PC 06-18-14 Meeting Minutes
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3108
Minutes of June 18, 2014
MEETING MINUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in
Winchester, Virginia on June 18, 2014.
PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice
Chairman/Opequon District; Robert S. Molden, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District;
J. Stanley Crockett, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel,
Shawnee District; J. Rhodes Marston, Back Creek District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District;
Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney; and Martha Shickle,
City of Winchester Liaison.
ABSENT: Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Kevin Kenney, Gainesboro District; and Charles
F. Dunlap, Red Bud District.
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; John A. Bishop, Deputy Director-
Transportation; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; and Renee S. Arlotta, Clerk.
-----------
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Wilmot called the June 18, 2014 meeting of the Frederick County Planning
Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Wilmot commenced the meeting by inviting everyone to
join in a moment of silence.
-------------
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Crockett,
the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for this evening’s meeting.
-------------
MINUTES
Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Crockett,
the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the minutes of their May 7, 2014 meeting.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Crockett,
the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the minutes of their May 21, 2014 meeting.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3109
Minutes of June 18, 2014
-------------
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Economic Development Commission (EDC)
Commissioner Thomas reported the EDC met last week and a significant discussion item
was small businesses in Winchester and Frederick County. He said 87% of businesses employing in
Frederick County employ less than 25 people and small business is a significant and important part of the
economy. He commented the EDC, over their 20+ years, has had a significant role in setting up those
businesses and mentoring them to be successful in Frederick County. Commissioner Thomas stated that
Frederick County also has a much higher success rate for small businesses than the remainder of the
country and the EDC has done a great job over the years.
Commissioner Thomas also reported that the EDC’s June meeting was its last meeting
and the name will be changed to the Economic Development Authority. He said the name change, the
mission refocus, and the membership will change for the future.
-------------
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC) – 6/09/14 Mtg.
Commissioner Mohn reported the CPPC considered a SWSA (Sewer & Water Service
Area) inclusion request and a CPPA (Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment) for the Blaine properties
located within the Stonewall Magisterial District. He said it was a straight-forward request and is an area
already included within the NELUP (Northeast Land Use Plan). He stated the CPPC was in full
agreement this should move forward for full consideration by the Planning Commission and the Board of
Supervisors. Commissioner Mohn said the request will be going to a joint work session of the Board and
Commission sometime in the near future.
--------------
City of Winchester Planning Commission - 6/17/14 Mtg.
Ms. Martha Shickle, Winchester City Planning Commission Liaison, reported the
Commission had three public hearings at their meeting yesterday. She said the first was for multi-family
housing for a CUP (conditional use permit) for five two-bedroom apartments atop the Goodwill Industries
Building on Millwood Avenue, which was forwarded to Council with a recommendation of approval.
The second public hearing was in regards to the inclusion of Wick and Cameron Streets in the zoning
ordinance relating to Corridor Enhancement Districts, which was forwarded on to Council with a
recommendation for approval. Ms. Shickle said the third public hearing was for an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan to amend the location of the new John Kerr Elementary School and siting of the
property within the zoning district. This was also forwarded on with an affirmative recommendation.
-------------
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3110
Minutes of June 18, 2014
Citizen Comments
Chairman Wilmot called for citizen comments on any subject not currently on the
Planning Commission’s agenda or any item that is solely a discussion item for the Commission.
No one wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the Citizen Comments portion of
the meeting.
-------------
PUBLIC HEARING
An Ordinance to Amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article V–Planned
Development Districts, Part 502-R5, Residential Recreational Community District, Section 165-
502.05, Design Requirements. This proposed amendment will remove the requirement that R5
communities must be “age-restricted communities” to qualify for private streets; it provides for the
inclusion of additional design standards for private roads; and directs maintenance responsibilities
for private roads to be the responsibility of the property owners association.
