Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_06-02-99_Meeting_MinutesMEETING MINUTES • OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on June 2, 1999. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John R. Marker, Back Creek District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; W. Wayne Miller, Gainesboro District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Terry Stone, Gainesboro District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; STAFF PRESENT: Kris C. Tierney, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Zoning Administrator; Mark Cheran, Planner I; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER • Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 21, 1999 MEETING Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Romine, the minutes of the Planning Commission's April 21, 1999 meeting were unanimously approved as presented. APPLICATIONS ACTION SUMMARY Chairman DeHaven accepted the report for the Commission's information. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 368 -2- COMMITTEE REPORTS • Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee - 05/27/99 Mtg. Mr. Thomas, member of the DRRS, reported that representatives from Oakcrest Builders and the Top of Virginia were present to discuss the inclusion of a section in the RP Section of the Zoning Ordinance covering retirement community housing. Mr. Thomas said that retirement community housing is probably one of the largest growing segments of the housing market and the County is ill- prepared, ordinance -wise, for that growth in Frederick County. He said that there is not a separate section in the ordinance that covers it adequately to meet the needs of persons interested in developing this type of community. Mr. Thomas reported that, in the next several months, the DRRS will be working on specific requirements and making the ordinance more accommodating for retirement -type communities. PUBLIC HEARINGS Conditional Use Permit 408 -99 of David E. Carter for a Cottage Occupation to operate a tack and saddle shop (catalog sales). This property is located at 173 Heartwood Drive and is identified with P.I.N. 51 -23 -1 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. • Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Mr. Mark Cheran, Planner I, read the background information and review agency comments. Mr. Cheran explained that the proposed business would be conducted in a detached garage and no adjoining properties are visible from the site due to natural wooded screening and buffers. Mr. David E. Carter, Sr., the applicant and owner of the property, said the operation will consist of catalog sales of horse supplies. Mr. Carter said that in most instances, he will deliver the supplies to the customer. There were no public comments. Based on the limited scale of the proposed business, the Planning Commission believed the use would not create any significant impacts on the adjoining properties. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve Conditional Use Permit #08 -99 of David E. Carter, Sr. fora Cottage Occupation for a tack and saddle shop (catalog) sales at 173 Heartwood Drive with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 369 -3- 2. All work shall be accomplished inside of a completely enclosed building. • 3. Any proposed business sign shall conform with the Cottage Occupation Sign Requirements (sign shall not exceed four square feet). Conditional Use Permit #09 -99 of Albert M. Murr to operate a Cottage Industry as a cabinetmaker. This property is located at 156 Three Creeks Road and is identified with P.I.N. 13 -A -65B in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Mr. Mark Cheran, Planner I, read the background information and review agency comments. Mr. Cheran stated that this application was submitted in response to a zoning violation complaint. He said that the applicant was cited for the operation of an illegal business (cabinet - making shop) and obtaining a conditional use permit is an available option to resolve the violation. He explained that the proposed business will be conducted in a separate building and the nearest residences are 220' and 350', respectively, with a man-made buffer separating the adjoining properties. Mr. Cheran added that no excessive noise would be generated by the use and the required spray booth would mitigate any odor generated. A member of the Commission inquired about the origin of the complaint. Mr. Cheran said • that the fire marshal responded to a fire call at this location. He said that the fire marshal then contacted the Planning Department of a possible illegal operation of a business. Mr. Albert M. Murr, the applicant and owner of the property, stated that he had a direct lightening hit at his shop and a fire started. He explained that he has been operating at this location for the past six years. Mr. Murr said that he was not aware that he needed a conditional use permit. Commission members inquired if this was Mr. Murr's sole occupation, if clients visit his shop, if he has received any complaints from the neighbors, and if special BOCA requirements will need to be