The URL can be used to link to this page

BZA 05-15-07 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia May 15, 2007 3:25 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 1) Determination of a Quorum 2) Minutes of March 20, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING 3) Appeal Application #04-07 of Joyce E. Myers, to appeal the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Zoning Ordinance pursuant to Article V - RA Rural Areas District, Section 165-50 - Permitted Uses, pertaining to animal shelters. The subject property is located at 625 Town Run Lane, and is identified with Property Identification Number 85-A-137 in the Opequon Magisterial District. 4) Other FILE COPY MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, on, March 20, 2007. PRESENT: Theresa Catlett, Chairman, Opequon District; Robert Perry, Vice Chairman, Stonewall District; Kevin Scott, Shawnee District; Dwight Shenk, Gainesboro District; Eric Lowman, Red Bud District; and, Jay Givens, Back Creek District. ABSENT: Robert W. Wells, Member -At -Large. STAFF PRESENT: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator; Lauren Krempa, Zoning Inspector; and Bev Dellinger, BZA Secretary. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Catlett at 3:25 p.m. On a motion by Mr. Scott and seconded by Mr. Lowman, the minutes for the February 20, 2007 meeting were unanimously approved as presented. The cut-off date for the April meeting is March 23, 2007, and at this time, there are no items to be heard. PUBLIC HEARING Appeal Application #03-07 of Roma Restaurant, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to appeal the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to Section 165-30A(1), animated or flashing signs. The subject property is located on the south side of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), approximately 500 feet east of Interstate 81, Exit 307, and is identified with Property Identification Number 85 -A -148E in the Opequon Magisterial District. ACTION —APPEAL APPROVED Mr. Cheran gave the staff report. This is an appeal of the determination of the Zoning Administrator in the interpretation of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-30A(1), animated or flashing signs. The applicant is appealing the determination of the Zoning Administrator as to the use of LED, Light Emitting Diode, signage in Frederick County. There is a picture of the proposed sign in your agenda package. Mr. Cheran further stated that the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance does not allow animated or flashing signs within Frederick County. The definitions of the Frederick County Ordinance defines an animated sign as any sign or part of a sign that changes physical position or light intensity by any movement or rotation or that gives the visual impression of such Minute Book Page 1434 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of March 20, 2007 movement or rotation. The ordinance defines a flashing sign as any sign directly or indirectly illuminated that exhibits changing natural or artificial light or color effects by any means whatsoever. Staff has included Section 165-156, sign definitions, in your agenda package. This proposed sign falls under the definition of a flashing sign and is not permitted. Any change in definitions or types of signage allowed by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance is a legislative action and not within the scope of the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Cheran asked the Board members to keep in mind that although they have seen this type of appeal before, each land use action stands on its own merit; there is no precedent set. Staff is requesting to affirm the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-30A(1) and Section 165-156, that LED and EMB signage is flashing and is not a permitted sign in Frederick County. Mr. Cheran stated that the applicant is represented by Mr. Evan Wyatt of Greenway Engineering. Mr. Wyatt approached the podium and identified himself. Mr. Wyatt handed out a picture of the proposed sign. This picture was the same as the picture included in the Board's agenda package. Mr. Wyatt stated that one of the things that Roma has applied for is to be able to produce the type of sign in the picture he handed out. Roma Restaurant is requesting for the message board portion of the sign to use the LED technology. Roma has applied for a sign and the permit for the sign in and of itself was acceptable; however, the message board portion of the sign was rejected by the Zoning Administrator. Mr. Wyatt spoke of things that had happened previously, for the benefit of Mr. Lowman and Mr. Givens, who were not on the Board when the previous three actions