Action – Recommended Approval with Specifications
Commissioner Mohn 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 is a second request to allow the use of
private streets for all types of developments within the R5 (Residential Recreational Community) Zoning
District. Ms. Perkins said currently, the use of private streets in the R5 District are solely allowed within
age-restricted communities and only if approved by the Board of Supervisors. She said the amendment
would allow the use of private streets within all types of developments, but would still require Board of
Supervisors’ approval.
Ms. Perkins said the applicant’s request included the following modifications to the
original text considered with the first text amendment: a requirement that the development must include a
minimum of 1,000 lots and a requirement that paving designs based on actual CBRs (California Bearing
Ratio) are provided to Frederick County for approval. Ms. Perkins explained that if approved, this
amendment would apply to all land zoned R5; the developments that currently have this zoning are
Shenandoah, Lake Holiday, Shawneeland, Mountain Falls Park, and Autumn Hills/Timber Ridge Estates.
While these developments currently utilize private streets, it should be noted there are undeveloped (large
lot) sections within some of these developments that could potentially request the waiver. She pointed
out that new MDPs (Master Development Plan) and approval of a private street waiver would be required.
Ms. Perkins next provided some history of the discussion of this amendment through the
DRRC (Development Review & Regulations Committee), the Planning Commission, and the Board of
Supervisors. Ms. Perkins stated that during the Planning Commission’s and Board of Supervisors’
meetings, the issue of meeting all VDOT (Virginia Department of Transportation) requirements was
discussed. Therefore, the staff has included two options for consideration: 1) The applicant’s request
which requires the road sections meet the minimum VDOT thickness requirements; and 2) A second
option that would require the road sections to meet all VDOT requirements. Ms. Perkins said tonight, the
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3111
Minutes of June 18, 2014
staff is seeking a recommendation on Option #1 (the applicant’s request) or Option #2 (suggestion based
on comments received) from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Thomas (Ty) Moore Lawson, with Lawson and Silek, P.L.C., came forward on
behalf of the applicant, property owner, and developer of the Shenandoah development. Mr. Lawson said
the mission for all parties involved is to create an ordinance that allows for private streets, not only in age-
restricted communities, but also within non-age-restricted communities, and furthermore, to have the
ability to appear before the Board of Supervisors and have the opportunity to request, under certain
circumstances and conditions, private streets within a community. Mr. Lawson said upon reviewing the
ordinance, language already exists to allow private streets in age-restricted communities with certain
VDOT standards and with a program for the perpetual maintenance of all streets which is acceptable to
the Board of Supervisors and the transportation planner. Mr. Lawson said this request is to be able to
open this up for non-age-restricted communities as well, by asking the Board for permission to do so.
Mr. Lawson stated that throughout the various meetings, they heard comments for
suggested revisions to the ordinance for more standards. He said these standards all focus on the quality
of the road, the depth of the pavement, the upkeep of maintenance, for engineering standards to be met,
and going forward, a demonstration of the financial fitness of the community. Mr. Lawson pointed out
that Shenandoah development began as an age-restricted community with private streets; he said if private
streets are not allowed within the non-age-restricted portions, the development would end up in the range
of 20% public streets and 80% private streets, which could be very confusing implementing maintenance
and snow removal.
Mr. Lawson expressed concern over an issue with one addendum by the staff requiring
the applicant to not only meet or exceed the vertical standard, but also the horizontal standard for a public
street. Mr. Lawson was opposed to this addendum because he believed it was added so the applicant
would basically have to install a public street and keep it private until such time as a failure may occur
and the road would be accepted back into the public system. He believed this deviated from the mission
and the intent. Mr. Lawson said the developer and the residents of this community do not want to have
public streets. He said they were fine with designing to exceed or meet the public street standards so the
streets will last and be durable, but they do not want to create a street that government can come back in
and take over.
Chairman Wilmot next opened the public hearing and called for anyone who wished to
speak regarding this amendment to please come forward.
