PC 07-17-96 Meeting Agenda7:00 P.M.
�S
AGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Old Frederick County Courthouse
Winchester, Virginia
V
JULY 17, 1996 `ra ' n4 4,
CALL TO ORDER `-TAB
1) Minutes of May 15, 1996 ............................................... A
2) Bi -Monthly Report .................................................... B
3) Committee Reports ................................................... C
4) Citizen Comments .................................................... D
DISCUSSION ITEMS
5) Discussion of Draft Kemstown Battlefield Plan
(Mr. Lawrence) ...................................................... E
6) Discussion regarding a proposed amendment to the Frederick County Planning
Commission Bylaws to establish new standards for tabling procedures
(Mr. Wyatt)......................................................... F
7) Discussion on Sewer Extension Requests:
a) Faith Baptist Church
b) First United Methodist Church
(Mr. Tierney) ..............1 ........................................
G
8) Others
MEETING MINUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Courthouse in Winchester, Virginia on May
15, 1996.
PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John R. Marker, Vice-
Chairman/Back Creek District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; John H. Light,
Stonewall District; Terry Stone, Gainesboro District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Robert
A Morris, Shawnee District; Jimmie K. Ellington, Gainesboro District; George L. Romine, Citizen
at Large; Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel.
ABSENT: S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; and Robert
M. Sager, Board Liaison.
STAFF PRESENT: Kris C. Tierney, Interim Planning Director; Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II; and
Renee' S. Arlotta, Minutes Recorder.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 3, 1996
Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Light, the minutes of the
April 3, 1996 meeting were unanimously approved as presented.
BIMONTHLY REPORT
Coinniission members had concerns about the granting of a variance for Holiday Inn
Express for a 76" sign setback and a 89.5 square foot sign size for an existing sign. Staff answered
questions from the Commission and Chairman DeHaven accepted the report for the Commission's
2
information.
An Amendment to Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, Article IV,
Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165-37, Buffer and Screening Requirements. This
amendment will establish standards for common shared buffer and screening easements
between adjoining properties within various zoning districts.
Action - Approved
Mr. Wyatt said that it had been suggested to the staff that the current buffer and
screening requirements were excessive, in that they required too much land to be set aside and
concerns had been expressed that land was too valuable to be reserved strictly for the purpose of
providing buffer distance. Mr. Wyatt said that the staff agrees with this argument to a point,
however, the staff believes that distances can be reduced provided that the required buffer and
screening methods are designed and constructed to provide for maximum protection.
Mr. Wyatt said that one method to promote flexibility is to allow adjoining property
owners to design and develop a common shared buffer and screening easement between properties.
He said that the staff believed that this approach had several benefits including that the amount of land
required for the buffer may be reduced, the initial cost and maintenance costs are reduced, and the
adjoining property owners are aware of the development potential of each property.
Mr. Wyatt said that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS)
felt that this amendment provided a benefit to the development community which would allow
adjoining property owners to work together to design appropriate buffers and they endorsed the
proposal at their April meeting.
There were no citizen comments.
Members of the Commission were in favor of the proposed amendment and upon
motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Marker,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the. Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
recommend approval of the amendment to Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning,
Article N, Supplementary Use Regulations, Section 165-37, Buffer and Screening Requirements, as
follows:
165-37D Zoning District Buffers
(8) Proposed developments required to provide buffers and screening as determined by
Section 165-37D(1)(b) of this Chapter may be permitted to establish a common
3
shared buffer and screening easement with the adjoining property. The common
shared buffer and screening easement shall include all components of a full screen
which shall be clearly indicated on a site design plan. A legal agreement signed by all
appropriate property owners shall be maintained with the approved site design plan.
This agreement shall describe the location of the required buffer within each property,
the number and type of the plantings to be provided, and a statement regarding the
maintenance responsibility for this easement. The required buffer distance may be
reduced by 501/o for a common shared buffer easement if existing vegetation achieves
the functions of a full screen.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
DISCUSSION OF REVISIONS TO THE LAND USE PLAN FOR ROUND HILL
Action - Unanimously Endorsed Revisions
Mr. Tierney said that during the Board of Supervisors' review of the 1996
Comprehensive Plan in January of 1996, the Board expressed concern about various aspects of the
section dealing with the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Mr. Tierney said that the Board was not in favor
of using public money to extend central sewer. He explained that another concern of the Board was
the large area designated for residential development and the costs that go along with it.