occurred. The first one of these that came in front of the BZA was done as a result of CVS and this is really the first time, based on Mr. Wyatt's research, that the Board of Zoning Appeals was really educated on LED technology and message boarding. One of the things that the representative of that application pointed out was the fact that LED and EMB are not defined by the ordinance, and the staff report recognizes that. What the representative did at that point was went to the next source, which was the International Zoning Code. What the representative determined was the definition in the International Zoning Code actually does define both animated and flashing signs. The definition of a flashing sign is where it's characterized by a repetitive cycle in which the period of illumination is either the same or less than the period of non - illumination. The repetitive cycle is defined as a period of less than four seconds. Locally, a sign that comes close to that would probably be like what the Sportsplex has up. Mr. Wyatt thinks if that type of sign was being proposed, there would be a legitimate argument by staff. But what Mr. Wyatt is talking about is something very similar to this: what you have is a message display and the message display is no different than a manual board. Mr. Wyatt continued that with the CVS sign what the BZA determined was that it was appropriate to use LED technology for the message board and they approved that with a change in that the message board could not change messages for a period of two minutes. The thinking at that time, based on the research Mr. Wyatt did, was that's a standard that the City of Winchester uses for their LED -type signs and if you are sitting at an intersection, that's going to supercede the signal for a traffic Minute Book Page 1435 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of March 20, 2007 light to change. In other words, you'll be in and out of that intersection, so the feeling was that was an appropriate time change. In April 2006, Mr. Wyatt said he was in front of this Board with something that was similar, but different, in that it was LED technology to display gas pricing. What the BZA and staff were concerned with on that application was to have the gas pricing as a fixed LED display wasn't necessarily that big of a concern, but they didn't want the price flashing. That wasn't what the applicant wanted either, and the BZA recommended approval of that type of sign with the caveat there would be no flashing mechanism. In May of 2006, Valley Farm Credit came in with an application for a LED technology sign with an electronic message board. Similar to CVS, there was a limitation that the message portion could not change for a period of two minutes, but there was also a restriction put on that there would be no animation effects associated with the sign. Mr. Wyatt stated he's talking about something very similar to the other three cases that have been before the Board. He's talking about a sign that instead of using block lettering uses LED technology to display the message and, of course, it's important to know that there is no restriction on changing a message in the County. If you had a standardized manual sign, they could change the message as many times during the course of the day as they wanted to. What he's talking about here is the same thing; it's using LED to display a message. Mr. Wyatt continued that basically what the flashing sign definition is it exhibits changing light or color effects by means whatsoever. What he's looking at is a sign that is going to have red lettering, it's not going to change colors, and it's not going to have animation. He doesn't believe that this falls under the definition of a flashing sign whatsoever. Mr. Wyatt stated they are willing to entertain that if the BZA would be willing to grant the appeal similar to what you did with CVS and Valley Farm Credit, they would certainly accept the condition placed on the sign that there would be no animation and no flashing effects of the sign whatsoever. They are simply looking to use a message board with LED technology and to have an interval change for a message that is acceptable to the Board. Mr. Shenk asked Mr. Wyatt how often they plan on changing the LED message. Mr. Wyatt responded that he's talked to Mr. Ritenour, owner of Roma Restaurant, and they would be very willing to have the same conditions that CVS and Valley Farm Credit have, which is two minutes. Mr. Benjamin Ritenour approached the podium and identified himself as the owner of Roma Casual Dining. Mr. Ritenour stated that he hopes the Board will allow him the tools he needs to compete successfully against nationally owned corporate restaurants. Mr. Ritenour believes