Mr. Charlie Harmon, a resident of Lake Frederick in the Opequon District, came forward
to speak in support of the private road request for the Lake Frederick community. Mr. Harmon read from
a prepared statement. He said the existing residents bought their homes expecting a private gated, age-
restricted community; however, recent changes in market conditions required the developer to market for
non-age-restricted homebuyers as well. Mr. Harmon said the proposed ordinance change and waiver will
enable the residents to keep the gated community design and will avoid possible management and
maintenance challenges of a community with both private and public streets. He commented that
residents fully understand the financial obligations of the HOA for private street repairs and maintenance
and for several years, under the guiding hand of an experienced and knowledgeable Budget and Finance
Committee, have been building up long-term reserves in anticipation of those expenditures. Mr. Harmon
urged the Commission to send a positive recommendation forward to the Board of Supervisors.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3112
Minutes of June 18, 2014
Mr. D. Michael Reyman, a resident of Lake Frederick in the Opequon District, came
forward to speak in support of the private road request for the Lake Frederick community. Mr. Reyman
read from a prepared statement. Mr. Reyman said the essential elements of the originally approved MDP
for Lake Frederick remain today with regards to number of homes, amenities, and the desire of both
developer and residents to develop a gated access community. He said the only change Lansdowne is
requesting to long-standing County approvals is to enable them to apply to the County to build private
streets at Lake Frederick for the non-age-restricted sections of the community. Mr. Reyman pointed out
that at completion, 72% of the homes at Lake Frederick will be located on private residential streets under
existing County approvals; the requested ordinance change will enable Lansdowne to apply for
permission to construct private streets for the remaining 28%, including the main connector road between
the Route 522 and Route 277 entrances into the community. He said this will allow the residents to retain
the gated community design they bought into and will avoid the previously-mentioned management
challenges for the HOA dealing with a mix of private and public streets. In conclusion, Mr. Reyman
spoke about the HOA’s ability to fund private street maintenance. Mr. Reyman said the residents have
high confidence this cost can be absorbed within the current HOA fee level and they anticipate that over
time, additional residents will be available to contribute to the HOA. Mr. Reyman urged the Commission
to send a positive recommendation forward to the Board of Supervisors.
Dr. Richard Setton, a resident of Lake Frederick in the Opequon District, came forward
to speak in support of the private road request for the Lake Frederick community. Dr. Setton read from a
prepared statement and he re-emphasized the points made by the two previous speakers. He noted the
only change requested by the developer from the originally-approved MDP is for the ability to submit an
application to the County to provide private streets for both age-restricted and non-age-restricted homes at
Lake Frederick. Dr. Setton said the HOA and the residents are no strangers to the challenges and benefits
of private streets. He said the 4.8 miles of existing private streets have all been constructed to VDOT
base standards. He assured the Commission that the HOA and the residents have a solid grasp on the
reserve requirements necessary for the streets, both from formal cost and reserve studies, and from the
considerable prior life experience and knowledge many residents bring with them. Dr. Setton urged the
Commission to send a positive recommendation forward to the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Kevin Walek, a resident of Lake Frederick in the Opequon District, came forward to
speak in support of the private road request for the Lake Frederick community. Mr. Walek read from a
prepared statement. Mr. Walek said he supported the diversity of a mixed age-restricted and non-age-
restricted community. He also supported the developer’s desire to build out such a mixed community
with gated access and private streets. He believed integrated private street development will provide
benefits to all homeowners; and, it will eliminate complexities and avoid challenges in the governance
and day-to-day management of the HOA. He spoke of the two classes of homebuyers their mixed
community has been designed to address, the younger life-style seekers and the aging baby boomers, and
he believed it was a model for future planned communities in Frederick County and the Northern
Shenandoah. Mr. Walek urged the Commission to send a positive recommendation forward to the Board
of Supervisors.
