Loading...
CPPC 03-09-98 Meeting AgendaCOUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAY: 540/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director iz RE: March Meeting and Agenda DATE: March 4, 1998 The Frederick County Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) will be meeting on Monday, March 9, 1998 at 7:30 p.m. in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. The CPPS will discuss the following agenda items: AGENDA I. Request from Mark Smith, Greenway Engineering, to extend water and sewer service to Mr. Lynwood Ritter's mobile home development located on the western side of Hudson Hollow Road (Route 636), in the Opequon Magisterial District. I1. Discussion regarding information and strategies necessary to begin land use studies along the Front Royal Pike corridor (Route 522 South) and the Shady Elm Road corridor (Route 651). III. Other. Staff has been directed to advise all committee members that access to the County Administration Building for night meetings that do not occur in the Board room will be limited to the back door of the four-story wing. I would encourage committee members to park in the county parking lot located behind the new addition or in the Joint Judicial Center parking lot and follow the sidewalk to the back door of the four-story wing. Please bring your copy of the 1997 Comprehensive Policy Plan to this meeting if you have not provided it to our department to be updated. Please contact our department if you are unable to attend this meeting. Thank you. U:\EVAN\COMMON\CPPS\030998.MTG 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 ITEM # I WATER AND SEWER EXTENSION REQUEST Please find enclosed a letter from Mr. Mark D. Smith, Greeway Engineering, to Kris Tierney, Planning Director, dated January 23, 1998, requesting connections to the existing water and sewer system at Sherando Park to serve property owned by Mr. Lynwood Ritter. This property is identified as P.I.N. 86-A-208, is 5.64 acres, is zoned MH -1, Mobile Home Community District, and is the site of Ritter Mobile Home Park. The county address database identifies five units with addresses on this tract. The CPPS considered a similar request for this parcel in December 1994 and February 1995. The CPPS recommended that water and sewer service should not be extended to this property at that time. Please find enclosed a copy of the minutes from the April 5, 1995 Planning Commission meeting, and the minutes from the April 26, 1995 Board of Supervisor meeting. The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors denied this request by majority vote at that time. Staff has created two maps which depict the proposed layout for water and sewer service to the Ritter Mobile Home Park for your information. Staff has also discussed this issue with Mr. Jim Doran, Director of Parks and Recreation. Mr. Doran has advised staff that the applicant has not submitted a request to present this proposal to the Parks and Recreation Committee at this time. Mr. Doran also stated that if a favorable recommendation was made by the Parks and Recreation Committee, his department would need to receive verification from the Department of Interior or the their designated state agency (the Department of Conservationa and Recreation) to determine if an easement could be granted for this improvement. Staff recommends that the CPPS discuss the following issues with the applicant: • How many existing mobile homes will be served by this improvement? • Are there plans for future expansion if this improvement is allowed? (The property is currently zoned MH -1 which would permit a maximum of 8 units per acre or 45 units.) • Is there sufficient capacity to serve this site under both scenarios listed above? • Do other property owners in the area have the ability to tie into this system? Staff recommends that the CPPS consider the following issues regarding this proposal: Does the extension of water and sewer service outside of the SWSA for this proposal set a precedent that will be followed by others, or is this a unique situation? Is it reasonable to extend water and sewer service outside of the SWSA this distance without compromising the validity of the Comprehensive Policy Plan? Founded in 1971 BEEN AY ENGINEERING 151 Windy I fill lane Windiester, Virginia 22602 January 23, 1998 County of Frederick Dept. of Planning 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Va. ATT: Chris Tierney, Planning Director RE: Ritter Dear Mr. Tierney: On behalf of our client, Mr. Lynwood Ritter, and to comply with a State's DEQ consent order, we are requesting Mr. Ritter be granted permission to connect to the existing water and sewer system at Sherando Park. This connection will allow the closure of an existing open air lagoon which now services the mobile homes on Mr. Ritter's property. Attached are preliminary routing plans that show the location of the water and sewer connections into the park area. Once you have reviewed the information please contact me to discuss the procedure and time frame required to facilitate this request. Thank you for your time in this matter. Please contact me should there be additional information needed. Sincerely, Greenway En&ineeri-fi Mark D. Smith, P.E., L. S. President F,ngincers Survevnrs Telephone 540-6i,2-4155 FAX 540-722-9� 28 12 Commission, and both of these people's recollection was the same as his. Mr. Stiles felt that the Commission also needed to revise the minimum road frontage. Mr. Stiles said that in conjunction with this, he discovered that the "one-time division lot" was also removed from the ordinance and he was not aware of this or in favor of it. Mr. Stiles said that this was an important part of protecting and preserving agricultural land in Frederick County. Several of the Commission members, Mr. Marker, Mr. Thomas, and Mrs. Copenhaver, said that they distinctly remembered detailed discussion of this issue at the subcommittee level. Mr. Light said that as a realtor, he also was aware of the two -acre minimum lot size required by the ordinance. Mrs. Copenhaver said that the 250' frontage was established to prevent too many driveways from coming out onto a main road. Mr. Thomas felt that if the goal was to preserve agricultural land, then it would be best to Iook into the elimination of the five -acre lot. Mr. Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., Stonewall District Representative on the Board of Supervisors, said that he recently gave each of his five children approximately 1 1/2 - 1 3/4 acre to build on. Mr. Orndoff said that this acreage is sufficient for them for a septic and a nice home and is probably even too much land. iNlr. Orndoff said that he agreed with Mr. Stiles in that as far as he could recall, fancily subdivisions were not discussed at the Board meeting in 1991 when the Rural Areas District was amended. He said that he spoke with Mr. Dudley Rinker and Mr. Harrington Smith, who were both on the Board at the time, and they did not recall changing the family subdivision lot size. Mr. Orndoff felt that it should be rescinded and changed back to the one -acre miniinum. Mr. Donald Welsh, area resident, said that he felt the family lot division was being abused by some people. Mr. Welsh said that he knew of an instance where a person received approval to give each of his three very young children lots, however, the parent built on the lots and sold them. Mr. Welsh felt that family lot subdivisions should have an age limit, a time limit on building, and that the recipient of the lot should be required to reside on the lot. Mr. Welsh said that lie also was unaware that the minimum family lot size was changed to two acres. Some of the Commissioners said that they still firmly believed in the two acre lot size, however, they would be willing to relax width requirements with the stipulation that shared driveways were used. tNlr. Thomas said that he was fairly involved with this issue at the time it was changed and he said that it was studied very deliberately. t*vlr. Thomas felt that it shouldn't be changed without serious investigation. After lengthy discussion, the consensus of the Commission was to send the issue to the DRRS for studv. 4/5 ----------- 95 PC rt�nav RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PROGRAMS SUBCOMMITTEE (CPPS) CONCERNING THE REQUESTOF LINWOOD RITTER FOR 3982 13 SEWER EXTENSION Mr. Tierney said that the CPPC again discussed this matter at their March meeting, at the request of the Planning Commission, and it was the consensus of the CPPC that it would not be appropriate to extend either the Sewer and Water Service Area or the Urban Development Area at this time. Mr. Tierney said that the Committee's decision was based on the precedent situation that may be caused by extending the Sewer and Water Service Area to accommodate an individual property owner, let alone an individual enterprise. Commissioners noted that Mr. Ritter's property was zoned MH -1 (Mobile Home) and if he was permitted to connect to the sewer, he could place 42 mobile homes on his parcel. It was noted that not far from this property, there was another mobile home park with a similar system and the same zoning. The Commissioners were concerned about the precedent setting situation that may be caused by extending sewer to Mr. Ritter's property. They were also concerned about the open lagoon on the property, which is adjacent to the park, and the probability of it presenting an environmental and public safety/health hazard. They wanted to see a solution to that problem, however, most of the Commissioners felt that extending a sewer line was not the best solution. The staff noted that Mr. Ritter will be required by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to upgrade his system. Mr. Tierney said that once :1-1r. Ritter applies for his DPDES permit, he will be required to upgrade his system within four years. Mr. Light moved to recommend denial of ibli-. Ritter's request for sewer extension to his MH1 property located on Route 636. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Copenhaver and was passed by a majority vote. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Fredericl< Countv Planning Commission does herebv recommend that Mr. Linwood Ritter's request for sewer extension to his ylHl property located on Route 636 be denied. The Planning Commission felt that it would not be appropriate to extend either the SeNver and Water Service Area or the Urban Development Area at this time. The vote on this recommendation was: YES TO DENY THE SEWER HOOK-UP : Ours, :Morris, ilklarker, Copenhaver, Light, DeHaven NO: Shickle, Thomas, Romine, Stone APPOINTMENT OF MR. RICHARD C. OURS TO Tlli; COitiIPREIIENSIVE PLANS 3983 4 /2-GIO (305 MM Robert M. Sager - Aye Jimmie K. Ellington - Aye Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. - Aye MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF VALLEY MILL ESTATES - APPROVED Mr. Kris Tierney, assistant planning director, presented this request to the Board stating that it was for twenty-two single family detached homes on sixteen acres. He further stated that staff and Planning Commission has recommended approval. Mr. Orndoff moved to approve and Mr. Sager seconded the motion. Mr. Sager stated that he has a problem with all the differ- ent sets of rules that are being applied to these various master development plans. Mr. Smith stated that he agrees. Mr. Sager stated that he feels the rules need to be the same for all development. Mr. Longerbeam feels this is VDOT's call. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard G. Dick - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye James L. Longerbeam - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Jimmie K. Ellington - Aye Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. - Aye 5 REQUEST OF LINWOOD RITTER FOR A SEWER EXTENSION DENIED N ` Mr. Tierney presented the request of Mr. Linwood Ritter for au orization to extend sewer to his MH -1 (Mobile Home) property located on Route 636. He explained that the Planning Commission had met with Mr. Ritter and in turn passed the request to the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee for a recommendation. The Committee discussed the request at their meeting of December 12, 1994. The Committee recommended against permitting the extension. Mr. Tierney further explained that in order to permit the request, either the Sewer and Water Service Area or the Urban Development Area would have to be extended to encom- pass the Ritter property, and the committee felt that to do so 0 � ❑LUL would set a precedent that would open the door to numerous requests for similarly situated properties to request sewer extensions. There have been additional meetings with various agencies and Mr. Ritter however, the recommendation from the Planning Commission remains the same, Mr. Dick asked if this property has been fully develop- ed. Mr. Tierney replied there would be a total of thirty mobile homes when completed. Mr. Ritter appeared before the Board on behalf of his request noting that he presently has seventeen connections. Mr. Wyatt, planner II, explained there would be avail- able space for twenty three additional trailers which would be in addition to the seventeen he already has. Mr. Sager stated that it was his understanding that the only thing that Mr. Ritter was requesting was to install an additional holding pond that would generate 5,000 gallons per day, and his main concern was getting rid of this septic pond that is so close to the park, and he wondered if there was a compromise that could be agreed upon therefore he moved to have this tabled until further discussions could be held. There was no second to this motion. Mr. Smith asked if the Sanitation Authority has been contacted with regard to this, and if so, what was there comments. Mr. Tierney replied yes, and that Mr. Jones, director, has no problems with it. Mr. Longerbeam explained that he was opposed to this as he felt it would in fact be setting a precedent as he explained when the Fulton request was brought before the Board therefore he would move for this request to be denied. Mr. Smith seconded the motion. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote., 11 42-095- (306, (305 149E N Richard G, Dick - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye James L. Longerbeam - Aye Robert M. Sager - Nay Jimmie K. Ellington - Nay Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. - Aye HISTORIC PLAOUES PRESENTED TO COUNTY PROPERTY OWNERS Mr. Eric Lawrence, planner I, appeared before the Board and explained that the Historic Resources Advisory Board which was created as a means of furthering historic preservation, has worked over the past two years towards developing a program that recognizes historic properties and therefore would like to present the following county property owners their historic plaques: Old Frederick County Courthouse Springdale St. Thomas Episcopal Church Monte Vista sunrise Springdale Flour Mill Hopewell Friends Meeting House Poor House Belle Grove DELETION OF A ROAD NAME - APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA Mr. Mark LeMaster, mapping and graphics manager, submitted areport noting that the Road Naming Committee had met and re- viewed a citizen request to remove a road name, Fiddlers Bow Lane, from the County Road Name System, and the committee recommends that the Board approve the removal of the road name. INFORMAL DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED INTERS'T'ATE AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT NG Mr. Evan Wyatt, planner I, appeared before the Board to present a draft overlay district proposal which allows for taller commercial business signs with a greater square footage within the proximity of the eight interstate interchange areas. In order to insure that negative impacts are held to a minimum, staff has drafted a proposed ordinance that addresses the specific needs of the commercial uses within each interchange e Q z>> v, Lsherando Park CD0 U Sp�OSh Averue m Swimming Pool 0 J A O °\\\ 8" W.L. -k Proposed Water Extension Plan n 0 -/2>> V. Sherando Park v SP�OSh Avenge o U 3 v 4" F. M. Y J Pump Station o„ f 2.5" F. O� �L 2" F. M. • 2" F.M. www pJ V Qo�C2 --1 -L- �al I - Wh- I ,L; Proposed Sewer Extension Plan ITEM # 2 LAND USE PLANS DISCUSSION During the February meeting, staff presented information that was discussed during the 1998 Panning Commission Retreat. Staff advised the CPPS that the Board of Supervisors was interested in conducting land use studies for two areas of the county. The first area includes land along the Front Royal Pike corridor (Route 522 South), while the second area includes land along the Shady Elm Road corridor (Route 651). Staff would like to expand on this discussion to determine all appropriate issues that require research, information desired by the CPPS during this study, as well as a strategy to establish appropriate land use plans for each area during this calendar year.