this sign is essential. Roma is tucked away some 200 feet off Route 277 and a store front sign can only be seen for a few seconds when you pass it. Mr. Ritenour stated that this business is changing and becoming more competitive. He's asking for consistency and fairness in this appeal. Mr. Shenk asked Mr. Ritenour if he anticipates needing to change the sign every two minutes, or maybe once every day. Mr. Ritenour responded they will probably have daily specials listed, lunch and dinner, and any entertainment they might be having, so maybe five to seven messages. Mr. Perry stated that the LED portion of the sign shown in the picture shows two lines. Does Minute Book Page 1436 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of March 20, 2007 Mr. Ritenour envision his sign staying at two lines. Mr. Ritenour responded yes, two lines, because of the letter size. Chairman Catlett asked if anyone else would like to speak. No one responded and the public hearing portion was closed. Discussion Chairman Catlett stated that like Mr. Scott, she lives in the area and goes by the restaurant frequently as well. She does have a little more concern about this area than perhaps the CVS area because this is so much more congested. Personally, Chairman Catlett isn't sure that she would see the need to change it every two minutes but maybe change it occasionally throughout the day for lunch and dinner. Mr. Givens stated that being new to the Board, this is his first exposure to this. Mr. Givens stated that he really does not have a problem with the LED display; it's the way that's coming and it's probably safer and just as good as a manual sign. Mr. Givens thinks because the ordinances are written in such a way now that they're very hard to follow that this Board should be consistent. If we're going to approve this, it ought to be two minutes. To do this, the Board has to make the determination that it's not a flashing sign. Once they make the determination, if they uphold the flashing sign then it's not allowed and the BZA cannot put a condition on it, because the way he reads it under the zoning ordinance, it's prohibited. Therefore, Mr. Givens feels they wouldn't be able to go in and put a condition on something the Board of Supervisors has set. Mr. Givens doesn't know why they couldn't define it as a business sign, which says... "A sign which directs attention to a business or profession conducted or to a commodity or service sold, offered or manufactured or to a service or entertainment offered". At the same time, restrict it to that two minute change over. In Mr. Givens' opinion, if you call it a flashing sign, you have no option but to say that it's not allowed in Frederick County. Mr. Scott would agree with Mr. Givens until they were educated about the definition of LED versus flashing or animated. Mr. Scott agrees with Mr. Cheran's action based on his ability to follow the ordinance; he didn't have any choice. What Mr. Scott disagrees with is the nature of what the ordinance states right now. Mr. Scott asked Mr. Cheran the status of changing the sign ordinance. Mr. Cheran stated that the ordinance for the signage is ready to go, but they have to talk to the Chamber of Commerce, Retail Petroleum Association and the industrial parks before it's brought to public hearing. Mr. Cheran further stated that what concerns staff are violations of the two minutes limitation. Mr. Cheran believes the competitive issue doesn't play into this, because none of the other adjoining businesses have a LED sign. Mr. Perry asked Mr. Cheran how the ordinance that's almost ready to go to public hearing addresses LED signage. Mr. Cheran stated it completely outlaws them, but that may change. Mr. Perry told Mr. Cheran that he totally agrees with what he had to do, with the way the ordinance reads. Minute Book Page 1437 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of March 20, 2007 Chairman Catlett stated that she doesn't think this Board has the authority to change and allow a sign that the Board of Supervisors has not already allowed. What this Board has to do is to determine in our minds if this is a flashing or animated sign. If we say it is, we have to uphold Mr. Cheran's decision. If we believe that it is not, we have the authority to override Mr. Cheran's decision. Mr. Perry stated that if it changes every two minutes, in his opinion, it is not flashing. Mr. Shenk made a motion to overturn the decision of the Zoning Administrator, based on the definition that the sign is a business sign and not a flashing sign. However, the Board limits the number of changes in messages to two -minute intervals. Mr. Perry seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. OTHER Chairman Catlett asked if there