The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 08-20-14 Meeting Agenda AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia August 20, 2014 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission should adopt the Agenda for the meeting ................................................................ (no tab) 2) July 16, 2014 Minutes ...................................................................................................... (A) 3) Committee Reports .................................................................................................. (no tab) 4) Citizen Comments ................................................................................................... (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 5) 2030 Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPPA; Frederick County Public Schools Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) Adjustment – The request is for consideration of an amendment to the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to serve the proposed 4th High School of approximately 83 acres. The property is located adjacent to and east of Admiral Richard E. Byrd Middle and Evendale Elementary Schools, and is identified by Property Identification Number 76-A-96E, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Mr. Ruddy ....................................................................................................................... (B) ACTION ITEM 6) Master Development Plan/Waiver Request for Wright Renovations, Inc. submitted by Michael Artz of Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors P.L.C. is requesting a waiver (s) of Article V Design Standards: §144-18 (A) (1) Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways; §144- 19 Streetlights; and §144-24 Lot Requirements, (C) Lot Access, resulting in the existing homes each being located on an individual lots. Mr. Cheran ......................................................................................................................... (C) INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS 7) Discussion on Landscaping Requirements-Revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to modify the landscaping requirements. Mrs. Perkins ...................................................................................................................... (D) -2- 8) Discussion on Zoning District Buffer Waiver Option-Revision to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to allow for a Zoning District Buffer waiver when the planned land use shown in the Comprehensive Plan is compatible. Mrs. Perkins .................................................................................................................... (E) 9) Discussion on Screening Requirements for Outdoor Storage Areas-Revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to revise the outdoor storage screening requirements. Mrs. Perkins ..................................................................................................................... (F) 10) Other Adjourn A Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3120 Minutes of July 16, 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 July 16, 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; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Kevin Kenney, Gainesboro District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Charles F. Dunlap, Red Bud District; Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney; and Robert Hess, Board of Supervisors; Liaison. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Director; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; and Renee S. Arlotta, Clerk. ----------- CALL TO ORDER Chairman Wilmot called the July 16, 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 Oates and seconded by Commissioner Crockett, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for this evening’s meeting. ------------- MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Crockett, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the minutes of their June 18, 2014 meeting. ------------- Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3121 Minutes of July 16, 2014 COMMITTEE REPORTS Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) – 7/15/14 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported the following from the FCSA meeting: Total customer base for water is 14,124; sanitary is 13,639; rainfall for June was 2.5; the previous month was 5.1; average rainfall is 3.26 per month; use at the Diehl plant was 2.9mgd; use at the Anderson plant was 1.7mgd; 1.36mgd was purchased from the City of Winchester; the daily average use was 5.95. The Diehl plant dropped about two feet last month, but continues to be in good shape; the Anderson plant remained at the same level; water loss last month was 18%; a few leaks were found and now water lost is about 17%. A report was provided concerning Stephens City and some of the problems involving basement flooding in Fredericktowne and The Pines. The cause was determined to be old water and sewer lines and water infiltration through some of the manholes. Research is being conducted to determine the best ways to fix the problems. ------------- Southern Frederick Land Use Plan Working Group Chairman Wilmot reported the Southern Frederick Land Use Plan Working Group held a public input meeting on Tuesday, July 1, at the Robert E. Aylor Middle School. She reported there will be a Joint Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors Work Session on Tuesday, August 12, at 12:00 Noon in the County Administration building. -------------- Board of Supervisors Report – 6/25/14 & 7/09/14 Mtgs. Board of Supervisors’ Liaison, Supervisor Robert Hess, reported there were five Planning Commission items considered at the June 25 meeting: the Board approved the revisions to the DIM (Development Impact Model); a public hearing amending the Comprehensive Plan to include additional language regarding the UDA centers was held and although there appeared to be general recognition of the diligent work of staff and the Planning Commission, on a split vote the Board declined to approve this amendment at this time. Next, on a split vote, the Board approved the CUP (conditional use permit) for the kennel on Laurel Grove Road. Supervisor Hess said following discussion, the Board voted to move forward to public hearing the expansion of the SWSA (Sewer & Water Service Area) for the property north of LFCC (Lord Fairfax Community College) with the understanding that the FCSA (Frederick County Sanitation Authority) would be the provider of service for that area. Also moved forward for public hearing was the McCann-Slaughter Properties amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Regarding the meeting on July 9, Supervisor Hess reported the following items: the amendment to the County Code to remove the requirement that R5 Communities must be age-restricted to qualify for private roads. He said the Board seemed pleased with the Planning Commission adding the requirement of specific VDOT (Virginia Department of Transportation) standards and the amendment was approved on a split vote. Next, was the public hearing on reducing the setback requirements for multi-family residential buildings and on a split vote, the reduction was not approved; the Board received Planning Commission reports on the MDPs (Master Development Plan) for Madison Village, Clearbrook Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3122 Minutes of July 16, 2014 Business Center, and Snowden Bridge Station with few comments or questions. Finally, the Board discussed expanding the SWSA to the future high school site off Route 522 and approved moving it forward for public hearing. Supervisor Hess commented that perhaps there are questions in the minds of the members of the Planning Commission as to why the Board does not approve some items that have been sent forward by the Planning Commission with a recommendation for approval and he personally sees it as an indication of a government process that works in that additional information and additional perspectives are gained at every step and he hopes the citizens of Frederick County are well served by that process. ------------- Charles F. Dunlap, Certified Planning Commissioner Chairman Wilmot announced that Commissioner Charles F. Dunlap, Red Bud District, was recently certified through the Virginia Tech’s Land Use Education Program. Chairman Wilmot thanked Commissioner Dunlap for his dedication and service on the Planning Commission. ------------- 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 2030 Comprehensive Plan Amendment – McCann-Slaughter Properties. A proposed amendment to the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan (NELUP), contained within Appendix I of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The McCann-Slaughter parcels contain approximately 160 acres, near the intersection of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charlestown Road, on both sides of McCann Road, and adjacent to the CSX Railroad. The properties are identified with P.I.N.s 44-A-40 and 44-A-25B in the Stonewall Magisterial District. The properties are collectively designated in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan for various types of land uses, including Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) and Industrial. The proposal would allow mixed use office manufacturing land uses on a portion of the property and maintain the DSA on the balance of the property. Action – Recommended Approval Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3123 Minutes of July 16, 2014 Commissioner Oates said he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this item due to a possible conflict of interest. Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, identified the location of the subject properties just east of Route 11 and south of Old Charlestown Road. He noted the current designation as a DSA (Developmentally Sensitive Area) on the northern portion, Route 37 running through the southern portion, and the bottom area identified for industrial future land uses. Mr. Ruddy reported that the CPPC (Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee) recommended an approach to amending the NELUP (Northeast Land Use Plan) in this area which balanced the request for OM (Office-Manufacturing Park) future land uses, the DSA which include both environmental and historical, and a variety of other factors. Mr. Ruddy said the proposed text reinforces what the land use plan shows, as follows: Protection of the environmental features of the site; Preservation of those areas identified with DSAs and development limited to those areas to the south of the DSAs and south of McCanns Road; An OM (mixed use office/industrial) land use designation; Utilizing McCanns Road and other historical features, such as Milburn Road, as features to be protected and potentially used in a manner that promotes their historical context (an extension of the historical trail system in the area); Access to be provided via a new north- south road that would generally be either: i) parallel to the west side of the existing railroad or, ii) the dividing line between the DSA land use and the OM land use; No access would be permitted to McCanns Lane for vehicular access to Martinsburg Pike or Milburn Road. Mr. Ruddy stated that some additional text was included as a result of CPPC members meeting with the HRAB (Historic Resources Advisory Board) members and those additional points are: A small area of supporting commercial land use; Interpretive wayside parking at the north end of the road (which may be done in conjunction with the commercial); Buffer zone between the DSA and the OM Land use (environmental BMPs and site design elements); and, Historical signage. Chairman Wilmot next opened the public hearing for citizen comments and she called for anyone wishing to speak to come forward. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. No questions or issues were raised by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Crockett made a motion to recommend approval of the amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Appendix I – Area Plans, Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan for the McCann- Slaughter Properties. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Mohn. BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the McCann-Slaughter Properties by a unanimous vote. This amendment to the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan (NELUP) is contained within Appendix I of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The McCann-Slaughter parcels contain approximately 160 acres, near the intersection of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charlestown Road, on both sides of McCann Road, and adjacent to the CSX Railroad. (Note: Commissioner Oates abstained from voting.) ------------- Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3124 Minutes of July 16, 2014 2030 Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPPA; LFCC/Middletown SWSA, Future Expansion Area. Proceeding from the recently-approved LFCC/Middletown SWSA, which created a 138-acre SWSA in the area surrounding and including the Lord Fairfax Community College, the proposed future expansion area, previously identified as Phase 2, includes an additional 100 acres of business development land uses in support of the college and an expansion of the Middletown/Lord Fairfax SWSA to be served by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). The property is identified with P.I.N. 84-A-78 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Action – Recommended Approval Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, displayed the proposed land use plan which showed the location of the area for business development uses in support of the community college. Mr. Ruddy said text is associated with this expansion area; he said the text recognizes that with the approval of this land use plan, Frederick County will also be approving the SWSA (Sewer and Water Service Area) around the property. Mr. Ruddy stated the SWSA is the area in which the Board of Supervisors has authorized the provision of water and sewer specifically by the FCSA (Frederick County Sanitation Authority). He said the previous initial discussions of this project identified the City of Winchester and the Town of Middletown as the providers of those services. Mr. Ruddy said the direction received very clearly from the Board of Supervisors was to make sure the FCSA would be the party ultimately responsible for providing water and sewer service within Frederick County’s SWSA and this change has been noted within the text. He added the goal of this amendment is to provide land use opportunities in support of the community college and its ongoing growth. Commissioner Oates remarked about the comment specifying the FCSA as the party to serve this area. He surmised the FCSA would have to purchase the water and sewer from the City of Winchester and the Town of Middletown and then sell it to the applicant. Commissioner Oates asked what would happen if the Town of Middletown or the City of Winchester decides not to sell directly to the FCSA. He questioned whether the FCSA would then be forced to do a multi-million dollar project of constructing water and sewer lines to the area. Mr. Ruddy believed this issue was part of the discussion that would need to take place. He stated the FCSA has the role and responsibility to provide water and sewer service within Frederick County. Mr. Ruddy said those discussions about whether or not FCSA can provide the service or whether they need to be a conduit or a gate keeper in that direction will need to be received through communication between the Board of Supervisors and the FCSA. Mr. Ruddy did not believe FCSA would be backed into a corner to construct new facilities; he believed the additional text would be reinforcing the SWSA policy of the County’s Comprehensive Plan and reinforcing the role of the FCSA as the entity which oversees that for county residents and business owners. He said there is a variety of different ways how that can be achieved, but he believed it was beyond the realm or out of the scope of this particular Comprehensive Plan discussion. He believed it was certainly appropriate between the FCSA and the Board of Supervisors. Commissioner Thomas inquired about a portion of the text, Appendix 1–Area Plans, Middletown/Lord Fairfax SWSA, 5th Paragraph; he said the middle of the paragraph was deleted and probably, the last sentence was added. He said in order to make this text clear, the entire paragraph may need to be rewritten because the first sentence essentially states, “The FCSA has expressed that, at this time, they have no desire to serve this area of Frederick County…nothing would preclude the FCSA from serving this area in the future, if it is deemed necessary and appropriate.” Then, the last sentence states, “The Board of Supervisors, in approving this update to the area plan, expressly stated that the FCSA will Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3125 Minutes of July 16, 2014 be the party responsible for providing water and sewer in this area.” Commissioner Thomas said it doesn’t seem like the FCSA has the option in the final sentence, but the first sentence states they have the option and can choose to or not choose to. He said for clarity, those two sentences should be combined. Mr. Ruddy replied the first sentence was placed there to identify and relay the chronology, which may be redundant at this point and confusing, so he believed that paragraph could be re-worded. Commissioner Unger was pleased questions were being asked because he believed there were numerous issues to overcome before this could take place. Commissioner Unger said he knew Middletown had a fairly new sanitation system and he was sure they needed more businesses and more customers in order to pay for it. He said the FCSA does not own that system, nor does Frederick County have water there. He said the County is getting water from the City of Winchester; therefore, the City has to supply the water at this point, unless wells are dug. Commissioner Unger stated there are no sewer lines in that area either, so taking it over is going to be tough. In addition, Commissioner Unger said as far as bringing the service back towards Stephens City, he didn’t think it was an option because the FCSA is presently having problems trying to get water to the plants without flooding surrounding areas. Commissioner Unger said he liked the idea of this concept, but he believed there was a lot of work to do before it could take place. Chairman Wilmot next opened the public hearing to citizen comments and she called for anyone wishing to speak to come forward. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comments portion of the hearing. Commissioner Unger made a motion to recommend approval. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Oates and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of a 2030 Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPPA; LFCC/Middletown SWSA, Future Expansion Area. Proceeding from the recently-approved LFCC/Middletown SWSA, which created a 138-acre SWSA in the area surrounding and including the Lord Fairfax Community College, the proposed future expansion area, previously identified as Phase 2, includes an additional 100 acres of business development land uses in support of the college and an expansion of the Middletown/Lord Fairfax SWSA to be served by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). ------------- 2030 Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPPA; Reliance Road Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) Designation–Middletown Properties, LLC and Molden Properties. Middletown Properties, LLC owns approximately 41 acres at the Middletown Exit off Interstate 81, east of the interchange, and is identified with P.I.N.s 91-A-56, 91-A-57, and 91-A-59 in the Opequon Magisterial District. Molden Properties has 90 acres to the east and is identified with P.I.N.s 91-A- 47, 91-A-47A, and 91-A-67 in the Opequon Magisterial District. Additional properties within the Reliance Road Study Area may be added to ensure a contiguous SWSA. Action – Recommended Approval with Stipulation Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3126 Minutes of July 16, 2014 Commissioner Molden said he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this matter due to a possible conflict of interest. Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that during the discussion of the Middletown/LFCC SWSA (Sewer and Water Service Area), the Board of Supervisors received two requests simultaneously and believed it was appropriate to evaluate both those requests and also include them in the public hearing process with the designation of SWSA. Mr. Ruddy said the staff crafted an amendment with the Board’s discussion in mind, which was to identify this particular request as the Reliance Road SWSA. He noted the Reliance Road Study, approved several years ago in conjunction with the Town of Middletown, identified a study area boundary, as well as a variety of potential land uses, predominantly commercial and OM (Office-Manufacturing Park). It also contained a statement that sewer and water service to Frederick County properties would require the Board of Supervisors’ approval. Mr. Ruddy stated this is, in essence, the reason why this is being considered today--to have the Board ultimately through policy approve the Reliance Road SWSA. Mr. Ruddy stated in addition to having the existing boundaries of the Reliance Road Study Area to include the Middletown and Molden properties, the entire boundary within the potential SWSA was included. He said the first property request is located immediately in the southeastern quadrant of the interchange with I-81 (Middletown properties) and contains about 10 acres, zoned commercial; the second area of properties is located on the eastern side of the study area (Molden properties). Mr. Ruddy said the illustration not only provides the Commission with the location of the properties, but provides some understanding of why it was suggested that the SWSA boundary include the entire study area. He noted it is possible to ultimately pull back on the boundaries, if the Board of Supervisors feels it’s appropriate to do so; however, clear direction was given through discussion that it was okay to include the properties requested within the SWSA provided the FCSA (Frederick County Sanitation Authority) would be responsible for providing the water and sewer service. Mr. Ruddy pointed out that the request this evening is a minor modification to the text of the Reliance Road Study; it states the Board of Supervisors expressly recognizes that FCSA will be the party responsible for providing water and sewer services in this area; and secondly, the boundary of the map is designated as a SWSA, as opposed to simply the study area boundary. Commissioner Oates believed it would be appropriate to have comments from the FCSA in which they recognize the proposed SWSA, they state they can provide the service, and describe how they plan to provide the service; or, conversely, that they will not be able to provide the service. Commissioner Thomas commented the Commission is considering the addition of approximately 311 acres to the SWSA and it was his understanding over the last few years that the FCSA doesn’t have an over-abundance of capacity. He understood this wasn’t a rezoning, so the acreage will not be developed soon; nevertheless, this would give the owners the expectation that sometime in the future, a rezoning would be submitted and a request forthcoming for sewer and water service in these areas without knowing what quantities of water would be involved. Commissioner Thomas said the FCSA has not yet come forward and said whether or not they can provide the service. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3127 Minutes of July 16, 2014 Mr. Ruddy said there is ongoing discussion at various levels regarding the provision of service and the discussions that need to occur with the Town of Middletown and also the City of Winchester from the water perspective. Mr. Ruddy said it is recognized the Town of Middletown and the City of Winchester will have a very big role to play in providing water and sewer service in these areas and no doubt that will be part of the solution. In addition, he said the FCSA would have to be involved to a greater extent. Mr. Ruddy agreed issues would have to be addressed before receiving anything that would implement this. He recognized two exceptions: a small portion of two properties in the area that are presently zoned commercial. Mr. Ruddy stated that by designating this as a SWSA boundary, it provides the policy approval for water and sewer. He noted the zoning is the next step that would implement this and in some cases, there is a portion of zoning already in place. Mr. Ruddy added that for the vast majority of the 311 acres, there are significant steps to go through to enable the development to happen and those questions would have to be answered and agreements, roles and responsibilities, worked out. Chairman Wilmot raised a question concerning the text. She questioned the meaning of the text, “An approach that includes fewer properties may be more acceptable following the review of this proposal.” Mr. Ruddy replied the Board of Supervisors received the request from the two property owners, which included a number of properties. He said for a simple way of approaching it, the properties were grouped together with all of the land in the Reliance Road Study Area and was advertised as a part of the proposal. Mr. Ruddy explained this may not be what the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors ultimately would want to do and a smaller, more contiguous area could be considered, if necessary. Commissioner Unger commented that he liked the idea of expanding the SWSA in this area for the future; however, at this time, the Commission has no idea where the service will come from. He said the Commission is being asked to vote on extending water and sewer services to this area with no answers as to where the service is coming from and the Board wants FCSA to take it over. Commissioner Oates said if the FCSA has to do this and supposing it is 40 years before FCSA can get service down there, if they can’t work out an agreement with the Town of Middletown or the City of Winchester, then all of these property owners are on hold for 40 years. The property owners would have no ability to go to the Town or the City on their own to get water and sewer service. Commissioner Oates asked if this was correct and Mr. Ruddy replied yes. Mr. Ruddy said there is an exception, one existing business operation is currently on a connection to the Town of Middletown and they would be able to continue with that connection, but any future expansion would have to be with the approval of the FCSA. Commissioner Thomas noted if these properties are placed inside the SWSA, it would allow anyone who wanted to develop this to provide proffers to connect to the FCSA lines, as long as they had approvals. He said if the developer wanted to pay for the extension of lines for water and sewer service and if FCSA had the capacity to provide it, then this would allow the developers to pay for the connection. Mr. Ruddy replied that was correct. He said the implementation of the land use plans, transportation, sewer and water infrastructure, and land uses, would be the responsibility of the developer. Chairman Wilmot next opened the public hearing to citizen comments and she called for anyone wishing to speak to please come forward. No one wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3128 Minutes of July 16, 2014 Members of the Commission discussed the possibility of waiting to make their recommendation on this matter until a comment is received from the FCSA. They considered the appropriateness of making a motion to recommend approval contingent on getting a positive comment from the FCSA stating they acknowledge this expectation and are willing to provide service. A member of the Commission remarked it was impossible for the FCSA to make that comment because there are no lines in that area. Another Commissioner commented it was possible, if a developer builds the lines and the FCSA oversees the construction. Another Commissioner believed this was an opportunity for the FCSA to identify the source of water and how much capacity they could provide there. Commissioner Thomas next made a motion to recommend approval contingent upon the FCSA providing recognition they are expected to provide sewer and water service with comments on how they would provide service and the future timing to provide service to this entire area. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Unger. BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPPA; Reliance Road Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) Designation–Middletown Properties, LLC and Molden Properties, contingent upon the FCSA (Frederick County Sanitation Authority) providing recognition that they are expected to provide sewer and water service to this area in the future, and with comments on how they would provide this service, along with the timing for installation. The vote on this recommendation was as follows: YES (TO REC. APPROVAL): Unger, Marston, Ambrogi, Manuel, Crockett, Thomas, Dunlap NO: Oates, Wilmot, Kenney, Triplett, Mohn ABSTAIN: Molden ------------- Rezoning #01-14 of Cowperwood FEMA, LLC, Commercial Property, submitted by Greenway Engineering, Inc., to rezone 1.24+ acres of an 18.34-acre property from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business General) District with proffers. The balance of the property is to remain 16.53+ M1 (Light Industrial) District and 0.57+ RA (Rural Areas) District. This property is located approximately 0.6 miles north of Interstate 81, Exit 317 and is identified with P.I.N. 43-A-111 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action – Recommended Approval with Proffers Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported this parcel is home to the FEMA headquarters in Frederick County. Mr. Ruddy pointed out the main access to the facility through the Rutherford Farm project and the secondary access on Martinsburg Pike (Route 11N). He said the purpose behind this request is simply to allow some land subdivision and boundary line adjustment/consolidation to occur. Mr. Ruddy said this rezoning request is consistent with the land use plan for a commercial land use designation. Referring to the proffer statement, Mr. Ruddy noted the use is completely limited to the existing residential use. He said there will be no additional access points on Route 11 and no real development opportunity; therefore, no impacts exist at this time. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3129 Minutes of July 16, 2014 Commissioner Thomas remarked about a residence on commercial property. He noted the proffer specifies the only activity that can occur on this property is residential use. Commissioner Thomas inquired if there are any by-right commercial uses that would be allowed with a residence on a commercial designated plot of land, even though the proffer states residential use. Mr. Ruddy said a home occupation could be done; however, a conditional use permit could not. Mr. Ruddy commented there are a few places where this occurs and especially in recent years as rezoning has occurred in anticipation of future commercial development. He said it allows continued use of the residential property until such time as the commercial development occurs. In this particular area, it is recognizing there are a variety of small existing residential lots up and down Route 11 and the future land use is identified as commercial. Consequently, over time, it will convert to the commercial designation and eventually there will be a mass that would be sufficient enough to support an actual commercial project of substance. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, with Greenway Engineering, was representing the Cowperwood FEMA, LLC commercial rezoning. Mr. Wyatt provided some history, explaining that back in 2006, Greenwood came forward with a request for a waiver of the minimum acreage size in the RA (Rural Areas) District to create a 1.24-acre parcel off this and the purpose was to allow the residence to be subdivided off what FEMA did not need for the balance of the property. He said the history goes back even further when the rezoning actually occurred, which set forth the FEMA project, and the property owners had an agreement in principle with FEMA that if they could achieve the ability to get the residential property severed from the 18 acres, they would do so. So, back in 2006, the conduit they tried to achieve was to get a waiver exception for the minimum lot size in the RA District and then be able to subdivide the property in that regard. Mr. Wyatt said the Board of Supervisors preferred him to come back later with a rezoning and do it in that fashion; however, from 2008 until a year ago, the momentum was lost in the recession. Mr. Wyatt said he was approached to come back in and rezone the property because whether the property is zoned RP or B2, the minimum lot size would not be an issue and, therefore, they would be able to subdivide the property. Mr. Wyatt said in his initial discussions with the planning staff, the question was asked if RP would be the appropriate zoning district and staff pointed to the Comprehensive Plan for this particular area. He said the Comprehensive Plan adopted for this area of the County calls for the properties along the frontage of Route 11 to be commercially zoned over time. Therefore, the request is for B2 Zoning and the idea is this parcel is being zoned B2 today. He noted the other arrangement the property owners and Cowperwood had was that because this access drive serves primarily for service delivery and for emergency access for FEMA, FEMA did not want the access loaded with commercial traffic in the future. The idea was they would get this zoned today so the property could be subdivided off on B2, they would restrict the proffers to say everything that exists today is all that it will ever be, even though the zoning is going to change, and then over time, work to try to obtain the parcel next door to create a four-acre land bay. They would be able to get entrance spacing and they could reset the plan at that point in time. Mr. Wyatt said in the future, if the adjoining parcel did come into play and it was rezoned, the applicant could combine it with the 1.24 acres and change the proffers, and that would be the project the Commission would be considering. Chairman Wilmot next opened the public hearing to citizen comments and she called for anyone who wished to speak to come forward. The following individual came forward to speak: Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3130 Minutes of July 16, 2014 A neighbor in the Stonewall District, said she was surprised the review comments state there will be no impact and no change with a business rezoning for this property. She assumed a business rezoning would give the property owners the ability to place a business there and she questioned why this would be of any benefit to the neighborhood; she said this is a nice northern approach to the City of Winchester. She said Rutherford Crossing is a large business district less than a quarter of a mile away and it is not yet built out. She saw no reason at this time to give a business rezoning to a property in this area. She believed it was disingenuous to say it’s going to be rezoned to business, but will have no impact. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Crockett made a motion to recommend approval of Rezoning #01-14 of Cowperwood FEMA, LLC. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Manuel and was unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning #01-14 of Cowperwood FEMA, LLC, Commercial Property, submitted by Greenway Engineering, Inc., to rezone 1.24+ acres of an 18.34-acre property from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business General) District with proffers. The balance of the property is to remain 16.53+ M1 (Light Industrial) District and 0.57+ RA (Rural Areas) District. ------------- INFORMATION/ DISCUSSION ITEMS Waiver Request for Lake Frederick (Shenandoah) Development – A request to waive the public road requirement and allow the Lake Frederick (Shenandoah) Development to utilize private roads. Action – Recommended Approval Master Development Plan #06-14 of Shenandoah, submitted by Bowman Consulting Group, to revise Master Development #01-13. The subject properties are located on the western side of Route 522 South (Front Royal Pike), south of Route 277 (Fairfax Pike) and east of Route 636 (Hudson Hollow Road). Existing primary access to this site is located on Route 522 South via Lake Frederick Drive. These properties are identified with P.I.N.s 87-A-103C and 87-A-102 in the Opequon Magisterial District. Please note this item is presented for informational purposes only. No Action Required Commissioner Mohn said he would abstain from all discussion and voting on both of these items due to a possible conflict of interest. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3131 Minutes of July 16, 2014 Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that her presentation would include both the waiver request for Lake Frederick (Shenandoah) Development and the following item, Master Development Plan #06-14 for Lake Frederick (Shenandoah) Development. Ms. Perkins stated the Lake Frederick (Shenandoah) MDP (Master Development Plan) is a proposal to develop 926 acres of land zoned R5 (Residential Recreational Community) District with a total of 2,130 residential dwelling units (includes the 253 existing platted lots). She said this development was originally zoned in 1975; it was master planned in 1991; and revised in 2001 and 2007, with the most recent revision in 2013. She noted the access to the development is via an existing entrance, Lake Frederick Drive, off Route 522. Ms. Perkins said the revision before the Commission this evening is to the 2013 Shenandoah MDP, which is now called Lake Frederick. The changes include removing the commercial pod located in Phase 1B, removing a road connection and adding lots in Phase IIA, and adding a model court in Phase 1A. She noted these changes do not impact the overall lot number approved within the development. Ms. Perkins said the MDP for Lake Frederick is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance and is being presented to the Commission as an informational item. Ms. Perkins stated the action item for the Commission this evening is the waiver request received from Lawson and Silek, P.L.C., on behalf of Lansdowne Development Group to waive the public street requirements within the Lake Frederick (Shenandoah) Development. She said the applicant is requesting that the public streets be waived to allow the development to be constructed with a complete network of private streets with a gated access. Ms. Perkins said a recent text amendment allowing all developments in the R5 District to apply for a waiver to the public street requirement was approved by the Board of Supervisors, as recommended by the Planning Commission. She stated the applicant has provided road details for the proposed private streets. Ms. Perkins said the staff is seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors on the proposed waiver request for private streets within the Lake Frederick Development. Commissioner Unger asked if access to the commercial land is through the private streets. Ms. Perkins pointed out the only commercial pod remaining, which is held under separate ownership, was severed; she said it has access via existing Lake Frederick Drive, constructed a number of years ago. Commissioner Oates recalled a previous site plan in which there was land set aside for a fire station. Ms. Perkins said there was a note on an older MDP; however, it was never a proffer and was removed with the 2013 plan. Commissioner Thomas said back in 2002-2003, it was understood there would be a fire station; he said it was a mistake not to have that understanding formalized into a proffer. Commissioner Thomas next made a motion to recommend approval of the waiver request to the public streets requirement. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and was unanimously passed. No action was required by the Planning Commission on the MDP. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3132 Minutes of July 16, 2014 BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the waiver request for Lake Frederick (Shenandoah) Development to the public road requirement and allow Lake Frederick (Shenandoah) Development to utilize private roads. (Note: Commissioner Mohn abstained from discussion and voting.) ------------- OTHER Cancelation of the August 6, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Chairman Wilmot announced there were no pending items for the Planning Commission’s August 6, 2014 meeting. A motion was made by Commissioner Oates to cancel the August 6, 2014 meeting of the Planning Commission. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas and unanimously passed. ------------- ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and a motion was made by Commissioner Oates to adjourn the meeting. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and unanimously passed. The meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________ June Wilmot, Chairman ____________________________ Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary B COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Director DATE: August 1, 2014 RE: 2030 Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPPA); Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) Expansion – 83 acre Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) amendment to Serve Proposed 4th High School This 83 acre expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) draft amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is presented to the Planning Commission for public hearing. The Board of Supervisors, at their July 9, 2014 meeting directed the Frederick County Planning Commission to hold a public hearing and forward a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors regarding this SWSA amendment to serve the 4th High School. Following the public hearing, a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan would result in the expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) around the property purchased for the 4th High School, approximately 83 acres immediately adjacent to the existing SWSA. This property is located within the Senseny/Eastern Frederick Area Plan. The proposed expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area is consistent with the approved Area Plan. Frederick County Public Schools requested the amendment to the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) in an effort to serve the proposed 4th high school site. The recently acquired high school site is located at the eastern terminus of Justes Drive, adjacent to Admiral Byrd Middle and Evendale Elementary Schools. Supervisor Fisher sponsored this request. Frederick County Planning Commission Public Hearing: 4th High School SWSA Public Hearing Memo. August 1, 2014 Page 2 The proposed high school site is 83 acres and zoned RA Rural Areas Zoning District – schools are by-right permitted uses in the RA Zoning District. The site is located outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Therefore, current County policy would prohibit the proposed high school from utilizing the public water and sewer services. Private on-site health systems are generally expected in the RA Zoning District. With the Admiral Byrd Middle School and the Evendale Elementary School adjacent to the high school site, it would appear appropriate to permit the extension of water and sewer to serve the new school. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) is the entity that provides the water and sewer services to properties that are located in Frederick County. Therefore, the properties within this SWSA would be served by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA). Please contact the Planning Department should you have any questions regarding the information provided for the above item. Attachments: Request from School Board Map depicting school location Map depicting SWSA adjustment Resolution Directing the Public Hearing Attachments MTR/pd/rsa K. Wayne Lee, Jr. LEED AP ● Coordinator of Planning and Development ● leew@frederick.k12.va.us 1415 Amherst Street www.frederick.k12.va.us 540-662-3889 Ext. 88249 P.O. Box 3508 540-662-4237 fax Winchester, Virginia 22604-2546 Mr. Eric Lawrence 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 June 25, 2014 Re: Water and sewer service for the Fourth High School Dear Eric, This letter is to request consideration by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors that water and sewer services be extended to the property recently purchased for the Fourth High School. Currently, the property is located just outside the SWSA, and so what we are seeking is a SWSA amendment. Should you wish to contact me, please feel free to do so. My phone number is 540-662-3889 x88249. My email address is leew@frederick.k12.va.us. Sincerely, Wayne Lee, LEED AP Coordinator of Planning and Development cc: Dr. David T. Sovine, Superintendent of Schools Mr. Albert L. Orndorff, Assistant Superintendent for Administration 01522 ST644 ST644 ST644 EVENDALE LN VINE LN JUSTES DR P A P E R M I L L R D ROS A L N F R O N T R O Y A L P I K E LAURELWOOD DR Inside- SWSA Request for SWSA Amendment4th High School F01,000 2,000500 Feet Future Rt37 Bypass SWSA Streets Parcels Outside - SWSA Proposed 4th Highschool Site 01522 ST644 ST644 ST644 EVENDALE LN VINE LN JUSTES DR P A P E R M I L L R D ROS A L N F R O N T R O Y A L P I K E LAURELWOOD DR 76 A 96E83 Ac. Request for SWSA Amendment4th High SchoolProposed SWSA F01,000 2,000500 Feet Future Rt37 Bypass Streets Parcels Outside - SWSA Proposed 4th Highschool Site C MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #07-14 Wright Renovation’s Inc. Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared:August 5, 2014 Staff Contact: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist in the review of this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission:08/20/14 Pending Board of Supervisors:09/10/14 Pending PROPOSAL:To develop the properties of land zoned RP (Residential Performance) with residential uses. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT:Red Bud PROPERTY ID NUMBERS:54F-A-22 &54F-A-22A LOCATION:The subject properties are located on the southeastern side of the intersection of Dowell J. Circle (Route 1240) and Anderson Avenue. PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential ZONING & PRESENT USE OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES: North:RP (Residential Performance) Use:Residential South:RP (Residential Performance)Use: Residential East: RP (Residential Performance)Use: Residential West: RP (Residential Performance)Use: Residential STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 08/20/14 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Master Development Plan (MDP) for Wright Renovation’s Inc. depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the requirements of Article VIII, Master Development Plan of the zoning ordinance. However, in order for this MDP to be administratively approved and the three (3) parcel subdivision to occur,the Board of Supervisors under Chapter 144-5 would need to act on the following waiver(s) of Chapter 144 of the Code of Frederick County: §144-17 (L) Curbs and gutters specifies that: Curbs and gutters shall be constructed along both sides of all streets in any subdivision containing lot(s) less than 15,000 sq. ft. or lot widths of 80 feet or less at the street.Justification for waiver: Surrounding lots do not have curb and gutter. MDP #07-14 Wright Renovation Inc. August 5, 2014 Page 2 §144 -18 (A) (1) Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways specifies that: Sidewalks shall be installed along both sides of all local streets in any subdivision located in the RP (Residential Performance), R-4 (Residential Planned Community), R-5 (Residential Recreational Community) Districts, and residential areas in the MS (Medical Support) Districts. Justification for waiver: Surrounding lots do not have sidewalks. §144-19 Streetlights specifies that: Streetlights of adequate type and intensity shall be required to promote public health and safety in any subdivision located in the RP (Residential Performance), R-4 (Residential Planned Community), R-5 (Residential Recreational Community) Districts, and residential areas in the MS (Medical Support) District. Justification for waiver: Surrounding lots do not have streetlights. § 144-24 (C) Lot access specifies that: All lots shall abut and have direct access to a public street or right-of-way dedicated for maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation. Justification for waiver: Anderson Avenue is private and currently services 103 Anderson Avenue. § 144-26 Buffers and screens: recreational facilities specifics that: Appropriate provisions shall be made for the location of recreational facilities on the subdivision plans. Justification for waiver: There is no Home Owner’s Association to support and maintain recreational facilities. § 144-28 Dedication of common open space specifies that: Common open space, required to be located within the subdivision by the County Code, shall be dedicated to the property owners association. Justification for waiver: There is no Home Owner’s Association to have open space dedicated to. All of the issues brought forth by the Planning Commission should be appropriately addressed by the applicant. It appears the application meets all requirements. Following presentation of the application to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and the incorporation of your comments, staff is prepared to proceed to approval of the application. MDP #07-14 Wright Renovation Inc. August 5, 2014 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation: Comments will be made at subdivision submittal. Frederick County Fire Marshal: No comments. Frederick County Fire & Rescue: No comments. Frederick County Public Works: No comments. Frederick County Inspections: No comments Frederick County Sanitation Authority: No comments; served by City of Winchester; will comment on subdivision submittal. Planning & Zoning: A) Master Development Plan Requirement A master development plan is required prior to development of this property. Before a master development plan can be approved, it must be reviewed by the Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors and all relevant review agencies. Approval may only be granted if the master development plan conforms to all requirements of the Frederick County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The purpose of the master development plan is to promote orderly and planned development of property within Frederick County that suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious with adjoining property, and is in the best interest of the general public. B) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester, VA Quadrangle) identifies the subject property as being zoned R-3 (Residential General) when Frederick County adopted zoning in 1967. Frederick County amended its ordinance in 1989 to change the R-3 Zoning District to the current RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District. Lot sizes within the RP Zoning District range from 100,000 sq. ft. to 3,000 sq. ft. C) Site Suitability & Project Scope Comprehensive Policy Plan: The 2030 Comprehensive Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. MDP #07-14 Wright Renovation Inc. August 5, 2014 Page 4 Land Use Compatibility: The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, recognizes that these properties are planned for residential land uses. In addition, the adjacent area is planned for residential and commercial land uses. The properties are located within the County’s Sewer and Water Service Area and Urban Development Area. Site Access and Transportation: Access to these properties will be via Dowell J. Circle (Route 1240) and Anderson Avenue respectfully. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 08/20/14 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Master Development Plan (MDP) depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the requirements of Article VIII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning Ordinance. However, in order for this MDP to be administratively approved and the subdivision of three (3) parcels to occur, the Board of Supervisors under Chapter 144-5 would need to act on the following waiver(s) of Chapter 144 of the Code of Frederick County: §144-17 (L) Curbs and gutters specifies that: Curbs and gutters shall be constructed along both sides of all streets in any subdivision containing lot(s) less than 15,000 sq. ft. or lot widths of 80 feet or less at the street. Justification for waiver: Surrounding lots do not have curb and gutter. §144-18 (A) (1) Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways specifies that: Sidewalks shall be installed along both sides of all local streets in any subdivision located in the RP (Residential Performance), R-4 (Residential Planned Community), R-5 (Residential Recreational Community) Districts, and residential areas in the MS (Medical Support) Districts. Justification for waiver: Surrounding lots do not have sidewalks. §144-19 Streetlights specifies that: Streetlights of adequate type and intensity shall be required to promote public health and safety in any subdivision located in the RP (Residential Performance), R-4 (Residential Planned Community), R-5 (Residential Recreational Community) Districts, and residential areas in the MS (Medical Support) District. Justification for waiver: Surrounding lots do not have streetlights. § 144-24 (C) Lot access specifies that: All lots shall abut and have direct access to a public street or right-of-way dedicated for maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation. Justification for waiver: Anderson Avenue is private and currently services 103 Anderson Avenue. § 144-26 Buffers and screens: recreational facilities specifics that: Appropriate provisions shall be made for the location of recreational facilities on the subdivision plans. Justification for waiver: There is no Home Owner’s Association to support and maintain recreational facilities. MDP #07-14 Wright Renovation Inc. August 5, 2014 Page 5 § 144-28 Dedication of common open space specifies that: Common open space, required to be located within the subdivision by the County Code, shall be dedicated to the property owners association. Justification for waiver: There is no Home Owner’s Association to have open space dedicated to. All of the issues brought forth by the Planning Commission should be appropriately addressed by the applicant. It appears the application meets all requirements. Following presentation of the application to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and the incorporation of your comments, staff is prepared to proceed to approval of the application. 107ANDERSONAVE 144DOWELL JCIR 108ANDERSONAVE 142DOWELL JCIR 106ANDERSONAVE 103ANDERSONAVE 140DOWELL JCIR 104ANDERSONAVE 136DOWELL JCIR 102ANDERSONAVE 134DOWELL JCIR 132DOWELL JCIR 118DOWELL JCIR AND E R S O N A V E 54F A 27 54F A 28 54F A 29 54F 2 2 54F A 11 54F 2 1 54F A 12 54F A 22 54F A 13 54F A 14 54F A 15 54F A 16 54F 1 2 54F A 21 54F A 20 54FA 19 54F 1 1 Applications Parcels Building FootprintsB1 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District)EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)HE (Higher Education District) M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District)MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District) I Note:Frederick County Dept ofPlanning & Development107 N Kent StSuite 202Winchester, VA 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: August 6, 2014Staff: mcheran BERRYVILLE PIKE DOD G E A V E DAIRY CORN E R P L VALLEY MIL L R D DOWEL L J C I R BERRYVILLE PIKEBERRYVILLE EXIT RA M P N MDP-Waiver Request #07-14Wright Renovation Inc.for sidewalk, streetlight and access requirementPINs:54F - A - 22, 54F - A - 22A MDP-Waiver Request #07-14Wright Renovation Inc.for sidewalk, streetlight and access requirementPINs:54F - A - 22, 54F - A - 22A 0 50 10025 Feet 54F A 22A D COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Discussion on Landscaping Requirements – Business Friendly Recommendations DATE: August 4, 2014 ______________________________________________________________________________ In October of 2012, the Board of Supervisors formed the Frederick County Business Climate Assessment Committee (also called the Business Friendly Committee) to evaluate the current processes and procedures being utilized by the County. The purpose of the effort was to search for ways that the County could better meet the needs of new and existing businesses in the community. The Committee’s final report was adopted by the Board of Supervisors in July of 2013. One recommendation contained in the report was to review the landscaping requirements contained in the Zoning Ordinance and the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) was tasked with reviewing the current requirements and looking at the suggested changes. The Land Use and Development Subcommittee of the Business Friendly Committee “recommended a complete review and re-evaluation of the Frederick County Buffers and Landscaping Ordinance to provide a well defined purpose to allow for flexibility in project site landscaping, tree preservation, and effective development buffers.” The DRRC first reviewed the landscaping ordinance in September 2013, January 2014 and February 2014. At these meetings the DRRC recognized that the buffer and landscaping sections were recently discussed and amended and the committee felt that the existing ordinance was appropriate. The DRRC did recommend that the parking lot landscaping requirements be moved into the main landscaping section. The Planning Commission discussed the landscaping requirements at their meeting on April 2, 2014. During the citizen comments portion of the meeting, Mr. John Goode, the Chairman of the Land Use and Development Subcommittee of the Business Friendly Committee, stated his subcommittee had recommendations on a number of different subjects and the landscape ordinance was only one item among many. Mr. Goode requested that he be given the opportunity to attend a DRRC meeting and make a presentation including all of the recommendations in order to bring things into context and reflect what the subcommittee had in mind. A Commissioner remarked that of all the localities he conducts landscaping business; Frederick County is by far one of the simplest and easiest localities to work in. He commented if one additional step could be taken to save money on site development, it would be to specify Landscaping Requirements August 4, 2014 Page 2 places on site where pavement, curbing, and concrete could be reduced and this would significantly drop the cost of site development. A Commissioner was opposed to the recommendation that a tree committee be formed to review site plans because he believed it would stall the process; he was not in favor of forming another committee. Considering all of the landscaping and buffer revisions recently approved, Commissioners agreed with the DRRC that the existing ordinance was adequate and appropriate. Nevertheless, the majority of Commissioners were not opposed to having the landscaping requirements go back to the DRRC and allow Mr. Goode to make a presentation to make certain the DRRC understood what the subcommittee was trying to get across. The DRRC again landscaping ordinance at their April 24, 2014 meeting and a representative from the Business Friendly Committee spoke. The committee requested staff to look at a proportional upgrade waiver; meaning sites that are proposing minimal upgrades could request a waiver of the landscaping requirements. The DRRC discussed the revised landscaping ordinance at their June 26, 2014 meeting. The DRRC was satisfied with the changes and sent the amendment forward to the Planning Commission for discussing. The attached document shows the existing ordinance with the proposed changes supported by the DRRC (with strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added). This item is presented for discussion. Please contact staff should you have questions. Attachments: 1. Proposed Revisions (deletions shown in strikethrough and additions show in bold underlined italics). CEP/pd Draft Landscaping Revisions 1 Part 202 – Off-Street Parking, Loading and Access § 165-202.01 Off-street parking; parking lots. D. Parking lots. Parking spaces shared by more than one dwelling or use, required for any use in the business or industrial zoning district or required for any institutional, commercial or industrial use in any zoning district shall meet the following requirements: (13) Landscaping. Parking lots in the RP Residential Performance District, the R4 Residential Planned Community District, the R5 Residential Recreational Community District, the MH1 Mobile Home Community District, the B1 Neighborhood Business District, the B2 Business General District, the B3 Industrial Transition District, the OM Office- Manufacturing Park District, the M1 Light Industrial District, the M2 Industrial General District, the MS Medical Support District, and the HE (Higher Education) District shall be landscaped to reduce the visual impact of glare and headlights on adjoining properties and rights-of-way. Parking lots shall be adequately shaded to reduce reflected heat. In the RA (Rural Areas) District, parking lot landscaping shall not be required for parking lots with 10 or fewer spaces. Landscaping shall also be provided to reduce the visual expansiveness of parking lots. Landscaping shall be provided in such parking lots as follows: a) Perimeter landscaping. The perimeter of all impervious areas shall be landscaped with shade trees and other landscaping. One tree shall be provided for every 2,000 square feet of impervious area for the first 100,000 square feet of the entire site. One tree shall be provided for every 5,000 square feet in excess of the first 100,000 square feet of the entire site. Self-service storage facilities shall provide one tree per 10,000 square feet of impervious area of the entire site, in addition to the trees required in § 165-204.18, Storage facilities. The perimeter landscaping trees shall be reasonably dispersed throughout the parking lot. A three-foot-high evergreen hedge, fence, berm or wall shall be provided to prevent headlights from shining on public rights-of-ways and adjoining properties. All perimeter landscaping shall comply with the requirements of §165-203.01B, Plant selection, planting procedure and maintenance. b) Interior landscaping. A minimum of 5% of the interior portions of parking lots shall be landscaped for the purpose of providing shade trees. Such interior landscaping shall be provided on raised islands and in continuous raised strips extending the length of a parking bay. Within the parking lot, raised islands and landscaped areas should be uses to delineate traffic and pedestrian circulation patterns. No less than one shade tree shall be provided in the interior of the parking lot for each 10 parking spaces. The Zoning Administrator may waive the requirement for interior landscaping for parcels located outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area when curb and gutter is not proposed. The Zoning Administrator may approve alternative locations for interior landscaping for parking lots used for truck parking, as well as other parking lots, when it would improve the overall quality of the landscape plan. Draft Landscaping Revisions 2 All interior landscaping shall comply with the requirements of § 165-203.01B, Plant selection, planting procedure and maintenance. Part 203 – Buffers and Landscaping § 165-203.01 Landscaping requirements. The requirements of this section are intended to enhance the appearance, environment, and general welfare of Frederick County by providing minimum landscaping standards and encouraging tree preservation for developments. The provisions of this section shall apply to all site plan and subdivision design plan applications, including the revision or expansion of any site or development. A. Residential Developments and Parking Lots in all Zoning Districts. (1) Residential developments. Residential developments which require a master development plan, subdivision design plan or site plan shall provide at least one of the three types of landscaping identified below. (a) Street tree landscaping. Street tree landscaping shall require one street tree for every 40 feet of street frontage in a residential development, with the exception of frontage on roads which require a road efficiency buffer. Street trees shall be planted no more than 20 feet from rights- of-way. Planting street trees on the property lines of building lots should be avoided. Two or more street trees shall be planted on each building lot. The Zoning Administrator may allow fewer than two street trees for an individual building lot if topographical features, utilities, easements, or the width of the lot makes it impractical to do so. All street trees shall comply with the requirements of § 165-203.01B C, with the exception that street trees must be at least two-and-one-half-inch caliper at the time of planting. (b) Ornamental landscaping. (i) Ornamental landscaping shall be provided for residential developments based on the following index and matrix: Index of Lot Types Lot Type Description A Single-Family Detached Rural Traditional B Single-Family Detached Traditional C Single-Family Detached Urban D Single-Family Detached Cluster E Single-Family Detached Zero Lot Line Draft Landscaping Revisions 3 (ii) Ornamental trees and shrubs shall comply with the requirements of § 165-203.01B. The Zoning Administrator may allow some of the required ornamental trees and ornamental shrubs to be planted in areas of common open space so long as the intent of this section is met. (c) Tree preservation landscaping. An area with a tree canopy coverage, of at least 25% of the entire site area, shall be preserved within dedicated open space. In no case shall individual building lots be located within the open space. Canopy coverage shall be calculated from the cumulative total of existing tree canopies. Preserved trees shall be clustered together to maintain a contiguous canopy; and shall be protected from construction activity. These areas of open space may be counted towards the total required open space, as specified in § 165-402.07. Residential developments which are not required to have open space by § 165-402.07 are not exempt from creating open space for the required canopy coverage. The calculation of tree canopy shall be based on either the individual tree standards of the "Manual of Woody Landscape Plants," F Single-Family Small Lot G Multiplex H Townhouse, Back-to-Back Townhouse I Garden Apartment, Multifamily Residential Buildings Age Restricted Multifamily Housing Required Landscaping Per Dwelling Unit Lot Type Ornamental Shrubs Ornamental Trees A None 10 per 1 unit B 10 per 1 unit 5 per 1 unit C 10 per 1 unit 5 per 1 unit D 10 per 1 unit 5 per 1 unit E 10 per 1 unit 5 per 1 unit F 15 per 1 unit 5 per 1 unit G 3 per 3 units* 1 per 3 units* H 6 per 5 units* 2 per 5 units* I 3 per 2 units* 1 per 2 units* Note: *Required ornamental trees and shrubs are in addition to all trees and shrubs elsewhere required in the Zoning Ordinance. Draft Landscaping Revisions 4 written by Michael A. Dirr, or through a comprehensive analysis of existing tree drip lines, conducted by a Virginia certified engineer, land surveyor, or landscape architect. (2) Parking lots. Parking spaces shared by more than one dwelling or use, required for any use in the business or industrial zoning district or required for any institutional, commercial or industrial use in any zoning district shall meet the following requirements: (a) Landscaping. Parking lots in the RP Residential Performance District, the R4 Residential Planned Community District, the R5 Residential Recreational Community District, the MH1 Mobile Home Community District, the B1 Neighborhood Business District, the B2 Business General District, the B3 Industrial Transition District, the OM Office-Manufacturing Park District, the M1 Light Industrial District, the M2 Industrial General District, the MS Medical Support District, and the HE (Higher Education) District shall be landscaped to reduce the visual impact of glare and headlights on adjoining properties and rights-of-way. Parking lots shall be adequately shaded to reduce reflected heat. In the RA (Rural Areas) District, parking lot landscaping shall not be required for parking lots with 10 or fewer spaces. Landscaping shall also be provided to reduce the visual expansiveness of parking lots. Landscaping shall be provided in such parking lots as follows: (i) Perimeter landscaping. The perimeter of all impervious areas shall be landscaped with shade trees and other landscaping. One tree shall be provided for every 2,000 square feet of impervious area for the first 100,000 square feet of the entire site. One tree shall be provided for every 5,000 square feet in excess of the first 100,000 square feet of the entire site. Self-service storage facilities shall provide one tree per 10,000 square feet of impervious area of the entire site, in addition to the trees required in § 165-204.18, Storage facilities. The perimeter landscaping trees shall be reasonably dispersed throughout the parking lot. A three-foot-high evergreen hedge, fence, berm or wall shall be provided to prevent headlights from shining on public rights-of-ways and adjoining properties. All perimeter landscaping shall comply with the requirements of §165-203.01B, Plant selection, planting procedure and maintenance. (ii) Interior landscaping. A minimum of 5% of the interior portions of parking lots shall be landscaped for the purpose of providing shade trees. Such interior landscaping shall be provided on raised islands and in continuous raised strips extending the length of a parking bay. Within the parking lot, raised islands and landscaped areas should be uses to delineate traffic and pedestrian circulation patterns. No less than one shade tree shall be provided in the interior of the parking lot for each 10 parking spaces. The Zoning Administrator may waive the requirement for interior landscaping for parcels located outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area when curb and gutter is not proposed. The Zoning Administrator may approve alternative locations for interior landscaping for Draft Landscaping Revisions 5 parking lots used for truck parking, as well as other parking lots, when it would improve the overall quality of the landscape plan. All interior landscaping shall comply with the requirements of § 165-203.01B, Plant selection, planting procedure and maintenance. B. Plant selection, planting procedure, and maintenance. (1) Plant selection. Based on the type of landscaping, required trees and shrubs shall be selected from the table of acceptable trees and shrubs shown below. Types of Landscaping Street tree landscaping (street) Ornamental landscaping (ornamental) Tree preservation landscaping (canopy) Interior and perimeter landscaping (shade), Buffer screening and parking lot screening (screen), Deciduous buffer element (street, canopy, shade), buffer shrub element (shrub or screen) Acceptable Trees and Shrubs Common Name Scientific Name Types of Landscaping Permitted Amur Maple Acer ginnala Street, shade, canopy, ornamental European Hornbeam Carpinus betulus Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Hop Hornbeam Ostrya virginiana Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Katsura Tree Cercidiphyllum japonicum Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Ginkgo (male) Ginkgo biloba Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Thornless Honey Locust Gleditsia triacanthos inermis Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Golden-Rain Tree Koelreuteria paniculata Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Flowering Crabapple Malus (disease resistant varieties) Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Chinese Pistache Pistacia chinensis Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Draft Landscaping Revisions 6 Linden Tilia (all varities) Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Lacebark Elm Ulmus parvifolia Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Japanese Zelkova Zelkova serrata Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Red Oak Quercus rubra Street, shade, canopy, ornamental White Oak Quercus alba Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Scarlet Oak Quercus coccinea Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Sawtooth Oak Quercus acutissima Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Kentucky Coffeetree Gymnocladus diocus Street, shade, canopy, ornamental Dawn Redwood Metasequoia glyptostroboides Street, shade, canopy Swamp Chestnut Oak Quercus michauxii Street, shade, canopy Willow Oak Quercus phellos Shade, canopy, ornamental Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum Street, shade, canopy Red Maple Acer rubrum Shade, canopy, ornamental Freeman Maple Acer freemanii Shade, canopy, ornamental Sugar Maple Acer saccharum Shade, canopy, ornamental Paperbark Maple Acer griseum Shade, canopy, ornamental American Sycamore Platanus occidentallis Shade, canopy, ornamental London Plane Tree Platanus acerifolia Shade, canopy, ornamental Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua Shade, canopy, ornamental Copper Beech Fagus sylvatica 'Riversii' Shade, canopy, ornamental Weeping Beech Fagus pendula Shade, canopy, ornamental Draft Landscaping Revisions 7 European Beech Fagus sylvatica Shade, canopy, ornamental River Birch Betula nigra Shade, canopy, ornamental Star Magnolia Magnolia stellata Shade, canopy, ornamental Saucer Magnolia Magnolia x soulangiana Shade, canopy, ornamental Black Gum Nyssa sylvatica Shade, canopy, ornamental Yellowwood Cladrastis kentukea Shade, canopy, ornamental Downy Serviceberry Amelanchier arborea Shade, canopy, ornamental Hawthorn Crataegus plaenopyrum, Crataegus viridis Shade, canopy, ornamental Sourwood Oxydendrum arboreum Shade, canopy, ornamental Tuliptree Liriodendron tulipifera Shade, canopy, ornamental Paw Paw Asimina triloba Shade, canopy, ornamental Dogwood Cornus florida, Cornus kousa, Cornus hybrid Shade, ornamental Flowering Cherry Prunus (all varieties of Flowering Cherry) Shade, ornamental Cornelian Cherry Cornus mas Shade, ornamental Eastern Redbud Cercis canadensis Shade, ornamental American Plum Prunus americana Shade, ornamental Japanese Maple Acer palmatum Shade, ornamental Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii Screen, ornamental White Fir Abies concolor Screen, ornamental Spruce Picea (all varieties) Screen, ornamental Japanese Umbrella Pine Sciadopitys verticillata Screen, ornamental Hinoki False Cypress Chamaecyparis obtusa Screen, ornamental White Pine Pinus strobus Screen, canopy Draft Landscaping Revisions 8 Western Arborvitae Thuja plicata Screen, ornamental Eastern Arborvitae Thuja occidentalis (all varieties) Screen, ornamental Leyland Cypress Cupressocyparis x leylandi Screen, ornamental Japanese Cedar Cryptomeria japonica Screen, ornamental Viburnum (Evergreen) (all evergreen/semi-evergreen varieties) Screen, ornamental, shrub Yew Taxus (all varieties) Screen, ornamental, shrub Holly Ilex (all varieties) Screen, ornamental, shrub Common Boxwood Buxus sempervirens Screen, ornamental, shrub Juniper Juniperus (all varieties) Screen, ornamental, shrub Abelia (All varieties) Screen, ornamental, shrub Witchhazel Hamamelis vernalis Ornamental, shrub White Fringetree Chionanthus virginicus Ornamental, shrub Slender Deutzia Deutzia gracilis Ornamental, shrub Althea Hibiscus syriacus Ornamental, shrub Vicary privet Ligustrum x vicaryi Ornamental, shrub Sweet Mockorange Philadelphus coronarius Ornamental, shrub Japanese pieris Pieris japonica Ornamental, shrub Cotoneaster (All varieties) Ornamental, shrub Spirea (All varieties) Ornamental, shrub