Loading...
PC_03-18-09_Meeting_MinutesMEETING MINUTES OF THE 6 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on March 18, 2009. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chainnan/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; Richard Ruckman, Stonewall District; Laurence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Christopher M. Moln, Red Bud District; Gregory S. Kerr, Red Bud District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Roderick Williams, Legal Counsel; and Gary Lofton, Board of Supervisors Liaison. ABSENT: George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director, Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director, John A. Bishop, Deputy Director - Transportation; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner, and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA i Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Upon motion made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Conunissioner Triplett, the Planning Conunission unanimously adopted the March 18, 2009 agenda for this evening's meeting. MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Triplett and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the minutes of the January 21, 2009 meeting and the minutes of the February 18, 2009 meeting. COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Committee (DRRC) — 02/26/09 Mtg. Commissioner Unger announced a new member of the DRRC, Mr. Jay S. Banks of Back Creek District. i Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2491 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -2- is Commissioner Unger reported that the DRRC discussed the recordation of proffers. He said the DRRC is working on revisions to the zoning ordinance requiring proffers to be recorded along with property deeds. He said the DRRS also discussed revisions to Section 165 -27 of the zoning ordinance regarding off -street parking and parking lots. Sanitation Authority — 3/17/09 Mtg. Commissioner Unger said the Sanitation Authority (SA) reported below normal rainfall for the last few months; the Anderson water plant is pumping about 1 mgd; a malfunction at this plant is anticipated to be fixed within a month; and the Diehl plants are pumping about 2.1m9d. Commissioner Unger said the SA is purchasing about 1.6- 1.7mgd of water from the City of Winchester; the City is plamring to increase their rates by 15 %. Camnissioner Unger reported that the SA finished the waterline to Berkeley Comity, which is hrtendedto be used for emergency purposes only. Commissioner Unger noted that the SA has applied for stimulus funds. Route 11 North Work Group — 3/13/09 Mtg. Commissioner Oates reported that the work group reviewed land uses and received an update on • transportation. He said they should be ready to present their study to the public in Stonewall District in mid May. Conunissioner Oates said there will be another meeting on Friday morning, March 20. Transportation Committee — 3/02/09 Mtg. Conunissioner Oates reported a joint meeting of the Transportation Committee and the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) where the transit expansion plans were studied. Commissioner Oates provided the following website for those seeking additional information: Nvww winfredmpo.com Winchester Planning Commission (WPC) — 3/17/09 Mtg. Conunissioner Ours reported the WPC recommended approval of a request by Adams- Nelson Management for a modification of their existing conditional use permit for the Old Town Event Center on Loudoun Street to expand uses, particularly during daytime hours. Commissioner Ours said the WPC also recommended approval of a rezoning from low- density residential to residential- office on Linden Drive, adjacent to the Winchester Medical Center. In addition, the WPC tabled a rezoning for a conwtercial property adjacent to the K -Mart store, behind Jiffy Lube. He commented the tabling was to allow additional time to work out logistics prior to public hearing. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2432 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -3- NAICS Conversion Committee • Conunissioner Manuel reported that the NAICS Conversion Committee is in the final stages of their work and are fine tuning the final product. He said the committee members have been meeting by interactive email and expect completion of their work by March 31. 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 HEARING Conditional Use Permit 901 -09 for AT &T and Wesley Helsley, submitted by Dewberry, for a 120 -foot commercial telecommunications facility at 2042 Martinsburg Pike (Route 11). This property is identified with P.LN.s 43 -A -130 and 43 -A -132 in the Stonewall Magisterial District Action — Tabled for 28 days • Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported this request is for a conditional use permit (CUP) to enable the construction of a 120 -foot, lattice -type commercial telecommunications facility. Mr. Cheran said the proposed tower location is on properties contained within the Northeast Land Use Plan ( NELUP) as designated in the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. He said this NELUP component indicates there are Developmentally Sensitive Areas (DSA) surrounding and including this site. The