is any other business to come before the Board. Mr. Cheran stated that the Board of Supervisors on February 28, 2007, made a change to the RA setbacks. A waiver for the setback requirements goes to the Board of Supervisors versus the Board of Zoning Appeals. The BZA should not be seeing as many cases, especially concerning non -conforming lots. As there were no other items to be discussed, the meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m. by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, Theresa B. Catlett, Chairman Bev Dellinger, Secretary Minute Book Page 1438 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of March 20, 2007 APPEAL APPLICATION #04-07 cO� JOYCE E. MYERS Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals w Prepared: May 1, 2007 ;8 Staff Contact: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING DATE: May 15, 2007 - Pending LOCATION: The subject property is located at 625 Town Run Lane. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBER(S): 85-A-137 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoning: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) Fast: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential Land Use: Agricultural Land Use: Agricultural/Residential Land Use: Agricultural APPEAL: To appeal the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-50, permitted uses. REASON FOR APPEAL: Applicant is appealing the decision of the Zoning Administrator as to animal shelters as a permitted use in the RA zoning district. Appeal Application #04-07, Joyce E. Myers May 1, 2007 Page 2 STAFF COMMENTS! The County of Frederick cited the applicant for operating a kennel on June 9, 2006. The applicant was adjudicated via the General District Court as to the violation of operating a kennel in the RA zoning district. The applicant's motion to dismiss to the General District Court identifies the use on this property to be an animal shelter, not a kennel. The General District Court agreed with the applicant that the use on this property was not a kennel as defined by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. On February 27, 2007, the applicant was cited for operation of an animal shelter in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. Section 165-50 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance does not allow for animal shelters in the RA zoning district. In accordance with the Frederick County Zoning Ordnance, animal shelters are classified by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 0752 as defined below: Standard Industrial Code (SIC) 0752- Animal specialty services, except veterinary, with all activities and animals kept within a fully enclosed primary structure. SIC -0752 is only a permitted use in the B-2 (Business General) and B-3 (Industrial Transition) zoning districts. Animal shelters are treated as public buildings in the M-1 (Industrial, Light) and M- 2 (Industrial, General) zoning districts (Frederick County Animal Shelter). Frederick County Zoning does not delineate between private, public, or rescue animal shelters. Therefore, the animal shelter located on this property is not a permitted use in regards to Section 165-50 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and is not permitted in the RA zoning district. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE MAY 15, 2007 MEETING: Staff is requesting to affirm the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-50, animal shelters are not an allowed use in the RA zoning district. It OS8 LS L L (ISO hP %SD 6 40 L hp Lg [ L °' ^ 0 , ao OSS yp s 4 ^ Oil ¢,`'O LOS O ^ a5D , yy B B h h ^ ^o ^ ^o LL O OSB 17 O y yy ^ ^y p^ 6y Ogg O a yy0 1798 v m0 hh wy0 .. ^a LL Og8 Q O yp yy y b 6 ♦,. O y L Ogg m°jp ^ Og8 O h^ t 4 %y0 ogB �� a p? 4 °O %1IL1 ot ^vsa J�TY a U r aF 4-4 a P V � R y' d � Y �4"b It OS8 LS L L (ISO hP %SD 6 40 L hp Lg [ L °' ^ 0 , ao OSS yp s 4 ^ Oil ¢,`'O LOS O ^ a5D , yy B B h h ^ ^o ^ ^o LL O OSB 17 O y yy ^ ^y p^ 6y Ogg O a yy0 1798 v m0 hh wy0 .. ^a LL Og8 Q O yp yy y b 6 ♦,. O y L Ogg m°jp ^ Og8 O h^ t 4 %y0 ogB �� a p? 4 °O %1IL1 ot ^vsa J�TY a U r aF � R y' d � Y �4"b {i��d-� . CL = O 4 O U E E � is � n y o a Q It OS8 LS L L (ISO hP %SD 6 40 L hp Lg [ L °' ^ 0 , ao OSS yp s 4 ^ Oil ¢,`'O LOS O ^ a5D , yy B B h h ^ ^o ^ ^o LL O OSB 17 O y yy ^ ^y p^ 6y Ogg O a yy0 1798 v m0 hh wy0 .. ^a LL Og8 Q O yp yy y b 6 ♦,. O y L Ogg m°jp ^ Og8 O h^ t 4 %y0 ogB �� a p? 4 °O %1IL1 ot c � O U V] o N = E IF�- �, `-' v c H 5 E O Q a "T w - w W u n 22 �d�'fYf+S4 V a1� NM 2w ii C 00 m 00 W7 nyy 20``' K K �: 3 C okCL 7 = . 