PC_08-15-07_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 August 15, 2007.
PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Shawnee District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Robert A.
Morris, Shawnee District, Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District;
Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; H.
Paige Manuel, Member -At- Large; Barbara Van Osten, Board of Supervisors Liaison; Philip A. Lemieux, Board
of Supervisors Liaison, and Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel.
ABSENT: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman / Opequon District, George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District,
Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; and Cordell Watt, Back Creek District.
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director; Mark
R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator, Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; John A. Bishop,
Transportation Planner; Dana Johnston, Zoning Inspector; 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 Ours and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the
agenda for this evening's meeting.
MINUTES
Upon motion made by Commissioner Triplett and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the meeting
minutes of July 18, 2007 were unanimously approved as presented.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) — 08/13/07 Mtg.
Conunissioner Mohn reported that the staff presented the results of the Board of Supervisors and
Planning Commission's joint work session concerning the CPPA (Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments) for
T� this year. Commissioner Mohn said the Board tentatively agreed to forward one CPPA to the CPPS for additional
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2090
Minutes of August 15, 2007
-2-
study; which was the Route 277 Mixed -Use to Urban Center Project. He said the staff broughtthe CPPS up -to-
date and there was good discussion. He said the small -area triangle was discussed as well.
Conservation Easement Authority (CEA)
Commissioner Light reported that the CEA is preparing for an event on October 27, 2007, at the
Museum of the Shenandoah Valley, to promote and raise money for the CEA.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
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 412 -06 of Carriage Park, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associatesl(PHR &A), to rezone
30.26 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District and 15.18 acres from
® MHl (Mobile Home Community) District to RP District, totaling 45.44 acres, with for up to 240
single4amily attached homes (townhouses). The properties are located south and adjacent to Route 7,
and east and adjacent to Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park. The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s
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 — Recommended Approval
Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that the Commission has seen this project on a
number of occasions over the previous ten months and it is back before the Commission again because the
applicant's latest reiteration is different from what the Commission reviewed and sent forward to the Board of
Supervisors in May of 2007. Mr. Lawrence said the applicant substantially revised the application, the proffer
statement, and the generalized development plan, prior to the Board's July 25, 2007 meeting. Subsequently, the
Board returned the project back to the Planning Commission so the Commission could review the latest proposal
and forward a recommendation to the Board concerning the revision. Mr. Lawrence said the staff will forward
this rezoning to the Board next week, on August 22, for final action.
Mr. Lawrence stated that the property is located at the intersection of Route 7 and Valley Mill
Road and this intersection plays a key role in this application because it is where the transportation aspect ofthis
project is emphasized. He said no access is being proposed on Route 7; the sole access onto the property is
Valley Mill Road, about 300 -400 feet south of Route 7, Mr. Lawrence said this will preserve the integrity of
Route 7 as a limited access roadway. hi addition, the applicant has proffered to provide a 60 -foot right -of -way
from Valley Mill Road through the southern edge of the property, ultimately tapping an inter -parcel connection to
• the Blue Ridge Mobile Home Park, as well as making right -of -way provisions for the property to the immediate
south, Valley Mill Farm, if future access is desired.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2091
Minutes of August 15, 2007
-3-
• Addressing transportation upon leaving the property, Mr. Lawrence said the applicant has
proffered a traffic signal installation at Route 7 and Valley Mill Road, which would be installed before the 50"
building permit, but more importantly, within 180 days of VDOT's request. In addition, the applicant has made a
cash contribution to the transportation system for the County of $3,000 per unit; the application continues to offer
a $25,000 contribution to the County for purposes associated with the historic Star Fort site; and the applicant
has also proffered $15,530 per unit to offset project capital facilities impacts.
In conclusion, Mr. Lawrence stated that the project appears to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Policy Plan and the applicant has made a significant effort in this revision to address the
transportation needs for the area.
Mr. Patrick Sowers, with Patton Harris Rust & Associates, representing the Carriage Park
rezoning application, was available for questions.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman
Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing.
Conmmissioner Mohn inquired of the VDOT representative, Mr. Lloyd Ingram, if VDOT was
comfortable with the applicant's signalization proffer with regards to the 180 -day turn - around after the first
building permit. Mr. Ingram replied yes; he said VDOT had made the request and the applicant complied.
Commissioner Mohn thought this latest revision returned to the original concept in many ways.
He said that the Commission had many concerns and had asked the applicant to look at some other alteratives.
