HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 01-04-12 Meeting AgendaAGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Board Room
Frederick County Administration Building
Winchester, Virginia
January 4, 2012
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission
shouldadopt the Agenda for the meeting................................................................ (no tab)
Election of Officers, Committee Assignments, 2012 Meeting Schedule and Adoption of
Bylaws.............................................................................................................................. (A)
December 7, 2011 Minutes ..............
Committee Reports
................. (B)
(no tab)
CitizenComments.................................................................................................... (no tab)
PUBLIC HEARING
6) Conditional Use Permit 910-11 for Joseph Racey, Sr., and AT&T Mobility, for a 199
foot Monopole Telecommunications Facility. This property is located at 3392 Back
Mountain Road, and is identified with Property Identification Number 59-A-6 in the Back
Creek Magisterial District.
Mr. Cheran.......................................................................................................................(C)
7) Tasker Road Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment (CPPA) — An 11.35 acre
change in Land Use Classification from Institutional to Residential.. The property is
located on the east side of Tasker Road and north of Rutherford Lane, approximately 0.7
miles south of 1-81 exit 310 interchange in the Shawnee Magisterial District,
Mr. Ruddy........................................................................................................................(D)
8) 2012-2013 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP is a prioritized list of capital
projects requested by various County Departments and Agencies. The Plan is created as
an informational document to assist in the development of the County's annual budget. If
adopted, the CIP is a component of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Ruddy........................................................................................................................ (F,)
9) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165 Zoning, Article 11 Supplementary Use
Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 204
Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, 165-204.19 Telecommunications facilities,
commercial - Revisions to the commercial telecommunication facility requirements of
the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance.
Mrs. Perkins..................................................................................................................... (F)
10) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165 Zoning, Article I General Provisions,
Amendments, and Conditional Use Permits, Part 101 General Provisions, 165-
101.02 Definitions and word usage; Article 11 Supplementary Use Regulations,
Parking, Buffers and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 201 Supplementary Use
Regulations, 165-201.08 Protection of environmental features - Riparian Buffers.
Revisions to the riparian buffer requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance.
Mrs. Perkins.....................................................................................................................(G)
11) Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 165 Zoning, Article II Supplementary Use Regulations,
Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 202 Off -Street Parking,
Loading and Access, §165-202.03 Motor Vehicle Access; and, Chapter 144
Subdivision of Land, Article V Design Standards, §144-17 Streets, §144.18
Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways, §144.24 Lot Requirements — Revisions to allow
alternative designs to implement low impact design techniques in residential development
and to increase the cul-de-sac length requirement.
Mrs. Perkins.....................................................................................................................(H)
12) Other
MEMORANDUM
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director�t/
SUBJECT: Election of Officers, Committee Appointments, Meeting Schedule
DATE: December 16, 2011
ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR 2012
At the first meeting of each year, the Planning Commission elects a Chairman, Vice
Chairman and Secretary. These three Planning Commission officers assume office
immediately, and hold such office for the duration of the calendar year.
For each office, the Commission will: open the nominations; accept nominations; close
nominations; and, vote to fill the officer position.
ADOPTION OF MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 2012
At the first meeting of each year, the Planning Commission adopts their meeting
schedule for the ensuing year.
Historically, the Commission has held meetings on the first and third Wednesdays of
each month at 7:00 p.m., to be held in the Board of Supervisors meeting room; the
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee meets on the second Monday of each
month at 7:00 p.m. in the first floor conference room; and, the Development Review &
Regulations Committee meets on the fourth Thursday of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the
first floor conference room.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Memorandum: Elections, Appointments, and Meeting Times
December 16, 2011
Page 2 of 2
COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS FOR 2012
At the first meeting of each year, the Chairman appoints the membership for the
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC) and the Development Review &
Regulations Committee (DRRC). The Chairman also appoints a Planning Commission
liaison to the: Transportation Committee (TC); Historic Resources Advisory Board
(HRAB); Economic Development Commission (EDC); Frederick County Sanitation
Authority (FCSA); and, the Winchester Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS FOR 2012
At the first meeting of each year, the Planning Commission adopts their Bylaws, and
Roles and Responsibilities for the ensuing year. These documents are attached.
Please contact staff should you have questions.
Attachment: Proposed 2012 Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed 2012 Planning Commission Roles and Responsibilities
Proposed 2012 Planning Commission meeting dates and application
deadlines
ERL/bad
PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS
County of Frederick, Virginia
For consideration on January 4, 2012
ARTICLE I - AUTHORIZATION
1-1 The Frederick County Planning Commission is established by and in conformance with
Chapter 21 of the Code of Frederick County, and in accord with the provisions of Section
15.2-2210 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
1-2 The official title of this body shall be the Frederick County Planning Commission,
hereinafter referred to as the "Commission'.
ARTICLE II - PURPOSE
2-1 The primary purpose of the Commission is to advise the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors and to carry out all duties and functions described by the Code of Virginia, as
amended.
ARTICLE 111 - MEMBERSHIP
3-1 The membership of the Commission shall be determined by the Frederick County Board
of Supervisors as specified in Chapter 21 of the Code of Frederick County. Methods of
appointment and terms of office shall be determined by Chapter 21 of the Code of
Frederick Countv.
3-2 Within the first month of initial appointment, new Commissioner appointees shall: 1)
participate in an orientation to familiarize themselves with the operations of the
Department and the Commission, and 2) meet with planning staff representatives in an
effort to review and better understand specific agenda items by no later than their second
Planning Commission meeting.
Page 2
Planning Commission Bylaws—for consideration
January 4, 2012
ARTICLE IV - OFFICERS
4-1 Officers of the Commission shall consist of a chairman, vice-chairman and secretary.
The chairman and vice-chairman must be voting members of the Commission. The
secretary shall be a member of the Commission or a county employee.
4-2 Selection
4-2-1 The officers shall be elected by the voting members of the Commission at
the first meeting of the calendar year.
4-2-2 Nomination of officers shall be made from the floor. Elections of officers
shall follow immediately. A candidate receiving a majority vote of the
entire voting membership shall be declared elected.
4-3 Duties
4-3-1 The Chairman shall:
4-3-1-1 Preside at meetings.
4-3-1-2 Appoint committees.
4-3-1-3 Rule on procedural questions. A ruling on a procedural question by the
chairman shall be subject to reversal by a two-thirds majority vote of the
members present.
4-3-1-4 Report official communications.
4-3-1-5 Certify official documents involving the authority of the Commission.
4-3-1-6 Certify minutes as true and correct copies.
4-3-1-7 Carry out other duties as assigned by the Board of Supervisors and the
Commission.
4-3-2 The Vice -Chairman shall:
4-3-2-1 Assume the full powers of the chairman in the absence or inability of the
chairman to act.
4-1-2-2 When acting as chair, the vice-chairman shall carry out other duties as
assigned by the Board of Supervisors and the Commission Chairman.
Page 3
Planning Commission Bylaws — for consideration
January 4, 2012
4-3-3 The Secretary shall:
4-3-3-1 Ensure that attendance is recorded at all meetings.
4-3-3-2 Ensure that the minutes of all Commission meetings are recorded.
4-3-3-3 Notify members of all meetings.
4-3-3-4 Prepare agendas for all meetings.
4-3-3-5 Maintain files of all official Commission records and �reports. Official
records and reports may be purged in accordance with applicable state
codes.
4-3-3-6 Give notice of all Commission meetings, public hearings and public
meetings.
4-3-3-7 Provide to the Board of Supervisors reports and recommendations of the
Commission.
4-3-3-8 Attend to the correspondence necessary for the execution of the duties and
functions of the Commission.
4-4 Term of Office
4-4-1 Officers shall be elected for a one-year term or until a successor takes office.
Vacancies shall be filled for an unexpired term by a majority vote of the
Commission. In such cases, the newly elected officer shall serve only until the
end of the calendar year or until a successor takes office.
4-5 Temporary Chairman
4-5-1 In the event of the absence of both the chairman and the vice-chairman from any
meeting, the Commission shall designate from among its members a temporary
chairman who shall act for that meeting in the absence of the chairman or vice-
chairman.
Page 4
Planning Commission Bylaws — for consideration
January 4. 2012
ARTICLE V -COMMITTEES
5-1 The Commission shall establish committees necessary to accomplish its purpose.
5-2 In establishing committees, the Commission shall describe the purpose for each
committee.
5-3 Members of the committees shall be appointed by the chairman and will serve for a term
of one year. The chairman may request recommendations from the Commission or
committee members on committee appointments.
5-4 Members of the committees may be Commission members, employees of the County, or
citizen volunteers.
5-5 The chairman and vice-chairman of the Planning Commission shall be ex -officio
members of every committee.
5-6 The committees will elect a chairman and vice-chairman annually. These officers shall
be current Commission members and should represent different Magisterial Districts, if
possible.
5-7 The committees may operate as a committee of the whole or by executive committee with
current and past Commission members serving as members of that committee.
5-8 The committees may establish standing subcommittees whose activities will be a specific
annual responsibility of the parent committee. One executive committee member will
serve as liaison to the standing subcommittee and will assist staff in managing its
activities. Membership will be comprised of past Commission members and citizens.
Membership will be appointed by the chairman of the Committee with concurrence by
the Commission Chairman.
5-9 The committees may establish ad-hoc groups to assist in specific, carefully -defined tasks
for a limited period of time. Important considerations for membership on the ad-hoc
group are skills and experience necessary to assist in providing acceptable solutions.
Membership will be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee with concurrence by
the Commission Chairman.
Page 5
Planning Commission Bylaws — for consideration
January 4, 2012
ARTICLE VI — COMMISSION MEETINGS
6-1 Al the first meeting of each calendar year, the Commission shall fix the date, time, and
place of all its regular meetings for the ensuing calendar year, and shall fix the day on
which a regular meeting shall be continued should the Chairman declare that weather or
other conditions make it hazardous for members to attend.
6-2 Special meetings may be called by the chairman or by the secretary after due notice and
publication by the secretary.
6-3 Notice of all meetings shall be sent by the secretary with an agenda at least five days
before the meeting.
6-4 All meetings of the Commission shall be open to the public except for Closed Sessions
held in accordance with the provision specified under Section 2.2-3711(A) of the Code of
Virginia. 1950, as amended.
6-5 Work sessions shall be held at the adjournment of regular meetings or at the time and
place set by the Commission.
ARTICLE VII - VOTING
7-1 A majority of voting members shall constitute a quorum. No action shall be taken or
motion made unless a quorum is present.
7-2 No action of the Commission shall be valid unless authorized by a majority vote of those
present and voting.
ARTICLE VIII - OPERATING RULES
8-1 Order of Business for a regular meeting
8-1-1 Call to Order.
8-1-2 Adoption of the Agenda.
8-1-3 Consideration of Minutes.
8-1-4 Committee Reports.
Page 6
Planning Commission Bylaws—for consideration
January 4, 2012
8-1-5 Citizen Comments on Items not on the Agenda.
8-1-6 Public Hearings.
8-1-7 Public Meetings.
8-1-8 Planning Commission Discussion.
8-1-9 Other.
8-1-10 Adjournment.
8-2 Minutes
8-2-1 The Commission shall keep minutes of each meeting. The chairman and
secretary shall sign all minutes following approval by the Commission certifying
that the minutes are true and correct. Minutes made available to the public prior
to formal approval by the Commission shall be clearly identified as a draft version
of the meeting.
8-3 Procedures
8-3-1 Parliamentary procedure in the Commission meetings shall be governed by
Robert's Rules of Order, except where otherwise specified in these procedures.
8-3-2 Whenever an agenda item involves a recommendation to the Board of
Supervisors, the Commission shall continue to consider the item until a definite
recommendation is made. If a motion has been made and defeated, additional,
differentmotions may be made concerning the item under consideration.
8-3-3 The initial motion on an agenda item shall be made by a member representing the
application's Magisterial District. If both District representatives are absent or
decline to make the initial motion, then any other Commissioner may act.
8-3-4 Business items on the agenda shall be considered using the following procedures:
8-3-4-1 Report by County Staff.
8-3-4-2 Presentation by Applicant.
8-3-4-3 Citizen Comment.
Page 7
Planning Commission Bylaws — for consideration
January 4, 2012
8-3-4-4 Applicant Response.
8-3-4-5 Staff Summary.
8-3-4-6 Discussion by Commission.
8-3-4-7 Motion and Action by Commission.
8-3-5 Public comment shall be allowed in all cases required by the Code of Virginia,
1950, as amended, or the Code of Frederick Countv. In other cases, the chairman
may allow public comment.
8-3-6 The Commission members may ask questions of clarification and information
after the staff report, applicant presentation, and/or citizen comment.
8-3-7 Petitions, displays, documents or correspondence presented at a meeting may be
made part of the official record of the meeting by motion of the Commission and
are to be kept on file by the secretary, Such items need not be made part of the
published minutes.
8-3-8 Public Hearings
8-3-8-1 The Commission shall hold public hearings on all items for which
hearings are required by the Code of Virginia. 1950. as amended, or by the
Code of Frederick County. Such public hearing shall be advertised and
notifications provided as required by the Code of Virginia, 1950, as
amended.
8-3-8-2 The Chairman may establish special rules for any public hearing at the
beginning of said hearing. These rules may include limitations on the time
of staff report, applicant presentation and citizen comment.
8-3-8-3 In addition to those required by law, the Commission may hold public
hearings on any matter which it deems to be in the public interest. In such
cases, the public hearings shall follow all procedures described for public
hearing in these bylaws.
8-3-8-4 The 90 -day period (Section 165-102.03 of the Frederick County zoning
Ordinance) for the Planning Commission to make a rezoning
recommendation to the Board will start at the date of the first completed
public hearing
8-3-9 Tabling
Page 8
Planning Commission Bylaws— for consideration
January 4, 2012
8-3-9-1 The Planning Commission shall have the authority to table agenda items
45 -days (less if reaching the limits of Section 165-102.03) for any one of
the following:
A) The agenda item does not meet the requirements of the Code of
Virginia, 1950, as amended.
B) The agenda item does not meet the requirements of the Code of
Frederick County.
C) Insufficient information has been provided for the agenda item.
D) Revised proffers have been received from the applicant less than
twenty-one (21) days of the advertised Planning Commission
meeting.
E) Issues or concerns that arise during formal discussion of the
agenda item warrant additional information or study.
F) The applicant provides the Frederick County Planning Department
with a written request to table the agenda item.
G) The Frederick County Planning Department is advised of an
emergency situation that prevents attendance by the applicant.
H) The applicant fails to appear at the meeting in which the
application has been advertised to appear.
8-3-9-2 The applicant shall be permitted to request that an agenda item be tabled
from a scheduled Planning Commission meeting one time. The Planning
Commission shall table the application for a specific period of time to
ensure that the requirements of Section 165-102.03 of the Frederick
County Zoning Ordinance are not exceeded unless the applicant requests a
waiver from this requirement. In no case shall an application be tabled for
more than 12 months from the time the complete application was received
by the Zoning Administator or applicable staff.
8-3-9-3 An application that has been tabled for an unspecified period of time shall
be re -advertised for consideration by the Planning Commission once the
following steps have been completed:
A) The applicant has requested in writing that the agenda item be
Page 9
Planning Commission Bylaws — for consideration
January 4, 2012
considered by the Planning Commission.
B) The applicant has provided all required
Frederick County Planning Department
concerns of the Planning Commission,
8-3-10 Work sessions
information to the
which addresses all
8-3-10-1 The Commission may hold work sessions at which the procedural rules of
these bylaws shall not apply.
8-3-10-2 Work sessions shall be held after the adjournment of regular meetings or
at the time and place set by the Commission.
8-3-10-3 Notice of work sessions shall be sent -to the Planning Commissioners at
least five days before the session.
8-3-10-4 The chairman shall lead the session and require orderly behavior and
discussion.
8-3-10-5 No actions shall be taken or motions made at a work session.
8-3-10-6 Work sessions shall be open to the public. Public comment is not required
at a work session.
8-3-10-7 The secretary shall keep a general record of all work sessions and the
items discussed.
8-3-11 Adjournment
8-3-11-1 In no case shall the Commission consider any new items
after 10:30 P.M. and the meeting shall be adjourned by
11:00 P.M. In the instance that an item begun before
10:30P.M. has not been acted on by the 11:00 P.M. hour,
the Commission may, by majority vote, lift the
adjournment time until a recommendation has been made,
or such time. after 11:00 P.M., as the Commission may fix.
ARTICLE IX - AMENDMENTS
9-1 These bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of the entire voting
membership after thirty days prior notice at any time during the calendar year.
