Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_11-05-08_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 November 5, 2008. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel; and Gary Lofton, Board of Supervisors Liaison. ABSENT: Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Richard Ruckman, Stonewall District; Lawrence R- Ambrogi, Shawnee District; and Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; Amber Powers, Planner 1; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Kriz moved to adopt the November 5, 2008 Planning Commission Agenda for this evening's meeting. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours and unanimously passed. MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Oates, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the minutes of the September 3, 2008 meeting. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Oates, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the minutes of the September 17, 2008 meeting. COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) — 10/23/08 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported that the DRRS continued their discussions on the new Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) District. Commissioner Unger said they discussed what could and should be Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2364 Minutes of November 5, 2008 — 2 — allowed, the types of housing, and where the community centers should be located. He said discussions on this • subject will continue into next year. Joint Stephens City/ Frederick County Study Group - 10/30/08 Mtg. Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that the Joint Stephens City/ Frederick County Study Group reached a consensus on a land use plan, which will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for their discussion and direction on how to proceed. Natural Resources Study Group Commissioner Kriz reported that the Natural Resources Study Group will meet next Monday, November 10, for its final review of the Natural Resources Section for inclusion in the Comprehensive Policy Plan and then it will be sent out for continents. Comprehensive Policy Plan — 11/10/08 Mtg. 0 Commissioner Kriz reported that a meeting will be held on November 10 with the Community Facilities Subcommittee and the various Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) will be reviewed. Rural Areas Subcommittee Commissioner Watt reported that the Rural Areas (RA) Subcommittee has met for about three months to better understand State - enabled regulations the County might utilize to better manage growth in the rural areas. Through these efforts, the RA subcommittee has identified a number of tools that could be effective in managing growth in the rural areas while promoting the agricultural economy, preserving the viewshed, and reducing the impacts on county service demands. He said these available tools are now being presented to the community in a series of three community meetings to gain citizens' comments and suggestions. The first community meeting was held on Monday, November 3, and valuable insight and ideas were gained from those in attendance. He said two more community meetings are scheduled over the next week and everyone is encouraged to attend and participate in the process. The remaining meetings arc tomorrow evening, Thursday, November 6, from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at Orchardview Elementary School and next Thursday evening November 13, from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at Indian Hollow Elementary School. Commissioner Watt said the meetings are an informal workshop, providing opportunities for interested citizens to talk with subcommittee and Planning Staff members, learn about the process, and offer their thoughts and ideas on the rural areas. He noted that information is also available at the RA Subcommittee's website at www.co.frederick.va.us. • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2365 Minutes of November 5, 2008 -3- • Chairman Wilmot called for public comments on any subject not on the Commission's agenda for this evening. No one came forward to speak. PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning Application #09 -08 of Frederick Block, submitted by Painter - Lewis, PLC to rezone 1.8 acres from the RP (Residential Performance) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with proffers to accommodate storage of materials and to revise the proffers for P.I.N. 54A- 1 -15B. The properties are located at 1086 and 1098 Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 North). The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s 54A- 1 -15B, 54A -1 -18, and 54A -1 -19 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval with Proffers Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this rezoning application is a request to rezone two parcels, zoned RP (Residential Performance), as well as to modify the proffers associated with the woodland buffer area on Parcel 54A -1 -15B to accommodate outdoor storage. Ms. Perkins said the subject properties are within the limits of the S WSA (Sewer and Water Service Area) and are within the limits of the Easter Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. She said the long -range land use plan shows this area with a commercial and • industrial land use designation and therefore, this request is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Mr. Perkins said the applicant has submitted a proffer which places several conditions on the development of the site; she proceeded to review the proffers for the Commission and those proffers included: 1) a generalized development plan; 2) parcel usage; 3) lot consolidation; 4) zoning buffers; and 5) the entrance. Referring to Proffer 45, regarding the entrance, Ms. Perkins said the applicant has proffered that while the existing residential dwellings on Parcels 54A -1 -18 and 54A -1 -19 are retained, they will utilize the existing shared driveway and this driveway will not be used for commercial operations. She pointed out that this proffer does not restrict an entrance on Martinsburg Pike for future commercial uses. Mr. John Lewis with Painter - Lewis, P.L.C. was representing this application. Mr. Lewis said the owners acquired these two lots some time ago for the purposes of expanding their existing business at Frederick Block. He stated the existing driveway serves both residences and is a legal non - conforming, asphalt driveway; he said the applicant is aware this driveway cannot be used for commercial purposes. Mr. Lewis said the applicant did not want to proffer out the possibility of placing a commercial entrance at this location in the event there is a future opportunity for Frederick Block to have an additional entrance; they wanted to avoid an additional rezoning because it was cost prohibitive. Mr. Lewis said the applicant understood if they wanted to pursue a commercial entrance here, they would need to go through the permitting process and acquire approvals from the County and VDOT, and would probably need to construct additional lanes. Chainnan Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak. Chairman Wilmot then closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Some members of the Commission expressed concern about the possibility of an additional commercial entrance at this location on Route 11 without an analysis of the impacts by the County and VDOT. • They suggested a TIA be conducted, especially because of efforts to restrict the number of entrances along Route 11. Commission members commented that since this is a storage yard, there would be tractor - trailer traffic making left turns coming South on Route 11. Furthermore, mitigation is only required during the rezoning Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2366 Minutes of November 5, 2008 process. • The VDOT representative stated he reviewed the plan with the assumption the two residences would remain and additional storage would be towards the rear of the property; VDOT did not review the project with any assumptions a commercial entrance would be placed at this location. He said if the applicant decided to pursue a commercial entrance, details would have to be submitted to VDOT for analysis and the entrance would need to meet VDOT's Access Management Guidelines for Arterials. Other Commission members were satisfied the County would be protected from an impact perspective, given the applicant's proffer which restricts uses solely to additional storage and the additional reviews required by the County and VDOT, particularly with the more stringent Access Management Guidelines. A motion was made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Kriz to table the rezoning for 45 days with the expectation the applicant, the County, and VDOT conduct a review of potential impacts of an additional entrance, including the possibility of additional turn lanes and other issues. This motion was defeated by the following vote: YES (TO TABLE) Oates, Wilmot, Thomas, Kriz NO: Unger, Watt, Manuel, Ours, Mohn A new motion was made by Commissioner Unger and seconded by Commissioner Watt to approve the rezoning with proffers. This motion passed by the following majority vote: • YES (REC. APPROVAL) Unger, Watt, Manuel, Wilmot, Ours, Mohn NO: Oates, Thomas, Kriz (Note: Commissioners Ambrogi, Ruckman, Triplett, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Districts, Section 165 -82, District Use Regulations; Section 165 -83, Dimensional and Intensity Requirements; Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -27, Off - Street Parking; Section 165 -29, Motor Vehicle Access; Section 165 -31, Protection of Environmental Features; Section 165 -37, Buffer and Screening Requirements; Section 165 -47 Landfills, Junkyards, Trash Disposal and Inoperable Vehicles; ArticleXVIII, Master Development Plan, Section 165 -133 When Required; and Section 165 -141 Contents of Preliminary Master Development Plans. These revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance would add a new zoning district to implement the mixed use industrial/office land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and would add new secondary use standards. Action — Recommended Approval Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that staff has been working on a new zoning district which is intended to implement the new Route 277 Land Use Plan that was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. She said this district would implement the mixed -use industrial/office land use classification of the • Comprehensive Policy Plan. The new district, OM (Office Manufacturing) Park District, is designed to provide area for research and development centers, office parks, and minimal impact industrial and assembly uses. She said the primary uses that