HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_07-01-02_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 July I, 2002.
PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman /Stonewall District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/
Opequon District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District: George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Greg L.
Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District: Pat
GoclienOUr. Red Bud District; Marie F. Straub, Red Bud District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; John
H. Light, Stonewall District; Gene E. Fisher, Citizen at Large; Robert Sager, Board of Supervisors' Liaison;
and Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison.
A13SENT: William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District; Jay Cook, Legal Counsel.
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director: Abbe Kennedy, Senior Planner; Jeremy F. Camp,
Planner 11; Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; and Renee' S. Arlotta. Clerk.
CALL TO ORDER
0 Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) - 06/27/02 Mtg.
Commissioner reported that the DRRS continued their discussions on amendments
to the woodlands disturbance ordinance.
PUBLIC HEARING
Rezoning #02 -02 of Sherwood Bryant, submitted by Pain ter- Lewis, P.L.C., to rezone 7.8691 acres from
RA (Rural Areas) to 132 (Business General) District. This property is located approximately 200 feet east
of the intersection of Gore Road (Rt. 751) and Northwestern Pike (Rt. 50), on the south side of
Northwestern Pike (Rt. 50), and is identified with Property Identification Number28 -A -63C in the Back
Creek District. (This item was tabled from the Commission's 06/05/02 meeting)
•
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July I, 2002 Page 894
2-
• Action - Recommended Denial
Ms. Abbe Kennedy, Senior Planner, stated that in response to concerns raised during the
Planning Commission meeting on June 5,2002, the applicant has attempted to address the concerns in a revised
proffer statement. She said the revised proffer statement provides for establishing a maximum sign height of
25 feet and limits access to the site from Rt. 750 for emer _ ency vehicles only. Planner Kennedy statedthatthe
applicanthas not addressed the concerns expressed by the Commission regarding potentially inappropriate land
uses that could result from a B2 rezoning in the Gore community.
Mr. John Lewis, representing Mr. Sherwood Bryant, stated that this vacant 7.869 -acre parcel
has approximately 10,000 vehicles per day traveling past it on Rt. 50. He said the parcel has a motel on one
side and a bank on the other, a post office in front, a railroad right -of -way behind it, and two residential
properties on the west. Mr. Lewis said that both he and Mr. Bryant believe the property is too valuable to
remain vacant. He said it was his impression that Commission was not opposed to the development ofthe
property; however, it seemed that a type of "idealized" development was being sought. Mr. Lewis added that
this wasa speculative rezoning. He believed rezoning to B2 was prerequisite tothe development ofthe parcel
and the market economy should determine the uses that are viable for this site.
Commissioner Morris asked Mr. Lewis if he had met with any of the residents in the Gore
comnumity. Mr. Lewis replied that he did not; however, the owner, Mr. Sherwood Bryant, met with some of
the residents.
Commissioner Triplett stated that he spoke with several of the Gore residents and they were
• concerned about the possibility of a used car lot on the parcel. Commissioner Triplett pointed out that this
issue was raised atthe previous meetingand no changes have been made to the applicant's proposal regarding
this issue.
Commissioner Straub inquired of Mr. Lewis if he would be agreeable to removing used car
lots and /or any kind of service stations from his application. Mr. Lewis replied that they would not be
agreeable to that; he believed the market should determine what use would be equitable here.
(Commissioner Light arrived at this point of the meeting)
Commissioner Watt said that he has not received any negative comments from the residents
Oil mini- storage, but he has received negative comments for a used car lot.
Mr. Sherwood Bryant, the applicant, came forward to answer questions front the Commission.
Commissioner Straub pointed outacrossoverin front ofthe old postofficeand was concerned
about the possibility of vehicles making `U- turns" to gain access to this property. Mr. Steve Mclnikoff, of
V DOT, said that VDOT's intentions are to locate an access roadway directly across from the crossover. Mr.
Melnikoff said that an official site plan has not yet been submitted to VDOT for their comments.
n
LA
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July I, 2002 Page 895
-3-
• Chairman Del -Iaven asked Mr. Meln ikoff if the emergency veh i c le access only for Rt. 750 was
acceptable to VDOT. Mr. Melnikoff replied that the access must be gated or locked so it would not be used
daily and this would be acceptable to VDOT.
Some Commission members pointed out the intention ofa "Neighborhood Business Center"
is to minimize the traffic traveling into a larger urban area to obtain services. It was also pointed out that in
a rural area, gas stations are not only used to fill -up automobiles, but are used for fill -up of lawn mowers,
tractors, and other equipment.
Chairman Del -Iaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to
speak:
Mr. Arnold Anderson, residentacross from the old postoffice, was concerned that a used car
lot here would upsetthe quality of life in the area. Mr. Anderson was also concerned about other undesirable
B2 uses that could possibly establish here, ifthe first use did not workout. Mr. Anderson was opposed to the
rezoning.
Mr. Edward Anderson, adjoining property owner, was not opposed to the property being
rezoned to B2, but he was opposed to a used car lot.
Mr. Charles Brill, adjoining property owner, believed that if someone purchases property and
pays the land taxes yearly, he should theoretically have the right to do what he sees best for his land. Mr. Brill
said that Gore has not been an attractive area along the roadway for a long time. lie said the motel is already
an eyesore and the lights from the new post office shine throughout the night.
The Commission next discussed with Mr. Lewis the possibilities of limiting the number of
vehicles or the area used to display vehicles, if a used car lot was established on the proposed lot. They also
discussed setbacks and buffering for the site. Mr. Lewis said that he would be agreeable to designating a 10
to 15 -foot setback, however, visibility was needed from Rt. 50. Commissioners pointed out that the site only
has 86 feet of road frontage, which will need to accommodate an access road, thereby limiting the number of
vehicles that could be displayed in front, if the B2 rezoning resulted in a used car lot use.
A motion was made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours to
approveIherezoningwith the proffers submitted. This motion was defeated, however, by the following vote:
YES (TO APPROVE) DeHaven, Thomas, Ours, Fisher
NO: Straub, Gochenour, Watt, Morris, Unger, Kriz, Triplett
ABSTAIN Light
(Note: Commissioner Light said that he would abstain from voting because he was not present for the entire
discussion.)
Upon motion made by Commissioner Watt and seconded by Commissioner Triplett,
•
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July 1, 2002 Page 896
-4-
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial of the
Rezoning 402 -02 of Sherwood Bryant, submitted by Painter- Lewis, P.L.C., to rezone 7.8691 acres from RA
(Rural Areas) to B2 (Business General) District. This property is located approximately 200 feet east of the
intersection of Gore Road (Rt. 751) and Northwestern Pike (Rt. 50), on the south side of Northwestern Pike
(Rt. 50), and is identified with P.I.N. 28 -A -63C in the Back Creek Magisterial District.
This recommendation of denial was passed by the following majority vote:
YES (TO DENY) Straub, Gochenour, Watt, Morris, Kriz, Triplett
NO: Unger, Dellaven, Thomas, Ours, Fisher
ABSTAIN Light
(Note: Commissioner Light said that he would abstain from voting because he was not present for the entire
discussion.)
Rezoning #05-02 of Red Bud Run, submitted by G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. to rezone 157.01 acres
from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) District. This property is located north of Rt.
7, and adjacent to Woods Mill Road (Rt. 660), directly between Red Bud Road and Rt. 7, and is
identified with P.I.N.s 55-A-105,55-A-106, and 55 -A -107 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. (This item
40 was previously heard by the Commission on June 5, 2002.)
Action - Recommended Approval
Mr. Eric R. Lawrence Planning Director, provided the Commission with V DOT's latest
response to the proposed application. Director Lawrence stated that this item was previously heard at the
Commission's June 5, 2002 meeting; however, there were questions about whether the subject site was properly
posted to inform the public of the rezoning hearing. He said the Planning Staff has since confirmed that the
subject site was not properly posted and staff was directed by the County Administrator to return the rezoning
application to the Planning Commission in order to fulfill the public notice requirements.
Director Lawrence stated that the applicant has submitted a revised proffer statement to
address concerns raised by the staff, VDOT, the Planning Commission, and citizens during the June 5, 2002
public hearing. Director Lawrence reviewed all the proffers with the Commission; the latest revisions
addressed in the proffer statement included: I) the applicant will conduct necessary improvements to address
sight d istance concerns at Morgans Mill Road and the proposed minor collector road; 2) the applicant will enter
into a signalization agreement for a possible traffic signal at the proposed minor col lector road and Woods Mill
Road; 3) the applicant will limit the number of private driveway entrances onto the proposed minor collector
road; 4) the stream preservation parcel will be held by the property owner until such time as an appropriate
management party is identified and approved by the Board of Supervisors; 5) the applicant will workwith the
Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation to establish a viewshed protection plan along Route 7; and, 6) the
applicant will prohibit private entrances on Morgans Mill and Woods Mill Roads, and will work with the
County to establish viewshed protection plan for the roads.
•
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July I, 2002 Page 897
-5-
Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr., of G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. was present to represent
the owners, Patrick A. McTiernan and Thomas M. McTiernan. Mr. Maddox stated that they are proposing
substantial transportation improvements completely funded by private capital, He described a system of
improvements for the Woods Mill Road connection with Rt. 7, which included right -turn lanes, a signalized
intersection at Rt. 7 westbound, improved ramps and extended transitions, and the replacement ofthe crossover
at Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park with a right -turn lane. Mr. Maddox read a statement received from VDOT
indicating that V DOT was satisfied with the transportation proffers except for the factthat they were opposed
to private - entrance access directly onto major and minor collector roadways. Mr. Maddox noted that the
applicant has proffered to limit the number of private driveway entrances onto the proposed minor collector
road and to prohibit private entrances on Woods Mill Road and Morgans Mill Road. Mr. Maddox next spoke
with the Commission about considering the elimination of the Rt. 7/ Rt. 656 crossover because of the
difficulty, from an engineering standpoint, of satisfactorily improving it; he noted other alternative accesses
thatcould be used in lieu ofthis one. Mr. Maddox continued, describing the other newly proffered conditions
for the Commission.
Commissioner Gochenour raised the issue that service costs per household far exceeded the
revenue that would be received, resulting in a negative impact. She was concerned that infrastructure,
especially for schools, was not available to serve the additional residents.
CommissionerFi slier asked for add itionaldetaiIs concern ing the preservation easement. Mr.
Maddox explained that the preservation easement will be maintained as a separate parcel by the owner; it has
frontage on both Woods Mill and Morgans Mill Roads. He said there werea rmmberofindividuals who were
interested in maintain ing easements and a corridor along the stream, but the concept is only in the initial stages.
He guaranteed they will not develop the area and will maintain it in its present state. Commissioner Unger
asked if the ownership of the preservation easement would be transferred to the homeowners or another
organization. Mr. Maddox replied that the 28.4 -acre fee simple parcel can be transferred to Parks and
Recreation, or another type of agency, but it would not be a part of the property owners' association.
Commissioner Thomas inquired abouta time framefor the signalization of Woods Mill Road
and the Rt. 7 crossover. Mr. Maddox replied that the proffer would be clarified to state that signalization of
that intersection will occur as part of the Phase I bonding.
Commissioner Straub voiced her concern about the impact of increased residential
development on the school system. She also expressed concern about the ability of the proposed minor
collector road to handle the traffic that would be generated by a new school.
Mr. Steve Melnikoff with V DOT commented that the vast majority of improvements proposed
for Rt. 7 and Woods Mill Road are satisfactory; however, there are still some areas of concern, particularly
the elimination of private accesses on Rt. 7, Morgans Mill Road (Rt. 656), and Woods Mill Road (Rt. 660).
Commission members asked Mr. Melnikoff ifadditional traffic analysis, particularly atthe master plan stage,
could affect V DOT's recommendation on the minor collector access issue. Mr. Melnikoff replied there was
the possibility that some of the proposed transportation improvements would relieve pressure on the minor
collector, however, based on their analysis to date, they have reservations. He added that there was no reason
whytheir concerns could not be more appropriately addressed at the master plan stage when additional traffic
analysis have been completed.
•
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July t, 2002 Page 899
6-
Commissioner Morris inquired of Mr. Me] nikoff if the traffic situation in this entire area might
• not be significantly improved over current conditions by the transportation improvements proffered by the
developer. Mr. Mein ikoff replied that V DOT has been working with the developer's engineer for wel I over a
year and a half and have studied the area in great detail. He said thatthe proposals will soften the on /off ramp
grades atthe Rt. 7/ 660 intersection and the traffic signal will better direct traffic; however, the changes will
slowthe westbound traffic overall. Commissioner Morris could not foresee any of these improvements being
made, in light of VDOT's financial situation with State funding, without the private money that developers
would supply to accomplish it.
Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, however, no one came forward to speak.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of
Rezoning Application #05 -02 of Red Bud Run, submitted by G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., to rezone
157.01 acres, identified with P.I.N.s 55 -A -105, 55 -A -106, and 55 -A -107, from RA (Rural Areas) to RP
(Residential Performance) District with proffers submitted by the applicant.
The motion was passed by the following majority vote:
YES (TO APPROVE) Watt, Morris, Unger, Light, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Fisher, Triplett
NO: Straub, Gochenour, DeHaven
•
Rezoning Application #07 -02 of Doris F. Casey, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 27 acres
from RA (Rural Areas) to RI' (Residential Performance); and 3.31 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to B2
(Business General) District. This property is located approximately 800' north of the intersection of
Front Royal Pike (Rt. 522) and Paper Mill Road (Rt. 644) and is identified with P.I.N. 64 -A -23 in the
Shawnee Magisterial District.
Action - Tabled
Ms. Abbe Kennedy, Senior Planner, reported that the significant review agency comments were
from the Public Schools System, who advised that the cumulative impact ofthis project and others of similar
nature will necessitate the future construction ofadditional school facilities, and from the Parks and Recreation
Department, who advised that the proffer proposed was less than adequate to meet 50% of the impact the
County has projected this development will have on parks and recreation. She reported thatthe site is within
the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and the
Comprehensive Policy Plan identifies the property as part of the Southern Frederick Land Use Plan. Ms.
Kennedy next reviewed the proffers submitted by the applicant; she also reviewed issues that the Plann ing Staff
believed needed to be addressed to improve the application.
Mr. Mark Smith with Greenway Engineering was presentto represent the owner, Ms. Doris
F. Casey. Mr. Smith said that Shenandoah Memorial Park, Inc., the adjoining property owners, had first right
r 1
LJ
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July 1, 2002 Page 899
7-
of refusal on the Casey property, which they declined on the offer to purchase. Mr. Smith stated that no
connection is planned to Papermill Road (Rt. 644); the primary entrance is Rt. 522; and a connection to
Westwood Drive (Rt. 822) through the Swisher property will occur after improvements are made to Westwood.
He commented that in light ofthe pending improved corridor standards, they have set the B2 parking area back
20' from Rt. 522 and are proposing monument -type signs not exceeding 10' in height between Rt. 522 and the
parking lot areas. Regarding the comment from the Parks and Recreation Department, Mr. Smith explained
that the Capital Facilities Impact Model indicated a positive impact from this development because of the
B2 /RP Zoning. He explained that in light of the fact that the B2 area will not be built first, $40,OOO total has
been proffered and divided between the schools, parks and recreation, and emergency services.
