Loading...
PC_01-19-05_Meeting_MinutesMEETING 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 19, 2005 PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; Pat Gochenour, Red Bud District; Marie F. Straub, Red Bud District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; H. Paige Manuel, Member -At -Large; Gary Dove, Board of Supervisors' Liaison; Barbara Van Osten, Board of Supervisors' Liaison; and Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District; STAFF PRESENT: Eric R Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director; Mark R Cheran, Zoning Administrator; Candice Perkins, Planner; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. • CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. WELCOME NEW AT -LARGE MEMBER, H. PAIGE MANUEL Chairman DeHaven welcomed the new Member -At -Large to the Planning Commission, Mr. H. Paige Manuel. MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, the minutes of December 15, 2004 were unanimously approved. Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1441 Minutes of January 19, 2005 -z- E Comprehensive Plans & Proerams Subcommittee (CPPS Commissioner Light reported that the CPPS, the working group, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors held a work session together on January 5, 2005. Commissioner Light said that he believed all but one of the Board of Supervisors members supported the rezoning option and the by -right option for the rural areas. He said the proposal was then sent to the Board of Supervisors on January 12, 2005 as a discussion item and a large number of land owners were present to speak in opposition. Commissioner Light said that because of the landowners' objections, the Board appointed an Ad -Hoc Committee, chaired by Mr. John P. Goode and assisted by Mr. Kenneth Y. Stiles, to develop their own proposal for the rural areas. Commissioner Light was concerned because the Ad -Hoc Committee was given no direction, no guidance, no objective, nor Hiles to follow. Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Commissioner Gochenour stated that her report this evening was in the form of a request. Commissioner Gochenour stated that the HRAB did not have their regularly scheduled meeting last night, January 18, 2005, and regrettably, this has been the trend over the past three years that she has served as the liaison from ® the Planning Commission. She said she realized there were many mitigating circumstances why the HRAB is not operating at its fullest potential; however, due to the historic value of the community, it should be a vibrant leader in land use plans and protecting the irreplaceable. Commissioner Gochenour said that she was, therefore, requesting the cooperation of the Planning Commissioners, the Planning Staff, and the Board of Supervisors to look into ways of helping to revitalize this very important component of the planning process. Economic Development Commission (EDC) Commissioner Thomas reported that the EDC talked about their upcoming program for the year and branding initiatives. He said the EDC also introduced and demonstrated their new website. Sanitation Authority Commissioner Unger reported the following information from the December Sanitation Authority meeting: The month of December had normal rainfall in the amount of 3% inches; both plants are working in very good shape; 2005 expenses were reviewed; and, connection fees for water meters and sewers were predicted to double by January of 2006. • Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1442 Minutes of January 19, 2005 -3- 6 Winchester Planning Commission (WPC1 Commissioner Ours reported that the WPC has appointed a new liaison to the Frederick County Planning Commission, Mr. David Shore, who will be attending the Frederick County Planning Commission meetings in the near future. In addition, Commissioner Ours reported on an interesting discussion by the Winchester Planning Commission dealing with residential - commercial development and how to best structure the City's ordinances. Commissioner Ours said the subject arose with the proposed development of land adjacent to Sacred Heart Church. He said the discussion included the subject of corridor overlay and at some point, there may be the opportunity for some beneficial dialogue between Frederick County and Winchester to work together on corridor appearance. He said that for the most part, the Winchester Planning Commission discussed their new PC (Planned Commercial) Zoning. Specifically, they talked about how to model the new PC Zoning from the former Planned Shopping Center Zoning and determining what is the best type of commercial development to occur in and adjacent to the residential areas. CITIZEN COMMENTS Ms. Diane Kerns, representing the Community Consensus Coalition (CCC), announced that the • CCC, along with the Virginia Citizens Planning Education Council (VCPEC), formerly the VCPA, will be sponsoring a Citizens Planning Workshop focusing on Comprehensive Policy Plans. She said the workshop is scheduled for Thursday evening, February 10, 2005, at 7:00 p.m, at the Winchester Medical Center Conference Center. Ms. Kerns gave a brief explanation on how the educational session will be conducted; she also supplied the Commission and the members of the public with flyers about the workshop. PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning 413 -04 of Westbury Commons, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 3.13 acres from B2 (Business General) District to RP (Residential Performance) District. The property fronts on the east side of Westminster- Canterbury Drive (Rt. 1318), approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of North Frederick Pike (Rt. 522). This property is further identified with P.I.N.s 53 -4 -3 -E and 53 -4 -3 -F in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval with Proffers Planner Candice Perkins presented the background information for the Commission. Ms. Perkins stated that although the land requested for rezoning is within the Urban Development Area (UDA), the Easter Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan indicates that the property should be used for commercial use. She said that due to the subject site's location adjacent to the RP -zoned Westminster - Canterbury development, a rezoning from 132 to RP may be supported to continue the consistency and compatibility of the • area, if all impacts are appropriately mitigated Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1443 Minutes of January 19, 2005 Ms. Perkins next summarized the proffered conditions associated with this rezoning. She noted there were still issues regarding the proffers that needed to be resolved by the applicant. She said the first issue deals with the dollar amount being proffered by the applicant, based on the Capital Facilities Impact Model. She noted that this age - restricted development will create impacts on Fire & Rescue, Parks & Recreation, the public library, the Sheriff's Department, and County Administration; she said the Capital Facilities Impact Model projects a fiscal impact of $2,081 per dwelling, excluding the public school system because of the age - restricted designation. Ms. Perkins explained that the applicant is proffering a $1,000 contribution for each residential unit; this amount equates to a $1,081 deficit in the public services required for this project. In addition, she said the maintenance for the trail system, the buffers and fencing, and the community center is unclear. Ms. Perkins believed it would be appropriate to include language in the proffer to the effect that the community center shall be located as generally shown on the GDP and will be handicapped accessible, provide for parking, and meet other requirements of the county's ordinances. Commissioner Kriz questioned the appropriateness of having a community center for the 11 homes designated for this project. Due to the small scale of the homeowners association, he felt the maintenance and upkeep would be too costly and he doubted it would get full use. He suggested eliminating the community center and improving the circular area as a community gathering place. Commissioner Kriz also suggested the possibility of the developer donating the surplus funds to Parks and Recreation. In addition, he believed the proposed four -foot fence alongside the road was not in keeping with the surrounding area there. Ms. Perkins responded that the four -foot fence was not a requirement of the ordinance, but was proposed by the applicant. She said the community center, however, is a zoning ordinance requirement for this housing type and currently, there is no waiver option for it. She said an ordinance revision would be required to • remove the community center requirement from the single- family, small -lot housing type. Commissioner Straub mentioned the one -way in and one -way out condition of this project; she asked about the possibility of providing a horse -shoe type entrance instead of just the one street. Commissioner Gochenour inquired if the street within the project could be state - maintained so that the senior citizens living in the development would not have to worry about snow removal. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering, the design engineers representing the owner, Harvest Communities, described the proposal as an in -fill development and he noted that the residential component is in keeping with the majority of land uses surrounding this project. Regarding the one point of access, Mr. Wyatt explained that the circular road was designed specifically for limited accessibility by the outside public because this will be a private community. He said there was not a great distance from the public street into the project and he didn't believe there would be a problem for emergency vehicles to access the properties in the off chance the entrance would be blocked. He pointed out that even though the HOA is responsible for maintenance of the street, they have a provision in the proffer that the road will be constructed to meet or exceed the public street pavement section utilized by VDOT. Mr. Wyatt continued, stating that Harvest Communities is in favor of working towards an ordinance amendment to eliminate the community center. He suggested the possibility of a waiver