Mr. Tierney said that the staff believed the latest modifications to the plan have
addressed the Board's concerns and make it clear that this is a long-range plan. He stated that the
issues of permitting an extension of central sewer and the potential growth that may result have been
dealt with in a way in which the fiscal interests of the County are protected. Mr. Tierney said the
timing of any extension, beyond areas already eligible for sewer, is clearly in the hands of the Board.
He added that it was also made clear that any future extension would have to be funded through
private investment and would be contingent on a number of other factors.
Members of the Commission empathized with the citizens of the Round Hill area who
had been identified as having sewer problems and failing septic systems and questioned what
alternatives were left for them. The question also arose as to whether the Urban Development Area
(UDA) would need to be expanded to accommodate the development of Phases II and III. Staff
noted that the UDA allows for residential development and the Sewer and Water Service Area
(SWSA) allows for commercial and industrial development without being in the UDA.
Members of the Commission who were on the Comprehensive Plans & Programs
Subcommittee (CPPS) felt that other important issues were addressed in the overall community plan,
such as land use and appearance, and even though the reality of the situation is that sewer was a long
4
way off, it didn't diminish the importance of the remainder of the plan.
A motion was made by Mr. Light, seconded by Mr. Romine, and unanimously passed
to send the Round Hill Plan revisions to the Board with the Commission's endorsement.
DISCUSSION ON THE EXPANSION OF THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA
Mr. Tierney stated that the staff received a request to consider including a 9.81 acre
parcel in the Urban Development Area (UDA). He said that the parcel is located on the western side
of the City of Winchester, along the City and County corporate boundary, and north of Middle Road.
He explained that the request would enable the developer of the Westridge subdivision, located in the
City, to continue the current subdivision onto the 9.81 acre parcel in the County, which is outside of
the UDA. Mr. Tierney said that the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS)
discussed the issue, but had concerns because it may establish a trend that would encourage existing
subdivisions located in the City to continue developing into the County.
Members of the Commission asked if the 9.81 acre parcel would be accessed from the
City or the County and it was determined that the only access to the parcel was through the City of
Winchester. Commission members had jurisdictional concerns about who and how the property
would be served by emergency services and school buses.
Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin, with G. W. Clifford & Associates, was available to represent
the applicant and explained the proposed development in further detail for the Commission.
Members of the Commission were concerned about the precedent setting situation
this could create; however, they felt there were a couple aspects about this particular development
that made it unique, so its expansion into the County could be defended: 1) the property was split by
the City/County boundary line; and 2) the portion of property within the City had already been
developed.
Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Romine, the Commission
unanimously voted to allow the expansion of the UDA to include the 9.81 acre parcel, designated as
P.I.N. 63-A-3.
The staff noted that this proposal would need to come back before the Commission
with an application for rezoning and then a master development plan. Mr. Light requested that
specific information be presented during the rezoning application about which jurisdiction would
serve the property with emergency services and school buses and how the property would be
accessed.
5
DISCUSSION REGARDING COMMITTEE REPORTS
Mr. Wyatt said that the staff will be providing the Planning Commission with detailed
reports of the committee meetings held each month. W. Wyatt said that the reports will be designed
to identify the issues coming before the Committee, to provide information based on committee
discussion, and to recommend various actions that may be desirable to the Planning Commission. Mr.
Wyatt explained that there are occasions when the Committee is not interested in endorsing an
amendment that is brought before them and he asked the Commission if the applicant should be told
that there is no reason to pursue the amendment further or if the Commission would prefer to hear
the request anyway.
Commissioners felt that every citizen deserved the opportunity to bring a request
before the Planning Commission for discussion. They felt that even though the Committee heard the
request and was not in favor of pursuing it, the citizen should have the prerogative to bring it before
the Commission as an agenda item.
As a point of clarification, the Commission said that they would prefer to continue to
have informal discussions on Code amendments.
ADJOURNMENT
No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
by unanimous vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman
Kris C. Tierney, Interim Planning Director
BIMONTHLY REPORT OF PENDING APPLICATIONS
(printed July 8, 1996)
Application newly submitted.
