Loading...
PC_04-18-07_Meeting_MinutesMEETING MINUTES • • • OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 Winchester, Virginia on April 18, 2007. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Shawnee District; Richard C. Ours, 0 Morris, Shawnee District, Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, C S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gary R. Oates, Light, Stonewall District, Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; H. Paige Manuel, M Lemieux, Board of Supervisors Liaison; Barbara Van Osten, Board of Supervisors Ambrogi, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Cordell Watt, City of Winchester Liaison. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Candice Perkins, Planner 11; and Ren CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. A Commissioner Kriz, seconded by Commissioner Triplett, and unanimously passed Commission's agenda for this evening's meeting. MINUTES Kent Street in District; Robert A. )ro District Gregory ill District; John H. At -Large; Philip E. is and Lawrence R. District; and the inning Director; Mark S. Arlotta, Clerk. )tion was made by adopt the Planning Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the minutes of the March 7, 2007 Planning Commission meeting were unanimously approved as presented. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 18, 2007 Page 2025 -2- • 11 COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) — 04/09/07 Mtg. Commissioner Light reported that the CPPS reviewed the Comprehensive Policy Plan text amendments in a clean -up session of the document. He said this was an overview of how the language could be updated for items that had changed in the past few years. He added that the CPPS also discussed how each committee within the County could improve methods of operation. Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) — 04/17/07 Mtg. Commissioner Oates reported that the HRAB discussed three items. 1) consideration of a monument for Greenwood School, located at the southeast comer of the intersection of Greenwood and Senseny Roads; the HRAB believed this rezoning was a positive step towards mitigating impacts; 2) consideration of 58 acres on Shady Elm Road for B3 Zoning; neither the applicant nor his representative were present, The HRAB determined a portion of the property may be in core battlefield and an existing house was identified by the Virginia Division of Historic Landmarks. The applicant's impact analysis did not identify historical impacts and the HRAB generated an extensive list of questions and concerns that will need tolbe addressed by the applicant at a future meeting; 3) consideration of funding options to acquire the birth place of Willa Cather; members of the Willa Cather Foundation presented the historical significance of die site and possible uses, should it be preserved. Economic Development Commission (EDC) — 04/06/07 Mtg. Commissioner Kerr reported that the EDC had three action items: 1) Study results, 2) review of the fourth quarter project list, which included pro- active maj and, developing a strategy to remedy a problem in the County with sites ready to go; Small Business Development Center presented their annual update. Sanitation Authority (SA) — 04/17/06 Mtg. regional Workforce g and industry tours; 3) the Lord Fairfax Commissioner Unger reported that March rainfall was approximately 2 -2/3 inches. He noted one week in March with excessive rain and the plant had to be shut down to conduct work. He also reported water production up about 100,000 gpd, which was credited to industrial use. Conmussioner Unger said a bid for Stephenson's pump station was received from Eastcoast Utility Contractors and the SA voted in favor of pursuing the project with that bid. In addition, he said the SA is working towards getting the force main ready for Stephenson; the SA will need to go through five properties. He commented that some issues will need to be resolved through the court system. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 18, 2007 Page 2026 -3- • Winchester Planning Commission (WPC) — 04/17/07 Mtg. Commissioner Ours reported that WPC approved an ordinance to conditionally rezone approximately. 158 acres from limited high- density residential to educational /institutional and public use; this is the Timbrook Park property, adjacent to the City's public safety building. He said the WPC also approved a request of Montgomery Engineering Company for a conditional use permit for a structure having roof pitches less than otherwise permitted in the City; this is an addition onto the Saturn dealership on Valley Avenue. Also approved was a preliminary six -lot subdivision for the East Tevis Street development; the other portion of that commercial development will be across I -81 in Frederick County. Commissioner Ours reported that the WPC approved an ordinance to vacate portions of improved North Cameron and East Piccadilly;' this is for sidewalks bordering on the Winchester Towers Building and this could develop into a new complex I Also approved and sent to City Council was the WPC's 2007 Capital Improvement Program. 