Loading...
PC 04-17-24 Meeting Minutes Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4115 Minutes of April 17, 2024 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 April 17, 2024. PRESENT: Tim Stowe, Chairman/Red Bud District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Shawnee District; Robert S. Molden, Opequon District; Elizabeth D. Kozel, Shawnee District; Justin Kerns, Stonewall District; Charles S. DeHaven III, Stonewall District; Jason Aikens, Gainesboro District; Betsy Brumback, Back Creek District; Jeff McKay, Back Creek District; Charles Markert, Red Bud District; ; Mollie Brannon, Member at Large; Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney. ABSENT: Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District. STAFF PRESENT: Wyatt G. Pearson, Director; M. Tyler Klein, Senior Planner; Amy L. Feltner, Planner I; Kayla Peloquin, Planner I; Shannon L. Conner, Administrative Guaranty Coordinator. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Stowe called the April 17, 2024 meeting of the Frederick County Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Upon a motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Markert, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for this evening’s meeting. MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Molden, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the minutes from the February 21, 2024 meeting. ------------- 5 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4116 Minutes of April 17, 2024 COMMITTEES Frederick Water – Mtg. 4/16/24 Commissioner Brumback reported the Board of Directors held their annual organizational meeting with election of officers and the adoption of bylaws. The Board also adopted the FY24-25 budget. Commissioner Brumback presented the March operations report. Transportation Committee – Mtg. 3/25/24 Chairman Stowe reported the Committee received an update on Route 37 (Eastern Frederick Transportation) Study; the upcoming SmartScale Application round update. Discussion was held on the Route 50 crossover and County projects. City of Winchester – Mtg. 4/16/24 Commissioner Mayfield, Winchester City Planning Commission Liaison, reported a public hearing was held for O’Reilly Auto Parts and an update to the Corridor Enhancement overlay. Board of Supervisors – Mtg. 4/10/24 Supervisor Liero, Board of Supervisors Liaison reported the Board approved: Rezoning #06-23 Winchester Gateway, Rezoning #01-24 Singh Trans, Rezoning #02-24 for Washington Commons, and Conditional Use Permit #01-24 for Christiopher Bowie. An appeal of SUB #01-24 Lillie Heflin was postponed until the May 8, 2024 meeting. ------------- CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Stowe 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. Sami Sfeir came forward and requested a change to the RP zoning to allow up to 10 hens on a property. He commented this is necessary for the sustainability of our community, green and health conscious living, education, children’s activities, neighborly interactions, and local food supply No one else came forward to speak and Chairman Stowe closed the public comments portion of the meeting. ------------- 6 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4117 Minutes of April 17, 2024 PUBLIC HEARINGS Rezoning #03-24 for Snowden Bridge and Stephenson Village II (Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC. And Snowden Bridge Holdings, LLC. Action – Postponed for 30 days M. Tyler Klein, Senior Planner, reported this is a request to rezone approximately 330.46+/- acres of the R4 (Residential Planned Community) District with proffers to the R4 District with modified proffers; the subject property is in the Stonewall Magisterial District. The proposed proffer amendment includes changes to density, housing types mix, cash proffers, recreational amenities, commercial development, and County office space. He shared a zoning map of the property. Mr. Klein continued, the proposed rezoning does not propose a change to the current zoning of the property (R4) or site access; it would not have a negative impact on the planned or existing transportation facilities in the vicinity of the project. He noted, as such, the proposed rezoning remains in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan policies specific to future land use compatibility. However, the proposed rezoning does not address all future transportation improvements identified in the Plan, including Route 37 along the southern property boundary, and may not be fully compatible with Plan policies. Mr. Klein explained, the application deficiencies remain outstanding as proposed in the proffer statement (dated March 22, 2024) and the GDP: • Modification to “Uses, Density, and Mix of Housing Types” (Proffer 3(A)(2)). • Revision to “Capital Facility Impacts (Proffer 4). • Modification to “Recreational Amenities and Linear Park” (Proffer 9(A)) to add additional community amenity. • Modification to “Commercial Center” (Proffer 13(F)); revise location, minimum SF, and extend timing of providing commercial space. • Deletion