REZONINGS:
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS:
1
Mosby Station, Sect. I & II
(MDP #005-96)
Opequon
SF Detached Residential on
36.12 acres (RP)
Location:
Between old Rt. 642 & relocated Rt. 642
Submitted:
05/02/96
PC Review:
06/05/96 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
L07/10/96
Dr. Raymond Fish (MDP)
I
Stonewall
I
54 SF Det. Cluster; 26.123 Ac.
(RP)
Animal Hospital & Mobile
Office Sales on 20.93 acres (B2
& B3)
Location:
East side of I-81 and south side of Rt. 672
Submitted:
11/02/95
03/06/96 - Recommended Approval
PC Review:
01/03/96 -
Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
O 1/24/96 -
Approved
LPending Admin. AppK2yah
Awaiting completion of easement plat for water line ext.
IIHID Valley (MDP)
Shawnee
54 SF Det. Cluster; 26.123 Ac.
(RP)
Location:
N.W. Corner of Valley Mill & Greenwood Rds.
Submitted:
11/15/95
PC Review:
03/06/96 - Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
05/13/96 - Approved
Pending Admin. A Koval:
Awaiting completion of staff & review agency comments
SUBDIVISIONS:
Wrights Run Ltd. Ptnrshp
Shawnee
Subdivide a 10 ac. lot off of a
(SUB #005-96)
196.5625 acre tract (Ml)
Location:
\,So. W�st quadrant
of Rt. 642 (relocated) & Rt. 522
Submitted:
05� 3/96
PC Review:
0'6/05/
- Recommended Approval
BOS Review:
6/12/96
- proved
Admin. Approval:
06/20/96
Fredericktowne Est. Sect.
14 & 15 (SUB #00496)
Opequon 33 SF Trad. Lots on 9.9804
Acres (RP)
Location:
East of Stephens City; N.E. of Sections 11-13
Submitted:
05/02/96
MDP #007-88
Approved 12/05/88
Admin. A rovak
Pending
Valley Mill Estates (SUB)
Stonewall
121 SF Trad. Lots (RP)
Location:
No. Side of Valley Mill Rd. & East of Greenwood Rd.
Submitted:
10/23/95
MDP #001-95
Approved 04/26/95
Pending Admin. A royal:
Awaiting bonding, signed plats, & deed of dedication
Wine -Fred Co. IDC (SUB)
Back Creek
2 Ml Lots (0.552 acres & 20.285
acres)
Location:
Southeast side of Development Lane
Submitted:
09/08/95
MDP �f003-87
Approved 07/08/87
Pending Admin. AppE21al
Awaiting signed plats.
RT&T Partnership (SUB)
Back Creek 1 Lot - 29.6 Acres (B2)
Location:
Valley Pike (Rt. 11 So.)
Submitted:
05/17/95
MDP #003-91
Ap roved 07/10/91
Pending Admin. Approval: J1
Awaiting submission of signed plat & deed of dedication
Briarwood Estates (SUB)
Stonewall
20 SF Det. Trad. Lots (RP)
Location:
Greenwood Rd.
Submitted:
01/03/94
MDP #005-93
Approved 12/8/93
Pending Admin. Approval-,
Being held at a licants request.
;Abrams,, Point, Phase I
Shawnee 230 SF Cluster & Urban Lots
(�:
Two B2 Lots
South side of Rt. 659
Submitted:
05/02/90
PC Review:
06/06/90 Approved
BOS Review:
06/13/90 Approved
Pending Admin. ApEK2yahj
Awaiting deed of ded., letter of credit, and si nedlat
Harry Stimpson (SUB) A
Opeguon
Two B2 Lots
Location:
Town Run Lane
Submitted:
09/23/94
PC Review:
10/19/94 Approved
BOS Review:
10/26/94 Approved
Pending Admin. Approval: I[Awaidng
signed plat.
SITE PLANS:
5h�l�l�n,
�J
Cedar Creek Center (SP
#025-96)
ck Creek
Museum on 0.485 ac. of a 3.210
acre parcel (Bl)
Location:
[8437Valle Pike (Rt. 11), Middletown
Submitted:
/16/96
A roved:
ndin
Johnny Blue, Inc. Port.
Toilet Sys. (SP #024-96)
Stonewall 900 s.f. bldg addit. on 1.00 acre
(Ml)
Location:
255 Lenoir Drive (Stonewall Industrial Pk.)
Submitted:
05/16/96
Approved:
Pending
AMOCO/House of Gifts
(SP #022-96)
Gainesboro Gas Pump Canopy 880 sq. ft.
area of a 0.916 acre parcel (RA)
Location:3548
North Frederick Pike
Submitted:APending
05/08/96
Approved:
Pending
Dr. Raymond Fish (SP
#023-96)
Stonewall Mini -Golf Facility on 5,000 sq.
1 ft. of a 16 acre parcel (B2)
Location:
S. E. Corner of 1-8 1 /Hopewell Rd. Intersection
Submitted:
05/09/96
Approved:
Pending
Shenandoah Presbytery
Corp. (SP #021-96)
Opequon Church on 2.4 ac. of a 6.5255
acre site (RP)
Location:
751 Fairfax Pike
Submitted:
04/23/96
Approved:
Pending
Valley Mill Apts. (SP #020-
96)
Shawnee 76 -unit apartment development
1 on 7.684 acres (RP)
Location:
Corner of Rt. 658 & Rt. 659
Submitted:
04/12/96
Approved:
Pending
#019-91
Stonewall Elem. School (ST3165
newall
School Bldg; developing 8.22 ac.
of a 10.0122 ac. parcel (RA)
Location:
Martinsbur
Pike, Clearbrook
Submitted:
04/11/96
Pending
A roved:
Pending
American Legion Post #021
(SP #018-96)
Stonewall Addition to lodge building on
3.4255 acre site (B2)
Location:
1730 Berryville Pike
Submitted:
04/10/96
Approved:
Being held at the applicants request.
Senseny Rd. Elem. School
Addition (SP)
Shawnee School Addition on 3.0 ac. of a
9.7 ac. site (RP)
1
Location:
1481 Senseny Road
Submitted:
03/11/96
Approved:
Pending
Dominion Knolls (SP)
Stonewall
180 TH on 20.278 ac. (RP)
Location:
Intersection of Baker Lane and Gordon Street
Submitted:
02/21/96
Approved:
Pending
Pegasus Business Center,
Phase I (SP)
P434Buffflflick
Office, Misc. Retail, Business on
2.5 ac of a 6.0623 ac site (B2)
Location:
Road
Submitted:
02/14/96
A roved:
Pendin
D.K. Erectors &
Maintenance, Inc. (SP)
Gainesboro Indust Sery/Steel Fabrication on
a 10 acre site (MZ)
Location:
4530 Northwestern Pike
Submitted:
12/28/95
Approved:
Pending
Regency Lakes, Sect. E
(SP)
Stonewall 95 units on 28.0 acres (XM1)
Location:
North of Regency Lakes Drive
Submitted:
10/27/95
Approved:
Pending
Wheatlands Wastewater
Facility (SP)
Opequon
Treatment Facility on 5 Acres
(R5)
Location:
So. West of Double Toll ate; adj. & west of Rt. 522
Submitted:
09/12/89
Note:
Being held ata licant's request.
Flex Tech (SP)
Stonewall
Ml Use on 11 Ac. (Ml)
Location:
East side of Ft. Collier Rd.
Submitted:
10/25/90
Note:
LBeingheld atapplicant's request.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS:
Robert C. Fowler (CUP
#007-96)
Gainesboro Comm. Outdoor Rec. Facility/
Shooting Range (RA)
Location:
840 North Timber Ride Road
Submitted:
05/ 10/96
PC Review:
06/05/96 - Tabled to unspecified time.
BOS Review:
Not yet scheduled.
Kevin W. Fox (CUP #006-
96)
Shawnee Cottage Occupation - Recording
Studio (RP)
Location:
687 Front Royal Pike
Submitted:
05/08/96
PC Review:
06/05/96 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
07/10/96
Lee R. Smeltzer (CUP
#005 -96)
Back Creek Re-establish discontinued non -
conform. use/Cnt Store (RA)
Location:
4163 Northwestern Pike
Submitted:
05/07/96
PC Review:
06/05/96 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
07/10/96
Gary VanMeter (CUP #004-
96)
Shawnee Retail/Wholesale of Nursery
. Stock & Related Products (RA)
Location:
1544 Airport Road
Submitted:
05/02/96
PC Review:
11107/10/96
06/05/96 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
10
VARIANCES:
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, Planner I OL
SUBJECT: Resource Management Plan for the Kernstown Battlefields
DATE: July 8, 1996
West Main Design Collaborative (WMDC), the firm selected to complete a resource
management plan for the Grim Farm property, has recently submitted the draft copy of the
Kernstown Battlefields Resource Management Plan to the Planning Department.
This draft plan incorporates elements ranging from the site's role in the Civil War to visitor
access and interpretation. The plan proposes that visitor access and interpretation be addressed
by historical elements and zones. Interpretive zones will be designated based on battles, farming
characteristics, and the Pritchard house area. Each zone would interpret separate historical
stories and combine together to interpret the overall story behind the Grim Farm during the Civil
War era. Visitor access to the site would be via an entrance on Middle Road with parking
provided off this entrance. An interpretative trail system would be accessed from the parking
area.
The resource management portion of the draft plan addresses issues such as protection of the
natural features and the physical structures on the property. The natural features considered
include, but are not limited to: the management of water resources, wildlife, and vegetation.
Stabilization and protection of the Pritchard House is also mentioned. The overwhelming theme
behind the plan is to protect, preserve, and promote the historical and natural characteristics of
the site for others to enjoy and learn from.
Not included in the draft plan, but worth mentioning, is that the final plan will contain cost
estimates for completing the numerous phases of the plan. These estimates will address such
elements as construction costs for a parking facility and the interpretive trail system, and the
costs associated with maintaining the facility before and after the site is improved for visitor
access.
In addition to the presentation at this Planning Commission Meeting. a Public Meetin�� �,vill be
scheduled in eark' .august to present this draft plan to the public. Representatives from West
11i— �wth ` ent 'ir:_.. ,J._:ri t . + �3i:i _'�tTi)1_�islN?
Page 2
July 8, 1996
Kernstown Battlefields Resource Management Plan
Draft Plan review
Main Design Collaborative will present the plan during the August meeting and address
questions that are raised. Staff will notify the Commission of this Public Meeting when the
specifics are finalized.
A copy of the draft plan has been distributed to the Commission for their review. Staff will
present the draft plan and be available to respond to any questions. As this plan is in its draft
format, comments are encouraged.
Attachment
�"ACOUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
5401665-5651
FAX: 540/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Planner 11
RE: Planning Commission Tabling Procedures
DATE: July 2, 1996
During the Planning Commission Retreat in February, it was suggested that new procedures be
created for the tabling of various development applications. The DRRS began discussion on this
issue during the April meeting. The DRRS expressed interest in creating new procedures and
directed staff to consider the following issues:
Ensure that the Planning Commission has the ability to table applications if they do not
believe the application is complete.
• Ensure that the Planning Commission has the ability to table applications if issues or
concerns are surfaced during discussion that they do not feel comfortable with.
• Provide the applicant with the ability to table an agenda item one time in the event that an
emergency situation should arise.
• Allow staff to determine when it is appropriate to place a tabled item on a subsequent
Planning Commission agenda.
• Consider the possibility of allowing staff and the appropriate Planning Commission
representatives to determine when it is appropriate to place a tabled item on a subsequent
Planning Commission agenda.
Staff created an amendment to the Planning Commission Bylaws to address the above referenced
issues. The DRRS reviewed this language and felt that it adequately addressed these issues. The
DRRS directed staff to forward this information to the Planning Commission for consideration.
The Planning Commission should ensure that the proposed amendment is consistent with the
requirements of Article II, Amendments, of the Code of Frederick County. This language
requires the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to act on specific applications
within a certain time frame. Traditionally, an applicant waives his or her right to action by the
Planning Commission under these guidelines if the request for tabling exceeds ninety days.
107 North Kent Street • Winchester. Vir-inia 22601-5004)
Page -2-
PC Memo
July 2, 1996
Included under this agenda item is Section 9-3-9 of the Planning Commission's Bylaws, the
proposed language to amend this section, and Sections 165-10 and 165-11 from Article 11,
Amendments, of the Code of Frederick County. Staff asks that the Planning Commission review
this information for the purpose of discussion. Amendments to the Planning Commission
Bylaws are permitted by a majority vote after thirty days prior notice. Therefore, staff will
provide the appropriate amendment and resolution for Planning Commission action when
directed.
9-3-7-3 In addition to those required by law, the Commission
may hold public hearings on any matter which it deems
to be in the public interest. In such cases, the public
hearings shall follow all procedures described for public
hearing in these bylaws.
9-3-8 Master Development Plans - Master development plans shall be
considered by the Commission according to the following procedures:
9-3-8-1 Presentation by Applicant
9-3-8-2 Report by the Secretary, County Staff or Commission
Members
9-3-8-3 Citizen Comment
9-3-8-4 Rebuttal by Applicant
9-3-8-5 Discussion by Commission
9-3-8-6 Motion and action by Commission
9-3-9 Tabling
9-3-9-1 Agenda items may be laid on the table by the
Commission. In such cases, such items should be tabled
for a specific period of time, to be put back on the
agenda at a particular scheduled meeting.
9-3-9-2 The Commission shall table items for which insufficient
information has been provided or for which the rules of
the Code of Virginia or the Code of Frederick County
have not been met,
9-3-10 Worksessions
9-3-10-1 The Commission may hold worksessions at which the
procedural rules of these bylaws shall not apply.
9-3-10-2 Worksessions shall be held after the adjournment of
regular meeting or at times scheduled by the
Commission for worksessions at the first meeting'of the
year.
9-3-10 Notice or,.v��C�;'sSit)�.:
Section 9-3-9 Tabling
9-3-9-1 The Planning Commission shall have the authority to table agenda items if
any one of the following situations occurs:
A) The agenda item does not meet the requirements of the Code of
Virginia.
B) The agenda item does not meet the requirements of the Code of
Frederick Countx.
C) Insufficient information has been provided for the agenda item.
D) Issues or concerns that arise during formal discussion of the agenda
item warrant additional information or study.
E) The applicant provides the Frederick County Planning Department
with a written request to table the agenda item.
F) The Frederick County Planning Department is advised of an
emergency situation that prevents attendance by the applicant.
G) The applicant fails to appear at the meeting in which the applicant
has been advertised to appear.
9-3-9-2 The applicant shall be permitted to request that an agenda item be tabled
from a scheduled Planning Commission meeting one time. The Planning
Commission shall direct the applicant to meet with the Frederick County
Planning Department to determine an appropriate subsequent meeting date
when the agenda item will be considered.
9-3-9-3 The Frederick County Planning Department shall readvertise an agenda
item that has been tabled when the following steps have been completed:
A) The applicant has requested in writing that the agenda item be
reconsidered by the Planning Commission.
B) The applicant has complied with the items specified in subsection
9-3-9-1 of the Planning Commission Bylaws and has provided the
Frederick County Planning Department with all required
information.
C) The Planning Commissioner representing the Magisterial District
in which the agenda item has been tabled has reviewed all
information provided to the Frederick County Planning
Department and determined the appropriateness of the application.
9-3-9-4 The Planning Commission shall have the authority to act on an agenda
item that has been tabled one time when the agenda item has been
readvertised for a subsequent Planning Commission agenda.
§ 165-9
ZONING
§ 165-11
the application for a public hearing at the next available Planning
Commission meeting according to the requirements of the Code of
Virginia, as amended. [Amended 6-9-19931
E. Signs. At the time of application for rezonings, the applicant shall post,
on the properties for which rezoning is sought, a sign with full
information on the change sought. Such sign shall be placed at the
front property line and be maintained so as to be legible from adjoining
roads and properties until the date of the hearings.
§ 165-10. Planning Commission public hearing.
The Planning Commission shall hold at least one (1) public hearing on any
proposed amendment after notice as required by § 15.1-431 of the Code of
Virginia and may make appropriate changes in the proposed amendment as a
result of such hearing. Upon the completion of its work, the Commission shall
present the proposed amendment to the Board, together with its
recommendations and the appropriate explanatory materials to the Board of
Supervisors. The Planning Commission" shall present its recommendations to
the Board within ninety (90) days after the first Commission meeting following
the referral of the amendment to the Commission.
§ 165-11. Board of Supervisors public hearing.
Before approving and adopting any amendment, the Board shall hold at least
one (1) public hearing thereon, pursuant to public notice as required by
§ 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, after which the Board may make
appropriate changes'or corrections in the proposed amendment; provided,
however, that no additional land may be zoned to a different classification than
was contained in the public notice without an additional public hearing after
notice required by § 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia. An affirmative vote of a
majority of the members of the Board shall be required to amend this chapter.