1 and the following person came forward to speak: Chairman Wilmot called for citizen comments on any item that was not on evening's agenda Mr. Kirk Matthews came forward and said he was a resident of Frederick County, a native of Virginia, and a Hokie. Mr. Mathews asked the Chairman if she could have everyone rise for• a moment of silence in recognition of the tragedy that happened at Virginia Tech. Chairman Wilmot agreed and everyone stood for a moment of silence. PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning #12 -06 of Carriage Park, 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 MH1 (Mobile Home Community) District to RP District, totaling 45.44 acres, with proffers, for up to 249 single family attached homes (townhouses). The properties are located south and adjacent to Route 7, east and adjacent to Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park in the Red Bud Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 55 -A -161, 55-A-1 65A, 55 -A -166,55-A-1 67, 55-A-1 67A, 55 -A -168,55-A-1 74A, 55 -A- 17413, and 55-A-1 74D. Action — Tabled for 45 Days • Deputy Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that the Planning Commission previously tabled this request for 30 days to allow the applicant a period of time to work out some issues with the rezoning request. Mr. Ruddy stated that since that time, the staff has received no additional information pursuant to the rezoning application; however, the staff did receive a request for a continuance of this particular rezoning request. Mr. Ruddy pointed out that the May 16, 2007, Planning Commission meeting would be the earliest in which the Commission could reconsider this application, considering that the Commission has previously discussed a 45- day tabling procedure. Mr. Ruddy said that with this in mind, the applicant has made the tabling request to the Planning Commission. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2027 Minutes of April 18, 2007 ME Chairman Wilmot recognized that the applicant had requested the previous tabling. Chairman ® Wilmot asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak to this rezoning. No one came forward to speak. Commissioner Mohn made a motion to grant the applicant's request for a continuation and to schedule the Carriage Park rezoning application for the May 16, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that by a unanimous vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby table Rezoning Application 912 -06 of Carriage Park until May 16, 2007, at the applicant's request. Rezoning 03 -07 of Easy Living Associates, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to'rezone 4.02 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, and 15 acres from RA District to B3 (Industrial Transition Business) District, totaling 19.02 acres, with proffers, for commercial uses. The properties are located on the west side of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), approximately 600 feet north of the Martinsburg Pike /Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) intersection, in the Stonewall Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 44 -1 -B, 44B -1 -2, 44B -1 -3, 4411-1 -3A, 44B -1 -4 and 44B -1 -6. Action — Recommended Approval Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that the applicant is proposing commercial uses on this 19.02 -acre site and is proffering a maximum of 120,000 square feet of structural • development. Mr. Ruddy said the parcels comprising the rezoning application are located in the Sewer and Water Service Area (S WSA) and are also within the limits of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP), which provides for commercial uses in the vicinity of this site and along Route 11. He said the plan also recognizes the existing industrial zoning classification to the north of this site and, in particular, the developmentally - sensitive areas (DSA) along the frontage of the property. Mr. Ruddy stated that as part of the Generalized Development Plan (GDP) this applicant has limited the number of entrances on Martinsburg Pike by proffering one public street entrance and one commercial entrance. He said the project proposes additional access management to accommodate the traffic from the Easy Living Mobile Home Park by relocating their access to the new public street system. Pedestrian accommodations have been provided within the project and along the frontage of Route 11. He added that the project's location on a major corridor and adjacent to an area identified as a DSA warrants particular attention and the applicant's proffers include a corridor enhancement strip of 20 feet in width along the entire frontage of the property. Included within this strip is a ten -foot multi -use bicycle trail and additional landscaping. Furthermore, the applicant has provided a limitation on signage along the front of the property, along with general building material specifications, and buffers and screening for adjacent properties. Also included within the transportation proffers are the signalization of the main entrance and a monetary contribution in the amount of $50,000 which may be applied to other transportation improvements in the vicinity. Commissioner Oates asked about potential inter- parcel connections to the north; he asked about the applicant's designation of a particular fire company to receive proffer money; and he asked how the dollar amount for potential signalization will be calculated. Mr. Ruddy pointed out the areas where inter - parcel connectivity will take place; he said there is no inter -parcel connection provided to properties to the north. Mr. • Ruddy noted that monetary contributions under proffers will go directly to the Frederick County Treasurer and VDOT will provide the dollar amount associated with signalization. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2028 Minutes of April 18, 2007 -5- Commissioner Light commented about the numerous rezonings that have occurred recently along the Route 11 North corridor and he asked if the staff had compiled any cumulative numbers on the loading. Mr. Ruddy said the TIAs that have occurred with the most recent developments have attempted to maintain a current evaluation; however, from 81 in Stephenson and the Rutherford's Farm all the way through the Sempeles property and Route 323, the County staff has not conducted a thorough, comprehensive evaluation on the loading of that entire section. Commissioner Oates stated that the TIA for the Rutherford's Fann rezoning, approved this past winter, had included uses all the way to the Sempeles' property in their TIA; however, this particular rezoning only had two recent rezonings in their background study. He named several projects that were not included. Commissioner Oates questioned whether applicants just pick and choose what they want to show for background traffic; he asked about the possibility of the staff or the transportation planner providing the applicant with a list of properties that need to be included in the TIA. Mr. Ruddy recognized the recent evolution in the scope of the TIAs and he anticipated this will continue with input from the transportation planner and VDOT so that a full comprehension of the scope and the impacts can be achieved. Mr. Ruddy commented that this particular project's TIA was seeped over a year ago, preceding some of the projects mentioned. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, with Greenway Engineering, was present to represent the owners and applicants, Easy Living Associates. Mr. Wyatt explained that one of the challenges the owners faced was attempting to get the existing access drive for the mobile home conmumity relocated; he said they worked with die adjoining property oNvner and were successful in acquiring a two -acre parcel for the relocated entrance. In addition, Mr. Wyatt stated that the applicant worked with VDOT regarding seoping for the ITIA, the background traffic, as well as the maximum structural square footage, to prevent overloading the system. He commented that this was how they arrived at the maximum 30,000 structural square footage for the B2 portion of the property and the maximum 90,000 structural square footage for the B3 portion. He mentioned the specific uses that were modeled for the B2 and B3 portions. Mr. Wyatt then reviewed the design features, including the proffered 20- foot corridor enhancement strip with a ten -foot bicycle /pedestrian trail, the construction of an additional travel lane along the frontage of the property, sidewalk accommodations, inter- parcel connectivity, and restrictions on signs and building materials. He also discussed the monetary proffers with the Commission. Chairman Wilmot next called for public cormuents. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Conuuissioner Light said that his concerns were not of this individual property, but the comprehensive transportation plan for the entire Route 1 I North corridor. Conunissioner Light said that if you take into consideration all of the existing and potential traffic signals at the intersections, starting north and heading south from the State Line Exxon, it seems the only traffic solution to accommodate development is another traffic signal. He believed the County needed to implement a comprehensive transportation plan for the Route 11 North corridor before it accepts any further development in this area. He said the only way to get around these potential problems is inter- parcel connectivity to take pressure off Route 11. Commissioner Light said before the Commission votes on any additional development, a comprehensive transportation plan should take place to allow the development community to proffer potentials to offset the mitigation of traffic impacts to Route 11. He predicted a future need for a four or five -lane Route 11 North and possible exit/entrance ramps onto I -81 further north on Route 11. Commissioner Light said he could not support this rezoning because he didn't think the traffic improvements and proffers were significant enough to improve the current problems. He suggested the need to have the County's transportation planner, the Transportation Conunittee, and VDOT study the potential problems and determine how they can start being addressed with future rezonings. • i Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2029 Minutes of April 18, 2007 Commissioner Manuel said it was his understanding the County does have a current Eastern Road Plan, as part of the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the