HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_11-21-79_Meeting_MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board of Supervisors' Roan, November 21, 1979, 2:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Frank Bnmiback, Vice- Chairman; Elmer Venskoske; W. French Kirk; PQanuel
DeHaven; James Golladay, Jr.; Thomas B. Rosenberger.
ABSENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Cha Herbert Sluder
Chi •;�
The Vice -Cha called the meeting to order.
IS 1 •�YY.I CCN9�
Mr. Riley first noted that the only two items on the Bimonthly Report that
have been lingering, the Round Hill Fire Department and the Leon Zeiger Subdivision,
are still not resolved.
Mr. Riley also noted that the office has been trying to get in touch with
Mr. Curtis Hansen to pick up a sign and post it and added that adjacent property owners
will be notified again after the sign is picked up. Mr. Riley added that this needed to
be re- advertised and will not be heard until December 5, 1979.
Vice - Chairman Brumback noted that this application can only be postponed once
and, if not heard on December 5, re- application will have to be made.
In answer to Mr. Golladay's question, Mr. Riley answered that there is not
a date yet set for the Leon Zeiger Subdivision case.
Vice - Chairman Brumback then acknowledged receipt of the Bimontly Report as
information only.
Mr. Riley explained that Mr. Stine was in touch with him approximately two
weeks ago to ask for time before the Planning Commission to discuss access to the site
and also to present information regarding a possible client.
Mr. Fred Stine, Fort Collier Industrial Estates, then came forward and intro-
duced himself to the Commission. Mr. Stine then noted that an adjoining developer has
made contact again with the parties who are controlling the access at the present time
for access to the Baker Lane and adjoining the Southeastern corner of the property.
Mr. Stine further explained that there have been no final conclusions made but negotiations
are still in process and it appears that some positive response is evident_at- this'time.
2M
Planning Commission -2- 11/21/79
Mr. Stine noted that it is hoped that the Pl annin g Commission and Board of Supervisors
will be made aware that they are pursuing this access with diligence.
A second access to the Park, which will require some rezoning, is also
being considered, noted Mr. Stine. Mr. Stine further expalined that he has discussed
this possibility with an adjoining business that has a mutual interest in this and it is
hoped that some additional access can be gained in this area. Mr. Stine noted that it
is hoped that some definite commitment will be made by the beginning of the year regarding
the access to the southeastern corner of the property and the application for rezoning,
with respect to the second access north of the existing entrance on Route 11, should be
presented later in the year.
Mr. Stine then noted that, since the moratorium on the approval of site plans,
there have been approximately five clients contacting then, two of which chose Fort
Collier as industrial sites but were discouraged because of the aspect of site plan
approval. Mr. Stine commented that he had a client with him today who is in the light
manufacturing business and presently leasing in Winchester. Mr. Stine then pointed out
the property in question on a visual aid and noted that the site satisfies the servicing
requirements with respect to layout, access road and water and sewer.
Mr. Stine then introduced Mr. Gerald Sumner, General Manager of the local
Winchester plant of Bonnie Apparel; Mr. Ross Freeman, Bonnie Apparel, Portsmouth, Va.;
and Mr. Herb Reiter, Executive Vice - President of Bonnie Apparel.
Mr. Reiter next came forward and explained that Bonnie Apparel is a company
that does light manufacturing of garments. Mr. Reiter noted that a pilot plant was started
in Winchester and it was decided to open a larger facility in this area. Mr. Reiter
explained that they hoped to employ 100 -150 people on this site and that the hours are
broken into winter and summer hours. In the winter the hours are 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
and in the summer they are 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., continued Mr. Reiter.
Mr. Brunback then asked how much traffic would be generated.
Mr. Reiter answered that approximately seventy cars would be using the roads
and that there might be a truck delivery in the morning and a pickup in the afternoon.
M
Planning Cormission -3- 11/21/79
In answer to Mr. Rosenberger's question, Mr. Reiter noted they would still
maintain their plants in Norfolk, Portsmouth and Strasburg. Mr. Reiter noted that it
was felt there is a labor market here that could benefit.
In answer to Mr. Venskoske's question, .Mr. Reiter noted that this was the
manufacture of apparel for men.
In answer to Mr. Rosenberger's question, Mr. Reiter also explained that this
is just manufacturing, with no retail sales.
Mr. Stine noted that they should know where they stand by the beginning of
the year. Mr. Stine further explained that there has been positive response to an offer
made and as soon as the estate itself can be positively identified and everyone involved
has given consent this could be settled. Mr. Stine also noted that they are within
seventy -five feet from the junction with Baker Lane.
Mr. Stine then explained that he: is asking today, understanding that they are
moving ahead with provision for access, that the Planning Commission consider this site
Plan approval, recognizing that there are restrictions placed on me with regard to
marketing this property.
