Loading...
PC_11-01-06_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 November I, 2006. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Shawnee District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Member -At- Large; Philip A. Lemieux, Board of Supervisors Liaison; and Barbara Van Osten Board of Supervisors Liaison. ABSENT: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel; and City of Winchester Liaison. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; John A. Bishop, Transportation Planner; Susan Eddy, Senior Planner; Candice E. Perkins, Planner II; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. • CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission adopted the agenda for this evening's meeting. MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the minutes of September 20, 2006 were unanimously approved as presented. COMMITTEE REPORTS Transportation Committee — 10/23/06 Mtg. Commissioner Kriz reported the following information from the Transportation Committee: 1) A new approach for transportation proffers for small commercial areas that cannot contribute enough funds to • make transportation improvements themselves was tabled so additional information could be obtained. It was Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1889 Minutes of November 1, 2006 -2- suggested that information to determine the effect of this approach for both small and large commercial tracts is along the entire Route I I corridor be studied. 2) A resolution was passed to expedite the discussion with the city on the existing bus route in order to determine whether to apply for an additional grant. 3) Metropolitan Planning Organization Update — There is a public meeting scheduled on November 13, 2006 from 4:00 -7:00 p.m. in the conference room of the Our Health building to discuss the Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility Plan. The I -81/ Rt. 37 /Shady Elm local assistance project has been accepted by VDOT to be performed by their on -call consultant at no charge to the MPO. There was a recommendation to bring all of the suggested local assistance projects before the Transportation Committee for their information. 4) A private citizen recommended that a study be made to establish a utility corridor along the proposed Rt. 37 so there would not be as much land condemned to establish both. 5) The December meeting is scheduled for December 18, 2006, at 8:30 p.m. Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) — 10/26/06 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported two items for discussion at the DRRS meeting. He said the first was the definition in the zoning ordinance for community centers and the other was the parking of commercial vehicles in all zoning districts in the County. Economic Development Commission • Commissioner Kerr reported that a joint work session with the Economic Development Commission and the Chamber of Commerce is scheduled for November 15, 2006. Chairman Wilmot called for citizen comments on any item that was not on this evening's agenda. No one came forward to speak. PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning #12 -06 of Carriage Place, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to rezone 30.26 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District, and 15.18 acres from MHl (Mobile Home Community) to RP District, totaling 45.44 acres, with proffers, for 165 single - family attached and detached homes. The properties are located south and adjacent to Route 7, east and adjacent to Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park. The properties are further identified with PINS 55 -A -161, 55- A -165A, 55 -A -166, 55 -A- 167, 55- A -167A, 55 -A -168, 55- A -174A, 55- A -174B, and 55- A -174D in the Red Bud Magisterial District. Action — Tabled for 60 Days Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1890 Minutes of November 1. 2006 -3- Senior Planner Susan K. Eddy reported that the proposed plan calls for 73 single- family detached • units and 92 townhouses. Ms. Eddy said the site is located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA); however, the site was not within the limits of any small area land use plans. She said that because there were so many environmental features on the site, she wanted to point out that the Comprehensive Policy Plan calls for protecting natural resources, including stream valleys. Ms. Eddy next talked about the transportation issues. She explained that the adopted Eastern Road Plan shows Valley Mill Road being relocated to a new location beginning east of Millrace Estates, across the Adams and Haggerty properties, and then meeting up with the Spine Road, in the vicinity of future Route 37, with traffic going in either direction to Senseny Road or Route 7. She said that all of the projects within this area are expected to have their traffic go onto the re- routed Valley Mill Road and also to contribute towards its construction. Ms. Eddy said this particular application does not conform to this aspect; instead, this project routes its traffic over to Valley Mill Road and vehicles can either go across the one -lane bridge or out to Route 7 at the cross over. She pointed out that Route 7 is classified as a major arterial road. She added that in order to