Northeast Land Use Plan. Commissioner Manuel commented that the plan states industrial and commercial development can occur, if the impacted roads function at a Level of Service (LOS) "C." Commissioner Oates said he agreed with Commissioner Light's comments; however, he believed it was the County's responsibility for not getting something in place sooner. Commissioner Oates said that obviously, the Northeast Land Use Plan is very lacking and needs to be improved immediately. However, he did not want to penalize the individuals coming before the Commission because of the County's lack of planning. Commissioner Light made a motion to table the rezoning for 45 d Iys in order to have discussions between the parties involved to determine if an inter - parcel transportation plan for the western side of Route 11 would help the situation. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Oates, but failed by the following vote: YES (to table) Kriz, Ours, Light, Oates NO: Mohn, Kerr, Triplett, Mortis, Manuel, Unger, Wilmot (Note: Commissioners Thomas and Watt were absent from the meeting.) A new motion was made by Commissioner Oates to recommend approval of the rezoning with the recommendation that the applicant continue to work with the staff to attempt to improve their transportation proffers. This motion was seconded by Conmussioner Kriz and passed by a majority vote. BE IT RESOLVED, That by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Rezoning 403 -07 of Easy Living Associates, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 4.02 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, and 15 acres from RA District to B3 (Industrial Transition Business) District, with proffers, for commercial uses with the recommendation that the applicant continue to work with the staff to attempt to improve their transportation proffers. The vote was as follows: YES (to rec. approval) Kriz, Ours, Oates, Molin, Kerr, Triplett, Morris, Manuel, Unger, Wilmot NO: Light (Note: Commissioners Thomas and Watt were absent from the meeting.) PUBLIC MEETING Master Development Plan 401 -07 for revisions to Sovereign Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for 216 single - family urban detached units, 42 single - family detached zero lot line units, 62 multiplex units, and commercial use, located on Senseny Road (Rt. 657). The properties are further identified with PINS 65 -A -39 and 65 -A -39A in the Red Bud Magisterial District. 0 Action — Recommended Denial Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2030 Minutes of April 18, 2007 -7- Planner Candice E. Perkins reported that this master development plan (MDP) is a proposal to • revise the original MDP for Sovereign Village; she pointed out that the MDP process is an administrative process and the approval of the plan is based on ordinance and proffer conformity. Ms. Perkins said this latest proposal offers a revision to the MDP reviewed by the Planning Commission at their March 7, 2007 meeting. She said the previously- reviewed plan called for 116 multiplex units and 216 single - family detached units; the latest proposal calls for the same 216 single - family detached units, 42 single - family zero lot line units, and 62 multiplex units. She said the revised MDP continues to provide the 12 acres of commercial land. The revision reduces the overall density of the project to 2.2 units per acre. Using a Powerpoint presentation, Ms. Perkins projected an illustration of the housing types proposed and definitions from the zoning ordinance. She said the addition of the 42 zero lot line units provides more of a transition between the existing single - family urban units and the proposed multiplex. She said the zero lot line units are now located along Canyon Drive, fronting on Rossman and Farmington. The multiplex units are now located between the B2 -zoned portion of the property and the zero lot line units. Ms. Perkins said at the March 7, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, it was requested that the applicant provide more information on the design of the proposed multiplex units. She said that while the applicant has not provided the detail of the units, they have revised the MDP to include the zero lot line units to address concerns expressed at the meeting. Ms. Perkins said the revised MDP provides alcommitment for the completion of Channing Drive from Farmington Boulevard to Canyon Road within 12 months of the approval of the MDP; the plan also states that this portion of Channing Drive will be bonded prior to the MDP receiving final signatures; the plan further states that the proffered community center will be constructed within 24 months of approval of the revised plan. Ms. Perkins concluded her presentation by stating that the revised MDP is in conformance with . the zoning ordinance and the proffers from the rezoning. She added that the Planning Commission previously utilized a 45 -day deferral and the zoning ordinance requires an action be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors within 60 days; therefore, the application can not be tabled again. Commissioner Kriz asked if the completion of Channing Drive, the conuuunity center, and the commercial area was previously