PC 03-20-13 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..March 20, 2013.
PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman /Member at Large; :Roger L. Thomas;: Vice Chairman/
Opequon District; Brian Madagan, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; J. Stanley
Crockett, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee
District; Kevin Kenney, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District•, Kevin O. Crosen, Back
Creek District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud. District; Roderick B. Williams, County. Attorney; Robert
Hess, 'Board of Supervisors, Liaison; and Beau Correll, Winchester Planning Commission_Liaison.
ABSENT: Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District
STAFF PRESENT:. Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy. Planning
Director; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; and
Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order °at 7:00 p.m.
CHAIRMAN WELCOMES BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' LIAISON, MR. ROBERT(BOB) HESS
Chairman Wilmot introduced the newly appointed Board of Supervisors' member
representing the Gainesboro District, Mr. Robert (Bob) Hess. Chairman Wilmot welcomed Mr. Hess as
the Board of Supervisors, Liaison to the. Planning „Commission. ,
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR PHILIP E. LEMIEUX
Chairman Wilmot called for retiring Planning Commissioner; Philip E. Lemieux, to come
forward to the podium. Chairman Wilmot read a Resolution of Appreciation in recognition. of Mr.
Lemieux's service: to Frederick County. Chairman Wilmot presented the Resolution of Appreciation to.
Mr. Lemieux, which was by all the members .of the Planning Commission.
Frederick County Planning Commission, Page 2952
Minutes of March 20, 20:13
2_
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Commissioner Oates, seconded by Commissioner Crockett, and
unanimously passed to adopt the agenda for this evening's meeting as presented.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Economic Development Commission (EDC) — 3101113 Mfg.
Commissioner Madigan reported the EDC discussed their strategy for 2013 -2014; no
significant changes from the previous year's strategies were noted. The EDC staff provided an update on
the 2012 Career Awareness Tours, including the survey results from students. and teachers; these continue.
to be a success and are well received. Staff additionally provided informational updates on the EDC's
30'x' anniversary, the business cluster activities, and ,reactive client updates. , The final item of business
was the retirement announcement of the. EDC's business coordinator, Mr. Ken Jones. The EDC is
currently working on filling that position.
Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) — 3/19/13 Mtg.
Commissioner Unger reported' February rainfall at 13 inches; January rainfall was 3.77'.
inches; water level at the Diehl Plant rose four feet, within the last month; water level at the Anderson
Plant dropped approximately two feet, which was expected. Approximately .1.7mgd is being pumped
from the'Di'ehl Plant; approximately 2 -.1mgd is being pumped from the Anderson Plant, approximately
800,000 gpd was purchased from the City of Winchester; and the average daily use is approximately,
46mgd_. Commissioner Unger reported the. FCSA, _repaired some water leaks discovered within the
system and this past month they had only a one percent average in leaks, which is outstanding. Stephens
force main replacement, is 95% complete-'and the airport business pump station will be started within the•
next few weeks. Commissioner Unger reported the FCSA will install an emergency generator -at the
Sanitation Department's . main office for special equipment; and area water haulers will have their trucks
equipped with.meters to. measure the amount .of'waterremoved from hydrants.
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC) — 3/11/13 Mtg.
Commissioner Mohn reported the CPPC discussed a couple items that have been
previously discussed at prior committee ,meetings. Specifically, those items were the Comprehensive
Policy Plan Amendment request, which was initiated by the Board of Supervisors, for the Light Property .
in the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) area, north of Brucetown, and a Comprehensive Policy Plan
Amendment application for the Middletown/Lord Fairfax Community College SWSA expansion and land
use study. Commissioner Mohn said both of these items were sent forward from the CPPC to the
Frederick County Planning Commission , Page 2953'
Minutes of March 2.0, 2013
3_
Planning Commission for discussion and will. be, on the agenda, for. the Commissions April 3•, :2013
meeting.
Winchester City 'Planning- Commission — 3/1943 Mtg.
Commissioner _Beau Correll; Liaison from the Winchester City Planning, Commission;
reported the consideration of several routine conditional use permits from .the City `Planning;
Commission's rneeting. He said new business involved the review and, initiation of an: ordinance
pertaining, to temporary signs within t_he. City In :addition, the City Planning-'C omm'ssion considered„
amending the ordinance 'to include' specif c distinctions between entertainment establishments, ,and
restaurants; however, this was not.finalized ljecause':of issues def ning each of these uses
Appointment to-the Comprehensive'Plans and Trograms Committee:(CPPC)
Chairman Wilmot announced ,the appointment of J. P. Carr as "a citizen member of the
GPPC representing the Red Bud District,
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Chairman Wilmot called for 6tizen•comments on any issue not on th'is evening's agenda. .
