HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-06 BOS Staff ReportCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #03-06
REBECCA AND EDWARD ARNETTE
Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors
Prepared: September 8, 2006
Staff Contact: Kevin T. Henry, Planning Technician
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter.
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 08/02/06 Recommended Denial
Board of Supervisors: 09/27/06 Pending
LOCATION: This subject property is located at 819 Redbud Road (Route 661).
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 55-A-2
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT` USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas)
Land Use: Vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE:
North: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential
South: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential
East: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Agricultural
West: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Agricultural
PROPOSED USE: Landscaping Contractor Business
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The application for a Conditional Use Permit for this property
appears to have little measurable impact on Route 661 the VDOT facility which would provide
access to the property. Existing entrance is adequate for proposed use. However, should use ever
expand in the future, the entrance may have to be upgraded to VDOT commercial standards.
Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended.
CUP #03-06, Rebecca and Edward Arnette
September 8, 2006
Page 2
Inspections Department: No permits required provided exemption under Section 102.3 of the
Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code is met.
Sanitation Authority: We do not serve this area.
Winchester-Frederick County Health Department: The applicant has advised this office that the
County (John Riley) has stated approval for a pump and haul system will be granted for this property.
Based on that information, the Health Dept. has no objection as long as the County supplies written
approval specifying the pump and haul is acceptable for this property and the proposed use.
Winchester Regional Airport: Since the CUP does not appear to have any impact on the
operations of the Winchester Regional Airport, there are no objections or special conditions
requested.
Planning and Zoning: This proposed Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is for a landscape contracting
business. This proposed use will take place on a two (2) acre tract of land located in the RA (Rural
Areas) Zoning District. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for landscape contracting in
the RA Zoning District with an approved CUP. Staff would note that there is currently one dwelling
on the property, which has been abandoned, and one shed. The current shed on the property is going
to be used for storage. Due to the layout of the parcel, Staff would recommend an opaque fence of
six (6) feet in height to screen the entire property.
Since this proposed use is commercial in nature, staff would recommend that a 50’ buffer be placed
along Redbud Road and the adjoining residential lot. This buffer is the same as a zoning district
buffer, in that its purpose is to distinctly shield different land uses. The 50’ buffer will be 25’
active/inactive, also known in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as a Category B landscape
buffer. The active buffer will be required to contain a landscaping variety that includes a majority of
evergreen, and contains three trees per ten linear feet, which will be located outside the fence.
The applicant has proposed no more than eight (8) employees at any one time, and the site will not
contain more than seven (7) vehicles stored on the premises. No sales of nursery stock will take
place on site. This landscaping business will not be open to the public.
The Health Department has indicated the only type of health system available for this tract of land
would be a pump and haul. Upon approval of this CUP, the pump and haul system will need to be
applied for and approved.
The location of the property for this proposed business is adjacent to a DSA (Development Sensitive
Area) as indicated in the 2003 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County. This application has
eleven parcels within a ¼ mile radius that are within the Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District.
Also, special attention should be warranted due to this commercial use taking place along a scenic
CUP #03-06, Rebecca and Edward Arnette
September 8, 2006
Page 3
byway. Higher standards of development should be taken into consideration within these specified
areas.
Staff would like to note that this CUP has been applied for in response to a zoning violation. The
Frederick County Zoning Ordinance specifies that storage of heavy equipment is not a permitted use
in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. Also, any storage trailer(s) must be removed from the
property. Staff strongly recommends that vehicular storage and storage of heavy equipment is
minimal. This property is currently still in violation of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance,
Sections 165-50 (storage of heavy equipment) and 165-26E (trailer not permitted as accessory use).
In summary, staff does not support this Conditional Use Permit. The applicant has been in violation
of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance since February 24th of this year. The CUP was applied
for as means to resolve the zoning violation. Since February 24th, there has been a consistent
increase in business activity on the property. Approval of this CUP will not be consistent with the
goals of the 2003 Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan.
