PC_05-07-08_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 May 7, 2008.
PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon
District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud
District, Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; Richard Ruckman, Stonewall District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek
District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel,
Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Gary Lofton,
Board of Supervisors Liaison; and Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel.
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R Lawrence, Planning Director, Mark R Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision
Administrator; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk.
CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA
• Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Upon motion made by Commissioner
Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for the
May 7, 2008 meeting.
MINUTES
Upon motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the meeting
minutes of March 19, 2008 were unanimously approved as presented.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) — 04/24/08 Mtg.
Commissioner Thomas reported that the DRRS discussed revisions to Section 165 -58 Age -
Restricted, Multi- Family Housing. Commissioner Thomas said the revisions will be refined more and it will be
forwarded to the Planning Commission for discussion. He said the DRRS also discussed revisions to Section
165 -26 Accessory Uses, which was basically a clean -up of terms and definitions.
•
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2241
Minutes of May 7, 2008
-2-
• Transportation Committee — 04/28/08 Mtg.
Commissioner Kriz reported on the following items discussed from the Transportation
Committee: 1) Updated Draft of the Secondary Street Acceptance Requirements; 2) Secondary Road Project
Prioritization; 3) Draft of the County's TIA Standards; 4) Installation of red -light cameras at designated
intersections in the county; 5) Update of the MPO; 6) Citizen request to widen the single -lane bridge over the
Opequon on Old Charlestown Road; and, 7) Intersection improvements at White Oak and Tasker Roads.
Conservation Easement Authority (CEA) — 04/24/08 Mtg.
Commissioner Watt reported that the CEA had a guest speaker, Mr. William Funk of
Conservation Partners, LLC, a professional advisory firm based in Lexington, Virginia. Commissioner Watt said
that Conservation Partners, LLC consults with Virginia landowners throughout the process of donating
conservation easements and preparing and registering land preservation tax credits. He said since its founding,
Conservation Partners, LLC have helped to protect approximately 40,000 acres of farms, forests, and other open
space in Virginia. In addition, the CEA received an update on the Snapp Property application, located near
Marlboro; the property owners are considering another easement.
• Sanitation Authority (SA) — 04/22/08 Mtg.
Commissioner Unger reported that the SA's auditors provided information on areas needing
improvement. In addition, Commissioner Unger reported on the following items: Rainfall for March was up at
2.7 inches, which is close to average, and flows were good at the plants; H.P. Hood experienced some problems
with their system, which resulted in the SA's systems working harder and measures are being taken to correct
this; there continues to be a ten -inch deficit in groundwater and the SA is hoping for above average summer
rainfall; bids have been awarded to Synder Environmentalists for a water main to the Parkins Mill Plant and a Red
Bud force main; the number of new hookups is expected to be down this year; average annual hook -ups generally
range between 400 -500 and the SA is hoping to get at least 300 this year.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments on any agenda item that was not either a public
hearing or a public meeting. Chairman Wilmot announced there were two Commission discussion items
pertaining to proposed ordinance amendments dealing with rural preservation requirements and a new business
overlay district. She announced that now would be the appropriate time for citizen comments on either of those
two discussion items. The following persons came forward to speak:
• Mr. John Goode, Stonewall District, stepped forward to speak about the County's Rural Areas
Ordinance, scheduled for discussion later on this evening's agenda. Mr. Goode recalled a coupleyears ago, when
he, Mr. Robert Carpenter, Ms. Margaret Douglas, Mr. Kenneth Stiles, and others did considerable work studying
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2242
Minutes of May 7, 2008
-3-
the rural ordinance, particularly to save open space. .After that effort, circumstances occurred and then the
• momentum for the project died. Mr. Goode said if it was the Commission's intention to slightly modify the
ordinance to just not waste time on it; however, if the Commission really wants to make a better job of rural area
development, he urged the Commission to conduct a comprehensive study, pick up where the committee left off,
and address several issues. Mr. Goode said the extra lot seems to be a concern for some people, even though it
has been policy for some 15 years. He felt the elimination of the extra lot when somebody tries to preserve the
rural area seems to be petty, rather than being significant. The second issue he noticed was the 40% requirement
for the reserve area was proposed to be bumped up to 60 %, but he did not see a corresponding reduction in the
minimum lot size. Mr. Goode said he would suggest a reduction in the minimum lot size, which is something the
conunittee talked about. Lastly, he said the committee raised the issue of community systems, which could be
very beneficial for the environment and allow the clustering of homes on much smaller lots, saving significant
amounts of open space that would be meaningful to the community in the future. Mr. Goode recommended that if
a review was imminent, the old committee was willing to help to do it in a comprehensive way. However, he said
if the Commission and Board were only going to tinker with the ordinance, he recommended that the Commission
simply let it fall back into the black hole it fell into previously.