met for the shop. They also inquired if Mr. Murr felt he could meet all the conditions of the permit. Mr. Murr replied that this business was his sole occupation, that half of his work is carried out in his shop and the other half is on the client's location, he has not received any complaints from his neighbors, and finally, that special BOCA requirements will have to be met and he is taking steps to come into compliance. Mr. Murr believed that he could meet all the conditions of his conditional use permit. There were no public comments. Based on the limited scale of the proposed business, the Planning Commission believed that the proposed use would not have any significant impact on the adjoining properties. Upon motion made by Mr. Miller and seconded by Mr. Romine, • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 370 -4- BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 409 -99 of Albert M. Murr for a Cottage Occupation as a cabinetmaker at 156 Three Creeks Road, with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. All work should be accomplished inside a completely enclosed building. 3. Any proposed business sign shall conform with the Cottage Occupation Sign Requirements (sign shall not exceed four square feet). Rezoning #11 -99 of Ronald and Velma Simkhovitch to rezone 1.836 acres from M1 (Light Industrial) to RA (Rural Areas). This property is located at 2659 Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11), approximately '/x mile north of the intersection with Old Charlestown Road (Rt. 761), and is identified with P.I.N. 44 -1 -A in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Ruddy, Zoning Administrator, read the background information and review agency comments. Mr. Ruddy said that the purpose of the rezoning request is to construct a residential garage for personal use on the M 1 portion of the property. He explained that the sightly larger setback required with • MI -zoned land may preclude the desired placement of the structure. He said that the existing residence is located on the RA portion of the property. Mr. Joseph Higgs, representing Ronald and Velma Simkhovitch, stated that the Simkhovitch's would like to rezone the parcel because the setbacks in the RA District are not as strict as those in the M 1 District. Mr. Higgs said that the house is on the RA portion of the property and the garage will be for residential use. There were no other public comments. The Planning Commission believed that the construction ofa residential garage for personal use would not create a negative impact to the area or adjoining residential properties. Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Marker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning Application # 11 -99 of Ronald and Velma Simkhovitch to rezone 1.836 acres from M 1 (Light Industrial) to RA (Rural Areas) for the purpose of constructing a residential garage for personal use. PUBLIC MEETING • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 371 -5- Master Development Plan #02 -99 of Oakdale III, Raven Pointe, Raven Oaks, and Ravenwing, • submitted by G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. for the development of 668 dwelling units on a 247 - acre site. This site is located between Senseny Road (Rt. 657) and Millwood Pike (Rt. 50 East) and is identified with P.I.N.s 64-A-113,64-A-117, and 64 -A -119 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Kris C. Tiemey, Planning Director, read the background information and review agency comments. Mr. Tierney said that the preliminary master development plan depicts appropriate land uses and is consistent with the overall gross density provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Policy Plan. He stated that several issues will need to be addressed by the applicant, of which transportation and environmental disturbance are the most significant. Mr. Tierney pointed out that the adjoining Carper property is where the collector road terminates on the eastern edge of the property. He said that he has had a number of discussions with the property owners and they have concerns about how the road is aligned and where it affects their property. Mr. Tierney said that he has relayed those concerns with the applicant and the applicant's engineer and he believed that they are willing to discuss alternative alignments for the road, however, he would let the applicant address that issue further. There was some discussion about the possibilityof getting anothertraffic light in the Custer Drive/ Prince Frederick Drive area, even though one had already been proffered nearby by another developer. The question of the possibility of having that previously proffered light placed at the entrance to this development, where traffic may be greater, was discussed. Another issue discussed was sidewalks along the anticipated major collector (4 -lane) road. . A question was raised about how the sidewalks would be placed, if the developer builds only two lanes, so the sidewalks are not put in and then torn up again when the road expands. One possibility discussed was to place the sidewalk only on one side. Also discussed was