• He believed the applicant had exhausted those efforts at the Commission's request. Commissioner Molmn said
that his biggest concern with the newest proposal was the intersection at Route 7 and its signalization; lie said that
assuming VDOT is comfortable they can get the signalization in a timely fashion when warranted, then he felt
comfortable with the application presented.
The Conunission appreciated the efforts that had been made by the applicant on this application.
In addition, the Commission stated their appreciation for the additional opportunity to review and provide a
recommendation on this rezoning, which was substantially different from what they had previously reviewed.
I
i
Upon motion made by Commissioner Mohn and seconded by Commissioner Ours,
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of
Rezoning 412-06 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 MH 1 (Mobile Home
Community) District to RP District, totaling 45.44 acres, with proffers, for up to 240 single- family attached
homes (tommmhouses).
The majority vote was as follows:
YES (TO REC. APPROVAL) Unger, Manuel, Morris, Wilmot, Ours, Triplett, Molmn
NO: Oates, Light
(Note: Commissioners Watt, Thomas, Kriz, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.)
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2092
Minutes of August 15, 2007
MIN
Rezoning #07 -07 of 1 -81 Distribution Center, submitted by Triad Engineering, Inc. to rezone 59 acres
from RA (Rural Areas) District to Ml (Light Industrial) District, with proffers, for office and warehouse
uses. The properties are located approximately 0.61 miles north of the Route 11 intersection with Cedar
Hill (Rt. 671), bounded on the west by 1 -81 and on the east by Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11). The properties
are further identified with P.I.N.s 33 -A -109 and 33 -A -110 in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
Action — Recommended Denial
Commissioner Oates said that he would abstain from all discussion and vi ting on this rezoning
due to a possible conflict of interest.
Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, began by discussing the application's relationship
to the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. Mr. Ruddy reported that the site is located within the County's
Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and it is within the limits of the Northeast Land Use Plan ( NELUP) of
the Comprehensive Policy Plan. He pointed out that the industrial land use proposed in this rezoning is not
consistent with the NELUP, which calls for commercial uses catering to the interstate traveler along the three 1 -81
interchanges and retail, service, and office land uses along the Martinsburg Pike corridor! Mr. Ruddy said the
NELUP also calls for Martinsburg Pike to be improved to a four -lane facility. Furthermore, the NELUP states
that proposed industrial and commercial development should only occur if impacted roads function at a Level of
Service (LOS) Category C or better, however, this application does not provide the desired LOS. He stated that
• the NELUP discourages individual lot access onto Route 11 and encourages inter - parcel connections; it also
recommends the provision of adequate screening and buffering along Martinsburg Pike and adjacent to residential
properties.
Mr. Ruddy stated that during the Historic Resources Advisory Board's (HRAB) evaluation of
the project, two recommendations were made. The first was for the submittal of a Preliminary Information Form
for the historical property on the site, which the applicant has accomplished. The second recommendation dealt
with an additional landscaped berm along the front of the property to provide screening protection for the adjacent
historical properties; he said no tailored corridor improvements have yet been provided beyond what is currently
required by the ordinance for parking lot landscaping.
Mr. Ruddy next discussed potential impacts of the project. He stated that the applicant has
limited the amount of office space on the property to 150,000 square feet; however, no additional limitations have
been provided regarding the potential development of the site for non - office industrial -type uses. He said the two
scenarios used by the applicant in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) do not accurately reflect the potential worst -
case scenario for the build -out of the property. Mr. Ruddy conuuented that both the County and VDOT have
expressed concerns about the trip generation figures used in the TIA and, in particular, the use of employee counts
rather than the trip generation figures typically used within the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual,
Mr. Ruddy continued, stating that the TIA indicates that LOS "C" conditions or better will be
maintained on study roads and intersections with the completion of several area improvements including
improvements at the intersection of Route 11/ Hopewell Road/ Brucetown Road and improvements at the
intersection of Route l I/ Rest Church Road. He stated that none of the improvements identified in the TIA have
• been addressed by this application. In addition, the applicant's transportation program does not provide for or
advance the County's Eastern Road Plan element of the Comprehensive Policy Plvr, in particular, the widening of
Route 11. Mr. Ruddy next proceeded to review and provide staff comments on the applicant's proffer statement.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2093
Minutes of August 15, 2007
-5—
Comity Transportation Planner, John A. Bishop, added that the primary issue with the
applicant's TIA is the method used by the applicant to project potential traffic for the 750,000 square feet of
warehousing space. Mr. Bishop commented that using numbers of employees is one method, but the County has
no control over how many employees will be hired; therefore, the County uses square footage, unless another
method is agreed upon beforehand. He said the concern is that the applicant is significantly under - estimating the
trip generation figures. In addition, the figure doesn't include any potential office use or other type of
development on the property. Furthermore, the applicant's triggers for specified road improvements, monetary
contributions, and signalization are all based on the number of vehicle trips and the discrepancy, from the
County's point of view, could result in p.m. peak -hour trips that are more than double the point at which the
applicant proffers a signal or cash in lieu of a signal. Mr. Bishop said the two site driveways are also a concern.