of “Rent-Free County Office Space” (Proffer 14) entirely. Mr. Klein reported, when evaluating capital costs of new residential development, the County projects per unit costs through the Capital Impact Model (CapIM). The model has been designed to project fiscal impacts that may result with land use change decisions to schools, fire and rescue services, parks and recreation, and other County services. Mr. Klein reviewed the impacts: • Capital Impact Contribution Revision o $15,000 per unit commencing with the 1,766th non-age restricted residential unit ➢ Potential shortfall to the County of up to $5,309 per unit for the newly converted units based on CapIM output. o Any units developed up to the proposed trigger would continue to utilize the original proffered amount with escalation ($7,897). ➢ Depending on final mix of housing types, the new contribution may not be met. o While the original per unit contribution may have been a sufficient to offset impacts on capital facilities in 2003 circumstances have changed greatly since then and it falls well short of the County’s current calculations of capital impact. 7 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4118 Minutes of April 17, 2024 • Recreation Amenities Addition o Revision to include an additional recreation center (Proffer 9(A)) for the non-age restricted component of Stephenson Village II. ➢ Does not meet the applicable Zoning Ordinance standard for phased development and proposed a lesser standard. ➢ Common recreational facilities and improvements and other improvements indicated for any phase section are required to be started not later than when that section reaches fifty percent (50%) occupancy and are required to be complete by the time that section reaches sixty percent (60%) occupancy. • Commercial Center Revisions o Revision to extend the trigger for the commercial center to six (6) years from the 1,200th non-age restricted residential building permit (Proffer 13(F)) does not propose a reasonably related timeframe and also removed the minimum square footage (60,000SF) of commercial space to be provided. ➢ The application fails to provide sufficient justification as to why meaningful commercial land uses are not being developed at this time. ➢ The completion of commercial square footage should coincide with development of additional residential units and provide for uses that are complementary to a residential community. • Rent-Free County Office Space Deletion o The proposed revision removes in its entirety the requirement to provide rent-free County office space (Proffer 14). ➢ May not fulfill the original intent of the proffer as written in 2003, or provide a new alternative, to offset the impact of the development on general County government. Mr. Klein concluded, modification to approved proffer statement (revised March 22, 2024) and GDP; proposes changes to density, mix of housing types, cash proffers for residential units, add recreational amenities, revise commercial development component, and remove requirement for County office space. The Planning Commission shared concerns with the transportation impacts this application will have on the area. They commented this development will be a burden for the taxpayer and the commercial uses should be completed sooner than later. Chairman Stowe called for anyone who wished to speak regarding this Public Hearing to come forward at this time. Kenny Unger, Jr. of the Stonewall Magisterial District spoke, and he objects to the revised plan. He is concerned that the negative impacts this development will have on the area will be severe. No one else came forward to speak and Chairman Stowe closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Upon a motion made by Commissioner Kerns and seconded by Commissioner DeHaven to postpone this item 8 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4119 Minutes of April 17, 2024 BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does unanimously recommend to postpone for 30 days Rezoning #03-24 for Snowden Bridge and Stephenson Village II (Brookfield Stephenson Village, LLC. And Snowden Bridge Holdings, LLC. (Note: Commissioner Triplett was absent from the meeting) INFORMATION/DISCUSSION Ordinance Amendment – Religious Organization and National Chartered Fraternal Lodges or Civic Clubs, Social Centers, and Their Related Club Facilities Kayla Peloquin, Planner I, reported this is a proposal to amend the Zoning Ordinance to change the term “Church” to “Place of Worship” throughout the ordinance. No changes are proposed to the definition – “Building or structures primarily intended for the conduct of organized religious services and associated accessory uses” (§165-101.02). She noted, given the broad definition, updating the term “Church” to “Place of Worship” helps meet the intent of the definition. Added to the ordinance is a permitted use to the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District for “Na tionally chartered fraternal lodges or civic clubs, social centers, and their related club facilities.” Currently, this is a conditional use in the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District and remains a conditional use in the RP with this amendment. Ms. Peloquin explained, this amendment will move the additional regulations from the conditional uses list in the RP to a new subsection the Additional Regulations for Specific Uses Section (§165-204) for consistency; no changes are proposed to the additional regulations. She shared the additional regulations: • Where allowed facilities shall have an approved site plan meeting the following conditions: 1. All principal activities shall take place entirely within an enclosed structure. 