Loading...
PC_11-07-07_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 November 7, 2007. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Shawnee District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Richard C. Ours, 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. Kent, Red Bud District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District ; H. Paige Manuel, Member -At- Large; Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Board of Supervisors Liaison; and Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Director, Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; John A. Bishop, Deputy Director - Transportation; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner, and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA • Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Wilmot announced that Item # 10 on the Commmission's agenda, Rezoning Application # 12 -07 of Opequon Crossing, has been requested to be postponed by the applicant with no time limit. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the Commission unanimously agreed to remove Item # 10 from the agenda. Chairman Wilmot next referred to Item 97 on the Commission's agenda, Rezoning Application #09 -07 of the Clearbrook Property. She said the applicant has already used one opportunit to request a delay of their application, which is the limit. Chairman Wilmot said the Commission will leave this item on the agenda because the Corm ussion will need to take action on the applicant's request to postpone the hearing for 45 days. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for the November 7, 2007 meeting, minus Item # 10. MEETING MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the minutes of September 19, 2007 were unanimously approved as presented. J Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of November 7, 2007 Page 2135 -2- COMMITTEE REPORTS • Conservation Easement Authority (CEA) — 10/27/07 Gala Commissioner Light reported that the CEA held a gala on October 27, 2007 at Glen Burnie at the Museum of the Shenandoah Valley. Commissioner Light reported an excellent presentation by Mr. Doug Rinker on rural community and rural land management. He said between 30 and 40 people attended. Commissioner Light said this was the first fundraiser for the CEA as an organized group and the experience gained will help them with future events. Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) 10/25/07 Mtg. Commissioner Unger reported that the DRRS once again reviewed the sign ordinance in detail and made a few minor changes. He said sign heights will be measured from the entrance into the business; the distance between signs will be increased from 50 feet to 100 feet, and with developments containing several businesses, a sign will be allowed every 1,200 feet. Transportation Committee— 10/22/07 Mtg. Commissioner Kriz reported that the Transportation Committee received a briefing on the progress regarding access management. He reported that the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution generally in support of the VDOT draft of the access management standards, but did express some concerns. The Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) adopted a similar resolution. Conunissionerkriz said the Board directed the Transportation Committee to do no further work on the temporary solutions until after the next legislative session. In addition, Commissioner Kriz reported that the Transportation ConnIttee prioritized the interchange improvements as follows. Exit 307 relocation, Exit 317 improvements, Exit 310 completion, Exit 315 safety improvements, Exit 315 improvement to the ultimate VDOT 1999 plan, and Exit 313 decking and improvement to ultimate design. Commissioner Kriz reported that the MPO adopted the Bicycle and Mobility Plan and the Transportation Planner will begin work on the details. Route 277 Study Commissioner Ours reported that the goals and objectives for the Route 277 Study are being defined. He said the transportation issues are being thoroughly examined by the study group. 11 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2136 Minutes of November 7, 2007 -3- 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 An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, Residential Performance (RP) District, Section 165 -65, Dimensional Requirements. This amendment will allow detached accessory structures on single - family small lots. Action — Recommended Approval Senior Plarmer, Candice E. Perkins, reported that the Planning Staff has had inquiries from members of the public regarding the permissibility of allowing detached accessory buildings on lots that were created under the single - family, small -lot housing type. She said the Zoning Ordinance prohibits detached accessory structures on lots created under this housing type. She noted that within the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District, the single - family, small -lot housing type is the only housing type that does not permit detached accessory structures. Ms. Perkins stated that the ordinance amendment proposed Witt permit this lot type to have one detached accessory structure that does not exceed 150 square feet. • Ms. Perkins reported that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) endorsed this proposed ordinance amendment at their meeting of July 26, 2007. The proposed text amendment was also discussed and supported by the Planning Commission on September 5, 2006. Cormnissioner Kriz asked if homeowners associations (HOAs) mould still have the ability to place a prohibition against detached accessory structures in their bylaws, if they desired to do so, if this amendment was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Ms. Perkins replied yes. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments; however, no one came forward to speak. Chairman Wilmot suggested that a communication received from Mr. and Mrs. Mickey Poole regarding their feelings on this ordinance change be included in the record. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the Commission unanimously voted to add this communication to the minutes of the meeting, as follows: October 27, 2007 TO: Members of the Frederick County Planning Commission TO: Members of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors We would like to go on record in opposition to the proposed change to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Article VI, Residential Performance District, Chapter 165 -65, Dimensional Requirements. Currently, Section 165- 65F(4) does not permit any detached accessory buildings on lots within a single- family, small -lot subdivision. However, if this amendment passes, a single freestanding or detached accessory structure (i.e., • storage shed, pergola, gazebo, arbor, dog house, greenhouse, etc.) would be permitted in the rear yard of lots of these subdivisions, subject to certain size criteria. I Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2137 Minutes of November 7, 2007 ZE • We live in a new single- family, small -lot subdivision called Shenandoah located at Lake Frederick. The lots in our development are too small to accommodate any type of free standing or detached accessory structure without causing a severe visual impact on adjacent lots. That visual impact will detract from the harmonious look and feel to each individual neighborhood, thereby impairing the overall ambiance of the community as a whole. The impact of a single free standing or detached accessory structure will fall on those homeowners who back up to other homeowners and who may be forced to look at the freestanding storage shed, pergola, gazebo, arbor, dog house, greenhouse, etc. from their yards, decks, patios, and porches. Thank you for considering our comments and concern. Please have our comments read into the record for the November 7 Planning Commission public hearing and for the upcoming Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Sincerely, Mickey and Charlotte Poole Lot #29, Shenandoah, 105 Merganser Court Lake Frederick, VA 22630 -2062 540- 869 -6424 Chairman Wilmot nest closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Conmrissioner Thomas reported significant discussion of this matter at meetings of the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS). He said the Subcommittee did not see any negative aspects of this amendment and viewed this as bringing this one particular section in conformance with • the remainder of the ordinance. Commissioner Thomas next made a motion to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amendment. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours and was unanhnously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, Residential Performance (RP) District, Section 165 -65, Dimensional Requirements. This amendment will allow detached accessory structures on single - family small lots. An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 165- 82(C), District Use Regulations. This amendment will allow grocery and food stores in the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with a size restriction. Action — Recommended Approval Commissioner Oates said he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this item, due to a potential conflict of interest. Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that this amendment pertains to the addition of grocery stores to the permitted uses in the B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District. She said the Zoning Ordinance permits SIC 54 (food stores) in the B 1 (Neighborhood Business) District and the B2 (Business General) District. SIC 54 as a whole would permit grocery stores, fruit and vegetable markets, meat and fish • markets, candy confectionary stores, dairy product stores, retail bakeries, and miscellaneous food stores. Ms. Perkins noted that this proposed text amendment would permit only SIC 54 11, which is grocery stores, in the B3 (Business General) Zoning District and would have a supplementary section which would limit the building Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2138 Minutes of November 7, 2007 -5- square footage for the retail sales of grocery or food products to 10,000 square feet, excluding areas for storage • and warehousing of products. She explained that this size limitation would permit small, convenient -type stores serving surrounding residents, but would preclude larger operations from locating to the B3 District. Ms. Perkins said the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) considered and endorsed this proposed amendment at their meeting on July 26, 2007. The Planning Commission reviewed and discussed this item at their meeting of September 5, 2007. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments regarding this proposed change to the Zoning Ordinance. No one came forward and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Conunissioner Thomas stated that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) had considerable discussion of this proposed amendment. He stated that the DRRS believed this amendment would provide a good service with limited scope for those who work within a B3 area or surround a B3 area. Upon motion made by Conunissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 165- 82(C), District Use Regulations. This amendment will allow grocery and food stores in the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with a size restriction. (Note: Commissioner Oates abstained from voting.) • Rezoning Application 409 -07 of Clearbrook Property, submitted by German Engineering, to rezone 14.53 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business General) District, with proffers, for commercial uses. The property is located on the west side of Route 11, approximately 2,200 feet north of Hopewell Road (Interstate Exit 321) and south of Cedar Hill Road (Rt. 671). The property is further identified with P.I.N. 33 -A -125 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Tabled for 45 Days Commissioner Oates abstained from all discussion and voting on this item, due to a potential conflict of interest. Chairman Wilmot stated that the applicant has already used one opportunity to request a delay of their rezoning application. She said the applicant has once again requested that their item be removed from the agenda in order to allow time for further refinement of their application. Chairman Wilmot said that because of the applicant's previous request, the Commission will need to approve the applicant's second request. She suggested the Conmrission consider a 45 -day postponement. A motion was made by Commissioner Light to postpone Rezoning Application #09 -07 of Clearbrook Property for 45 days. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours. • There was some discussion by the Commission members as to whether the 90 -day time limit would start on this application from the first or second postponement request. Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, stated that the Commission is endorsing a request by the applicant for postponement and as part of that Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2139 Minutes of November 7, 2007 a • endorsement, the applicant is waiving any time considerations at this point. It was clarified that the 90 -day time limit would not start until this application is considered by the Commission at their first meeting in January. Mr. Claus Bader, P.E., of German Engineering, PLC, the applicant's representative, said that they would like additional time to work out all of the transportation issues with VDOT. Mr. Bader had no problems with a postponement for 45 days until the Commission's first meeting in January. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT by a unanimous vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby table for 45 days Rezoning Application 909 -07 of the Clearbrook Property, submitted by German Engineering, to rezone 14.53 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business General) District, with proffers, for commercial uses. (Note: Commissioner Oates abstained from voting.) Rezoning Application 911 -07 of 1932 Senseny Road Pharmacy, submitted by Painter- Lewis, PLC, to rezone 2.2 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (Business General) District, with proffers, for a pharmacy. The properties are located at 1932 Senseny Road (Rt. 657), at the intersection with Greenwood Road (Rt. 656). The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s 55 -A -196 and 65A -2 -1 in the Red Bud Magisterial District. Action — Tabled for 45 Days Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that this application is to rezone 2.2 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (Business General) District, with proffers, specifically for a pharmacy with a drive - through window. The site is located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA); however, it is not within the limits of any small -area land use plan. He said the Comprehensive Policy Plan does call for neighborhood business uses in the vicinity of residential areas and given this key intersection of Senseny Road and Greenwood Road and the existing 132 -zoned properties at this intersection, this commercial development would be consistent with the Plan. Mr. Ruddy noted that the business design standards in the Comprehensive Policy Plan are relevant to this application, including landscaping, screening of adjoining uses, and controlling the number, size, and location of signs. Mr. Ruddy stated that the applicant is implementing the County's Eastern Road Plan. On Senseny Road, one additional lane is being provided to achieve an ultimate four -lane section of Senseny Road. Also provided is a raised median across the front of the property which provides additional access management benefits. He said that Greenwood Road is also being improved to standards identified in the Comprehensive Plan; however, the improvements do not fully address the turning movements identified in the applicant's Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Mr. Ruddy next reviewed the impacts associated with this request. Regarding the full commercial entrance proposed on Greenwood Road, he said the possibility exists for an insufficient left -turn stacking area on the northbound Greenwood turning movement onto Senseny Road. He explained that the parcel lacks sufficient depth to allow for adequate right -of -way dedication to elevate the stacking situation. As a result, the applicant has proffered to provide $25,000 for future transportation improvements within the Senseny Road (Rt. 657) and Greenwood Road (Rt. 656) right -of -ways. • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2140 Minutes of November 7, 2007 -7- Mr. Ruddy reviewed the design standards proffered by the applicant. He said the applicant has • provided for a single monument sign with a maximum proffered height of 20 feet; however, the draft sign ordinance amendments currently being studied may restrict the height of monument signs along collector roads to 15 feet. The applicant should seek consistency with the proposed ordinance. In conclusion, Mr. Ruddy stated that the rezoning application is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan and, in particular, the long -range transportation elements of the plan. However, careful consideration should be given to the impacts generated by this request, specifically, the transportation impacts as they pertain to Greenwood Road and its intersection with Senseny Road. Commissioner Manuel suggested the possibility of re- orienting the structure on the property to mitigate the vehicle stacking problem. Mr. Ruddy said he was familiar with potential layouts, but the stacking remained a problem. Mr. Ruddy said the issue is a combination of the left -turn movements into the site and the left -turn movements heading westbound from Greenwood Road onto Senseny Road. Mr. John Lewis of Painter- Lewis, P.L.C:, representing the project, stated that results of the TIA under current conditions determined a Level of Service (LOS) B -C. He said the TIA results under 2010 conditions were based on traffic projections for pending projects already approved by Frederick County, such as the Orrick development and others, not currently started. He said when these projects come on line, traffic will be doubled and LOS will be C -F under the current lane configuration. He stated that with the addition of the pharmacy's 1,140 trips to the 2010 background traffic trips, the TIA determined that the LOS remains the same with or without the pharmacy. Mr. Lewis explained that the 1,140 trips used was a conservative figure because the proposed pharmacy takes its trips from existing traffic and is not a destination point. Mr. Lewis said the problem identified by the TIA is when the left turn stacks northbound on Greenwood, it stacks through the exit during peak -hour traffic. Mr. Lewis next went over the needed improvements identified by the TIA to obtain a • LOS B -C. He said the applicant's proffered transportation improvements include: 1) left -tum lane southbound into the site; 2) left -turn lane northbound onto Senseny Road; 3) right -turn northbound onto Senseny Road; 4) right -tum lane eastbound into the site restricted to a right -in, right -out only with a raised median. Regarding the design and sign standards, Mr. Lewis commented that they incorporated identical language from the Orrick application into their proffers and anticipate something very similar as far as architectural finishes and signage as what was approved with the Orrick application. Commissioner Mohn was interested in the applicant's renditions of the arclutectural appearance of the structure. He said the Orrick Commons project shared renderings and made a commitment to elevate their design standards in this neighborhood with the use of brick facades. Commissioner Mohn believed this particular location is even more prominent in this neighborhood and more visible to existing residences. He asked Mr. Lewis if the applicant had any interest or willingness to pursue a continuation of the architectural treatments that were used with Orrick Commons. Commissioner Morris raised the issue of pedestrian access to adjacent lots across Senseny Road, since this lot was within the neighborhood design circle of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Ms. Joanne Leonardis, Red Bud District, also raised the issue of pedestrian and bicycle mobility to the pharmacy and if cross walks would be available. She believed every rezoning was an opportunity to provide for pedestrians. Ms. Leonardis also inquired about the new urbanism initiative and if there was any consideration of placing the building closer to the road with parking in the rear. She also inquired about • landscaping. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2141 Minutes of November 7, 2007 15:2 Ms. Kathy Kerns, Shawnee District, said the proposed location of the pharmacy entrance will be directly across from her property and driveway and she will be directly impacted. Ms. Kerns was concerned about vehicle lights and parking lot lighting shining into her home and on her property. She said her mailbox was located across the street from her house, next to the pharmacy entrance. She described the traffic congestion at all hours of the day and the safety issue to get her mail. Ms. Kerns inquired about the proposed hours of operation. She commented that all of the neighborhood residences are single -story structures and all of the CVS pharmacies in Winchester appear to be two -story structures. Ms. Gillian Greenfield, a resident of Senseny Glen, commented that getting across town to the nearest pharmacy is inconvenient because of the terrible traffic congestion on Greenwood Road to Route 7 and from Route 7 to Berryville Avenue. Ms. Greenfield said it seemed the County was trying to have these mixed -use areas within a nucleus where residents could live, work, and shop in order to avoid all of the traffic. She believed this application for the Senseny Road Pharmacy fits in perfectly with what the County is trying to achieve. She was in favor of this application. Mr. John Fox, the owner of Greenwood Grocery and Deli, located at the corner of Greenwood and Senseny Roads, directly across the road from the proposed project, had questions on the proposed median and how it will affect his main entrance and parking. He asked if left -turn traffic will be able to access his store or if the proposed median would block this entrance. Mr. Lewis returned to the podium to address the issues raised. Mr. Lewis recognized that crossing five lanes on Senseny Road will be difficult for pedestrians. He said he will be working with the staff and VDOT to see what could be done in this area to assist pedestrians, whether it is signalization adjustment or a median refuge. Regarding the suggestion about moving the building closer to the front with parking in the rear, Mr. Lewis said the configuration would not work for this use. He said there would be a problem mixing services, ® such as deliveries and trash removal with the drive- through and patron parking. In addition, he mentioned the size of the building versus the size of the lot. He noted that CVS pharmacies do fairly extensive landscaping on their sites; he pointed out two areas that will have a 25 -foot green space buffer with an opaque fence, as well as landscaping. Regarding the traffic congestion, he said the pharmacy is making a significant investment in transportation improvements here to help with the flow of traffic. Mr. Lewis said he would be happy to meet with Mrs. Kerns to work on a solution to the problem of vehicle headlights shining into her home. Regarding access to the Greenwood Grocery and Deli, Mr. Lewis said vehicles traveling eastbound will not be'able to turn into the grocery; he said vehicles would have to come up Greenwood Road and into the site. Mr. Lewis said he would review this situation further with VDOT at the site plan stage. Commissioner Light commented there will be new construction