He understood the desire to keep trucks and automobile traffic separate; however, the staff l believes that Route 11
m
is not the avenue to deal with this on -site proble.
Mr. Lloyd Ingram of VDOT was available to answer questions from the�Cornmission.
Mr. Jolui Knott of BPG Properties, Ltd., the applicant, said BPG was headquartered in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and has offices in Northern Virginia and across the United States. Mr. Knott said
BPG are the owners of approximately 20 million square feet of comnercial space around the country, including
office, industrial, and retail space. He gave the Commission further information on the background of his
company. Mr. Knott said that BPG intends to actively market this site for potential users in the M1 District.
Mr. Ty Lawson, attorney with Lawson & Silek, P.L.C., was representing the applicants and
owners for the I -81 Distribution Center. Mr. Lawson responded to the staff's statement that the application was
not consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan by pointing out that existing uses on the west side of Route 11
and the east side of I -81 were comprised of an overlap of commercial and industrial uses and, therefore, this area
• could be considered as a transitional area. He spoke of the County's desire to have readily available facilities for
potential Ml users and his client's preference for M 1 zoning, rather than B3. He noted that M 1 uses produce less
traffic impacts than B3 uses. He said his client did not intend to build office facilities, other than ancillary offices
for an industrial use and, therefore, had placed a cap in their proffer for permitted square footage of office use.
Mr. Lawson stated that they chose warehouse and office uses for their traffic modeling and, in addition, they
conducted actual traffic counts of existing facilities, such as Home Depot and Target. In conclusion, Mr. Lawson
reviewed the applicant's proffers, specifically those dealing with right -of -way improvements, financial
contributions, the traffic signal, and caps on office space.
w
The applicant's transportation analyst, Mr. Mike Glickman of PHR &A, spoke about the
applicant's trip generation results and he explained why other methods besides square footage, such as acreage or
employees, were valid in the modeling studies. Mr. Glickman said his client strongly disagreed this site would
generate the numbers of trips indicated by the use of square footage modeling.
Mr. Ruddy stated that there can be considerable discussion on the scopurg and details of the TIA,
but there is an important relationship between the proffers and the impacts revealed by the TIA. He explained
that the impacts have to translate into details of the proffer statement. Therefore, the square footage uses and
other elements identified in the TIA need to translate to action in the proffer statement. Mr. Ruddy commented
that this is where there is a large gap in this particular situation.
A Commission member asked if some of issues raised would be better addressed at the master
development plan level, such as screening or guaranteeing that a LOS "C" will be met. Mr. Ruddy replied that in
this location, adjacent to a rural area property used for residential purposes, buffers should be addressed. In this
• particular application, he said a mmnber of occasions arise, such as I -81 and the recommendation that came from
the HRAB regarding the historical property. Mr. Ruddy said those were examples where an applicant could go
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2094
Minutes of August 15, 2007
-6-
above and beyond what is required in the ordinance. Mr. Ruddy said that the TIA indicates that what will be
needed to achieve an acceptable LOS "C" would be significant improvements to Route 11 and its intersections
to with Rest Church Road and Hopewell and Brcetommm Roads. He said those were off -site improvements that go
above and beyond what could be captured with a site development plan and master development plan application.
He said the rezoning is the opportunity to insure the impacts associated with the rezoning are addressed, as well
as the Comprehensive Policy Plan.
Commission members expressed concern that none of the transportation improvements identified
in the TIA had been addressed by the application to provide a LOS Category C on impacted roads; nor did the
applicant's transportation program provide for or advance the County's Eastern Road Plan element of the
Comprehensive Policy Plan, specifically, the widening of Route 11. The applicant's two site driveways were
raised as an issue because the NELUP discourages individual lot access onto Route 11. Commission members
questioned the applicant's TIA because it used employee counts, rather than square footage for trip generation
figures, and may not accurately reflect the potential worst -case scenario. Furthermore, no additional limitations
had been provided regarding the potential development of the site other than a cap on the square footage of office
use. Some Commissioners commented that recently- rezoned properties and background traffic from West
Virginia should be included in the applicant's calculations. They inquired about the proposed tractor-trailcr count
for the site. Members of the Commission noted the applicant had not offered any information on signs, nor had
any MI uses been proffered out. A Conmmissioner expressed the need for a regionalized transportation plan for
the Route 11 corridor, so future applicants are aware of what the County's expectations are for transportation
improvements.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman
Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing.