Dr. Carol Delacruz, a resident of Lake Frederick in the Opequon District, came forward
to speak in support of the private road request for the Lake Frederick Community and she read from a
prepared statement. As mentioned by the previous speakers, Dr. Delacruz stated the fact that the Lake
Frederick gated community of approximately 2,100 residences was approved for private streets was an
important part of her personal buying decision. Dr. Delacruz commented that beginning in 2012, she was
a member of the group of nine homeowners on a Redevelopment Study Group working with Lansdowne
prior to their purchase of the Lake Frederick property. She said although they differed on some details of
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3113
Minutes of June 18, 2014
the new development plan, both the study group and Lansdowne were in agreement on two key points: 1)
in order to fulfill the promise of a 2,100-home community, the developer needed to address in parallel
both the age-restricted and non-age-restricted homebuyer markets; and 2) given the geography of the
development and existing developed portion, it was imperative that there be gated, private streets
throughout the entire development to provide the security existing homeowners expected, as well as a
sense of cohesiveness and community among the age-restricted residents. Dr. Delacruz stated presently,
the community has two age-restricted sections with private streets, one is gated and the other as yet is not.
She asked the Commission to imagine the impact on the sense of community, and on community
governance, in a situation where roughly half of the age-restricted community has gated access and
private streets and the other half has no gated access and a mix of private and public streets. She said
such a condition would create disjunction within the community, not to mention the challenges it would
present for HOA governance. Dr. Delacruz believed resident age should not influence or be a
determining factor as to whether they are permitted to continue with private roads throughout the
development. She stressed the fact that residents are an active adult community and the daily lives of the
residents will not be that much different from the younger, non-age-restricted residents. Dr. Delacruz
urged the Commission to send a positive recommendation forward to the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Bob Suchan, a resident of Lake Frederick in the Opequon District, came forward to
speak in support of the private road request for the Lake Frederick Community. Mr. Suchan said he was a
Vietnam veteran, retired military and he estimated that over 10% of the Lake Frederick residents were
also veterans. Mr. Suchan stated if the remainder of the development does not get the private roads, a
negative message is being sent. Mr. Suchan understood there was another development within Frederick
County that wasn’t successful with the construction and maintenance of their private roads; he was
concerned this experience would influence the decision of the Planning Commission and the Board of
Supervisors for the Lake Frederick community.
Mr. Chris Baldrop, a resident of the eastern side of Lake Frederick in the Opequon
District, came forward to speak in support of the private road request for the Lake Frederick Community.
Mr. Baldrop said many of the supporters this evening are from the western side of Lake Frederick, which
will remain with private roads regardless of the final decision by the Board of Supervisors. He said this
shows the level of support and integrity of all the residents within this community. Mr. Baldrop next
turned his discussion to the event this effort is not approved. Mr. Baldrop said he lives on Tutalo Lane
which ends on Rachel Carson. He explained that if Rachel Carson is converted to a public road, there
will be a series of side roads which are private and have direct access to a public road, particularly those
homeowners on the corner; they will be paying the cost of maintaining private roads, yet not have the
advantages of being on a private road system because they will be directly next to a public road. He
believed this was eminently unfair and for that reason, he urged the Commission to recommend approval
of Option #1 of the staff’s recommendations.
No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of
the hearing.
Commissioner Thomas believed a gated community with a diverse population would
provide a very good quality of life for the residents of the Lake Frederick community. He said over many
years, he has been very vocal about meeting VDOT standards; however, the developer’s representative,
Mr. Ty Lawson, has possibly swayed his opinion with some of his discussions. Commissioner Thomas
stated that after working with contractors and lawyers for over 42 years, he learned the use of the English
language has to be as specific as mathematics. He stated the language used within the County’s
ordinances must be extremely specific and clear or the County will not get what is expected.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3114
Minutes of June 18, 2014
Commissioner Thomas said he would support this change; however, he would want to
have five very specific items with this. He stated the private roads would have to meet VDOT standards
for the following items: 1) structural section design; 2) material composition and quality; 3) construction
standards, techniques, and workmanship quality; 4) drainage and storm water management systems; 5)
the design must be certified by a registered professional engineer; all the design, testing and materials,
and in-place quality testing and as-built drawings for the road system must be submitted to Frederick
County and certified by the developer and a professional engineer that the roads meet VDOT standards.