proffered with the rezoning. Ms. Perkins replied that the rezoning proffered Channing Drive to be completed by the 475` building permit; she said there was no time frame on the completion of the community center, and there was no time frame for the development of the cormmercial area. Mr. Thomas Moore (Ty) Lawson, P.C., of Lawson & Silek, P.L.C., was present on behalf of the owners, Manning and Ross Developers, LLC, and the applicant, Greenway Engineering. Mr. Lawson said the planning staff has confirmed this revised MDP conforms to the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Lawson said the MDP is an administrative process and this is a public meeting as opposed to a public hearing. Mr. Lawson said the biggest change from the previous MDP submittal was in response to comments the applicant received, which were that homeowners who lived on the constructed side of Rossman Boulevard expressed concerns about looking across at the multiplex housing. He said the revised MDP places single - family detached homes across the street; he said the viewshed from the existing homes will be of single- family homes. Mr. Lawson said the change in housing type has resulted in an overall reduction in the number of homes originally approved in the rezoning and fewer than what was presented in the previous MDP proposal. He said the ten -unit reduction results in fewer impacts with respect to trips per day and school students. Mr. Lawson said this MDP revision stipulates that Charming Drive will be bonded immediately and constructed within 12 months, and the recreation center will be built within two years or 24 months. He believed this revision presented a much more viable layout for the commercial use. Mr. Lawson asked the Commission for a positive recommendation and a forwarding of the MDP to the Board of Supervisors. Frederick County Planning Commission I Page 2031 Minutes of April 18, 2007 • Commissioner Kriz asked Mr. Lawson how close the applicant was to the 475 unit built. Mr. Lawson replied it was pointed out at the last meeting that the timetable, given the current build -out, would be in the 2 -2'/2 year plus time frame. Chairman Wilmot next called for citizen comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Jack Lewis, a resident of Sovereign Village, spoke on behalf of the Sovereign Village Homeowners Association (HOA). Mr. Lewis said the HOA has reviewed the revised MDP and has found nothing in it which addresses the principal concern of the homeowners of Sovereign Village. He said the proposal remains a fundamental breech of the contract the homeowners believed they were entering into when purchasing homes in Sovereign Village. He said that contract was embodied in the existing MDP which specifies that Sovereign Village would be a community of single- family detached homes. He stated it would be another matter if there had been an allowance in the plan that mixed housing would be allowed; however, there is no such provision and the home buyers proceeded in good faith and trust to purchase in Sovereign Village. Mr. Lewis said that he spoke with several families who recently purchased homes within the past month or so; all of them said a key factor in their decision to purchase in Sovereign Village was the single - family detached homes. He noted that not one of the families had been advised, nor did they have any knowledge of the on -going effort to change the character of the community with the addition of high - density multiplexes and other housing types. Mr.l Lewis added that he understands this is a unique situation and there has not before been a case where a new type of housing has been grafted onto the MDP of an established community; he said this would be a precedent and a poor one. Mr. Lewis further added that the precedent that should be shown is that the contractual rights of existing homeowners will not be sacrificed to the financial gain of a few developers. In conclusion, Mr. Lewis questioned the compliance of this proposal with the County's zoning ordinance; specifically, Article 6, Chapter 165 -62, Section D, which states, "... in no case shall the gross density of any development within an approved MDP, which contains more than 100 acres, exceed four dwellings per acre." He said the multiplex proposed in this revision will have a density factor of 6.3 units per acre. Mr. Kirk Matthews, a resident of Sovereign Village, spoke about the promises, contracts, and proffers that were made to the home buyers, the community, and the County. Referring to the applicant's comment about the shrinking impact of the new MDP, Mr. Matthews agreed, saying the original monetary proffer to the County was $3,600 per lot and now there will be 30 less lots, which totals $110,000 less the County will receive. He also pointed out that the 12 acres of commercial land was never recorded as commercial property and, therefore, has never been taxed as commercial. He said the Real Estate Office just discovered the oversight in July of 2006 and the 2007 tax year will be the first time this acreage has been billed out as commercial land. Mr. Matthews also questioned whether a membership -based community center could go on RP -zoned land and he pointed out that the road layout