Mr. Mike Perry, President of the Top of Virginia (TOV) Building Association, said the TOV
Building Association would like to go on record with their concurrence of the DRRS's recommendations for the
Rural Preservation Ordinance. Mr. Perry agreed with Mr. Goode to either leave the ordinance the way it is, or
look at the whole ordinance comprehensively, particularly the lot sizes. Mr. Perry said the TOV Building
Association would also prefer. to continue the policy of not counting the preservation lot towards density. He said
the TOV Building Association believes the Rural Preservation Ordinance is a good alternative land - planning too]
for Frederick County.
• Mr. Claus Bader, Red Bud Run District Representative on the DRRS, stated that he has been on
the DRRS for a very long time and the subject of changing rural preservation development generated one of the
quickest reactions he has seen for not changing the ordinance. Mr. Bader said if the ordinance goes to a 60%
reserve, the result will be the end of rural preservation subdivisions in the County. He believed it would result in
a very poor planning tool.
Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, with Greenway Engineering, came forward to speak about the Commission's
discussion item on the Business Overlay District. With regard to the provision of a new business overlay district,
Mr. Wyatt believed the Commission and staff were on to a good idea with this. He said a considerable amount of
time has been spent on the Urban Development Area (UDA) Study, right- sizing the UDA, thinking about
different modeling of development within the UDA, and as a result, the Commission has urged the staff and the
comtnittee to begin writing the technical aspects to implement the Comprehensive Plan. He said it was
encouraging to see some of these new ideas coming out. Mr. Wyatt said he, and others in the development
community, were encouraged by the Business Overlay District concept and designers are trying to make the
concept work. He said may retail clients he represents throughout the community would prefer to have parking in
front of their stores; however, the new model of commercial development encourages parking behind buildings.
Mr. Wyatt suggested that instead of doing an all -or- nothing proposal, he asked if the Commission would consider
a maximum percentage of the total parking requirement in front, perhaps 15 %. For example, for every 50
parking spaces required, seven would be allowed as pull -in spaces in front of the building and the remaining
parking, or 85 %, behind the building. Mr. Wyatt referred to another concept in the ordinance, the proposed
"build to" line, which states the building has to be no more than 20 feet off of the property line. He said this
concept also becomes problematic because of some of the other design elements the staff is looking for, such as
ten -foot sidewalks in front of the building, street trees, bicycle trails, plaza areas, etc. Mr. Wyatt said when the
designers try to lay out the plan, they can't get all of the design concepts within the space. He said the ideas of
• outdoor plazas and mixed use with apartment units over retail are all good concepts, but the draft ordinance is
design challenged, he said it's over- parked, it's buffer - heavy, and it does not integrate well with adjoining
communities. He urged the Commission to consider these issues and make revisions to the ordinance so that
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2243
Minutes of May 7, 2008
-4-
• everyone can use the urban design standards implemented.
PUBLIC HEARING
Conditional Use Permit Application 902 -08 of Gregory and JoAnn Smith for a cottage occupation for a
nail salon at 181 Ridings Mill Road. The property is identified with P.I.N. 85 -A -103 in the Opequon
Magisterial District.
