Loading...
PC_10-03-07_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 October 3, 2007. PRESENT: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chaimtan/Opequon District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District, Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gregory S. Kerr, 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 Vin Osten, Board of Supervisors Liaison; and Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: June M. Wilmot, Chainuan/ShaNuee District, Richard C. Ours, Opequon District, and Cordell Watt, Back Creek District. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; John A. Bishop, Deputy Director- Transportation; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Lauren Krempa, Planner 1; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. ® CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Vice Chairman Thomas called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Conuiissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for this evening's meeting. MEETING MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Conumissionei Triplett, the minutes of September 5, 2007 were unanimously approved as presented. COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) — 09/27/07 Mtg. Vice Chairman Thomas reported that the DRRS continued their discussions on the conversion of SIC Code classifications in the Zoning Ordinance to the NAISC Code classifications. He said the ERRS studied and agreed upon the B2 Districts and is now ready to move on to other areas. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2118 Minutes of October 3, 2007 -2- • Sign Ordinance Working Group — 10/02/07 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported that the Sign Ordinance Working Group has been meeting every Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. He reported that the working group talked about the number of signs allowed to be posted on a particular property and this issue raised some controversy. Commissioner Unger said questions were raised about the size of posted signs and areas where more than eight businesses are located in one park. He said allowing a larger sign for these particular locations was proposed, to enable visibility from the road. Commissioner Unger said sign heights were also discussed and the conclusion reached was that signs may be at least 25 feet high on B2 -zoned properties; however, the issue still caused controversy because of topography. A proposal was made for sign heights to be measured at the property entrance, so the sign wouldn't be too low. -- ---- - --- - -- Transportation Committee - 09/24/07 Mtg. Commissioner Kriz reported that the Transportation Committee discussed and took action on six items: 1) The Enhancement Grant application for Senseny Road was sent forward to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation for submittal. This grant, in the amount of $1,517,600, has a local match component of 20 %; however, the application process does not obligate the County. Commissioner Kriz provided further explanation about the grant to the Commission. 2) The 2007 Capital Improvement Program was sent forward ® with a recommendation for approval. Commissioner Kriz noted that the list of transportation projects is the same as last year with the addition of the Exit 307 relocation. 3) No work was done on Access Management because the VDOT version will not be available until October 2, 2007. Public continents on the VDOT version will be received on October 22, 2007. 4) The CPPS's Route 277 Triangle Study was mentioned and a member of the Transportation Conunittee will be included in this working group. 5) The Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Activity Update was included in the agenda materials, but not discussed. 6) There was discussion about the need for some ordinance changes regarding entrance spacing and inter - parcel connectors to assist the Planning Department and the Planning Commission before the Access Management Plan is completed; this request will be sent to the Board of Supervisors for their reconunendations. Conservation Easement Authority (CEA) Commissioner Light reported that the CEA is having a fund - raising event at the Museum of the Shenandoah Valley on October 27, 2007 for the education and promotion of the conservation of rural lands in Frederick County. CTIZEN COMMENTS Vice Chairman Thomas called for citizen comments on any item that was not on this evening's agenda. No one came forward to speak. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2119 Minutes of October 3, 2007 -3- PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit 907 -07 of Florence Heflin for an Adult Care Residence at 215 Stafford Drive (Route 1226). The property is identified with P.I.N. 54E -4 -B2 in the Red Bud Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval With Conditions Plarmer Lauren Krempa reported that the proposed conditional use application is for an adult care facility which will take place within the existing structure at 115 Stafford Drive. Ms. Krempa stated that the property is zoned RP (Residential Perfomnance) and convalescent and nursing homes, adult -care residences, and assisted living care facilities are permitted in this zoning district with an approved conditional use permit (CUP). She said the applicant is requesting the ability to operate a small -scale adult care residence consisting of one or two adults at a time. Ms. Krempa said that based on the review agency continents from the Building Official, the staff believes up to five care recipients at one time would be appropriate, provided there is no more than one recipient per bedroom. She noted the Sanitation Authority has made no comments regarding any increased usage of public facilities that would occur as a result of this business. Ms. Krempa said that in an effort to prevent any negative impacts to the su ng properties, the staff is recommmending limiting the hours of visitation to between 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. In addition, staff is recommending that all vehicles should be parked on the 115 Stafford Drive property, due to the narrow streets in the Frederick Heights subdivision. She said the applicant has ample driveway and garage space to accommodate this condition. Ms. Krempa added that the applicant does not intend to employ any additional nursing or care staff to assist with this business; therefore, staff feels the prohibition of any additional employees on the property ® further protects the surrounding property owners from the impacts of the business. Ms. Krempa next read the list of recommended conditions, should the Commission find the use to be appropriate. Ms. Jeanette Heflin and Ms. Florence Heflin, the property omicrs and applicants, were available to answer questions from the Commission. Vice Chairman Thomas asked the applicants if they understood all of the conditions presented by the staff. The Heflins replied that they did. Vice Chairman Thomas called for public continents. No one came forward and Vice Chairman Thomas closed the public continent portion of the hearing. Commissioner Unger questioned the wording of reconunended Condition 45, noting it implied no one was allowed on the property, other than the residents of 215 Stafford Drive. Ms. Krempa said the condition is intended to mean the applicants will not hire any outside help. Ms. Krempa said that both applicants are nurses and they did not feel any outside help would be necessary. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kerr and seconded by Commissioner Molm, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #07 -07 of Florence Heflin for an adult care residence at 215 Stafford Drive (Route 1226) in the Red Bud Magisterial District, with the following conditions: Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2120 Minutes of October 3, 2007 -4- I . The adult care residence facility shall take place entirely inside the existing residential dwelling, located at • 215 Stafford Drive. 2. No more than five occupants shall be allowed on the property for the purpose of the adult care residence at any time. There shall be no more than one care - receiving occupant per bedroom. 3. No signs shall be posted on the property advertising the adult care residence. 4. Visiting hours for the adult care residence shall be limited to between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m, All visitor vehicles should be parked on the property of 215 Stafford Drive. 5. No employees, other than residents of 215 Stafford Drive, are permitted on the property. 6. One business vehicle shall be permitted on the property for the transport of occupants. 7. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new conditional use pen (Note: Commissioners Watt, Ours, and Wilmot were absent from the meeting.) Authorization to Apply for a Virginia Department of Transportation Enhancement Grant to Implement Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements in the Vicinity of Senseny Road Elementary School. • Action — Recommended Approval Deputy Director - Transportation, John A. Bishop, reported that the County Staff has been working to refine an application for a Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Enhancement Grant for the current application cycle. Mr. Bishop explained that erilnancement grants are federal funds awarded by the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) on an amoral basis for improvements to bicycle and pedestrian transportation. He noted this is a grant with a local match component of 2ft however, the application process itself does not obligate Comity funds. Mr. Bishop stated that for this year's application cycle, the staff has recommended an application for enhancements to bicycle and pedestrian transportation in the vicinity of Senseny Road Elementary School. He noted this is a continuation of this project which was awarded $140,000 based upon last year's application. He said the proposed project would add paved multi -use paths to the northern and southern sides of Senseny Road between 1 -81 and the Orrick Commons project. The project would also include unprovements to the crossovers of roadways traversed by the paths and an additional crossover of Senseny Road at Senseny Elementary School. Mr. Bishop continued, stating there were a number of ways Frederick County could meet the required match, including proffers, staff project management, dedicated property or right -of -way, and any other grant funds received by the County. He said it was the staff's intention that either very little or none of the project would be funded out of the County's general funds. Mr. Bishop said the Transportation Committee reviewed this on September 24, 2007 and unanimously reconunended endorsement. i • Vice Chairman Thomas called for public comments at this point in the hearing. No one came forward k d the Vice Chairman closed the public comment portion of the meeting. to spea an g. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2121 Minutes of October 3, 2007 -5- Commissioner Kriz was pleased with the effort Mr. Bishop had put forth to develop last year's • enhancement grant and with the money received. He said if the County receives 20 % -25% of this application, there will be a significant amount of money for the County to make accomplishments in the Senseny Road area. Commissioner Kriz complimented Mr. Bishop for a good job on this application, as well as his efforts seeking other areas for grants. Commissioner Kriz made a motion to endorse the enhancement grant application as presented. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Morris. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously endorse the Virginia Department of Transportation's 2007 -2008 Enhancement Grant Application to Implement Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements in the vicinity of the Senseny Road Elementary School and recommends that the Board of Supervisors provide authorization to apply. (Note: Commissioners Watt, Ours, and Wilmot were absent from the meeting.) An Ordinance to Amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Section 165 -156, Definitions and Word Usage for Single - Family Action — Recommended Approval Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that on September 12, 2007, the Board of is Supervisors reviewed a Public Works Conunittee report which recommended Frederick County adopt a definition for single family. Mr. Lawrence said that because the definition will be placed within the zoning ordinance, it is being presented to the Planning Commission as a public hearing. He noted the Planning Commission's recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors and the Board will consider a larger package assembled by the Public Works Committee. Mr. Lawrence explained the underlying task of the Public Works Committee was to study the occupancy loading of residential structures within the County. Mr. Lawrence proceeded to read the proposed definition for the Commission. Comments from the Planning Camnission included inquiry about adopted or foster children. Mr. Lawrence