objectives of the NELUP are to, "... ensure that the recommendations of the Third Winchester Battlefield Preservation Plan are implemented to the extent possible..." and to designate DSAs to "...protect potentially significant historic resources as identified by the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey and to ensure that the HRAB reviews all development proposals which impact identified DSAs." Mr. Cheran pointed out that the general surrounding area of the proposed site contains areas of significant historical importance, including the Hackwood property, the Milburn Road corridor, and the Third Battle of Winchester study area. He said Frederick County has traditionally set a higher expectation for land use actions with regards to properties in and/or adjacent to DSAs. These performance standards are to ensure that scenic areas and properties of significant historic values are not negatively impacted. In addition, Mr. Cheran noted that the proposed site does not appear to qualify for a lattice-type facility. He explained that the zoning ordinance requires that all proposed new telecommunications facilities be monopole -type structures, particularly if the proposed location is adjacent to identified historic sites. He also noted that the proposed location is on property located in close vicinity to the 150 -acre industrially and commercially -zoned Rutherford Firm development. He said the Rutherford Fann development may provide satisfactory coverage for this applicant and future co- location opportunities in this area of Frederick County. 0 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2433 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -4- Mr. Stephen L. Pettler, Jr. of the firm, Harrison & Johnston, was representing the applicants in this request. Mr. Pettler introduced Ms. Christie Lowery with Dewberry, who assembled the application; Robert Ericksen, Real Estate Manager with AT &T, Kurt Oliver, consultant for AT &T; and Mr. William Commerford and Mr. Mark Grace, both representing AT &T. Mr. Pettler first addressed the issue of a lattice tower versus a monopole tower and why they were pursuing the lattice -type tower. He said Section 165- 48.6.B(2) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance states that lattice -type towers are permitted for areas located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and which are not adjacent to properties that are identified historic sites. Mr. Pettler said this site is located outside of the UDA and it is not "adjacent" to a historic site; he pointed out that future Route 37 cuts this property off from the battlefield areas. He said an enormous structure would have to be built for a monopole versus only a ten -foot by ten -foot structure for a lattice tower. In addition, the cost of construction for a monopole would be double of that for a lattice -type tower. It would also be cost- prohibitive for Emergency Management Services (EMS) or anyone else to co- locate on the monopole structure in the future. Mr. Pettler next addressed the DSA and NELUP issues. He said the Route 11 corridor is slated for future commercial development and already has significant existing commercial development. Regarding the staff's comment about locating the tower on the Rutherford's Farm property, Mr. Pettler stated that AT &T does not own any property within Rutherford's Farin. Addressing the possibility of placing the communications facility on the building that FEMA will occupy, Mr. Pettler stated that FEMA does not own the building they will occupy at Rutheford's Famn. He stated that considerable structural changes to the building would need to be done by the landlord in order to place the communications facility on top of the FEMA building. He said the numerous third -party issues they encountered created a stalemate in negotiations. Responding to a Planning Commissioner's question about possibly locating on the Cowpenvood property, Mr. Pettler said the parcel was not large enough to accommodate a sufficient fall -zone area for a tower of this size. Mr. Pettler added there has been no citizen objections this request. He referred to a letter of support from David Lopez, Acting Branch Chief, for FEMA IT Operations, dated March 11, 2009. In the letter, is Mr. Lopez states that, ..... this communications link is critically important to FEMA's operations in Frederick County," and,'`... it is essential to have fail -safe communications capability, particularly when disasters occur." Mr. Robert R. Ericksen, Real Estate Manager with AT &T, said AT &T is requesting the placement of a communications tower adjacent to AT &T's existing communications building at 2032 Martinsburg Pike. He said AT &T has chosen this location because of the existence of a network access point (POP). He noted that a 180 - degree fall zone is not required if the property is owned by the owner of the tower and the building is unmanned. Mr. Ericksen said that because of the structural improvements that would be necessary and structural integrity issues, in addition to liability and legal issues, the parties reached a stalemate in negotiations in their attempts at placing the communications facility on top of the FEMA building. He said neither AT &T, nor FEMA owns the building or the property in Rutherford's Farm. Chairman Wilmot called for citizens comments at this point in the public hearing and the following person came forward to speak: Mr. Earl Rittick, a resident at 2045 Martinsburg Pike, asked if the tower would fall on Route 11 if it happened to collapse. Mr. Pettler replied that it would not. hearing. • No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public continent portion of the Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2434 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -5- Some members of the Plarnm Commission expressed their individual views that a monopole tower would be more visually obvious in this setting than a lattice -type tower; they noted that you could at least see through a lattice tower. Mr. Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director, stated that when the telecommunications ordinance was adopted in the 1990's, it was concluded that the County preferred a monopole tower in Urban Areas because it was believed a monopole would more easily blend into the viewshed. Other Commissioners believed the proposed tower location was not an appropriate site because there was available commercial and industrially -zoned land across the street within the Rutherford development and because the HRAB's recamnendation was that the proposed tower would cause a visual impact for the historic areas. The staff noted that portions of the Rutherford development were outside of the UDA and the HRAB's report had indicated that historical integrity on that side of Route 11 had already been lost. Commissioner Manuel said that he supported approval of the application as presented with a lattice -type tower. Conunissioner Manuel said there has been no opposition from the public, no opposition from neighbors, the applicant has made serious and genuine efforts to locate on the FEMA property and it's just not feasible or practical. He said the proposed tower would be located in a conunercial and industrial area where these facilities are supposed to be located. In his opinion, a six -foot diameter monopole resembled a smoke stack, not a tree, and at least you could see through a lattice pole. He added that this area is slated for a four -lane interstate highway. Conmrissioner Oates recognized there was a need for this facility, especially by FEMA. Commissioner Oates said the CUP before the Commission is site specific and they are requesting a lattice -type tower. Commissioner Oates said he was not in favor of a lattice -type tower and his view was that a monopole tower was much more aesthetically pleasing. He did not agree that this was the preferable place for the proposed • tower; he said there was plenty of land near and around the FEMA building. He said if the tower was located in that direction, it most likely would not be seen from Route 11. Conunissioner Oates agreed with the HRAB's recommendations that it would cause a visual impact on the core battlefield areas. Based on these comments, Commissioner Oates made a motion to reconmrend denial of the CUP. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours. This motion failed, however, based on the following vote: YES (TO DENY) Ours, Thomas, Oates, Ruckman NO: Molm, Kerr, Triplett, Manuel, Ambrogi, Unger, Wilmot ABSTAIN Watt (Note: Commissioner Kriz was absent from the meeting.) A new motion was made by Connnissioner Ruckman to table the CUP application request for another 28 days because there are so many issues involved. Conunissioner Ruckman commented that the proposed tower location is outside of the UDA and the County could require that it be a monopole -type tower. He said he would like to see the application revised. He also commented that the proposed tower would be in site of historical battlefields and it will impact the viewshed. Commissioner Ruckman said he would still like to see the tower relocated closer to the FEMA building where there are trees and buildings to visually shelter the tower. The motion to table for 28 days was seconded by Conunissioner Oates and passed by a majority vote. • �rederick County Planning Commission Page 2435 Minutes of March 18, 2009 ® BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planting Commission does hereby table Conditional Use Permit 401 -09 for AT &T and Wesley Helsley, submitted by Dewberry, for a 120 -foot commercial telecotmnmtications facility at 2042 Martinsburg Pike (Route 11) for 28 days to allow the applicant the opportunity to revise the application. The vote was as follows: YES (TABLE 28 DAYS) Ambrogi, Manuel, Ruckman, Oates, Thomas, Ours, Wilmot NO: Unger, Triplett, Kerr, Mohn ABSTAIN Watt (Note: Convnissioner Kriz was absent from the meeting.) Rezoning Application 901 -09 of Silver Lake, LLC, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 238.96 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, and 131.06 acres from RA District to MS (Medical Support) District, with proffers, for commercial use and a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) use. The properties are located on the north side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50 West), west of Retail Boulevard and east of Poor House Road (Route 654). The properties are further identified with P.LN.s 52 -A -C, 52 -A -50, 52- A -50A, 52 -A -52, and 52 -A -63 