Page 10
Planning Commission Bylaws — for consideration
January 4, 2012
9-2 Planning Commission shall conduct an annual review of these bylaws in
November of each calendar year to ensure their accuracy.
9-3 At the first meeting of the calendar year, the By -Laws will be adopted.
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
For Consideration January 4, 2012
This document has been prepared to assist Frederick County Planning Commissioners in
understanding what their role and responsibilities are in the myriad of activities that they
accept as a member of the Planning Commission. This compilation is a companion
document to the Commission's By -Laws.
APPLICATION COMMUNICATIONS
There are three primary sources of information gathered by and weighed by the Planning
Commission in order to make quality planning recommendations to the Board of
Supervisors. They are ex -parte communications, staff reports and public input.
Ex -Parte Communications:
Individual meetings between Commissioners and an applicant/developer regarding a
specific application shall follow the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. During this
discussion or at any other time prior to action taken by the Commission on the
application, a Planning Commissioner should make no commitments or endorsements.
Any new written materials provided by the applicant to any one Commissioner shall be
made available to all commissioners and staff by the applicant prior to the application
appearing on the agenda. To not do so may result in the application being tabled at the
Planning Commission public hearing.
Staff Application Briefings/Work Sessions:
Prior to the first public hearing being held, staff will hold a briefing for the Planning
Commissioners, with an invitation extended to the Board of Supervisors to participate,
regarding any application deemed sufficiently complicated / controversial to warrant
detailed explanation. The purpose is to apprise the Commissioners regarding the details
of the application, both those items that meet the ordinance and those that do not. This
provides the opportunity for the Commissioners to have a common understanding of the
application prior to the public hearing. The decision to hold a briefing on a specific
application will be made jointly by the Director of Planning and the Chairman of the
Planning Commission. In addition to complexity, the application shall be basically
complete prior to scheduling the briefing.
The Planning Commission may request a work session for an application which, after the
first public hearing is concluded, is subsequently tabled. The purpose of the work session
Page 2
Planning Commission Roles and Responsibilities
Adopted January 5, 2011
is to discuss amongst each other and with staff details of the application, any revised
proffers provided or anticipated by the applicant, and other improvements which could be
made to the application.
For either a briefing or a work session:
-The applicant should attend, but will not have an active role.
-The format of a Planning Commission work session as identified in paragraph 8-
3-10 of the Commission's By -Laws will be used.
In no case will the legal timeline for consideration before the Planning
Commission be changed.
Public Hearing/Meeting:
Efficient and effective public hearings are an essential part of enabling the, Commission
to make reasoned recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.
Every attempt will be made to obtain focused and broad representation of opinion or
information from the public. When possible, specific time limitations will not be used.
However, both rules of order as well as time constraints most appropriate for the specific
application will be implemented when there is either large interest in or controversy
regarding an application.
One constant during this process on both the part of the public, the applicant and the
Commission itself is civility and respect for information offered or a differing opinion.
Deviation from this behavior is unacceptable.
COMMISSIONER DEVELOPMENT:
Each Commissioner shall be committed to preparing for and keeping knowledge current
in order to do the most effective job for the community.
New initial appointees should strive to obtain Planning Commissioner certification from
an acceptable training program within the first year of appointment. This training is
supported by the Planning Department budget
Further continuing education through many offerings should be pursued and will be
supported by the Planning budget as possible. These opportunities should be shared
amongst the number of Commissioners who are serving. Examples include CPEAV's
Page 3
Planning Commission Roles and Responsibilities
Adopted January 5, 2011
annual meeting, other special offerings as well as the American Planning Association's
readings and meetings. A library is maintained by the Planning office.
COMMISSIONER ATTENDANCE
Commissioners are expected to participate in 80% of the regularly scheduled meetings
per year. Members who cannot attend a meeting due to illness, business, and other
governmental or family reasons should notify the Commission Chairman and/or staff
Administrative Assistant prior to the scheduled meeting in order for the absence to be
noted. It may affect quorum considerations.
Especially essential is preparation and readiness for each of the Commission's meetings
in order to use not only the Commission's but the staff's and public's time wisely.
COMMISSION COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS:
Appointments to a Commission committee or liaison assignments are made by the
chairman and shared by the membership. Generally, they involve a once per month
meeting.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
Each Commissioner needs to be familiar with Commonwealth of Virginia information on
conflict of interest. If a Commissioner is unsure if there is conflict, the County Attorney
is the correct resource.
Upon determination that there is or might be perceived to be a conflict, the Commissioner
should state immediately after the agenda item is read that recusal action is necessary
(with, preferably, stating the reason) then step down from the dais until the item is
concluded.
PUBLIC REPRESENTATION:
Commissioners are citizens, too. If there is a public item that is of interest, the
Commissioner should participate, but not identify themselves as members of the
Frederick County Planning Commission unless acting in an official capacity and directed
to do so. Implied endorsements by the Commission should be avoided.
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 December 7, 2011.
PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/
Opequon District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Kevin O. Crosen, Back Creek District; Gary R.
Oates, Stonewall District; J. Stanley Crockett, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee
District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz,
Gainesboro District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; and Kevin McKannan, City of Winchester
Planning Commission Liaison.
ABSENT: Brian Madagan, Opequon District; Philip E. Lemieux, Red Bud District
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning
Director; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; and Renee' S.
Arlotta, Clerk.
CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Upon motion made by
Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission unanimously
adopted the December 7, 2011, Planning Commission agenda for this evening's meeting
MINUTES
Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the
minutes of October 19, 2011 were unanimously approved as presented.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Historic Rescources Advisory Board (HRAB) — 11/15/11 Mtg.
Commissioner Oates reported the HRAB discussed meeting procedures and minutes.
Commissioner Oates reported that the HRAB also reviewed an AT&T Commercial Telecommunications
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2809
Minutes of December 7, 2011
-2 -
Facility Conditional Use Permit for 3392 Back Mountain Road. He said the HRAB voted to approve the
conditional use permit with the condition the applicant work with the planning staff on the tree -save area.
Conservation Easement Authority (CEA) — 11/17/11 Mtg.
Commissioner Triplett reported that the CEA discussed fund-raising efforts.
Commissioner Triplett noted there is a website at w-,Nw.G1FT.or¢ where interested citizens can donate
$1.00 for Frederick's Tomorrow.
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC) — 11/14/11 Mtg.
Commissioner Kriz reported that CPPC discussed the 2012-2013 Capital Improvements
Plan and the Tasker Road Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment, CPPA #01-11, Parcel 86.
City of Winchester Plannine Commission
City Planning Commissioner, Kevin McKannan, reported that the City Planning
Commission has been focusing on some corridor enhancement projects; working on some different CUPS
for nightclubs; and working through a few issues for Old Towne Winchester, primarily balancing the
interests of both residential and business because of the many mixed-use properties in that area. He said
one item coming up is the concept of a form -based code and incorporating it with the overall
Comprehensive Policy Plan.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Chairman Wilmot called for citizen comments on any issue not on this evening's agenda.
No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the citizen comment portion of the meeting.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
DISCUSSION OF THE TASKER ROAD CPPA (COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2810
Minutes of December 7, 2011
-3 -
Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that only one Comprehensive
Policy Plan Amendment was received this year, for Tasker Road, Parcel 86, CPPA 401-11. Mr. Ruddy
reported this is an 11.35 -acre change in Land Use Classification from Institutional to Residential and the
property is located on the east side of Tasker Road and north of Rutherford Lane, approximately 0.7 miles
south of I-81, Exit 310 Interchange. Mr. Ruddy noted that when the Comprehensive Plans and Programs
Executive Committee initially evaluated this request, issues of concern included transportation,
compatibility of uses, design standards, and potential impacts. The CPPC expressed significant concern
regarding access to this site directly from Tasker and Rutherford Lanes and they requested that the
applicant work with VDOT to discuss how the property would be accessed, should it be developed either
institutionally or residentially. VDOT's response was that the parcel could be served off the existing
Rutherford Lane with the appropriate improvements to Tasker Road at the time development occurs.
Mr. Ruddy reported the CPPC recommended approval of this CPPA for a change in the
land use designation from Institutional to Residential at their November 14, 2011 meeting. He said the
CPPC remained somewhat concerned about the transportation side of development, but they moved the
application forward with a recommendation of approval, provided the applicant continue to look at inter -
parcel connectivity and other means of access as this project moves forward.
Mr. Ruddy noted that Mr. Ron Mislowsky with Patton Harris Rust & Associates
(PHR&A), was present this evening to answer questions from the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Unger had a question regarding the zoning of property to the south of
Parcel 86 and if there were any structures on that property. Mr. Ruddy replied the property to the south is
zoned RA (Rural Area) and there is an existing residential structure. I
No other questions or issues were raised by the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission believed this CPPA was ready to go forward to the Board of Supervisors for discussion as
presented.
DISCUSSION OF THE DRAFT CIP (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN)
Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, presented the Draft 2012-2013 Capital
Improvements Plan (CIP) for Frederick County. Mr. Ruddy stated that on November 14, 2011, the
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC) Executive Committee met with County
Department and Agency representatives to discuss their individual capital improvement project requests,
including new projects and modifications to previous requests associated with the 2012-2013 CIP. He
said following the CPPC discussion, the Executive Committee endorsed the 2012-2013 CIP and endorsed
its conformance with the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. The CPPC Executive Committee
forwarded the CIP to the Planning Commission for discussion.
Mr. Ruddy reported the number of projects in this year's CIP has increased from 77 to 92
and many of the new projects revolve around the airport. He noted that representatives from the various
departments and agencies were present this evening to answer questions from the Planning Commission.
Mr. Ruddy reviewed some of the projects listed on the CIP and the various corresponding maps with the
Commission. Mr. Ruddy concluded by stating that this process continues to reinforce the connection
between the CIP, the Comprehensive Policy Plan, and rezoning applications.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2811
Minutes of December 7, 2011
-4 -
Commissioner Thomas asked for further clarification regarding the CIP Table which lists
the projects and their associated costs. Commissioner Thomas assumed that if the Commission endorses
the CIP, the Commission would be recommending funding of everything shown for 2012-2013. Mr.
Ruddy explained that the Planning Commission's role is typically to look at the projects themselves and
to recognize those projects' conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan in general. Mr. Ruddy
said the funding discussion is certainly a guide, but the actual funding of projects comes through the
County's budget process. He added that the monetary estimates provides some guidance as to the
anticipated costs, but the Commission's role and action would not be in approving a budget to purchase
these projects in upcoming years.
Commissioner Kriz, who is a also a member of the CPPC Executive Committee, pointed
out that everything on the CIP project list has been working hand -in -glove with the Comprehensive
Policy Plan, so things are going well according to the way all the County's departments are working
together. Commissioner Kriz complemented the various departments on their efforts of working together
on this particular budget in their attempts to get the projects which are needed and not duplicated
throughout the County. As an example, Commissioner Kriz cited the schools and parks using the same
buildings.
Chairman Wilmot stated that the Commission's focus should be whether a facility, its
construction, the parks, etc. are in the appropriate locations. She said this aspect of the CIP is much
improved and all of the work by each of the organizations and agencies is appreciated. Chairman Wilmot
made an additional comment about the equipment at the bottom of the list; she suggested that the
Commission's comments deal with all other projects except for the equipment list, because those are not
location driven.
Mr. Ruddy said he would forward all of the Planning Commission's comments to the
Board of Supervisors for their discussion of the CIP.
DISCUSSION OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FOR RA (RURAL AREAS) AND
RP (RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE) USES
Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this discussion is regarding a proposed
ordinance amendment to revise Chapter 165, Zoning, to include additional conditional uses in the RA
(Rural Areas) and RP (Residential Performance) Zoning Districts. Ms. Perkins said the proposed
amendment would add "public buildings" as a conditional use in the RA and RP Districts; "libraries" as a
conditional use in the RA District; and "museums" as a conditional use in the RP District. She said the
amendment also proposes to remove the definition of "government services office" because it is very
similar to "public building," as well as update the corresponding supplementary use regulations.
Ms. Perkins commented this amendment may seem familiar to the members of the
Planning Commission; she said the Commission discussed this topic a few meetings ago, however, the
uses were all shown as "permitted uses." She noted that when this was forwarded to the Board of
Supervisors for discussion, the Board chose to change the "permitted uses" to "conditional uses." Ms.
Perkins said the staff opted to take the proposal back to the Development Review and Regulations
Committee (DRRC) because there was another change that came into play dealing with the definition for
"government services offices." She said the proposal is to remove the "government service office"
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2812
Minutes of December 7. 2011
-5 -
definition and use the "public buildings" definition. There were also several supplemental use regulations
pertaining to the government services offices and it is proposed to strike the text of the government
services and add public buildings in its place. Lastly, she said there is a proposed amendment to remove
the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) requirement for that use because it will now be covered under
a conditional use instead of a permitted use.
Commissioner Thomas raised an issue regarding the addition of museums under the
Residential Performance Districts; he asked if the definition of museums was well defined or if there were
subsequent codes identifying what it is. He provided an example of someone in a residential district with
a five -car garage containing four 20 -year-old automobiles and asked if that could be considered a
museum. Commissioner Thomas was concerned about compatibility with adjacent neighbors. Ms.
Perkins said museums were not defined in the zoning ordinance and the staff would subsequently refer to
a dictionary. She pointed out that since it would only be a conditional use, the Board of Supervisors
would have to deem it appropriate at that particular location.
Commissioner Thomas also questioned the practicality of someone investing money to
start a museum in a residential area under a conditional use permit (CUP). He likened it to someone
starting a Burger King business on a CUP. Commissioner Thomas questioned the appropriateness of
having a CUP for a museum in a residential area. Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, provided an
example of a museum in a residential area within the City of Winchester, which was the Patsy Cline
Museum. Mr. Lawrence said if there is something in an RP District of this nature, such that there is
history behind the structure and there is enough community support and interest, although it is within a
residential neighborhood, there should be an opportunity for this to occur. Mr. Lawrence noted the CUP
process provides the opportunity for the public to come forward and express opinions. Ms. Perkins
provided another similar example with the Bowman Library, which is located in an RP District.
Commissioner Thomas raised the issue of parking in a residential area. It was noted (that the Board of
Supervisors had requested the CUP with all three uses, libraries, museums, and public buildings.
No other issues were raised. Ms. Perkins said she would forward the Commission's
comments and concerns to the Board of Supervisors for their discussion.
DISCUSSION OF THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF PC BYLAWS AND THE ROLES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES
Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that the Planning Commission's guiding
documents, the Bylaws, and the Roles and Responsibilities, are reviewed each fall, revised as appropriate,
and then adopted during the first meeting of the calendar year. Mr. Lawrence said the staff identified only
minor modifications to the Bylaws and is presenting those revisions at this evening's meeting for the
Planning Commission's consideration. Mr. Lawrence explained that should the Commission concur with
the suggested revisions, the staff will place the revised Bylaws, and the Roles and Responsibilities
documents on the Commission's first meeting agenda in 2012 for adoption.
Mr. Lawrence stated the three suggested revisions to the Bylaws include: 1) correct
chapter references from Chapter 165 to Chapter 21; 2) under Section 8-3-6, the word "/or" should be
added so the sentence will read, "The Commission members may ask questions of clarification and
information after the staff report, applicant presentation, and/or citizen comment; and 3) under Section 8 -
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2813
Minutes of December 7, 2011
sm
3-9-1 D), removal of the word, "not" and, therefore, the sentence would read, "...The Planning
Commission may table agenda items if... Revised proffers have been received from the applicant less
than twenty-one (21) days of the advertised Planning Commission meeting."
The members of the Commission agreed with the revisions presented. Mr. Lawrence
stated that he would place the revised Bylaws and the Roles and Responsibilities documents on the
Commission's first meeting agenda in January 2012 for adoption by the Planning Commission.
CANCELATION OF THE DECEMBER 21, 2011 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Chairman Wilmot announced there were no pending agenda items for the Planning
Commission's December 21, 2011 meeting.
Commissioner Kriz made a motion to cancel the December 21, 2011, regular meeting of
the Planning Commission. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and unanimously
passed.
SENSENY ROAD/ EASTERN FREDERICK URBAN AREAS PLAN — FACILITATOR GROUP
MEETING
Chairman Wilmot announced there will be a Senseny Road/Eastern I Frederick Urban
Areas Plan Facilitator Group meeting on Wednesday, December 21, 2011, under the leadership of
Commissioner Chris Mohn, to review and discuss the first iterations of the Plan.
Commissioner Kriz wanted to thank all of the people involved in the four working groups
who worked very hard during the month of November on the Senseny Road/Easterni Frederick Urban
Areas Plan. Commissioner Kriz said the groups were asked to accomplish their work in the month of
November, which they did; he said the groups turned in their information so the meeting could be held on
November 21. Commissioner Kriz wanted to especially thank the Natural Resources Group, lead by Mr.
Jeff Rezin; the Urban Areas and Residential Development Group, lead by Mr. John Conrad; the Business
Development Group, lead by Mr. Evan Wyatt; and the Transportation Group, lead by CI mmissioner Phil
Lemieux.
LOW -IMPACT DENSITY CHANGES
Commissioner Thomas had a question concerning the Low -Impact Density Changes
which were discussed by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors at their noon work
session on December 7, 2011. Commissioner Thomas asked what the process for this would be for public
hearing. Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated the proposed subdivision and zoning ordinance
changes discussed would accommodate some low -impact design proposals implemented to deal with
storm water management quality and quantity. Mr. Lawrence said the four changes proposed deal with
enabling waivers, so that someone in a residential area could do a private street and request a waiver of
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2814
Minutes of December 7, 2011
-7 -
the curb and gutter in exchange for doing some type of low -impact design. Mr. Lawrence noted that the
staff will report all the comments received at the work session to the Board of Supervisors at their
December 14 regular meeting. He said if everyone is comfortable with the revisions, the staff will start
the public hearing process. Mr. Lawrence noted this will come before the Planning Commission as a
public hearing.
Commissioner Thomas noted this issue of low -impact design has been discussed by the
committee for about three years. He felt an opportunity may be missed if an incentive is not included to
encourage the use of low -impact design. Commissioner Thomas said at the work session, one specific
developer's proposal for a specific development was presented. He didn't think this use was encouraged
to occur anywhere else. Additionally, he thought some potential was missed with the absence of utilizing
porous driveways, instead of the typical impermeable surface. Commissioner Thomas 'stated that from a
Planning Commission's standpoint, he believed the ordinance should be crafted in some way to
encourage developers to use the low -impact design for wide -spread use throughout the county.
Commissioner Thomas also expressed concern regarding the complete elimination of curb because of the
potential for the road edge to break down. He recommended the use of zero -profile curb for all roadway
edges.
Mr. Lawrence stated the State has assigned the task of developing a better storm water
management plan to the Public Works Department, because they handle storm water management for the
Frederick County. The State's storm water management regulations impose a 2014 deadline for the
County. Mr. Lawrence said as the Public Works Department comes up with techniques which are
acceptable within the community and which are workable from an infiltration perspective, the Planning
Department Staff will work closely with them to make sure that the zoning and subdivision ordinances are
appropriate to reach those goals.
Mr. Lawrence said the work session discussion today centered on four relatively minor
changes to help an example development get going. He said as the storm water management regulations
are reviewed over the next couple years, the zoning and subdivision ordinances will be evaluated and
areas that need to have incentives will need to be identified.
ADJOURNMENT
No further business remained to be discussed. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz
and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, the meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. by a unanimous vote.
Respectfully submitted,
June M. Wilmot, Chairman
Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2815
Minutes of December 7, 2011
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #10-11
JOSEPH RACEY, SR. AND AT&T MOBILITY
< Staff Report for the Planning Commission
Prepared: December 12, 2011
w 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 them in making a decision on
this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter.
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 01/04/12 Pending
Board of Supervisors: 01/25/12 Pending
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to enable the construction of a 199 foot Monopole
Telecommunications Facility with a 3,200 square foot equipment compound with an 11 foot 5
inch by 20 foot equipment shelter.
Should the Planning Commission find this use appropriate, Staff would suggest the following
conditions be placed on the CUP:
All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
2. The tower shall be available for collocating personal wireless services providers.
3. A minor site plan shall be approved by Frederick County.
4. The tower shall be removed by the applicant or property owner within twelve (12)
months of abandonment of operation.
5. In the event a telecommunications tower is not erected within twelve (12) months of the
approval of this Conditional Use Permit, the CUP will be deemed invalid.
6. Any expansion or modification of this use will require a new Conditional Use Permit.
Following the requisite public hearing, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission
to offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors.
Page 2
Conditional Use Permit 410-11
Joseph Racey, Sr., and AT&T Mobility
December 12, 2011
LOCATION: This property is located at 3392 Back Mountain Road.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 59-A-6
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
Zoned: RA (Rural Areas)
Land Use: Residential
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE:
North:
RA (Rural Areas)
South:
RA (Rural Areas)
East:
RA (Rural Areas)
West:
RA (Rural Areas)
Land Use:
Residential
Land Use:
Residential
Land Use:
Residential
Land Use:
Residential
PROPOSED USE: This application is for a 199 foot Monopole Telecommunications Facility
with a 3,200 square foot equipment compound with an 11 foot 5 inch by 20 foot equipment
shelter.
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Department of Transportation: Please see attached letter dated July 1, 2011 from
the Department of Transportation.
Fire and Rescue: Requiring a key box to be installed for access. Plans approved.
Inspections Department: Structure shall comply with The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building
Code and Section 312, use group U (Utility and Miscellaneous) of The International Building
Code 2009. The structure is required to comply with Chap 15 & 16 of the IBC 2006 for
structural load, as well as Section 3108 for Towers. Fencing greater than 6' in height requires a
building permit. The new 195' tower shall be located and equipped with step bolts and ladders
so as to provide ready access for inspection purposes. The tower shall not cross or encroach
upon any street or other public space, or encroach upon any privately owned property without
written consent of the owner of the encroached -upon property. (See 3108.2, Location and
Access.) Special instructions per Chap 17 IBC 2006 apply to this structure. Plans submitted
for review shall be sealed by a Virginia Registered Design Professional. Equipment shelters
require a building permit. Snow bridging requires a building permit. Antennas require a
building permit.
Page 3
Conditional Use Permit #10-1 1
Joseph Racey, Sr., and AT&T Mobility
December 12, 2011
Frederick County Sanitation Authority: The Sanitation Authority does not serve this area.
Winchester -Frederick Countv Health Department: Health Department has no objections to
the request so long as no existing or proposed drainfields or wells are affected.
Winchester Regional Airport: In accordance with the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2294,
and the Federal Aviation Administration Notice of Proposed Construction, FAA Form 7460-1
applicant is required to be filed with the Federal Aviation Administration with a copy forwarded
to this office for review and comment. Upon completion of the aeronautical study by the FAA, a
copy must be forwarded to this office for final review comment. Any temporary construction
equipment exceeding the overall height of the proposed structure including all
appurtenances will require filing of a separate 7460-1 form with the FAA before
construction begins and requires a separate review by the Airport Authority. The form can
be found online at the FAA's website http://forms.1aa.gov/. Towers over 200 feet AGL are
required by FAA to be lighted and depending on the proximity of a tower to an airport, towers of
less height are required to be lit. For towers between 150 and 199 feet AGL, the Winchester
Regional Airport requests all structures to be marked and lighted in accordance with FAA
Advisory Circular 70/7460-1 K, Change 2. Final comment on behalf of the Airport Authority
will be withheld pending a review by this office of the Determination Study completed by the
Federal Aviation Administration.
Historic Resources Advisory Board: Please see the attached letter dated November 22, 2011
from the HRAB.
Planning and Zoning: The 2030 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County
("Comprehensive Plan") provides guidance when considering any land use action. This
proposed 199 foot monopole -type commercial telecommunication facility is located on property
identified within the Comprehensive Plan to remain rural and is not part of any land study. The
properties immediately adjacent to this proposed CUP are currently zoned RA (Rural Areas)
Zoning District. The applicant has applied for a Conditional Use Permit for a 199 foot monopole
-type commercial telecommunications facility on a 75+/ -acre property, with the nearest
dwelling(s) being approximately 800 feet from this facility.
The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for commercial telecommunication facilities in
the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The
zoning ordinance requires that all proposed telecommunication facilities be subject to additional
performance standards in order to promote orderly economic development and mitigate the
negative impacts to adjoining properties, residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas
and properties of significant historic values. The Frederick County I-[istoric Resources Advisory
Board (HRAB) via the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report, has identified three
Page 4
Conditional Use Permit #10-11
Joseph Racey, Sr., and AT&T Mobility
December 12, 2011
potentially significant structures within the immediate area of the subject site; one structure is
located on-site. (See HRAB comments.)
Furthermore, the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires an applicant to provide
confirmation that an attempt was made to collocate on an existing telecommunication facility,
and possible co -location structures. The applicant has provided an inventory of existing
telecommunication facilities, and no other telecommunication facility or possible co -location
opportunity structures exist in this area. This proposed commercial telecommunication facility
will be positioned to provide the existing and future land uses in this area of the County with
telecommunication needs.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 01/04/12 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
This is a request to seek approval for the construction of a 199 foot Monopole
Telecommunications Facility with a 3,200 square foot equipment compound with an 11 foot 5
inch by 20 foot equipment shelter. Should the Planning Commission find this use appropriate,
Staff would suggest the following conditions be placed on the CUP:
1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
2. The tower shall be available for collocating personal wireless services providers.
3. A minor site plan shall be approved by Frederick County.
4. The tower shall be removed by the applicant or property owner within twelve (12)
months of abandonment of operation.
5. In the event a telecommunications tower is not erected within twelve (12) months of the
approval of this Conditional Use Permit, the CUP will be deemed invalid.
6. Any expansion or modification of this use will require a new Conditional Use Permit.
Following the requisite public hearing, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission
to offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors.
O Application
93 Parcels
dr Building Footprints
61 (Business, Neighborhood District)
B2 (Business, General Distrist)
63 (Business, Industrial Transition District)
EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)
® HE (Higher Education District)
M1 (Industrial, Light District)
M2 (Industrial, General District)
4M MH1 (Mobile Home Community District)
® MS (Medicat Support District)
OM (Office - Manufacturing Park)
R4 (Residential Planned Community District)
40 R5 (Residential Recreational Community District)
RA (Rural Area District)
RP (Residential Performance District)
-0
O
e
CUP#10-11
Joseph Racey and ATT
PIN: 59-A-6
Monopole Tower:
199ft Communication Facility
0 225 450 900 Feet
F��
Note:
Frederick County Dept of
Planning Developments
107 N Kent
St
Suite 202
Winchester, VA 22601
540 - 665 - 5651
Map Created: Dec 1, 2011
Staff: djohnston
tProposed
Tower Location (apprx)
O
Application
Parcels
dip
Building Footprints
...
Bt (Business, Neighborhood District)
B2 (Business, General Distrist)
OW
B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District)
EM (Extractive Manufacturing District)
4W
HE (Higher Education District)
®
M7 (industrial, Light District)
M2 (industrial, General District)
40
MH1 (Mobile Home Community District)
40
MS (Medical Support District)
OM (Office - Manufacturing Park)
,
R4 (Residential Planned Community District)
®
RS (Residential Recreational Community District)
RA (Rural Area District)
RP (Residential Performance District)
Topo
CUP # 10 - 11
Joseph Racey and
PIN: 59-A-6
Monopole Tower:
199ft Communication Facility
0 225 450
59313
59
28L
59 A 28C
59 A 28
59 A 28D
Note:
Frederick County Dept of
Planning Developments
107 N Kent
S}
Suite 202
Winchester, VA 22601
540 - 665 - 5651
Map Created: Dec 1, 2011
Staff: djohnston
Feet
,CO M1MOAWTAI,TH of VIRGIXIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -
811 Commerce Road '
Staumon, VA 24 1-9029
VDOTVIRG1NWGOV -
GREGORY A. WHIRLEY
COMMISSIONER
Dear Ms. Anderson:
We have reviewed the above referenced plan dated May 24, 2011. We offer the following
comments:
1. The sight distance profile on sheet A-4 needs to indicate the legal speed limit of 55 mph
was used to determine >the sight distance.. For a 55 mph speed ,limit, thesight distance in -
both directions needs to be 610'.
2. teeg
distance of 14.5' from the sfmeoRoute ac that was used to
dermine thesig "distan e. Tlie location doeof appear to in accordance
with the
Road Design Manual. Appendix F. i
3. The vehicle shown on the sight distance profile does not appear to be perpendicular to the
road due to the sharp carve prior to Route 600. The entrance needs to be designed to
allow the vehicles to sit perpendicular to the road, and should be perpendicular a
minimum of 25' before starting the turn. We also recommend using a turning template to
determine if the largest vehicle that will be accessing the site can make the sharp turn.
This may be difficult during construction for the larger vehicles to maneuver.
4. A sight distance easement will be needed for any area along the line of sight where it is
outside of the right-of-way to ensure that no objects can be located in this area that would .
obscure the line of sight.
5. Provide an enlargement of the entrance showing the width of the entrance„ andthe radii
to ensure it is conformance with our standards. The type of entrance that can be used
depends on the average daily trips to the site, and this needs to be shown on the plan. .
6. There appear to be. trees shown within the sight distance triangle that have not been
shown to be removed, and appear to block the line of sight.
r
u WE KEEP VIRGINIA MVING
O
.m
Qt-
' yt �
s
Ms: Tracy Anderson
July 1, 2011`
Page 2 of 2
7. Any grading along the embankment that is needed to obtain the _sight distance needs to be
shown on the plan.
8. The right-of-way along Route 600 needs to be shown on the plan, and ensure that where.,
the driveway runs parallel itis outside of the right-of-way.. We also recommend shifting
the road so it is not parallel to Route 600 because it could provide confusion to the
drivers on Route 600::
9. Show all existing entrances on Route 600:
10. Label and dimension the edge of pavement, shoulder,, centerline, and right-of-way line on
Route 600.
Please provide a comment response letter indicating how. the above referenced comments have
been addressed. The comment response should, be as specific as possible,. and include the page
number where the information can be found. All corrections to. the plan should be highlighted'.
If you have any questions, please give me a call of 540-535-1828.
Sincerel
Kim Yeatman ` (/
Land Development- Permit Specialist
2275 Northwestern Pike
Winchester, VA 22603
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540!665-6395
November 22, 2011
Tracy L. Anderson
Donohue & Stearns, PLC
801 North Fairfax Street, Suite 209
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
RE: Application Requesting a Conditional Use Permit Application for a 199 foot Monopole
Telecommunications Facility — AT&T - 3392 Back Mountain Road
Property Identification Number (PIN): 59-A-6
Current Zoning District: RA (Rural Area)
Dear Ms. Anderson:
The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the above referenced
conditional use permit application at their meetings on October 18, 2011 and November 15, 2011. The
HRAB reviewed information associated with the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report, and
information provided by AT&T (photographs of the historic properties, monopole simulations, site plan,
NEPA Report).
The proposal seeks to construct a 1.99 foot monopole commercial telecommunications tower with
accessory equipment building on a property located at 3392 Back Mountain Road in the Back Creek
Magisterial District.
Historic Resources Advisory Board Concerns
The Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley, published by the National Park Service, does not
identify the proposed tower site or the surrounding areas as being part of a battlefield. The Rural
Landmarks Survey Report for Frederick County Virginia identifies three potentially significant structures
within the immediate area of the subject site; one structure Is located on-site. The sites that are listed
in the survey are:
e House, Route 600 (#34-193) — Located on site, Potentially Significant
• Taylor Furnace Farm — (#34-734) — Potentially Significant
e Saint John's Lutheran Church (#34-360) — Potentially Significant
After reviewing this information and the applicant's materials and proposals, the Historic Resource
Advisory Board (HRAB) recommended that the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors
approve the proposed conditional use permit application with the following conditions:
The HRAB stated that a tree preservation area should be identified on the site plan to help
screen the proposed tower and compound.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Ms. Tracy L. Anderson
Re: Conditional Use Permit Application for AT&T
November 22, 2011
Page 2
e The HRAB suggested that the applicant contribute to the Frederick County Historic Property
Designation Program (Plaque Program). This is a voluntary program that allows Frederick
County to award numbered plaques to formally acknowledge structures that have an
architectural and historical significance.
Please contact me with any questions concerning these comments from the HRAB.
Sincerely, f
Candice Perkins, AICP
Senior Planner
CEP/bad
cc: Rhoda Kriz, HRAB Chair
Submittal Deadline
P/CMeeting
BOS Meeting
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
1. Applicant (check one): Property Owner = Other
NAME: AT&T Mobility
ADDRESS: c/o Tracy Anderson, Donohue & Stearns, PLC, 801 N. Fairfax St., Alexandria, VA 22314
TELEPHONE: (703) 549-1123, Ext. 104
2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property:
Joseph H. Racey, Sr.
3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of
your road or street)
3392 Back Mountain Road, Winchester, VA 22602
4. The property has a road frontage of 3.315 feet and a depth of 876 feet and
consists of 75.73 acres. (Please be exact)
5. The property is owned by Joseph H. Racey, Sr. as
evidenced by deed from Frances Cao Clifton (previous owner) recorded in
deed book no. 900 on page soft as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court, County of Frederick.
!ol
Property Identification Number (P.LN
Magisterial District Back Creek
Current Zoning RA
WffX— 1
5
0
7. Adjoining Property:
0
USE ZONING
North Residential RA
East Residential RA
South Residential RA
West Residential RA
8. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing)
An unmanned telecommunications facility consisting of twelve (12) sector antennas mounted on a proposed 199' monopole
(including a 4' lightning rod) with a 50'x 50' equipment compound to be located at the base of the monopole.
9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed:
The only structures proposed to be erected on the property are the above-described 199' monopole with antennas, a
3,200 sf equipment compound with surrounding chainlink fence, a 11'5" x 20' equipment shelter on a concrete pad, and
an ice bridge connecting the shelter to the proposed monopole.
10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property
adjacent to both sides and rear and in front of (across street from) the property
where the requested use will be conducted. (Continue on back if necessary.)
These people will be notified by mail of this application:
Name and Property Identification Number
Address
Name Dorothy Stant
127 Geronimo Trail
Winchester, VA 22602
Property # 59 -A -6A
Name Pressley Pullen, Jr.
3545 Back Mountain Road
Winchester, VA 22602
Property#59-A-6B & 59 -A -6C
Name Duncan & Joan Pollitt
3401 Back Mountain Road
Winchester, VA 22602
Property # 59 -A -6E
NameCarl Hales
241 Providence Lane
Bluemont,VA 20135
Property # 59 -A -28G
Name St. Johns Lutheran Church
c/o Thos. Rosenberger, 2070 Back Mtn. Rd.
Winchester, VA 22602
Property # 59-A-5
Namel-arry Pangle
40909 Forest Glen Drive
Leesburg, VA 20175
Property # 59-A-28 F
Name Crossing Path, LLC
255 Crossing Paths Lane
Winchester, VA 22602
Property # 59-A-28 E
0
0
Name and Property Identification Number
Address
Name David Brown
3240 Back Mountain Road
Winchester, VA 22602
Property # 59-3-16
Name Mt Falls Hunt Club, Inc.
c/o Gary Lantz, 3009 Saratoga Drive
Winchester, VA 22601
Property # 59-A-1
Name Stephen Rosenberger, Trustee
301 Millwood Avenue
Winchester, VA 22601
Property #59-A-3
Name Hugh Pitcock
3612 Back Mountain Road
Winchester, VA 22602
Property # 59-A-4
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name
Property #
Name
Property 9
11. Please use this page for your sketch of the property. Show proposed and/or existing
structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines.
['3
I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the governing body
of Frederick County, Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I understand that the
sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at
least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after
the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit
authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or
Planning and Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed use will be
conducted.
Signature of Applicant
. Signature of Owner
Owners' Mailing Address /3392 Back Mountain Ro , Winchester, VA 22602
Owners' Telephone No. (540) 877-3149
9
I h �
,4k.
.. LANDOWNERAFF'IDAVrr - -
As per § 165-204.19(B)(7) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the undersigned, Mr.
Joseph H. Racey, Sr., owner of Parcel 59-A-6 located at 3392 Back. Mountain Road in
Winchester, Virginia 22602, hereby acknowledges that they may be held responsible for the
removal of the commercial telecommunications facility proposed on this site.
Mr. Jo eph H. Racey,.Sr., Owner
e State/Commonwealth of U'lr[eCI I tJ t 1 . in the City/County of
n J p y,, information is accurate and
h H Race Sr state that the above mfo .
-'.
... true.
r0�a Notary Public of the County and State ^ aforesaid,-. hereby
certify that Mr. Joseph H. Racey, personally known to me to be the affiant in the fo . 'i�gt
affidavit, personally appeared before me this day and having been by me duly swoVK. 411
and says that the facts set forth in the above affidavit are true and correct : �o
v.
d MY O
TILL- : C7 : coM&,,] g, �N * < 3
Witness my hand and official seal this the day o 2011. � . NUMar:R :`Q
318568
O fGZ
My Commission expires:
/ �► / an
Notary Public
✓ x
44vW
�4 t+
Notary Public
�4 t+
0
0
Special Limited Power of Attorney
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Website: www.co.frederick.va.us
Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia
107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone (540) 665-5651 Facsimile (540) 665-6395
Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We)
(Name) Jos h N. Ra ay, Sir.
(Phone) 1540)577-3149
(Address) 3392 Back Mountain Road, Wncheslor, VA 22602
the owner(s) of all those tincts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by
Instrument No. 900 _ on Page 900 and is described as
Parcel: _ Lot: 6 Block: A Section: 59 Subdivision:
do hereby make, constitute and appoint:
(Name) Donohue & Stearns, PLC
(Address) 801_ N. Fairfax St. Suite 209, Alexandra, Virginia 22314
(Phone) (703) 549-1123
To act as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place and stead with full power and
authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described
Property, including:
_Rezoning {including proffers}
�✓ ._Conditional Use Permit
M Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final)
_Subdivision
=Site Plan
Variance or Appeal
My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously
approved proffered conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from �t�he�, day it is sibmed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified.
In witness them I (we) have hereto set my nd and seal this rf day of _ "'' 2. � f , 20C_,
State of Virginia, City/County of e To -wit:
1, i\C-a1. �G a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid,
certify tha"L-#he person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has
acknowledgod the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this -7 day of "r , 20 1 t
My Commission Expires: if� .3Y, i�c' 13
Notary Public Roberta Deane Hardy
Notary Public
Keg. a U71490
My Commission Expires CP1 3e -14,j
ACO PROPERTY ADVISORS, INC.
NEW YORK OFFICE
184 EDIE ROAD
SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866
FAX (518) 584-9967
MARYLAND OFFICE
7050 OAKLAND MILLS RD., STE 130
COLUMBIA, MD21046
FAX (443) 864-5773
STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION
[To supplement Item No. 12 (additional comments) on the Conditional Use Permit
("CUP") Application]
The Applicant, New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC dba AT&T Mobility ("AT&T"), is
licensed by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to provide state-of-the-
art wireless communications services within Frederick County, Virginia. Applicant seeks
a CUP pursuant to §§165-103.01-165-103.08 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance
("Zoning Ordinance") for a wireless communication facility ("WCF") to be comprised of
twelve (12) antennas mounted at a centerline height of one hundred and ninety feet
(190') above ground level ("AGL") on a new one hundred and ninety-five foot
("195"')monopole (199', including 4 ' lightning rod). The facility is proposed to be
located on Tax Map Parcel No. 59-A-6, 3392 Back Mountain Road, Winchester, Virginia
22602. The proposal will also include the installation of a 1l' -5'x20' ancillary equipment
shelter and required utility connections near the base of the monopole. The entire 40'x
80' compound will be surrounded by a eight -foot high (8') chain linked fence with
appropriate landscaping. Access to the facility will be from Back Mountain Road along
a proposed 20' wide drive.
COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING ORDINANCE
The subject parcel is located within the Rural Areas ("RA") District. Section 165-204.19
of the Zoning Ordinance deals with the siting of telecommunications facilities and their
consideration for installation in RA districts through the conditional use permit/public
hearing process. AT&T's CUP application is in compliance with the requirements for
submission noted in §165-204.19(A)(1)-(4) and the standards set forth in §165-
204.19(B)(l)-(7). Site plans of the proposal have been included pursuant to §165-103.06 of
the Zoning Ordinance.
The minimum lot area in the RA district is two (2) acres per §165-401.05 of the Zoning
Ordinance. The parcel on which the proposed wireless communications facility
("WCF") would be sited ("subject parcel") is 75.73 acres, and because the WCF will be
Real Estate
Consultants • Development • Brokerage • Wireless Services
•
AFM
Is ACO PROPERTY ADVISORS, INC.
MNEW YORK OFFICE MARYLAND OFFICE
C0 184 EDIE ROAD 7050 OAKLAND MILLS RD., STE 130
SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866 COLUMBIA, MD 21046
FAX (518) 584-9967 FAX (443) 864-5773
located in a leased area, the lot size of the subject parcel is not proposed to change with
this project. Therefore, lot size remains satisfied.
The only state road adjacent to the subject parcel is Back Mountain Road. Section 165-
401.07(A)(1) requires a setback of at least sixty feet (60') from the edge of the right-of-
way of a secondary road. Proposed improvements will be located approximately five
hundred sixty one feet (561') from Back Mountain Road. Parcels in the RA district must
have side and rear yards of at least fifty feet (50') (if adjoining parcel is six (6) acres or
less) or one hundred feet (100') (if adjoining parcel is more than six (6) acres). In this
case, the improvements will comply because they will be located 315' and 217' from the
side and rear property lines respectfully. Section 165-401.08(A)(1)(c) mandates that lots
fronting on existing state roads have a setback of two hundred and fifty feet (250') at the
front setback line. Here, there is a setback of approximately 561'.
AT&T will comply with all applicable federal regulations regarding interference and
electro -magnetic radiation.
The objective of this site is to provide enhanced coverage along Back Mountain Rd -SR -
600, SR -608 Wardensville Grade, SR -622 Cedar Creek Grade, SR -628 Middle Road,
Mount Williams, and surrounding communities. The site will provide good overlapping
coverage with existing sites in Winchester, VA. Please see the attached propagation
maps showing anticipated coverage from the proposed facility.
In cases where visibility is a concern, a monopole design is typically used instead of a
lattice or guyed tower. In this case, the use of a monopole will lessen the visual impact.
The Winchester Regional Airport is requesting that the top of the monopole be marked
or lighted. If the Board requires the tower to be lit as a condition of approval, then AT&T
is proposing the installation of a lighting shield which will minimize the visual impact of
the lights to the surrounding area.
An overall pole height of 195' AGL is necessary for radio frequency ("RF") propagation
to sufficiently address the need in this area. The predicted coverage assumes a 12 -
antenna array mounted at 195' AGL. Flush -mounted antennas are not appropriate in
this case because this site is designed to provide coverage to an area not currently served
Real Estate
Consultants • Development • Brokerage • Wireless Services
0 0
ACO PROPERTY ADVISORS, INC.
NEW YORK OFFICE
184 EDIE ROAD
SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866
FAX (518) 584-9967
MARYLAND OFFICE
7050 OAKLAND MILLS RD., STE 130
COLUMBIA, MD 21046
FAX (443) 864-5773
by AT&T and because the use of flush -mounted antennas would require four (4)
centerline heights (with three (3) antennas each) in order to achieve the 12 -antenna
design that the RF engineer has called for. The use of four (4) flush -mounted arrays at
different heights would result in compromised coverage because antennas mounted at
lower heights would not propagate as far. Additionally, deploying four (4) flush -
mounted arrays for one carrier would unnecessarily eliminate the availability of two (2)
rad centers for future collocators and make the remaining available heights less
attractive. This would have the effect of discouraging collocation and would run
contrary to the intent of both the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed monopole will be designed to accommodate a total of three (3) additional
carriers in order to minimize the construction of additional telecommunications facilities
in the future. AT&T shall reasonably cooperate with all other carriers in order to
accommodate use on the proposed monopole.
Grading will be limited to the area necessary to construct the WCF and its access road
connecting to Back Mountain Road.
No painting or staining is proposed, other than that which may be required to meet the
suggestion of the Winchester Regional Airport.
When searching for possible sites to satisfy their RF objectives in a particular search area,
AT&T first looks for existing structures which might be able to accommodate their
antennas and equipment without the need for building a new support structure. In this
case, there are no existing structures of sufficient height to provide sufficient coverage.
Other structures in the area include agricultural and residential buildings, which are not
adequate for providing sufficient coverage.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The 2007 Comprehensive Plan states, "[clertain types of business and industrial uses
may be located at scattered rural locations if safe access is available, and if adverse
impacts on surrounding areas and the rural environment can be avoided."
Real Estate
Consultants • Development • Brokerage • Wireless Services
ACO PROPERTY ADVISORS, INC.
C�
NEW YORK OFFICE MARYLAND OFFICE
184 EDIE ROAD 7050 OAKLAND MILLS RD.. STE 130
SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866 COLUMBIA, MD21046
FAX (518) 584-9967 FAX (443) 864-5773
AT&T is committed to providing better coverage to the growing number of subscribers
in this area and doing so with minimal impact to the surrounding community.
Real Estate
Consultants • Development • Brokerage • Wireless Services
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP 4t
Deputy Director
DATE: December 14, 2011
RE: Public Hearing: CPPA #01-11, Tasker Road, Parcel 86
Change in Land Use Designation of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan
Institutional to Residential. !
On November 14, 2011, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC)
Executive Committee reviewed CPPA #01-11, Tasker Road, Parcel 86 -and
recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment for a change in the
land use designation of this property from institutional to residential. The CPPC
expressed their desire to see further efforts in providing the best and safest access to the
site at the time the property would develop, including inter parcel connectivity.
Both the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission discussed this item. The
Board of Supervisors, at their December 14; 2011 meeting, provided direction to move
this item to a public hearing. Previously, the Planning Commission discussed this item at
their December 7, 2011 meeting and expressed general support for the request as
recommended by the CPPC.
Request.
CPPA #01-11, Tasker Road, Parcel 86 — 11.35 acre change in Land Use Classification
from Institutional to Residential. The property is located on the east side of Tasker Road
and north of Rutherford Lane, approximately 0.7 miles south of 1-81 exit 310
interchange.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Planning Commission
Public Hearing: CPPA401-11
December 14, 2011
Page 2
CPPA
Name of Request
Magisteria
Type of Request
Proposal
Acreage
Number
1
District
901-11
TASKER ROAD
Shawnee
Change in land
Institutional -
1135
- Parcel 86
use designation
Residential
i
Current land use classification - Institutional
The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance defines institutional use as follows:
INSTITUTIONAL USE
A nonprofit or quasi -public use or institution, such as a church, library, public
or private school, hospital or municipally owned or operated building, structure
or land used for public purposes.
Proposed land use classification — Residential
The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance enables a broad variety of residential housing
types within the residential zoning districts. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan,
Residential Development Chapter, provides the following future focus for residential
development. This future focus is further guided by several policies and
implementation methods.
FUTURE Focus
Future residential growth in Frederick County is anticipated to continue and
expand. The County must ensure that land use policies are established to
adequately direct and shape that growth to guarantee that it is positive for the
community and located in areas that are capable of accommodating that growth.
While new residential growth is expected in both the rural areas and the urban
areas, new residential growth should be focused primarily with the urban areas of
the County. The UDA is better able to accommodate higher density growth and is
able to provide public services to those new residents.
Planning Commission
Public Hearing: CPPA #01-11
December 14, 2011
Page 3
The County should continue to establish policies which result in high quality
residential neighborhoods which are able to accommodate a growing population
and expanding workforce. Such residential development should be comprised of
a mixture of housing types and lot sizes to provide options for a range of lifestyles
and incomes. The land use policies of the Urban Areas will further guide this
residential development and community growth.
In the Urban Area, the long-term livability of residential neighborhoods will be
enhanced by sustainable development practices that incorporate the principles of
Neighborhood Design and Green Infrastructure elements into the community.
CPPC 08/08/11 and 11114/11
The CPPC initially evaluated the request and discussed the following issues:
• Transportation - Access to Tasker Road and Rutherford Lane.
• Compatibility of Uses — Adjacent residential properties, commercial uses, and
institutional uses.
• Design Standards — Visibility from Tasker Road and interstate 81 and integration
with adjacent uses.
• Potential Impacts — Impacts on resources, infrastructure, and community facilities.
The CPPC expressed significant concern regarding access to this site directly from
Tasker and Rutherford Lane and stated that further study of the access elements of this
request is warranted, including a review and input from VDOT. VDOT's perspective
would provide additional insight as to the appropriate way to access this site, either
through the existing adjacent state roads or through the adjacent properties.
Staff received the following input from VDOT:
We would ask at the rezoning stage that the proposed development do any
upgrades to ensure current intersection sight distance requirements are met at
Rutherford Lane and Tasker Road. We will also ask that turn lanes on Tasker
Road be provided il'warranted.
Matthew B. Smith, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer
Planning Commission
Public Hearing: CPPA 401-11
December 14, 2011
Page 4
Background.
The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors held their respective discussions on
the request at regularly scheduled meetings this summer. Following the Commission's
discussion and recommendation, the Board determined that this request warranted
additional study and formal action through the public hearing process.
The Board of Supervisors agreed with the consensus of the Commission to move forward
with the study of this request and to enable this to be done independent of the Senseny
Road/Eastern Frederick County Study.
Please find attached with this agenda item: a location map identifying the property, a
conceptual access plan provided by the applicant, and the CPPA application. Please
contact the Planning Department should you have any questions regarding this
information.
Attachments
MTR/bad
CPPA # 01 -11
Tasker Parcel - 86
PIN: 75-A-86
To Reclassify Parcel
from institutional use to residential use.
Mike Ruddy
From:
Smith, Matthew, P.E.[Matthew.Smith@vdot.virginia.gov]
Sent:
Wednesday, October 12, 20119:19 AM
To:
Mislowsky, Ronald; Mike Ruddy
Cc:
John Bishop, Dave Holliday (E-mail)
Subject:
RE: Tasker Road CPPA amendment
Ron,
We would ask at the rezoning stage that the proposed development do any upgrades to ensure current intersection
sight distance requirements are met at Rutherford Lane and Tasker Road.
Road be provided if warranted.
Thanks,
Matt
RZattbew B. Smith, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
VDOT - Land Development
Clarke, Frederick, Shenandoah & Warren Counties
14031 Old Valley Pike
Edinburg, VA 22824
Phone # (540) 984-5615
Fax # (540) 984-5607
From: Mislowsky, Ronald [mailto:RMislowskkv(o)Pennoni com]
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 20113:54 PM
To: Mike Ruddy; Smith, Matthew, P.E.
Cc: John.Bishop; 'Dave Holliday (E-mail)'
Subject: Tasker Road CPPA amendment
We will also ask that turn lanes on Tasker
Mike had requested that we prepare an exhibit showing how the site might be accessed to address a concern expressed
by the County Board.
Our plan would be to access and improve Rutherford Lane, an existing state road, generally as shown on the attached
plan.
I'd be happy to meet to review any comments or questions that you might have.
Ronald Mislowsky
Vice President
Patton Harris Rust & Associates
A Pennoni Company
117 East Piccadilly Street
Winchester, VA 22501-5002
Office 540-667-2139 x8123
Fax 540-665-0493 1 Mobile 540-664-2110
htto:/1"wohra.com 1 RMislowskvepennoni.com
Patton Harris Rust & Associates
Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects.
/�
117 East Piccadilly Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
P�1-C +! \
�1 1 T 540.667.2139
F SAn AFS neer
Memorandum
To: Eric Lawrence, AICP, Director
Organ izationlCompany: Frederick County P g
F116 0
From: Ron Mislowsky, E ^�
Date:
Project Name/Subject:
cc:
27.2011
Plan Amendment
Tasker Road, Parcel 86
Tax Map Parcel 75-A-86 of 11.4 acres lies on the east side of Tasker Road and north of Rutherford Lane,
approximately 0.7 miles south of the I-81 interchange 310. Water and sewer lines are i�ithin close proximity.
The site is bounded by commercial uses to the north and residential uses to the east. The lands to the south,
across Tasker Road, are vacant but zoned residential.
Currently, the comprehensive plan classifies the northern portion of this site as institutional, a designation
that extends to the north onto the Agape church site. Unfortunately, the owner can find no description of the
institutional use within the comprehensive plan.
We believe the best use of the property would be residential and ask that the Eastern Frederick County Long
Range Land Use Plan be revised to classify this parcel as such.
The owner has investigated the possibility of some type of commercial use on the property. However, the
considerable slope across the site, from west to east, make use of the site for a commercial or retail use
difficult especially when vacant commercial parcels, without grading challenges existlon both ends of Tasker
Road. The same site slope constraints would also restrict the feasibility of an institutional use, assumed to be
schools or churches.
We have attached the completed application and the required fee of $3,000.00. Additionally, please find two
exhibits. One represents the existing comprehensive plan classifications and the other depicts the revised
boundaries which are being requested.
We appreciate your acceptance of this application and look forward to a presentation before the
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee and then the Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
0
2011 COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN AMENDMENT
INITIATION REQUEST FORM
(Please type all information. The application will not be deemed complete unless all items listed
below have been submitted.)
Owner(s) Information:
1. Name:
Shawnee Village LC, c/o Dave Holliday Construction, Inc.
2. Project Name:
Tasker Road, Parcel 86
3. Mailing Address: 420 W. Jubal Earl Drive, Suite 103
Winchester, VA 22601
4. Telephone Number: (540) 667-5414
Authorized Agent Information:
1. Name:
Patton Harris Rust & Associates
2. Project Name:
3. Mailing Address:
Tasker Road, Parcel 86
4. Telephone Number:
117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200
Winchester, VA 22601
(540) 667-2139
B. Legal interest in the property affected or reason for the request:
Owner requests clarification of appropriate use as identified on the current comprehensive plan to
guide future development.
3
C. Proposed Comprehensive Policy Plan amendment - please provide the following information.
1. FOR A MAP AMENDMENT
01
7
PIN(s): 5-A-66
Magisterial District:
Shawnee
b. Parcel size (approximate acres):
11.35 Acres
C. Plat of area proposed for CPPA amendment, including metes and bounds description.
d. Existing Comprehensive Plan land use classification(s):
The northern portion of the site is classified Institutional. The remainder appears to be
unclassified.
e. Proposed Comprehensive Plan land use classification(s):
Residential
f. Existing zoning and land use of the subject parcel:
RA
g. What use/zoning will be requested if amendment is approved?
Currently the owner has no plans to rezone the property.
h. Describe, using text and maps as necessary, the existing zoning, Comprehensive
Policy Plan designations, and/or approved uses and densities along with other
characteristics of properties that are within:
0 1/4 mile from the parcel(s) perimeter if the parcel is less than 20 acres in size;
See attached exhibits.
0 '/2 mile if 21 - 100 acres in size; or
0 1 mile if more than 100 acres in size.
Note: Colored maps cannot be duplicated in the Planning Department
The name, mailing address, and parcel number of all property owners within 200 ft. of
the subject parcel(s), with Adjacent Property Owners Affidavit (page 8).
2. FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT NA
go
In
C.
Note:
crosse
Purpose and intent of amendment.
Cite Plan chapter, goal, policy and/or action strategy text that
amended.
is proposed to be
Proposed new or revised text.
Please attach and specify text changes with additions underlined
d through.
and deletions
d. Demonstrate how the proposal turthers the goats, ponciesiocj ecuves, MU acuUu
strategies set forth in the Comprehensive Policy Plan chaptei(s) relative to the
amendment request and why proposed revisions to said goals, policies, and action
strategies are appropriate.
C. Demonstrate how the proposal is internally consistent with other Comprehensive
Policy Plan components that are not the subject of the amendment.
f. What level of service impacts, if any, are associated with the request?
R
3. FOR ALL AMENDMENTS
a. Justification of proposed Comprehensive Policy Plan amendment (provide
attachments if necessary). Describe why the change to the Comprehensive
Policy Plan is being proposed.
The institutional classification found to the north has no description within the comprehensive
plan. Due to the grades on the site which slope considerably from west to east, an extension
of commercial uses from the north, or an institutional use is not feasible. IThe best use of the
property would be an extension of the residential uses which fie to the east.
b. How would the resultant changes impact or benefit Frederick County. Consider, for
example, transportation, economic development and public facilities.
It would benefit the County to utilize lands within the UDA to their fullest extent possible. This
site is located within close proximity of the 1-81310 interchange providing quick access to
medical and commercial uses located along VA Route 37 as well as libraries, schools and
parks located to the east and south. Sewer and water lines are located adjacent to the site.
Direct access to Tasker Road is not required as the site has frontage on Rutherford Lane,
VA Route 846.
i
i
Other information may be required by the Director of Planning, the Planning Commission, or Board
of County Supervisors during the review of the initiation request. The applicant will be notified, in
writing, if additional information is required.
All applications must also contain the following items:
1. Special Limited Power of Attorney Affidavit (see page 9 if parcels of land are
involved).
2. Non -Refundable Application Review Fee of $3,000 (payable to the Frederick County
Treasurer).
Applicants should consult the Comprehensive Policy Plan to identify goals; policies or action
strategies which are applicable to individual Comprehensive Policy Plan amendment requests.
Signatures:
I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application to and petition the Frederick
County Board of Supervisors to amend the Comprehensive Plan. I (we) authorize Frederick
County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes.
I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and
accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge-
Applicant(s): aBE elm f Date:®�
Owner(s): A/z/0" Date: f/
Adjoining Property Owners
Tasker Road, Lot 86 — 2011 CPPA
Name
Address
Property Identification Number (PIN)
Name: Winifred W Hack ETALS c/o Hackwoods LLC
974 Tasker Road
Property#: 75 A 78
Stephens City, VA 22655
Name: John L Boyd
521 Tasker Road
Property#: 75 A 78C
Stephens City, VA 22655
Name: Gary D 8 Carolyn S Rutherford
163 Rutherford Lane
Property #: 75 A 86A
Stephens City, VA: 555
Name: The Hall Partnership 11 LLC
3763 Tasker Road
Property #: 75 A 86C
Stephens Ci VA
Name: Agape Christian Fellowship
199 Agape Way
Property #: 75 A 87C
Stephens City, VA 22655
Name:
Property #:
Name:
Property #:
Name:
Property #:
Name:
Property #:
Name:
Property #:
Name:
Property #:
Name:
Property#:
Name:
Property#:
Name:
Property #:
Name:
Pro ert#:
Attachment I
(TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT)
SUBJECT PROPERTY OWNERS AFFIDAVIT
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Web Site: www.co.frederick.va.us
Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone 540-665-5651 Facsimile 540-665-6395
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF FREDERICK
This day of OAY ® <
(Day) (Month) (Year)
1, Patton Harris Rust & Associates
(Owner/Contract Purchase uthorized Agen
hereby make oath that the list of property owners of the subject site, as submitted with the
application, is a true and accurate list based on the information provided by the Frederick County
Commissioner of the Revenue Office as taken from the current real estate assessment records.
ntract urchasei uthorized Ag t
(circle one
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA:
Countyof �i;?u e-t,-e'c:L
Subscribed and sworn to before me this --3 0 day of fn rA )i vLt3 11_ in my
County and State aforesaid, by the forenamed Principal.
NOTARY PUBLIC
My Commission expires: F& -h g (.'At4A/ a ? A 0 11,
aeq'4# 1579?Y
Special Limited Power of Attorney
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Website: www.co.frederick.va.us
Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia
107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone (540) 665-5651 Facsimile (540) 665-6395
Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We)
(Name) Shawnee Village LC c/o Dave Holliday Construction, Inc. (Phone) (540) 667-5414
(Address) 420 W. Jubal Earl Drive, Suite 103, Winchester, VA 22601
the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by
Instrument No. 17570 on Page and is described as
Tax Map Parcel 75-A-86
do hereby make, constitute and appoint:
(Name) Patton Harris Rust & Associates
Subdivision:
(Phone) (540) 667-2139
(Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester, VA 22601
To act as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact for and in my (our) name, place and stead with full power and
authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described
Property, incl -ding:
Rezoning (including proffers)
Conditional Use Permit
Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final)
Subdivision
Site Plan
Variance or Appeal
X Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment
My attorney-in-fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously
approved proffered conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified.
In witness thereof, I (wS�have hereto set my, (W) hand and seal this 3 \5:r day of tAA H 20 ,
Signature(s)
State of Virginia, City/qty of
To -wit:
I, i1l(,'I, . r, F ,iii. F r c o -i , a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid,
certify that `the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally appeared before me and has
acknowledged the same before mein the jurisdiction aforesaid this day of 1- Er_ i 120 ! 9
C IMy Commission Expires: k`/ -?511t
Notary Public t a -?r ' C `r -, ---- --- ---
• K T " '.t ... �. i a ,7
A.
ir I''
`/'
17 a 4 r y �� i of // X.
, r
t " '!�/ %/��,;7 `'�-.�..n.1; •�, 1NSTTrUT10N.4
\ r ; . � • . � RESIDENTIA —
Vi
u
A
r
f
-
_
R� t
BUSINESS INSTITUTIONAL RESIDENTIAL
Patton Harris Rust 8 Associates TASKER ROAD PARCEL 86
Engineers. Surveyors. Planners, Landscape Architects.
117 East Pi«oanly Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST
PH+/� Winchester, VA 22601 PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION
� � � T 540.667.2139
F 540.655.0493
DRAWN: KLM CHKD: RAM NO SCALE DATE: 05/27/11 PROJECT: 16724-1-0
_� gas ®�:� ..�
� �,� 'Y*�f � a
,� a -�:;
������
®®
k
///.: ti �: ►���
... ..
. . �
...
,� „_
��
�� � •• �
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665.5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP
Deputy Director
DATE: December 14, 2011
RE: Public Hearing: 2012 — 2013 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)
On November 14, 2011, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC)
Executive Committee met to discuss the individual County Department 'and Agency
capital improvement project requests, including new projects and modifications to
previous requests, associated with the 2012-2013 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP).
The role of the CPPC in the CIP process was to ensure that the various departmental
project requests are in conformance with the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan.
Following the CPPC discussion, the CPPC Executive Committee endorsed the 2012-2013
CIP and endorsed its conformance with the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. The
CPPC Executive Committee forwarded the CIP to the Planning Commission for
discussion.
Both the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors considered the proposed 2012-
2013 Capital Improvements Plan as a discussion item prior to the CIP's advertisement for
public hearing. The discussion of both bodies expressed general support of the 2030 CIP.
It is the role of the Planning Commission to affirm that the 2012-2013 CIP is in
conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan.
The Commission expressed their belief that the CII' was consistent with the 2030
Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the Commission recognized that their review and
endorsement was primarily for the facilities and physical improvements, rather than the
estimated values provided for each project.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202- • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Planning Commission
Public Hearing: 2012-2013 CIP
December 14, 2011
Page 2
This year's CIP focuses once again on enhancing the connection between the CIP and
potential proffered contributions made with rezoning projects. The connection between
the CIP and the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and the Area Plans, is also reinforced. This
effort is highlighted through the effort of the Parks and Recreation Department and their
identification of their comprehensively planned parks, and a new project which promotes
the Abrams Creek Greenway Trail. The CIP projects are generally reflective of the
current economic climate and with the life cycle costs of facilities in mind. The
Winchester Regional Airport has several new projects. In addition, two new items have
been requested by Parks and Recreation for inclusion in this year's CIP.
Please find attached with this agenda item: a summary of the proposed 2012-2013 CIP in
table form, and a draft copy of the proposed 2012-2013 CIP maps illustrating the known
locations of the CIP requests. More detailed information regarding the individual
department requests is available digitally and may be forwarded to you directly if
requested.
If adopted, the CIP and included maps will ultimately become a component of the
Comprehensive Policy Plan, which would satisfy the review requirement of Section 15.2-
2232 of the Code of Virginia, which states that no public facility shall be constructed
unless said facility is a "feature shown" within a jurisdiction's comprehensive plan.
Please contact the Planning Department should you have any questions regarding this
information.
Attachments
MTR/bad
County Total Project
Department Priority Count Contribution Per Fiscal Year Contributions Notes Costs
{'s`s'tM ." n
r .i Ri,
2013-
2014-
2015-
2016
Projects
t`201220d3'
2014
2015
2016
2017
°;02017+-'!�?:
`Fiscal ,Y,e`ar,{
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
GBe and Year 6+;
Public Schools151
v
z'.L
JWMS Parking Lot Safety Enhanc
7n['„t5F$600 000
r,-...,1; dT5
$600 000
$600 000
5R, "-" a�..d+�' s
Full`Da Kindergarten Classroom., '
i �m w b, J 'r;
!',Rsk1.y!'srs+ . iVt
�, `'"t'tr�"rF
y sa ni.d
gm . n e
t , �',�'�d
5'sr x
i'S� a„' E'�"'�
a;� { x
"t'+Iru! nm,.
+ e$kA' ,x „moi " +
[l1 �'� r��
' �`" %js s"-"r"' F,t7
4 1g MtSR
h---,`,,4
�t�, Ldp
,1cav " s t=r
-r I 5
�i5t 4}b'w'L,
......{:. fr.,". .awl,
Atldliions (BH EV;.RBST)1:r�-i"x'!!!$5500000
5,,..t
't e-F''L,',t,'s.
5s*F,�mui,
+..tu;w': rk
-t Olt-rf,`in
{w1
S
i�-{c r�.,5.;:$5500000i'}6.-'z"2tx:.�at
*et••e.,�e+L'$5500000
OL.,7.1ki'{kcu
7'1e'T
Fourth Hlgh School +"n
{ 000 000
"
.r',
._'.0
C
$63' 01 00p
00.,..,c00..
$61,000,000
6100000g0
azs$
s.,tl'".a"r;i, ta
ada.,�@aIwtLd` U
R, pe Gle� csement t Fl tre`26enck CunYr
'_*w.:ws
s�$.'a;
n
41
a
00034
,6s
._rc
nrca
Mddle Schcop0'3e;,iZAa0a`
k$81
tl00-000
Pv,
.K00_
Robert E Aylor Middle School
4{ asia;eJ
y
'$22
bS,v,7'yt
, t•'••• 1h "s v
$22,000,000
$22,000,000
Addition and Renovation
oma-^..�.r>
000 000
atS,-w
sP'.,r>+.S.,�Ia.56"„�a,Y"�-we..,_,�„!k&.7
e rJ
reqs "-1j
°P
r H
Uzi k,�aact n
TBD
-"1+r
zra 7-r
✓W Sr TBD
:1'._..�.»G,�"[5.'t'.It.,,m,.�.
_n@James
WoodHlghaSool,Upgretlea
�,+
>,,w,rr�auL
t�}''r4
, wk, ".<.,.
Sherando High School Parking Lot
to
rTBD
TBD
TBD
8 Softball Field Improvements
Appie Re Rldge..Elementary F _bm,
�'t p1l--'
`t(' �jt ,5i5T'np. 'r
,q.'S�"0.}t .:z:
'Ey- 7, aR e;.;
"i 'H evk'}
r�,n'. ',1�n1�'rre
Leges".;i
;>k'h't<@ysr,1
F-i 5. `tki'�
kti' rk+'
s., tt..
t, z,� i:.L{
...%
o-�ig
'N FS.
ry'fizl� k"I
4'ty wkr^c a
,may;. ti 7�uz ys ;
Phe5e 2zReaevahop N§x ` m'
z"'x4et
,} �eP
K xt $5 000 b00
•«,a�i
FCPS Admin Office Exp/Renov.
"v ° i
7,4, y b1ks4a �ay?BD
TBD
?BD
-� k
t.. L rvi8 u(;i•' &W
h �t
;,�-_ -' ,N �,
Bass Hoover Elemenlarys [ F"
, a nu rr yyt�
v ','W6i@
"t" ile.OF”
7!a
fSC ,J t Hh -µ'2i8'
1a`.:5
sa", r
*'A sty ,
i'r " " '�,
:§w'`T }, 7
x P t 4 n��L !
Gera yg L[:=r s>tii
b m y
Ia „K, '»t T , asR
R4 nI
�+'
�e .. �a
S s?!''_ -`.`� s
4`L
v'Lr h RE
$ k^ti3 3.m ; {
Phase 2 ftenovatsonal,,iA.a
d +n"
a,+t �a.6
.::3..kacsaxtGkni.
rlR","
;.'',.d..-5,5.1
i .'u},N
+">n"",uaTu.3`.,,0.[it'rR1-'.9<:aaS..E;,$5
.S
600
"...
'r'xlcit:i $5 800 000
Elementary School #12MR
$19300000
$19300000
i[t".=7.a`pv�i
�5G�,�r-at`a$19300;000
Flfth:Mlddle°SchodE. ,.,ipAise"k
v._..
`�"�+tr 3'4u:n>5.:
+t aai'+},`.'s
wa.vGwu,!s$F,.+-"r1t�ka
iklt�',�'=,rak$35000�OO�w$
�$35,00000,0,9,r�.*,'y
,'.a$35°000000
.._
Elementary School #13
,,. 44 ..l+. 5R.H
i000
$19,300,000
$19,300,000
r S1L:ht�t:1Fjf2'af[�E[r
$206900,000
Parks & Recreation.{
Clearbrook~&Sherando�t
�.
BGebalI Field"L;ghtt9,�P9�ade�i.
e,`w
...l.�riRv
s, �„Lr.
ar„i
et,
"„.
Cx,`
tri? i
i:a .:�$1090w498
t'+q i'"rSOFTIE
:+-.txe d}„i
$109049$
.�
Fleet Trip Vehicles
.c$1090498
y'fj 4$335'000
.i+ -aka,
a{>mr,�TM.+rc
,�au",Sr,i,{b,-_
,a,{tua ,y
+y
irtir
,.4# .?,.
$335.000
$335,000
'fit r t„��j,",h.
IndoornA uetla Facts rW' e>` 1!1'x$75163'000
tY 3€s1xi,. S�
s"
'' `~
a u-.,. w
} n fir
>� ad.'
`t ss' I ,.a`ae15163000'
i1t`stL bti{si
�r,j €
IR 15163000
u,G.}a:.$
Clearbrook & Sherando
r,
Water Slide/Spray Ground
Access Road�wlPe kingITrads
t
K1lr{$1 251 208
Ett1,'s Ga
sa
'ss .5w 1 a
wT y5r
p w5'y$1{25f 208
krs'xa $13540`626
$1,251,208
p,0 s. ;*i$1 540626
$'.t zh ''„
$1.251,208
;;; t[, r[$1 540626
h;F�s
Park Land Western Fred Co.
7qti
URN
„l-
_,",asnw,
x
rx2xk” $3 387728
{
$3 367 728
ie;$"
"k'a
$3,367,728
maw z, -Y"rn
�2:t,;,2i{,.,tisry.n gx
PerkiLand EasterO,Fred Co! a
yt 4i�Y'iP
aLY,gI i
s.,'r'
f 11 .t4
w�'a"''a $4 490 510
�.ty '" ."% r, $4 49F
;k.,`hn
,,i
t$671 062
$671,062
$671,062
Sherando
SFie�ando,��,`dps'1yg
Softball Complex1,11"-:
Soccer/Multi Use F;eltlsZc-,„a'�„`,i,.
t„r'yc
nY v[,F
rl„n1!?t'?'w, �as„,"t„"
l
av, N`?A. r+
On".,„' „�...
E-ern{-''°2
t t cir.t S
$1121998i
'.
1, x„$1121998
^L t3
°t{ „?p
_.......:
a $1121996
€--.;•,„,,:;
Sherando
Maintenance Compound
'En.,"_ �q
d 25? %til- +
ME
yrr-
'g,r-
`r"
rf
z` F
,,
ry�'t(7
:w Ait $37x41310
Vii` z t
kr 7 $478565
$374,310
-so- n ;$478 565..
$374.310
Clearbrook t r''
0 ,en P, IaY Areas"'�,4 at't`
a'''”;^'
r t
7 4 n,.... a'S
'"
..dttG.es„ss+t'ee'r
€'T:-.
ki ,u{ c
Li i`r
,,
$1360610
Sherando
.,.-g....'.
LakefTrails/Parking 2Fields
W ... 2
st""a5R"1 y>
7 �
''
7
tr ;$136061W0
+doF...
$1360610
089
{
t!n: Y" t
t '.,sps,$513 089
Sherando ryr'! "y
a
SkaFeboard Parkl.sra') �!
-::...,,..,..� xarxub
w' 4''
uLT,ae1
a �,"
5v St{.§.,...i,
r.�.w+�.?I
N^v r° tia�
6 kra. d {
$s •p,1 $513089
H 3ogr:8513
;,„'$j
w ,s."'
Clearbrook
,...x.
Tennis/Basketball Complex
� =
,i'# .,
Ga?a,�. E! 7
r 4
�R -r
-je
r'rg
t
,"y �+($526355
h
$526355
$526355
Sherando;` �^* ''
P,Icnlc Areas fi".T {- P, -" y
G! r^I ,ice` r}
a
:�€.rti"
IW. tai 6[,
"yu-'""
Z 5J" .°a
7! Ib
rf} $804 243
'J
Clearbrook
.uH
Sheller Stage
rs,:,::r
7.a!
s�' 7:.
a
.YP3
s,y
t'1z $506402
"
$508402
r $8802605
$508402
9.H $6 802G05
s_1n qP k??1 aaaa
Mulf GenerationalCe ler
P 6.t' r,"
4"755cd-
,u ''+'�
,t^'Tr
5
}n+,
s a
rt,,l,
TCwrv{rs$i"K
1} * tx:
1c5
t 7 $B 802 fi05
k", aw ..
t. (
rp;.
Commundy Parks (5)
1;..WINNERs T
Y ,`r-{,.,; $1 347153
$1,347,153
$1.347,153
`
'-a= t
"-�'
r4$ r
'4
° rt'
qua t&' ti
s a `�'
�' yY
aGrc 43#n-
'r„�,., 7 t"'
?r
` "�r£ $336.788
IM= (• 5+_
c 1`,*
1d9
-
Distract Parks (Northeast and Southwest)[
x,�nAs
5-`�"" , $ 858 238
$7 858 238
$7858238
rx„Abnams;Creek`GreenwaY
Trail,,uR
n�n,ddt;8s,-1s'+
1'"!':��T":1#+?gA�4F--i.,ztra^
t +ei$1' 252;558
1, ,e `$1x252556
"'t3""'.,..;
351;2521558
MEMO "141-i,T2
1
kii'esCa}'".+a0j° g'7;u.L"v Ya:
50,516,490
County Total Project
Department Priority County Contribution Per Fiscal Year Contributions Notes Costs
2013-
2014-
2015-
2016
�
Projects
2017�
ts 2.i I
F[. 1R
€
tlx' , 5
tate (,a"I,a rc,
Regional Library
UvS
vsx,y, "H°
ar.-.` arkRyv3,:d
.,
0owman LoUSidewa k Phese2ys e1
'�x'y" $42880
t,'�v�,(caa 4»0
w «,;.,h
�:.:k ���s. I
4;.?�a�. ",�d,�
ji.?,€,` 342r880
!,� . g
Gamesboro Branch
m x nxy
'.�,�"
f Lni t $2(279.575
$2,279,575
$2.279,57
Senseny/Greenwood Branch}
«rza
a '.m'4;'i'E'`y
Ww
.�ic17n
1.4v,v k4.a-t- 3i!kyN/A
5�:e.aa:;.N/A
fi.va..k$p
,aau.{,s' iNfA
.._......_ _»
Route 522 Branch
,.``. >.;,.�.�. `
N ., `mayS k:;N/A'w
N/A
N/A
pp;ik
eha
't{F4T
's
$,ts 7
$2.322.455
Transportation
gp '-'.v,,,"$°,�,,,!g{,x',xv !H rc
Route 37 Engineanng,8 Construction
a
$300,000,000
x i
'`"�' "`-='+y�:y..
'kr
i} x e
` `P' ;
z ��
t
f''-" zM
k $300s000 000;
E�ak.
s = E
I
mss' `r $300 000.000
b
a E�$5,.
m
81 Exit 310 Improvements
T1r r Y�
frv+
" srzp
xt
R"k
est. $30,000,000,
$30,000,000
t
E
TUB,,
$30.000,000
L-01;:Exit
Na�� to
r _ 30r RelOaatlon!(r
y- xt •"
u^..b
1` 5:-'.5i
aafi:. E.,
4 a;, [ $80000'000
€i
s .iir:`!d$fiQ OOQ 000.
h v E4!
y;�$60 000 000
East Tevis Street Extension
L H ,. €
x
tNk.'rF $2 600000
$2.600,000
E
$2,600,000
eid,. fC 13N*.�iN 3F'7f.-3E iu
Wm or Drrve Exterisio n^�''re"'
,
`4 G
e'-'."'a"y''ril—
aziS4ic .s6
ZTE Zu
Erc>1"k.s`l�,
l$�i+^d WF ".:'..
'E R
at€$23 zWt000
`r' rt &
at4 "'':23200 OOOs�
-U Yt `�
&E�
$23200x000
{E yrr t
Channing Drive Extension
Wiilenin of Route t1 �lNorlh° n'-"fl
eTe"
t'a t2 7 r) 4 s
logy2'T
rP" a
sw�
£ -y''
-r-
w.
""r y,r'L
e it-c
s'R ">:!
V'RAJ``y $20 600 000 i
5 s sr $47re00r0010"'du
$20,600,000
-c-' :$ 7 800 000
E
:?a'- y t` E
$20,600,000
'!$47 800 000
m.2t,s x r o-:. r a5&>
9 .........d....�...,u..'kxm31'
M {l: kl
^i
xsmai�'. f
n. s G (ua.
;
3 p ,
:. v,..
,
r s ti m
Brucetown/Hopewell Realign
x? yai
E`1 '. nn€
pp��
5€"Eis°+ �$3r000'000
($22
$3,000,000
�i�r+s
E
Tr,-
$3,000,000
T'"
fi 3M
"UN-1-0 .,a
Ser!seny_Road,Widanmgy,,, 4
Inverrlee
t` g
S R
(`,�,py
p ,ri<
F
tAru"� t- Is...
xi<; d" k 25,
,, ilr-t 800 000
to
C $F0200000:
:$22 800 000
C ( a,
FUR
E
7i! 'Ek. $22 60Q-00Q
$10200000
,# nta In
ds i1 d�i
x$10200000
n
0.i..e?:aY"-e=')`sr�FoxµDnvexty'.w..�:v(=�v#uiride...4;a
`6yM 4.
�y
I)i
sk:h.aI,z
awacinsd .={![air_?':,:
,;t'�,E•s"�att
r. ki3�3$250000
&ai}Yraya-ers$250000,
:L4tyCr E:,..G$250000
Rennaisance Dnve9
ukr�
+ 000,000
$2000000
E
$2000000
a'r-'-' "r'yyce�''� j�,�
Sensen Roed, Pike P d'
nub x$150 000
"vg $15Q_oo�
;$,150 000
a$1T550'OOQ
''y 1,
s*c+ T N 5.,, 1
x $2 000 OOtlrz`
rt.2
F:v..yVaC..
z!slrsst"hn
Eastern Road Plen Improvements
s-0: ?
.:,$.d:4.-,txr F?BD
.oi`a n'. n. .A
TBD
TBD
{,„n a9a"I€,"SkEw
X2"2" s$
$524450000
Winchester Airport
src „r`"t
"P
",&m. g y zxa. ; sE
lend ?arcel 646`A 33A �;y" 4 g ,�
4L $295000
�,yna2 ;Ft
l+'+;q;',µ:
Stu
t x,
mra9.k.-,a il3
€`r r "s v
? CP
e 2 1 4
x,a i 2'
UP_I: 2! y--
"i, .:3s
! IAB
'a s
$295 tl00
Construct T/W (1) Reloc„1
S r 4 rc
$31684210
e ✓
r,E+N 7-! xa3
A B
$3,684,210
wayi�f� rptcz m' _�
Desi n TlW 2) Reloc su-' s"allOEl^,''6
"�riY6"""$200'000
"-sr""r)T-M
`i'`.r Bi't5
'i'mt i '' 's
:�E rxl�"r""`�i
},
nti sa`Mi 'i.v o-1
3-t f L r?!`'
i.,'cK
{ A B
z o
e'r'r'$"' $200000
$iFansus.
mw x 'f.,G`:- v+ "
Maintenance Facility site
LenC Parce164 A l i4�, d, .7"n
�d1F $360.000
Ts'a,t n !fir a
tv'""275'000
s ns, rg
fly llm '1
`s
xrs "+ 4e1
kra!
SK
K iY.kFS.AB�f�1�E UGIT
AB
p: g'
_ $360000
$
iJ �:i 51nU5 bik'.Hi4c{n Nx
lA .2.= ,d''+!
I
M+tt
ik'wfatx fir" Y"
ptC' ci': �'iL:ei`1ll. rV4
?.
:Ea ('.:
N.
:av;S'T 4v Tk f5 !
Land Parcel 64-A-70
8 '"Tiy;ha
tiauc vb jet
we`6""!•gya°.'C'
$275000
o-'2", €"'.,.
i,� t> {A
.,,v rale
l„�$y-r`1 "0�1.a'kn ,r
r.,xu i rix'!
krx�,t,., n`;m€
A B
xw r�rB
$275,000
e $275000
Carid Perce184'-A` ;!'.'
... , Y"x:�1FnE24}
.,w$275000
F
y-d
il .aW: 1. °sti
a.
b"d�iCi'.# O:N,dO
,oy
bc$akd
urrl�riy`
lyt�` aka Y ilr
HUS7h+
�:i i6i «..
Construction Maintenance Facilitys
0
& I&
F,allaliyn��s
$250,000
n .�-fuaa+;r lbs €'�
A 8
$250 000
9
m�^tm4 !"2 hvirv,`-'�-r s:
Ctu'{ 2t, al P.
Construct TlW 2-:Reloc 'ro;it"
O �naft,
kJ t a>i5"
500 Oi)0
s S.
�^Bk�yr�i.
T�
�,ru� ".+fir
vagi I � �.`D. � 4
t a )) et
'��A B
x €k;3 §$4 500 tltl(1
..