2r N o c z > J O lk Q¢�in �a`m3c �,Be�N1t2I 1 O S 0 GG QG0 r� t �LMOd v�y i r VIRGINIA: IN THE GENERAL DISTRICT COURT FOR FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Criminal Division COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VA, V. Case No. GC06-8042 JOYCE E. MYERS, Defendant. MOTION TO DISMISS COMES NOW Defendant, Joyce E. Myers, Ph.D. ("Defendant" or "Myers"), by counsel, -and moves this Honorable Court to dismiss the misdemeanor summons filed against her by the County of Frederick ("County") in its entirety. Myers basis for this motion is that the facility she operates is not a kennel as defined by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Myers operates the not for profit animal rescue facility, Paws and Whiskers, a 501(c)(3) tax exempt charitable organization, (the "Shelter") on property located at 625 Town Run Lane, Stephens City, Virginia (the "Property"). The Property is zoned Rural Areas ("RA"). The Sheltq,p dedicated to removing dogs and cats from shelters where they would otherwise be euthanized and adopting them out to suitable homes. She has received national recognition for her efforts in this area. Myers neither sells the animals, nor receives compensation for her efforts. On June 15, 2006, Myers received a notice letter of violation from the County with respect to operation of her Shelter, stating that a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP") was required, but had not been obtained. A summons was issued for Myers on July 26, 2006 alleging a violation of Section 165-51(K) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. (A copy of the summons is attached hereto as "Exhibit I"). The charges against Myers state that she did "unlawfully violate Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to wit: Operation of Kennel without Conditional Use Permit." However, Section 165-156 of the Zoning Ordinance defines a Kennel as "a place prepared to house, board, breed, handle or otherwise keep or care for dogs for sale or in return for compensation." (Emphasis added.) (A copy of Section 165-51(K) the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance is attached hereto as "Exhibit 2 and a copy of the relevant portion of Section 165-156 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance is attached hereto as "Exhibit 3"). As stated above, Myers does not sell animals or receive compensation. In addition, there is no provision in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance that places a limit on the amount of cats and dogs that can be located on property zoned RA. Therefore, not only does Myers not meet the definition of a kennel, but her activities are consistent with RA zoning uses. In summary, for the above stated reasons, Myers' activities on the Property do not meet the definition of a kennel as defined in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, she has not violated the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, and therefore, the charges against her should be dismissed. WHEREFORE, Defendant Joyce E. Myers respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss the summons issued against her based on the grounds stated above and provide such other and further relief as may be deemed appropriate. Erik W. Fox, Esquire Respectfully submitted, Joyce E. Myers By Counsel Virginia Bar No. 65456 LAWSON AND SILEK, P.L.C. P.O. Box 2740 Winchester, VA 22604 Phone: (540) 665-0050 Fax: (540) 722-4051 Counsel for Defendant Joyce E. Myers I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the J01 SERVICE of foregoing Motion to Dismiss was mailed first class, postage prepaid to: Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Esquire County Attorney 107 North Kent Street V-inchester, VA 22601 Lawson, Esquire Fox, Esquire 2007, a copy of the § 165-82 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-82 B. [Amended 8-8-1990; 6-11-1991; 6-8-1994; 7-10-1996; 2-26-1997; 8-13-19971 B2 Business General District. The intent of this district is to provide large areas for a variety of business, office and service uses. General business areas are located on arterial highways at major intersections and at interchange areas. Businesses allowed involve frequent and direct access by the general public but not heavy truck traffic on a constant basis other than that required for delivery of retail goods. General business areas should have direct access to major thoroughfares and should be properly separated from residential areas. Adequate frontage and depth should be provided, and access should be properly controlled to promote safety and orderly development. Nuisance factors are to be avoided. (1) Allowed uses shall be as follows: Allowed Uses Veterinary offices with all activities and animals kept within the fully enclosed primary structure, excluding the following: [Amended 8-24-2004] Veterinary services livestock Animal speciality services, except veterinary, with all activities and animals kept within the fully enclosed primary structure [Added 1-10-20011 Communication facilities and offices, including telephone, telegraph, radio, television and other communications, excluding the following:' [Amended 8-24-20041 Communications services, not elsewhere classified Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 074 0741 0752 W - 1 Editor's Note: The entry for electric, gas and other utility facilities and offices, SIC No. 49, excluding sanitary services, SIC No. 495, which immediately followed, was repealed 8-24-2004. 