No; one came, forward, to speak and., Chairman.,,-Wilmot, closed the Citizen Comments portion of'ihe
meeting.*--
INFORMATION/ DISCUSSION =
i.
Discussion of the Urban Center Design Cabinet' Study — `Review of 'the study completed by the;,.
Urban Center Design' Cabinet which provides guidance •and illustration on, previously - approved
Urban Centers'within Frederick- County's'Urban,Development Area
Deputy Planning Director, Michael T-,, Ruddy, reported that during the 2013: Planning.
Commission Retreat, the Board of Supervisors and the •Planning Commission reviewed` the study
completed by the Urban,;; Center Design .Cabinet;, which provided further. guidance and illustration: on
previously= approved urban :centers within Frederick County's Urban Development ,Area.. He said
endorsement was received to move the study through the County's approval process„ and discussion,.by
the Commission is the first step-in the process. Mr. Ruddy noted thatultiinately"; the Urban, Center Design
Cabinet Study will 6e ,adopted by the County as a policy,in support ofAhe 2030 Cpmprehens -iye Policy
Plan =and will be a resource to property owners and the.development community,:
Fredeerick CountyPlanning Commission Page 29 54
Minutes of March 20, 2013` .
Mr. Ruddy stated the Urban Center Design Cabinet was established to conduct more".-
detailed land use studios for :selected urban centers which have been identified in. area plans. Those
centers include.-: `Crosspomte, Greenwood, and Parkins Mill Urban Centers :from the, _$enseny Eastern .
Frederick `Urban Area ,Plan (SEFUAP) and Sherando from the Route 277 Study Area 'Plan. Mr.:Ruddy
said the intent was. 1) to further implement the: 2030 'Comprehensive Plan and 2) to provide tirther
guidance,'to property.owners and developers located in areas identified as urban :centers; the design plans
Will evaluate how; the various land uses can be- .:,mixed, into an intensive, walkable, interconnected
neighborhood with puWic, open'space§and integrated community facilities'...
Mr.'Ruddy commented that, the,study:group thought it important to, look at other existing
urban centers in and around our area and three exam_" ' pies "visited were, the West Broad Village; withiii,the u
Richmond- Henrico County area; the Village at Leesburg, off 'Route 7 and east of Leesburg; and: the
Landsdowne Town Center. He .noted each of these examples, created an environment that, was certainly,,
urban, and;have obviously become very desirable to residents and economic, development ,growth and'
I
opportunityin, these communities.. Mr. Ruddy described the details and showed slides of'these various '
urban centers. He noted the top .five attributes: ' of: urban. centers .include: 4) entertainment; 2)
transportation; 3) residential; 4,) employment; and 5.) public services. Mr Ruddy, examined each of these'
attributes with the" Commission, :noti'ng.the attributes,together make an urban center successful and viable.;
He also talked, about a unique feature of the urban center, .referred to as a "hook;" and may be a hist'orica'l
feature, a, farming environment; or possibly entertainment- driven, and draws; people to' a particular
li
location. _
Mr Rudd stated •the urban centers `have been identified. in the County's Comprehens
Policy lan.. He' said, the, development of these, urban .centers may introduce more 4ritensiVe land
Y ive
Y P use
designations, that, may not currently be in the land use'plan. Therefore, each 'of the• centers includes four
main designations in addition to the institutional uses and.,those,are: 1) higher intensity commercial mixed
use; 2) main - street commercial. mixed use; 3) higher density residential; and 4) :medium deri'slty
residential. He noted that both of the residential . densities are more'intensive,than wliatcurrently exists in
Frederick County; but will be appropriate for the identified urban centers. Mr. Ruddy continued'.with his -
presentation of`the, four urban centers the special characteristics of °each one:
concept for these urban centers. will probably: notChairman 'Wilmot commented that the _
materialize until past the year 2030; and furthermore, -not all will develop at once and not all. are
necessarily predictable. She inquired how the, staff sees, the process of prioritizing th'e urban centers and
the process of phasing y uld be considerable evolution. in the'growth`_of
these areas over time and he studyuggroup discussed, prontization. He, pointed out that in order for "the
study group to identify the details to the extent in which they did they needed to provide flexibility in th e
the key, not only for the end result,' but, Also the timing f when that, would. occu. He said there are some
timing. He said one location may, come forward before another. Mr. Rudd emphasized. that flexibility Is
improvements others .butImportanttransportationimprovementsthatmaydrivesomeurbancenterstooccur .before , '
even with that, it is envisioned there should be lots of flexibility; because the ;market may, not- support
some, of thevisions the group. has for these areas any time, soon. Mr. Ruddy believed it was important, to
recognize there may be interim commercial or residential which occurs within the next f0 -15 years that
may be som ethin completely different: in 40 -50 years and, be. yond.
eHe.
said the group thought
p rioritization should be 'somethirig that happens organically. The believed. the, land uses would change
overtime and eertaml y the framework P rovided b y 1 )the location of the urban centers; and- 2),the
transportation, the,network, and the mix of different uses.