The Board shall act on rezoning petitions within twelve (12) months of the time
when the petition was received by the Zoning Administrator. Should a request
for a rezoning be disapproved by the Board of Supervisors, at least twelve (12)
months shall expire before another application for rezoning of substantially the
same land to the same zoning district designation shall be considered.
16515 10-25-93
I MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commissioners
FROM: Kris C. Tierney, AICD
RE: Requests for Sewer Extension
DATE: July 2, 1996
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
5401665-5651
?� FAX: 540/678-0682
rim
The Planning Department received two requests for a sewer and water extensions which would
be just beyond the bounds of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The requests are for
extensions to what is now vacant land with the stated intent being to construct churches.
r ?6:5 - Fr'4 Pvd -5 9"
One request is from Faith Baptist Church and pertains to a lAzagge
_,si located on the east side of
Double Churches Road, just south of the Route 277 intersection. The property is zoned RA
(Rural Areas), and churches are a permitted use. There is a large amount of vacant acreage
around the parcel in question. The other request is for the First United Methodic C'hu�rch, and
involves a 15 -acre parcel owned by-MaryEllen Pope on p_ Pie Rid e. This parcel is also
zoned RA and is the same parcel that was the subject of a recent rezoning application. This
parcel is essentially surrounded on three sides by five -acre lot developments.
There have been instances where the County has seen fit to allow a minor, small diameter sewer
extension outside the SWSA for a specific use. The Apple Pie Ridge School, the Mormon
Church (across the street from the Pope property), and Fulton Trucking are some examples. In
each case, care was taken to limit the potential precedence that was set.
The requests were considered by the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee at their
meeting of July 1, 1996. The Committee recommended approval of both requests with the
stipulation that the extensions be sized solely for the uses described. Vicinity maps showing the
location of both parcels, and a letter pertaining to each request, are attached for your information.
The Commission should consider a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.
KCT,'cc
Attachment
1() 7 `vj1 !It `trete' - %N incht'At r. 'Vir<*inia 22601-;0011
JUNE 20, 1996
FAITH BAPTIST CHURCH
122 FREDERICKTOWNE DRIVE
STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655
KRIS TIERNEY
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
FREDERICK COUNTY
107 NORTH KENT STREET
WINCHESTER, VA 22601
Dear Kris:
I have spoken with Wayne Miller recently regarding property that is available
to our church family located in Frederick County and identified as Pin # -
86 - A - 72 and currently owned by Jim Bowman.
Mr. Bowman has agreed to sell this site (14 Acres) to our church and has
also informed us that he will be constructing water and sewer lines across
a portion of this property to serve homes under future construction which are
across highway 641. We would like to purchase this property for our future
church building with the understanding that we could tap the water and sewer
line that is planned to cross this property.
In speaking with Wayne, he mentioned that you were aware of this request and
that I should confirm in writing to you that Faith Baptist Church would want
to buy this property with the understanding from Frederick County Planning that
we could use the sewer and water lines. We would like to know that this can
be accomplished and would request that the Planning Committee approve our re-
quest for the church. We would assure the County that we only plan to use
this connection for the church building. Currently we have approximately 75
attending members and would expect our family to grow over the years ahead.
We would be meeting on Sundays and Wednesdays as primary days of the week.
Please use this letter as our request for approval to use the future sewer and
water lines for the planned church. We believe building could begin within one
to two years from the date of purchase. Mr. Bowman has agreed not to sell this
property until he hears from us on this matter.
Please feel free to call me regarding any questions you may have as we would
like to pursue this as quickly as possible. We thank you in advance for making
this a matter before the Board of Supervisors.