within the roadways on three sides of this project. He questioned whether painted pedestrian crosswalks and signals and expanded sidewalks had been incorporated into the transportation plan for this area. Mr. Ruddy said that implementation of the items mentioned are sought as new projects conic on line. He said the Comprehensive Policy Plan illustrates an idealized intersection design, which includes bicycle paths, sidewalks, crossovers, etc. Mr. Ruddy said that with new development, there is an opportunity to improve design standards, both locally and through the State. He said presently, there is greater recognition and ability to get those improvements; however, historically, it is not something that was achievable through County ordinances and Stale requirements. Commissioner Light wanted to know if the capability to get these items exists today. Mr. Ruddy replied the ability to do so is in the Comprehensive Policy Plan and rezoning; and, in addition, the State has also recently been improving their ability to require and implement pedestrian accommodations. He said every transportation project currently moving forward should have pedestrian accommodations as a priority to that improvement and he saw no reason why the improvements to this intersection would not respect that. Commissioner Light inquired if this particular property and rezoning would be accountable for all of the pedestrian crossing traffic implementations. Mr. Ruddy said the • applicant should evaluate what is appropriate given their particular development Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2142 Minutes of November 7, 2007 Mr. Lloyd Ingram came forward at the Commission's request. Mr. Ingram said the pharmacy has offered to donate property for the right -of -way; however, the grocery across the street has no additional right - of -way available for sidewalks at this time. He said the property to the west has been rezoned to commercial, but the sidewalk would have to be within the State's right -of -way in order to be maintained by VDOT. Mr. Ingram commented that pedestrian access has increasingly become a higher priority and more regulations are going through that require these issues to be addressed. There is no ability, however, to force a developer to go off their site to create walkways. Since VDOT's primary concern was the stacking distance, Commissioner Oates made the suggestion that the Commission approve the rezoning with the condition, as the property to the south develops and inter - parcel connectors are constructed, that the applicant close off the Greenwood Road entrance and utilize another one that's safer. Mr. Ingram specified that the p.m. peak hour was the issue and the remainder of the day should not be a problem. Mr. Ingram said VDOT preferred the transition lanes to be just north of the entrance for safety reasons. Commission members agreed the only way to resolve the problem is to wait until additional acreage to the south becomes available and consolidate or develop with this site on the comer to move the entrance further back. Commissioner Thomas commented this was a low- intensity business and would provide a neighborhood service. He thought it provided what was intended by the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Commissioner Thomas noted that the applicant was putting forth considerable effort to improve the transportation problems at this location, particularly with the expansion of the intersections, the right -in, right - out, and the median strip. Commissioner Mohn said that while he agreed with the transportation rationale, the neighborhood was probably going to have to contend with some imperfect issues, particularly on Greenwood • Road. Commissioner Molm stated that given the location and the setting within an established neighborhood, he felt the applicant could go further in providing some comfort to the community in terms of the appearance of this site. He didn't think the residents needed to be compelled to accept the "off- the - shelf' architecture of a chain pharmacy. Commissioner Mohn felt the Commission would be remiss if they did not ask for additional dialogue regarding the structure's appearance and how it will fit onto this site. He said he was in favor of the use, but believed more attention was needed to the way this site will be designed in terms of layout and the appearance of the building; he suggested the applicant submit some type of rendering. Commissioner Oates commented that the extreme eastern side of this property ties into the Orrick site. He said there could possibly be a crosswalk at the far eastern end of this property, which might be safer than trying to accommodate something up in the intersection itself. Commissioner Mohn made a motion to table the rezoning to allow the applicant an opportunity to provide the Planning Commission with additional information concerning building design and site layout and to include additional information on pedestrian connectivity. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kerr. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby table Rezoning Application # 11 -07 of 1932 Senseny Road Pharmacy, submitted by Painter- Lewis, PLC, to rezone 2.2 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (Business General) District, with proffers, for a pharmacy at 1932 Senseny Road (Rt. 657), to allow the applicant an opportunity to provide the Planning Commission with additional information concerning building design and site layout and to include additional information on pedestrian connectivity. • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2143 Minutes of November 7, 2007 -10- The majority vote was as follows: YES (TO TABLE) Mohn, Kerr, Triplett, Kriz, Ours, Wilmot, Light, Oates, Morris, Manuel, Watt, Unger NO: Thomas Rezoning Application 908 -07 of Artillery Business Center, submitted by Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, to rezone 58.