Frederick:County Planning Commission; Page 295
Minutes,,ofMarch:20,,2013
Chairman Wilmot believed it was ,important to keep the public apprised and •public. y
discussions were -one of-the ways to accomplish.this
Discussion of the New Traditional, Neighborhood Design (TND): District , This new district is
proposed,to implement the goal's of the. 2030 - Comprehensive Plan with regards to planned urban,
centers+ and -neighborhood. villages:
Senior, Planner, Candice E. Perkins; reported this item is the,.proposed ordinance that
pwould ;im lenient the 'urban centers .and neighborhood villages concepts. M . Perkins said this is, a
proposed new zoning district entitled, "Traditonal'Neighborhood Design (TND) District. She said. this
proposed, ordinance was discussed quite extensively back, in 2008- 2009,; however, it'was put on hold at
that time: Now with the renewed interest in the urban' centers,'the staff 'is bringing the, ordinance back for'
additional discussion
Ms: Perkins stated this p ro p osed or pinance is intended t P p rov de or the imimplementation,
part of the urban center neighborhood design concepts, in the - 2030 Com ehensive Plan As •outlined in
the proposed text of the ordinance, the purpose of`the TND District is to allow. for the, development of
compatible mixed. use and 'pedestrian - oriented activity centers which contain a mix of •integrated. use`s
including business, retail, residential; cultural, educational, and other,public and.private uses,,, in areas
consistent with the Comprehensive Planto create wumrW, livable community:.
Ms: Perkins next identi'fed ,some ;o f the specifics of the TND District, which included a
requirement for a minimum of 20 acres of land "to ,be submitted :for'rezonin i ' g, After the;nrt al core.area,is
rezoned, contiguous acreage can be added to the TND District, if it is demonstrated the -acreage could be
integrated with the district that was ,previously approv,"ed: :She said there is a requirement. for- a design - -
guidelines manual and this is intended to identify the types of residential uses proposed, as well as
architectural
to introduce, different hous n
mm
es tmto the TND
Distriocte
thatla en'
tccurrentlyt
in. We RP
P.
g g typ'` "
District: She said'thene is a master, development plan (MDP) requirement to be submitted with- the,,TIVD
rezoning. Also included is a requirement "for a mixture.,iof housing; types; the ordinance states .at, least
three separate :categories of residential uses are to be provided within the coininuriity and no:, more than
25%0 .of the, residential uses can be single- family detached:
p allowed = Y. Regarding the permitted uses. within the TND District Ms. Perkins, said: "an use
within the RP, Rt, and B2 Districts will ,be permitted. There are a couple of outlet uses that would. be.
permitted a conditional use permit CUP Re ardin g development standards, vs. Perkins stated
there. are minimum, established, for commercia resid ential; public, and civic uses, and open,
space; a, central plaza or square is required within the :community center; off - street parking is; required Ito
be=at the rear or side =of buildings within the community center, and on- street parking "is encouraged.
Regarding general requirements, Ms: Perkins stated, the maxithuiri growth density for the
TND is 1:6 units per acre for,residential; this, maybe increased up to 24 units per acre> if TDRs (Transfers
of Development Rights)' are used; there ,is a minimum residential density of six. units per acre for the
residential portion; there are established minimum and. maximum: setbacks. Regarding the, commercial
areas., there is a minimum floor ratio of .4 and:a;maximum,floor=to -area ratio of 2:;
Frederick County Planning Commission Rage.2956
Minutessof March 20; 2013
01 1 _6'
1VIs:*;Perk ns said this proposed ordinance wa "s originally discussed, back in 2098= 2009
She, said it was taken back- to the' DRRC (Development Review & Regulations. Committee) at their
February:2013 meeting;. DRRC :endorsed the ordinance as drafted and sent:.it forward tothei Planning;
Commission for further •discussion. Ms. Perkins said the staff is now seeking comments from the.
Planning Commission on the =proposed ;ordinance.
Chairman Wilmot asked what was, new within the proposal that may not have been in the
4
p -no mayor Chan es °from the original wording. ' evJous draft. ,Ivlspr Perkins re -1_ed there have been g _ -
Commissioner Thomas .believed this was a very good ordinance proposal. He said his
only" concern, And he, believed he also expressed'it: back in 2008, was the question of whether or not;the, 20
acres was large enou h for a startin omt. Commtssroner. Thomas questioned whether a; mixed =useggp w
development was viable on 20 acres°and thought. maybe 50 acres would be more appropriate.