carry out this transportation plan, the applicant will have to cross the floodplain and the creek, they will need to upgrade a portion of Valley Mill Road, they will need to install a traffic light at Route 7, and they will have to construct turning lanes on Route 7 in both the east and west direction, all at a significant expense for the applicant. Ms. Eddy further added that none of these improvements are called for in the Comprehensive Policy Plan; she commented that all of this money could be more effectively spent funding the transportation improvements that are called for in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Ms. Eddy next talked about the agency review comments. She stated that the HRAB was concerned about Valley Mill Farm, which includes a historic house and mill, and is on the national register of historic places and the Virginia Landmarks Register. When the HRAB reviewed this rezoning, they did not know the entrance would be so close to the Valley Mill Farm. In addition, Ms. Eddy said the Public Works Department had questions about the steep slopes and wetlands; the Parks and Recreation Department requested details on internal trails and connections • to adjacent developments; and VDOT had hesitation about the rezoning because it did not support the County's long - range transportation goal. Ms. Eddy continued by reviewing the applicant's proffer statement with the Commission. In conclusion, Ms Eddy stated that the application was not in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan because it did not conform to the Eastern Road Plan; she added that staff is not satisfied that environmental features are being protected. Mr. Clay Athey, attorney, was representing the owners and applicants of the Carriage Place rezoning application. Mr. Athey stated that they initially proposed to staff and VDOT entrances directly onto Route 7, however, safety concerns were raised about the possibility of "U- turning." Mr. Athey said they next proposed an access out to existing Valley Mill Road and then up to its intersection with Route 7; he said that Valley Mill Road lines up directly with one of the two on -off ramps for proposed Route 37. Mr. Athey said their plans are to improve the intersection with traffic- control devices, so that when Route 37 is constructed, an intersection will already have been established. He said they have also provided a proposed connector, if the right -of -way is acquired across the Stafford property back to Valley Mill Road. In addition, he said they have provided $641,000 indirect transportation proffers over and above the proffer model to help accomplish the County's goals. He pointed out that their property borders two existing highways, Route 7 and Valley Mill Road; he said they have site distance to establish an entrance on either one of these roads, and they feel they have a right to access those roadways. Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr., consultant with PHR &A, the design and engineering firm for the project, came forward to address the HRAB issues for the proposed rezoning. Mr. Maddox explained that the initial proposal for direct access on Route 7 would have created a break in the vegetative buffer and was one of the issues raised by the HRAB. He said the HRAB preferred to have a continuous vegetative buffer along Route 7. Mr. Maddox said everyone seems to feel this access alternative, described by Mr. Athey, is a much better approach in • order to meet that goal. In addition, initial meetings with the HRAB indicated the historic groups' desire to have interpretive kiosks in safe locations off Route 7. In subsequent discussions, however, it was decided this would not serve the purpose desired and an equivalent amount of money was voluntarily proffered by the applicant for fencing Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1891 Minutes of November 1, 2006 — 4 — • and improvements at Star Fort, which everyone agreed would be a better alternative. Mr. Maddox commented that the access alternative described by Mr. Athey does not eliminate any options the County has for closing Valley Mill Road and the one -lane bridge. He explained, however, that it does depend on Route 37 being fixed in that location; Haggerty Road will intersect with it on the east and Valley Mill Road will be on the west. Mr. Maddox believed that any traffic that can be brought through Valley Mill Road to Route 7, and not the Haggerty Road location, will be good traffic planning because traffic will not be concentrated at only one point along Route 7. He said there will be multiple access points at safe locations, with traffic signals. Mr. Patrick Sowers, also with PHR &A, came forward to address issues relating to the environmentally - sensitive areas of the site. Mr. Sowers said the proposed layout does affect some of the more environmentally - sensitive areas of the site, but the reason for doing so was to create a better transportation system, with a connection to Route 7 through a signalized intersection with Valley Mill Road. In addition, Mr. Sowers commented that a traffic signal is already proposed on the spine road by the Haggerty rezoning, regardless if Valley Mill Road is there or not; their objective was to use the existing traffic signal to more