would be permitted in this district consist of target business as determined by the Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2367 Minutes of November 5, 2008 -5- Economic Development Commission. Also introduced with this proposed new ordinance are design and development standards. These standards include minimum district sizes, standards for building materials, and screening requirements for loading areas, as well as the prohibition of outdoor storage areas. Ms. Perkins explained that the NAICS Work Group (a subcommittee of the DRRS) has reviewed this draft ordinance on three occasions and endorsed the ordinance on May 13, 2008. After several revisions and minor text changes, the DRRS forwarded the draft ordinance to the Planning Commission for discussion in August 2008, followed by the accessory use regulations amendments in May of 2008. Ms. Perkins said the Planning Commission discussed this item at their meeting on September 17, 2008. She said the discussion consisted of concerns regarding three proposed uses: aircraft and parts manufacturing, rubber and miscellaneous plastics manufacturing, and fabricated metals. The Commission believed these three uses may be heavier than what was appropriate for this new district. Other than the concern over the uses, the Planning Commission was supportive of the proposed new zoning district. She said the Board of Supervisors discussed the new district ordinance at their October 8, 2008 meeting and approved this item to be sent to public hearing. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. No issues were raised by Commission members and they were satisfied with the ordinance amendment as proposed. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval • of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Districts, Section 165 -82, District Use Regulations; Section 165 -83, Dimensional and Intensity Requirements, Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -27, Off -Street Parking; Section 165 -29, Motor Vehicle Access; Section 165 -31, Protection of Environmental Features; Section 165 -37, Buffer and Screening Requirements; Section 165 -47 Landfills, Junkyards, Trash Disposal and Inoperable Vehicles; Article XVIII, Master Development Plan, Section 165 -133 When Required; and Section 165 -141 Contents of Preliminary Master Development Plans. These revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance would add a new zoning district to implement the mixed use industrial /office land use classification of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and would add new secondary use standards. (Note: Commissioners Ambrogi, Ruckman, Triplett, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -37, Buffer and Screening Requirements. These proposed revisions to the Zoning Ordinance pertain to buffer and screening requirements adjacent to railroad right -of -ways. Action — Recommended Approval Senior Planner, Candice E, Perkins, reported that the zoning ordinance requires zoning district buffers to be provided when property is developed adjacent to other uses or other zoning districts per Section 165 -37D. She said this section does not, however, address buffering requirements when the zoning districts are separated by a railroad right -of -way. Ms. Perkins said the staff has been directed to prepare a revision to the is Zoning Ordinance to address properties adjacent to railroad right -of -ways. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2368 Minutes of November 5, 2008 Ms. Perkins said this proposed amendment was endorsed by the DRRS (Development Review • and Regulations Subcommittee) and it was discussed by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. She said 'the Board of Supervisors approved this item to be scheduled for public hearing. Chairman Wilmot commented that OM District was not included in the second line of the teat in the list of ordinances; she asked if it was an oversight. Ms. Perkins said she would add it to the text. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. proposed. No issues were raised and the Commission was satisfied with the proposed amendment as Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -37, Buffer and Screening Requirements. These proposed revisions to the Zoning Ordinance pertain to buffer and screening requirements adjacent to railroad right -of -ways. (Note: Commissioners Ambrogi, Ruck Triplett, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -24, Height Limitations/ Exceptions. The proposed revisions to the Zoning Ordinance will enable the building height restriction in the B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District to be increased from 35 feet to 45 feet. Action — Recommended Approval Commissioner Oates said he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this item, due to a possible conflict of interest. Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this proposed ordinance amendment was initiated by a formal request to enable the building height restriction in the B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District to be increased from 35 feet to 45 feet. She said the requested changes are based on a desire to have a height allowance in the B3 District that falls between the B2 (Business General) District at 35 feet and the M I (Light Industrial) District at 60 feet. Ms. Perkins said the requested height increase is proposed to be added as a height exception to Section 165 -24 Height Limitations; Exceptions. Ms. Perkins said the DRRS (Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee) endorsed this proposed ordinance amendment at their meeting on June 26, 2008. The DRRS stated they could support the 45- foot height increase as an exception to the height requirements so long as anything over 35 feet in height utilized the building setbacks required for the M 1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District. She said the Planning Commission discussed and supported this amendment at their August 20, 2008 meeting. At the September 24 meeting, the Board of Supervisors directed the staff to schedule a public hearing. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2369 Minutes of November 5, 2008 • Chairman Wilmot called for public continents and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. John Knott, with BPG Properties, acknowledged the recommended 45 -foot height exception is the height allowance between the B2 and M1 Districts. Mr. Knott commented that nearby jurisdictions also have a 45 -foot height limit or higher in similar districts. He said if this amendment is recommended for approval, the 45 -foot exception would increase the County's ability to compete for users who are interested in locating on B3 properties. In addition, he referred to illustrations in the Commission's agenda packets which depict potential scenarios of modem storage facilities which stack materials in buildings constructed up to 45 feet. Mr. Knott said modern facilities are utilizing this type of storage in buildings of this height. He also pointed out the M 1 setback is appropriate and is utilized in a proffer for his client's B3 -zoned site. Commissioner Thomas favored this amendment because it increases structures vertically instead of horizontally. He said the increase in size will allow developers to get another 30 -35% volume for storage. Commissioner Thomas made a motion to recommend approval of the ordinance amendment. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz and unanimously approved. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -24, Height Limitations/Exceptions. The proposed revisions to the Zoning Ordinance will enable the building height restriction in the B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District to be increased from 35 feet to 45 feet. (Note: Commissioner Oates abstained; Commissioners Ambrogi, Ruckman, Triplett, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.) • An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article XVII, IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District, Section 165 -130, Qualifying Criteria, and Section 165 -131, District Regulations. The proposed revision to the zoning ordinance will remove general merchandise, apparel stores, and automotive dealers from the qualifying uses. Action — Recommended Denial Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this proposed ordinance amendment deals with the uses permitted on IA (Interstate Area) Overlay signs within the Overlay District. She said property owners within this district are currently permitted to erect larger signs along highways; she said the intent and purpose of the Interstate Overlay sign is to inform the traveling public as to the location of hotels, gasoline stations, and restaurants, which are regarded as destination businesses. Ms. Perkins said the staff is proposing to remove three uses currently permitted on signs: general merchandise, apparel stores, and automotive dealers. She said people usually plan their trips in advance when going to these types of businesses and, therefore, they are not considered by the staff to be destination uses. Ms. Perkins said the proposed ordinance revision was discussed and endorsed by the DRRS (Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee) at their meeting of June 26, 2008. The Planning Commission discussed and supported the amendment at their meeting on August 20, 2008. At the Board of Supervisors' September 24, 2008 meeting, the Board directed the staff to advertize the amendment for public • hearing. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2370 Minutes of November 5, 2008 • Commissioner Manuel pointed out that some businesses are almost always located along interstates; he gave examples of CarMax, Bass Pro Shop, and Gander Mountain. Commissioner Manuel was conremed about the County's ability to attract and keep these types of businesses, if they are not permitted to have signs along the interstate. Commissioner Thomas commented that the uses mentioned, CarMax, Bass Pro Shop, and Gander Mountain could be considered destination uses for people traveling from other areas to Frederick County seeking this particular business. He asked if there was a problem with the existing ordinance. Ms. Perkins replied that this proposed amendment will help to ensure that Frederick County does not get inappropriate signs along the interstate interchange areas in the future. She added that the businesses mentioned would still have the opportunity for building - mounted signage. Commissioner Oates commented that the intent was to minimize the number of tall signs that tend to accumulate around the interstate exits and to reserve the signage for gas stations and restaurants for traveling motorists. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak. Chairman Wilmot then closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Manuel believed signs should identify commercial areas and retail centers, as well as food and gasoline. He said the interstate interchange areas are best suited and are presently designated for commercial and retail development in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. • Commissioner Manuel made a motion to recommend denial of the proposed ordinance amendment. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Mohn and was passed by a majority vote. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article XVII, IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District, Section 165 -130, Qualifying Criteria, and Section 165 -131, District Regulations. This proposed revision to the zoning ordinance would have removed general merchandise, apparel stores, and automotive dealers from the qualifying uses. The majority vote for recommending denial was: YES (TO DENY) Watt, Manuel, Thomas, Ours, Mohn NO: Unger, Oates, Wilmot, Kriz (Commissioners Ambrogi, Ruckman, Triplett, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.) An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District, Section 165 -54, Permitted uses, Section 165 -61, Number of uses restricted, Section 165 -62, Gross Density, Section 165 -62.1, Multi - family Housing, Section 165 -65, Dimensional Requirements; Article IV, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -37, Buffer and Screening • Requirements; Article XXII, Definitions, Section 165 -156, Definitions and Word Usage; and Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, Article V, Design Standards, Section 144 -24, Lot Requirements. The proposed revisions to the ordinances will enable age- restricted, multi - family housing in the RP (Residential Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2371 Minutes of November 5, 2008 Performance) District. • Action — Recommended Approval Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this proposed ordinance amendment was officially initiated by Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates (PHR &A) and would allow a new housing type, age - restricted, multi - family housing in the RP (Residential Performance) District. Ms. Perkins said the proposal calls for anew housing type to be only allowed in proffered, age - restricted developments and the changes are based on a desire to incorporate elevators in a cost - effective manner by permitting taller buildings with more units per building than currently allowed under the garden apartments housing type. Ms. Perkins stated the proposed ordinance was discussed at the August 5, 2008 Joint Work Session of the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission. She said the main issue of concern at this meeting was the proximity of the building to adjacent residential uses and a waiver option to increase the height of the building was discussed. Ms. Perkins said the ordinance was revised to include a waiver option for the building height. The DRRS discussed the height issue extensively and ultimately endorsed the ordinance at their meeting on August 28, 2008. The Planning Commission discussed and was supportive of the amendment at their meeting on September 17, 2008. At the Board of Supervisors' meeting on October 8, 2008, the Board discussed the proposed waiver, as well as the potential roof design, they ultimately directed the staff to advertise the amendment for public hearing. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. Patrick Sowers, with PHR &A, thanked the staff and the DRRS for all the time and effort that was put into this ordinance amendment. Mr. Sowers said as this ordinance was developed over time, two concerns remained: One concern was that the new housing type could potentially be over parked for an age - restricted, multi- development. He explained a one - bedroom unit or efficiency -type apartment calls for P/2 parking spaces and for two - bedroom or three- bedroom units, the ordinance calls for two parking spaces per unit. Mr. Sowers and his client believed this probably was in excess of what would be needed. He wanted to make sure the parking was sized correctly because there is limited public transportation in the area. In addition, they didn't want to over park, creating a greater environmental impact and also impact the aesthetics of the development. Mr. Sowers said his second concern is with the setback. Mr. Sowers said that under the existing ordinance, their proposal would have a 100 -foot side and rear setback. In situations where the building is located adjacent to single - family residential units, for every foot the building is above 40 feet in height, that setback would increase two feet in setback per one foot in height. He said a four -story building with a flat roof could be 40 feet tall and be 100 feet away from an adjacent residential use. The method of measuring height in Frederick County is at the very peak of the roof line. He said a building of this size with an eight -to- twelve pitch roof, which is a little more aesthetically pleasing, the height increases by about 18 feet. He said by adding a pitched roof to a four -story building, h will create a need for an additional 36 feet of setback. Mr. Sowers explained that in a site - specific scenario where they have proposed this use, adjacent to the Orrick Commons site, space is at a premium. When the 36 -foot setback is added, it dramatically affects the viability of the site. He said the only way to correct it would be to go to a lower pitched roof, which is not in anyone's best interest. He suggested the possibility of measuring the building height using the mean elevation between the eaves of the gable and the peak of the gable. He said it would provide more incentive to the applicant to go with the more steeply pitched roof. Mr. Sowers stated that aside from those two points, he felt strongly the ordinance was needed. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2372 Minutes of November 5, 2008 -10- Commissioner Thomas said that Mr. Sowers' continents have been extensively discussed by the DRRS, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors. It was pointed out that any applicant could still request a waiver. Comm ussioner Thomas made a motion to recommend approval of the ordinance amendment as presented by the staff. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District, Section 165 -59, Permitted uses, Section 165 -61, Number of uses restricted, Section 165 -62, Gross Density, Section 165 -62.1, Multi - family Housing, Section 165 -65, Dimensional Requirements; Article N, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165 -37, Buffer and Screening Requirements; Article 7XII, Definitions, Section 165 -156, Definitions and Word Usage; and Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, Article V, Design Standards, Section 144 -24, Lot Requirements. The proposed revisions to the ordinances will enable age - restricted, multi - family housing in the RP (Residential Performance) District. (Commissioners Ambrogi, Ruckman, Triplett, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.) PUBLIC MEETING Conditional Use Permit 910 -08 of Adam Arkfeld for a Cottage Occupation for a moteUbed & breakfast at • 250 Sister Chipmunk Lane. This property is identified with P.I.N. 34 -A -98 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. This item was tabled from the Commission's September 3, 2008 meeting. Action — Recommended Approval with Conditions Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported the Planning Commission tabled this conditional use permit (CUP) request on September 3, 2008 to allow the applicant to address some private road issues that were raised by the adjoining property owners. Mr. Cheran read the proposed conditions that would be attached to the CUP, if it was recommended for approval. Mr. Benjamin M. Butler, Attorney, was representing the owner /applicant, Mr. Adam Arkfeld. Mr. Butler stated that he researched the right -of -way which serves this property and it is well established by all of the property owners in the chain of title. It was always contemplated that Mr. Arkfeld's property would be served by the right -of -way and go over the adjoining properties. One of the questions that remained was the maintenance issue. Mr. Butler believed this issue has been resolved with an agreement which has been signed by everyone except the Johnsons. He explained that the agreement essentially places a maximum amount that the other property owners would have to pay at $200; if the other property owners paid for any materials, for example gravel for the road or cleaning ditches, they would receive a credit against that $200. Mr. Butler believed everyone was satisfied with the agreement, except the Johnsons. He commented that the Johnsons may be in agreement, but they were not available to sign. Concerning staffs recommended conditions, Mr. Butler spoke with the Commission about a one -time only activity to take place in the Spring of 2009 to allow Mr. Arkfeld to have a Chamber of Commerce social. Mr. Butler asked the Commission to consider this one -time exception so they would not have to come before the Commission in the Spring. Frederick Couny Planning Commission rage L� i Minutes of November 5, 2008 -11- Commissioner Oates stated that at the first public hearing on September 3, 2008, many upset neighbors attended and he wanted to give them an opportunity to work with the applicant and get some of the issues straightened out. Commissioner Oates said the applicant has accomplished that task. Upon motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 410 -08 of Adam Arkfeld for a Cottage Occupation for a motet/ bed & breakfast at 250 Sister Chipmunk Lane with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. Any proposed business sign shall conform to the cottage occupation sign requirements and not exceed four - square feet in size. 3. No more than three bedrooms and six guests allowed with this bed and breakfast use. 4. No other on -site activities will be associated with this bed and breakfast. 5. Any expansion or modifications will require a new conditional use permit. 6. Allowance of a one -time Chamber of Commerce Social_ on site in the Spring of 2009. (Commissioners Ambrogi, Ruckman, Triplett, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.) 