Attached are images of existing site conditions.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 08/02/06 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
Should the Planning Commission find this use appropriate, Staff would recommend the following
conditions:
1.All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
2. No more than eight (8) employees allowed on site.
3.Three (3) employees and four (4) business vehicle parking spaces are the maximum
parking allowance.
4. An engineered site plan shall be approved and implemented prior to business activity on
the site.
5. Any expansion or change of use, including any increase in number of employees or
equipment, will require a new Conditional Use Permit with an engineered site plan.
6. No sale of nursery stock will be allowed on site.
7. A 50’ landscaped buffer, with full landscape screen (Category B), will be placed along
Redbud Road and completely along the adjoining residential lot.
8.A six foot tall board-on-board fence will screen all storage areas on the property.
9.Business activities conducted on the property shall only take place during daylight hours.
10.The storage and driving areas shall have a gravel surface.
11.A health system approved by the County and State shall be in place prior to the
commencement of business activities.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION OF AUGUST 2, 2006: Nine
neighboring residents spoke in opposition to the CUP at the Planning Commission’s public hearing.
Seven of those who spoke lived on Redbud Road and the other two resided on Marquis Court and
Morgan Mill Road. The majority of the speakers said they were opposed to the CUP because the
application did not meet the necessary criteria of the Comprehensive Policy Plan or the zoning
ordinance. Specific comments included: a commercial enterprise was not consistent with the
existing rural character of the area, the newly-created Agricultural and Forestal District, or the scenic
by-way designation of Redbud Road; the site lacked adequate facilities and the only health system
alternative was a pump and haul system, which has not yet been approved; road-safe access is not
available because the driveway is on a blind curve and Redbud Road is narrow with many curves;
nothing less than a state-approved, commercial entrance would be acceptable for safety purposes; the
property is well outside of the SWSA and the UDA; the operation illegally began in February and
has continued to grow, despite notification that it is in violation; there has been increased activity
involving sea containers, mulch delivery, and an increased volume of trucks, trailers, and equipment;
the property is an eyesore containing fill dirt, gravel, and woodchip piles, dead trees on an overgrown
berm, piled-up logs, and an uninhabitable house; and the applicants will soon outgrow the site and
they should move the business to a commercially-zoned area now. The residents had safety concerns
about commercial traffic on the narrow, winding road. In addition, one speaker was not in favor of
the staff’s recommendation for a six-foot high, board-on-board fence because it would be visually
unappealing from the scenic byway.
The applicants said that 95% of their business is erosion control and they do a considerable amount
of construction cleanup. Responding to concerns about delivery of materials, the applicants said they
did not intend to sell nursery stock, mulch, or wood from the site; all nursery stock required for their
business is delivered directly to the job site. They did not intend to have an office at this location.
Employees come to the site to park personal vehicles, get into work trucks, and leave for the job site.
The applicants said they used 30-HP tractors; their equipment inventory included four trucks, a
Kaboda, a couple Bobcats, and trailers. The applicants’ understanding was they could store the
equipment on the property as long as it was inside a building and they complied with the numbers.
The applicants said they met with the County Administrator regarding the pump and haul system and
were given a verbal approval. The applicants intended to renovate the existing house and then lease
it.
CUP #03-06, Rebecca and Edward Arnette
September 8, 2006
Page 4
The Commission members discussed the definition of heavy equipment, since storage of heavy
equipment and trailers was prohibited in the RA Zoning District. Some Commissioners did not see
how the applicant could conduct business from the property under this restriction. Commissioners
asked the applicants if they understood all of the conditions of the CUP, especially the requirements
for an engineered site plan, a commercial entrance, and a Category B buffer. Commission members
were concerned about the amount of opposition from the local community and the absence of an
approved health system. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the CUP by a
unanimous vote. (Note: Commissioners Mohn, Ours, and Oates were absent from the meeting.)
CUP #03-06, Rebecca and Edward Arnette
September 8, 2006
Page 5