option allowing 30 units or under to provide a recreational equivalent, based on the total number of dwelling units, in lieu of the community center. However, Mr. Wyatt suggested that possibly, a portion of the money could be kept on site for the benefit of the residents of the community and another portion designated to the county for regional parks, etc. r­1 \J Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1444 Minutes of January 19, 2005 -5- • Regarding fiscal impacts, Mr. Wyatt commented that age - restricted communities tend to use emergency and police services more than other agencies. He noted that the in the fiscal model, the two line items for both Sheriff and Fire & Rescue combined were less than $500.00; he said they have attempted to double that dollar amount, which is how they arrived at the $1,000 per residential unit. Mr. Wyatt next offered some letters of support from adjoining homeowners in the Canterbury Square Subdivision and the residents along Hickory Lane. Commissioner Unger also questioned whether the four -foot fence would look appropriate along the front of this property. Chairman DeHaven pointed out that landscaping goes along with the fence. Mr. Wyatt said the property owners would be willing to eliminate the fence, if it was not a requirement. Commissioner Light was concerned about the capability of a homeowners association of this small size to take care of the streets in perpetuity. Mr. Wyatt replied that purchasers of homes in these types of communities are well aware of what they are buying into. He said that prospective buyers want the private street that is not open to the public. There were no citizen comments. There was a consensus among the Commissioners that the ordinance needed to be reviewed concerning the possibility of providing a waiver of a community center for a development of this size. They did not want to hold up the applicant's rezoning application, however, until this was accomplished. • Upon motion made by Commissioner Light and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Rezoning Application 413 -04 of Westbury Commons, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 3.13 acres from B2 (Business General) District to RP (Residential Performance) District with the proffers as submitted by the applicant. The majority vote was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE) Watt, Unger, Morris, Light, DeHaven, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Triplett, Manuel NO: Straub, Gochenour (Note: Commissioner Rosenberry was absent from the meeting.) Rezoning Request 914 -04 of the Haggerty Property, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Inc. to rezone 111.56 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District. This property is located adjacent and east of Eddys Lane (Rt. 820), approximately three miles east of Winchester and 1,500 feet south of Route 7. Furthermore, the subject site is located adjacent and south of the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant property and adjacent and west of Opequon Creek, which forms the boundary of Clarke County. This property is identified with P.I.N.s 55-A -212 and 55- A -212A in the Red Bud Magisterial District. E Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1445 Minutes of January 19, 2005 Action — Recommended Approval with Proffers • Commissioner H. Paige Manuel said that he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this matter due to a possible conflict of interest. Planning Deputy Director Michael T. Ruddy read the background material for the Commission's information. He said the Haggerty rezoning application is generally consistent with the goals of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan as described in the staff report. He said the staff report also identifies several impacts generated by this rezoning request that have not been fully mitigated with the details of this application. Mr. Ruddy stated that it may be appropriate for the applicant to modify the rezoning application and proffer statement to ensure that the impacts associated with this rezoning application are fully mitigated. Mr. Ruddy identified those impacts as: 1) The proffer regarding the land dedication of the Route 37 right -of -way and the desirability of the ten -year sunset clause on the dedication of the right -of -way. 2) The implementation of the suggested improvements and lane geometry at the new collector road intersection with Route 7, identified as being needed to maintain an acceptable level of service, should be fully implemented and guaranteed with the Haggerty project. 