0 Master Development Plan 405 -08 for Snowden Bridge, Parts A and B, submitted by Greenway Engineering for a residential planned community on 285.5 acres, zoned R4 (Residential Planning Community) District. The properties are located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and east of Milburn Road (Route 662). The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s 44-A-292,44-A-293, and 44 -A -31A in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval Planner Amber Powers reported that this application proposed a revision to the previously - approved master development plan (MDP) for the Snowden Bridge development, a 231 -acre portion, which is Land Bay 3A, and is a portion of a larger 794 -acre parcel rezoned in 2003- The proffer limits the housing to 2,455 housing units and a minimum of 2395 acres of open space. The initial MDP for Land Bay 3A was 285.5 acres, but the southern 54.5 -acre portion was removed from the application due to a conflict with the original location of Route 37. The remaining 231 -acre portion of the MDP was approved and is currently being developed under MDP 414 -07. The County approved the relocation of planned Route 37 to the southern portion of 44 -A- 31 A. With planned Route 37 no longer going through Land Bay 3A, the applicant decided to rejoin parts A and B into a single MDP application, which is before the Commission this evening. Ms. Powers said there are minor changes involved in the Part A portion, Dutchman Court and Blackford Drive has new right -in, right -out entrances onto Stonebridge Boulevard. Also, there is the addition of Honeycomb Road which accommodates the replacement of courtyard -style homes with townhomes. This application also proposes the removal of one of two • recreational sites; the applicant has reserved them as two optional locations and only one of them will be developed. Part B includes the addition of single- family detached housing units and public roads to service them, as well as additional residential units and private roads within the adult facility. These changes in the MDP as a Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2374 Minutes of November 5, 2008 -12- whole are consistent with the proffers from the 2003 rezoning and the County ordinances. If approved, it would • enable the applicant to implement the generalized development plan. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, with Greenway Engineering, was representing the application. Mr. Wyatt said the rezoning that was approved back in 2003 was done with a generalized development plan (GDP) that showed various land bay bubbles and the way the proffer was written, the MDP would be following the GDP. Since the rezoning was approved, the applicant has been introducing a series of MDPs as sections come on line for development. The last MDP approved by the County (MDP # 14 -07) was about 231 acres and they are doing a building block of the GDP, which does two things: It adds some smal ler areas and a cul -de -sac into the MDP; it also adds a right -in, right -out, which has been approved by VDOT, and an option for the recreational community building and amenities for the overall community. Mr. Wyatt summarized by saying these are minor revisions to the previously - approved MDP and the inclusion of some areas which extend primarily into the active adult community. He said it was consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the requirements of the ordinance. Commissioner Thomas asked Mr. Wyatt if he understood correctly that planned Route 37 has now been placed on the Generalized Master Development Plan. Mr. Wyatt replied no. Chairman Wilmot next closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Thomas expressed his desire for the developer to recognize Route 37 and place it on the MDP. Having said that, he guessed there was no way the Commission could require it at this point. Commissioner Thomas next made a motion to recommend approval of the MDP. This motion ® was seconded by Commissioner Manuel. Commissioner Oates also believed it would be important for subsequent MDPs to show Route 37. He said, obviously, this MDP had already been approved by the Board of Supervisors and the Commission couldn't require that it be shown. However, he encouraged the applicant, since the County had relocated Route 37 to accommodate this project, to at least recognize the location according to the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The vote on the motion to recommend approval was unanimously in favor. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Master Development Plan #05 -08 for Snowden Bridge, Parts A and B, submitted by Grcenway Engineering for a residential planned community on 285.5 acres, zoned R4 (Residential Planning Community) District. The properties are located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road (Route 76 1) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and east of Milburn Road (Route 662). (Note: Commissioners Ambrogi, Ruckman, Triplett, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.) i s Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2375 Minutes of November 5. 2008 — 13 — OTHER Chairman Wilmot stated there has been discussion with the DRRS (Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee) to change their meeting start times to 7:00 p.m. Chairman Wilmot recognized this may be appropriate if both major subcommittees would meet at 7:00 p.m. to be consistent and less confusing. The consensus of the Commission was that both the CPPS (Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee) and the DRRS will start future meetings at 7:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, the meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, q LAII L�.Lka JunLM. Chairman � ul�— % Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary • • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2376 Minutes of November 5, 2008