Action — Recommended Approval with Conditions
Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that this proposed use will
take place on a 4.8308 -acre parcel in the RA (Rural Areas) District with an existing dwelling occupied by the
applicants. Mr. Cheran said the surrounding properties are all zoned RA and the closest dwelling is
approximately 150 feet from the location of the proposed use. He said the nail salon will be within the
applicant's dwelling in a 10 X 10 room accessed by an exterior door leading to a gravel driveway. This room is
equipped with one nail station for preparing nails and one drying station capable of serving one customer at a
lime. Mr. Cheran said the applicant has agreed to limit the hours and days of operation, as well as the number of
customers that will be seen each week. He said that based upon the limited scale of the proposed use and
evaluation of the property, it appeared the use would not significantly impact the adjoining properties. In
conclusion, Mr. Cheran read a list of recommended conditions, should the Commission find the use to be
appropriate.
• Chairman Wilmot called for public comments and the following person came forward to speak:
Mr. Joe Powers came £onward to speak on behalf of his brother, Randy Powers, who is the owner
of several undeveloped adjoining lots around the Smith property. Mr. Powers said both he and his brother were
supportive of this request and believed the applicant and the staff had done a good job of preparing conditions
which would address any concerns they might have as far as businesses in the area. Mr. Powers had one
additional comment on the agency review comments; he said the Health Department commented that the sewage
disposal system should only receive domestic waste which does not include any chemicals generated by the
business. Mr. Powers said all of the lots in this area are composed of shale and do not perk well, therefore, most
of the lots are on alternative systems. He expressed concern about contamination of the groundwater or
alternative systems. As a result, Mr. Powers asked the Commission about expanding Condition # 1, "All review
agency comments shall be complied with at all times," with a second sentence which states, "Sewage disposal
shall only receive domestic waste and no chemicals from the business per the Health Department's review
comments," so it will be clear about what those Health Department comments were.
hearing.
No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the
Mr. and Mrs. Gregory Smith, die property owners and applicants, came forward. Mrs. JoAnn
Smith stated that all the waste from the operation is sealed and properly disposed; she said that no chemicals go
into the sewage system. Mr. and Mrs. Smith had no problems with the Health Department statement being added
to the conditions.
• Commissioner Ours made a motion to recommend approval of the CUP with the conditions
recommended by the staff, along with an additional statement to Condition #1, "No chemicals may be put into the
sewage disposal system." This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas and unanimously passed.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2244
Minutes of May 7, 2008
-5-
• BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of
Conditional Use Pemiit Application #02 -08 of Gregory and JoAnn Smith for a cottage occupation for a nail salon
at 181 Ridings Mill Road with the following conditions.
1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. No chemicals may be put into the
sewage disposal system.
2. No business signs shall be permitted.
3. No other employees, other than those residing in the household.
4. Hours of operation shall be permitted from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
5. There shall be a maximum number of 20 customers allowed weekly.
6. Any expansion or modification of this use will require the approval of a new Conditional Use Permit.
Conditional Use Permit Application #03 -08 of John Venskoske for a Cottage Occupation for Black
Powder Sales at 863 Chestnut Grove Road (Rt. 681). The property is identified with P.I.N. 30 -A -57 in the
Gainesboro Magisterial District.
is Action — Recommended Approval
Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that this conditional use
permit (CUP) is being applied for in response to a zoning violation complaint for selling black powder to
customers from the property without an approved cottage occupation or conditional use permit (CUP). Mr.
Cheran said the applicant currently is permitted to sell black powder off site and has an ATF permit and fire
marshal approval to operate this business. Mr. Cheran reported that the applicant is requesting that he be allowed
to sell black powder to customers on this site. He said the property is surrounded by like properties, with the
nearest dwelling being more than 150 feet from the proposed use. He noted that the staff has concerns with sales
of black powder during the North -South Skirmish Association (NSSA) activities. He said that during these
NSSA activities, the sale of black powder from this site and the amount of traffic generated, along with parking,
has caused problems along Chestnut Grove Road. Mr. Cheran explained that the applicant has addressed this
issue by adding a gravel parking area to his property to mitigate the traffic and parking issues along Chestnut
Grove Road. He noted that the black powder sales will be conducted from a 50 square -foot accessory building.