whether the developer may be required to put money into a bond for the future construction of the other two lanes. Members of the Commission noted that this property was rezoned for residential development at least 20 years ago, before proffers were required. Buffers for the property were next discussed. It was noted that the ordinance required the entire length of the collector road to be buffered. Mr. Tierney said that a good portion of this property is heavily wooded. He said the staff would tailor the road efficiency buffer requirement as much as possible to utilize the existing vegetation. A member ofthe Commission believed that the early construction of the Route 50 entrance, rather than the entrance onto Custer Avenue, was a key to good transportation planning. Mr. Tierney pointed out that the phasing had been revised by the applicant, by switching Phases I and 11, and Phase I now includes the connection to Route 50. A member of the Commission expressed doubt that the owners or heirs of the Carper Faun property would ever permit the extension of a road across their property to make the Senseny Road connection. Commissioners believed it was very important to make any necessary changes or negotiations to get the road extended to Senseny. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 372 L Mr. Bill Tisinger, attorney representing the joint applicants and owners, the Jeni Company . and the Glaize Development Company, reported that this property has been rezoned for some 20 years and no proffers are involved. He presented the master plan to the Commission and elaborated on specific components of the plan, such as layout, types of dwellings, lot sizes, the road plan, entrance and signalization at Route 50 for Phase I, and provisions for connector roads into adjacent subdivisions. Mr. Tisinger emphasized that there are no direct connections from their proposed development onto Senseny Road. Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr. of G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., the design engineers for this project, showed slides of aerial photographs of the site. He pointed out the planned phases. Mr. Maddox requested that the Commission grant a waiverof the buffer requirements along the collector road so they could utilize the existing vegetation. Chairman DeHaven next called for public comment and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Nick Unger, speaking for the Fairway Estates property owners, had several questions which included: 1) was the project in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan; 2) was a traffic impact study done; 3) how will impacts to fire and rescue services, schools, and other infrastructure be mitigated; and 4) what Capital Improvement Plan is in place and when will the infrastructure be completed. Ms. Marie Straub, Secretary forthe Apple Ridge Homeowners Association, came forward to speak on behalf of the parents and children of the Apple Ridge subdivision. Ms. Straub was concerned about the fact that the elementary school children are being bused to schools outside of their neighborhood. • She was also concerned about the inadequacy of the roads to handle existing and proposed traffic, especially Senseny Road. In addition to the roads being inadequate, Ms. Straub believed the schools were overcrowded, and that the County had failed to provide the necessary services required by its residents. Mr. Carrie Kimble, a resident of Pembridge Heights, believed that Custer Avenue is inadequate and hazardous in its present state to accommodate even the existing traffic. Mr. Kimble was also concerned aboutthe environmentally - sensitive issues, specifically, the ponds, wetlands, meadows, and wildlife existing on the proposed site. Mr. Keith Simcox had concerns about the area where the collector road connects to Route 50. Mr. Simcox had concerns about the effects of run -off, stream damage caused by grading, and the effects of overall development on residential wells in the area. Ms. Sandra Carper Ambrose stated that their farm, erroneously referred to as the Ambrose Farm, is still incorporated under the name of the "Carper Farm" and is still owned by her brother, her sister, and herself. Pointing to the master development plan on display, Ms. Carper said that the bend in one of the roads depicted on the plan takes a diagonal cut either out of their front fields that border on Senseny Road or it would take a cut through the back of her home and cut their farm into two parts. Ms. Ambrose stated that as long as her brother, sister, and herself are alive, they will not permit a road through their property. Ms. Ambrose expressed a desire for her farm not to become the recreational and open space area for the families and children of adjoining residential subdivisions. She suggested the possibility of some type of buffer or setback between the two types of land use. E Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 373 -7- Mr. John Carper said that his family has been here almost 100 years and they want to • continue to farm their land, unless they are forced out by encroaching development. Mr. Carper said