Commissioners had concerns about residents having to drive through the middle of the B2 area
to get to their residences. Commissioners also suggested that the applicant consider I imiting the neighborhood
transition area toBI usesonly, or el im inating the intensive uses allowed in the B2. They pointed out that some
commercial uses may not be compatible with respect to the adjoining cemetery.
Commissioner Gochenour believed that infrastructure services were not in place to serve the
proposed development.
Chairman DeFlaven inquired about buffering against the cemetery property. Mr. Smith said
some landscaping exists forthe cemetery's office and maintenance buildings. Mr. Smith could see no problems
with placing additional buffering and screening.
Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to
speak:
Mr. Robert Van stated that he and Ms. Ann S. Cross live next door to the proposed
development and their property is bordered on three sides by the Doris Casey property. Mr. Van said the Casey
property has a 1 T right -of -way on the north side oftheir property which is primarily used for power lines. Mr.
Van said there is a large area adjoining their property which is a permanent drainage easement and when it
rains, it gets quite deep. He was concerned about establishing commercial uses in this area and how it would
affect the drainage onto his property. In addition, Mr. Van was concerned about the compatibility of some
business uses with the cemetery, especially since Patsy Cline is buried in this cemetery. Furthermore, Mr. Van
pointed out the excessive amount of traffic on Rt. 522 South next to 1 -81 and he believed this was the busiest
north /south corridor south of Winchester. He said that in addition, there are numerous driveways and side
roads coming out onto Rt. 522. Mr. Van was concerned about adding additional traffic to this situation. In
conclusion, Mr. Van strongly urged the Commission to prohibit the use ofthe Casey's 17'right -of way strip
for construction vehicle access.
Mr. Michael Brooks, a resident on Westwood Drive, stated that there are about 14 residences
on Westwood Drive. Mr. Brooks said V DOT had already made improvements to Westwood Drive when water
and sewer was installed. Mr. Brooks reported that only five or six of his neighbors received letters notifying
them of the public hearing; he wondered why over half of the neighbors did not get letters, especially if
Westwood Drive was to become the access road to the proposed development.
Ms. Brenda Dodd, a resident on 155 Westwood Drive, was concerned about increased traffic
on Westwood Drive; she was concerned about adding additional traffic on Rt. 522 South, and she had concerns
about maintaining the integrity of the cemetery. She did not want to see children from the proposed
•
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July I, 2002 Page 900
- 8 -
development using the cemetery as a playground. She also had questions about a proposed 50' right -of -way
• on Westwood Drive, mentioned by Mr. Smith.
Ms. Barbara L. Midkiff, resident at 179 Westwood Drive, also had questions concerning Mr.
Smith's proposed 50' right -of -way. Ms. Midkiff was opposed to using Westwood Drive as the proposed
access because it would disrupt the quality of life of their neighborhood.
Ms. Judy Morrison, a resident on Westwood Drive, said she regretted that she and others in
her neighborhood did not receive a letter of notification of the public hearing; she said the residents could have
come more prepared with information they are concerned with. In addition to traffic concerns, Ms. Morrison
was concerned about maintaining the integrity of the cemetery, especially since Patsy Cline was buried here.
She was concerned that infrastructure services were not in place to take care of additional homes and costs
associated with add itional homes would become the burden oftaxpayers. Additionally, she was also concerned
water runoff and flooding.