Mr. Rosenberger then asked what the timetable of Bonnie Apparel would be.
Mr. Reiter explained that they had gone ahead with test borings on that property
and preliminary work has been done. Depending on the weather, etc. they would move
ahead speedily, Mr. Reiter explained.
Mr. Brumback then asked if the access in the southwest corridor would be
pursued if the southeast access were achieved.
Mr. Stine noted that they would not relinquish the pursuit of the third access.
Mr. Rosenberger then asked, on the access to Route 11, if it was directly north
of the existing one.
Mr. Stine acknowledged that it was and it would serve the western side of the
property.
EZM
Planning Commission -4- 11/21/79
Mr. DeHaven then asked if the only problEln with the main exit was the
Baltimore party.
Mr. Stine noted that was the only problem.
Mr. Pangle commented that the staff tried to contact the party in Baltimore
and the responses were not affirmative. Mr. Pangle then asked how soon after receiving
access would construction be started.
Mr. Stine noted they would start with construction, but noted they are awai
approval from the Board with respect to the road servicing Northwestern Workshop and Harris
Intertype. Mr. Stine continued, noting that construction will be done in segments and
noted that a timetable would be hard to establish.
Mr. Pangle noted that the Board would probably like an exact timetable when
the site plan is next presented.
Mr. Stine co mented that he hoped this and additional site plans could not
be held up before the road is constructed since new industries will not wait. Mr. Stine
explained that the State is not generally receptive to building two accesses into a park.
Mr. Stine noted that what is being considered now is the actual acquisition of
the property from the Hughes Estate by his adjoiner. Mr. Stine then asked, in order not
to hold up the decision of Bonnie Apparel, if there was the possibility of the Planning
Ccnrdssion and Board of Supervisors discussing this matter of site plan approval. Mr.
Stine noted that he brought this to the Ccanassion in order not to delay Bonnie Apparel
any further.
Mr. Brumback suggested that perhaps this should be taken to the Board and they
in turn could give the Commission direction.
Mr. Stine then noted that because of the nature of the employee traffic of
Bonnie Apparel, they would not be adding to the traffic build up and that he felt that
the approval of this particular site plan could be made.
Mr. Brimback explained that the Commission could do nothing at this point in
time, until the Board of Supervisors lifted their moratorium on site plan approval.
a
Pl annin g Conmdssion -5- 11/21/79
Mr. Stine then asked if this question could go to the Board at the next
meeting as a result of the minutes of this Planning Comnission meeting to see if there
is any feeling on the part of the Board to lift the restrictions because of the nature
of this business.
Mr. Brumback noted that if Mr. Stine made a formal request to be on the Board
agenda, he was sure it would be granted and noted that the Board of Supervisors certainly
has access to the Pl annin g Comnission minutes.
Mr. DeHaven then made a motion to grant Mr. Stine the permission of the Planning
Commission to go before the Board of Supervisors to discuss this matter. This was
seconded by Mr. Kirk.
Mr. Rosenberger camlented that the Board of Supervisors meets on November 28,
1979 and also noted that, if within the next week more information on the second access
could be made available, it might be helpful.
Mr. Stine noted that he would certainly try.
Mr. Riley commented that it might be advisable for Mr. Stine to be present
at the Board of Supervisors meeting to answer any questions they may have.
There being no further discussion, the unanimous vote was take
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does grant permission to Mr. Stine to go
before the Board of Supervisors to discuss the current moratorium on site plan approval
as it pertains to the consideration of a site plan approval for Bonnie Apparel.
Mr. Golladay then suggested the sign posting procedure should be discussed
next.
Mr. Riley noted that the ordinance reads that the applicant shall post on the
property.
Mr. Golladay then found in the hand -out sheet given to applicants that it
reads "at the time of application applicant shall post on the property"
In the case of Curtis R. Hansen, it was the general consensus of the Planning
Conudssion that the determination regarding the posting of the sign be left up to staff.
RM
Pl annin g Canaission -6- 11/21/79
Mr. Riley noted that the next order of business was the discussion of a
request to amend Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Article XV, Section 21 -128 to read:
(a) Before a building permit shall be issued or construction commenced on any permitted
use in this district or a permit issued for a new use, the plans, in sufficient detail
to show the operations and processes, shall be submitted to the zoning administrator
for study. The administrator may refer these plans to the planning ccmussion and /or
the board of supervisors for a conditional use permit. Mr. Riley noted that the proposed
change is fran shall to may and the purpose is to allow the administrator some discretion
if a site plan is submitted for a change use in the M -2 Section as to whether the
individual will need a conditional use permit to acccmpany that site plan.
Mr. DeHaven commented that and /or has also been added from the previous text.
Mr. Riley acknowedged this was so and further explained that this was to allow
the administrator the flexibility of taking sanething just to the Planning Cannission and
not the Board if he had doubts and needed to discuss it with the Planning Commission before
making a decision. The Planning Commission in turn, could refer it to the Board if they
felt the Board should rule on it, continued Mr. Riley.
