Loading...
PC 09-15-21 Meeting MinutesFrederick County Planning Commission Page 3850 Minutes of September 15, 2021 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 September 15, 2021. PRESENT: Kevin Kenney, Chairman; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; William H. Cline, Stonewall District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Elizabeth D. Kozel, Shawnee District; Betsy Brumback, Back Creek District; John F. Jewell, Back Creek District; Kathleen Dawson, Red Bud District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Alan L. Morrison, Member at Large. ABSENT: Robert S. Molden, Opequon District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District. STAFF PRESENT: Wyatt G. Pearson, Director; Candice E. Perkins, Assistant Director; Shannon L. Conner, Administrative Assistant. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Kenney called the September 15, 2021 meeting of the Frederick County Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Kenney commenced the meeting by inviting everyone to join in a moment of silence. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Manuel the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for this evening’s meeting. MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Jewell, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the minutes from the August 18, 2021 meeting. ------------- CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Kenney called for citizen comments on any subject not currently on the Planning Commission’s agenda or any item that is solely a discussion item for the Commission. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Kenney closed the public comments portion of the meeting. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3851 Minutes of September 15, 2021 COMMITTEES City of Winchester – Mtg. 09/07/21 Commissioner Pifer, Winchester City Planning Commission Liaison, reported the Commission discussed the following at a work session: short term rentals text amendment; assisted living on Valor Drive; property off of Legge Boulevard converting from CM1 to B2 for 246 dwelling units and 2,000 sf of commercial space; off street parking buffers text amendment; site plan approvals and waivers. Board of Supervisors Supervisor Stegmaier thanked Staff for having the work session with the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. ------------- PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance Amendment – Opaque Fencing Requirement (Waiver) to the Frederick County Code - Chapter 165 Zoning, ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS; PARKING; BUFFERS; AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES PART 201 – SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS PART 203 – BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING PART 204 – ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES. Revision to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to modify requirements for “opaque fence” to allow chain link fence with slats to satisfy screening requirements for certain uses and to fulfill zoning district buffer screening requirements where a waiver may be granted by the Board of Supervisors. Action – Recommend Approval Wyatt G. Pearson, Director, reported this is a proposed ordinance amendment to Chapter 165 – Zoning Ordinance to allow for double-walled winged slats and chain link fence to satisfy the opaque fence requirement for zoning district buffers through a waiver if granted by the Board of Supervisors. The proposed amendment also allows chain link fence with slats for certain uses without a waiver in the County’s business and industrial districts. Mr. Pearson noted, to be eligible for a zoning district buffer waiver, the applicant/owner/developer making such a request must have written consent from the adjoining (affected) property owners to proceed. He shared a photo of the double-walled winged type slat. Mr. Pearson continued, the Zoning Ordinance definition for an opaque fence specifies: “a fence that is constructed to visually obscure structures, outdoor storage areas, and other uses. A chain link fence with slats shall not constitute an opaque fence.” The opaque fence requirement is also referenced in other sections of the Zoning Ordinance including: • §165-201.10 Outdoor storage and processing • §165-203.02 Buffer and screening requirements • §165-204.11 Landfills, junkyards, trash disposal and inoperable vehicles (dumpster enclosures). • §165-204.12 Motor vehicle uses, automotive repair shops and public garages • §165-204.18 Storage facilities, self-service Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3852 Minutes of September 15, 2021 Mr. Pearson reported, in satisfying the requirements for an opaque fence in the noted sections, a 6-foot tall board-on board fence, hedge, wall, or a berm is typically required; for outdoor storage areas in business and industrial districts, chain link is typically the preferred type of fence for security; and for zoning district buffers and residential separation buffers, an opaque element is required to screen differing land-uses and housing types on adjoining properties. He noted, the elements fulfilling the requirements for a “full screen” buffer are landscape plantings, plus a 6-foot tall opaque wall, fence, hedge, or berm. Mr. Pearson commented the Development Review and Regulations Committee discussed this item at their regular meeting on June 24, 2021 and recommended a Zoning Administrator waiver in lieu of a waiver by the Board of Supervisors; the Planning Commission discussed this item on July 21, 2021; and the Board of Supervisors discussed this on August 11, 2021. Chairman Kenney called for anyone who wished to speak regarding this Public Hearing to come forward at this time. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Kenney closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Oates commented it makes sense to have the Zoning Administrator waiver. Commissioner Morrison and Commissioner Thomas concurred, the guidelines are written well. Upon a motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Triplett with the Zoning Administrator approval waiver BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does unanimously recommend approval of Ordinance Amendment – Opaque Fencing Requirement (Waiver) to the Frederick County Code - Chapter 165 Zoning, ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS; PARKING; BUFFERS; AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES PART 201 – SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS PART 203 – BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING PART 204 – ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES. (Note: Commissioner Molden and Commissioner Mohn were absent from the meeting.) Ordinance Amendment – Master Development Plans (Approval Process) to the Frederick County Code – Chapter 165 Zoning, ARTICLE IV AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; PART 402 – RP RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE DISTRICT §165-402.01 INTENT; ARTICLE VIII DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND APPROVALS; PART 801 – MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS §165-801.02 WHEN REQUIRED §165-801.03 WAIVERS §165-801.06 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMISSION §165-801.07 FINAL MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN. Revision to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to remove the requirement that master Development Plans (MDP) be presented to the Planning Commission (PC) and Board of Supervisors (BOS) at a public