Weigela (All varieties) Ornamental, shrub Forsythia (All varieties) Ornamental, shrub Dwarf Fothergilla Fothergilla gardenii Ornamental, shrub Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis Ornamental, shrub Japanese pagodatree Sophora japonica Ornamental, shrub Draft Landscaping Revisions 9 (2) Planting procedure. All required trees and shrubs shall meet the specifications and procedures established by the American Nursery and Landscape Association. a) All trees shall be planted no closer than three feet to the edge of sidewalks, curb or other pavement. b) Deciduous trees shall be a minimum of two-inch caliper at the time of planning. c) Only single stem trees shall be planted as street trees. d) Evergreen trees shall be a minimum of four feet in height at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be a minimum three-gallon container at the time of planting. In addition to the three- gallon container requirement, parking lot screening shrubs shall be a minimum of 36” in height at time of planting and buffer shrubs shall be a minimum of 18” in height at time of planting. Spacing of parking lot screening shrubs shall be no greater than four (4) feet on center. e) Only trees having a mature height of less than 20 feet shall be located under overhead utility lines. f) Measurement of Size. Caliper is measured six (6) inches above the ground up to and including four (4) inch caliper size, and twelve (12) inches above the ground for larger sizes. Diameter at breast height (dbh) will be measured at the height of 54 inches from the base of the trunk or as otherwise allowed in the Guide for Plant Appraisal. Chastetree Vitex agnus-castus Ornamental, shrub Standard Nandina Nandina domestica Ornamental, shrub Purple Plum Prunus cerasifera Ornamental Crape Myrtle Lagerstroemia indica Ornamental Persian parrotia Parrotia persica ornamental Hydrangea (all varieties) Ornamental Mugo pine Pinus mugo Ornamental Itea (All varieties) Ornamental Aronia (All varieties) Ornamental Clethra (All varieties) Ornamental Azalea Rhododendron (All varieties) Ornamental Rhododendron (All varieties) Ornamental Northern Bayberry Myrica pensylvanica Ornamental Meyer Lilac Syringa meyeri ‘Palibin’ Ornamental Draft Landscaping Revisions 10 (3) Maintenance. The owner, developer, and/or builder who is responsible for planting required landscaping shall be responsible for maintaining it in a state of good health for one year after planting. After one year, from the date occupancy is approved, the individual property owner and/or homeowner's association shall become responsible for maintenance. As long as the intent of this section is met, the Zoning Administrator may waive the requirement for landscaping on individual building lots when a hazard or nuisance exists. C. Existing tree credits. If the intent of § 165-203.01 is satisfied, including species type and location, existing trees that are preserved may be counted towards the total number of required trees for residential developments. Commercial and industrial developments may utilize existing tree credits when calculating the required number of parking lot trees, as required in § 165-202.01D(13) 165- 203.01(A), if the preserved trees are shown on an approved site plan and serve the intent of interior and perimeter landscaping. The following table shows the credit given for each preserved tree, based on the tree's caliper: D. Enforcement procedures. The Zoning Administrator may require a bond with surety or other acceptable guaranties to insure the completion of required improvements. Such guaranties shall be in the estimated amount of the required improvements. Such guaranties shall be for a period of completion set by the Zoning Administrator with consultation with the applicant. Such guaranties shall be released when the required improvements have been completed. ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS § 165-101.02 Definitions & word usage. SITE PLAN - A specific and detailed plan of development which contains detailed engineering drawings of the proposed uses and improvements required in the development of a given parcel or use. of development meeting the requirements of this chapter. In all Articles of this Chapter, where the term 'site plan' is used, it shall also include the term 'minor site plan'. Caliper (inches) Tree Credit 4 to 6 1 7 to 12 2 13 to 18 3 19 to 29 4 Greater than 30 5 Draft Landscaping Revisions 11 ARTICLE VIII DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND APPROVALS § 165-802.03 Site plan contents. The site plan shall be clearly legible and shall be drawn at a scale acceptable to the Zoning Administrator. The site plan shall include three general sections, the project information section, the calculations section, and the site plan and details section. The information required for each section is listed below: A. Project information section. (1) A title that includes the name of the proposed or existing business and a subtitle which describes the proposed development. (2) The name, address, and phone number of the landowner, developer, and designer. (3) The Frederick County Property Identification Number (PIN) of all lots included on the site plan. (4) The number and type of dwelling units included on the site plan for residential uses. (5) The total land area and total developed land area of all lots included on the site plan. (6) A detailed description of the proposed use or uses of the development, as well as a description of the existing use or uses. (7) A reference to any other site plan or master development plan approved by the County for the site. (8) The date the site plan was prepared and a list of all revisions made, including the date and a description of why the site plan was revised. (9) A table of contents including all pages of the site plan. (10) A list of all proposed utility providers, with their address, name and phone number. (11) An inset map showing the location of the site, along with the location of streets, roads and land uses within 500 feet of the property. (12) A statement listing all requirements and conditions placed on the land included in the site plan resulting from approval of conditional zoning or a conditional use permit. (13) A description of setbacks or conditions placed on the site as a result of an approved variance. (14) The name of the Magisterial District within which property is located. B. Calculations section. (1) Calculations showing the floor area ration (FAR) of the site, including the maximum allowed FAR, total ground floor area, total floor area, and total lot area. (2) Calculations showing the total number of required and proposed parking spaces, including the total number of existing and proposed spaces. (3) Calculations showing the total number of required handicap spaces, including the total number of existing and proposed spaces. (4) Calculations showing the total number of required loading spaces, including the total number of existing and proposed spaces. (5) Calculations showing the total number of required perimeter and interior trees required, including the number of provided trees. (6) Calculations showing the percentage of the property that will be landscaped and the percentage of woodlands disturbed. Draft Landscaping Revisions 12 C. Site plan and details section. (1) The location of all adjoining lots with the owner's name, specific use, zoning, and zoning boundaries shown. (2) The location of all existing or planned rights-of-way and easements that adjoin the property, with street names, widths, and speed limits shown. (3) All nearby entrances that are within 200 feet of any existing or proposed entrances to the site. (4) All existing and proposed driveways, parking and loading spaces, parking lots and a description of surfacing material and construction details to be used. The size and angle of parking spaces, aisles, maneuvering areas, and loading spaces shall be shown. (5) A North arrow. (6) A graphic scale and statement of scale. (7) A legend describing all symbols and other features that need description. (8) A boundary survey of the entire parcel and all lots included with distances described at least to the nearest hundredth of a foot. (9) The present zoning of all portions of the site, with the location of zoning boundaries. (10) The location of all existing and proposed structures, with the height, specific use, ground floor area, and total floor area labeled. (11) The location of all existing and proposed outdoor uses, with the height, specific use, and land area labeled. (12) Existing topographic contour lines at intervals acceptable to the Zoning Administrator. Proposed finished grades shall be shown by contour. (13) The location of the front, side, and rear yard setback lines required by the applicable zoning district. (14) The location and boundaries of existing environmental features, including streams, floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater retention areas, steep slopes, and woodlands. (15) The location of outdoor trash receptacles. (16) The location of all outdoor lighting fixtures. (17) The location, dimensions, and height of all signs. (18) The location of required buffers, landscaping buffers, and landscaped screens, including examples, typical cross sections or diagrams of screening to be used. The location and dimensions of required fencing, berms, and similar features shall be specified. (19) The location of recreational areas and common open space. (20) The location of all proposed landscaping with a legend; the caliper, scientific name, and common name of all deciduous trees; the height at planting, scientific name, and common name of all evergreen trees and shrubs. (21) The height at planting, caliper, scientific name, and common name shall be provided for all proposed trees. The height at planting, scientific name and common name shall be provided for all shrubs. (22) The location of sidewalks and walkways. (23) The location and width of proposed easements and dedications. (24) A stormwater management plan describing the location of all stormwater management facilities with design calculations and details. (25) A soil erosion and sedimentation plan describing methods to be used. (26) The location and size of sewer and water mains and laterals serving the site. (27) Facilities necessary to meet the requirements of the Fire Code. (28) A signed seal of the certified Virginia land surveyor, architect, or engineer who prepared the plan. Draft Landscaping Revisions 13 (29) A space labeled "Approved by the Frederick County Zoning Administrator" for the signature of the Zoning Administrator, approval date, and a statement that reads "site plan valid for five years from approval date." D. Minor Site Plans. A minor site plan may be submitted in lieu of a full site plan for additions to existing sites. A minor site plan shall constitute a revision that increases an existing structure area by 20% or less and does not exceed 5,000 square feet of disturbed area. Minor site plans, at a minimum shall include the following information: (1) A title that includes the name of the proposed or existing business and a subtitle which describes the proposed development. (2) The name, address, and phone number of the landowner, developer, and designer. (3) The Frederick County Property Identification Number (PIN) of all lots included on the site plan. (4) The total land area and total developed land area of all lots included on the site plan. (5) A detailed description of the proposed use or uses of the development, as well as a description of the existing use or uses. (6) A reference to any other site plan or master development plan approved by the County for the site. (7) The date the site plan was prepared and a list of all revisions made, including the date and a description of why the site plan was revised. (8) A table of contents including all pages of the site plan. (9) An inset map showing the location of the site, along with the location of streets, roads and land uses within 500 feet of the property. (10) A statement listing all requirements and conditions placed on the land included in the site plan resulting from approval of conditional zoning or a conditional use permit. (11) A description of setbacks or conditions placed on the site as a result of an approved variance. (12) The name of the Magisterial District within which property is located. (13) Calculations showing the total number of required and proposed parking and loading spaces, including the total number of existing and proposed spaces. (14) Calculations showing the total number of required perimeter and interior trees required, including the number of provided trees. The Zoning Administrator shall determine the number of landscaping plants required, proportional to the additions shown on the minor site plan. (15) A