In answer to Mr. Rosenberger's question, Mr. Riley explained that he is the
Zoning Administrator and Subdivision Administrator and further explained that his deputy
would be Deputy Subdivision Administrator and Deputy Zoning Administrator.
In answer to Mr. Golladay's question, Mr. Riley explained that if it is a
decision having to be made by the governing body, it will always cane before the Planning
Cammission first. Mr. Riley continued, saying if there is a question the Planning
Conmission will be asked for a decision. If it is not a gray area, Mr. Riley stated, the
decision will be made administratively.
In summary Mr. Golladay stated that routine decisions will be made by the
staff, the remainder will cane before the Planning Cannission.
Mr. Riley added that the site plan will always came before the board in the
MM
Planning Commission -7- 11/21/79
M -2 category.
Mr. Brumback noted that the Planning Commission is trying to eliminate the
routine from caning before the Commission to shorten the red tape and time involved for
citizens. Mr. Brrnnback then asked if it would be possible to add these items in a
special category in the bimonthly report to moniter these items.
Mr. Riley acknowledged that this can be done and noted that if it is a
new use you will see it on a site plan and if it is a rezoning you will see it, the
only thing you might not see is an addition to an existing structure.
Mr. Golladay noted that the continuation of the same use would not necessarily
come before the Commission.
Mr. Brmmiback noted that he felt confident that any planner would bring any
questionable item before the Planning Commission.
Mr. Riley then asked if the Planning Commission reviews any proposed large
development such as McDonalds or a grocery store.
Mr. Golladay noted that the routine site plans never came before the Planning
Corunission.
Mr. DeHaven commented that he did not even knew the McDonalds was being
built until:.it was under construction.
Mr. Brmunback noted that it was his opinion that he was not concerned with
the routine items, however, that he would like to know about then.
Mr. Riley noted that the bimonthly report would give the Commission that
information and noted that if it is a large development that would generate traffic,
etc. the site plans will be directed to the Planning Conmtission.
Mr. Venskoske then made a motion to- recommend approval of this ordinance
amendment change to Article XV, Section 21 -128. This was seconded by Mr. Golladay and
passed unanimously.
MM
Planning Camdssion -8- 11/21/79
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Ccnmdssion recommend approval of the ordinance
amendment change to Artcile XV, Section 21 -128 to the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Riley then noted that a letter has been addressed to the members of the
Board of Supervisors further explaining the proposed changes to the Hone Occupations section
of the ordinance. Mr. Riley noted that it was thought best to re- advertise this item
and set it up for public hearing. Mr. Riley noted that he asked for comments fran the
Board of Supervisors and,if their comments are substantial enough to require amending
what the Commission has done, it might be necessary to discuss this further in a
workshop session.
Mr. Riley also noted that a meeting has been set up for the regular workshop
meeting to discuss the criteria used by the Board of Assessors.
Mr. Riley also noted that he is still looking into land use taxation.
Mr. Riley then commented on the meeting at Lord Fairfax Community College
regarding Agricultural and Forestal Districts. Mr. Riley noted that Mr. Andy Guest and
a representative from the Rockland District (the first in the area) were present. The
meeting, Mr. Riley continued, was an informational one to explain the workings of a
District to citizens of Clarke, Warren and Frederick Counties. Mr. Riley commented that
he thought that this program and land use taxation together will establish some credibility
to individuals wanting to preserve agricultural land.
Mr. Rosenberger then asked has this related to what Clarke County is trying
to get through the Legislature.
Mr. Riley noted that he is not familiar with what Clarke County is doing, but
stated that he did not think this is the same thing. Mr. Riley noted that the Districts
being established commit the landaaners to keeping the land in agriculture. Since the
District is approved by the Board of Supervisors, Mr. Riley continued, it would be given
priority when an adjoiner would want to subdivide next to it.
FM
Planning Commission -9- 11/21/79
In answer to Mr. DeHaven's question, DIr. Brimiback noted that these Districts
would be strictly voluntary. Mr. Brumback commented that the original legislation was
much stronger than its modified version present today. Mr. Brumback further noted that
at least there is sane indication that the State Legislature is going to revise the
land use tax. Mr. Brumback noted that a minimum of 500 acres is required for a District.
Mr. Rosenberger stated that the Commission should be thinking about the
revision of land use tax.
Mr. Brumback noted that the planner could be asked to write a letter to
representatives in the area to ask if there is anything that can be done about land use
taxation. Mr. Brumback further commented that when Mr. Riley receives the information
back, this subject should be put on a worksession for discussion.
There being no further business, Mr. Venskoske made a motion to adjourn.
This was seconded by Mr. Golladay and passed unanimously.
:.: