Loading...
PC 02-20-02 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia FEBRUARY 20, 2002 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) January 2 and January 16, 2002 Minutes .................................... (A) 2) Committee Reports ................................................ (no tab) 3) Citizen Comments ................................................. (no tab) PUBLIC HEARING 4) Conditional Use Permit #04-02 of Rose M. Lauck for a Cottage Occupation to operate a Piano School. This property is located at 303 Tanager Drive and is identified with Property Identification Number 75E-3-2-154 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. (Ms. Ragsdale)........................................................ (B) 5) Revision of Conditional Use Permit #18-01 for the Cross Junction Tower, submitted by Shared Towers, Inc., for a height increase from the approved 195 -foot lattice -type telecommunications facility to 260 feet. This property is located at the corner of Collinsville Road and Cross Junction Road, approximately 290 feet from Northwestern Pike (Rt. 522N) and is identified with Property Identification Number 18-A-3 8 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. (Mr. Lawrence) .......................................................(C) 6) Conditional Use Permit #05-02 for the Hunting Ridge Tower, submitted by Shared Towers, Inc., for a 195 -foot -high lattice -type telecommunications facility. This property is located at 329 Hunting Ridge Road and is identified with Properly Identification Number 30- A -98C in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. (Mr. Lawrence) .......................................................(D) 7) Expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), to incorporate approximately 199 acres of property located south of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), in the vicinity of Hudson Hollow Road (Route 636) and Sherando Park, in the Opequon Magisterial District. Sherando High School and Sherando Park occupy approximately 170 acres of the expansion. (Mr. Lawrence) ....................................................... (E) 8) Proposed Text Amendments to Section 165-28, Loading Areas, and Section 165-145, Definitions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. If approved, these changes would provide greater flexibility to small businesses, with minimal loading space activity. It would also clarify several ambiguities in the current language of the Zoning Ordinance. (Mr- Camp) .......................................................... (F) 9) Other 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 January 2, 2002. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Gene E. Fisher, Citizen at Large; Sidney A. Reyes, Board Liaison; Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District; and Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District STAFF PRESENT: Evan A. Wyatt, Planning Director; Eric R. Lawrence, Deputy Planning Director; Mark R. Cheran, Planner I; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS FOR 2002 Chairman DeHaven asked those persons who are currently serving on committees to continue to serve in their capacities until the Board of Supervisors appoints the two new Red Bud District commissioners. This arrangement was agreeable with the remainder of the Commission. ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR 2002 Election of Charles S. DeHaven Jr. Chairman The Chairman declared nominations open for Chairman. The nomination of Charles S. Deflaven, Jr., for Chairman was made by Commissioner Ours Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 776 -2 - and seconded by Commissioner Kriz. Motion was made by Commissioner Ours, seconded by Commissioner Kriz, and unanimously passed to close nominations for Chairman. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously elect Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., as Chairman of the Planning Commission for the Year of 2002. Election of Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman Chairman DeHaven declared nominations open for Vice Chairman. The nomination of Roger L. Thomas was made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Kriz. Motion was made by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Kriz, and unanimously passed to close the nominations for Vice Chairman. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously elect Roger L. Thomas as Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission for the Year of 2002. Election of Evan A. Wyatt, Secretary Chairman DeHaven declared nominations open for Secretary. The nomination of Evan A. Wyatt was made by Commissioner Morris and seconded by Commissioner Light. Motion was made by Commissioner Kriz, seconded by Commissioner Fisher, and unanimously passed to close the nominations for Secretary. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously elect Evan A. Wyatt as Secretary of the Planning Commission for the Year of 2002. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 777 -3- 2002 Meeting Schedule Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Ours, BE iT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission voted unanimously to have their regular monthly 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 Subcommittee on the second Monday ofeach month at 7:30 p.m.; and the Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee on the fourth Thursday of each month at 7:30 p.m. REAPPOINTMENT TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Chairman DeHaven reappointed Commissioner Roger L. Thomas to serve as the Frederick County Planning Commission's representative to the Winchester -Frederick County Economic Development Commission for a two-year term. (February 1, 2002 through January 31, 2004) COMMITTEE REPORTS Winchester City Planning Commission Mr. DiBenedetto reported that the chairman of the Winchester City Planning Commission is retiring and in two weeks the Commission will be electing a new chairman. He also reported that the Commission recently revised their fee schedule. PUBLIC HEARINGS Conditional Use Permit Application #22-01 for the White Tail Lane Tower, submitted by Shared Towers, LLC, for a 195 -foot -high lattice tower telecommunications facility. This property, zoned RA, is located on White Tail Lane, off North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522N), and is identified with P.I.N. 19-A-27 in the Gainesboro District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Planner Mark Cheran said the applicant proposes to construct a 195 -foot lattice -type telecommunications tower designed to accommodate commercial telecommunication carriers and to be located on a 118.19 -acre site east of North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522N). Planner Cheran said there were no adverse comments from any of the reviewing agencies. He said that staff believes this application has adequately addressed the requirements of the County Zoning Ordinance in that a need for this facility, based on a lack of Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 778 -4 - coverage and capacity in this part of the County, has been demonstrated. Planner Cheran continued, stating that the applicant has offered to provide space on this tower for Frederick County emergency communications free of charge per the applicant's letter, dated November 15, 2001. He next read a list of recommended conditions, should the Commission choose to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Fisher recalled that at the Commission's December 5, 2001 meeting, the applicant presented a chart showing the coverage area for the three towers previously proposed. Commissioner Fisher asked why a fourth tower was now proposed when they had previously stated the area would be adequately covered with three towers. Mr. Mark Smith with Greenway Engineering, representing the applicant, Shared Towers, LLC, said this particular site was included because they were attempting to accommodate a service carrier, Triton, PCS, who was present at the Commission's December 5, 2001 meeting. He said there is a low area with steep banks at Little Isaac Creek in which this carrier's service cannot adequately cover. Mr. Smith added that the lattice -type tower is proposed because it is less expensive and is not located in a high -visibility area. Mr. Kamal Doshi of Shared Towers, LLC, the applicant, said the three tower sites originally proposed are adequate for other service providers with appropriate technology all the way out to the West Virginia line. Mr. Doshi said this additional site, however, will strengthen the entire system. Chairman DeHaven inquired how close the proposed tower site was from the Timber Ridge airport. Mr. Doshi gave the approximate distance and location and stated that the tower would be marked and lighted at the airport's request. Some ofthe Commission members believed that if service was not installed on the tower within 12-18 months, then the CUP should be revoked. They believed this would discourage tower speculators from seeking towers without having a commitment from a service provider to use the tower. The Commissioners were seeking a way to control the number of towers that could be placed in a given area. It was pointed out that the code requirements do not specifically address tower providers and it was a concern of the Commission that towers could be constructed without a tenant or, in order to address the needs of multiple carriers, the County could end up having towers placed literally next door to each other. Another concern raised was the regularity of being asked to use the lattice -type construction. They believed that the monopole was less intrusive and that "less expensive" was not an acceptable reason for granting the use of a lattice tower. Commissioners believed it was their responsibility to minimize the impact this industry will have on the viewshed of Frederick County. Commission members believed that all of these issues needed to be discussed at the committee level. The Planning Staff pointed out that additional conditional use permit applications from a different applicant have been submitted to the Planning Department for this area and will be presented to the Commission for review at an upcoming meeting. Mr. Smith asked if he could make a point of clarification; he said that the other applications that are coming in are by another tower provider, SBA, not a service carrier. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, but no one came forward to speak. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Fisher, Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 779 MV BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission, by a majority vote, does hereby recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit Application #22-01 for the White Tail Lane Tower, submitted by Shared Towers, LLC for a 195 -foot -high lattice -type telecommunications facility with the following conditions: All zoning ordinance requirements and review agency comments shall be addressed and complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for co -locating personal wireless services providers. A minor site plan shall be approved by the County. 4. The tower shall be removed by the applicant or property owner within 12 months of abandonment of operation. 5. This conditional use permit will be revoked if it is not placed in service within 18 months of its approval. The vote on this application was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE CUP #22-01): Fisher, Kriz, DeHaven, Light, Unger NO: Watt, Morris, Ours Proposed Amendment to Chapter 144, Subdivision Ordinance, Article IV, Subdivision Review Procedures, Section 144-13C, Final Plat Approval. The proposed amendment is intended to provide consistency with Section 15.2-2241(8) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, pertaining to plat recordation procedures. Action - Recommended Approval Planning Director Evan A. Wyatt stated that staff had met with the County Attorney's Office to review the current ordinance standards for plat recordation and discovered one inconsistency with a section of the Code of Virginia. He said the proposed amendment increases the time for plat approval from 30 days to six months and will bring our local ordinance into compliance with the State Code. There were no citizen comments. The Commission believed the amendment was appropriate. Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Ours, Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 780 M BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the amendment to Chapter 144, Subdivision Ordinance, Article IV, Subdivision Review Procedures, Section 144-13C, Final Plat Approval, as presented. The proposed amendment is intended to provide consistency with Section 15.2-2241(8) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, pertaining to plat recordation procedures. PUBLIC MEETING Request for a waiver to increase woodlands disturbance on the O'Sullivan tract in the Westview Business Center, submitted by Mr. Mark Smith of Greenway Engineering. This property is identified by P.I.N. 64 -A -159H in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Stipulation Deputy Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence stated that Mr. Mark Smith of Greenway Engineering has submitted a request for a woodlands disturbance waiver on behalf of the property owners of the O'Sullivan tract located in the Westview Business Center. Deputy Director Lawrence stated that the property is approximately 26 acres, zoned MI (Light Industrial) and B2 (Business General), and was previously master planned in 1987. He said the applicant is requesting permission to disturb up to 60 percent of the woodlands on this site in order to more fully develop the property for light industrial use. Deputy Director Lawrence continued, stating that the applicant has provided for the establishment of a buffer, or "perimeter tree save area," along the northern, eastern, and southern perimeter of the tract, essentially preserving the natural landscape while maintaining a buffer against the adjoining properties and the Rt. 50 right-of-way. He said this buffer would contain approximately 8.5 acres, protecting approximately 40 percent of the tract's woodlands. Mr. Mark Smith of Greenway Engineering, the representative for the owners ofthe O'Sullivan tract, stated that he will be submitting several other woodlands waivers to the Commission in the coming year; he said that any guidance or comments from the Commission would be helpful. Commissioner Morns commented that he was not unduly concerned about these kinds of woodlands disturbances, especially in light of the fact that replanting seems to be a viable method of replacing trees. Commissioner Light was in favor of including tree canopy calculations on site plans, along with all the other necessary calculations, such as building square footage, parking lot areas, walkways, etc., showing the percentage of tree canopy on the site. Chairman DeHaven inquired if the applicant believed he could still accomplish the storm water management functions necessary in the ravine and if the line had already been installed within the existing sanitary easement. Mr. Smith was confident that the storm water management functions could be accomplished and he replied that the line had already been installed within the sanitary easement. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 781 -7 - Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, but no one came forward to speak. The Commission believed this woodlands waiver request was appropriate and forwarded a recommendation for approval to the Board of Supervisors with a stipulation that a plat containing metes and bounds is submitted to guarantee tree save areas on subsequent site plans. Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the waiver request to increase woodlands disturbance on the O'Sullivan tract in the Westview Business Center with the stipulation that a survey description for the "perimeter tree save area" be required to ensure that subsequent site development plans do not encroach into this area. DISCUSSION ITEMS DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED 2002-2003 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN Deputy Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence stated that the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) met with county department representatives to discuss new project requests and project modification requests associated with the 2002-2003 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). He said that following discussion, the CPPS evaluated all the projects proposed for inclusion in the 2002-2003 CIP and established a prioritized list that was forwarded out of committee with a recommendation for approval. Deputy Planning Director Lawrence summarized the plan and the process for the Commission. Representatives from various county agencies and departments were present to answer questions from the Commission. Commissioner Unger inquired why a new fire station was needed on Rt. 277, considering the distance from Double Toll Gate. Mr. Gary DuBrueler, Director of Fire and Rescue Services, stated that a number of years ago, five areas of Frederick County were identified in the Comprehensive Plan as needing increased services. He said that with the approval of the Shenandoah Subdivision, a projected service increase of approximately 4,500 elderly residents was estimated. Commissioner Unger said he understood the Shenandoah development was going to donate land for the construction of a fire station. Mr. DuBrueler said that the Shenandoah developers were willing to donate land only at the entrance of their town center; he explained that serving surrounding County areas from this location was not feasible. Mr. DuBrueler said that if a location would have been provided on the Rt. 277 corridor, the Shenandoah development, as well as Stephens City and the Tasker Road/ Rt. 277 area, could be served. Mr. DuBrueler said the call volume from Tasker Road/Rt. 277 has drastically increased in the last year because of the increase in construction of homes. There next ensued some discussion on why the Round Hill Volunteer Fire Station was included on the CIP as a relocation project. It was pointed out by Mr. DuBrueller that although this project is being done completely with private funds, it needs to be on the CIP so that proffer money could be channeled to the volunteer company to assist with the construction. A couple of the Commissioners, who were members ofthe CPPS, believed it would be helpful for the county agencies and departments to supply the CPPS with technical data, either quantitative or Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 782 -8 - statistical, in order to justify the need for acquisition of the project sought. They believed this would aid in prioritizing the various projects. No action was required by the Commission. The consensus of the Commission was that the CIP was ready to be advertised for public hearing. DISCUSSION OF A SEWER AND WATER SERVICE AREA (SWSA) EXPANSION SOUTH OF FAIRFAX PIKE (ROUTE 277) IN THE SHERANDO PARK AREA Deputy Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence stated that the Board of Supervisors directed the staff to develop options for the extension of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) south of Fairfax Pike (Rt. 277) in the Sherando Park area. He said that the extension is intended to enable existing residences, many of whom claim to have failing health systems, to utilize the public water and sewer system. Deputy Director Lawrence stated that in recent months, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) reviewed, and the Board of Supervisors has approved, an extension of the SWSA to enable the Pioneer Trailer Park, who made the request because oftheir failing lagoon system, to utilize the public sewer and water system. He said that a number of residential properties in the vicinity of the Pioneer facility have also expressed concern with the potential for failing health systems. Deputy Director Lawrence continued, stating thatthree alternatives for SWSA expansion were presented by the staff to the CPPS. He said that the CPPS believed that none of the three alternatives presented by the staff were acceptable, however, the CPPS did recommend another alternative: to expand the SWSA to include Sherando High School, Sherando Park, Pioneer Trailer Park, residences on the east side of Hudson Hollow Road, and the Fulton trucking property (Alternative 4). Deputy Director Lawrence presented all four alternatives to the Commission. The Commission and staff members discussed the alternatives presented. Commissioner Morris said he would be opposed to any alternative that would include the Double Church Road corridor because it would potentially cause development to encroach on the Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District. Planning Director Wyatt came forward to point out a few observations he had concerning Alternatives 1 and 4. Director Wyatt said the two plans are essentially the same, however, Alternative 1 does not include a section on the north side at the intersection of Fairfax Pike and White Oak Road. He said that the Rite Aid site is currently zoned B2 and the staff has an opinion from the County Attorney which states that the Capital Properties' site, which is approximately 20 acres in size and zoned B2, has the legal right to be served with public water and sewer because they granted the easement to allow water and sewer through their property to serve the Sherando High School. He believed it made sense to provide water and sewer along a minor arterial road system to serve commercial development. Director Wyatt believed this was a viable corridor because it had existing commercial zoning and some of the area was already served. Mr. Mark Smith of Greenway Engineering came forward and commented that he receives Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 783 many inquiries from commercial and residential developers for the area from White Oak to Dinosaur Land/ Double Toll Gate, and up to Tasker. Mr. Smith said the County will soon need to look at this corridor for the next area of pro -active planning for fire stations, walking trails, parks and recreation areas, etc. After some discussion, the Planning Commission preferred Alternatives 1 a^d 4 and believed they would be completely acceptable to either alternative. Alternative 1 and 4 are described as follows: Alternative 1: Alternative 1 expands the SWSA by approximately 304 acres, and encompasses 42 properties. Ofthe 42 properties, 17 are currently serviced by public facilities. Staff estimates that 38 structures are located within the proposed extension area. A majority of the acreage included in Alternative 1 is county owned: Sherando High School and Sherando Park. The proposed expansion would include those properties fronting on Fairfax Pike and White Oak Road. Alternative 4: Alternative 4, recommended by the CPPS. Expands the SWSA by approximately 199 acres, and encompasses 15 properties. Of the 15 properties, 5 are currently served, or have been approved for service, by public facilities. A majority ofthe acreage included in Alternative 4 is county owned: Sherando High School and Sherando Park (approximately 170 acres). No action was required by the Commission at this time. The staff said they would forward the Commission's preferred alternatives, for the reasons discussed, to the Board of Supervisors. OTHER PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS AMENDMENT Planning Director Evan A. Wyatt stated that staff had presented a proposed amendment to the Bylaws of the Planning Commission for discussion at the Commission's November 7, 2001 meeting. He said that staff advised the Commission that the County had adopted a Freedom of Information Act Policy which allowed for formal recorded minutes to be provided to the public in a draft form. He stated that this adopted policy created an inconsistency with the Commission's Bylaws which stated that minutes will not be provided to the public until approved by the Planning Commission. Director Wyatt said that he has modified Section 8-2-1 accordingly and requested the Commission's approval ofthe change in order to be consistent with County policy. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Ours, Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 784 -10 - BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve the revision to the Planning Commission Bylaws, Section 8-2-1, as follows: 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. DISCUSSION OF PLANNING COMMISSION RETREAT Commission and staff discussed the Board of Supervisors' suggestion that the Planning Commission's 2002 Retreat be moved from February 2, 2002 to sometime in March, April, or May because the new Board members were scheduled to be sworn in on January 9, 2002. It was pointed out that the supervisors may be better able to contribute once they've been through a couple Board meetings or have a retreat on their own beforehand. The majority of the Planning Commission members preferred the month of March, however, they believed some input from the Board would be helpful as to when the supervisors believed it would be best to have the retreat, in order to be the most productive for everyone. ADJOURNMENT unammous vote. No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. by Respectfully submitted, Evan A. Wyatt, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 2, 2002 Page 785 • • i 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 January 16, 2002. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Gene E. Fisher, Citizen at Large; William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District; Sidney A. Reyes, Board Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison STAFF PRESENT: Evan A. Wyatt, Planning Director; Eric R. Lawrence, Deputy Planning Director; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 5, 2001 Upon motion made by Mr. Kriz and seconded by Mr. Thomas, the minutes of December 5, 2001 were unanimously approved as presented. COMMITTEE REPORTS Economic Development Commission (EDC) Commissioner Thomas reported that the EDC is working on their "Mission Statement" and future direction. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 786 -2 - Sanitation Authority (SA) - 11/20/01 Mtg. Commissioner Fisher said the SA's Executive Director, Mr. Wellington Jones, reported that rainfall was below average and in deficit conditions, however, the quarries have remained stable. PUBLIC HEARINGS Request to remove four parcels totaling 160.80 acres from the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. These parcels, owned by Rinker Properties, L.L.C., are located along Marlboro Road (Rt. 631) and are identined with P.I.N.s 73-A-95, 73-A-99, 73 -A -99A, and 73-A-102 in the Back Creek District. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Cordell Watt said that he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this request, due to a possible conflict of interest. Planning Director Evan A. Wyatt stated that Mr. Dudley Rinker has requested the removal of four parcels totaling 160.80 acres, owned by Rinker Properties, L.L.C., from the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. Director Wyatt said that Mr. Rinker has identified a need to pursue other options for this acreage due to the financial constraints that local orchardists have experienced over the past several years. He pointed out that Section 15.2-4314 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, provides property owners with the ability to request removal of land from an agricultural and forestal district through a public process via the local governing body. Director Wyatt added that the ADAC (Agricultural District Advisory Committee) considered this request during their meeting of November 27, 2001 and unanimously recommended that the four parcels be removed from the District. Mr. Dudley Rinker of Rinker Properties, L.L.C. stated that he is continuing with orcharding the property at the present time, but doesn't know how long he will continue to do so. He wanted to re -open the property to other options. Commission members asked Mr. Rinker why he believed the orchard industry was in a downward cycle. Mr. Rinker gave his thoughts on why he believed the general conditions of the apple industry were depressed and why local orchardists were having a difficult time competing on a world-wide market. Commission members asked the staff to explain the significance of being in or out of an agricultural and forestal district. Director Wyatt said that being within the district provides certain guarantees at the State level, such as guaranteed tax rates and protection from public utilities; however, membership in the district also provides support to the farming community by various means. Director Wyatt pointed out that the amount of acreage within Frederick County's agricultural and forestal districts is lessening due to the viability of local agriculture. There were no public comments. No other issues were raised by the Commission. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 787 -3 - Upon motion made by Commissioner Unger and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the request by Rinker Properties, L.L.C. to remove four parcels, identified with P.LN.s 73-A-95. 13-A-99, 73 -A -99A, and 73-A-102, totaling 160.00 acres, from the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. (Note: Commissioner Watt abstained from voting.) Request to include one parcel totaling 107.75 acres into the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. This parcel, owned by Ruth Gregory, is located along Middle Road (Rt. 628) and is identified with P.I.N. 62-A-34 in the Back Creek District. Action - Recommended Approval Planning Director Evan A. Wyatt stated that Ms. Ruth Gregory has requested the inclusion of one parcel totaling 107.79 acres into the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. Director Wyatt pointed out that Section 15.2-4310 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended provides property owners with the ability to request additions of land into an existing agricultural and forestal district through a public process via the local governing body. He added that the ADAC (Agricultural District Advisory Committee) considered this request during their meeting of November 27, 2001 and unanimously recommended the inclusion of this parcel into the District. Ms. Ruth Gregory was available for questions. There were no public comments. No issues were raised and the Commission believed the request was appropriate. Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the request by Ms. Ruth Gregory to include one parcel, identified with P.I.N. 62-A-34, totaling 107.79 acres, into the South Frederick Agricultural and Forestal District. Request to include six parcels totaling 381.34 acres into the Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District as follows: P.I.N.s 85 -A -125,85-A-130, and 85-A-131, owned by Mary Ritenour; P.I.N. 85-A-132, owned by Sandra Ritenour; P.I.N. 85-A-129, owned by Steven and Mary Ritenour; and P.I.N. 85 -A -125A, owned by Benjamin and Priscilla Ritenour. All parcels are located along Peace and Plenty Lane in the Opequon Magisterial District. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 788 -4 - Action - Recommended Approval Planning Director Evan A. Wyatt stated that Frederick County Extension Agent, Gary DeOms, on behalf of several members of the Ritenour family, has requested the inclusion of Parcels 85-A-125, 85 -A -125A, 85-A- 129, 85-A-130, 85-A-131, and 85-A-132, totaling 381.34 acres, into the Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District. Director Wyatt pointed out that Section 15.2-4310 of the Code of Virginia, 1950. as amended, provides property owners with the ability to request additions of land into an existing agricultural and forestal district through a public process via the local governing body. He added that the ADAC (Agricultural District Advisory Committee) considered this request during their meeting of November 27, 2001 and unanimously recommended the inclusion of these parcels into the District. There were no public comments. No issues were raised and the Commission believed the request was appropriate. Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval ofthe request to include six parcels totaling 381.34 acres into the Double Church Road Agricultural and Forestal District as follows: P.I.N.s 85-A-125, 85-A-130, and 85-A-131, owned by Mary Ritenour; P.I.N. 85-A-132, owned by Sandra Ritenour; P.I.N. 85-A-129, owned by Steven and Mary Ritenour; and P.I.N. 85- A -125A, owned by Benjamin and Priscilla Ritenour. Conditional Use Permit #01-02 for the Cold Spring Tower, submitted by SBA Properties, Inc./Triton PCS (SunCom), for a 199 -foot monopole telecommunications tower. This property is located at 6298 North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522N) and is identified with P.I.N. 19 -A -15A in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Deferred Indefinitely at the Applicant's Request Deputy Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated that the applicants, SBA Properties, Inc./Triton PCS (SunCom), have requested that their conditional use permit application be deferred pending the outcome of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) #22-01 of the White Tail Lane Tower submitted by Shared Towers, Inc. (Spectrum Resources, Inc.), which is scheduled to be considered by the Board of Supervisors on January 23, 2002. Deputy Director Lawrence said that Triton PCS (SunCom) will be able to utilize the White Tail Lane Tower, if it is approved by the Board of Supervisors, and the applicant will then withdraw CUP #01- 02 for the Cold Spring Tower. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously grant the applicant's request to indefinitely defer Conditional Use Permit #01-02 for the Cold Spring Tower, submitted by SBA Properties, Inc./Triton PCS (SunCom), for a 199 -foot monopole telecommunications tower. In the Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 789 -5 - event that CUP #22-01 White Tail Lane Tower is approved by the Board of Supervisors on January 23, 2002, the applicant has stated that they will withdraw CUP 401-02 Cold Spring Tower. Conditional Use Permit #02-02 for the Acorn Hill Tower, submitted by SBA Properties, Inc./Triton PCS (SunCom), for a 199 -foot monopole telecommunications facility. This property is located at 7185 North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522N) and is identified with P.I.N. 18-A-25 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Deputy Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence said the applicant proposes to construct a 199 - foot monopole telecommunications tower designed to accommodate commercial telecommunication facilities on a 62.5 -acre site located west of Rt. 522m' the Cross Junction community. He reported no adverse comments from any ofthe reviewing agencies. Deputy Director Lawrence said that staff believes this application has not adequately addressed the requirements of the zoning ordinance in that a need for this facility, based on a lack of coverage and capacity in this part of the County, has not been demonstrated. He explained that the staff's position was based on the fact that pending CUP # 18-01 by Shared Towers, Inc. (Spectrum Resources, Inc.) for the Cross Junction Tower, proposed to be located in this same general area, is scheduled for consideration by the Board of Supervisors on January 23, 2002, and the applicant has not clearly demonstrated that CUP # 18-01 will not be appropriate for collocation in the event it gains the Board's approval. Mr. Dave Stewart, an attorney with the law firm of McGuire Woods, present on behalf of Triton, PCS (SunCom), a licensed wireless service provider in Frederick County, and SBA Properties, Inc., a site acquisition firm, stated that this application is a part of their expansion of service out the Route 522 North corridor. He said that all of SunCom's other 15 sites are collocated on existing structures and this is their first request for the construction of a tower. Mr. Stewart explained that in their opinion, if the Cross Junction site (CUP # 18-01) referred to by the staff was utilized, it would leave dead spots or gaps in their service along Route 522 and, in particular, their service would not be able to reach into all areas of the Summit. He said that the tower they are proposing would eliminate the gaps along Route 522 and reduce the gaps in the Summit. Mr. Mickey Mahoney, an RF (radio frequency) Engineer with Wireless Facilities, Inc., and speaking on behalf of Triton, PCS (SunCom), came forward to answer some of the technical questions from the Commission regarding how and when the studies were done to determine the adequacy ofprojected service using the towers in question. Questions were also raised by the Commission concerning whether SunCom could use different hardware or technologies or increase output to allow them to utilize the Cross Junction Tower. Mr. Mahoney believed the majority of their coverage loss was due to topography and the location of the Cross Junction Tower, rather than their anticipated height position on the tower or their technology. There were no public comments. Based on the information supplied by the applicant on their lack of service coverage capability and capacity in the Rt. 522 corridor, the Commissioners believed the applicant's need had been demonstrated. The Commissioners believed that a tower at this location was appropriate, with conditions. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 790 Upon motion made by Mr. Kriz and seconded by Mr. Morris, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #02-02 for the Acorn Hill Tower, submitted by SBA Properties, Inc./Triton PCS (Suncom) for a 199 -foot monopole telecommunications tower at 7185 North Frederick Pike with the following conditions. All Zoning Ordinance requirements and review agency comments shall be addressed and complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for collocating personal wireless service providers. A minor site plan shall be approved by the 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, then the CUP will be deemed invalid. This conditional use permit was recommended for approval by the following majority vote: YES (TO APPROVE CUP #02-021: Rosenberry, Fisher, Kriz, Ours, DeHaven, Light, Morris, Watt NO: Triplett, Thomas, Unger Conditional Use Permit #03-02 for the Hunting Ridge Tower, submitted by SBA Properties, Inc./Triton PCS (SunCom), for a 199 -foot monopole telecommunications facility. This property is located at 4048 North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522N) and is identified by P.I.N. 30-A-116 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Denial Deputy Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence said the applicant proposes to construct a 199 - foot monopole telecommunications tower designed to accommodate commercial telecommunication facilities on a 99.98 -acre site located north of Rt. 522 in the Hunting Ridge area of the County. He reported no adverse comments from any of the reviewing agencies. Deputy Director Lawrence said that staff believes this application has not adequately addressed the requirements of the zoning ordinance in that a need for this facility, based on a lack of coverage and capacity in this part of the County, has not been demonstrated. He explained that the staffs position was based on the fact that pending CUP #19-01 by Shared Towers, Inc. (Spectrum Resources, Inc.) for the Hunting Ridge Tower, proposed to be located in this same general area, is Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 791 -7 - scheduled for consideration by the Board of Supervisors on January 23, 2002, and the applicant has not clearly demonstrated that CUP # 19-01 will not be appropriate for collocation in the event it gains the Board approval. Mr. Dave Stewart, an attorney with the law firm of McGuire Woods, present on behalf of Triton, PCS (SunCom), a licensed wireless service provider in Frederick County, and SBA Properties, Inc., a site acquisition firm, stated that this application is a part of their expansion of service out the Route 522 North corridor. He said that all of SunCom's other 15 sites are collocated on existing structures and this tower, along with the previous tower application, is their first request for the construction of towers. Mr. Stewart explained that in their opinion, ifthe Shared Towers' Hunting Ridge site (CUP # 19-01), referred to by the staff, was utilized, it would create interruptions in their service along Route 522. He said the tower they are proposing would eliminate interruptions in the service along Route 522. Mr. Mickey Mahoney, an RF (radio frequency) Engineer with Wireless Facilities, Inc., and speaking on behalf of Triton, PCS (SunCom), explained that a ridge will interfere with Triton's service if they collocate on Shared Towers' Hunting Ridge Tower (CUP # 19-01) and it would cause a high probability ofcall interruption. He said that in this particular case, the service inadequacy is due to their anticipated height position on Shared Towers' tower and not necessarily the location of that tower. It was noted that Shared Towers already has a leasee for the very top position on the Hunting Ridge Tower and Triton would be allocated the second lower position. Mr. Mahoney said that Triton's signal will not get over the ridge at this position. Referring to the pictures and information submitted by the applicant, Mr. Dale Finocchi, a deployment manager with SunCom, said that although the breaks in service look small, it would take a customer's cell phone quite a bit of time to recover their call, when an interruption occurred. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments, however, no one was present to speak. Some members of the Commission said that although Triton's service may experience some interruptions, the majority of their projected service area could be covered by Shared Towers' pending tower (CUP # 19-01), if it was approved. Therefore, they believed that this application had not adequately addressed the requirements of the zoning ordinance in that a need for this facility, based on a lack of coverage and capacity in this part of the County, has not been demonstrated. A motion was made by Commissioner Morris and seconded by Commissioner Rosenberry to approve Conditional Use Permit #03-02 with the conditions as recommended by the staff. This motion failed, however, by the following vote: YES (TO APPROVE CUP #03-02): Rosenberry, Fisher, Light, Morris NO: Triplett, Kriz, Ours, Thomas, DeHaven, Unger, Watt Because this motion failed, Chairman DeHaven called for a new motion. Commissioner Kriz moved to deny Conditional Use Permit #03-02. This motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and was passed by a majority vote. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 792 -8 - BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial of Conditional Use Permit #03-02 for the Hunting Ridge Tower, submitted by SBA Properties, Inc./Triton PCS (SunCom), for a 199 -foot monopole telecommunications facility proposed to be located at 4048 bT:,rth Frederick Pike (Rt. 5221`0. The vote on this denial was as follows: YES (TO DENY CUP #03-02): Triplett, Kriz, Ours, Thomas, DeHaven, Light, Unger, Watt NO: Rosenberry, Fisher, Morris PUBLIC MEETING Three Waiver Requests of Bean Properties, LLC, submitted by Mr. Ben Butler, for exceptions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as follows: Chapter 165-55A(2) regarding setback requirements; Chapter 165-56A regarding minimum lot width requirements; and Chapter 165- 54(A) pertaining to creating two lots with an area less than five acres. This property is identified with P.LN. 42-A-309 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Deputy Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated that staff had received a request from Mr. Ben Butler, an attorney with Kuykendall, Johnston, McKee and Butler, P.L.C, representing the Bean Properties, L.L.C., the owners of approximately 1. 17 acres zoned RA (Rural Areas) in the Gainesboro Magisterial District, for the subdivision of land owned by Bean Properties, L.L.C. Deputy Director Lawrence stated that the subject property contains two existing dwellings, situated approximately 63.7 feet apart and the property owners wish to subdivide the parcel in a manner that would have each house situated on an individual parcel. Deputy Director Lawrence gave the following details: the new side setback for the northern dwelling would be 31.7 feet, which is 18.3 feet less than the required 50 -foot setback applicable to the zoning district; the new side setback for the other dwelling would be 32.0 feet, which is 18.0 feet less than the 50 -foot side setbacks required by Section 165-55A(2); the proposed subdivision will cause both lots to have less than the 250 feet of road frontage as specified in Section 165-56A; the proposed subdivision will also create two new lots, both less than five acres in area; Chapter 165-54 requires that the minimum lot size in the RA District must be five acres with the exception of Family Variance Lots or Rural Preservation Lots. Commission members inquired about the drainfield easement. Deputy Director Lawrence stated that the Frederick County Environmental Health Department required that the subject Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 793 -9 - property undergo septic system repairs, to obtain Health Department approval for the proposed subdivision, the property owners have complied with this request and created a drainfield easement on Lot 2 for Lot 1. He said that drainfields for both dwellings will be located on Lot 2, the larger of the two lots. Mr. Ben Butler, an attorney with Kuykendall, Johnston, McKee and Butler, P.L.C, representing the Bean Properties, L.L.C., the owners, was available to answer questions from the Commission. The Planning Commissioners were divided in their opinion of whether or not the request was appropriate. Some Commissioners believed the request, with the intention of selling each lot, was inappropriate because the drainfields for both dwellings were located on one lot. They believed it exacerbated the existing drainfield problems in the County. Other Commissioners believed it was unfair to hold the property owners to current standards when the existing situation was created before the County had adopted its subdivision ordinance. There were no public comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Kriz and seconded by Mr. Morris, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the three waiver requests of the Bean Properties, LLC, submitted by Mr. Ben Butler, for exceptions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as follows: Chapter 165-55A(2) regarding setback requirements; Chapter 165-56A regarding minimum lot width requirements; and Chapter 165- 54(A) pertaining to creating two lots with an area less than five acres, by the following majority vote: YES (TO APPROVE): Triplett, Fisher, Kriz, DeHa.ven, Morris, Unger NO: Rosenberry, Ours, Thomas, Light, Watt Waiver Requests of the Orrah Adams Estate and the Charles D. Adams Property for an exception to Chapter 165-55A(2) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, regarding setback requirements, and Chapter 165-56B, pertaining to the depth -to -width ratio requirements. This property is identified with P.I.N. 30-A-45 and 30 -A -45D in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommend Approval Deputy Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated that staff has received a request from Mr. Thomas A Shockey, a licensed land surveyor in Virginia, representing the Orrah Adams Estate, containing approximately 28.9 acres, zoned RA (Rural Areas), for a minor subdivision of the property, and a boundary line adjustment on the adjoining property, owned by Charles D. Adams, containing approximately 25.7 acres. He stated that the Orrah Adams Estate contains two existing Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 794 -10 - dwellings, situated approximately 61.8 feet apart, and the property owners wish to subdivide the parcel in a manner that would have each house situated on an individual parcel. He said the proposed subdivision would create a new property line evenly dividing the setback distances between the two existing dwellings Deputy Director Lawrence gave the details of the subdivision as follows: the new side setback for both dwellings would be 30.9 feet, which is 19.1 feet less than the required 50 -foot setbacks applicable to the zoning district; in accordance with Chapter 144-5 of the Subdivision Ordinance, the property owners are requesting a waiver of the setback requirements specified in Chapter 165-55 of the Zoning Ordinance; this waiver request would apply to existing dwellings on the newly created parcels; the property line adjustment will result in the parcel owned by Charles Adams to not comply with the 4:1 depth -to -width requirements as specified in Chapter 165-56B and Mr. Adams has requested a waiver to allow the boundary line adjustment. There were no public comments regarding this request. There were no issues raised by the Commission_ Upon motion made by Mr. Kriz and seconded by Mr. Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the waiver requests of the Orrah Adams Estate and the Charles D. Adams property for an exception to Chapter 165-55A(2) ofthe Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, regarding setback requirements, and Chapter 165-56B, pertaining to the depth -to -width ratio requirements. Waiver Request of O. L. Payne and Ruth B. Payne, submitted by Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C., for an exception to Chapter 144-24C of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance regarding access to a public street or right-of-way. The property is identified with P.I.N. 44-1-D in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Stipulation Chairman DeHaven announced that he would abstain from discussion and voting on this item due to a possible conflict of interest. He then turned the conduction of the meeting over to Vice Chairman Thomas. Planning Director Evan A. Wyatt stated that staff has received a request from Mr. H. Bruce Edens of Marsh and Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C., who represents Mr. O. L. Payne, the owner ofapproximately 36.49 acres, split -zoned NMI (Mobile Home) Community and Ml (Light Industrial) District, who is proposing a subdivision along the CSX Railroad right-of-way. Director Wyatt explained that both subdivided parcels would contain mobile homes and would be accessed by the Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 795 -11 - existing private right-of-way. He pointed out that the existing recorded right-of-way was unfortunately recorded without a designated right-of-way width; however, both owners are working to establish a clear 50 -foot right-of-way designation so that hard -surfacing may be accomplished in the future, if it is desired. Commissioners inquired ifa 50'right-of-way would encroach on any existing units and Director Wyatt replied that it would not. He added that the 50 -foot recorded width is not critical to the granting of the requested waiver, however, this would be an appropriate time to have the width legally recorded. Mr. H. Bruce Edens of Marsh and Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C., representing Mr. O. L. Payne, stated that they will not be changing the use of this property. Mr. Edens said that they were pursuing the recorded 50 -foot right-of-way width as requested. There were no public comments. No other issues of concern were raised by the Commission. Upon motion made by Mr. Light and seconded by Mr. Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the waiver request of O. L. Payne and Ruth B. Payne, submitted by Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C., for an exception to Chapter 144-24C of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance, regarding access to a public street or right-of-way, with the stipulation that a 50 -foot right-of-way is legally executed prior to subdivision approval by the staff. (Note: Chairman DeHaven abstained from voting.) Vice Chairman Thomas relinquished the conduction of the meeting back over to Chairman DeHaven. OTHER RECOGNITION OF NEWLY -APPOINTED PLANNING COMMISSIONERS OF THE RED BUD DISTRICT - MS. PAT GOC14ENOUR AND MS. MARIE F. STRAUB Chairman DeHaven recognized the two newly -appointed Planning Commissioners of the Red Bud District, Ms. Pat Gochenour and Ms. Marie F. Straub, who were observing from the Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 796 -12 - audience. Chairman DeHaven said that Ms. Gochenour and Ms. Straub will be officially attending their first Planning Commission meeting on February 6, 2002. ADJOURNMENT unanimous vote. No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. by Respectfully submitted, Evan A. Wyatt, Secretary Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of January 16, 2002 Page 797 • C: • PC REVIEW: 02/20/02 BOS REVIEW: 03/13/02 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #04-02 ROSE M. LAUCK Cottage Occupation - Piano School LOCATION: This property is located at 303 Tanager Drive. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 75E-3-2-154 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) District; Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RP (Residential Performance) District; Land Use: Residential PROPOSED USE: Cottage Occupation - Piano School REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The application for a conditional use permit for this property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 1078, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. Existing entrance is adequate for proposed use. However, should use ever expand in the future, the entrance may have to be upgraded to VDOT minimum standards. Inspections Department: No comment or change of use required provided under five persons are attending training at one time. Fire Marshal: Portable fire extinguishers and working smoke detectors. Plan approval is recommended. Sanitation Authority: No comment. CUP #04-02, Rose M. Lauck Page 2 ir' elux nary u, 2002 Planning and Zoning: The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for cottage occupations in the RP Zoning District. This proposed Conditional Use Permit application is for a piano school. The proposed school would take place in the applicant's home. A room of the residence has been dedicated as the piano room. The applicant would like to teach up to 25 students a week. There were no disapproving agency review comments. Based upon the limited scale of the proposed use and evaluation of the property, it appears this use would not have any significant impacts on the adjoining properties. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 2-20-02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Should the Planning Commission determine that this request is appropriate, staff would suggest the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. No business sign shall be permitted. 3. Any change of use or expansion of this use will require a new Conditional Use Permit. 0 \Agendas\COMMENTS\CUP's\2002\Rose Lauck.wpd CUP #04-02 Location Map For: Rose M. Lauck PIN: 75E-3-2-154 1� Note: ' Created by Frederick County Department of Planning and Development j Agray 0212002 - - r 9� �^l DOYLE C PSE 75E 3 2 145 ��P� ��pN Moro o�Qo� 21�� 3 � ara Q/S jl� EILAND WRIGHT '. L 75E 3 2 153 75E 3 2 155 � LAUCK '. 75E 3 2 154 CHINA[ �i 75E 3 2 156 li WHITE 75E 3 2 161 I I MCFARLAND i SPRIGGS 75E 3 2 160 ;% � 75E 3 2 157 I f� LUKENS 75E 3 2 1591] i. r�1 a i i CUP #04-02 Location Map For: Rose M. Lauck PIN: 75E-3-2-154 1� Note: ' Created by Frederick County Department of Planning and Development j Agray 0212002 - - r RECEIVED CUP #04-02 �QZ Submittal Deadline A��17 P/C Meeting BOS Meeting APlai, �TT� 'E O 16NDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA �4w z>- z 1. Applicant (The applicant if the ,/ owner other) NAME: P O S e, M - La L, c- ADDRESS: TELEPHONE 5 `/G - 57 C 9- ) O a G V, 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: LCA 0 G 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) fir..-,rn (,11lY1c Ey + :�l�<—) Ion -G1. pr,,,,eA 3 il-I CFC f0 j � 3 0. l �.+ r t1 ! P T ! b 1'1 I C 1 /rJ � � A i 7 f%'ye- 1vr r �1�� 6t� �ovei� e -z Trave] �i�� �eC � Tlr�� IE�fi cn Te.r,aoer (�,, �5+ 6Jc"5e cn IJ4 4. The property has a road frontage of feet and a r depth of f ,3 0 feet and consists of , �E acres. (Please be exact) 5. The property is owned by a v r P. cui J Rc �� tt La u U ){ as evidenced by deed from R,•-LQel x,A A r r) K Com: rn recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. r on page 3 C-- (,, , as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. 6. 14 -Digit Property Identification No. 7�E 0 03 0--wo z/o Magisterial District11 Current Zoning 7. Adjoining North East South West Property: (� USE R F S ` 0 Y) i'; CO V..nrrTNTr 8. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) t`ca� c�Cc 10a 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: 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: P. n o lien err 1� 2a i S+Q�1� _ NAME Q� - ' t ADDRESS 300 l ari a 2J- PROPERTY IDI Z5-- L 000, 3(")—)Q &VO NAME ��.;1�ie _cn�i C�PnC,�Y111� �an� ADDRESS 34S►na� �fiV PROPERTY ID# NAME Q * 4^CTY\A Ley)6 MC-FrjCtrlc, ADDRESS 1Jq A,, Ave, PROPERTY ID# 00 O Z (7 v NAME gn�.--- LaLlrie LKe D -L -ADDRESS I,9a i^\C '. e- —Ave, PROPERTY IDI_ E 006),3 C7r�2 0 O NAME )LOQLC a C^ 2 -i CAI I V) Q� 1 ADDRESS /d 7 Pa Ven � PROPERTY I D# moi E 0 0 0 3 0 NAME 7 r.i .�� F_+�, S' _Q C-)) ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# 7,5C- 000 NAME ADDRESS PROPERTY IDI NAME ADDRESS PROPERTY ID# 12 . Additional comments, if any: is in+erlinn ic, `may �O_Y1Y �1f�Y� 11Ve `aft 1��/ r�P1aY�Yl(7f 11D0�` I/oan,/ ay-- SIrI_ j CT_Yl �F.q n; �-� . c�►� l�� ��e c�} crr �wc, s���e���'� ' n� ma<� areare, hc���1� .�c ���� ccth Covine. cvr�rZa %h c13-\/ ,,� 47oc .�C� marts C 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 Owners' Telephone No. S —T- �v2 v TO BE COMPLETED BY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: O C� 'D, vE \ r 4C GQA'1E[ y i 4 zo 64.2G rz aoz I f I O I � I G I 3 0* i► N N D denotes utility box. O denotes existing pin. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED TO THIS OFFICE. ► �Fc O SU&TF;CI' TO ANY AND ALL EASFIfFPTI'S OF I r,PC RECORD. f ` " y-C,L O RESTRICTIONS IN 610/542-547, N0. 13 REFERS TO A 10' UTILITY EASFMpM. 'Na �F DERIVATION OF TITLE TO ROGER P. 8 ROSE M. v7t,kit \ T LAUCK IN 886/366. v y NOT IN FLOOD ZONE. ZONE C PER FIRM MAP < D T PANEL NO. 510063 0200 B, FFFECPIVE 1-53 4 DATE 07/17/78. 1 '27-27 4 6.31 Q: P11jo ZONED RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE (RP) I I S r o � c � � S.B. 35'; S.Y. 101; R.Y. 251. 2 � 0 OUTBUILDINGS: S.Y. 5' ; R.Y. 5' . I I[. I I N ti D I E L c _� Np 303 W I I 2.0 13?)4 -----� 24- 0. d.5 0.x5 r sr� h Colic i22 V1 o � 'Q. G p J.. I✓6so _fes 9 SURVEY OF LOT 154 FINAL PLAT SECTION TWO GREENBRIAR VILLAGE RECORDED IN 610/549 I U • • PC REVIEW: 02/20/02 BOS REVIEW: 03/13/02 Revised - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ##18-01 CROSS JUNCTION TOWER Telecommunications Facility LOCATION: This property is located at the corner of Collinsville Road and Cross Junction Road, approximately 290 feet from North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522N). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 18-A-38 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use: Residential and Agricultural PROPOSED USE: 195 feet i4gh 260 -foot high lattice -type telecommunications facility REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The application for a conditional use permit for this property appears to have little measurable impact on Rt. 770, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. Existing entrance is adequate for proposed use. However, should use ever expand in the future, the entrance may have to be upgraded to VDOT minimum standards. Fire Marshal: Maintenance of roadway for emergency vehicle access. 14.5 foot vertical clearance and entire width per NFPA. Roadway requirements allow for enhancement of Rural Fire Protection in Wildland Fire Control. Plan approval is recommended. Lnspections Department: Structures shall comply with The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 312, Use Group U (Utility) of The BOCA National Building Code/1996. Please note Chapter 17 of BOCA for special inspection requirements for this type structure (concrete/bolt Cross Junction Tower, Revised CUP # 18-01 Page 2 February 4, 2002 testing, etc.) Public Works/Engineering: Disturbance of more than 10,000 s.f. will require an erosion and sediment control plan and a land disturbance permit. This land disturbance include access roads and site development. Winchester Regional Airport: Please see attached letter from Serena R. Manuel, Executive Director, dated 01/22/02. Planning and Zoning: The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for Commercial Telecommunication Facilities in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit, The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance specifies that a CUP for a commercial telecommunication tower may be permitted provided that residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas and properties of significant historic values are not negatively impacted. Furthermore, additional performance standards shall apply to the CUP review in order to promote orderly economic development and mitigate the negative impacts to adjoining properties. The Board of Supervisors granted the initial request for CUP#18-01 on January 23, 2002. This approval enabled the construction of a 195 -foot -high lattice -type telecommunications tower. The approval also granted a reduction in the setback requirements against the property's northeast and southeast property lines. The application was approved with the following conditions: All Zoning Ordinance requirements and review agency comments shall be addressed and complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for co -locating personal wireless services providers. 3. A minor site plan shall be approved by the 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, then the CUP will be deeded invalid. Following discussions with the Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors, and representatives from SunCom/Triton PCS, the applicant determined that an increase in tower height to 260 feet would better accommodate the needs of the community and personal wireless service providers. Therefore, the applicant has requested the ability to increase the tower's height by 65 feet, bringing Cross Junction Tower, Revised CUP #18-01 Page 3 February 4, 2002 the tower height to 260 feet. The applicant contends that the increased tower height will enable personal wireless carriers to provide a more efficient service to the community as topographical restrictions will be lessened. The applicant is requesting a reduction of the setbacks pursuant to Section 165-48.6(B).1 of the Zoning Ordinance as the proposed increase in height would require an increase in structural setback distances. Based on the proposed 260 -foot height, the setbacks would be as follows: The Planning Commission may reduce the required setback distance for commercial telecommunication facilities if it can be demonstrated that the location is of equal or lesser impact. The applicant has attempted to place the facility in the middle of the site (property under common ownership), maximizing the structural setback. The applicant has provided a letter (dated January 2, 2002) certified by the Tower Manufacturers Professional Engineer indicating that the tower can be built with a safety stress point to reduce its fall zone. The applicant is also requesting the ability to continue to utilize lattice -type material construction pursuant to Section 165-48.6(B)2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance requires that new commercial telecommunication facilities be of monopole -type construction. The Planning Commission may allow lattice -type construction for new commercial telecommunication facilities that are located outside of the Urban Development Area, and are not adjacent to properties that are identified as historic areas. The proposed site is located outside of the UDA, and is not in close proximity to any identified historic areas. Therefore, allowing a lattice -type tower would be in conformance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. This proposed commercial telecommunication facility will be in Required Proposed Requesting a Setback Setback Setback Setback from: Reduction of: Northwest Property line 275 ft 220 ft 55 ft (Collins property) Northeast Property Line 275 ft _135 ft — 135 ft (Hoffman - property owned by applicant) East Property Line 275 ft — 40 ft — 235 ft (Hoffman - property owned by applicant) Southwest Property Line 285 ft 284 ft 1 ft (Route 522 North) The Planning Commission may reduce the required setback distance for commercial telecommunication facilities if it can be demonstrated that the location is of equal or lesser impact. The applicant has attempted to place the facility in the middle of the site (property under common ownership), maximizing the structural setback. The applicant has provided a letter (dated January 2, 2002) certified by the Tower Manufacturers Professional Engineer indicating that the tower can be built with a safety stress point to reduce its fall zone. The applicant is also requesting the ability to continue to utilize lattice -type material construction pursuant to Section 165-48.6(B)2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance requires that new commercial telecommunication facilities be of monopole -type construction. The Planning Commission may allow lattice -type construction for new commercial telecommunication facilities that are located outside of the Urban Development Area, and are not adjacent to properties that are identified as historic areas. The proposed site is located outside of the UDA, and is not in close proximity to any identified historic areas. Therefore, allowing a lattice -type tower would be in conformance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. This proposed commercial telecommunication facility will be in Cross Junction Tower, Revised CUP 918-01 Page 4 February 4, 2002 conformance with Section 704 of the Telecommunication Act of 1996. In evaluating this application, it has been demonstrated that there is a need for the infrastructure within the area of the County identified. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 2-20-02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Staff believes that this application for a Commercial Telecommunication Facility has adequately addressed the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance in that need for this facility, based on a lack of coverage and capacity in this part of the County, has been demonstrated. Further, a reduction of the setback requirements, as well as allowance for a lattice -type tower construction, may be appropriate. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of this application, the following conditions of approval would be appropriate: 1. All Zoning Ordinance requirements and review agency comments shall be addressed and complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for co -locating personal wireless services providers. A minor site plan shall be approved by the 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, then the CUP will be deemed invalid. 0:\Agendas\C0MMENTS\CUP's\2001 \CrossJunctionTower.revised.wpd 7 �_& SJ _-SJ 1 is / i .L��i' I ] G 1 �I �Vini1� I I,II I_me Winchester, Virginia 22602 1-i�unlcxl in I ); I January 23, 2002 Frederick County Department of Planning and Zoning 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Eric Lawrence Re: Cross Junction Communications Tower — Height Increase We are requesting an amendment to an original Conditional Use Permit that was approved on January 23, 2002 for the Cross Junction Communications Tower. The approved height of this tower is 195 feet. We are requesting an increase in height to 260 feet to improve cellular coverage provided by this tower. Winchester Regional Airport has provided its comments on this height increase. All other Agencies comments remain unaffected, as the nature of their concerns would not be affected by this height increase. We have also obtained and attached a letter certified by the Tower Manufacturers Professional Engineer indicating that the tower can be built with a safety stress point to reduce its fall zone. The attached sketch indicates that the height increase will require additional setback waivers. We request your approval of the height increase through the Frederick County Planning Commission and the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as the proposed structure will not affect the safety of the adjoining neighbors as we commit to designing stress points for the tower to fall within the landlord's properties. The original application is attached with height related matters updated. Thank you for your assistance with this project. Call with any questions or concerns. Sincerely,I Green, ay iueering`:�� Mark D. Smith, P.E., S. President Enclosures `E -C JAN 1 -5 09102 ��'T 11F p! A.NNII I(IfP=ilcl npp.i"-. Engineers SUrVeVOIs File##3162/MDS/dls Telephone540-662-4185 FAX 540-722-95 28 www.greenwayeng.com WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT 9ERVMG THE TOP OF VRQNLA / January 22, 2002 Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 491 AIRPORT ROAD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 (540) 662-2422 RE: Revised Site Plan Comments -- Share Towers Cross Junction Pole — Height Increase 266' Dear Sir: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority offers the following comments on the above referenced revised site plans as conditions to be included for approval of this site ptan: 1. As required by FAA regulations, structure must be,marked and lighted in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460-1 J, Obstruction Marking and lighting, Chapters 4, 8 (M -Dual) & 13 2. Consideration should be given to the owner/operator of the Timber Ridge Airport which is a private airport located approximately four nautical miles from two of the towers as to possible impact on that facility. These comments are based on review provided by our engineering firm, Delta Airport Consultants, Richmond, Virginia. They have determined that the proposed revision in the height of the tower does penetrate any FAR Part 77 surfaces therefore there should be no impact on current or future operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. Final comment will be withheld pending review of the FAA's determination of the aeronautical study. If the above referenced conditions along with any others outlined in the FAA's study are met, the Winchester Regional Airport Authority has no objections to this conditional use permit. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please contact this office (430) 662-5786. Sincerely, S. R. Manuel Executive Director World Headquarters 6718 W. Plank Rd. Peoria, IL 61604 USA PH: 309.697-4400 FAX 309-697-5612 Industries, Inc. January 2, 2002 Shared Towers, LLC 6501 Sandy Knoll Court McLean, VA 22101 Attn: Kamal Doshi Reference: 250' SSV Tower Frederick County, Virginia The referenced tower will be designed to meet the specified loading requirements in accordance with ANSI/TLA/EIA-222-F Standards for a 70 MPH basic wind speed, no ice. The 70 MPH basic wind speed is assumed constant up to 33' above ground level and is escalated to an effective wind speed of approximately 98 MPH at the top of the tower. In the event an extreme wind speed were to occur, failure would not be expected to occur the instant the design wind speed was exceeded. All tower members will be designed to support a minimum of 1.25 times their design load without permanent deformation. This would be equivalent to an effective wind speed of 82 MPH at the base of the tower and escalate to 110 MPH at the top of the tower. Based on customer specifications, the tower may be designed with heavier members than required by analysis in the lower portion of the structure. Therefore, in the unlikely case of failure, the point at which such failure would occur would be in the upper portion of the tower, allowing the upper portion to fold over the lower portion, limiting the area affected by the failure. Please contact us at your convenience should you have further questions concerning the safety of tower structures or other aspects of tower design. Please reference this letter with any forthcoming purchase orders where local requirementSE�`iined fall radius. Sincer mos 'moi �Axouri,. URI .rjtg Ad tUZr cc: Al E'sTMONA Ken Cordrey PC REVIEW: 02/20/02 BOS REVIEW: 03/13/02 vaOi. NDiT10NAL USE rER1Y111 1t0J-IJ12 HUNTING RIDGE TOWER Telecommunications Facility LOCATION: This property is located at 329 Hunting Ridge Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 30 -A -98C PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use: Residential and Agricultural PROPOSED USE: 195 -foot -high lattice -type telecommunications facility REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The application for a conditional use permit for this property appears to have little measurable impact on Rt. 608, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. Existing entrance is adequate for proposed use. However, should use ever expand in the future, the entrance may have to be upgraded to VDOT minimum standards. Fire Marshal: Maintenance of roadway for emergency vehicle access. 14.5 foot vertical clearance and entire width per NFPA. Roadway requirements allow for enhancement of Rural Fire Protection in Wildland Fire Control. Plan approval is recommended. Inspections Department: Structures shall comply with The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 312, Use Group U (Utility) of The BOCA National Building Code/1996. Please note Chapter 17 of BOCA for special inspection requirements for this Hunting Ridge Tower, CUP #05-02 Page 2 February 8, 2002 type structure (concrete/bolt testing, etc.) Public Works/Engineering: Disturbance of more than 10,000 s.f. will require an erosion and sediment control plan and a land disturbance permit. This land disturbance include access roads and site development. Winchester Regional Airport: Please see attached letters from Serena R. Manuel, Executive Director, dated 1/11/02 and 10/22/01. Planning and Zoning: The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for Commercial Telecommunication Facilities in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance specifies that a CUP for a commercial telecommunication tower may be permitted provided that residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas and properties of significant historic values are not negatively impacted. Furthermore, additional performance standards shall apply to the CUP review in order to promote orderly economic development and mitigate the negative impacts to adjoining properties. The applicant proposes to build a 195 -foot lattice -type telecommunication facility that is designed to accommodate commercial telecommunication carriers. The proposed facility will be located on a 40 -acre site located north of Route 522, west of Hunting Ridge Road. The applicant has provided an inventory of existing telecommunication facilities in the area, and staff would concur that there are no existing facilities or appropriate structures available for collocation in this general area. The maps provided within the application analyzing coverage need in this area appear to be sufficient to determine the adequacy of the search area, and the existing coverage and capacity of the licensee holder in the vicinity of the proposed facility. As shown on the maps, the coverage needs will be met by a facility in this location. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP # 19-01) for a telecommunications tower was granted to the applicant for an adjoining parcel; CUP #19-01 will be withdrawn upon approval of the new application. The applicant is seeking the new tower location (CUP #05-02) in order to better accommodate SUNCOMJTriton, a wireless service provider seeking a tower location in the vicinity of this CUP request. The applicant will be required to provide lighting to comply with the requirements of the Winchester Regional Airport Authority. The lights shall comply to FAA standards as noted in the letter submitted by the Director of the Airport Authority. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires that these lights be shielded from ground view to mitigate illumination to neighboring properties and right-of-ways. Buffer and screening requirements will be determined at site plan review. Hunting Ridge Tower, CUP #05-02 Page 3 February 8, 2002 The applicant is requesting the ability to utilize lattice -type material construction pursuant to Section 165-48.6(B)2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance requires that new commercial telecommunication facilities be of monopole -type construction. The Planning Commission may allow lattice -type construction for new commercial telecommunication facilities that are located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA), and are not adjacent to properties that are identified as historic areas. The proposed site is located outside of the UDA, and is not in close proximity to any identified historic areas. This proposed commercial telecommunication facility will be in conformance with Section 704 of the Telecommunication Act of 1996. In evaluating this application, it has been demonstrated that there is a need for the infrastructure within the area of the County identified. It should be noted that the applicant has offered to provide space on this tower for emergency communications. This space has been offered to Frederick County free of charge per the applicants' letter dated November 15, 2001. Setback Reduction Request: The applicant is requesting a reduction of the setbacks pursuant to Section 165-48.6(B). l of the Zoning Ordinance as they are proposing to locate the commercial telecommunication facility adjacent to a property line. The Zoning Ordinance provisions require that towers of 195 feet (as is proposed) be placed a minimum of 210 feet from the adjoining property line. The Planning Commission may reduce the required setback distance for commercial telecommunication facilities if it can be demonstrated that the location is of equal or lesser impact. The applicant has attempted to place the facility in a location that complies with the setbacks from adjoining properties held by other parties. The setback reduction is being sought to enable the structure to be placed adjacent to property owned by the same property owner. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 2-20-02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Staff believes that this application for a Commercial Telecommunication Facility has adequately addressed the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance in that need for this facility, based on a lack of coverage and capacity in this part of the County, has been demonstrated. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval ofthis application, the following conditions of approval would be appropriate: 1. All Zoning Ordinance requirements and review agency comments shall be addressed and complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for collocating personal wireless service providers. 3. A minor site plan shall be approved by the County. Hunting Ridge Tower, CUP #05-02 Page 4 February 8, 2002 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, then the CUP will be deemed invalid. 6. Issuance of CUP#05-01 shall make the Conditional Use Permit (CUP#19-01) previously issued for an adjoining property (same property owner) invalid. 0:\Agendas\COMMENTS\CUP's\2002\Hunung Ridge revised.wpd t4zavio oWINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT 491 AIRPORT ROAD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 (540) 662-2422 January 22, 2002 Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 RE: Conditional Use Permit Comments — Share Towers Hunting Ridge Pole — Revised Location Dear Sir: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority offers the following comments on the above referenced site plans as conditions to be included for approval of this site plan: 1. Although not required by FAA, stnicture should be marked and lighted in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460-1J, Obstruction Marking and lighting, Chapters 4, 8 (M -Dual) & 13 2. Consideration should be given to the owner/operator of the Timber Ridge Airport which is a private airport located approximately four nautical miles from two of the towers as to possible impact on that facility. These comments are based on the review provided by our engineering firm, Delta Airport Consultants, Richmond, Virginia. They have determined that this proposed tower does not penetrate any FAR Part 77 surfaces therefore there should be no impact on current or future operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. Final comment is withheld pending review of the FAA's determination on the aeronautical study. If the above referenced conditions along with any other comments outlined in the FAA's aeronautical study are met, the Winchester Regional Airport Authority has no objections to this conditional use permit. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please contact this office (430) 662-5786. Sincerely, S. R. Manuel Executive Director WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT J n� mr aF v�au+ � October 22, 2001 Greenway Engineering 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 491 AIRPORT ROAD WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 (540) 662-2422 RE: Site Plan Comments — Share Towers Hunting Ridge Pole, Cross Junction Pale, Reynolds Store Pole Dear Mr. Sir: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority offers the following comments on the above referenced site plans as conditions to be included for approval of this site plan: 1. Although not required by FAA, structure. should be marked and lighted in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70!7460-1J, Obstruction Marking and lighting, Chapters 4, 8 (M -Dual) & 13 2. Consideration should be given to the owner/operator of the Timber Ridge Airport which is a private airport located approximately four nautical miles from two of the towers as to possible impact on that facility. These comments are based on the review provided by our engineering firm, Delta Airport Consultants, Richmond, Virginia. They have determined that these proposed towers do not penetrate any FAR Part 77 surfaces therefore there should be no impact on current or future operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. If the above referenced conditions along with any outlined in the FAA study are met, the Winchester Regional Airport Authority has no objections to these site plans. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please contact this office (430) 662-5786. Sincerely, '<: a- � � I � I �\a3 S. R. Manuel Executive Director CUP #05-02 Location Map For: Hunting Ridge Tower (Shared Towers, Inc.) PIN: 30 A - 98C I� I- Note: Created by Department of Planning & Development Astrav 02!2002 — ---.y'"�a�-�F-�� .,. ..a._ I � �� 1 �' f f rt' r` �� J ,'f •r, r ,Ft J� } if ? F ~" tl e!' jl of 1 f T fit,, _ �"-' - a'y ! _ I t r,.�,- „r-a,,,�, ..-•- ' - --• 1 � � � ' jt�' �F!� t� ,"f � + j't� � � 1� ' r+t # Ile t F ! S' r {rr F 15 : r _t' s ry r 7T,1 $OFA- r "0.0000 rrr' p r r i- C,iTRRENTIzY .'PROVED C{L�_Pi L;OCATIgN EK 0 ,X-j0 ot" DRN —� LEASE 9 1 r x . z..--s® `ai Grp f 3r ra. aVF s [ #r { r� p EXISTING DRIVEW. 3 t i„ r` A ff s' *'NEE �t _ ;TOWER; LOC. , ENTR ,t' _'tt `i r''�f ? t•I, f ~ ... '"". - k ; Y '•,,- �f✓r � { �a rp. � rr � � t � � -+r"• 7°I ! r � �_t L `�'a- ' t qtr dt e I{ 1 •� frr �` I',i � s — rf� �'r fit, _ 1 � S dK f s ti tt' j I rf { rr� f r I HUNTING RIDGE COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY DATE: 01/24/02 APPROXIMATE PARCEL 30-A-98C SCALE: 1" = 500' LOCATION N 39016'06.8" GREEN AY 1 W 78013'29.3' 151 WINDY HILL LANE Engineers WINCHESTER, VA. 22602 Surveyors TELEPHONE: (540) 662-4185 FAX: (540) 722-9526 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com Note: This application replaces CUP #19-01 which was approved by the Board of Supervisors on January 23, 2002. Conditional Use Permit #05-02 Submittal Deadline 01-25-02 P/C Meeting 02-20-02 BOS Meeting 03-13-02 APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1. Applicant (The applicant if the ❑ owner ❑ other) NAME: Greenway Engineering ADDRESS: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 TELEPHONE (540) 662-4185 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: Talbert and Joyce DeHaven 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of our road or street) 329 Hunting Ridge Road, Winchester, VA 22603 4. The property has a.road frontage of 110 feet and a depth of 1,100 feet and consists of 40 acres. (Please be exact) 5. The property is owned by Talbert and Joyce Dehaven as evidenced by deed from Gregory Bishop revious owner recorded in deed book no. 599 on page 535, as recorded in the records of the clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. 6. 14 -Digit Property Identification No. 30 -A -98C, and a portion of 30 -A -98D Magisterial District Gainsboro District Current Zoning RA 7. Adjoining Property: Jackie M. & Marie S. ADDRESS 4048 N. Frederick Pike, PROPERTY ID# Roberts Winchester TAX MAP ID USE ZONING North 30-A-114 Commercial & Industrial RA East 30-A-110 Singe Family RA ADDRESS 151 Hunting Ridge Road, 30 -A -98A Sin le Family RA 30-A-108 Single Family RA 30 -A -I? 30-A-107 Single Family RA 30-A-106 Single Family RA 30-A-105 Single Family RA 30-A-104 Single Family RA South 30-A-103 Single Family RA 30-A-166 Agriculture RA West 30-A-115 Agriculture RA 30-A-116 Agriculture RA 8. The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing) Unmanned Commercial telecommunications facilities It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: 195' tall tower structure inside a 100' x 100' leased area for ground equipment/shelters to be placed on concrete pads. All equipment, and the tower, will be secured by a fence. 10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides and rear and in from of (across the street) the property where the requested use will be conducted. (Continue on next page if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: NAME Talbert & Joyce ADDRESS 329 Hunting? Ridge Road, PROPERTY ID# DeHaven Winchester 30 -A -115,30-A-114 + 30-A-110 NAME Jackie M. & Marie S. ADDRESS 4048 N. Frederick Pike, PROPERTY ID# Roberts Winchester 30-A-116 NAME James W. Frye ADDRESS 323 Hunting Ridge Road, PROPERTY ID# 30 -A -98A Winchester NAME Charles C. & Eva ADDRESS 151 Hunting Ridge Road, PROPERTY ID# DeHaven Winchester 30-A-103 Add- 30 -A -I? 5-1/e`er` Go-r6,LLC NAME Paul J. & Melissa L. PROPERTY ID# Hoskins 30-A-104 NAME Hugh Price Jr. PROPERTY ID# 30-A-105 NAME Ira E. Bishop III PROPERTY ID# 30-A-106 NAME David A. Downes PROPERTY ID# 30-A-107 NAME Ralt)h H. Combs Jr. PROPERTY ID# 30-A-108 NAME Katherine C. Jones PROPERTY ID# 30-A-166 ADDRESS 223 Hunting Ridge Road, Winchester ADDRESS 237 Hunting Ride Road, Winchester ADDRESS 251 Hunting Ridge Road, Winchester ADDRESS 14 Chester St. Front Royal, VA 22630 ADDRESS 311 Hunting Ride Road, Winchester ADDRESS 3890 N. Frederick Pike Winchester 12. Additional comments, if any: The landowner also owns parcel 30 -A -98D adjoining�the proposed property and the land on that parcel may be used to comply with setback requirements. Portions of leased area may occupy Parcel 30 -A -98D. The Developer is requesting the use of a lattice tower which may be permitted in rural districts if the prWerty has no adjoining historic structures. An approval_ letter from the Virginia Historic Preservation officer is enclosed indicating that the tower does not affect an historic properties. The new location when approved, will result in the withdrawal of the Conditional Use Permit for the approved location on adjoining parcel 30-A-114. At a meeting hosted by the Frederic_ k County Planning Department SunCom indicated that this new location would work for their project. If (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 e 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 c)c n cted. Signature of Applicant��oo Signature of Ownerxcz Owner's Mailing Address Owners' Telephone No. 3ZO, �t�r�►.Itom ,/ t_t?AQ UJ° 4 ZZ6; AFFIDAVIT To: Frederick County Department of Planning and Zoning We, the undersigned, Talbert and Joyce A. DeHaven, owners of property located at 329 Hunting Ridge Road, Winchester, Virginia, make this affidavit that we are aware that we may be held responsible for the removal of the commercial telecommunications facility as stated in Frederick County Code § 165-48.6B(7), if the developer fails to remove the facility. We own an adjoining parcel (parcel 30 -A -98D) and, if necessary, the setback and access requirements for the project may be met by the land in this parcel. We understand and agree that as placed the tower can potentially fall into this adjoining parcel. Sincerely, Talbert eHav`en Date G -Z • red Towers, LLC • 6501 Sandy Knoll Court, McLean, VA 22101 (703)-893-1571 Fax 253-423-3800 January 28, 2002 Mr. Eric P. Lawrence County of Frederick 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Lawrence: Map of Cellular Towers in the County and Update I have enclosed a map showing locations of cell towers in the county. You will recall that we had agreed to provide such a map per discussion with Mr. Harrington Smith at January 23rd meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Greenway Engineering has submitted on January 25th: An amendment to the application for Cross Junction tower to raise it to 260' to allow placement of Shentel and other carriers at very good heights of 260', 250', 240', 230' respectively. A new application to move Hunting Ridge tower approximately 1100' South. This moves the tower closer to Route 522 and at a meeting hosted by planning department SunCom/Triton had agreed that this location would work better for them. Shentel has agreed to go on this tower at either location. As this move allows the tower to be away from the landowners' driveway, they have agreed to allow lattice structure, so we are requesting permission for that change also. Upon approval, we will withdraw the approved CUP for the original location. I understand that these will be heard by the Planning Commission and later submitted to the Board of Supervisors for action. Sincerely, Kamal Doshi Encl: Cc: Members of the Board of Supervisors, with enclosed map. Mark Smith, Greenway Engineering RECEIVED JAN 2 9 2002 I PT OF PLANNINGINVROP —R11" MOV -1n-2001 03:s6 P^1 Shared Towers 7036282634 11 233 423 320e P.01 Sham 'Powers, LLC 6301 S;2 r--;dy Knoll COUrt, McLean, VA 22101 ?� -X33-1:x,1 F= 233-423-3300 e-mail- kdoahi(a�aharesjiowei-s.ca,-n November 13, 2001 Mr. Marie R Chcran, Plan= County of Frederick 107 North Kent Stmt Winchcster,'VA 22601 Via Fa. 40.665-6395 Dcar Mr. Chcran. We an happy to assist Cotmtp emergency con a umcatim wm cm(police, fim, ambulance) by, allowing thecal to attwh up to two omni antennas on each of our proposed todrers. Litre all other tenants, when they treed the space, they will need to enter into a lease d=mcnt (however. the r=1 will k waif Sincerely, Shand Towers, LLC Kamal Doshi TS maging Mcmber Cc: Mark Smith, Greenway Engineering 540-722-9528 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, Deputy Director RE: Public Hearing - Route 277 Area SWSA Expansion DATE: February 7. 2002 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 During the Board of Supervisors' January 23, 2002 meeting, staff presented four alternatives in response to a Board request for consideration of expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) in the vicinity of Hudson Hollow Road (RT 636). As a result of this discussion, the Board selected Alternative 4 as the choice for the SWSA expansion. Accordingly, staff has scheduled this public hearing in an effort to process a formal SWSA amendment. BACKGROUND In November 1994, the Board of Supervisors approved a request to allow public sewer service outside the SWSA, enabling the M2 (Industrial General) zoned Fulton property (located at the corner of Routes 277 and 636) to be served by the public sewer system. This approval also enabled residences in the immediate vicinity to utilize the sewer system even though their properties were located outside the SWSA. [Minutes from the November 1994 Board of Supervisors meeting are attached.] Since that time, the Fulton property has connected to the public sewer; a majority of the residences have not. In 2001, the Board of Supervisors directed staff to develop options for the extension of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) south of Fairfax Pike (Route 277), in the Sherando Park area. [Minutes from the May 2001 Board of Supervisors meeting are attached.] This extension was intended to enable existing residences, many of whom have claimed to have failing health systems, to utilize the public water and sewer system. The request, if approved, would also revise the County's SWSA boundary to include the subject properties. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM The proposed expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area would incorporate approximately 199 acres of land (15 properties) located south of Fairfax Pike, in the vicinity of Hudson Hollow Road 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 SWSA Expansion - Rt. 277 Area Page 2 February 7, 2002 (RT636). A majority of the land (approximately 170 acres) in this proposed expansion are County owned and are currently served by public utilities. These county facilities include the Sherando High School and the Sherando Park. Of the remaining 13 properties proposed for inclusion in the SWSA, all but one are vacant or residential in nature. Other than the residences on Hudson Hollow Road, the other properties are already served by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. A recommendation to forward to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. ERL/ch Attachments U:\COMMITTEES\CPPS\Projects\277 SWSA EXtensioMMA ExtensionAt 277.PC.PH.wpd NOWAY ENGINEERING 151 Windy Hill Lane NVinchester, Virginia 22602 Fcninded in 1971 February 19, 2002 County of Frederick Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attn: Eric Lawrence Re: Sewer and Water Service Area Expansion along the Route 277 Corridor Tax Map 86-((A))-81 Dear Mr. Lawrence: On behalf of our client, Mrs. Beverley Shoemaker, we are requesting an expansion of the sewer and water service area for a proposed office conversion at the existing house owned by Mrs. Shoemaker, which was previously Mr. Jim Bowman's (her father) residence. The existing office that Mr. Bowman occupied.was adjacent to the house in a warehousing setting with an existing zoning of M-2. As we have discussed, we are currently processing a rezoning application to convert Mr. Bowman's residence into an office for Shoemaker Development. In order to process the rezoning, we are requesting the sewer and water service area be expanded to include this property (please see the attached exhibit). I am also requesting that this letter be presented to the Frederick County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as they move forward in expanding the sewer and water service area on Route 277. I am hopeful this information will assist the Planning Commission and Board in expanding this service area to include all the properties fronting on Route 277 from Hudson Hollow Road to Double Church Road. Thank you for your assistance with this matter. Please contact me with any questions or concerns Sincerely, Green ay g' eering- Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S. President Enclosure Cc: Charles S. DeHaven, Chairman — Frederick County Planning Commission Gene E. Fisher — Frederick County Planning Commission Pat Gochenour — Frederick County Planning Commission George J. Kriz — Frederick County Planning Commission John Light — Frederick County Planning Commission Robert A. Morris — Frederick County Planning Commission Rick C. Ours — Frederick County Planning Commission William C. Rosenberry — Frederick County Planning Commission Marie F. Straub — Frederick County Planning Commission Roger L. Thomas — Frederick County Planning Commission Engineers Surveyors File #3269/MDS/dls Telephone 540-662-4185 FAX 540-722-9528 www.greenwayeng.com Charles E. Triplett — Frederick County Planning Commission Gregory L. Unger — Frederick County Planning Commission Cordell Watt — Frederick County Planning Commission Sidney A. Reyes, Frederick County Board of Supervisors Liasion File #3269/MDS/dls � i 72 ? B /� o to to -IN 02m OcQ �. `% /j%k� 4, X32 O l3 •. �- i \ \ , � �9 � � p I 24 ;tX �A ami \ ;\,, � ,' � '`� `\/i i \ ��/ %�/ �• /` • \ ,� \` , \ . � � 2g ani o , v q)q 79,00 C\l /♦/i .', ./'\/\. \ice ,"'\/ /`. I b. 00 Q)o 8 A \.>`, \ /fie."' `; ` /`�" .,._ _ �` �. � � i� � f`2 9 A �� = A � ; ' / / , `_'-�� �' MARK D. SMITH � \ x ® ` \(\ v i , �. �k No.022837 Jo "XXXXX IGH ME SUBJECT /-1 0"; SITE y�; ,� :�, /,;�• _ .� T.M. 86-((A))7781"77 Xx, V y%�' xz W z XIXA 78 6XX/ 19 �/ ZONING LEGEND gow ......r y �.., �% /�/� \�./ //'Y�.�/. ��;� /`jy �D x,y/�5 W wI24 77A RA RURAL AREAS DISTRICT i� \' �� ', a� 0 i RP RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE DISTRICT ' \' �/ .\ \'\ - O R4 RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY ,/ „ ® R5 RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL COMMUNITY 19A \ .�. _ MH1 MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY DISTRICT B1 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT B2 BUSINESS GENERAL DISTRICT LEGEND B3 INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION DISTRICT �.T M1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT 20B M2 INDUSTRIAL GENERAL DISTRICT U D A _ DATE: 2/20/02 EM EXTRACTIVE MANUFACTURING DISTRICT HE HIGHER EDUCATION DISTRICT - -, S W SA SCALE: 4"= 200 DESIGNED BY: JNT 75 4 3 2 1 4 1 JOB NO. 3269 SHEET 1 OF -1 M Zherand.0 HS'/ Sn 04, a M Currently Served � Existing SWSA 000000 SWSA Expansion SWSA Extension Alternative A 1(199 acres) (Cf'PSRec�naeca,)mmDraft I family residence.: The health department will not approve any construction permits for this septic system until the county approves the right-of-way agreement for the portion of property belonging to the Sanitary District. Upon motion made by James L. Longerbeam, seconded by W. Harrington Smith, Jr., the right-of-way agreement was approved as presented by the following recorded vote: Richard G. Dick - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye James L. Longerbeam - Aye RobertM. Sager -(was not in the room when vote was taken) Jimmie:K. Ellington - Aye Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. - Aye AR slug, R. EST FOR PM MISSION To EXTEND SEMM - Mr. Kris Tierney presented this request to the board noting that Mr. Fulton is asking permission to extend sewer to his property at the southeast corn'e'r of the intersection of Route 636 and 277:1 The board discussed with Mr. Tierney and Mr. Maddox of G. W. Clifford Associates, exactly where this line would be located and who would be,bearing these -expenses. Following board discussion it was the general consensus that the request be granted to extend a four -inch sewer line to Mr. Fulton's 14 acre parcel located at the southeast corner of th& intersection of. Routes 277 and 636. The request was approved with the stipulation that the extension parallel along the south side of Route 277 rather than ruin directly across the park property as originally requested, and that Mr. Fulton bear the cost of the extension, and that the homeowners along Route 636, in the immediate vicinity be allowed to.tie into this line at their expense. Upon motion made by Robert M. Sager, seconded by W. Harrington Smith, Jr., the above request of Arthur H. Fulton for permission to extend sewer was approved with certain conditions as spelled out, by the following recorded vote: V Richard G. Dick - Aye Ct iR 01L+ W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye James L. Longerbeam - Aye MIN LJTI-�S Robert M. Sager - Aye g04 Jimmie K. Ellington - Aye Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. - Aye M 272 would require separate action from this request_ There was no public input Upon motion made by Robert R Sager, seconded by Sidney A. Reyes, this request for extension of water and sewer service outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area boundary for Pioneer Trailer Park was approved as presented by the Planning Commission. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: ' "} Richard C. Sbidde - Aye Charles W. Omdo$ Sr. - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert A Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A. Reyes - Aye REQUEST TO DIRECT COUNTY STAFF TO POI LSM NECESSARY STEPS AND PROCEDURES TO RMAD.PUST TffE WATER ANISEWER SERVICE ARTA . ,*— BOUNDARY FOR THOSE THAT HAVE FAIT Y -G SvSTEMS BUT DOES NOT EXTEND TO THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA - APPROVED Supervisor Sager addressed some concernwith approving the Pioneer Trailer Parkwater and sewer extension request in that other existing residences and structures surrounding this area are experiencing the same problems, therefore, he would Hike to see that this extension be available to those areas as well. The Board made it perfectly clear that this was separate from extending the urban development area. Upon motion made by Robert M. Sager, seconded by Sidney A. Reyes, to direct staff to pursue the necessary steps and procedures to readjust the water and sewer service area boundary for those that have failing systems as addressed above. This does not extend the Urban Development Area. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Charles W. Omdof� Sr. - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Robert M. Sager - Aye Margaret B. Douglas - Aye Sidney A- Reyes - Aye PUBLIC HEARING AN ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE APPORTIONMENT OF MEMBERS OF COUNTY BOARDS OF SUPERVISORS, TO ESTABLISH BOUNDARY LINES OF THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS AND VOTING PRECINCTS TO NAME EACH MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT AND VOTING PRECINCT AND TO ESTABLISH A POLLING PLACE FOR EACH VOTING PRECINCT TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER?, ELECTIONS; ARTICLE LMAGISTERIALDISTRIGTS;SE_MONS 7_2 DISTRICTS ENUMERATED AND 7-4BOUNDARIES• AND ARTICLE II, Minute Book Number 27 Board of Supervisors Meeting of 0523101 J • • A T0: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Jeremy F. Camp, Planner IL COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 SUBJECT: Proposed Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Regarding Loading Space Requirements DATE: February 7, 2002 Staff drafted the attached amendments to the Zoning Ordinance from direction by the Planning Commission and the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee. The idea was brought forward during a joint work session held between the Planning Commission and the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee on December 15, 1999. During this meeting, the Planning Commission requested that consideration be given to modifying the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to loading spaces. The Development Review and Regulations Committee recommended approval of the attached text amendment in their meeting held on September 27, 2001. The primary goal of the amendments are to provide flexibility to smaller industrial and commercial users with minimal loading space activity. The amendments also clarify several ambiguities within the existing text. The Industrial Parks Association has participated in the discussions held during various Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee meetings, and supports the proposed changes. Both the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors have recently expressed their support of the proposed amendments. Therefore, please review these amendments again for final consideration and public hearing during the February 20, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting. Changes are proposed to Sections 165-28, Loading Areas, and 165-145, Definitions. JFC/ch Attachments 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 165-28. Loading areas. Spaces for the loading and unloading of trucks and vans shall be provided in association with business and industrial uses as follows: A, T fading spaces required. (1) The number of loading spaces required shall be as follows: Type of Use Food stores, restaurants and taverns Retail and personal services Hotels and motels, lodges, clubs, fraternal organizations and indoor recreation Office buildings Manufacturing, wholesale, trucking, construction and industrial uses Schools, hospitals and nursing homes (2) Interpretation. Loading Spaces Required 1 for first 10,000 square feet of floor area plus 1 for each additional 30,000 square feet 1 for first 10,000 square feet of floor area plus 1 for each additional 30,000 square feet 1 for each 20,000 square feet of floor area 1 for structures between 30,000 and 100,000 square feet; 1 for each additional 100,000 square feet 1 for each 40,000 square feet of floor area 1 for each structure with more than 100,000 square feet of floor area (a) When a use is not specifically listed above, the Zoning Administrator shall determine which of the above categories to use to determine the spaces required, based on similarities between the characteristics of the uses. When a use is not specifically listed above, the Zoning Administrator may also use information provided by the application or other sources of information to determine the number of spaces required. (b) In cases where mixed uses share the same loading area, the loading spaces required shall equal the sum of the spaces required for the various uses. In some cases, different uses will be contained in a single structure or site plan, and in those cases, the spaces required shall equal the sum of the spaces for each use. ErOVILINVall mr.101906111111r; B. Design standards. (1) Dimensions. Each required loading space shall be twelve (1 2) feet wide and forty- five (45) feet long. Each loading space shall have a vertical clearance of fourteen (14) feet. (2) Obstructions and structures. Loading spaces shall be designed to permit loading and unloading without requiring the moving of any parked motor vehicle. Utility poles, light standards, trash containers and similar structures shall not be permitted within loading spaces. (3) Access. In no case shall a loading space be approved which requires that a vehicle enter or back directly from loading spaces onto public roads. All loading spaces shall be provided access to a public road using an entrance which meets all requirements of the Frederick County Code and the Virginia Department of Transportation. (4) Surface Materials and Curb and Gutter. Loading areas shall meet the surface material and curb and gutter requirements for one of the following categories: (a) Loading areas separated from parking lots. Loading areas that are separated from parking lots shall be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete, or similar materials. Curb and gutter shall not be required when loading areas are separated from parking lots. (b) Loading areas that are part of parking lots. Loading areas that are part of parking lots shall be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete, or similar materials. Curb and gutter shall be required for all loading areas that are part of parking lots when curb and gutter is required for the parking lot. (c) Loading areas with two (2) or less loading spaces proposed. Loading areas serving uses identified in Section 165-28(A) may have a gravel surface if two (2) or less loading spaces are proposed, and if the loading area is separate from the parking lot. Curb and gutter shall be required for loading areas with two (2) or less loading spaces when the loading area is part of the parking lot, and when curb and gutter is required for the parking lot. (d) Stormwater management plan and erosion control plan requirements. The Zoning Administrator may require curb and gutter and different surface materials for loading areas when necessary to implement a stormwater management plan or an erosion control plan. 165-145. Definitions. Loading Area - 74m off-street vehieles. An off. -street area containing loading spaces and maneuvering areas, as well as their associated driveways. Loading Space - An off-street space used for loading or unloading by commercial, industrial, public, or semi-public vehicles. Maneuvering Area - A traveled way by which commercial, industrial, public, or semi-public vehicles enter and depart loading spaces. U. ICOMAfITTEESIDRRSIProjectslLoading Space RequirementslPCMGM092.wpd