is different on this plan from the original MDP. Mr. Matthews concluded by saying that the homeowners in this community bought homes with the understanding this was going to be a single- family neighborhood. Ms. Jennifer Esler, a resident of Sovereign Village, stated that at the previous Planning Commission meeting, the residents learned the developers were not in default with the construction of the recreational center or Charming Drive. She believed, however, that both the recreational center and Charming Drive would come in time. She asked the Commission to focus on the crux of the issue, which was that multiplexes and zero lot line houses are not in character with Sovereign Village, a single - family housing development. Ms. Esler said the only acceptable new housing type is the kind which has already been built in Sovereign Village. Ms. Esler said the County Code states the Planning Commission must evaluate changes by taking context into consideration; she said the multiplex and zero lot line houses are not in context with the remainder of the development. Ms. Esler provided the Commission with numerous photographs showing the areas proposed for the new housing types. She pointed out how close the new housing would be to existing Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2032 Minutes of April 18, 2007 homes. She also pointed out the small areas planned for the multiplex and zero -lot line units plus roads; she said • this kind of density would be hugely out of keeping with the remainder of the subdivision. Mr. Ken Jackson, a resident of Sovereign Village, said the homeowners in Sovereign Village paid for a promised single - family housing development with amenities and now they were being given with something less than what they paid for. Mr. Jackson believed this was an issue of right and wrong; he said voting this down was the right thing to do and accepting it was wrong. Ms. Christina King, a resident of Sovereign Village, believed the greatest concern of the residents is the construction of multiplex housing which was not a part of the original MDP. Ms. King believed multiplex units would depreciate the value of the existing single - family homes and it would increase the threat of crime. She stated that the homeowners were promised a single - family neighborhood with a community center and pool. Mr. Patrick Skorker, a resident of Sovereign Village, said that at the Commission's March 7 public meeting, he spoke about the horrendous conditions of townplexes and parking at his previous place of residence in New Jersey. Mr. Skorker then spoke about integrity and the American dream! He said his parents were immigrants and came to the United States in the early 1900's. He said his father started a business and his contract to his clients was a handshake and his word was his bond. Mr. Skorker asked the Commission whatever happened to the integrity of the handshake. Ms. Lisa Skittone, a resident of Sovereign Village, said that if she and her husband would have seen the revised MDP as presented, they would not have purchased a home in Sovereign Village. Ms. Skittone said they paid over $500,000 for their home; she said they could have paid that much and lived in a suburb of D.C., near this type of housing, or they could have purchased a zero lot line house in the Bronx where she is • originally from. Ms. Skittone said they purchased in the Sovereign Village community because they enjoyed the area and they liked the plan promised to them. Mr. Mark Chase, a resident of Sovereign Village, said he purchased his home in November of 2006, when the housing market was strong. Mr. Chase said he made his decision to purchase by evaluating his risk and knowing the climate of the housing market. He said today, there is one person who is responsible for that decision and it was him; he said any consequences of his decision falls upon himself Mr. Chase said that sometimes public bodies have to make decisions that are unpopular to the people they represent; he said this was not one of those times. Mr. Chase said there is nothing tojustify a change to this MDP, or a change to the Hiles, in the interest of the greater community. Mr. Chase asked the Commission, in their capacity as appointed public servants, if the proposed change was in the community's best interests or if it was in special interest. Mr. Brad Bluet, a resident of Sovereign Village, said that he just recently closed on the purchase of his home last month, after looking at over 200 available homes. Mr. Bluet said this housing change was not a part of the discussion he had with his builder. He said that when he asked what was going in the open area, he was told it was supposed to be a recreation center and more houses like the one he bought. Ms. Emmalina Dawson a resident of Sovereign Village said she also chose to live in the Sovereign Village community because it was supposed to be all single- family homes. She said she and her husband purchased their home 3/z years ago; she said they were promised a 3,000 square -foot recreational center, nature trails, bicycle trails, and a swimming pool. Ms. Dawson apologized for being so emotional about this issue, but she said it brought back memories of the planned