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to MI (Light Industrial) District, with proffers, for office and warehouse uses. The property is located east and adjacent to Shady Elm Road, approximately 1,500 feet south of Route 37. The property is further identified with P.I.N. 75 -A -1 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Action — Tabled for 45 Days Commissioner Manuel abstained from all discussion and voting on this rezoning application, due to a possible conflict of interest. Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that this property is within the Comity's Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) and it is within the Southern Frederick Land Use Plan. Mr. Ruddy said both the Southern Frederick Land Use Plan and the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan designate this area for industrial land use and recognizes the desire to provide for industrial uses along the CSX Railroad. Mr. Ruddy said the proposed M1 (Light Industrial) rezoning request is consistent with the land use • designation of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. He noted that the County's Eastern Road Plan shows an east -west major collector road in this location, running from Route 1 I South over to Shady Elm Road! In addition, Shady Elm Road, along the front of the property, is identified as an improved major collector road. Furthermore, the County's Eastern Road Plan defines those particular road improvements as an urban section and the proposed commercial and industrial development should only occur if impacted roads function at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better. Mr. Ruddy pointed out that this application does not achieve a LOS "C" or,better on roads and intersections studied in the application's Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). Mr. Ruddy reported that the property is the site of a historical house, the Route 651 House, dating from circa 1880 -1910. The HRAB (Historical Resources Advisory Board) suggested the completion of an archeological survey and documentation of the property, and the completion of a Phase I archeological survey of the site to determine the presence of any battlefield artifacts on the property. Mr. Ruddy continued by reviewing with the Commission the traffic impacts associated with the rezoning and the applicant's transportation program. Mr. Ruddy 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 Plan. Mr. Ruddy pointed out that a new proffer package was submitted by the applicant this evening. While those new proffers and improvements do not fully satisfy and address the impacts identified in the TIA, through a fair amount of collaboration, coordination, and effort to provide a consensus, it moves this plan forward from what was originally submitted. Mr. Ruddy proceeded to review the changes with the Commission. Mr. Patrick Sowers, with Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates (PHR&A), Inc., was representing the • Artillery Business Center project. Mr. Sowers stated that all three parties, VDOT, the Planning Staff, and the applicant, are in agreement with the revised proffer from a transportation standpoint. Mr. Sowers said the proffers address two separate scenarios: Scenario A, assumes the connection from Shady Elm to Route I 1 is not Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2144 Minutes of November 7, 2007 -11- in place and has traffic impacts from Shady Elm up to Apple Valley Road and eventually out to Route 11; and Scenario B, assumes the connection from Shady Elm through Renaissance Commercial Center is already in place. He said they have tried to blend both transportation scenarios to create a proffer package that both enhances the Eastern Road Plan and constructs a minimum of 1100 feet of the roadway as a two -lane section from points A to B as shown on die Generalized Development Plan (GDP). In addition, should the future bridge over the railroad track be a long -term plan and take longer to implement than hoped, there's still mechanisms within the proffers to mitigate impacts to intersections, if Scenario A ends up being the more long -term scenario. Mr. Sowers said that another issue raised was the pedestrian/ bicycle accommodations. He said per the existing Subdivision Ordinance, any proposed major collector roadways as identified by the Comprehensive Policy Plan, which would include the roadway from A to B, has to provide pedestrian accommodations. In addition, there is a pending subdivision ordinance amendment to require the same pedestrian accommodations along existing major collectors, which would apply to Shady Elm Road. Mr. Sowers next addressed the comments from the HRAB. He said roughly one -third of the property is within the study area for the First Kernstowm Battlefield. Recognizing the property is well outside of the core area, he did not believe anything of significant benefit to the Comity would be found on the property. Rather than spend the money on a Phase I Archeological Study, he believed there would be more benefit to historic resources by applying $5,000 for general improvements at Star Fort. Chairman Wilmot next called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Dr. James Sluss, a resident at 750 Shady Elm Road in Hedgebrook Hills subdivision, wanted to • express his extreme apprehension and disapproval of the proposed rezoning. Mr. Sluss said he was opposed for three main reasons. He said allowing commercial areas to encroach on residential would negatively affect the aesthetics and the quality of life of his neighborhood. He was concerned for the safety of his children and the neighborhood children, especially with delivery trucks on the same road with mini -vans and buses. And third, he was concerned the adjacent industrial zoning would devalue his home as well as his neighbors' homes. He noted that houses in Hedgebrook Hills and Shady Elm Acres were valued at $500,000 to $700,000. He added that this rezoning would set a precedent for further industrial rezoning on vacant land in the area. Ms. Liz Hunter, a resident of Hockinan Court, off Shady Elm, in the Hedgebrook