Loading...
PC_12-03-08_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 December 3, 2008. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; Richard Ruckman, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel; and Gary Lofton, Board of Supervisors Liaison. ABSENT: Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; and H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA • Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Kriz moved to adopt the December 3, 2008 Planning Commission Agenda for this evening's meeting.. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and unanimously passed. MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the minutes of the October 15, 2008 meeting. COMMITTEE REPORTS Natural Resources Subcommittee Commissioner Kriz reported that the Natural Resources Subcommittee had its final meeting to wrap up the first version of the environmental section before sending out to various technical people for review. 40 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2384 Minutes of December 3, 2009 -2- • Transportation Committee — 11/24/08 Mtg. Commissioner Kriz reported that the Transportation Committee considered the following items: 1) voted to go paperless as much as possible; 2) advised staff to look into the positives and negatives of joining the I -81 coalition; 3) a motion was passed to send the latest figures for the transportation component of the Development hnpact Model to the Oversight Committee; 4) a motion was passed to send a suggested Route 522 alignment east of I -81 to VDOT for comments; 5) the latest draft of the TIA Standards were reviewed and recommended it be placed on the agenda for the Planning Commission's Retreat or a joint work session of the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors; 6) the "red -light ordinance" is moving forward. CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Wilmot called for public comments on any subject not on the Commission's agenda for this evening. No one came forward to speak. PUBLIC MEETING Master Development Plan 407 -08 for Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting • Group, for an assisted living facility on the south side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50), west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50. The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s 53 -A -81, 53- A-82, 53B -3 -24, and 53B -3 -25 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval Commissioner Mohn said he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this application due to a potential conflict of interest. Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this master development plan (MDP) application is a proposal to develop slightly more than ten acres of land which was rezoned to the B2 (Business General) District this year with proffers. Ms. Perkins noted the site consists of four parcels and is proposed to be developed with an assisted living facility of up to 75,000 square feet. She said entrances to the site are limited to three: the primary access is off Ward Avenue; a secondary limited access point is shown on Route 50, which is a right -in, right -out entrance and restricted to- Allegheny -Power Company vehicles only; a third access point would be permitted at the rear of the property once a future collector road is constructed. Ms. Perkins added that a 50- foot landscaped buffer along Route 50, as well as zoning district buffers along the sides and rear of the site, is shown on the MDP. Commissioner Oates asked the staff if they were satisfied the applicant had met all of the conditions of the zoning ordinance and the approved rezoning. Ms. Perkins replied yes. Mr. Michael Pointer with Bowman Consulting Group was present to represent the MDP application and to answer any questions from the Commission. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2385 Minutes of December 3, 2008 -3- • Chairman Wilmot called for any public comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Commissioner Unger made a motion to recommend approval of the MDP. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Watt and was passed by unanimous vote. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Master Development Plan #07 -08 for the Route 50 Assisted Living Facility, submitted by Bowman Consulting Group, for an assisted living facility on the south side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50), west of the intersection of Ward Avenue and Route 50. (Note: Commissioner Mohn abstained; Commissioners Manuel and Ours were absent from the meeting.) COMMISSION DISCUSSION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN (CIP) Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) met with County Department and Agency representatives to discuss their individual capital improvement project requests on November 10, 2008. Mr. Ruddy said following the CPPS discussion, the CPPS Executive Committee endorsed the 2009 -2010 CIP and endorsed its conformance with the • County's Comprehensive Policy Plan. Mr. Ruddy stated that the discussions with the departments were very thorough and a fair amount of focus was once again provided to the transportation section of the CIP. In addition, again this year, the connection between the CIP and proffered contributions with individual rezoning requests, was greatly reinforced. Also included as a component to this year's CIP were the individual fire and rescue companies' requests. Mr. Ruddy said the CIP consists of a total of 71 projects. He said this is a few more than last year; however, the structure of the CIP is slightly modified with the individual fire and rescue company requests and a further breakdown of the airport requests to be more consistent with how the airport does their CIP for the State Department of Aviation. The schools, parks and recreation, county administration, and the airport modified the details of a variety