appropriately address the transportation needs of the County, instead of funneling all of the traffic to one location. At this point, Chairman Wilmot opened the public comment portion of the meeting. The following person came forward to speak: Mr. Tim Stafford said he represented his family, the owners of Valley Mill Farm, an adjoining property. Mr. Stafford said his family was opposed to the rezoning as it was presented. He mentioned some previous informational meetings that various public and county officials had with him about this project; he said tonight was the first time he heard about the applicant's proposed entrance onto Valley Mill Road. Mr. Stafford was concerned about any construction proposed by the applicant through this floodplain area. He said that in years past, adjoining • properties have been developed. He said the creek continues to flood, trees continue to fall, and with every storm, the flooding gets worse and encroaches closer to his home. Mr. Stafford said this applicant is proposing to construct a road system across a floodplain and is stating that the water will not back up on his property. Mr. Stafford said it was his family's intent to keep this property as a homestead. He said when this project was first presented to him, the applicant was going to go out on Route 7; he said he understood the concerns, but he was opposed to the applicant's new proposal, which involved construction across a wetland. He was also concerned about all the potential traffic coming across the front of his property. He commented that he had been working with the County on their plan for their new road which would cut across the bottom of his land; he said his family was present to make things right; but they were not going to be taken advantage of. No other member of the public wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Athey returned to the podium to address the comments made by Mr. Stafford. Mr. Athey said the Eastern Road Plan calls for the applicant to acquire a right -of -way across Mr. Stafford's land back to Valley Mill Road; he thought it was clear that Mr. Stafford was not interested. Mr. Athey said the applicant is left with this being the only reasonable access option; he said the proposed Route 37 entrance and exit aligns directly with Valley Mill Road, at a stop - lighted intersection. Mr. Athey did not think this option was inconsistent with satisfying the Eastern Road Plan; he said that VDOT could still cul -de -sac the road between the bridge and Route 7 and still satisfy Mr. Stafford's needs. Mr. Lloyd Ingram, a VDOT representative, was next called to the podium for his comments. • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1892 Minutes of November 1, 2006 -5- Commissioner Mohn asked how accurate the interchange design was that is being shown; he asked if • VDOT had accepted the applicant's access proposal as a better scenario than a direct access to Route 7; and, regarding signalization, he asked about the interim impact on Valley Mill Road and if there were concerns about having this signal and the Haggerty signal so close to each other on a major arterial highway. Mr. Ingram said the interchange shown is basically conceptual and has not yet been engineered. Mr. Ingram said it was VDOT's opinion that the latest entrance proposal was a better scenario than direct access onto Route 7, which in their opinion, was a fatal flaw and presented safety issues for the traveling public and local residents. With regards to the signalization issue, Mr. Ingram said the one -lane bridge will be a bottleneck, but will keep the flow of traffic through there relatively low; he added that traffic signals will be installed when they are warranted and spacing was sufficient enough to allow a synchronized system. With regard to the environmental aspects, Commissioner Kriz asked if there was anything that would prevent the applicant from coming through the area as they have shown. Mr. Ingram replied that VDOT's environmental division would have to be satisfied with the mitigation proposed by the applicant before VDOT would take it into the State System. Commissioner Mohn said he appreciated the interpretation of the Eastern Road Plan and how this may or may not fit in with the ultimate vision of re- aligning Valley Mill Road; yet, he felt there was something to be said for the fact that the Eastern Road Plan could potentially still be implemented with the applicant's proposed scenario. He asked the staff for their opinion and if this could be viewed as a compromise to achieve the broader goal. Ms. Eddy replied that one of the primary reasons for re- routing Valley Mill Road was to get the traffic off this portion of the road; she said it takes a lot of development to pay for that kind of road improvement, so, a portion of the issue is this project not being a part of the bigger whole. Ms. Eddy said the second part of it is not having all of the traffic spilling out to Route 7, which is more immediate. • Commissioner Mohn asked Mr. Maddox what environmental analysis had been done with regards to the environmentally - sensitive areas, in light of Mr. Stafford's concerns. Mr. Maddox replied that U.S. Corps of Engineers and FEMA floodplain permits will allow only a marginal increase in impact; he said the