Commissioner Thomas continued, stating that with those five items, he would definitely
support this ordinance amendment. Commissioner Thomas said the residents present this evening are
very mature in their experiences and life styles, but he was thinking forward to the future. He said if the
developer builds roads that meet these standards, the residents will not have any maintenance for the next
20 years. He noted after 20 years, if minimal maintenance on roads is carried out, the roads will last
another 10-15 years with minimal cost. He stated if the roads are built to these standards, the residents
and future home buyers, and the younger folks that move into the other areas, are not going to have a
significant capital expense for the next 20-35 years based on the roads.
Commissioner Oates stated he was in full agreement with Commissioner Thomas.
Commissioner Oates commented about the two options proposed within the agenda and said one thing he
didn’t like about either option was the wording, “…paving designs, based on actual CBR’s will be
provided to the County for approval.” Commissioner Oates didn’t believe it was the County’s place to
approve or deny the CBR testing. He said it implies that Frederick County is accepting the road or
approving the road; he said this is a private road. Commissioner Oates agreed the “as-built” drawings
should be provided to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Commissioner Oates said Option
#3 should be the five items pointed out by Commissioner Thomas.
Commissioner Unger asked if the developer would still have the option of providing
narrower streets within the development, rather than the width typically provided by VDOT.
Commissioner Oates commented that VDOT also has standards for alleyways and narrower streets and
the developer could follow those standards.
Commissioner Thomas commented that with the narrower streets which do not meet
horizontal standards of the State, the homeowners will be committed to maintaining the streets in
perpetuity and with the structural section, the homeowners will get the quality and durability. He
commented that the narrower streetscape reduces the speed and encourages a bicycling and walking
community.
Chairman Wilmot announced that an email communication concerning the private streets
was received from Mr. and Mrs. Larry Atkinson and she believed it appropriate to add their comments to
the record.
Commissioner Thomas made a motion to recommend approval for private roads in the
R5 Zoning District with the following qualifications: The private roads have to meet VDOT standards for
the following five items: 1) structural section design; 2) material composition and quality; 3) construction
standards, techniques, and workmanship quality; 4) drainage and storm water management systems; 5) all
the design, testing and materials, and in-place quality testing and as-built drawings for the road system
must be certified by the developer, the builder, and a registered professional engineer in the State of
Virginia, that the roads meet all of VDOT structural and quality standards, and these plans are submitted
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3115
Minutes of June 18, 2014
to the Frederick County Engineer and the Frederick County Planning Department. This motion was
seconded by Commissioner Molden and was unanimously passed.
BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of an
ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article V–Planned Development
Districts, Part 502-R5, Residential Recreational Community District, Section 165-502.05, Design
Requirements. This proposed amendment will remove the requirement that R5 communities must be
“age-restricted communities” to qualify for private streets; it provides for the inclusion of additional
design standards for private roads; and directs maintenance responsibilities for private roads to be the
responsibility of the property owners association. In addition, private roads must meet VDOT standards
for the following five items: 1) structural section design; 2) material composition and quality; 3)
construction standards, techniques, and workmanship quality; 4) drainage and storm water management
systems; 5) all the design, testing and materials, and in-place quality testing and as-built drawings for the
road system must be certified by the developer, the builder, and a registered professional engineer in the
State of Virginia, that the roads meet all of VDOT structural and quality standards, and these plans are
submitted to the Frederick County Engineer and the Frederick County Planning Department.
(Note: Commissioner Mohn abstained; Commissioners Kenney, Triplett, and Dunlap were absent from
the meeting.)
-------------
An Ordinance to Amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI-Agricultural
and Residential Districts, Part 402, RP (Residential Performance) District, Section 165-402.09,
Dimensional Requirements. The proposed revision will reduce the minimum front setback for
multi-family residential buildings from 35 feet to 20 feet.