2. All outdoor facilities shall be incidental to the principal facility or activity. 3. No facility or activity shall be erected or conducted less than 30-feet from any residential district or area within other districts which are predominantly residential in nature. Ms. Peloquin concluded, the DRRC discussed this item on March 28, 2024 and was supportive of updating the terminology from “Church” to “Place of Worship”; the DRRC recommended that “Nationally chartered fraternal lodges, civic clubs, and social centers” be added as a conditional use in the RA zoning district rather than a permitted use to be consistent with the RP and to mitigate any potential impacts. The Planning Commission members were supportive of updating the term from Church to Place of Worship. Through consensus, the Planning Commission recommended that Nationally chartered fraternal lodges or civic clubs, social centers, and their related club facilities be added as a conditional use in the RA rather than as a permitted use. Ordinance Amendment – Conference/Event Centers, Data Centers, Solid Waste Collection, and Materials Recovery Facilities Amy L. Feltner, Planner I, reported this is a proposal to update the reference in the definitions of Caliper, correct errors in the definition of Country General Store, and amend Public Garage to remove multiple types of garages. The amendment will specifically list the allowance of conference/event centers and data centers in the B2 (General Business) and B3 (Industrial Transition) 9 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4120 Minutes of April 17, 2024 Districts; Data centers in the M1 (Light Industrial), M2 (Industrial General , and TM (Technology- Manufacturing Park) District; Commercial Sport and Recreation Clubs in the B2 (General Business); Continuing-Care Retirement Community (CCRC) in the MS (Medical Support) District; and clarify the recycling operation and recreational facilities in the M1 (Light Industrial). The B1 (Neighborhood Business) square foot limitation for retail stores and grocery/food stores has been relocated. Mrs. Feltner noted, the amendments are not adding additional permitted uses, but rather clarifying that these are permitted uses. These uses were previously allowed under the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) use tables that were replaced with NAICS terminology in 2023. Mrs. Feltner continued, the DRRC discussed these items on March 28, 2024; in discussing the updated caliper definition, the committee suggested providing a link on the Frederick County web site for ease in finding the information. The committee was not supportive of the continued inclusion of data centers in the B2 (General Business) Zoning District; if data centers were to be permitted, additional buffer requirements, size limitations, and other requirements should be added in the Additional Regulations for Specific Uses section of the zoning ordinance. The committee was not in favor of allowing ‘data centers’ as a primary use in the B2 district and recommended that they be limited to accessory uses only. “Data centers” frequently increase the cost of land, thus affecting small businesses and the area around data centers tends to transform the B2 (General Business) District into more of a M1 (Light Industrial) District. The Committee recommended further discussion from the Planning Commission on allowing data centers in the B2 (General Business) District, and whether the use continued to be allowed is appropriate. The committee was supportive of all other proposed amendments and offered no comments. Commissioner Kerns asked if this was primarily a cleanup exercise. Mrs. Feltner stated that is correct. Commissioner Brannon commented she does not like data centers in the B2. The majority of the Planning Commission agreed with the DRRC Committee recommendations. Presentation on UDA Report Wyatt G. Pearson, Director shared a brief presentation on the Urban Development Area (UDA); residentially zoned development information (vacant lot summary); residential housing permits in 2023; and current noteworthy trends. ------------- ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and a motion was made by Commissioner Thomas to adjourn the meeting. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kozel and unanimously passed. The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________ Tim Stowe, Chairman ___________________________ Wyatt G. Pearson, Secretary 10