hydraulics, hydrology, and engineering design will have to satisfy a number of agencies before this could be approved. Mr. Maddox said there is no single item that would preclude this from being approved, as long as the engineering meets requirements. Mr. Maddox added that the implementation of the County's Eastern Road Plan would also necessitate crossing the stream and those same impacts will have to be met. Mr. Maddox next took some time to talk with the Commission about the adjoining Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park and why access through that park was not feasible; he also talked about the improvements to Woods Mill Road and why those improvements did not create a free - flowing intersection. Chairman Wilmot asked if the applicant's proposed transportation plan moves the County any closer to the implementation of the Eastern Road Plan. Secondly, she asked if there was an alternate Eastern Road Plan that perhaps may involve some of the concepts presented this evening. Commissioner Triplett inquired if the proposed crossover might ever be eliminated or if the future traffic signal might be in the way of the on-and-off ramps for Route 37. Mr. Ingram replied that they may have to be shifted somewhat; he thought it was safe to say there would be an interchange and a traffic light in the area. Commissioner Unger raised a concern about creating a worse traffic situation on Valley Mill Road with potential future development along Eddy's Lane. Mr. Ingram talked about future plans to cul -de -sac Eddy's Lane and VDOT's other long -range plans for this area. • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1893 Minutes of November 1, 2006 Frederick County's Transportation Planner, John A. Bishop, came forward with his comments • regarding the applicant's proposed access. Mr. Bishop said if this proposed access is viewed as a simple question, whether it is better to go onto Route 7 or to Valley Mill Road, the answer is yes, it is safer to go onto Valley Mill Road. He said that, unfortunately, by using Valley Mill Road, a Pandora's Box of other issues could be opened. The first being that Valley Mill Road is planned to be relocated, so although the Eastern Road Plan does not say specifically that this crossover will be closed, it can be inferred by the relocation. He said the primary reason for the relocation is that the existing geometry would be very difficult to improve to the point where it can adequately meet future development. Further, with the Haggerty and the Adams rezonings, there is a requirement that Eddy's Lane have access through there; so, by allowing this, the idea is presented that it will never close. Mr. Bishop said it was not just the 1,600 trips from this development, but the additional trips from those new developments would then have the opportunity to come up Eddys Lane and Valley Mill through an area that is very hard to adequately fix. As you enter Eddys Lane off of Route 7, there is a very short tangent where it is perpendicular to the roadway before it starts curving around the hillside. He explained that considering the amount of long -term traffic, the one side is unlikely to be able to handle the traffic without some major redevelopment of Valley Mill Road where it currently enters Route 7. He said this, in turn, could affect where the Route 37 ramps need to go. Commissioner Kriz conunented that the applicant's revised proffers were just handed out this evening and the Commission has not yet had the opportunity to review those. Conunissioner Mohn said he recognized the fact that, on a certain level, the applicant has tried to work the cards they were dealt to make a scenario work; he said he was not completely opposed to something along the lines of what they are proposing, assuming it fits in and compliments the Eastern Road Plan. He added that the Transportation Planner's comments were helpful to clarify the issues. • Commissioner Mohn said he would like to know more from the applicant about the conceptual design of this intersection, not only how things will potentially line up, but the scope of improvements —he thought it would be significant. Commissioner Mohn said he would like more information on two things —one, understanding the scope of the improvements and second, getting more information on the environmental impacts. Although he was not asking for a full -scale engineering study, he wanted something that helps the Commission visualize and see how this will take shape; he thought it was currently a little too conceptual. Commissioner Mohn said he would also like to see more clarity on what the system would look like relative to the proposed improvements of the Eastern Road Plan, if it comes to fruition. In addition, he requested some clarification and answers to those issues from VDOT as well. Other Commission members agreed and recognized the many layers and issues involved with the proposal. Commissioner Mohn next moved that the application be tabled for a period of 60 days to allow for the additional analysis previously mentioned to take place. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously table Rezoning Application # 12 -06 of Carriage Place, submitted by Patton, Hams, Rust & Associates, for 60 days, to allow time for additional analysis and information to be provided, as follows: to provide the Commission with a conceptual design of this proposed intersection, not only how things will potentially line up, but the scope of improvements; and, to provide more information on the environmental impacts. This information should be presented in a manner that helps the Commission to visualize how this will take shape. Also, additional clarification should be provided on what the system would look like relative to the proposed improvements of the Eastern Road Plan. Additional clarification • and answers to those issues was sought from VDOT as well. (Note: Commissioners Light, Ours, and Thomas were absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1894 Minutes of November 1, 2006 -7- • Rezoning #14 -06 of the Glaize Property, submitted by Painter- Lewis, P.L.C., to rezone 1.38 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for commercial use. The property is located on the southwestern quadrant of the intersection of Northwestern Pike (Route 50)/Round Hill Road (Route 803)/Retail Boulevard. The property is further identified with PIN 52 -A -252 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District, Action — Tabled for 30 Days Senior Planner, Susan K. Eddy, reported that Round Hill Road has been rerouted and is directly adjacent to this site. Ms. Eddy said the applicant is seeking all uses that would be allowed in the B2 District by the zoning ordinance. She said the site is within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and it is within Phase II of the Round Hill Community Land Use Plan, which supports commercial development. She said the Round Hill Land Use Plan includes design standards recommended for signs, including size and number, and for frontage improvements, which calls for a 20 -foot landscaped strip along Route 50. Ms. Eddy noted that the landscaped strip calls for the inclusion of street trees, ornamental shrubs, and a pedestrian facility using either a sidewalk or bicycle trail. Additional design standards include placing the buildings closer to Route 50 and positioning screened parking behind the buildings, not on Route 50. Ms. Eddy reported that with this application, the applicant is proposing a ten -foot trail on Route 50, but it is shown on the GDP in the public right -of -way. She explained that this would preclude the County and • VDOT from future anticipated road widening. She added that the applicant has proffered parking lot landscaping; however, he has not provided the 20 -foot landscaped strip along Route 50. Ms. Eddy said that the application, therefore, does not conform to the design elements of the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Regarding the transportation aspects, Ms. Eddy said the improvements to the Route 50 corridor are being pursued by the County and VDOT; however, this item has not been addressed by the applicant. These include future road widening and pedestrian signalization at key intersections; she said that staff believed the applicant should participate in these efforts. She added that the applicant will be constructing an additional lane on Round Hill Road and he will be providing curb and gutter along the frontages. Mr. John Lewis of Painter- Lewis, P.L.C. was representing the property owner, George W. Glaize, Jr., in this rezoning application. Mr. Lewis said the issues raised by the staff were design issues that he would prefer to address at the site plan stage because, at this point in time, they are uncertain what the uses will be. Commissioner Kriz explained that this was the first rezoning coming in for this expanded SWSA area and he expected many more to follow; he said the Commission needs to set a standard with regards to what is expected of applicants to meet the design requirements of the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Commissioner Kriz stated it was obvious the applicant is not meeting the requirements of the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Commissioner Oates cormnented that the applicant is benefiting from the County's recent SWSA expansion. He said that with that expansion, it was clearly spelled out what the County expected in the way of right -of -way improvements and standards. Commissioner Oates believed that having the design standards in place was paramount for this property to be rezoned. • Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1895 Minutes of November 1.2006 Mr. Lewis agreed to meet with the staff and re -work the rezoning application with the design • elements expected. Conunissioner Kriz moved to table the rezoning application for 30 days to allow time for the applicant to meet with the staff and work out the design elements expected. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby table for 30 days Rezoning Application #14 -06 of the Glaize Property, submitted by Painter - Lewis, P.L.C., to rezone 1.38 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for commercial use. The 30 -day time period is to allow the applicant to meet with the staff regarding the design elements of the Round Hill Land Use Plan that are expected to be incorporated on this site with the rezoning of the property. (Note: Commissioners Light, Ours, and Thomas were absent from the meeting.) PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN TO ALTER THE EASTERN ROAD PLAN. Action — Recommended Approval Transportation Planner, John A. Bishop, reported that the Planning Commission discussed the • Eastern Road Plan at their meeting on October 4, 2006; he said the Planning Commission desired to keep Victory Lane on as a minor collector, which has been implemented; and to also include consideration of the extension over to Route 277 from Warrior Drive extended. Mr. Bishop said the Board of Supervisors heard these comments at their discussion on October 11, 2006; he said the Board also received the generalized cross section map. Mr. Bishop said the Board had some concerns, not specifically with the content of the Eastern Road Plan, but with procedural -tvpe issues. He said that those concerns included how the plan would be updated and their desire to see the most current version of the Eastern Road Plan during consideration of rezoning applications and other such land use actions. Mr. Bishop proceeded to give the Commission some general history of the Eastern Road Plan. He showed a slide of the current plan and the proposed draft plan depicting all of the additions which have occurred through planning efforts and through the MPO. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak. No issues or concerns were raised by the Commission. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the amendment to the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan to alter the Eastern Road Plan with the addition of the six lanes of Route 50 out to Poor House Road. (Note: Commissioners Light, Ours, and Thomas were absent from the meeting.) • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1896 Minutes of November 1, 2006 WZ • PUBLIC MEETING Master Development Plan #13 -06 for Cedar Meadows, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to develop 30.6 acres of RP (Residential Performance) zoned property with 140 single - family, small -lot detached units. The property is located on the west side of White Oak Road (Route 636), approximately 2,600 feet south of the intersection of White Oak Road and Tasker Road (Route 642). The property is further identified with PINs 75-A-106,75-A-107, 75 -A -114, 75 -A -115, 75 -A -116, and 86 -A -153 in the Opequon Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval Planner Candice E. Perkins reported that the master development plan (MDP) for Cedar Meadows is a proposal to develop 140 proffered age - restricted, single- family small lot units on a tract of land which was rezoned in 2006 with proffers. Ms. Perkins noted that access to the site is proposed via a private, gated road network which will access White Oak Road. She said that during rezoning, the Board of Supervisors granted a waiver of Section 144- 24C(2)C which permitted this development to be constructed with a complete network of private streets. Ms. Perkins next reviewed the proffers associated with this MDP. Ms. Perkins raised a concern by the staff regarding the monetary contribution to offset the impacts of development. She suggested that the recreational unit tabulations not include the $25,000 figure; she explained that if this development is not implemented for a number of years, the per unit cost of the recreational facility could increase. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering, was representing Mrs. Beverley B. Shoemaker, the property owner, on this MDP. Referring to the staff s comment on the tabulation for the recreational unit, Mr. Wyatt said that if there was a concern about having the recreational unit value stated because of the possibility that the amount could increase over time, he would modify the information. He suggested keeping the required number of recreational units, which is about 13.5, eliminate the actual value, and add a statement noting that the required recreational unit value would be approved by the Frederick County Parks Director at the time of construction. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak. A Commission member asked Ms. Perkins if the staff was comfortable with the revision suggested by Mr. Wyatt and Ms. Perkins replied yes. No other issues or concerns were raised. A motion was made by Commissioner Morris to approve the MDP with the applicant's suggested amendment. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz and was unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Master Development Plan # 13 -06 for Cedar Meadows, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to develop 30.6 acres of RP (Residential Performance) -zoned property with 140 single - family, small -lot detached units with an amendment to the recreational unit tabulations to state the required number of recreational units, to eliminate the monetary value, and to add a statement noting that the required recreational unit value would be approved by the Frederick County Parks Director at the time of construction. • (Note: Commissioners Light, Ours, and Thomas were absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1897 Minutes of November 1, 2006 -10- 0 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment 06 -06 of Clearview, submitted by Painter- Lewis, PLC toexpand the Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to encompass 130.07 acres to enable