Mr. Robert Sager, Board of Supervisors' Liaison to the Commission, requested that the
applicant prepare an alternative access with Papermill Road (Rt. 644) for consideration. In addition,
Commissioners voiced their objection to having a "cut- through," nor did they want to see a single access to
residentialdevelopment. They concurred thatthe applicant could become more creative with tile inter-parcel
design to discourage the cut - through. It was Commissioner Light's opinion that neither B1 nor B2 should be
established here because it would disrupt the flow of the residential neighborhood and negatively impact the
funeral/ cemetery area. Comin issioner Light recogn ized the traffic congestion currently in the area and he also
believed the drainage could be better controlled if the proposal was for all residential. Other Commissioners
agreed, noting that other existing retail areas are only ten minutes away. Commission members were also of
the opinion that since modifications were planned for Westwood Drive, the property owners along that road
needed to be properly notified. Commissioner Fisher commented that he would like to see one of the
committees study the issue of RP Zoning abutting RA to address some of the issues raised by concerned
citizens this evening.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Morris and seconded by Commissioner Kriz,
BE IT RESOLVED, Thatthe Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously agree to table
Rezoning Application #07 -02 of Doris F. Casey, to allow Greenway Engineering additional time to revise their
proposal to address the concerns raised. In order to facilitate this, the Commission waived the time restraints
for the applicant.
Proposed amendments to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Article XX, pertaining to the
Regulation of Nonconforming Uses, Structures, and Signs, Sections 165 - 148,165- 149,165- 150,165 -152,
165 -153; and Chapter 165 -156, Definitions.
Action - Recommended Approval
Mr. Jeremy F. Cannp, Planner 11, reported that the Development Review and Regulations
Subcommittee (DRRS) and the staff have prepared several text amendments to the Frederick County Zoning
•
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July I, 2002 Page 901
M
Ordinance dealing with the requirementsgoverningnonconforminguses. Mr. Camp said that if approved, these
amendments would provide the ability to require that nonconforming uses be gradually brought into current
design standards when expansion is sought. He said the DRRS unanimously recommended approval of the
proposed amendments during their March 2002 meeting; he also pointed out that both the Commission and
Board of Supervisors had an opportunity to discuss the amendments at their May I, 2002 meeting and May
22, 2002 meetings, respectively.
Chairman DcHaven called for public comments, however, there were none.
The Commission had no questions for staff and believed the amendments as presented were
appropriate.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of
the amendments to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Article XX, pertaining to the Regulation of
Nonconforming Uses, Structures, and Signs, Sections 165 -148, 165 -149, 165 -150, 165 -152, 165 -153; and
Chapter 165 -156, Definitions, as presented.
Request for a waiver of the requirements of the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144- 17(G)1, Cul -de-
sacs, su bmitted by Bowman Consulting on behalf of Ms. Katherine P. Weber, to waive the maximum cul-
de -sac length of 1,000 feet to enable a cul -de -sac length of 1,300 feet. This property is located on the west
sideof FrontRoyal Pike (Rt.522), approximately 450 feetsouth of Oak Side Laneand is identified with
P.I.N. 53 -A -53 in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
Action - Denied
Mr. Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, reported that Mr. David
L. Frank of Bowman Consulting Group is proposing a residential subdivision in the undeveloped RP -zoned
portion of an I 1 -acre parcel owned by Katherine P. Weber. Administrator Davenport referenced an exhibit
illustrating the proposed residential subdivision street which would serve no more than 25 single - family
detached lots on a cul -de -sac length of no longer than 1,300'. He noted that the subject property contains
approximately 330' ofroad frontage along North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522) and is approximately 1,300' in depth;
the B2 portion of the property extends approximately 300' from North Frederick Pike toward the interior of
the property. Administrator Davenport reported that the applicant has indicated that no other options are
possible which would connect this proposed street to other streets on adjoining properties; and, due to the
relatively narrow rectangular shape ofthe property, construction ofa loop road is not practical. Administrator
Davenport advised that a masterdeveiopment plan would be required to develop this property in the proposed
manner. He said that Mr. Frank is seeking Plann ing Comm ission approval for the proposed Cul-de-sac length
before proceedin detailed development plans. Administrator Davenport also brought the Commission's
attention to the comment sheet from the Department of Fire & Rescue, in which no objections were raised to
the request.