16614 04-30-2006 FREDERICK COUNTY CODE § 165-82 165-82 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Allowed Uses 7832 Motion picture theaters, except drive-in 784 Videotape rental 79 Amusement and recreation services operated indoors 7999 Golf driving ranges and miniature golf courses 80 Health services 81 Legal services 8351 Child day-care facilities 86 Membership organizations 87 Engineering, accounting, research, related services, cluding management and the following: [Am 24 2004] 8734 Testing laboratories _ General business offices _ Model home sales offices J Self-service storage facilities _ .Public buildings _ Public utility distribution facilities - Business signs - Directional signs _ Building entrance signs - Residential uses which are accessory to allowed business uses _ Parks - Churches 16618 04-25-200 § 165-82 FRFDFQIrrlc CCO ,NITv CODE § 165-82 Conditional Uses (a) Such uses shall be located at least 2,500 feet from the property line of existing adult retail uses, schools, churches, parks, day-care facilities and residential uses and districts. (b) Such uses shall not be permitted in shopping centers and/or multi -tenant buildings. (c) All merchandise display areas shall be limited to enclosed structures and shall not be visible from the outside. (d) Business signs shall not exceed a maximum of 25 square feet. No wall - mounted signs or window displays shall be permitted. (e) Hours of operation shall be limited to between 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. Standar( Industrie Classificati (SIC) C. B3 Industrial Transition District. The intent of this district is to provide for heavy commercial activities, involving larger scale marketing or wholesaling, in locations that are separate from but in the vicinity of business and industrial areas. In some cases, such areas may be transitional, located between business and industrial areas. In these areas, there will be a mixture of automobile and truck traffic. Some of the uses in this district will require large areas of land and may have outdoor storage and display. It is intended that the uses in this district shall not be sources of noise, dust, smoke or other nuisances. Such industrial transition areas shall be provided with safe and sufficient access. 16620 04-25-2005 § 165-82 ZONING § 165-82 16621 04-25-2005 Standard Industrial Allowed Uses Classification Veterinary services with all activities and (SIC) animals kept within the fully enclosed 074 primary structure [Amended 1-10-2001] 'Animal speciality services, except veterinary, with all activities and animals 752 kept within the fully enclosed primary structure [Added 1-10-2001] Landscape and horticultural services Offices and storage facilities for 078 building construction contractors, 15, 16 and heavy construction contractors and 17 special trade contractors Commercial printing Local and suburban transit and 275 interurban highway passenger transportation 41 Motor freight transportation and warehousing Transportation by air 42 Transportation services 45 Communication facilities and offices, 47 including telephone, telegraph, radio, 48 television and other communications Electric, gas and other utility facilities and offices and trucking and 49 warehousing, excluding the following; Sanitary services Advertising specialties - wholesale 495 [Added 8-24-2004] 5199 Building materials, hardware, garden supply, mobile home dealers and retail 52 nurseries 16621 04-25-2005 § 165-82 ZONING § 165-82 Standard Industrial Classification Allowed Uses (SIC) Scale repair service [Added 8-24-20041 7699 Surgical instrument repair [Added 8-24-2004] 7699 Drive-in motion picture theaters 75 Amusement and recreation services 79 operated indoors Self-service storage facilities _ Vocational schools 824 Business associations 861 Professional membership organizations 862 Labor unions and similar labor organizations 863 Engineering, accounting, research, 87 management and related services Testing laboratories [Added 8-24-2004] 8734 General business offices _ Model home sales office _ Accessory retailing _ Public buildings _ Public utility distribution facilities _ Business signs _ Directional signs _ Building entrance signs _ Residential uses which are accessory _ to allowed business uses Parks _ 16623 12-15-2004 AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY, AND FISHING dustry :roup ' Industry 5� No ANIMAL SERVICES, EXCEPT VETERINARY 176 0751 Livestock Services, Except Veterinary 33 Establishments primarily engaged in performing services, except veterinary, for cattle, hogs, sheep, goats, and poultry. Dairy herd improvement associa- tions are also included in this industry. Establishments primarily engaged in the fattening of cattle are classified in Industry 0211. Establishments engaged in incidental feeding of livestock as a part of holding them in stockyards for periods of less than 30 days (generally in the course of transportation) are classified in Transportation and Public Utilities, Industry 4789. Establish- ments primarily engaged in performing services, except veterinary, for ani- mals, except cattle, hogs, sheep, goats, and poultry are classified in Industry 0752. Artificial insemination services: live- Pedigree record services for cattle, stock hogs, sheep, goats, and poultry Breeding of livestock Sheep dipping and shearing Cattle spraying Showing of cattle, hogs, sheep, goats, Cleaning poultry coops and poultry Dairy herd improvement associations Slaughtering, custom: for individuals Livestock breeding services Vaccinating livestock, except by veteri- Milk testing for butterfat narians rf- 0752 Animal Specialty Services, Except Veterinary Establishments primarily engaged in performing services, except veterinary, for pets, equines, and other animal specialties. Establishments primarily en- gaged in performing services other than veterinary for cattle, hogs, sheep, goats, and poultry are classified in Industry 0751. Establishments primarily engaged in training racehorses are classified in Services, Industry 7948. Animal shelters Pedigree record services for pets and Artificial insemination services: animal other animal specialties specialties Showing of pets and other animal spe- Boarding horses cialties tL Boarding kennels Training horses, except racing I Breeding of animals, other than cattle, Training of pets and other animal spe- hogs, sheep, goats, and poultry cialties Dog grooming Vaccinating pets and other animal spe- Dog pounds cialties, except by veterinarians Honey straining on the farm FARM LABOR AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES' 0761 Farm Labor Contractors and Crew Leaders Establishments primarily engaged in supplying labor for agricultural pro- duction or harvesting. Establishments primarily engaged in machine harvest- ing are classified in Industry 0722. Crew leaders, farm labor: contract 0762 Farm Management Services Farm labor contractors Establishments primarily engaged in providing farm management services, including management or complete maintenance of citrus groves, orchards, and vineyards. Such activities may include cultivating, harvesting, or other specialized activities, but establishments primarily engaged in performing such services without farm management services are classified in the appro- priate specific industry within Industry Group 072. Citrus grove management and mainte- Vineyard management and mainte- nance, with or without crop services nance, with or without crop services Farm management services Orchard management and mainte- _ nance, with or without crop services . � � ��rp+!' � � ". ..j• , f 'f ,• Kr � 1•>•/�'.. � ss�>Y• 'g' �: f * �1� \.�v,! �. �'c4�6�i1. 1y��G►�� a. � p�";' % �w�r y� s�`�.y+Af� ive p PC VIS .p •RMt'«� �. �, •1, 7 �. %'Ou FSA' lot 7 ` l 6 K iytY.� 10 w 01 1 Ttl r � MOP r r :,+�►: waw,,.,,,.. � ..��..'��`=� Ail y' ,�`S _e, ► , j � .fir•• � � / � 11 - � �� •.` y • 1 CD CXJ 'go•cw.s �� '� �:..... i +► r {ter CD l �f� i � [ t }j ' � .z _ �� erg • - r r' i ' � 1 i r ! z _ / i s.; •' -,gyp• i ..,m APPLICATION FOR APPEAL IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA MAR 2 3 200' -OFFICE USE ONLY - Appeal '/ Ap eal Application # -0 � Submittal Deadline Submittal Date For the meeting of Fee Paid yes initials: 2 3 MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK - PLEASE PRINT The applicant is the owner X other APPLICANT: NAME: Dr. Joyce E. Myers ADDRESS: 625 Town Run Lane Stephens City, VA 22655 TELEPHONE: (540) 869-5424 (Check one) OCCUPANT: (if different) ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): From Route 277, turn South onto Town Run Lane. House on Corner of Town Run Lane and Peace and Plenty Lane. 4. Magisterial District: uon 5. 