of their requests and two new transportation projects were added. The two new transportation projects were Renaissance Drive and pedestrian improvements on Senseny Road and the Eastern Road Plan connection. The two new projects for fire and rescue included a new fire station in the vicinity of the Crosspointe project and the second being a regional training facility for fire and rescue and public safety purposes. Mr. Ruddy said the CIP is being presented as a discussion item this evening Chairman Wilmot said she understood the concept of identifying items in the CIP so the County can accept proffers as they come forward; however, she inquired how the equipment needs are shown as a capital improvement rather than just buildings or structures. Mr. Ruddy replied this subject was heavily evaluated at last year's CIP because there were specific requests by some fire and rescue companies for vehicle replacement and equipment. As a part of that discussion of being able to use proffered funds to obtain equipment, the direction from the Finance Committee and ultimately, the Board of Supervisors, was that this particular category did, indeed, include equipment and vehicle needs associated with individual company requests. He said it was not necessarily bricks and mortar, but a very significant expenditure that allows the classification as a capital need for • the fire and rescue companies. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2386 Minutes of December 3. 2008 No other questions or issues were raised and the Commission members were satisfied with the • CIP as presented. PLANNING, COMMISSION BYLAWS Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that at the Planning Commmission's October 15, 2008, meeting, the Commission and staff discussed a few of the items relating to the Commission's Bylaws. Mr. Lawrence noted that those items included time limits for applicant and staff presentations; late information submissions by applicants, and clarification on the 90 -day application processing guideline. Two of the items, relating to time limits for presentations and what constitutes a complete application, Sections 8- 3 -8 -2 -A and 8 -3- 8-4, seemed to need further discussion and staff suggested these more complex items be saved for a future meeting. He suggested the Commission consider the simpler items for adoption on the January 7, 2009 meeting. He said the revisions with today's date are fairly minor and include code references and minor language changes. Commissioner Thomas felt there was a benefit on putting a time limit on an applicant's presentation; however, he didn't think the staff's presentation should have a limit. He said the staff's presentation provides the Commission with the comments and information. He believed a "time guide" on an applicant's presentation might encourage the applicant to assemble a more logical and effective presentation to get their message across, he said the Commission is looking more for quality, not quantity. Commissioner Kriz agreed. Commissioner Kriz believed that Section 8 -3 -8 -4 would aid in having all the materials, information, and comments submitted before the application can be placed on the Commission's agenda. • Chairman Wilmot commented there should be the opportunity, if staff is placed in a position where an application cannot be complete, for the applicant to come in at a work session with the Planning Commission before they get into a public hearing environment. So, she asked if the applicant would want the clock to start sooner or later. Commissioner Mohn also believed this was an opportunity to use the work session provision to help the entire process. He said in those cases, it's not so much as people neglecting their responsibilities to get agency comments completed or to assemble their package, but rather, when there is a legitimate impasse or difference of opinion between review agencies or whomever, that it may be better served to bring that to a work session first, before it gets to public hearing. This could be an effort to work through some of the issues to insure that everyone has an understanding; potentially, to assist staff in resolving the issues with the applicant. Commissioner Oates stated this ten - minute limit is being considered basically for rezoning; however, he thought incases of waivers, conditional use permits, and master development plans, ten minutes was plenty of time. Commissioner Oates believed it should be 20 minutes for rezoning, over that time a work session, and ten minutes for other items. He said this should not include staff presentation time. On the other hand, Commissioner Unger was not in favor of placing time limits on rezoning applicants. Commissioner Unger said when an applicant is trying to do something as big as a rezoning and he is spending a considerable amount of money to do it, he felt it was unfair to limit rezoning applicants to 20 minutes. Commissioner Thomas commented that the previous Planning Commission meeting indicated there is some uncertainty over the time limits of a tabling; specifically, the 90 -day cut -off and/or the year rule. He • suggested the Commission always have the ability to waive something specific within the Bylaws. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2387 Minutes of December 3, 2008 — 5 — Conunission members also discussed establishing guidelines so the applicant knows what is expected when they come before the Planning Commission. They stressed the importance of having a complete • application within their agenda packets. Mr. Lawrence said he would incorporate the suggestions and discussions within the Bylaws and bring the revised document to the Commission at their first meeting in January for adoption. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, M. Wilmot_ Chairman Eric R.%,a<Tence, Secretary • • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2388 Minutes of December 3, 2008