residential land uses. The four properties are located south of Hopewell Road (Route 672) and west of Interstate 81. The subject parcels are identified with PINS 43-A-75,44-A-1,44-A-3, and 44 -A- 3B in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Denial Commissioner Oates said he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this item, due to a possible conflict of interest. Planner Candice E. Perkins reported that this Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment (CPPA) request by Clearview consists of four parcels, totaling 130.07 acres, zoned RA (Rural Areas). Ms. Perkins said this was one of the two CPPA requests that the Board of Supervisors requested further study. She said subject parcels are not within the limits of any small area land use plan and are located over a mile from the Urban Development Area (UDA). The subject parcels are also outside of the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) designates this area around the interchange of Hopewell Road as commercial to enable interstate businesses. Ms. Perkins said the applicant is requesting that the UDA and SWSA be expanded to include these four parcels so the property can be developed as an age- restricted housing development. She noted, • however, that the extension of the UDA would enable all ages and residential housing types. Ms. Perkins added that if this property is rezoned at the maximum allowable density for the site, the potential for the introduction of 520 residential units is possible for this area. The approval of this CPPA will introduce future high- density residential land uses into an area with no adjacent high- density residential and a transportation network not designed for this use. She noted that in the past, the County has not extended the UDA in a noncontiguous manner. Ms. Perkins said that comments from the Sanitation Authority stated that while water is available, the sewer capacity here is insufficient to serve existing land within the SWSA. If the proposed Clearview property is incorporated into the SWSA, it will eliminate development potential from properties within the NELUP which are already located within the SWSA Ms. Perkins said the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) considered this request at their October 10, 2006 meeting. The CPPS's primary concerns was that the character and context of the proposed use did not fit in with surrounding rural land uses; she said the members were satisfied with the current rural use of this area and unanimously recommended to the Planning Commission that the CPPA request be denied. Commissioner Kriz, a member of the CPPS, said there was no adjacent UDA, the proposal was out of character with existing uses in this area, and the proposal did not fit at this particular time. Commissioner Mohn, also a member of the CPPS, agreed that Commissioner Kriz and the staff had appropriately summarized the views of the CPPS. He raised the issues of compatibility and context, and it represented a substantial leap of the UDA from its current boundary. 0 Other Commissioners agreed and could not support the CPPA request. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1898 Minutes of November 1. 2006 -11- • OTHER CITIZENS PLANNING EDUCATION ASSOCIATION OF VIRGINIA (CPEAV) Chairman Wilmot noted that Commissioner Morris has presented the Commission with information pertaining to new planning issues from the General Assembly which he brought back from the annual meeting of the CPEAV. Commissioner Morris said the items have already been passed and become effective July of 2007. Chairman Wilmot also announced that CPEAV is having an advanced seminar for the Certificate Program graduates on November 29, 2006. HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS Chairman Wilmot announced that the Blue Ridge Association of Realtors is willing to provide the Commission with 15 -20 minutes of discussion on homeowners associations. She said the presentation was scheduled for November 15. Since the Commission's agenda was full for that particular evening, the Commission agreed to move the presentation to another date. • CORRIDOR STANDARDS Conunissioner Oates raised the subject of corridor standards. He said that since the Eastern Road Plan will soon be approved with the graphic cross section for roads, he thought it would be a good opportunity for the Commission to decide where sidewalks, landscaping, and bicycle trails could be tied into the cross sections. He suggested this as a study project for the upcoming year. AGE - RESTRICTED HOUSING Commissioner Kriz asked the staff for information on the percentage of age - restricting housing in Frederick County. Mr. Lawrence said the department maintains this information and he would forward it to the Commission. Commission members suggested this may be a good discussion item for the Commission's next retreat. • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1899 Minutes of November 1. 2006 -12— • ADJOURNMENT Upon motion made by Commissioner Morris and seconded by Commissioner Manuel, the meeting adjourned by a unanimous vote at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, J—v-A Lt' ll_k M. Wilmot, Chairman M-9 Secretary • II L Frederick County Planning Commission Page 1900 Minutes of November 1. 2006