replied if it is a foster program or if the children are formally adopted, theybecome a part of the family and the two adults living in the home are caring for those children. Vice Chairman Thomas called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Vincent Diem, 137 Woodrow Road, spoke in support of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Section 165 -156, to adopt a definition for single family. Mr. Diem stated that residential over- crowding, excessive occupancy, or any other similar pleases are becoming topics of household and neighborhood concern throughout Northern Virginia and most recently, the northern Shenandoah Valley. He said the citizens within any incorporated municipality in the Commonwealth have a legitimate interest and an inalienable expectation of health, safety, and welfare within neighborhoods and common areas. It was Mr. Diem's opinion that the County was delegated with a sizable portion of this responsibility. He noted a growing concern that over- crowding is a direct threat to health, safety, and welfare of citizens within neighborhoods, as well as the occupants • of the home that is excessively occupied. He said many municipalities have adopted a two -prong approach, realizing that neither the property maintenance code provisions of the Uniform Statewide Building Code, nor the Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2122 Minutes of October 3, 2007 -6- zoning ordinance can be adequately affective alone. Mr. Diem said that recent discussions among the Board of Supervisors and within the Public Works Committee had centered on adopting the applicable provisions of the • property maintenance code. He said he was encouraged that the Planning Commissioh is simultaneously considering adopting this zoning ordinance amendment. He believed the tentative adoption of these provisions provides a crucial first step in preserving quality of life and will only succeed with a partnership of continued involvement from within the residential communities and consistent enforcement efforts from the County staff aimed at resolving the over - crowding concerns. He encouraged the Planning Commission ,'the elected Board of Supervisors, and Comity staff to continue pressing forward in not only identifying the magnitude and impact of residential over- crowding in our neighborhoods, but to consider a variety of alternative resolution efforts as well. Ms. Kathryn Green, 140 Woodrow Road, agreed with the comments made by her neighbor, Mr. Vincent Diem. Ms. Green said last year, she telephoned the County to report a neighbor's home with seven to eight cars in the driveway; she said all the residents were men and this wasn't a family situation. She commented that it seemed to be lowering the quality of life, particularly with late night parties. She said the County personnel told her there was nothing in the County Code to enforce. She thought this might be a circumstance where an owner had purchased a home and rented the home to eight or nine people. Ms. Green encouraged the Commission to consider and adopt this amendment. Mr. Hewitt L. Sisk, Li8 Woodrow Road, spoke in support of die proposed amendment. Mr. Sisk said there are laws in this country that everyone must abide by and his neighborhood was simply asking for the laws to be enforced so that everyone is on an equal balance. No one else came forward to speak and Vice Chairman Thomas closed the public continent portion of the hearing. Vice Chairman Thomas stated this proposed amendment was an effort to place specificity into • the County Code with a satisfactory definition. Commissioner Morris voiced concerns with the proposal. He questioned what the County was trying to fix, how it would be enforced, and under what circumstances would it have meaning. Commissioner Morris asked what criteria will be used to determine whether someone is actually living in a house or simply visiting for an extended time period. He was concerned that in the haste to fix something, the County could, in an exclusionary way, be interfering with honest -to- goodness people trying to survive. Mr. Lawrence replied the staff would need to establish a program before the single- family definition could be enforced. Vice Chairman Thomas added there is little the staff can do without having a definition of single- family; this is the first step in a number of actions that will have to be done. Vice Chairman Thomas said that single - family housing is frequently referred to in the zoning and subdivision ordinances, but the term is not defined. Commissioner Manuel thought the definition needed more study. He gave an example of four widows wanting to share a four - bedroom house or pharmaceutical students at Shenandoah University sharing a four- bedroom house. Commissioner Manuel thought there were other situations that needed to be considered. Other Commissioners believed it was important to include a definition of single - family for the purposes of identifying housing types within the ordinance. They did not believe a definition for single family was an uncommon item to see in a zoning ordinance and the definition was consistent with what many communities would use. Commissioners believed the details of enforcement will be I a critical task for the community to accomplish in a careful and thoughtful way. • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2123 Minutes of October 3, 2007 -7- Commissioner Light made a motion to recommend approval of the proposed amendment. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Mohn, • BE IT RESOLVED, that by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick Comity Code, Chapter 165, Zoning Ordinance, Section 165 -156, Definitions and Word Usage, with the addition of a definition for single - family, as follows: Single - Family — Two (2) or more persons related by blood or marriage occupying a dwelling, living together and maintaining a household, which may include not more than one (1) unrelated person; however, not more than three (3) unrelated persons occupying a dwelling, living together and maintaining a household shall be deemed to constitute a single - family. YES (TO APPROVE) Mohn, Triplett, Kriz, Thomas, Light, Oates, Unger NO: Morris, Manuel (Note: Conunissioners Watt, Ours, and Wilmot were absent from the meeting; Commissioner Kerr was absent for this item.) ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. by a unanimous vote. ® esp ctfullypl /) L. Thomas, Vice R. Lawrence, Secretary is Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2124 Minutes of October 3, 2007