meeting as an information item prior to administrative approval. Action – Recommend Approval Wyatt G. Pearson, Director, reported this is an ordinance amendment to Chapter 165 – Zoning Ordinance to remove the requirement that Master Development Plans (MDP) be presented to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors at a public meeting as an information item prior to administrative approval. He noted, currently, MDP’s must be reviewed as informational items by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors prior to their approval; no action is taken by the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors as the plans meet all County ordinance requirements. Mr. Pearson continued, MDP’s have been a requirement in Frederick County since the adoption of a 1973 Zoning Ordinance. Previously MDP’s required Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approval; however, a 2013 amendment changed the requirement to presentation to the PC and BOS for Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3853 Minutes of September 15, 2021 information only. He noted, the Code of Virginia does not specify a requirement for localities to require Master Development Plans. Mr. Pearson explained, MDP’s are typically required after a rezoning is approved by the Board of Supervisors and before a site plan or subdivision design plan may be submitted for administrative review/approval by the Zoning Administrator. MDP’s outline the basic layout of a project, including roadways, access, buffers, and open space; more specific details of the site, including specific lot layouts and grading, are handled at the site or subdivision design plan stage. Mr. Pearson concluded, the Development Review and Regulations Committee discussed this item at their regular meeting on June 24, 2021; the Planning Commission discussed this item on July 21, 2021; and the Board of Supervisors discussed this on August 11, 2021. Chairman Kenney called for anyone who wished to speak regarding this Public Hearing to come forward at this time. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Kenney closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Upon a motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Jewell BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does unanimously recommend approval of Ordinance Amendment – Master Development Plans (Approval Process) to the Frederick County Code – Chapter 165 Zoning, ARTICLE IV AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; PART 402 – RP RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE DISTRICT §165-402.01 INTENT; ARTICLE VIII DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND APPROVALS; PART 801 – MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS §165-801.02 WHEN REQUIRED §165-801.03 WAIVERS §165-801.06 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMISSION §165-801.07 FINAL MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN. (Note: Commissioner Molden and Commissioner Mohn were absent from the meeting.) Sewer and Water Area Expansion for the Southern Frederick and Double Tollgate Areas – proposed Sewer and Water Service Area expansion within the Southern Frederick Area Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan and 350 acres within Clarke County in the Double Tollgate area. Action – Recommend Approval Candice E. Perkins, Assistant Director, reported this is a request to consider a Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) expansion for areas identified in the Southern Frederick Area Plan to accommodate future commercial and industrial land uses, including the provision for water and sewer service for 350 acres within Clarke County. The expansion area with the Southern Frederick Area Plan is primarily located north and south of Tasker Road, east of White Oak Road, and west of Route 522. Ms. Perkins noted, the Clarke County area is located in the Double Tollgate Area, at the intersection of Route 522/340/277 and the requested water and sewer capacity is 150,000 gallons per day. Ms. Perkins presented mapping of the area in discussion. She explained, the Route 277 Triangle Centers of Economy is designed to be a significant area of commercial and industrial opportunity. There are three future neighborhood villages located within the limits of this proposed expansion area. The Southern Frederick Area Plan outlines that residential uses would only be permitted as an accessory component to these areas. Furthermore, these neighborhood villages would continue to remain outside the limits of the Urban Development Area which defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. She noted, this proposed SWSA expansion for the Southern Frederick Area Plan area would facilitate the future development of only commercial and industrial land uses. Ms. Perkins reported, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee discussed this item on May 10, 2021 and support the SWSA expansion; the Planning Commission discussed this Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3854 Minutes of September 15, 2021 proposal at their June 16th meeting; and the Board of Supervisors discussed this request at their August 11th meeting and sent it forward for public hearing. Ms. Perkins concluded, this public hearing is to consider a SWSA expansion for the Southern Frederick Area Plan and 350 acres within Clarke County. She noted, this amendment would only pertain to the potential for planned land uses to access water and sewer if available in the future; provisions for actual infrastructure are not a component of this item. Chairman Kenney called for anyone who wished to speak regarding this Public Hearing to come forward at this time. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Kenney closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Morrison commented he has concerns with the long term impacts of this and the precedent it will set down the road. Commissioner Thomas agreed and stated he is concerned with the County overextending. Chairman Kenney commented we need to look at the bigger picture and Frederick Water is looking at regional aspects. Commissioner Oates stated, by spring the water flow will double, there is the well at Lake Frederick, and Frederick Water is in fact looking at the regional aspect. Upon a motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Jewell BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does recommend approval of Sewer and Water Area Expansion for the Southern Frederick and Double Tollgate Areas – proposed Sewer and Water Service Area expansion within the Southern Frederick Area Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan and 350 acres within Clarke County in the Double Tollgate area. Yes: Kenney, Thomas, Oates, Manuel, Jewell, Triplett, Dawson, Cline, Kozel, Brumback No: Morrison (Note: Commissioner Molden and Commissioner Mohn were absent from the meeting.) OTHER Mr. Wyatt G. Pearson, Director, presented the current planning applications within the department and noted Senseny Village Phase 1 has been approved. Mr. Pearson shared the size of Planning Commissions for Counties within the state of Virginia and explained, the size of Frederick County’s Planning Commission is going to be evaluated and discussed at a later date. ------------- ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and a motion was made by Commissioner Oates to adjourn the meeting. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas and unanimously passed. The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________ Kevin W. Kenney, Chairman ___________________________ Roderick B. Williams, Secretary