Commissioner Light made a motion to recommend denial of the rezoning for three reasons: 1) it
• fails to address the Comprehensive Policy Plan; 2) it fails to adequately address the design standards within the
corridor; and 3) the TIA and transportation improvements do not adequately mitigate impacts to the Route I 1
corridor. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours.
BE IT RESOLVED, that by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend
denial of Rezoning 407 -07 of 1 -9l Distribution Center, submitted by Triad Engineering, Inc. to rezone 59 acres
from RA (Rural Areas) District to MI (Light Industrial) District, with proffers, for office and warehouse uses for
the following reasons: 1) it fails to address the Comprehensive Policy Plan; 2) it fails to adequately address the
design standards within the corridor; and 3) the TIA and transportation improvements do not adequately mitigate
impacts to the Route 1 1 corridor.
The majority vote was as follows:
YES (TO REC. DENIAL) Mohn, Triplett, Ours, Wilmot, Light, Morris, Unger
NO: Manuel
ABSTAIN Oates
(Note: Commissioners Watt, Thomas, Kriz, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.)
E
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2095
Minutes of August 15, 2007
-7—
PUBLIC MEETING
• Master Development Plan #04 -07 of the Haggerty Property, submitted by Patton Harris Rust &
Associates (PHR &A), for up to 300 single - family detached and attached residential dwellings. The
properties are located adjacent and east of Eddy's Lane (Rt. 820), approximately three miles east of
Winchester, and 1,500 feet south of Route 7. The subject site is further 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. The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s 55 -A -212 and 55 -A-
212A in the Red Bud Magisterial District.
Action — Recommended Approval
Commissioner Manuel said that he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this master
development plan application, due to a possible conflict of interest.
Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that the Planning Commission previously
evaluated the rezoning request for this project and ultimately, Rezoning 404 -07 was approved by the Board of
Supervisors on July 25, 2007. This project includes right -of -way dedication for future Route 37 and
approximately 33 acres of open space, which is adjacent to the Opequon Creek. He said access to the site will be
provided via a rural two -lane undivided collector road, Haggerty Boulevard, which will link the project from
Route 7, west of the Opequon Wastewater Treatment Plant, into the site. In addition, the master development
plan (MDP) provides for the construction of an east -west major collector road, consistent with the County's
Comprehensive Policy Plan. Inter - parcel connectivity has been provided to the adjacent Twin Lakes Overlook
project. Mr. Ruddy pointed out the location of the future community center, which is to be constructed during the
second phase of development. He added that the MDP reflects the protection of environmental features consistent
with the Generalized Development Plan (GDP) and the MDP is consistent with the proffer statement and the
GDP.
Mr. Ruddy pointed out one remaining issue to be evaluated by the Commission, which focused
on the road efficiency buffer between the residential lots and future Route 37. He said the applicant's proffer
statement provides for landscaping in this particular area; however, the staff would like to ensure the required
buffer is recognized on the MDP. In conclusion, Mr. Ruddy stated that the preliminary MDP is in a form which is
administratively approvable. The MDP also satisfies the requirements of the zoning and subdivision ordinances
upon addressing the road efficiency buffer requirement.
Commissioner Unger inquired if there was a designated limit on the number of houses that could
be constructed per year. Mr. Ruddy read from the proffer statement that, "the maximum dwelling units for which
certificates of occupancy are requested shall be 75 in any 12 -month period within the first 24 months of project
development, beginning on the date of MDP approval by the Board of Supervisors, and 50 in any 12 -month
period thereafter."
Mr. Patrick Sowers, with Patton Harris Rust & Associates (PHR &A), and Mr. Clary Athey,
attorney, were representing the owner, David B. Holliday, and the Haggerty Property MDP. Mr. Sowers said they
have - plantings consistent with the road efficiency buffer for Route 37 through their proffer statement
and with regard to open space, they are willing to work with the staff to reach a consensus on meeting the
ordinance requirements for Route 37's road efficiency buffer.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments. No one came forward and Chairman Wilmot
closed the public conunent portion of the meeting.