community she grew up in. She said she was told the • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2033 Minutes of April 18, 2007 -10- pool and recreational center would be built within 18 months of purchasing their home; she said she anticipated ® her children walking to the community pool when they were growing up. Ms. Dawson said that she and her husband worked very hard to afford the home they purchased in Sovereign Village and they looked at many other communities, but chose this one based on what they were told. Mr. Stan Rogers, a resident of Sovereign Village, said his home faces the property in question and it was very important for him to find out what was going to happen in that area before he purchased his home. Mr. Rogers said he was told he would be looking at the backyards of the houses in the cul -de -sac. Mr. Rogers said he also asked about the street system and if any intersections would be close to his home. He said with this revised MDP, Butterhouse Way will end up fronting on his driveway and he was concerned because he has small children. Mr. Rogers said it was already difficult to get out onto Rossman because it was a feeder route for all of the houses behind him; he said that having another road "T -ing" directly in front of his driveway will make it almost impossible to get in and out. Mr. Rogers said this issue is very important to him and his wife; he said they would never have purchased a home in Sovereign Village if they had known this street would be in front of their house. Mr. Rogers believed the issue is about holding people to their word. Ms. Sharon Carlson, a resident of Sovereign Village, spoke about promises that were made by the developer and his integrity. She spoke of the agreement the homeowners made to abide by the covenants when they purchased their homes. Ms. Carlson spoke about pride and community and the developer's agreement to provide a community center. Ms. Tiffany Burchese, a resident of Sovereign Village, came forward with her two daughters. Ms. Burchese said her oldest daughter was four years old when she moved into Sovereign Village and the second daughter was born after she moved into Sovereign. She said it has been five years since she purchased her home and she wanted the Commission to see how big her children were and still have no recreational center or pool. ® Mr. Hai Tran, a resident of Sovereign Village, spoke about the tragedy at Virginia Tech University; he said as an Asian- American and a former Penn State student, he was especially heartfelt about the incident. He said the media is now focusing on why and what happened. Mr. Tran believed the parents may not have paid enough attention to their children because they were working so very hard to pursue the American Dream and ensure a better life for their children. Mr. Tran was concerned that if this revised MDP was approved, the value of his home would be negatively affected; he said it would require him to work longer hours and have limited quality time with his family. Mr. Tran asked the Conunission not to approve this 'revised MDP. Mr. Harry Mallette, a resident of Sovereign Village, said that he and his wife previously lived in a townhouse conununity; he said they moved to Virginia in 1990 with a promise never to live in a townhouse community again. Mr. Mallette said they looked at close to 80 homes; they were looking fogy a one - level, single - family house. He said when they saw this home in Sovereign Village, they decided then and ithere to purchase this home. Mr. Mallette said they were promised a community center and there was no mention of towidiouses. He was certain they would not have moved to Sovereign Village if there were multiplex or townhouse units planned. Mr. Bruce Fry, a resident of Sovereign Village, said he lived on the corner of Rossman and Dover, across from the intersection in the photograph where all of the children gather to catch the bus. He commented that this is where a significant amount of traffic is now going to come pouring out of the multifamily area. Mr. Fry said that currently, there is a pile of dirt at this location that gets moved back and forth creating a dust storm and keeping the homes nice and dirty. He said that instead of the pile of dirt, the residents were supposed to have a community center and additional single - family houses. Mr. Frye said he would never have purchased a house in this subdivision had he known there would be towtthouse built there. Mr. Frve asked the • Commission to deny the request. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2034 Minutes of April 18, 2007 -11- Mr. Richard Crane, a resident of Red Bud District, said that in 1998 -1999, when he was president of the Glemnont Village HOA, he whole- heartedly supported the rezoning of Sovereign Village with the understanding this would be a single - family community. Mr. Crane said a mistake was made back then because a time limit was not required for construction of the recreational center; however, it was understood that membership would be available for all the residents along the Senseny Road corridor. He said a mistake was also made not to require a time limit for the commercial development, but the Glenmont Village HOA supported it because they wanted nearby shopping. He said they also supported it because they believed it was going to be a nice community where people could raise their children and be happy. Mr. Crane said they took the developer on his word that he was going to fulfill his promises. He said now is not the time for the residents to be blackmailed, so that Charming Drive can be finished. Mr. Crane said Sovereign Village should remain single family and the developer should be required to finish Charming Drive, the recreation center, and the commercial area. the meeting. No one else came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the portion of Mr. Lawson, the applicant's representative, returned to the podium with three points to make in response to the citizens' comments. Mr. Lawson's first point was that townhouses are not being proposed for this development; he said the multiplex lot sizes are significantly larger than townhouse lot sizes. His second point was in regard to Rossman and the comments that it was a "feeder" route. Mr. Lawson said he could not help but think the completion of Charming Drive would alleviate traffic, assuming Rossman has a congestion problem. He said Charming Drive is a major road which will run from Valley Mill to points east, all the way to Route 50. He added that Charming Drive was one of the major tenets of the rezoning and they are submitti rm ng that it will be completed not only by proffer, but by a time line. Lastly, in response to comments regarding precedence or reduction of property values, Mr. Lawson said that when the Fu -Shep tract came forward, a MDP amendment was also proposed for the Twin Lakes project, a Toll Brothers section of the development. Mr. Lawson said the MDP • amendment had proposed the addition of multiplex and single - family small lots, with lot sizes by -right to 3,750 square feet, he said they were proposing a minimum of 6,000 square feet for Sovereign Village. Mr. Lawson said he has not heard any comments about how that change had degraded the value of the neighborhood or done anything negative in any way. He added that the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors approved a MDP that allowed for that revision. Mr. Lawson asked the Commission for a recommendation of approval and asked that this request be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Commissioner Ours said he found the tern, "multiplex," to be somewhat nebulous and asked Mr. Lawson if he could provide some enlightenment as to what multiplex is intended to mean in this development. Mr. Lawson referred to the slide previously shown by Ms. Perkins which showed a diagram and provided a definition of multiplex from the ordinance. Mr. Lawson said they did not have a picture of a proposed unit available at this point in the process; in addition, they would be hesitant to provide one and then later be held accountable to that representation. He stated that secondly, he was not aware of this being done at a MDP stage, nor was it a requirement of the ordinance. Commissioner Oates stated that many of the citizens' comments referred to verbal or written contracts that were breached, the covenants of the development, possible stoppage, and whether home values would be affected. Commissioner Oates said issues of this nature can not be addressed by the Planning Commission; he said those types of issues are addressed at the Courthouse. He said the Commmission must review a plan based on County ordinances and the ordinance does specify that the MDP must be harmonious with the surrounding area. Commissioner Oates believed that Charming Drive was going to be built, whether by this project or another one; he said he was not inclined to vote for this simply for Charming Drive. He said that after listening to all of the comments, it is clear the revised MDP is not harmonious. Commissioner Oates said there is • currently an approved MDP for this project that everyone seems to be happy with and the Commission is not holding up the applicant from proceeding. Other Commissioners agreed, adding that the residents purchased their homes under an approved MDP with an expectation that things would continue along the same lines. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2035 Minutes of April 18, 2007 -12- • A motion to recommend denial was made by Commissioner Kerr and seconded by Commissioner Mohn. The motion was unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend denial of Master Development Plan 401 -07 for revisions to Sovereign Village, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for 216 single - family urban detached units, 42 single - family detached zero lot line units, 62 multiplex units, and commercial use along Senseny Road (Rt. 657). (Note: Commissioners Watt and Thomas were absent from the meeting.) A motion was made by Commissioner Ours, seconded by Commissioner Morris, and unanimously passed to include the photographs, provided by Ms. Esler, as a part of the official record forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Morris and unanimously passed. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, J e M. Wilmot, Chairman Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 18, 2007 Page 2036