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval With Proffers Deputy Planning Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that this application is to rezone five parcels totaling 370.02 acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the MS (Medical Support) and B2 (Business General) Districts with proffers for a Continuing Care Retirement Community and commercial land uses. Mr. Ruddy said this particular property was included in the 2006 update to the Round Hill Land Use Plan, wluch was approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2007. He said the land use plan expanded the water and sewer boundaries surrounding this property and it also provided for an improved land use plan for the Round Hill community. The property is located within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). He said the proposed land uses are generally consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Mr. Ruddy said the Round Hill Land Use Plan recommends that as land is developed over time and infrastructure extended, consideration should be given as to how development might contribute towards achieving the long -range goal of providing sewer to the core area of the Round Hill conununity. Furthennore, the Round Hill Land Use Plan encourages a variety of design principles for the Route 50 corridor and this application's proffer statement generally addresses the identified design standards. The Round Hill Plan also calls for a campus -style development and Mr. Ruddy believed a greater amount of consideration could be provided to coordinate the commercial portion of this project in the design layout; in particular, the building location, the site layout, and the design elements. He commented that the application should clearly demonstrate how it will achieve a campus -style development. In addition, the Round Hill Land Use Plan reconunends that a new park be included with the development of this area. He said it was the staff's recommendation that an area ® larger than that currently shown on the Generalized Development Plan (GDP) be provided in order to be consistent with the area shown in the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2436 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -7- Regarding the transportation aspects of the proposal, Mr. Ruddy said the Round Hill Land Use Plan recommends regional transportation improvements along the Route 50 Corridor, as well as on the north side of the corridor which traverses through this project. He said this application addresses these transportation improvements in a positive manner. Regarding the site access and design, Mr. Ruddy referred to the GDP and said it depicts the location of the internal road system serving this project. He said Spinning Wheel Lane, the project's major collector road, connects Route 50 through the site and connects with the existing road system to the rear of the Walmart Shopping Center. Silver Lake Drive provides an additional connection to Route 50, intersects with Spinning Wheel Lane, and it ultimately provides a potential connection to Poor House Road. Mr. Ruddy noted that the application provides for bicycle and pedestrian connectivity throughout the project and along the project's frontage with Route 50, along with pedestrian connections at the major intersections. He added that inter - parcel connectivity has been provided throughout the B2 portions, as development occurs. Mr. Ruddy next focused on potential impacts. He said the applicant's TIA has projected the build -out of this project within four phases. Beyond the four phases, there is no limitation upon the amount of commercial development that could happen. Ultimately, the TIA assumes the total build -out of the continuing care retirement community on the MS District property; 583,050 square feet of commercial retail; and 494,600 square feet of office land use developed over a four -phase study. He said the applicant's transportation program is based upon a four - phased approach and is described in detail in the application and proffer statements as to which particular improvements go with each phase. Mr. Ruddy continued, stating this application provides for the urban four -lane divided section (U4D), but only for the portion of the collector road from Route 50 back to the internal intersection with Silver Lake Drive. Mr. Ruddy stated that the U41) typical section should be extended along the entire length of Spinning Wheel lane with the use of a landscaped median. He said the Round Hill Land Use Plan is specific about this ultimate road section. Mr. Ruddy said this development will have an impact on community facilities and services; however, the commercial component of the project will generate tax revenue for the County. In addition, he recognized the applicant's significant effort to address the fire and rescue community's facility impacts. He said the application provides for land dedicated to Frederick County for the development of a new fire and rescue station and support facilities serving the Round Hill Community; and, the GDP identifies three -to -four acres as a potential location for such a new fire and rescue facility. Additionally, he said the applicant has proffered to provide a monetary contribution to Frederick County