signed seal of the certified Virginia land surveyor, architect, or engineer who prepared the plan. (16) Any other information determined by the Zoning Administrator necessary for the review of the minor site plan. D. E. Other information or statements may be required on the site plan by the Zoning Administrator to ensure that all requirements of the Frederick County Code are met. E. F. All site plans shall conform with master development plans that have been approved for the land in question. F. G. When required, deed restrictions, deeds of dedication, agreements, contracts, guaranties or other materials shall be submitted with the site plan. § 165-802.04 Required improvements. Draft Landscaping Revisions 14 A. All improvements and construction on the site shall conform with the approved site plan and the requirements of the Frederick County Code. B. The Zoning Administrator may require a bond with surety or other acceptable guaranties to insure the completion of required improvements. Such guaranties shall be in the estimated amount of the required improvements. Such guaranties shall be for a period of completion set by the Zoning Administrator with consultation with the applicant. Such guaranties shall be released when the required improvements have been completed. E COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Zoning District Buffer Waivers DATE: August 4, 2014 Staff has received a request to revise the Zoning Ordinance to include a zoning district buffer waiver that allows the Board of Supervisors to eliminate or modify the buffer if the adjoining land is designated in the adopted Comprehensive Plan for a use which would not require a buffer. The waiver as drafted would require support from the adjacent property owner. This item was discussed by the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at their June 26, 2014 meeting. The DRRC endorsed the proposed revision as drafted and recommended it be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. The attached document shows the existing ordinance with the proposed changes supported by the DRRC (with strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added). This item is presented for discussion. Comments and suggestions from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics. CEP/pd Buffer - Waiver Chapter 165 Article II - SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES Part 203 – Buffers and Landscaping D. Zoning district buffers. Buffers shall be placed on land to be developed when it adjoins land in certain different zoning districts. (1) Buffers shall be provided on the land to be developed according to the categories in the following tables: (a) Buffer categories: (b) Buffer categories to be provided on land to be developed according to the zoning of the adjoining land: Distance Buffer Required Category Screening Provided Inactive (Minimum) (feet) Active (Maximum) (feet) Total (feet) A No screen 25 25 50 B Full screen 25 25 50 B Landscape screen 75 25 100 B No screen 150 50 200 C Full screen 75 25 100 C Landscape screen 150 50 200 C No screen 350 50 400 Zoning of Adjoining Land Zoning of Land to be Developed RP R4 R5 MH1 B1 B2 B3 OM M1 M2 EM MS Buffer - Waiver (2) If a lot being developed is adjacent to developed land which would normally be required to be provided with a buffer but which does not contain the buffer, the required buffer shall be provided on the lot being developed. The buffer to be provided shall be of the larger category required on either the lot being developed or the adjacent land. Such buffer shall be in place of the buffer normally required on the lot being developed. The buffer may include required setbacks or buffers provided on the adjacent land. (3) Whenever land is to be developed in the B-1 (Neighborhood, Business) or B-2 (Business, General) Zoning District that is adjacent to land primarily used for residential use in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, a B Category buffer shall be provided on the land to be developed. The Board of Supervisors may grant a waiver to reduce the required buffer distance requirements with the consent of the adjacent (affected) property owners. Should a waiver be granted by the Board of Supervisors, the distance requirements of § 165-203.02D(1)(a) may be reduced, provided the full screening requirements of this section are met. (4) Whenever land is to be developed in the B3, OM, M1 or M2 Zoning District that is adjacent to land primarily used for residential purposes in the RA Rural Areas Zoning District, a C Category buffer shall be provided on the land to be developed. (5) Whenever land is to be developed in the MS Zoning District that is adjacent to land primarily used for residential purposes in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, a C Category buffer shall be provided on the land to be developed. Whenever land is to be developed in the MS Zoning District that is adjacent to all other land zoned RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, the requirements for buffer and screening shall be provided in accordance with §165-402.07 of this chapter. RP - - - - A A A A A A A A R4 - - - - A A A A A A A A R5 - - - - A A A A A A A A MH1 C C C - B B B B B A A C B1 B B B B - - A A A A A B B2 B B B B - - - A A A A B B3 C C C C B - - - - - - C OM C C C C B B - - - - - C M1 C C C C B B - - - - - C M2 C C C C B B B B B - - C EM C C C C B B B B B - - C MS C C C C B B B B B B C - Buffer - Waiver (6) The Zoning Administrator may waive any or all of the requirements for the zoning district buffers on a particular site plan when all uses shown on the site plan are allowed in the zoning district in which the development is occurring and in the adjoining zoning districts. (7) The Zoning Administrator may waive, reduce and/or modify buffer yard requirements (distance and landscaping) if in his opinion the topography of the lot providing the buffer yard and the lot being protected is such that the required yard would not be effective. The buffer may also be modified to maintain highway sight distances. (8) Land proposed to be developed in the OM (Office-Manufacturing Park), the M1 Light Industrial District and the M2 Industrial General District may be permitted to have a reduced buffer distance that is consistent with the required side or rear building setback line, provided that the following requirements are met: (a) The property to be developed with a reduced buffer distance is part of an approved master planned industrial park. (b) There are no primary or accessory uses within the reduced buffer distance area, including driveways, access drives, outdoor storage areas, parking areas, staging areas, loading areas and outdoor dumpster areas. All-weather surface fire lanes necessary to meet the requirements of Chapter 90, Fire Prevention, of the Code of Frederick County, Virginia, shall be exempt from this performance standard. (c) A full screen is required to be created within the reduced buffer distance area which shall be comprised of a continuous earth berm that is six feet higher in elevation than the highest elevation within the reduced buffer distance area and a double row of evergreen trees that are a minimum of six feet in height and planted a maximum of eight feet from center to center. (9) Proposed developments required to provide buffers and screening as determined by § 165- 203.02D(1)(b) of this chapter may be permitted to establish a common shared buffer and screening easement with the adjoining property. The common shared buffer and screening easement shall include all components of a full screen which shall be clearly indicated on a site design plan. A legal agreement signed by all appropriate property owners shall be provided to the Department of Planning and Development and shall be maintained with the approved site design plan. This agreement shall describe the location of the required buffer within each property, the number and type of the plantings to be provided and a statement regarding the maintenance responsibility for this easement. The required buffer distance may be reduced by 50% for a common shared buffer easement if existing vegetation achieves the functions of a full screen. (10) When a flex-tech development is split by a zoning district line, the Zoning Administrator may allow for a reduction of the distance buffer and the relocation of the screening requirements. Such modifications shall be allowed at the Zoning Administrators discretion, provided that all of the following conditions are met: (a) The zoning district boundary line for which the modification is requested is internal to the land contained within the master development plan. Buffer - Waiver (b) The required landscape screen is relocated to the perimeter of the flex-tech development. This relocated landscape screen shall contain the same plantings that would have been required had the screen been placed along the zoning district boundary line. (11) Whenever land is to be developed in the B1, B2, B3, OM, M1 or M2 Zoning District that is adjacent to a railroad right-of-way that has property zoned B1, B2, B3, OM, M1 or M2 on the opposite side, zoning district buffers shall not be required. In the event that residential uses are located on the opposite side of the railroad right-of-way, a zoning district buffer as required by § 165-203.02D shall be provided. In the event that a zoning district buffer is required, the width of the railroad right-of-way may be counted towards the required zoning district buffer distance. (12) The Board of Supervisors may grant a waiver to eliminate or modify a required buffer with the consent of the adjacent (affected) property owners when the adjoining land is designated in the adopted Comprehensive Plan for a use which would not require a buffer between the land under site plan and the adjoining property. F COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Screening for Outdoor Storage Areas DATE: August 4, 2014 Staff has received a request to revise the Zoning Ordinance to modify the screening requirements for outdoor storage areas. The current ordinance requires that all outdoor storage areas be completely screened from the view of road and street right-of-way and from surrounding properties by a fence, wall, mound or screening (landscaping). Staff has prepared a revision that would eliminate the screening element when an outdoor storage area adjoins a property also utilized for outdoor storage; screening shall not be required for their common property lines. Other amendments include surface material specifications and a landscaping exemption. The attached document shows the existing ordinance with the proposed changes supported by the DRRC (with strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added). This item is presented for discussion. Comments and suggestions from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics. CEP/pd Article II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES Part 201 – Supplementary Use Regulations § 165-201.10 Outdoor storage and processing. The outdoor storage or processing of products, equipment or raw materials is allowed in the business and industrial districts or in association with business uses allowed in any other zoning district only if the outdoor storage is directly associated with the primary uses of the property. A. In such cases, the outdoor storage or processing shall be completely screened from the view of road and street right-of-way and from surrounding properties by a six foot tall opaque fence, wall, berm or by screening, or evergreen screen. In no case shall chain link fencing with slats be utilized for screening. 1. When an outdoor storage area adjoins a property also utilized for outdoor storage, screening shall not be required for their common property lines. B. Outdoor storage surface areas shall consist of asphalt, concrete, stone, gravel or any other impervious surface approved by the Zoning Administrator. B. C. Such outdoor storage and processing shall not be permitted in any required front setback yard. C. D. The Zoning Administrator may require that the storage of hazardous materials or any materials which may contribute to contaminated runoff be fully enclosed. Where such materials are stored outdoors, they shall be contained within an impervious structure designed to contain spillage or contaminated runoff. D. E. The display of vehicles for sale by a vehicle dealer or nursery stock by a commercial nursery, along with other products for sale that are normally displayed outdoors, shall be exempt from the above requirements. E. F. Agricultural and forestry operations shall be exempted from the above requirements. F. G. Such requirements shall not apply to motor vehicle parking and loading areas. H. Landscaping shall not be required for impervious areas designated for outdoor storage.