14 -Digit Property Identification No.: 85-A-137 7 I The existing zoning of the property is: The existing use of the property is: Adjoining Property: USE North Residential East RA South Wooded West Agricultural ZONING RP RA RA RA Describe the decision being appealed. (Attach a copy of the written decision.) Notice of Violation Attached as Exhibit 1 10. Describe the basis of the appeal, indicating your reason(s) for disagreeing with the decision. (This may be provided on separate sheet.) The Applicant disagrees with the definition of animal shelter as there does not currentlqppy ear to be a definition of animal shelter contained in the Zoning Ordinance. Further the determination that the presence of dogs and structures used to contain animals does not rise to the definition cited in the County's letter. The stated requirement to remove structures for dogs is not a requirement under the ordinance. Also the interpretation reached by the Zoning Administrator of Section 165-50 is in error. 11. Additional comments, if any: 12. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to the property for which the appeal is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear, and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: Please list complete 14 -digit property identification number.) NAME Arcadia Development Address: 501 Town Run Lane Property ID# 85-A-138 Wm. L. Ramey Address: 834 Peace & Plenty Lane Property ID# 85 -A -137B Jerry L. See Address: 307 Buckingham Drive Property ID# 85-A-134 Wm. L. Ramey Address: 824 Peace & Plenty Lane Pro erty ID# 85-A-60 Address: Pro erty ID # Address: Property ID # Address: Property ID # Address: Property ID # Address: Property ID # Address: Property ID # Address: Property ID # AGREEMENT APPEAL # 6) V— C) I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully petition the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to overrule the administrative interpretation of the County Zoning Ordinance as described herein. I agree to comply with any conditions required by the BZA. I authorize the members of the BZA and Frederick County officials to go upon the property for site inspection purposes. I hereby certify that all of the statements and information contained herein a: -c, to the best of my knowledge, true. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE (if other than applicant) -OFFICE USE ONLY- BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF / V 7 ACTION: -DATE- UAPPEAL OVERRULED jAPPEAL SUSTAINED SIGNED: DATE: BZA CHAIRMAN HAND -DELIVERED February 27, 2007 Joyce E. Myers 625 Town Run Lane Stephens City, VA 22655 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development RE: 625 Town Run Lane; Zoning District: RA (Rural Areas) Property Identification Number (PIN): 85-A-137 Dear Ms. Myers: 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 On February 27, 2007, I visited the above -referenced property in response to a complaint regarding an illegal animal shelter. My inspection of the site revealed the presence of several dogs and multiple structures used for containment of animals. An animal shelter is defined as an establishment, especially one supported by charitable contributions, that provide a temporary home for dogs, cats, and other animals that are offered for adoption. In accordance with Section 165-50 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, animal shelters are not a permitted use in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. Specifically, resolution of this violation may be accomplished by removing the animal shelter. Failure to comply with the Zoning Ordinance will result in a criminal complaint being filed against you. This office will allow 30 days from the retrieval date of this letter to resolve this violation. You may have the right to appeal the above notice of violation within 30 days of the date of this letter in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia. This decision shall be final and un -appealable, if it is not appealed within 30 days. Should you choose to appeal, the appeal must be filed with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) in accordance with Article XXI, Section 165-155A(1), of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. This provision requires the submission of an application form, a written statement setting forth the decision being appealed, the date of :EXHIBIT� [__7 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Page 2 Joyce E. Myers Re: 625 Town Run Lane February 27, 2007 decision, the grounds for the appeal, how the appellant is an aggrieved parry, any other information you may want to submit, and a $300.00 filing fee ($250.00 filing fee and a $50.00 refundable sign deposit). Once the appeal application is accepted, it will be scheduled for public hearing and decision before the BZA. Please do not hesitate to contact me regarding any questions that you may have at (540) 665-5651. Sincerely, Kevin T. Henry Planning Technician KTH/dlw