Commissioner 'Unger said he was thinking the opposite and believed 20 :acres as a ` g =
minimum wastoo'high.
Commissioner Manuel remarked. that the.Food Lion Center in Stephens City';`s 20 acres;.
ifanyone wants to get a perspective on that size. Commissioner Manuel said,20 acres seems too' small.
Commissioner Oates said he thought the 20 acres was, simply to get- "a piece of the jigsaw
puzzle going, ,to just kick off the core and as other pieces come in, they fill in the blanks,,.," He said the 20`
acres may actually be, the commercial component, or it might be the main street; or it, might: be,a comer
containing'sonie of the housing.
C6mmi ssioner Thomas recognized.--if has to ,start somewhere and .he would. be satisfied if. =
the commercial area was the core; however; if -it starts off with 20 acres of high = density housing; 'he didn't
think` that °was desirable.." ... `•
Commissioner Mohn stated that with this particular TND ordinance, a . developer
wouldn't "be able to do an exclusively residential core area;: there would have °to be a :mix. 1VIs Perkins
agreed; she said, 20 :acres is the minimum and within the ordinance there. are percentages with- the
rezoning the developer; would have"'to meet. She said it couldn't: be all_ residential - or all commercial; tt
would, have to have all, of the percentages within the, proffer. Commissioner Mohn ;believed there could
be some really' creative designs on tight sites and opportunities to get some mixed ,uses. Commissioner -
Ivlohn believed.the 20 acres was a good starting pomi:
The .Commissioners agreed .to provide the opportunity to the, development _community
and see what someone can do with 'a MDP.
Chairman Wilmot commented; this' was an excellent document and_ made the observation' ..
that it is now occurring; within- the right sequence of.events:,
Commissioner T homas 'asked what,,the next step- would. Abe for "this proposed ordinance:_..
Ms. Perkins replied the next step would, probably .be, to meet . with the engineering and development
community and possibly, rolling into a; work session this summer...
4
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2957'.
Minutes 0M di-620, 20113,
Discussion, of Entrance Spacing, Requirements Revise and update motor yehic -1p, ?'access'
req"uirements,apecil cally'entrance spacing, requirements.
Senior; Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this is a minor amendment to update the
entrance spacing" requirements currently contained: within the zoning .ordi'nance. =!Ms;: Perkins said
primarily; ahe'biggest change within .this proposed ordinance is an update to bring the spacing, into.
conformance with -the , VDOT minimum ,spacing ;requirements. 'She said currently; there is a, large f
discrepancy between the County's requirements and 'VDOT's. 'Secondly, -the staff is clarifying "that`the
spacin for.residential considered on°, g. driveways and:entrarices are ,also apart of the ordinance,and must be
arterial and collector roadways; She said there is also a provision that 'VDOT.;approvals. must be obtained-
prior to the Zoning Administrator 'allowing alternative; methods, such as _right -ins /right -outs, thatdo not
meet the entrariceapacirig requirements,
Ms., Pe, ikins said the DRRC (Development' Review &; Regulations Committee) discussed
this, at their Fe'6tuary"rneleting and with some .minor 'changes, they sent ,it forward_ to =the TIkiiimg
Commfission for, ,discussion. _
Commissioner Thomas assumed „the 'concept has ;changed; from speed to classification of
road with the new ordinance. He said that previously, there was "considerable discussion on::speed :and :.
distance to stop if '.someone' was pulling out; he asked if the new spacing 'comes ,from State guidelines:
commissioner Thomas said he was concerned about two specifically: the .minor. collector` o. ds. for.,
minimum required spacing, which could be, 'a residential driveway; and the .major collector residential
driveway entrance at 150 feet. He said those two spacing distances.seein way too close.;
Ms. 'Perkins said staff used the VDOT list that contained all; their classifications and'
spacing and staff compared them with what was currently in the. ordinance. Shez said the staff obviously
had to condense because VDOT has a much broader number of ispaping. requirements;, nevertheless,' the
n ummbetsi, proposed are consistent with the.VDOT requirements. .Commissioner'Thomas remarked,th'atthe-.
posted speeds for those types of roads allow .for' a maximum of' three seconds. between':driveways; if a
driver is adhering to the posted speed:: He-cautioned,that itprovides-vecy little reachon'time.'
Msc Perkins said she would forward ,the Commission''s comments on, to the-Board of
Supervisors:;
ADJOURNMENT
No further business remained to be discussed and upon motion by.Commissioner Oates
y animous votergJpy _ ;. ner Grockeft .the meetm ad'ourned at'74 '5 .m. b a un _ and second, b, Comm ssio,
Respectfully submitted,
Ju e M ilmot, Chairman
Eric R. Lawrence;; Secretary
Frederick County Planning Commission e.2 958
Minutes ° of March 20; 2013: _ _