in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for the development of a new fire and rescue facility providing service to the Round Hill Community. It was noted that the applicant had not proffered any monetary contributions aimed at mitigating the potential impact of the residential wets on such community facilities as Parks and Recreation, Public Safety, Library, and General Government. Commissioner Thomas noted that staff had suggested a greater amount of area be dedicated for the park; he asked what percentage greater would be more appropriate. Mr. Ruddy replied that the Round Hill Land Use Plan identifies a lake visible from Route 50 and a fame pond internal to the property; he said between the two is a large area of enviromnental features, including floodplains and wetlands. These features were identified during the crafting of the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Mr. Ruddy suggested increasing the area greater than 10% and less than 100 %, but certainly consistent with the environmental features and floodplain that are located in this area. Commissioner Oates referred to the staff's comment that the applicant should demonstrate how he will achieve a campus -style development; he asked the staff if they intended for design criteria to be included, additional landscaping, or some other criteria. Commissioner Oates said he would like to steer away from the typical box store within a sea of pavement and strive to create a nicer development. Mr. Ruddy said the Land Use Plan calls for additional thought and layout in the design and he believed this was needed within the area of commercial buildings. is Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2437 Minutes of March 18, 2009 Deputy Director- Transportation, John A. Bishop, noted that the applicant had offered a substantial transportation package. Mr. Bishop said there is an extensive asphalt trail and pedestrian improvements network throughout the development and in most cases, it develops along with the associated roadways. Mr. Bishop described the transportation improvements associated with each phase of development in detail for the Commission. Mr. Evan W. Wyatt, with Greenway Engineering, was representing the Silver Lake rezoning request which included the Silver Lake commercial rezoning and the National Lutheran Home Medical Support District rezoning. Mr. Wyatt said the land uses, the transportation network, the provision of an opportunity for a new fire and rescue site, and the conversion of a public park into a passive open space area are all in conformance with the Land Use Plan and the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Mr. Wyatt proceeded to address the staffs outstanding issues, as follows: Regarding efforts to achieve a campus -style development, Mr. Wyatt said the applicant is proffering street trees along all major roads; an existing mature woodland area will be preserved along Spinning Wheel Lane; and the bases on monument signs will be consistently designed providing a subtle, but visually - recognizable structure throughout the project. He said major intersections on Route 50 will have crosswalks, pedestrian activation on traffic signals, underground utilities, and proffered inter - parcel connectivity for the commercial uses. In addition, the 50 -foot landscaped strip along Route 50 and Spinning Wheel Lane will contain ornamental shrubs, street trees, and a hiker/biker trail along the entire frontage of the property. Regarding the recommendation to provide a greater area for the park and protect environmental features, Mr. Wyatt said the green area was originally envisioned to be a county-owned public park. however, the Parks & Recreation Board decided against taking the land and it reverted back to a passive open space area. He said this passive open space area is not a public park, although it has been equipped with amenities such as trails that link to Route 50, as well as the main parallel road to Route 50, Spinning Wheel Lane. Additional areas of woodland preservation will be provided with the MDP. Regarding efforts to extend the U41) typical section along the entire length of Spinning Wheel Lane with the use of a landscaped median, Mr. Wyatt said the applicant is providing a landscaped raised median section from Route 50 back to the traffic circle; it transitions out of the traffic circle with some raised median and then continues as an urban section with four lanes, but does not have a raised grass median. He said the road improvement plan designed to tie into the retail is not a raised median, but a four -lane divided highway; he believed this design was consistent with what is perceived to be a campus -style development. It is recognized that this design is not consistent with what is called for in the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Addressing potential impacts associated with commercial development beyond that evaluated, Mr. Wyatt explained the use of color coding for the various road segments and how it related to the project's phases of development. He said the color coding demonstrates phasing improvements, with lighter green to darker green in sequential order, and until every improvement associated with each phase is provided, the applicant is capped at a certain square footage