that during the County's Comprehensive Downzoning in the early `80's, his property was down -zoned from residential to agriculture, however, the County did not down -zone the property currently under consideration. Mr. Paul Anderson, President of the Frederick County Farm Bureau, came forward to express the concerns of the agricultural community. Regarding the provisions for connector roads to adjoining subdivisions, Mr. Anderson said that it puts the agricultural landowner at the mercy of whoever developed the adjoining property, when the location of the road has already been decided on. He suggested that the County acquire input from the adjoining agricultural landowner and he also supported the use of buffers or setbacks between agricultural and residential zoned properties. Ms. Audrey Gilleskie, resident of the Gainesboro District, believed the proposed development was not vested and, therefore, was subject to changes in the zoning ordinance since the time of rezoning. Ms. Gilleskie inquired as to when the last review and update of the County's Comprehensive Plan took place. Mr. Larry Stotler, resident for the past seven years at 208 Stanley Drive, was concerned about construction traffic using Custer Avenue, especially at the sharp turn (fish hook). Mr. Stotler also requested that sewer and gas lines be run up into Miller Heights. He said that the septic systems in Miller Heights have been in existence for about 35 years and are in failing condition. Ms. Doreen Nicholson, resident on Oakridge Lane in Fairway Estates, said that a high- pressure gas main runs through the comerof her property and she was concerned about fractures occurring to the line when construction of the new development begins. In addition, Ms. Nicholson said that during heavy rains a lot of water runs down her driveway and she was concerned about the potential for flooding, due to the topography of the area. Ms. DorothyNapenas, resident on Oakridge Lane in Fairway Estates, had several concerns: 1) concern about the possibility of damage to the gas main that runs behind her house; 2) concern about over - crowding of local schools and the busing of children to schools outside of their neighborhoods; and, 3) concern about traffic on Senseny Road and if the proposed development would increase that traffic. Mr. Rusty Holland, resident ofPembridge Heights subdivision, had the following concerns: 1) the environmental impact to Isaac Creek; 2) traffic on Senseny Road; 3) the impact of the reconfiguration of Route 50 on the adjacent residential neighborhood; 4) the dangerous turn (fish hook) on Custer Avenue; and, 5) the impact of the additional 700 homes on the existing infrastructure. Mr. Ron Kimble, resident for the past 30 years at a family home in Prospect Hills, expressed concerned about the mixed -use portion of the Raven Oaks area. Mr. Kimble inquired if there was any way to ensure that town homes and condominiums would be prohibited in that area. He also expressed his desire for strict adherence to the woodlands preservation restrictions of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Donald Bush, a resident on Custer Drive, was concerned about the increased traffic that would take place on Custer Drive. LJ Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 374 kL -g- Mr. Robert Wells, a 32 -year resident of Frederick County, came forward to express his • support for the proposed plan. Mr. Wells said that the proposed plan has exhibited all the qualities that the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission, the builders, and the long -tern residents of Frederick County have been striving for over the past many years. He said that the proposed development involves local builders and local developers, who have grown up and live in Winchester and Frederick County, and who have strong personal concerns for the area. Mr. Stan Daywalt, resident on Apple Pie Ridge, believed that Frederick County citizens can take pride in the fact that those involved with this development, the planners, the developers, and the builders, are local residents. Ms. Connie Story, a resident of Fairway Estates, was concerned about the increasing amount of traffic and traffic accidents on Senseny Road. She was concerned about overcrowding of schools. Ms. Story asked who would pay to supplement infrastructure services such as fire and rescue services and schools. Mr. Jim Kriewald, resident at 214 Stanley Drive, lamented about how much he would miss observing all of the wildlife in the area of the proposed development. Mr. Kriewald said that there is considerable water runoff around both his home and his neighbor's home. He also mentioned the sharp curve (fish hook) on Custer Avenue. Mr. Kriewald then said that Mr. Tisinger was considerate enough to come to his home with the master plan and talk with him and a neighbor about their concerns and what they could anticipate with the proposed development. He said that Mr. Tisinger spoke about the possibility of connecting to the sewer line for those residents who had concerns about their failing septic systems. Mr. Kriewald explained that he was grateful that the people