Action – Recommended Approval
Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this is a proposed revision to the front
setbacks for multi-family residential buildings. Ms. Perkins said this is a new housing type added to the
RP revision approved in 2013. She said during discussions and the public hearing process, a high-density
residential streetscape schematic was provided and showed how this particular housing type could be
developed. The schematic provided a multi-family building with a front setback of 12-20 feet; however,
the text adopted for multi-family residential buildings required a 35-foot front setback, which is contrary
to what was shown and intended. Ms. Perkins said there is an applicant desiring to implement the
housing type and they have requested the setback be re-evaluated. Ms. Perkins said the proposed
amendment would reduce the setback from 35 feet to 20 feet.
Ms. Perkins said the DRRC (Development Review and Regulations Committee)
reviewed this at their March 14, 2014 meeting and recommended the reduction to 20 feet; the Planning
Commission discussed this at their May 7, 2014 meeting; and the Board of Supervisors discussed this at
their May 28, 2014 and directed the staff to advertise the amendment for public hearing.
Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing for citizen comments. No one came forward
to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3116
Minutes of June 18, 2014
There were no questions from the Planning Commission and no issues were raised.
A motion was made by Commissioner Oates to recommend approval of the proposed
ordinance amendment as presented by the staff. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas
and unanimously passed.
BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend
approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI-
Agricultural and Residential Districts, Part 402, RP (Residential Performance) District, Section 165-
402.09, Dimensional Requirements. This revision will reduce the minimum front setback for multi-
family residential buildings from 35 feet to 20 feet.
(Note: Commissioners Kenney, Triplett, and Dunlap were absent from the meeting.)
-------------
INFORMATION/ DISCUSSION ITEMS
Master Development Plan #03-14 of Madison Village, submitted by Painter-Lewis, P.L.C., to
develop 51.26 acres of land, zoned RP (Residential Performance) District, with 640 residential units
(townhouse and multi-family) and five acres of land, zoned B2 (Business General) District, with
commercial uses. The subject property is located on the west side of Route 522, approximately
1,000 feet south of the intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road. The property is further
identified with P.I.N. 64-A-18 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. This item is presented for
informational purposes only.
No Action Required
Commissioner Oates said he would abstain from all discussion on this item due to a
possible conflict of interest. He said he represents an adjacent landowner who is affected by this.
Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this is a proposal to develop a property
rezoned back in 2013. Ms. Perkins said 42.26 acres of the site are zoned RP (Residential Performance)
and will be developed with a maximum of 640 townhouse and multi-family units and the remainder of the
property, consisting of five acres zoned B2 (Business General), will be developed with commercial uses.
Ms. Perkins presented the MDP (master development plan) on the screen and pointed out the internal road
network, the land bays, and the inter-parcel connections. She said Madison Village will have one
signalized entrance on Route 522; she noted the location of this entrance on the MDP has been shifted
slightly south due to entrance spacing requirements. Ms. Perkins said the modified entrance is still in
conformance with the proffered Generalized Development Plan from the rezoning. She noted the MDP
for Madison Village is in conformance with the zoning ordinance, as well as Rezoning #03-13. She
added this MDP is presented as an informational item.
Commissioner Unger inquired if arrangements had been made so the adjoining
landowner can get in and out okay. Ms. Perkins replied the adjoining landowner has been provided with
an inter-parcel access in two locations, which was required by the proffer.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3117
Minutes of June 18, 2014
Chairman Wilmot inquired where Phase 1 of the road would begin and end, since there
was a change.
Mr. John Lewis, with Painter-Lewis, PLC, was present to represent the project. Mr.
Lewis pointed out the location where Phase 1 will end. Mr. Lewis said they will be constructing the
intersection at Route 522, the entrance to the first round-about, and then north to the northern property,
meeting the approved MDP for Russell 150; they will then build to the south to the first intersection,
which would allow them to develop a number of townhomes and part of the multi-family. Chairman
Wilmot commented that the reason she asked was because the School Board wanted some way to get
their buses turned around. Mr. Lewis pointed out where they planned to have a temporary cul-de-sac,
which they planned to do on every phase.