of commercial along the way. For example, if the applicant has an opportunity to develop more than 180,000 square feet of retail use designated for Phase I, the applicant would have to install all the improvements not only in the areas of very light green, but the next shade of green as well. Regarding the staffs continent that additional monetary contributions were not offered by the applicant for community facilities other than fire and rescue, Mr. Wyatt noted they have been working closely with the Sanitation Authority and this project addresses the goals of the Comprehensive Policy Plan by contributing to the expansion of services further up the corridor towards the community center, as follows: 12 -inch water and sewer lines will be installed to satisfy future growth in the area, although the applicant's needs on site require only eight- is inch water and sewer lines; the applicant will install a one - million gallon tank as opposed to a 600,000- gallon water tank projected to be sufficient solely for the project's needs, and easements will be provided at no cost Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2438 Minutes of March 18, 2009 — ® along the applicant's conunercial properties within the S WSA for connectivity by adjacent properties. The water and sewer improvements will not be done right away, but will occur as development proceeds. Mr. Wvatt stated that a fire and rescue station site has been proffered, along with a commitment to provide road access and utilities, if it is used. In addition, he said there is a one - million -dollar monetary proffer payable within five years of the final rezoning approval. Mr. Wyatt commented that the County's Fiscal Impact Model indicated a 32.28 million- dollar positive impact to the County with the projected commercial uses and the independent living units associated with the CCRC will pay real estate taxes, providing another revenue source to the County. Conmhissioner Oates said that with regard to the campus -style setting, he was not looking for building placement, but more so for the applicant to go beyond the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance for the parking areas, such as additional green area, open space, and more environmentally - friendly materials. Mr. Wyatt said that without a known layout detailing where office buildings and retail will be located and the scale and size of the structures, it was difficult to connnit to a certain percentage of green parking within a landbay. Mr. Wyatt said there will be broken up areas, green areas for parking, and small plaza areas, included on the MDP. Conniussioner Thomas said he would like to see an intent or commitment to a non - impervious parking area to the masinhun extent possible with more environmental collection areas for run -off. Mr. Wyatt said they would also like to see that because when projects are designed, they not only have to meet quantity measures, but quality measures and the county's ordinance requirement for all asphalt or concrete, curb and gutter, and hard -pipe, makes it difficult for engineers to reach an environmentally - friendly goal. Mr. Wyatt said he hoped the upcoming ordinance changes would case restrictions and allow for that type of design. • Chairman Wilmot nest opened the public comment portion of the public hearing. The following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Rodney Snapp, Back Creek District, came forward to speak on behalf of the Round Hill Community Fire and Rescue Company. Chairman Wilmot recognized approximately six to ten fire and rescue personnel in attendance with Mr. Snapp. Mr. Snapp said the Round Hill Community Fire and Rescue Company greatly appreciates the intent of the applicant for the proffer to fire and rescue. He expressed concems, however, about the lack of specificity in the language of the applicant's proffer designating the Round Hill Community Fire and Rescue Company as the recipient of the monetary contribution and the acreage proffered for a new facility. He said the proffers are intended for the impacts to the first due company in the area, which is the Round Hill Community Fire and Rescue Company. Unfortunately, the proffer language simply refers to "the County of Frederick for the Round Hill Community" as the recipient of the monetary contribution and acreage. He said theoretically, the money being proffered by the applicant intended for fire and rescue impacts could be used elsewhere. Mr. Snapp quoted language from the County's Amended Cash Proffer Policy, as follows: "...proffer funds received by Frederick County would be held for the use specified in the proffer language. In the case of funds proffered to offset impacts to fire and rescue services, in the absence of other proffered specifications, the funds will be earnharked for the first -due company in the area of the subject rezoning at the time the proffer funds are received." Chairman Wilmot asked for comment from the County Attorney, Mr. Roderick Williams. Mr. Williams made two points: First, that State Law does not clearly allow for anything other than proffers to the local government, itself. Second, the County's policy with respect to the cash proffer policy and the earmarking for first due companies is a guideline the County can follow in terns of how it proceeds on using proffered funds. • He did not see any reason why this applicant's proffer statement, in its current form, would be contrary to that policy. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2439 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -10- Mr. Chester Lauck, the Round Hill Community Fire and Rescue Company Chief, voiced a concern about the impacts of additional traffic on response times for fire and rescue vehicles traveling along Route 50. He suggested pre - emption devices on all the traffic signals installed along Route 50. Ms. Laura Campbell, a resident on Poor House Road, was concerned about increased traffic on Poor House Road. She asked if there was an estimate on the amount of traffic that would be generated by this proposal. Mr. Mike Mullen, a resident along Poor House Road, Gainesboro District, expressed his concern that not all residents along Poor House Road were notified of this public hearing. He said the public hearing sign was only up for a few days; he said he never received notification by mail and was only made aware of the meeting after he called about the posted sign. Mr. Mullen asked the Commission to table the rezoning in order to give those residents who just found out about the proposal time to respond. Mr. Robert (Bob) Carpenter, a resident of Gainesboro District, said he and his Mfe own property directly adjacent to this property and they are the parties who are in discussion with regard to the northern extension of Poor House Road. Mr. Carpenter said at this time, they have not yet reached a final agreement on the road, but are actively talking. He said there is greater potential for direct impact to his and his wife's property than anyone else along Poor House Road, simply because they have approximately '/z mile of adjoining common boundaries. Mr. Carpenter said they are concerned about this project and they have been in discussions with the applicant; he said the applicant has been very forthcoming with their plans. He also has had an opportunity to meet with the representatives from the National Lutheran Home and has seen the scope of the project they plan. He thought it would be a tremendous anchor and an encouragement for other good development on the remainder of the project. Mr. Carpenter believed the National Lutheran Home would bring an enhancement to the Route 50 ® corridor and to the Round Hill community. He said at this moment and based what he knows, both he and his wife supports this plan. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Mr. Wyatt returned to the podium to address comments from the citizens. Mr. Wyatt said the purpose for the relocation of Poor House Road is to take traffic primarily off this area, where there are existing houses, and die road geometry is much less than desirable. He said the current traffic volume is about 1,200 trips and based on complete build out of the project, traffic is anticipated to increase by another 5,800 -7,000 trips; however, those trips would be directed away from the existing houses along Poor House Road. Regarding Mr. Lauck's comment on the traffic signal pre - emption devices, Mr. Wyatt said if for some reason, the three -to -four acre site is not taken and the pre - emption at the Silver Lake signal is no longer a benefit, he would be willing to allow the pre - emption to transfer to the fully - funded traffic signal at the intersection of Poor House and Route 50. Commission members had positive comments about the proposal and commended the applicant and Greenway Engineering for a well- planned and well thought -out project. Commissioners believed this was a good project for Frederick County and they believed the National Lutheran Home component was a much needed asset to the community. A Commission member stated that for the short terns, this project could strengthen the economy in this area as far as the work that would be needed. Commission members said they would like to see a commitment made by the Board of Supervisors that the proffered funds will stay within the Round Hill Community and that the fire and rescue station will benefit from those funds. rI L Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2440 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -11- Conunissioner Triplet made a motion to recormmend approval of the rezoning with proffers ® This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas and was unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Rezoning Application 401 -09 of Silver Lake, LLC, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to rezone 238.96 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to B2 (General Business) District, and 131.06 acres from RA District to MS (Medical Support) District, with proffers, for conunercial use and a Continuing Care Retirement Conununity (CCRC) use. (Note: Commissioner Kriz was absent from the meeting.) COMMISSION DISCUSSION DISCUSSION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 165, ZONING• SPECIFICALLY THE Ml ZONING DISTRICT CHANGES TO ADDRESS ACCESSORY USES. Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported that in December 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved revisions to Section 165 -26 which addressed secondary and accessory use requirements in the zoning ordinance. Ms. Perkins said these new standards prohibited accessory retail in the MI and M2 Zoning Districts; however, as this revision went through the public process, the actual MI regulations were not updated to reflect the accessory use standards. Therefore, this ordinance revision has been prepared to strike accessory retailing from the M 1 permitted uses and will also cover the M2 District. She said additionally, this ordinance revision Is will modify the text to show SIC uses 37 -39 as permitted uses. Ms. Perkins stated this item was presented to the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) at their meeting on February 27, 2009. She said the DRRC understands the proposed ordinance revision is to update the M 1 District in order to be consistent with previously- approved updates. She said the DRRC recommended approval of the changes and reconunended it be sent to the Planning Commission for discussion. Conunissioner Oates was concerned about how this amendment would affect existing retail uses and any plans for those uses to expand in the future; he asked if this amendment would prohibit them from doing additions. Ms. Perkins said that anything in affect prior to the adoption of the secondary use standards would be grandfathered; any type of retail expansions or new uses that would come in after that would be governed by Section 165 -26. No other issues were raised. Ms. Perkins said this item will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors with the Commission's comments for discussion. No action was needed at this time. • Frederick County Planning Corrnnission Page 2441 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -1 2- DISCUSSION OF A SITE PLANFOR THE FREDERICK COUNTY REGIONAL LANDFILL SCALE HOUSE AND SCALES Senior Plainer, Candice E. Perkins, presented a site plan for the Frederick County Regional Landfill Scalehouse and Scales for the Commission's review and comments. She said typically, site plans involving public projects are brought before the Planning Commission for inforniation. She said this site plan is for the construction of a new Scalehouse, as well as the addition of two new weight scales to replace the existing scales at the existing landfill facility on Sulphur Springs Road in the Shawnee Magisterial District. Commissioner Unger commented that many citizens may not be aware of how well the landfill is run and how much the landfill does for the county. Other Commission members agreed. No issues of concern were raised. No action was needed by the Conunission at this time. SUMMARY OF THE 2009 PLANNING COMMISSION RETREAT Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that staff has prepared a summary of the topics discussed at the 2009 Planing Commission's Retreat, as well as list of the identified major planning projects for 2009. Mr. Lawrence said the Planning Staff is prepared to move forward on the following identified projects during the next year: 1) Review, update, and rewrite of the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan; 2) Route 11 North Land Use Plan; 3) Senseny Road Area Land Use Plan; 4) Develop ordinances to implement the UDA Study - -Urban Center and Neighborhood Village, 5) Develop ordinances to implement the recommendations of the RA Study; and 6) Evaluate and implement Affordable/ Workforce Housing Initiatives. The Planning Commission members were in agreement with the staffs list of identified projects for the upcoming year. UPDATE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated that since the adoption of the Planning Commission's Bylaws in early January, the Bylaws Work Group had reviewed three items that warranted additional consideration for inclusion into the Bylaws. Those items were: 1) Public meeting presentation time guidelines and the possible consideration of establishing presentation time limits applicable to staff and applicant presentations; 2) Detennination of when an application is complete and ready for scheduling on a Planning Commission agenda; and 3) A time restriction for how long an application may be tabled. Mr. Lawrence reported that the Bylaws Work Group recommended that Item 3 be addressed with a Bylaw amendment; however, Items 1 and 2 do not warrant inclusion in the Bylaws at this time. Mr. Lawrence said Item 3 could be addressed in the Bylaws with the following additional sentence to Paragraph 8- 3 -9 -2: "In no case shall an application be tabled for more than 12 months from the time the complete application was received by the Zoning Administrator or applicable staff." Mr. Lawrence said if the Planning Commission believes this amendment is appropriate, he would bring the amended Bylaws back to the Commission after 30 days, which would be May 6, 2009, for review and adoption. 0 �rederick County Planning Commission Page 2442 Minutes of March 18, 2009 -13- The Planning Commission was in agreement to authorize the staff to unitiate the 30 -day notice to change the Bylaws in order to incorporate a time restriction for tabling and to schedule the revisions for the • Planning Commission's consideration and adoption on May 6, 2009. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, Wilmot, Chairman Secretary u • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2443 Minutes of March 18, 2009