Hills subdivision, was opposed to the proposed rezoning. Ms. Hunter was concerned the industrial zoning would devalue the homes in her neighborhood. She expressed concern about setting a precedent for further industrial rezoning, particularly on the vacant Carbaugh property. Ms. Hunter stated that the mix of commercial and industrial uses with residential was unappealing and would affect her family's quality of life. She was concerned for the safety of neighborhood children and she was concerned about the increased traffic on local roads. Ms. Hunter commented that at a minimum, efforts should be made to buffer the residential development from the industrial uses. Mr. Darrell Habron, a resident at 188 Hockman Court in Hedgebrook Hills, was opposed to the rezoning and he expressed a number of concerns about existing and future road conditions. Be said that local roads could not handle the increased traffic industrial development would generate. Mr. Habron said Springdale was not wide enough for two vehicles to pass each other; he asked who would pay for the traffic signal at the corner of Springdale and Route 11; he questioned who would benefit the most from the proposed bridge over the railroad tracks; he also questioned how the applicant could proffer a road that would go onto another person's property. 11 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2145 Minutes of November 7, 2007 -12— Ms. Joanne Leonardis, Red Bud District, agreed with the points made by the previous speakers. Ms. Leonardis agreed that property values, safety, and transportation were extremely important; however, she believed this was a great opportunity to make this an aesthetically pleasing corridor. She suggested large berms, lots of landscaping, and pedestrian mobility be incorporated to make this area livable for the residents. Ms. Donna Diaz said that her property borders the Carbaugh Farm. Ms. Diaz said she contacted the County Planning Department before she purchased her property about one year ago. She said she was told the industrial zoning would only come down to a certain point because of all the residential. She agreed that Springdale was not wide enough for two vehicles to pass. Ms. Diaz said a significant number of tractor trailer trucks travel in front of her property and down onto Springdale, instead of going out to Route 11. Mr. Ben Montgomery, a partner in Prosperity Properties located on Prosperity Drive, said he was in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Montgomery said Springdale was an awful road and a new connector was needed coming across there; he thought this rezoning was the answer for that new connector. He said he would be pleased when there is a satisfactory road going through this entire area. Mr. Montgomery believed the whole area fit with industrial zoning, particularly with VDOT's long -range plans. Mr. James Sluss returned to the podium and stated that he thought the planned connector would only increase the traffic on Route 11. He said it would not connect to the bypass and would make a bad situation even worse. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public continent portion of the hearing. Mr. Ronald Mislowski, also with Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates (PHR &A), Inc., came • forward to address some of the transportation issues. Mr. Mislowski said initially, their efforts on the original proffer concentrated on the east -west connector, particularly with design and coordination with CXS on the bridge. However, VDOT had some immediate concerns and that is how the $200,000 signalization agreement came into focus. Mr. Mislowski said they still contributed $25,000 towards the east -west connector. He said they were not implying that this amount of money will build the bridge, but they wanted to contribute their share towards the cast -west connector while still addressing the short -terns goals of VDOT. Mr. Sowers returned to the podium to address some of the comments and concerns raised. Mr. Sowers talked about Frederick County's need for additional M I property to help fund the tax base. He addressed comments made about proposed future roads going across property boundaries; he addressed the long -term traffic impacts on Springdale Road. Mr. Sowers said the applicant is willing to provide pedestrian accommodations and has street trees along the proposed collector roadway, as well as the corridor for Shady Elm Road, to improve aesthetics along the corridor. In conclusion, Mr. Sowers stated that they were in accordance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; they had an agreement from the Planning Staff and VDOT on the transportation scenario, they were in accordance with the Long -Range Land Use Plan, and they were incorporating the Eastern Road Plan in recognition of the Shady Elm/ Route I I connector. Mr. John Bishop, Deputy Director- Transportation, spoke regarding the East -West Connector Road between Route I I and Shady Elm Road. He also explained the long -term goals about what is expected to develop over a significant amount of time. Commissioner Light talked about development from Apple Valley Road down Shady Ehu Road South. He said with each new rezoning, there are proffers for right -of -way donation; however, there are no proffers for improving road base or width on Shady Elm Road. Mr. Bishop replied there was a proffer to improve • northbound Shady Elm to add an additional northbound lane, solely on the property, and 40 feet of right -of -way. Mr. Bishop said turn lanes associated with future entrances would be addressed at the site plan stage. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2146 Minutes of November 7, 2007 -13- • Conmaissioner Thomas suggested that this development, along with the Carbaugh property, improve the entire length of Shady Elm Road because the opposite side of Shady Elm Road is already developed and will not change. Commissioner Thomas did not think the proposed rezoning package was complete enough for him to feel comfortable voting this evening. He said the transportation proffers needed additional work and were not at the point they needed to be. Commissioner Thomas said there were ways this area could be developed into an attractive industrial area and be compatible with the surrounding residential community. He suggested segregating the sidewalks from the industrial area. In addition, he said he disliked receiving revised proffers on the same day the Commission needed to vote on an application. He also did not prefer to see an industrial development with steel- framed structures and metal exteriors; he thought there should be something to address the standard of appearance. He commented there were a number of things that could be incorporated into the application package to raise it to a higher level. Commissioner Kriz agreed there could be ways to make the industrial areas compatible with the residential uses across the street by utilizing berms, expanded buffers, and landscaping. Commissioncr Kriz was not pleased with receiving revised proffers on the evening of the public hearing because it did not give the Commission sufficient time to review them. He believed the application needed to be postponed because the revised proffers were just received. Commissioner Unger asked the VDOT representative, Mr. Lloyd Ingram, what Level of Service (LOS) could be expected when this project is built out. Mr. Ingram replied there should be a LOS "C," if the connector is built. Commissioner Oates commented that last year, when the Eastern Road Plan was adopted, it • provided cross sections of a UD4, a rural two -lane, and required right -of -way. He said the Eastern Road Plan calls for this road to be a UD4 and the applicant is offering something less. Commissioner Oates said in the future, applicants seeking to do something different should be required to come in beforehand and request a change in the Eastern Road Plan. Mr. Mislowski replied that the rural section was not proffered lightly; he said they reviewed this with VDOT to make sure VDOT supported the rural section because it was easier to maintain, and easier to widen in the future; he said it will be more expensive to change the road in the future, if curb and gutter is put in now. Mr. Mislowski said this is an industrial area and trucks will be running up over the curbs and increasing the maintenance costs. In addition, he stated that recent industrial rezoning applications have set a standard for monetary proffer amounts. Mr. Mislowski said this is a 58 -acre rezoning that is proffering $200,000 for a traffic signal, $25,000 for off -site improvements to roadways. $5,000 for Star Fort, and constructing 1100 feet of roadway. He believed the monetary proffers were far in excess of any of the other recently- approved rezonings on a per -acre basis. Chairman Wilmot asked Mr. Mislowski what he envisioned for this site. Mr. Mislowski said he envisioned smaller buildings sharing access on the new connector road with a couple entrances on Shady Elm Road; he said one of the proffers restricts access to only four roads. Mr. Mislowski said there will be shared entrances to properties within the park and if another internal road is needed for future subdivision, it is proffered to be built to VDOT standards. Commissioner Kerr, who is the Planning Commission's Liaison to the Economic Development Commission (EDC), said Frederick County has a severe lack of available M 1 (Industrial Limited) land. He said that while distribution centers are a needed component of any connnunky, care needs to be exercised as to where • they are allowed. Commissioner Kerr said the County needs to maximize its M1 -zoned land for uses that are high -tax generators, which distribution is not He said his greatest fear is the County willIend up with a large distribution center which will also have higher traffic. On the other hand, he thought the applicant had offered to Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2147 Minutes of November 7, 2007 -14- pay their fair share, he recognized the considerable negotiation and compromise made with all parties. • Commissioner Unger made a motion to table the rezoning application for 45 days, due to the revised proffers being received the day of the hearing and to give the applicant more time to enhance the application package by addressing the Commission's concerns. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz. BE IT RESOLVED, THAT by a unanimously vote, the Frederick County Planning Conunission does hereby table for 45 days Rezoning Application #08 -07 of Artillery Business Center, submitted by Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates (PHR &A), Inc., to rezone 58.7 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to Ml (Light Industrial) District, with proffers, for office and warehouse uses, in order to provide the applicant additional time to enhance the rezoning application package and to give the Planning Commission time to review the revised proffers. (Note. Conunissioner Manuel abstained from voting.) OTHER PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS With the start of a new year approaching, Chairman Wilmot commented there were two items the Commission may want to think about putting in the bylaws. She said one is the issue of getting revised proffers between the time of agenda distribution and the public hearing meeting, so the Commission can be fully prepared ® and understand what is being presented. The second item is the 45 -day postponement. She suggested for the purposes of moving into the next year, the Commission carry forward with the Bylaws and the Rules and Responsibilities with one exception, which is a typographical error in the section dealing with motions. She said this will provide the Commission with 30 advisory days. The Plamning Commission agreed with this suggestion. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, k( ,(�:jwv� Wilmot, Chairman Eric 4. Lawrence, Secretary 0 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2148 Minutes of November 7, 2007