3) The dedication of the 20 acres of land for public use should be guaranteed by incorporating it into the proffer statement for the Haggerty project. Mr. Ruddy noted that Mr. Jerry Copp and Mr. Lloyd Ingram of VDOT were present to answer questions from the Commission. Commissioner Kriz believed the sunset clause should be lengthened from ten years to 25 or 30 years; he commented that after that period of time, it should be known whether Route 37 will be built or not. He believed ten years was too short an amount of time to get anything accomplished. • Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr. with Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Inc. was present to represent the owner, Mr. David Holiday, on the Haggerty Property (formerly known as The Canyon). Mr. Maddox said the history of this project dates back 12 years or so with a project known as Twin Lakes. He explained that the Haggerty proposal includes a connection with Route 7, which is recognized as a very important issue with the County. Mr. Maddox began by discussing the transportation issues and he noted that this has been a cooperative effort with a number of agencies and the issues involving the Valley Mill Road corridor, the Route 7 corridor, the Greenwood Road project, the intersection at Greenwood Road, and the Senseny Road corridor have all been taken into consideration. He said the conclusion was reached that the very best alternative is to provide a right -of -way which would parallel the future Route 37 corridor. It will be designed to be available as a local street after Rt. 37 is built and, in the interim, it would function as a Rt. 37. He said that his client has graciously agreed to do the construction and to negotiate with the Frederick- Winchester Service Authority on right -of -way and additional lands that may be needed for buffering. Mr. Maddox continued, stating that the proffer will be revised to eliminate the sunset clause and this land will be perpetually available for Rt. 37. He said that a Phasing Plan will be provided which extends three years from the master development plan approval and provides for 100 lots per year, beginning with the anniversary of the MDP. The Frederick - Winchester Service Authority will be able to close their Rt. 7 connection and his client will provide and build a connection to the Service Authority from their road, allowing access to the traffic light off of Rt. 7. In order to finance and provide cash flows to implement the proffers, they are requesting the allowance of 50 residential units to utilize the existing road system. The new road system would have to be available by the issuance of the 51" building permit. is Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1446 Minutes of January 19, 2005 Commissioner Kriz said he realized there would be cash flow problems, particularly at the onset of the project, but he was wondering if it would be possible to phase the project out to five years instead of three to better enable the County to handle the fiscal impacts. Mr. Maddox replied that they are sensitive to not only the transportation needs, but also school delivery and would be willing to slow the project from three to four years. Commissioner Straub inquired about the type of residential units proposed and if homeowners association would be established. She also pointed out that this section of the Senseny Road - Greenwood corridor has well over 1,000 homes; she said Senseny Road School and Red Bud School are either over or at capacity and she was not aware of another school planned for this area. Commissioner Straub asked Mr. Maddox for his thoughts on this situation. Mr. Maddox responded that single- family homes are planned on the east side and the west side will consist of innovative mixed uses, such as garden units, zero lot lines, or atrium homes. He said the types of units will be finalized at the MDP stage and a homeowners association will be established. Mr. Maddox said they had spoken with representatives of the Frederick County School Board about a school site; however, there may be some issue with the proximity of the treatment plant. Mr. Maddox said that land will be available for public use and he believed there was a beautiful site on the property for a community park with access to the Opequon. Additional transportation questions were raised by the Commissioners and a lengthy discussion followed on the impacts and location alternatives of the proposed road going from Route 7 to Senseny Road. Issues discussed included the possible impacts to traffic on Route 7 and Route 659; traffic studies and projections; responsibility of road construction from the Haggerty property out to Senseny; the type of improvements proposed for Route 7; and, the appropriateness of proposed locations for connectors, alignment, • and right -of -ways. Mr. Maddox believed the primary issue was the acceptability of an at -grade intersection on Rt. 37. (Note: Commissioner Ours left the meeting at this point.) Commissioner Gochenour was concerned about the availability of water. Commissioner Gochenour suggested the possibility of reservoir construction for a sustainable water supply. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following citizen came forward to speak: Mr. Tim Stafford, a resident at Valley Mill Farm in the Red Bud District, stated that he was in favor of the proposed project. Mr. Stafford thanked Mr. Holiday, Mr. Maddox, Mr. Copp, and Supervisor Forrester for inviting him to meetings involving this project and for taking his concerns, as a resident on Valley Mill Road, into consideration. He believed this was a great example of smart growth. He said that he, his wife, and his neighbors were all in favor of this project. Commissioner Thomas asked about the potential for using the Route 37 right-of-way bed for the north connector road to Rt. 7, assuming Rt. 37 would be limited access. Mr. Lloyd Ingram of VDOT replied that it probably will not be practical because a road system will still be needed for vehicular access to Rt. 7 and to Rt. 37 for the new homes that will be constructed; he believed two road systems would be necessary. Commissioner Thomas also inquired about what type of connection would be required for the crossover and Mr. Lloyd replied that it will probably be a fly -over bridge. • Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1447 Minutes of January 19, 2005 - ® Commissioner Straub asked Mr. Ingram for his comments on the letter received from Clarke County's Planning Director, Mr. Charles Johnston, in which Mr. Johnston raised concerns about increasing traffic on Route 7. Mr. Ingram said that the Route 7 design was capable of handling the additional traffic. Commissioner Straub believed that some alternative for moving traffic onto and off-of limited access roads was needed. Members of the Commission commented that the amount of time and lagency cooperation invested in this project had certainly provided a positive affect on the final results of the design. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Rezoning Application 414-04 for the Haggerty Property, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Inc. to rezone 111.56 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District with the amended proffers offered by the applicant, specifically, the elimination of the sunset clause for the Route 37 dedication and the change to the maximum number of dwelling units per year to 75 with a 48 -month phasing plan. The majority vote was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE) Triplett, Kriz, Thomas, Light, Morris, Unger, Watt, DeHaven NO: Gochenour, Straub ® ABSTAIN Manuel (Note: Commissioner Ours was absent for this vote; Conunissioner Rosenberry was absent from the meeting.) OTHER PLANNING COMMISSION 2005 ANNUAL RETREAT Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence reminded all the Commissioners that Saturday, February 5, 2005 is the Planning Commission's 2005 Annual Retreat. He said the discussion will be emphasizing the Urban Development Area (UDA), anticipating that this will be the next major task the Planning Commission, the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee, and the staff will be undertaking in the upcoming year. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FEES Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence announced that this morning, January 19, 2005, the Finance Committee reviewed and endorsed the revised Development Review Fees Schedule. He said the revised Review 11 Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1448 Minutes of January 19, 2005 m ® Fee Schedule will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for adoption. He added that the staff has been directed to begin circulating the revised schedule to the development community for information. DISCUSSION ON THE RURAL AREAS ISSUES As the Chairman of the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS), Commissioner Light spoke with the Commission members about his dismay with the outcome of the Board of Supervisors' actions on the Rural Areas Study at the Board's meeting of January 12, 2005. Commissioner Light believed it was the Planning Commission's role to lead the community towardbest management practices through land use plans; however, he felt the goal for the CPPS to development a plan was derailed by the political process. I Commissioner Light talked about how the study originated and how the CPPS proceeded with the study and the public meetings. He mentioned that certain landowners who voiced opposition to the proposals had not attended any of the public meetings. Looking back, he believed there was no clear direction from the Board about what they supported or the exact goals they wanted to achieve. Commissioner Light was open for suggestions on how the process could be modified for future studies. Commissioner Thomas added that the Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) has been postponing ordinance revisions and criteria updates, waiting for this Rural Areas Study to be completed. He said the DRRS has been waiting for over a year and there are issues that are coming to the point ® where they need to be addressed. Commissioner Thomas said that if the Rural Areas Study is going to continue for another year, the DRRS is going to have to proceed with some action on ordinance revisions for design standards. Chairman DeHaven felt confident that in 60 days, the Planning Commission, the CPPS, and the DRRS would have direction from the Board of Supervisors on the outcome for the Rural Areas Study. ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and the Planning Commission adjourned by a unanimous vote at 9:00 p.m. submitted, D ,' J A DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Lawrence, Secretary Fredrick County Planning Commission Page 1449 Minutes of January 19, 2005