^r
Design TNU (3) RelocFK$,91r'
a a ,
6
T'6ytzi. L`u.-,^'hz
+�4
$150,000
'Rim
nNE
a�xnnr,T„S
4
Ck€ ^*,
§-j,ua�w tta+a rx gi
ZENs 5'€rY+
A B
`'A'B
$150,000
tz;.� a!-am::` uLwyi 9Ws =•a
Cand Parce184 A'67b ,T>i'^x:mi
.... ..... ?``
b W
xl,?2grx`$267500
3, ! ! P i...
}'�` ,0'.:
t ya`t:sd a.�..G':
,r .! 1 as
dtc E !
M 1
Luh+@.v t. kZdiP aGP
ed
d"'r. Wt lx $267.'500
da uw3'.A:
Land Parcel 64-A-66
HER'
$267 500
.3,L
z"€ 4 C� �$
% sJkk`y c'
A B
$267 500
-.
,c;'; €$:"5i'rw F�+atr'ns. 'Edi
Construct T/W,(3)Raloc �v T' ,ni
&1 ..�t
ry4 n..s:u4ma
S`�, tph "irmAi
gr: ?rry
5n �cTra
,.,..,.,
m$1 1Q0'000
x
- "F {, 13M
a,
xi x3 2
x`-nv-a,:
�"kvM� s: € k
arm � itkrd{F� s.�"ti
:,g
✓,�t,5' GP' B
r ?ed
at,�ti:-' €$1 100 000
'(Jaw
Design T/W (4) Reloc
is i>t { a€
�'€. skn d`*
xLm�
$150,000
reser'yo-
'''h'a'rr 1 sus
0"'a "
Rg ° ORR
A 8
$150,000
Ii6't; DT'[x"
:. fE ,i$;a,{ „1.`•.w '-u�`. "r
General AvaletlonTermmal
-._.w -..._� _..K.t'ry 6
s Lj tt
.?yvr
i' >;:#''
2500006
,..
,"oars a-�
v.,a,�.ulS- US,
N�Wct
Y'
€„?}'1"'4j�I
2 .a{ aABi'''a"en"y„stst$2500000.
`k .:. ws.E`
a": "
k' a- `' JiV''"'xa ',v.
Expand Terminal Parking Lot
lcu
rvwa
r " c.'
$650 000
f „
ate`" xw
t=ap iF
� t gia'.d�'+ktt
' rY-3r# I""
A B
A B
$650.000
'r '[H $275 00(!
na' lr
x«sGe �3:D
Lend Parcel 64 A Bq art
....... t
a€ ('
k rv#Ed £
a ii D a
:+ `41'
s a
SIv"�lu �x $ ,
vs $275 000
..
5lSa9h
t t
! aR m �
sc m1tr :'r;F
?v3,i
sbr,,
Land Parcel 64A63
..
r¢s y, Flu
$275000
r tmk+ 3`°t
�3`"as r�j'{ya Tag
AB
$275000
!>"w' A`5'7Tryc`." -c h ns Z
ZERO; ^.It
Land Parcel 64,A 8D's h ";, E
.• d."rA
'* . -xi'
3"d
aM. 34.2L+?
..'
"AGfi�
ST1'�$275 000
„a
12274Aei(1+A
Rf Se F Fay
'4?i'k °x',n,�rS
e..
4Y 2'.k2 fi+F!ii#ai3::
2:A B
tiEy�jW $275 QOQ.
.�..,eLt
Construct TlW (4)Reloc
(ar N N�j'.3
cT Nhtdk'=
s a S
,:
$1100000
re�
S
u+�a s''^
`r{a
r "�
AB
Alem
$1100000
OOtl
$ 1 r-';w
Land Parcal 84 A 59 -�'"
s. ....`X24#+
r'N °''
k .. =
"�xax-
{,, a t
l_= $275 000
' +:rF 4a'2
,ao- .: a ( '
dr A B
h .14�! $2755
4.22
Land Parcel 64-A-52
+
Y tk
$275 000
r .:lt -ta
' x k"
lrfatwn 3 et-srl� 1
A B
$275000
m rNn c[+++��Elh
P
o-rs au„
:*'!
f: e $300 000
! .:rca o-
k;+ X}i..MYk rAx{-s.1wl�
i. "-aw +t1 A B
€at4,r�"MZ $300 000
Land Parcel 64-A-49
'sx„2"2w4 ,
�6{-d
mS{sa„$25O Q00
..,
A,B
$250,000
County Total Project
Department Priority County Contribution Per Fiscal Year Contributions Notes Costs
h �.. m p,
2013-
2014-
2015-
2016
KFRE. umF '�' i.5r ry
Projects
3
20'12-26,i3
2014
2015
2016
2017
V .-y2017+,T �'
,
County Administration
t .
M $
U ,rs
S
IGa'` 3
$18,524,210
j}'pP" A,TP„r�"[T%"'x> 5a
RCloeatlon'of. Gaideab0r0 St2 xtc�I,
t
$12:OOp
'W `�'
+ ^gx
r5^,."FL
"""y','+xe";j*
, -� F11M
M�
+F-
`ifi,-:!':1...$268000
!.r,:yi M.c -;
_....._. .t..x iuF
li
X5256000
w.,+nU�tc`«. u?,:�s.;^'
�'.ure+'3
uk tie, .fa
fr ay; "(#4
9URM`
VrIM$268000y
Albin Citizens Center
r3 MiI'll
a4 $374850
$374 850
$374,850
.9t1.
4....,-4.,'�'�i+;�'.R:Relocation/F�pans,,GoreUSite.;,;e.��'4.k�s..,8�„+.eaa+
I ,-
ar,E
:ESP,„,.�°.:;.
k:r�a+'r
pp�g�++$2253b0i:a"v
.,,-;a
$225350,
. vx+a» -: ,:--Kia„na:,7.
`nFr'm
w,
s+dEii!'1v:.�$225 350;
General Government Capital Expen
d': sx$200 606
$200,000
$200000
$200,000
$200000
[:
ij g4grgtE
$1,000,000
E
$1,000,000
Fire & Rescue
11 "Z5'' aW1
Py¢° rpt€
rp aEFQ y [o`
kr,F.1' STV 't i{'
$1,868,200
b# x
d,t
"
$1500000
:v
'`"�
$1500'000r
Tx
XrFS all [!.Srdt
' "�
i 1 .0
dor 4't' fiu
pn n^�+” ,$3400.000
y+�
`°`
of ;-$3400000
flTMX4 %4
it +''
M ri: if
n�$3 0000
dUw
Fire &Rescue Station #22 (277) ApparatusT
* 57{
r .{�
$100 000
$805 000
y, Yp
yL.ta c�sr $905.000
$905 000
$905 000
Rescue Station
+rk,acruI
tb
T
�Ss[.an,.'.��`
�:1�'r' 2[s
�'F.-",r $3 700000
E�"P
S %iI$3 700 000
�3
s3,,y
>,t^.e
$3 700 00�
Regional Training Center
kr+
ti#n �„
m sa3
-,p. $31 175 000
$31,175 000
r,s”
$31,175000Fyi
&,Rescue'8tat+on #24£,3',`,,.=,�}x="y
mt 4
b ,
I,4;
t.='?x
'[ $3 750 000
I 4: 750 00D
750 000
Station #15
+mrP}r
z"
a�
_�,
a t"'"�wu
,ay'$3
byk
;,a,a;.,$3
(Round FWI) Relocation
$494 000
$3,787.696
sw Fs $4 26P 696
°
$4 281,696
P Ps ..,^•.a-
$4,281,696.-...;r^u-,n.xt
"-t mm-
.-•, Fes. :3
Stalion#13 (Clear6rook)`Relodatidn
..a:d-,
`ti -. hamar.,
,� e.r.,.v,
pr .mn
!'u`o. %+.`=g
....
r, s;<. a._['.
-kms1 1°
1 .000
..X,r .$4.376
"+,-,ti 4,378,000
r:s, $
%>. arT+
c ,,
Ae"
MN $4376000
....
ih•�ppK c ``:R
vs `ti'tl "
m
�`,{E "
$51,587,696
Fire & Rescue Company
Capital Requests q' >$
200 0 0
4i $ 3•^y' E31s'
Fire &"Rescue Capdall.EgWprneOl�' : c "
�,rs,2001-000
1',,,+200 00=!)
OFF 200 000.
E 200 000"F,.$1"000
0
"62% tlOtl 000
Fr,4 E
1327121$1 000000
See Fire & Rescue Company Requests
Amti_ulance RouritliRlll ,`ja.r- �� 1" •$:.—+,;;..tom.,. 2':,tirF .:.nr.5:tr �„�n .r-. '`:,:"zas 5`.d"r•I
a
a. r'a q,$185i000
M ,,,pggrl$185000,;
;e o.0
1ba�:.r,'k $185rDOD
Ambulance Replacement Project for Greenwood Vol Fire &Rescue Co
1Evga axnT i$u1b0i000
$150,000
C
$150,000
Apparatus Ventilation System for Greenwood Vol. Fire & Rescue Co
esw t' a' o -a x w,3 e nr' " F 3�'s4 .6 be
-96
y. "PRNaJde$100, 000
n?}€t,��n
$100,000
''
C
$100,000
9'
$ t,aa
Pumper/Taoker forts tldletown Uol Flre & Reecue Co d ty u+�
["$63000tl
a,$190,000
',3` ? $630 000
1F.�,!."r"$190,000
dgLaC
"ME ,1$630 000
r
P,fntiula'nce`tor Middletown Vol-lFve°BRescueCo �.y,.„r'4h,a+,:,�+m1$pEE.'a iti.a1zhv1•r.-akm
isrt
i"'�"d,'"'*C
d.. 4+b.+$190,000
Eu.aq`• 0
$2,255,000
-. tY
'?+��
k 4i }Y"r( P?
xf
g, £
,
N I Y`r 1
�.',
^-i:v
_.._. 4 +-x ? . ntt'ri$=E r H ..
... .T,b
k.1,s,.,„ 1,-bv....
w_=t..is
;`!9�i` 7
L .:�,. :t„ [, ,. ')...Ykxr
-._.
+
x$858;424,051
1!
s;
Fire & Rescue Company Capital Equipment Requests (<$100K)
+ �`4i7x„",+[F1i""i”
^s. G Y v,„ t*a3T e e ,[ r .m,'fi;4 '1 :+ p & &
ab ;r~a?:1s!';":1;=, kg Nooe,ca� aF ,Sr, Is,xu.6.. �A, ;F, Win. i m<.;::-,.v.Fs 3.. ,n5,n :...,(.
i:,..,.r :^+. "`#'. ..
-:t b .:
ti -Tom'+,.;,. _,.""war._. iva
A= Partial funding from VA [Art, of Aviation
B= Partial funding from FAA
C= radial funding from plivale donations
D= Funding goes beyond displayed 5 years
E= radial funding anticipated through development 8 revenue sources
F= F;;nding Imitated for to displayer 5 years
WA= Not Available
TBD=To be Determined
$0
2012 as 2013
Capital Improvements
Specific or
Approximate Locations
County Administration
I Gainesboro Convenience Site Relocation
2 Albin Convenience Site Expansion
3 Gore Convenience Site Expansion
4 Annex Fadlity / Fire & Rescue Station
5 Round Hill Fire Station Relccation
6 Clearbrook Fire Station Relocation
Fire & Rescue Station 23
8 Fire & Rescue Station 24
- Airport
Library
1 Bowman Library- Parking Lot Sidewalk Addition
2 Nori Frederick County Library Branch
3 library, Branch - Senseny & Greenwood
4 Library Branch - Rt 522 South
DRAFT
i 0 6,000 12.000 24,000
r
Feet
0 1.5 3 6
Miles
Created by Fretlerlck County Department of
Planning & Development
Map represents the Capital Improvment Requests
submltled by various county depar mens.
11108111
6
9 High Schools
Middle Schools
Elementary Schools
Support Facilities
Potential School Facility Locations
OPotential School Locations
PmRered Land
Potential Proffer
I. _ Urban Development Area
SWSA
DRAFT
I Elementary School l(
Stephens
city
Vlr9lnla
0 1 2 4 Miles
Note:
Created by Frederick County Department of
Planning & Development
Map represents the Capital Improvmenl Requests
submitted by Frederick County School Board
11/28/11
Old
High
Facility
t 1 Elementary School
& Grounds
J Snowden BddgeI
School Locations
Are Most
Appropriate
Within the LIDA
Existing County Parks
District Park
Neighborhood Park
Proposed Parks
Q District
Community
Neighborhood
Linear Park Trail
tN UDA
- Please see attached Spreadsheet.
DRAFT
Nate',
Created by Frederick Cowry Department of
Plamiag & Development
Map represmts the Capital lrry meet Requests
submitted by The Dept of Parks & Reare tion
11;0813011
�
Sherandand
0 1 2 4 Miles
tclearbrook
1
w
P
T' to
NE
2012 -2013
Capital Improvement Plan
Transportation Projects
CONTINUE RT37 P LAFI N IFI G
ENGINEERING WORK
q� 1-81 IEXIT
310`MPROVEMENTS
1-81 'EXIT
307 RELOCATION
EAST TEVIS EXTENSION
TO RD WAY RUSSELL 150& 181
0%WARRIOR DR EXTENSION
04O NEW EXIT 307
CHANNING DR
EXTENSION TO RT50
RT11 NOF W
TO
IDENING TO WVLINE
BRUCETOW N RDIH O PE W E LL RD
ALIGNMENTAND INTERSECTION
' +/WIDEN
j
NGRD
NVERLEE WAY; CONNECTION FROM
_
RT50 TO SENSENY RD
=
FOX DR; I NSTALL RT
TURN LANE ONTO RTSY2
a aTs 075 ie I.RaS
r-r-r-r-�-r-rry
#%IPRE NAISSANCE DR
�CkCwrt/ °IFN
Senseny Rd Bike &
mo,
wa.C°SiiG°CFN:KYAYS
Pedestrian Improvements
,+mer+x
0%-, E�tarn Road Plan
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
MEMORANDUM
M 540/665-
1\ �J FAX: 540/665-63956395
To: Frederick County Planning Commission
From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner"T
Subject: Public Hearing— Commercial Telecommunication Towers
Date: December 16, 2011 f
Staff has been requested to revise § 165-204.19 - Telecommunications facilities, commercial.
The primary changes proposed are as follows:
I
I
o Changes to the introductory language to include recognition of a 15.2-2232(A) (Code of
Virginia) review in the ordinance.
e Addition of language that states there must be a need for a facility.
o Clarifying that co -location efforts should extend to buildings and structures generally and
not just existing telecommunication towers.
The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at
their meeting on September 22. 2011. The DRRC endorsed the amendment with minor changes
and recommended it be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. The Planning
Commission discussed this item at their meeting on October 19, 2011. 1 The Planning
Commission had no comments and forwarded the proposed changes to the Board of Supervisors
for discussion. The Board of Supervisors discussed this item at their meeting on November 9,
2011. The Board discussed the current policy for the notification of surrounding properties and
felt that a distance or radius from a proposed tower may be more appropriate to ensure that all
property owners that may be impacted are informed. The current fee schedule for
telecommunication towers was also discussed and how it would change with the additional
notification requirement.
The Board of Supervisors discussed this item again at their meeting on December 14, 2011.
During the discussion, the Board expressed concern and requested changes and clarification with
the co -location requirements, the definition of existing structures and the information required
from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for tower submissions. With those
changes, the Board of Supervisors approved the amendment to be sent forward for public
hearing. To address the concerns expressed by the Board of Supervisors, staff has added
additional, language to clarify that documentation is required by the Federal Communications
Commission indicating that the proposed telecommunication facility is in compliance with FCC
regulations. Additional language outlining what constitutes an "existing structure or tower" has
also been added.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
1
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Re: Telecommunication Towers
December 16, 2011
Additionally, the Board of Supervisors approved the adjoining and surrounding property
notification policy which now requires properties within 2,000 feet of a proposed tower
application to be notified of the public hearings. The Board also discussed changes to the fee
schedule for tower CUP applications, but requested additional information before proceeding.
The attached documents show the existing ordinances with the propose changes (with
strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added). A recommendation from the
Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please
contact me if you have any questions.
i
Attachment: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics and
deletions shown in st iliethr o
CEP/bad
Attachment 1
DRRC Reviewed 9/22/2011
PC Reviewed 10/19/2011
BCS Reviewed 11/9/2011
BOS Reviewed 12/14/2011
Article II
SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS,
AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES
§ 165-204.19 Telecommunications facilities, commercial.
The iRte t of this seetien is h.. e e that the siting of No commercial telecommunication fasilities
I
facility shall be sited, constructed, or operated except pursuant to a ( ee isthFeugh the conditional use
permit issued through the publie heaFing process defined in Part 103 of Article �I of this chapter.