Mr. Cheran next read a list of recommended conditions, should the Commission find the use to be appropriate.
Commissioner Ambrogi inquired how often the NSSA has activities near this location and also,
how many people attend the activities.
Mr. John Venskoske, the property owner and applicant, said he would like to operate the Back
Creek Gun Shop; he noted that the name is somewhat deceiving because he does not sell guns. In answer to
Commissioner Ambrogi's question, Mr. Venskoske said the NSSA holds 18 shoots perycar with twobig shoots,
in May and October. He said during the May and October shoots, there could possibly be 10,000 people. Out of
• the 10,000 people, roughly 2,000 are shooters and the remainders are family and visitors. Mr. Venskoske said a
notice is placed in the newspaper inviting the public at no charge; he said they like to promote Civil War history.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2245
Minutes of May 7, 2008
Chairman Wilmot asked the applicant if the building where sales will take place is permanently
• located on Mr. Venskoske's property and Mr. Venskoske answered yes.
Commissioner Kriz spoke with Mr. Venskoske about the gravel driveway he constructed inside
Chestnut Road, which connects to the NSSA property. It was determined that event attendees could travel from
the NSSA site activities to Back Creek Gun Shop without going out onto the main black- topped road.
Referring to recommended Condition #5, which stated, "No more than five customers at any time
on the site," Commissioner Triplett questioned limiting the number of customers on site and how it could be
monitored.
Commissioner Ambrogi asked Mr. Venskoske if he thought there would be a parking problem
during an event weekend. Mr. Venskoske believed the parking area would be large enough to handle the volume
of traffic he receives. Commissioner Ambrogi noted that Mr. Venskoske could not enforce the parking, if
someone randomly parked along the roadway. He did not want to see Mr. Venskoske's CUP jeopardized, if
someone just pulls off the road to quickly run inside his shop to purchase black powder.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman
Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing.
Commissioner Kriz made a motion to recommend approval with the conditions recommended by
the staff. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
• recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit Application 903 -08 of John Venskoske for a Cottage Occupation
for Black Powder Sales at 863 Chestnut Grove Road (Rt. 681), with the following conditions:
I. All review agency continents and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
2. No more than five customers at any time on the site, except during NSSA activities.
3. All customer parking shall be located on the applicant's property, not along Chestnut Grove Road (Route
68 1) or Chalybeate Springs Road (Route 687).
4. Hours of operation for on -site customers shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
5. No signage on the applicant's property shall be allowed.
6. Any expansion or change of use will require a new conditional use permit.
PUBLIC MEETING
Subdivision request of K & J Investments, LC, submitted by Grey Wolfe, Inc., for a non - residential
subdivision of an 11.283 -acre parcel into four lots consisting of 6.740 acres, 0.844 acres, 1.573 acres, and
2.115 acres. The property is located on the east side of Welltown Road (Rt. 661), across from Stonewall
• Industrial Park. The property is further identified by P.I.N. 43 -A -56 in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
Action — Recommended Approval
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2246
Minutes of May 7, 2008
-7-
• Commissioner Oates said that he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this item due
to a conflict of interest.
Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that the applicant has been
granted a waiver of the master development plan (MDP) requirements as stated in a letter from the Planning
Director to the applicant, dated February 12, 2008, and included within the Commission's agenda packet. The
waiver does not eliminate any applicable development and design requirements of the Frederick County
Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances and subdivision of the parcel requires review by the Planning Commission
and the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Cheran reported that the 11.283 -acre parcel is located within the Sewer and
Water Service Area (SWSA) and is surrounded by like -zoned properties. He said the parcel is currently split
zoned B3 and M 1, with four structures located on the parcel, the subdivision will result in existing structures
occupying their own individual parcels.
Commissioner Unger inquired if individual entrances would be created for each separate parcel.
