require sidewalks along streets they are building as well as streets they are touching. Another revision is to remove the 15,000 square foot lot size requirement; it will be based upon the zoning district and the use instead of square foot size. A requirement for sidewalks along collector or arterial streets in any zoning district is also proposed, as well as a requirement for bicycle and pedestrian facilities when called for by the Comprehensive Plan. Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 037 Section 144 -19 Streetlights is a change to remove the 15,000 square foot lot size and also to implement the requirement based on zoning district and use. Section 144 -33 Commercial and Industrial Design Standards Exemptions is a revision to remove sidewalks and pedestrian walkways extensions for the commercial and industrial properties. Section 144 -18 allows this revision to be implemented. This wouldn't require sidewalks on internal roads, but if they touch a collector or an arterial street, they would be required to put in sidewalks. Section 144 -18A2 states.... "Along both sides of all collector and arterial streets in any Zoning District ". Chairman Shickle asked Senior Planner Perkins if this is what she means. Senior Planner Perkins stated this is not what is meant and she will change it. Supervisor Dove is concerned about removing so much curb and gutter on larger lots. Director Lawrence stated this doesn't apply to the RA district so it would be larger lots in the UDA and the RP district. The State is saying we have to have a UDA and the density of the UDA has to be eight units per acre. That State Code is going to dictate how small lots are going to be in the UDA. Concerning streetlights, Supervisor Fisher asked if there is any potential issue with homeowner associations that normally take care of paying for the lights with nearby subdivisions that don't have streetlights. Mrs. Perkins stated if the subdivision has streetlights, they have to have a HOA. There were no additional comments and this ordinance revision will move forward. DEFINITION OF ATTACHED DWELLINGS - DISCUSSION Senior Planner Perkins stated this is a revision to the definition of attached dwellings. The actual definition of a dwelling is proposed to be revised, adding the word residential. A whole new definition of attached dwelling is proposed. This will clearly identify and distinguish each type of housing type from the other. There were no comments and this ordinance revision will move forward. NEW TND (TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN) ZONING DISTRICT — DISCUSSION Senior Planner Perkins stated this is a whole new zoning district being proposed, created to implement neighborhood centers and urban centers. This district would be served by public Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances) 03 water and sewer, shall contain no fewer than 20 areas and shall be located along an arterial or major collector roadway. This development is intended to provide for the new opportunities that integrate land uses to create future communities. Chairman Shickle stated we have had a problem lately with Property Owners Associations that did not have a purpose to exist. What is being proposed that makes POAs have to exist? Senior Planner Perkins stated with this type of development you see Master HOAs that have subset HOAs. Street trees have to be maintained in commercial areas by the HOA as well as the central plaza; street lights, parking areas and private roads will all necessitate HOA maintenance. Chairman Shickle believes if a HOA does not have a purpose, do not require them. Senior Planner Perkins answered they would have a purpose. Commissioner Mohn asked for staff's perspective on the applicability of this ordinance in the designated town center or neighborhood centers, will this be an option for rezonings? Senior Planner Perkins stated at this point, it is preferred that this new ordinance be used, but as long as the policy goals are met, this is not required. Commission Chairman Wilmot thinks this is very important and she hopes that everyone tries to contribute to its success. The draft ordinance shows a density of a maximum of 16 units per acre, and if this is one of the areas for which we're going to use our transferrable development rights, should we have an extraordinarily large number of units per acre or should we have a smaller density as an incentive for TDRs. There were no further comments and this ordinance amendment will move forward. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:35 P.M. Richard C. Shickle 4erk, . Chairman, Board of Supervisors upervisors Minutes Prepared By: Jay E. Tibbs Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Work Session with Planning Commission of 07/27/09 (2009 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments & Review of Ordinances)