Mr. David L. Frank, who was representing the contract owner, Sovereign Homes, came
11
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July I, 2002 Page 902
-10-
forward to answer questions from the Commission.
0 Commissioner Triplett inquired if blasting and drilling would take place; he was concerned
about damage that may occur to adjoining residential private wells.
Commissioner Thomas asked for the length -to -width ratio of the proposed lots. Mr. Frank
replied the proposed lot width is 60' and the proposed lot length is 150'. Commission members were opposed
to placing a house on such a narrow lot; they mentioned safety issues and the ability of fire and rescue services
to access the lots properly. They also voiced concern about the ability to place a house that would be
aesthetically pleasing.
Mr. Frank stated thatthe layout before the Commission is for cIusterdevelopment, however,
they do have other layouts with 80' lots; he suggested thatthe lot configuration be addressed at the master
development plan stage. Mr. Frank said he was seeking the extra 150' to bypass the 300' -B2 portion in the
front of the property. In addition, he said there were some existing buffer yards surrounding the B2 which
further pushed back the beginning of the residential portion.
Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to
speak:
Mr. Jeffrey Less, property owner adjoining the B2 area, stated that the proposed development
area consists of woods and rock and, he believed, considerable blasting would be required to develop the
property. Mr. Less said that both he and his neighbor, Mr. Peacemaker, are on wells and they were concerned
aboutthe impacts of drilling and dynamiting on their wells and groundwater. He explained that the proposed
business area will adjoin all three of the existing residential properties and the road that serves these three
is residential properties is an easement granted in their deeds. Mr. Less said the easement is not state- maintained;
it is maintained by the three adjoining property owners. In addition, he believed the development would destroy
a wildlife habitat.
Mr. Wayne Peacemaker, adjoining residential property owner, said his biggest concern was
possible damage to his wel I because it is only 105' deep. Mr. Peacemaker said thatthe limestone outcroppings
are extensive on the property under consideration and would require considerable blasting to develop.
Mr. Russell Hyde, adjoining residential property owner, also used a well and septic. Mr.l -lyde
stated that when the apartments were constructed, the blasting would shake his home. lie said that damage to
his well is a concern, in addition, he was concerned about surface water runoff.
Ms. Coleen Unger, adjoining residential property owner, said thatthe lot underconsideration
is an, eyesore. She was in favor of developing the property in order to clean it up.
Mr. Frank returned to the podium and stated that before blasting occurs, contractors will
conduct preliminary surveys of any adjacent properties within 200' and they also carry insurance, ifanything
was damaged due to the blasting.
Commissioners were not in favor ofthe narrow -sized lots proposed that would necessitate the
need fora waiver to the cul-de-sac length requirements. Commissioners noted thatthe length ofthe cul-de-sac
was a concern for emergency vehicle access and the narrowness of the lots was a concern for housing
r1
U
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July 1, 2002 Page 903
construction. The concerns of the neighbors, regarding impacts to wells, was also considered.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Morris,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously deny the
request for a waiver of the requirements of the Frederick County Code, Chapter 144- 17(G)I, Cul -de -sacs,
submitted by Bowman Consulting to waive the maximum cul -de -sac length of 1,000 feet.
OTHER
July 17, 2002 Planning Commission Worksession
Chairman Del -laven announced that no action items were anticipated for the Commission's
regularly scheduled meeting on July 17, 2002. Chairman DeHaven suggested an informal worksession. A
discussion on the overall planning processes, for example, the intentofthe Comprehensive Plan, the intent of
development review, how the Urban Development Area was decided upon, the master development plan
process; how the Commission can better conduct business at public meetings, etc. was agreed upon.
• ADJOURNMENT
No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m. by a
unanimous vote.
submitted,
V R. Lawrence, Secretary
0 tW
Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman
U
Frederick County Planning Commission
Minutes of July I, 2002 Page 904