No other questions or issues were raised by the Planning Commission. No action was
needed by the Commission.
(Note: Commissioner Oates abstained from discussion; Commissioners Triplett, Dunlap, and Kenney
were absent from the meeting.)
-------------
Master Development Plan #04-14 of Clearbrook Business Center, submitted by GreyWolfe to
develop 16.886 acres of land, zoned B3 (Industrial Transition) District, with commercial/ industrial
uses. The subject properties are located at 3625 Martinsburg Pike on the west side of Route 11,
approximately 2,000 feet north of Hopewell Road (Rt. 672). The properties are further identified
with P.I.N.s 33-(A)-122A and 33-(A)-123 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. This item is being
presented for informational purposes only.
No Action Required
Commissioner Oates said he would abstain from discussion of this item because his client
is the landowner. Commissioner Oates stated since this item is for informational purposes only, he would
represent the landowner at the podium in the event there may be questions.
Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this is a MDP (master development plan) for
16.886 acres of land which were rezoned in 2006 with proffers. Ms. Perkins pointed out the land along
Martinsburg Pike, as well as the internal road network and the proffered inter-parcel connections to the
north and the south. She said this MDP is in conformance with the zoning ordinance, as well as the
rezoning from 2006, and is being presented as an informational item.
No questions or issues were raised by the Planning Commission. No action was required
by the Planning Commission.
(Note: Commissioner Oates abstained from discussion; Commissioners Triplett, Dunlap, and Kenney
were absent from the meeting.)
-------------
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3118
Minutes of June 18, 2014
Master Development Plan #05-14 of Snowden Bridge Station, submitted by GreyWolfe to develop
91.82 acres of land, zoned M1 (Light Industrial), with industrial uses. The subject properties are
located at 1800 Martinsburg Pike, near I-81 North, Exit 317, and bounded by CSX Railroad to the
east, Redbud Road (Rt. 661) to the south, and Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11) to the west. The
properties are further identified by P.I.N.s 43-(A)-143, 43-(A)-144, 43-(A)-145, 43-(A)-146, 43-(A)-
147, 43-(A)-150, 43-(A)-151, 43-(A)-152, 43C-(3)-2, 43C-(3)-3, 43C-(3)-4, 43C-(3)-4A, 43C-(3)-5, and
43C-(3)-7A, within the Stonewall Magisterial District.
No Action Required
Commissioner Oates said he would abstain from discussion of this item because his client
is the landowner. Commissioner Oates stated since this item is for informational purposes only, he would
represent the landowner at the podium in the event there may be questions.
Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that a number of properties are associated
with this because there were two rezoning applications that covered this from 2005 and 2012. Ms.
Perkins showed the MDP (master development plan) and pointed out the location of future Snowden
Bridge Boulevard, the proffered Ezra Lane, as well as the land bays. She said access to the site will be
via Snowden Bridge Boulevard which will align with an access point previously approved with the North
Stephenson rezoning (2005). She said the initial segment of Snowden Bridge Boulevard has already been
constructed and aligns with the signalized intersection at Martinsburg Pike, across from Rutherford
Crossing Shopping Center. Ms. Perkins stated the MDP is in conformance with Rezoning #03-05 for
North Stephenson and Rezoning #01-12 for Snowden Bridge Station and is being presented to the
Commission as an informational item.
No questions or issues were raised by the Planning Commission. No action was required
by the Planning Commission.
(Note: Commissioner Oates abstained from discussion; Commissioners Triplett, Dunlap, and Kenney
were absent from the meeting.)
-------------
OTHER
Chairman Wilmot announced there will be a community meeting regarding the South
Frederick Land Use Plan on Tuesday evening, July 1, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Robert E. Aylor Middle
School Cafeteria. Chairman Wilmot invited all interested citizens to attend.
-------------