Mr. Cheran replied although there are three existing entrances to the property at this time, shared entrances would
be recommended at the subdivision stage. Commissioner Unger asked if there might be a screening or setback
problem with the subdivision. Mr. Cheran replied that all new uses would need to meet today's ordinance
requirements.
Mr. Claus Bader of German Engineering was representing this subdivision and was available to
answer questions from the Commission.
Chairman Wilmot called for public comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman
• Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the meeting.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Ruckman and seconded by Commissioner Kriz,
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend
approval of the subdivision request of K & J Investments, LC, submitted by Grey Wolfe, Inc., for a non-
residential subdivision of an 11.283 -acre parcel into four lots consisting of 6.740 acres, 0.844 acres, 1.573 acres,
and 2.115 acres.
(Note: Commissioner Oates abstained from voting.)
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
DISCUSSION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 165, ZONING, ARTICLE V, RA (RURAL
AREAS) DISTRICT PERTAINING TO THE RURAL PRESERVATION REQUIREMENT
Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated that staff has been directed by the Board of
Supervisors to look at the Rural Preservation Subdivision Ordinance in order to increase the minimum
preservation tract size from 40% to 60 %, as well as to eliminate the density right that has been presented in the
past for the preservation tract (bonus lot) itself. He explained that with the rural preservation subdivision, the
40% parcel has a dwelling right, but it is not counted towards the maximum density for the parcel under today's
• ordinance. Mr. Lawrence said these are the two changes that have been suggested and are open for discussion.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2247
Minutes of May 7, 2008
am
Mr. Lawrence said that when this item was discussed by the Development Review and
• Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) last month, there were concerns about the minimum lot size. He said a
minimum lot size of two acres is currently permitted; however, it was felt the lot needed to be a bit smaller to
maintain the density of the 60% set- aside. He said the staff made note of that comment to forward to the Board.
Mr. Lawrence said there were also discussions about reducing the road frontage requirements; particularly, with
the larger preservation tract. He said the final comment from the DRRS discussion was that while the initial
suggestion was to seek a 60% set - aside, the DRRS believed a 50% set -aside preservation tract is a more
reasonable number. In summary, Mr. Lawrence said the catalyst behind this amendment was to increase the
preservation tract from 40% to 60% and to eliminate the preservation tract as a bonus density.
Commissioner Kriz believed the lot sizes should be as minimal as possible so the density is
available to create a community waste disposal or water system. He didn't feel that removing the bonus density
was as significant.
Commissioner Mohn agreed with Commissioner Kriz and he commented about the bonus
density. He said if this is the preferred form of development for the rural areas of the County and the desire is to
maximize the open space or conservation areas,.then the incentives need to remain. Commissioner Molm said the
ordinance should be as flexible as possible and the bonus density opportunity should be preserved.
As a member of the DRRS, Commissioner Unger agreed with Mr. Lawrence's report from the
DRRS. Commissioner Unger said many of the members were concerned that the ordinance would not be looked
at closely before it was presented for public hearing. Commissioner Unger said he agreed with some of the
citizens who spoke earlier, during the citizen comment portion of the meeting, that specifics should be determined
before it goes to the Board. For example, he said there was no minimum lot size and road frontages may have to
be changed. He said he could go either way with the bonus lot, but he liked the idea of concentrating houses into
an area and preserving as much land as possible. Commissioner Unger preferred not to see everything go to five
acres.
Connnissioner Watt, also a member of the DRRS, commented that a couple years ago, regular
morning work sessions were held on this topic and there was good discussion. Commissioner Watt believed the
ordinance needs to either be looked at in depth or not changed at all.
Commissioner Oates described a project he recently submitted for a 31 -lot rural preservation
subdivision on slightly over 150 acres, located off Hites Road. Commissioner Oates said he did away with the
bonus lot, went to 60 %, and the subdivision dropped to 23 lots total. He said going from 31 to 23 at $100,000
per lot nets $800,000. He then tried the subdivision at 50% and it got him back up to 26 lots. Commissioner
Oates explained that with this same parcel, he could do a five -acre subdivision and get 28 lots. He said when this
ordinance is taken before a developer or land owner, with expectations of $100,000 per lot, every single lot
counts. He believed the ordinance would do away with future rural preservation subdivisions in the county and no
one will use the option; he said developers are going back to five -acre lots. As far as going to the 50 %,
Commissioner Oates said he has done two subdivisions where he has managed to save just over 50 %by using the
current rules; however, there are projects where 42 -43% saved area is the best he can do. He commented that land
is not perfectly square; it has imperfect shapes and creeks for boundaries, etc. Commissioner Oates commented
about the wording in the staff's report because it suggested that not counting the preservation tract towards
density was a mistake when, in fact, it was intentionally done to promote this type of subdivision. He said if the
Board of Supervisors no longer prefers this type of development and prefers the five -acre subdivision, this
proposal will be perfect because for all intents and purposes, it will kill rural preservation subdivisions.
Commissioner Oates believed it would be a huge mistake; he said the State of Virginia recently required all
• localities to adopt a development option of this type in their ordinance; he said this is the direction the County
should be going in. He said he would be in favor of having the Comprehensive Plans and Programs
Subcommittee (CPPS) review it; he also believed the Rural Areas Study needed to begin again.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2248
Minutes of May 7, 2008
• Commissioner Thomas strongly opposed the proposed revisions. He totally agreed with
previous comments that if the changes are made, this development option might as well be deleted from the
ordinance because it will remove all incentives for the use of rural preservation subdivisions. Commissioner
Thomas said if a modification is desired, then the committee should be brought back together, along with the
citizens that previously worked on this, and try to improve it. He strongly believed that what has been presented
is so much worse than what is currently on the books, that it will just kill the ordinance. Commissioner Thomas
said he thought 50% was too much; he thought 40 -45% open space is about the maximum the could be required
and still have an incentive to use rural development. He said if the County wants to go back to five -acre lots, then
this proposal is a good step toward it.
Commissioners Triplett and Ambrogi agreed with the comments made.
Referring to Commissioner Oates' subdivision project, Commissioner Kriz asked him if the
subdivision would have worked if the lot sizes were different. Commissioner Oates said it could have worked, if
the lot sizes were different. He said he would need to determine the minimum lot size needed to make the project
work. He guessed it might be around a quarter to a half -acre, but the road frontage requirements would need to be
loosened up and possibly, pipe stem lots to shorten the length of the state road. Commissioner Oates said it has
taken some time for communities to begin utilizing these subdivisions and probably within the last five years they
have come into their own.
Mr. Lawrence said that the comments provided will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors.
DISCUSSION OF A UDA (URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA) AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO THE
BUSINESS OVERLAY DISTRICT.
Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that this particular ordinance amendment will
create a brand new zoning district. He explained that it is an overlay district and would only apply to the B 1
(Business Limited) and B2 (Business General) commercial zoning districts. He said the proposed new district is
the result of the UDA (Urban Development Area) Study, which is a study the county adopted a little over a year
ago. He said the study examined the urban areas of the UDA and created the concept of urban centers, village
neighborhoods, and focal points for the community. Mr. La"Tence stated that the UDA Study Group believed the
County needed to quickly put an ordinance together to implement a small section of the UDA Study and that is
what has been drafted for the Commission. He said this proposed ordinance would only apply to parcels less than
20 acres in size; he said the staff and Commission will have to look at an ordinance for larger projects. This
ordinance tonight is solely concentrating on the smaller scale, the 20 -acre minimums. Mr. Lawrence said the main
body of the ordinance has been drafted for almost a year and discussions and work sessions have been held. Only
within the last couple months, more direction has been received as to how it should be applied. He said the core
of this ordinance, which speaks to shallow -front setbacks, wide sidewalks, central plazas, and housing and
apartment opportunities on the second and third floors of commercial establishments, has been consistent over the
past year. Mr. Lawrence said the intent behind the UDA Study was this type of urban setting should only apply in
certain areas. After discussions with the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors over the past year,
the direction received was that if such an ordinance is created, it should be within the UDA or within the target
areas within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA).. Mr. Lawrence referred to a map and pointed to the
areas that the new Business Overlay District could be applied. He said the Business Overlay District would create
• a center for the community and the walkability is important for the services catering to the residential area. He
said overall, it is not something that would survive on its own with the 20 acres; therefore, it would need the
surrounding residential community. He said the DRRS has endorsed the draft ordinance with some minor
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2249
Minutes of May 7, 2009
-10-
changes.