Warmest regards, opj&�_
C.J. Watson (phone- 662-4606)
Church Property Committee
cc
Jim Bowman
Fred Hudson
[39
140
UDA
N
W. E
s
6
77
19 i6 77A
19A
20B 5
74
73
72
79A ee
726
70 %K
72B
1A ez (0
21 1 �D I �k
71 71 B (0
0
52
51
*P,
21B
fl
B
G-
-------- --
---- ---------
Ban
332-343
mall
See 4
78
80
04
306�598,,
2
1
ra-M
117 4
[39
140
UDA
N
W. E
s
6
77
19 i6 77A
19A
20B 5
74
73
72
79A ee
726
70 %K
72B
1A ez (0
21 1 �D I �k
71 71 B (0
0
52
51
*P,
21B
Location Map for PIN: 86—A-72
57
fl
B
G-
-------- --
---- ---------
332-343
See 4
78
80
04
306�598,,
2
1
117 4
6
117
70
220-284
Location Map for PIN: 86—A-72
57
0
L J
C
PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C.
CONSUL TING ENGINEERS tel.: (540)722-9377
24 East Piccadilly Street tel.: (540)662-1565
Winchester, VA 22601 fax.: (540)662-1861
28 JUNE 1996
Mr. Chris Tierney
,
Frederick County Department Planning Development
of and
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
%; - •t,� - r, �'
Re: WATER AND SEWER SERVICE
MARY ELLEN POPE PROPERTY
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Dear Chris:
I am writing to you as Chairman of the Building Committee for the First United Methodist
Church (FUMC). FUMC has purchased an option on a portion of the Pope property located
across State Route 739 from Apple Pie Ridge Elementary School. FUMC is studying the
possibility of constructing a church on approximately 15 acres of the existing tract. The land is
zoned RA. FUNIC is currently located at the corner of Braddock Street and Fairfax Lane with a
congregation of approximately 1000 persons. The church's vision for the future centers around
the construction of a facility which would fulfill a variety of missions and ministries. We are
looking for a piece of property with 15 to 20 buildable acres. Our building program concept
contains facilities for worship, fellowship, preschool programs, athletic fields, outreach
programs, etc.
Construction of our vision will only be possible if adequate water and sewer service is available.
Our research indicates that Apple Pie Ridge Elementary School and the Mormon Church are
presently served by a 12" water main and an 8" sewer main. These services are located parallel
to and on the west side of the Route 739 right-of-way, which is directly across from the parcel of
interest. Please refer to the attached drawing.
On behalf of the First United Methodist Church, I would like to request an extension of the
sanitary sewer and potable water service area of Frederick County to include that portion of the
parcel shown on the drawing.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me.
Sincerelv:
1 ,A
�Ohn C. Len i/r L-., C.L.A.
EXHOI r SHOWING
PROPOSED SURD1 VS/ON
OF - THE
MA R Y ELLEN PORE
PROPERTY
STONEWALL D!SMICT
R=OER/CK COUNTY, WRG/N/A
i
r,
S 0981'15' W
414.94 • --�
L"
A C. J'
N 86714.2' W
=
le
!^ +� I IA
I h
S 0539'43' W 865.0
S OS ;i9'4ff' W 1297 41'
C4 41
cnl� L
I'd / tl .36.40• 1r09�7�1.£905.54'
124,'.94' _
ETA lC ROUTE g
15.81 A C.
N 81 ti,T',TOO W
20.00' —
N 08 6;30' F
O
Z
a
0
Nv
ww
1
czo•
ra
..
ti
t jt
a V
.O
o:Co
Qi
�
^
acv„
!^ +� I IA
I h
S 0539'43' W 865.0
S OS ;i9'4ff' W 1297 41'
C4 41
cnl� L
I'd / tl .36.40• 1r09�7�1.£905.54'
124,'.94' _
ETA lC ROUTE g
15.81 A C.
N 81 ti,T',TOO W
20.00' —
N 08 6;30' F
O
Z
a
0
Nv
ww
1
20a Cantu l I
�' r) Cane / 25 I
209A l�
4 207 0 7
14
258A x 202 ig:j4�� 26
l
i'
11 210A 3 203 17 13 27 ! I`
206
� m � lane
2
I Q 2106 °' 204 16 15 1 is
IQ 1 1 205 C 2 5 4
i I 210
Woodside Place 199
198B
Q°
of 6
'I o - ,0
16 212 ,aQ
198C 7 2 I
I
I� 213 9
8 98A 1 i
in
I
214 '
Rt. 739
• - e.
p
194
,
193 •
id
13 + t
44
Circle
f
4 41 .s„nnyside I�. `
3 edoubt Ln_ :'52F
I 2ots.
5 Warner St.
38 37 26
_ •�l,�...� ..� ����ti. " �� Wit,