involved with this development were local residents . who would take the time to talk with him and address his concerns. Mr. Vaughn Foura, representing the Top of V irginia Building Association, said that the Top of Virginia Building Association supports the approval of this master development plan. Mr. Tisinger requested that the Commission approve the master plan with the applicant's offer not to connect to any of the subdivision streets to the north until and unless either the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors make the request. Besides prohibiting the connections without permission, Mr. Tisinger believed the Commission should allow the applicant not to hook into Custer Drive on the east side, but be permitted to cul -de -sac, resulting in no traffic running through Custer Drive. He further stated that the applicants will make provisions in their plans for easements to properties in Miller Heights, allowing those residents in Miller Heights who want public sewer to extend the sewer lines, if they wish to. He said those residents already have public water. The Commission asked for clarification from Mr. Tisingeron the Route 50 entrance design; among other things, Mr. Tisinger said that they plan to construct a four -lane entrance. A member of the Commission believed that the applicant should provide some sort of protection, possibly in the form of buffer, for the adjoining open agricultural land. Mr. Tisinger said that he would be happy to talk with the adjoining owners to work something out; however, there is no particular ordinance that requires them to make that provision. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 375 The issue of straightening Custer Drive was also discussed. Mr. Maddox said that Custer • Drive was first discussed at the time of the rezoning in front of Pembridge Heights. Mr. Maddox explained that at that time, they had devised a way to make possible the alignment of that road into a major connection, which would have required the abandonment of existing Custer Drive, some acquisitions, and intense design to make it work. He said they felt that if they could be assured of the rezoning, they would pursue that; however, no assurances came. He explained that the rezoning was an intensely debated struggle with some people absolutely intent on not allowing the rezoning to go through. Mr. Maddox continued, stating that there are no building lots within the first couple hundred feet of the entrance road; until the road gets into the site, it is all open space. Referring to the issue of supplying infrastructure first, he said that is exactly what is being proposed by putting the entrance onto Route 50. Mr. Maddox stated that this financially substantial project will be undertaken and completed before the first lot is sold. Mr. Tisinger interjected that after the initial turn off of Route 50, Custer Drive will be widened to make a left turn lane into Phase III. Members of the Commission spoke favorably about the developer offering a cross -over/ entrance onto Route 50, they supported the applicant's desire to cul -de -sac Custer Drive rather than .entering into Miller Heights, and they supported the waiver of the buffer along the major route coming in off of Route 50. They believed a considerable amount of planning and effort had gone into this development and that it was an outstanding plan. The members of the Commission did, however, desire the applicant to meet with the owners of the Carper Farm to discuss a buffer between the two properties. They also encouraged the applicant to examine again the connector road location and its exit to the north; it was pointed out that the connector road will not do any good, and certainly will not ever perform its function, if it never manages to make it to Senseny Road and Route 7. • Upon motion made by Mr. Miller and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Master Development Plan #02 -99 of Oakdale III, Raven Pointe, Raven Oaks, and Ravenwing, submitted by G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. for the development of 668 dwelling units on a 247 -acre site with the inclusion of 1) the removal of the street connection into Miller Heights on the east end and, with the street ending as a cul -de -sac; 2) approval of the waiver for the buffers along the main road coming in off of Route 50; 3) with the acceptance of the offers of the developers to build the crossover onto Route 50 and to delay the inter - parcel connectors until the County feels it is appropriate. CANCELLATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S JUNE 16 1999 MEETING Mr. Tierney stated that no items of business were pending for the Commission's June 16, 1999 meeting. Upon motion made by Mr. Miller and seconded by Mr. Thomas, the Planning Commission unanimously agreed to cancel their June 16, 1999 meeting. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 376 hL -10- 0 ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, Kr' Krj C. Tierney, Secretary rt e , Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman 0 Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of June 2, 1999 Page 377