Commissioner Kriz stated that since this is designated for small areas, 20 acres or less, sonic
flexibility needed to be created. He saw this new overlay district being utilized for either lots that have not yet
been developed or for some in -fill or conversion areas. He believed that condos or apartments above commercial
needed to be promoted. In addition, he said there may need to be a quick -in, quick -out with some parking in front,
possibly with a 15 -85 split, as suggested during the citizen comments. He thought these suggestions needed to be
taken into consideration. Commissioner Kriz said the study group wants to see these concepts go forward and
wants to see the development community use this development option.
Commissioner Mohn stated that this ordinance provides direction to desired land uses. He said
the concept was created for various sites, some of which are relatively small, but perfectly situated for the uses
hoped for. He suggested, however, that before this proposal goes to the public hearing stage, it may be potentially
valuable to have a charrette involving the local design community, with both engineering and land planning
personnel, along with the architectural community, to see how all of the design elements fit together. As a result,
the Commission could then see how the different pieces work on a site as small as three acres, five acres, and up
to 20 acres, and make any adjustments accordingly. Commissioner Molm said he would like to see this ordinance
work and be able to be used.
Commissioner Thomas thought this was a great step in the right direction. He noted that staff
has put considerable time into this, the DRRS had considerable robust discussion, and it was very well received
by the DRRS. He suggested that for future discussions, specific locations should not be pinpointed because the
overlay needs to be made available for general use in the entire county or area where it's allowed to be used.
However, to in order to see any flaws that might have been overlooked, specific situations will need to be
evaluated. He said the desire was to develop a user - friendly, walking environment for people to use these
• facilities. The DRRS was looking at 20 acres or less in size. He said it probably does very good for between ten
and 20 acres and it may be acceptable for sites between five and ten acres; however, in an attempt make a one -
size- fits -all, he was not sure it worked well on sites less than five acres. He said parts of it would be good for
sites less than five acres, such as fill -in lots along Route 7, etc., but parts would not work. Commissioner Thomas
said if the Commission decides to use the charrette concept, he suggested possibly splitting this into two parts,
with one part of the ordinance applicable for sites between five and 20 acres and another for sites below five
acres. He said that possibly, some of the design concepts, such as the parking, the setbacks, the ten -foot
sidewalks, or the plaza are just not practical or economical to develop on a site less than five acres.
Commissioner Thomas said he liked the charrette idea and getting the local community involved.
Commissioner Unger was also interested in having planners and engineers come together and
give opinions on this and provide examples on different sites.
Commissioner Oates also agreed that the draft ordinance was set up for parcels of five to 20
acres and he believed the draft was very good the way it was written for that size parcel. He suggested going back
and creating a second section for parcels under five acres, using the charrette. He wanted to see the draft
ordinance moved along and adopted to get started and as problems arise, those could be worked out.
Mr. Lawrence said that the comments provided will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors.
•
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2250
Minutes of May 7, 2008
-11-
CPPS APPOINTMENT
• Chairman Wilmot appointed Ms. Gillian Greenfield to the Comprehensive Plans and Programs
Subcommittee (CPPS). Chairman Wilmot welcomed Ms. Greenfield, who was in the audience, and looked
forward to the experience she would provide to the committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. by a unanimous
vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Wilmot, Chairman
40
Eric R.�vrence, Secretary
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2251
Minutes of May 7, 2009