11
Frederick County Planning Commission Page
Minutes of August 15, 2007
-8-
Conunissioner Mohn made a motion to recommend that administrative approval authority be
granted to the staff by the Board of Supervisors with the expectation that the road efficiency buffer requirement
• along Route 37 be clarified between the applicant and the staff prior to final approval This motion was seconded
by Commissioner Triplett and unanimously passed.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby mnanimously recommend that
administrative approval authority be granted to the staff for Master Development Plan 904 -07 of the Haggerty
Property, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates (PHR &A), for up to 300 single- family detached and
attached residential dwellings, with the expectation that the road efficiency buffer requirement along Route 37 be
clarified between the applicant and the staff prior to final approval.
(Note: Conntnissioner Manuel abstained from voting; Corr nissioners Thomas, Watt, Kriz and Kerr were absent
from the meeting.)
Master Development Plan 408 -07 for Sharkey Brothers, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for
commercial uses on North Frederick Pike (Route 522). The property is identified with P.I.N. 54 -A -11 in
the Stonewall Magisterial District.
Action — Recommended Approval
Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that this master development plan (MDP)
application is a proposal to develop 24.8 acres of existing B2 (Business General) -zoned property with
commercial uses. Ms. Perkins said the property was shown with B2 zoning on the original County zoning maps
• and, therefore, the site does not have any associated proffers. She said the site is adjacent to the existing Shockey
Industrial facilities and will be accessed with one entrance off North Frederick Pike (Route 522). The Eastern
Road Plan of the Comprehensive Policy Plan shows the extension of Fort Collier Road running through the
property and the MDP shows an 80 -foot reservation for this roadway extension.
Ms. Perkins stated that the applicant is requesting a waiver of Section 144 -24C of the Frederick
County Subdivision Ordinance and would allow the property to be subdivided with private roads. She added that
the MDP is consistent with the requirements of the zoning ordinance and has addressed the staff s concerns. She
further added that two recommendations are needed for this MDP, one for the waiver and the other for the MDP.
Commissioner Oates inquired if a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) had been provided for the
MDP. Commissioner Oates asked the County's Transportation Engineer for his opinion on the transportation
aspects of the application.
Transportation Planner, John A. Bishop, said that since this was historically -zoned property, a
TIA was most likely not done. Mr. Bishop believed the location of the entrance is about the only place an
entrance could be acconmiodated along that portion of Route 522. He believed it was worthwhile to monitor the
intensity of development through the TIA process as site plans are submitted, primarily from a safety perspective.
Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering was representing the MDP. Mr. Wyatt
explained that when this MDP was originally designed, there was not a waiver issue. However, staff is desiring
that the issue of a waiver be addressed at the MDP level, rather than coming in and requesting it at the subdivision
stage. Mr. Wyatt said the owners have no intent of subdividing the property at this time and the property
currently meets ordinance standards in that it abuts and has direct access to a state - maintained road. However,
this will set the stage for the future, so if subdivision is desired, the oHaner will not have to come back before the
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2097
Minutes of August 15, 2007
Commission and Board with the request. Mr. Wyatt said the applicant is using an internal private street system,
which is the basis for requesting the waiver.
• In addition, Mr. Wyatt stated that a public improvement plan was approved by VDOT, the
County Engineer, and the County Sanitation Authority, which is why the entrance is at the proposed location. He
said that because of issues, such as site distance, this was the only place the entrance could be located and was
approved. The public improvement plan also provided a turn-taper into the entrance aid on the Route 522
approach into Winchester, there is striping to create a left -turn stacking lane.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman
Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the meeting.
Commissioner Oates made a motion to recormnend approval of the waiver of Section 144 -24C
of the Subdivision Ordinance for MDP #08 -07 of Shockey Brothers with the condition that only one other exit be
allowed and strictly designated as an "exit only." No additional entrances will be allow d. This motion was
seconded by Commissioner Light and unanimously passed.
Conunission Oates next made a motion to recommend approval of M
Brothers with the stipulation that upon request by staff, TIAs accompany future site
motion was seconded by Conunissioner Light and unanimously passed.
•
(Note: Commissioners Watt, Thomas, Kriz, and Kerr were absent from the meeting.)
ADJOURNMENT
Upon motion made by Conunissioner Ours and seconded by
adjourned at 8:35 p.m. by a unanimous vote.
Respectfully submitted,
M. Wilmot, Chairman
Lawrence, Secretary
0
#08 -07 of Shockey
as as needed. This
Morris, the meeting
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2098
Minutes of August 15, 2007