Commercial telecommunication facilities that locate on existing structures and towers shall be exempt
from the conditional use permit requirement. The issuance of a co.n��d.:iIt:`i:o^n�,al use permit for the siting,
construction, and operation of a commercial telecommunication farilities facifit is permitted within
the zoning districts specified in this chapter, provided that, pursuant to Section 15.2-2232(A) of the
Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), the general location or approximate location, character, and
extent of such facilities is substantially in accord with the adopted comprehensive plan or part thereof
and that adjoining properties, surrounding residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas and
properties of significant historic value are not negatively impacted.
A. Information required as part of the conditional use permit application and that the Planning
Commission and the Board of Supervisors may consider in actino on the application shall include,
but not be limited to, the following:
(1) Information regarding the need for the facility, including but not necessarily limited to usaqe
statistics, operational data, and maps and reports showing current and anticipated radio
frequency propagation.
W WA map depicting the search area used in siting each the proposed commercial
communications facility.
(2} Widentification of all service providers and commercial telecommunication facility infrastructure
within a prepesed search area. The applicant shall provide confirmation that aR attempts to
collocate on an existing structures or towers teleea municatien facility has have been made
and, if such attempts were unsuccessful, the reasons so.
(3) (4) Documentation issued by the Federal Communications Commission indicating +Rfpi,maTiRR
deFROPStFatiAg that the proposed commercial telecommunication facility is in compliance with
the Federal Communication Commission's established ANSI/IEEE standards for electromagnetic
field levels and radio frequency radiation.
(Q (5)An affidavit signed by the landowner and by the owner of the facility stating that hams
they are aware that he/she either or both of them may be held responsible for the removal of
the commercial telecommunications facility as stated in § 165-204.19B(7)."
B. If the Board of Supervisors grants a conditional use permit under this section, the The following
standards shall then apply to any property in which a commercial telecommunication facility is sited,
Attachment 1
DRRC Reviewed 9/22/2011
PC Reviewed 10/19/2011
BOS Reviewed 11/9/2011
BOS Reviewed 12/14/2011
in order to promote orderly development and mitigate the negative impacts to adjoining properties,
(1) The Planning Commission may reduce the required setback distance for commercial
telecommunication facilities as required by § 165-201.03B(8) of this chapter if it can be
demonstrated that the location is of equal or lesser impact. When a reduced setback is
requested for a distance less than the height of the tower, a certified Virginia engineer shall
provide verification to the Planning Commission that the tower is designed, and will be
constructed, in a manner that if the tower collapses for any reason the collapsed tower will be
contained in an area around the tower with a radius equal to or lesser Ithan the setback,
measured from the center line of the base of the tower. In no case shall the setback distance be
reduced to less than 1/2 the distance of the tower height. Commercial telecommunication
facilities affixed to existing structures shall be exempt from setback requirements, provided that
they are located no closer to the adjoining property line than the existing structure.
(2) Monopole -type construction shall be required for new commercial telecommunication
towers. The Board of Supervisors may allow lattice -type construction for new
telecommunication towers when existing or planned residential areas will not be impacted and
when the site is not adjacent to identified historical resources.
(3) Advertising shall be prohibited on commercial telecommunication facilities except for
signage providing ownership identification and emergency information. No more than two signs
shall be permitted. Such signs shall be limited to 1.5 square feet in area and shall be posted no
higher than 10 feet above grade.
(4) When lighting is required on commercial telecommunication facility towers, dual
lighting shall be utilized which provides daytime white strobe lighting and nighttime red
pulsating lighting unless otherwise mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration or the
Federal Communications Commission. Strobe lighting, shall be shielded from ground view to
mitigate illumination to neighboring properties. Equipment buildings and other accessory
structures operated in conjunction with commercial telecommunication facility towers shall
utilize infrared lighting and motion -detector lighting to prevent continuous illumination.
(5) Commercial telecommunication facilities shall be constructed with materials of a
galvanized finish or painted a noncontrasting blue or gray unless otherwise mandated by the
Federal Aviation Administration or the Federal Communication Commission.
(6) Commercial telecommunication facilities shall be adequately enclosed to prevent access
by persons other than employees of the service provider. Appropriate landscaping and opaque
screening shall be provided to ensure that equipment buildings and other accessory structures
are not visible from adjoining properties, roads or other rights-of-way.
(7) Any antenna or tower that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall be
considered abandoned, and the owner of such tower shall remove same within 90 days of
receipt of notice from the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. Removal
Attachment 1
DRRC Reviewed 9/22/2011
PC Reviewed 10/19/2011
BOS Reviewed 11/9/2011
BOS Reviewed 12/14/2011
includes the removal of the tower, all tower and fence footers, underground cables and support
buildings. If there are two or more users of a single tower, then this provision shall not become
effective until all users cease using the tower. If the tower is not removed within the ninety -day
period, the County will remove the facility and a lien may be placed to recover expenses.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
VMEMORANDUM Department of Planning and Development
MEMORANDUM 540/665-5651
To: Frederick County Planning Commission
From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner NP
Subject: Public Hearing — Riparian Buffers
Date: December 16, 2011
Staff has been requested to review the riparian buffer requirements contained within the Zoning
Ordinance and the provisions for disturbing and crossing them.
Pertinent definitions to this amendment are as follows:
• RIPARIAN BUFFER - An area of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation that permits inundation
by water and is at least 35 feet in width, measured outward from both sides of a natural
waterway beginning along the slope of the ground from the channel scar line. A riparian
buffer is managed to maintain the integrity of stream channels and reduce the effect of upland
sources of pollution by trapping, filtering, and converting sediments, nutrients, and other
chemicals.
• NATURAL WATERWAY - Creeks, streams, runs, or other annual or perennial waterways
identified on United States Geological Survey, Commonwealth of Virginia or Frederick
County maps.
• ACCESS - A way or means of vehicular or pedestrian approach to provide physical entrance
to a property.
• ROADS - A street dedicated to or owned by Frederick County or the Virginia Department of
Transportation; also, existing privately owned rights-of-way which serve as the principal
means of access to more than one property.
In accordance with §165-201.08 - Protection of environmental features. Wetlands, natural
waterways, and riparian buffers - Disturbance of wetlands is only permitted in accordance with the
requirements of the United States Army Corps of Engineers or other qualificd state or federal agency.
The disturbance of natural waterways and riparian buffers is prohibited, except when necessary for
public utilities, public facilities, or roads. Therefore, under the current definitions and ordinances,
riparian buffers cannot be disturbed for the construction of new private roads or for private access to
any property.
Staff has prepared an ordinance amendment that includes the following:
• Amendment to allow riparian buffers to be disturbed for the following:
o Public or private utilities;
o Public facilities, access to a property or roads;
o Riparian buffer restoration or enhancement projects;
o Creation of wetlands;
o Pedestrian, recreational and/or bicycle trails; and,
o Planning Commission waiver to allow for the disturbance of riparian buffers for
the creation of park areas or for stormwater management purposes.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Frederick County Planning Commission
Re: Riparian Buffers
December 16, 2011
• Amendment to the definition of "road" to remove the word "existing".
The item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at their
July and September 2011 meetings. The DRRC endorsed the amendment with minor changes and
recommended it be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. The Planning Commission
discussed this item at their meeting on October 19, 2011. The Planning Commission had no
comments and forwarded the proposed changes to the Board of Supervisors to 11 The
Board of Supervisors discussed this item on November 9, 2011; the Board had no changes and
forwarded the item to the Planning Commission for public hearing.
The attached document shows the existing ordinance with the proposed changes (with
strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added). A recommendation from the
Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please
contact me if you have any questions.
Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics and
for deletions.
CEP/bad
Attachment 1
DRRC Reviewed 09/22/11
PC Reviewed 10/19/11
BOS Reviewed 11/9/2011
ARTICLE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
§ 165-101.02 Definitions & word usage.
RIPARIAN BUFFER - An area of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation that permits inundation by water and is
at least 35 feet in width, measured outward from both sides of a natural waterway beginning along the
slope of the ground from the channel scar line. A riparian buffer is managed to maintain the Integrity of
stream channels and reduce the effect of upland sources of pollution by trapping, filtering, and
converting sediments, nutrients, and other chemicals.
ROAD - A street dedicated to or owned by Frederick County or the Virginia Department of
Transportation; also, exi5tiRg privately owned rights-of-way which serve as the principal means of access
to more than one property.
STREET - A roadway dedicated to or owned by Frederick County or the Virginia Department of
Transportation; also, existing privately owned rights-of-way which serve as the principal means of access
to more than one property.
Article II
SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES
§ 165-201.08 Protection of environmental features.
B. All developments which require a rezoning, master development plan, subdivision design plan, site
plan, or preliminary sketch plan shall preserve the following environmental features as described:
(3) Wetlands, natural waterways, and riparian buffers. Disturbance of wetlands is only permitted in
accordance with the requirements of the United States Army Corps of Engineers or other
qualified state or federal agency. The disturbance of natural waterways and riparian buffers is
prohibited, except when necessary for, and only in conformance with Part 702, the following:
i. Public or private utilities;
ii. Public facilities, access to a property or roads (only perpendicular riparian buffer
crossings shall be permitted);
iii. Riparian buffer restoration or enhancement projects;
iv. Creation of wetlands;
v. Pedestrian, recreational and/or bicycle trails, and,
vi. The Planning Commission may allow for the disturbance of riparian buffers for the
creation of park areas or for stormwater management purposes.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
MEMORANDUM 540/665-5651
�1L-11\ �J FAX: 540/665-6395
To: Frederick County Planning Commission
From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP N
Subject: Planning Commission Discussion
Low Impact Design & Related Design Ordinance Revisions. Proposed revisions
to the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances to allow for low impact design and an
increase in the maximum cul-de-sac length allowance
Staff has received a request to revise the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances to allow for
alternative designs to implement low impact design techniques in residential development. The
request seeks flexible private road standards in an effort to minimize impervious' surfaces, which
would enable improvements to stormwater runoff quantity and quality. Ultimately, staff seeks
the Board's direction regarding the advancement of the.proposed ordinance revisions.
The proposed revisions include the following:
e § 165-202.03. Motor vehicle access. Revision to provide the Zoning Administrator with
the ability to waive the curb and gutter requirement for private roads when low impact
design is proposed. The proposed curb and gutter elimination would also need approval
from the Director of Public Works.
e § 144.17. Streets. Revision to the street layout requirement for the continuation of
planned, existing or platted streets on adjoining parcels. This revision would eliminate
the need to continue a road when such continuation would result in an adverse impact on
exiting traffic patterns and access.
• § 144.18. Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways. Revision to the sidewalk requirement
to add "sidewalks" in addition to walkways and add the Director of Public Works and the
Building Official as reviewing parties to the allowance of alternative materials for
sidewalks and walkways.
e § 144.24. Lot requirements. Revision to allow individual lots on private roads to be up
to 1,000 feet from a state maintained road and allowance for the Planning Commission to
allow lots to be up to 1,200 feet from the state maintained road.
The Public Works Committee discussed this amendment at their meeting on October 25, 2011.
The Committee recognized that new state regulations to manage stormwater will place added
responsibilities on the County, and that it may be advantageous to implement flexible local
ordinances. The Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) discussed this
amendment at their meeting on October 27, 2011. The Committee discussed the proposed
changes to the motor vehicle access portion and recommended that the Zoning Administrator be
able to waive the curb and gutter requirement (the original amendment contained a Planning
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Page 2
Planning Commission
Memo: Low Impact Design & Related Design Ordinance Revisions
December 16, 2011
Commission Waiver). The Committee also wanted to see the Building Official added to the
reviewing agencies for the allowance of "alternative materials" for sidewalks to ensure ADA
compliance. With those two changes, the Committee recommended the amendment be sent
forward for review by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.
This item was then discussed at a joint work session with the Board of Supervisors, Planning
Commission and the Public Works Committee on December 7, 2011. Planning Commission
members were concerned with completely removing curb and gutter and the potential for going
back to roadside ditches. The use of low rise, mountable, zero profile curb was discussed to
ensure that integrity of the road was maintained. There was considerable discussion regarding
the future monitoring of the stormwater runoff from the development and what measures would
be in place should the proposed low impact design techniques fail. There were no other concerns
(raised about the proposed four ordinance amendments and the Board concurred that the item
should be brought to the next Board meeting as a discussion item.
The Planning Commission discussed this item at their meeting on December 7, 2011. The
Commission expressed concern for completely eliminating curb and gutter from private streets
due to the potential for the roadway edge of asphalt to deteriorate. Commission members
recommended the use of mountable or zero profile curb (ribbon curb) for private streets utilizing
low impact design.
The Board of Supervisors discussed this item at their meeting on December 14, 2011. The Board
expressed concern over the monitoring of the stormwater as well as the use of low impact design
techniques should the design fail. The Board also discussed the waivers contained in the
ordinances and wanted to make sure that waivers weren't approved prior to development plans
being reviewed or approved by the Board.
The attached document shows the existing ordinance with the proposed changes (with
strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added). A recommendation from the
Planning Commission on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please
contact me if you have any questions.
Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics
CEP/bad
ATTACHMENT
Low Impact Design & Related Design Ordinance Revisions
Chapter 165 — Zoning
Article II
SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC
USES
Part 202 — Off -Street Parking, Loading and Access
§ 165-202.03 Motor vehicle access.
A. New driveways.
(14) Private roads providing lot access to multifamily and single-family small lot housing, as
permitted in §144-24 of the Subdivision Ordinance, shall be a minimum; of 20 feet in
width. The pavement design for the private roads shall include eight inches of
aggregate base material, Type I, Size No. 21-13, and shall be paved with a 165 No. psy
asphalt concrete, Type SM -2A, surface treatment. In addition, curb and gutters,
standard curb CG -6, CG -7 or roll-top curb and sidewalks shall be provided) along private
roads; however, the Planni�a„ Board of Supervisors may approve a waiver
of sidewalks on private streets, provided that another recreationalI amenity is
substituted for the sidewalk. Additionally, the Zoning Administrator ml ay waive the
requirement for curb and gutters and allow alternate pavement design to
to be acceptable by the Director of Public Works.
Chapter 144 — Subdivision of Land
ARTICLE V
Design Standards
§ 144.17. Streets.
I
B. Street layout. The layout, width, grade, design and location of all streets shall conform to
the approved final master development plan, the standards contained in !the Frederick
County Comprehensive Plan, Virginia Department of Transportation requirements and the
following regulations:
(2) Provisions shall be made for the continuation of planned, existing or platted streets on
adjoining parcels. The design of such streets shall be coordinated in terms of location,
width, grades and drainage. Such continuations shall be made to provide access to
adjoining parcels, to provide for streets identified in the Comprehensive Plan and to
provide for safe and adequate traffic patterns and access. Such continuations may not
be appropriate where they provide for access between substantially different uses or
where they will result in adverse traffic impacts on existing neighborhoods or existing
traffic patterns and access. Where no lots front on the road, the planning r' mwis`iei;
Board of Supervisors may require the design and grading of the right-of-way to
ATTACHMENT
conform to the Virginia Department of Transportation standards with a minimum of
temporary or permanent seeding.
§ 144.18. Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways.
C. All sidewalks and walkways shall be a minimum of five feet wide. Sidewalks shall conform
to VDOT standards. Alternative walkways 'ha" be appr-oved by the Plan in
Cow_m_issiR4q and shall he P.Rnstndcted in a manner tb4 is acceptable to the Subdivisio
MministfatEw. designs and construction materials for sidewalks and walkways may be
approved by the Subdivision Administrator to accommodate to accommodate low impact
design. These alternative designs and materials shall only be permitted when acceptable
to the Submission Administrator and when approved by the Director of Public Works and
the Building Official.
§ 144.24. Lot requirements.
C. Lot access. 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.
(2) Single-family small lot housing, single-family attached housing and
multifamily housing.
(a) Lots
in subdivisions to be used for the following
defined
by Chapter 165, Zoning, need not abut public
[i]
Duplexes.
[2]
Multiplexes.
[3]
Atrium houses.
[4]
Townhouses.
[5]
Weak -link townhouses.
[6]
Garden apartments.
[7]
Single-family small lot housing.
[8]
Age -restricted multifamily housing.
(b)
types, as
When such lots do not abut public streets, they shall abut private roads,
parking lots or access easements. The length and extent of private
roads, driveways and parking aisles providing access to lots shall be
minimized, and public streets shall be provided in larger subdivisions
when substantial distances are involved. Individual lots shall be no
more than S99 1,000 feet from a state -maintained road, as measured
from the public street along the private access road. The NaaRing
Gemmissiaa Board of Supervisors may allow lots to be located as much
as 899 1,200 feet from a state -maintained road in cases where
enhanced circulation is provided with a driveway loop.
2