Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_11-03-10_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 3, 2010. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Brian Madagan, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; J. Stanley Crockett, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Kevin 0. Crosen, Back Creek District; Philip E. Lemieux, Red Bud District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; and Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney. ABSENT: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Mark R Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; and Rpnee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. A motion was made by Commissioner Kriz to adopt the November 3, 2010, agenda for this evening's meeting. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and unanimously passed. COMMITTEE REPORTS Transportation Committee — 10/25/10 Mtg. Commissioner Kriz reported on the following items from the Transportation Committee: 1) an update on the Comprehensive Policy Plan was received; 2) a recommendation was made to submit a letter of intent for Revenue Sharing 2011; 3) a recommendation was made to obtain more information on a sidewalk fund in Spotsylvania; 4) an update on the Route 37 Eastern Bypass was received as a result of the meeting held with VDOT on October 21, 2010. ®' Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2694 Minutes of November 3, 2010 -2- • 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 Rezoning 401 -10 of Busy Beez Daycare, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to revise proffers associated with Rezoning 405 -01 for 1.324 acres of land, zoned B3 (Industrial Transition) District, to B3 with revised proffers, and 0.567 acres, zoned B3 to B2 (Business general) District, with revised proffers, totaling 1.89 acres. The properties are located on the west side of Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11), approximately 2,000 feet south of 1 -81, Exit 323. The properties are further identified with P.LN.s 33 -A -92 and 33 -A -93 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval with Proffers Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this application is to revise the proffers for 1.324 acres of land, zoned B3 (Industrial Transition), and to rezone 0.567 acres of land from the B3 District to the B2 (Business General) District with revised proffers, totaling 1.89 acres. Ms. Perkins stated the 1.89 -acre property was originally rezoned in 2001 to the B3 District with proffers. She said this rezoning seeks to allow for the addition of SIC 8351 (child day -care facilities) only on the 0.567 -acre portion seeking the B2 zoning; all other uses are consistent with the 2001 rezoning. She said the land uses proposed in this application are consistent with the business designation of the Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP) and the application has addressed all of staff's concerns. Representing this application for Tim and Margaret Johnson was Mr. Evan A. Wyatt with Greenway Engineering. Mr. Wyatt stated the Board of Supervisors approved a rezoning for this property in 2001 and this rezoning enabled the Johnsons to develop the back portion of their property, which is now American Auto Body. He said the Johnsons also have a small portion at the front of the property; he noted the properties are both zoned B3 and in 2001, proffers were applied to both parcels. Mr. Wyatt said when the Planning Staff was consulted about the requirements to prepare for a daycare facility, it was thought that in order to be prudent, since some of the proffers done in 2001 had already been implemented, this rezoning should be processed to bring the back piece into current proffer and to request the zoning of the front piece to 132. Mr_ Wyatt said that since daycare facilities are not permitted as a standalone land use in the B3, they are requesting a down - zoning of the small portion in the front. Mr. Wyatt said they have modified the proffers by eliminating those proffers that have already been implemented and eliminating those uses that would be allowed in the B3 at the front of the property. He noted that none of the reviewing agencies have any issues with this request. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for citizen comments. The following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Stephen Johnston, a resident of the Stonewall Magisterial District, was concerned about the adjacent M 1 -zoned property. He said there was a driveway between the M1 -zoned property and the property being considered, which ran the entire length of the properties, and he did not think there was is Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2695 Minutes of November 3. 2010 -3- enough room to create a buffer between the two properties. Mr. Johnston thought some setback would be • required. Ms. Rhonda Lynch, adjoining property owner, did not believe a daycare center was appropriate at this location because of all the development taking place in this area, along with being so close to Route 11. She was concerned about safety for the children and believed fencing and /or gating should be required, if this use was approved. Chairman Wilmot asked the staff about the zoning issue. Ms. Perkins replied there was a discrepancy in the zoning shown on the maps taken from the County's GIS and the maps within the Planning Department. Ms. Perkins said she would check the maps again and make a determination on the zoning. Mr. Wyatt said his information showed the adjacent property as RA. He said nonetheless, if the adjoining property is zoned M1 or M2, and the applicant's property is zoned B2, no screening element is required within a 50 -foot distance between the permitted land use and the property line. He remarked that from a buffering standpoint, there is no issue. Commissioner Oates said the playground area in the rear of the property will have to be fenced. He also noted that this was a down zoning from B3 to B2. Commissioner Oates next made a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning application. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Crockett and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommended approval of Rezoning #01 -10 of Busy Beez Daycare, submitted by Greenway Engineering, • to revise proffers associated with Rezoning 905 -01 for 1.324 acres of land, zoned B3 (Industrial Transition) District, to B3 with revised proffers and 0.567 acres, zoned B3, to B2 (Business general) District, with revised proffers, totaling 1.89 acres. A waiver request by AT &T Corporation, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to allow a 120 -foot, lattice -type telecommunications tower in lieu of a 120 -foot, monopole -type telecommunication tower as approved within Conditional Use Permit 405 -10. The properties are located on the east side of Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11 North), approximately 'A mile northeast of I -81, Exit 317. The properties are further identified with P.f.N.s 43 -A -130 and 43 -A -132 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action — Recommended Approval Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported that Greenway Engineering, on behalf of AT &T Corporation, is requesting a waiver to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, 165- 204.19B Telecommunications Facilities, Commercial, to allow a 120 -foot, lattice -type telecommunication tower in lieu of a 120 -foot, monopole -type telecommunication tower approved with Conditional Use Permit 405 -10 of AT &T Corporation, Melissa Hall, Wesley Helsley, and Bradley Pollack. Mr. Cheran stated CUP #05 -10 was • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2696 Minutes of November 3, 2010 approved by the Board of Supervisors on August 11, 2010, for a 120 -foot, monopole -type • telecommunication tower. Mr. Cheran reported that on October 14, 2010, an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165- 204.19B(2), was approved to allow the Board of Supervisors to waive the monopole -type tower for properties which are located outside the UDA (Urban Development Area) and are not adjacent to properties identified as historic sites. He said the AT &T Corporation properties are located outside the UDA and are not located adjacent to identified historical resources. Mr. Cheran stated the applicant believes the construction of a lattice -type telecommunications tower will be less visually obtrusive to existing residential land uses and a lattice -type tower will provide a greater opportunity for co- locating personal wireless service providers. He also noted that the conditions assigned to CUP #05- 10 will remain in effect. Commissioner Oates said the only difference between the previous two times the Planning Commission recommended denial of a monopole -type tower and this third request, is that now the Board of Supervisors has the final say in whether or not the monopole is acceptable. Mr. Cheran replied that was correct; he said nothing else has changed regarding this application. Commissioner Crockett inquired if a monopole tower can be used to co- locate as many users as a lattice -type tower. He asked if more towers would be needed to get the same job done, if monopoles were used. Mr. Robert Erickson, with AT &T Corporation, believed more appurtenants could be placed on a lattice -type tower rather than a monopole tower. Mr. Erickson said the monopole would have to be pre - designed with all of the welded, fabricated arms when it is constructed in anticipation of what • may be coming. With a lattice -type tower, it is easier to attach additional antennas after it has been erected. Mr. Erickson said since there is inherently no attachment points with a monopole tower, there would either have to be structural collars to attach arms for antennas or pre -weld the attachment points. So physically, with the diameter of the monopole, there would not be as many places to attach cellular antennas. There are some limitations as to what can be placed on a monopole, compared to a lattice tower. Commissioner Kriz thought this tower was to be limited to only two users. Mr. Wyatt replied the conditional use permit was limited to two microwave dishes. Mr. Erickson added that AT &T's primary use was for microwave dishes and a line -of -site transmission up to the mountain is needed. Mr. Erickson added that a condition of the County is that this tower be available for co- locating of other cellular providers. Commissioner Kriz asked if the applicant would be doing just FEMA operations. Commissioner Kriz remarked that the Commission was told the last time this applicant came forward that the government would not allow other providers on the tower. Mr. Erickson clarified this was the case when they were attempting to place the tower on top of the FEMA building and FEMA would not allow another outside provider in that situation. Mr. Erickson said that although FEMA operations will be their primary focus, this proposal is now on AT &T property and will be available for co- location. Commissioner Oates inquired how many co- locaters are typically on a tower. Mr. Erickson said most providers want 20 feet of vertical separation, so they are limited with a 120 -foot tower. Mr. Erickson said they could possibly get two additional co- locators on the 120 -feet along with • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2697 Minutes of November 3, 2010 -5- their microwave dishes. He said the lattice -tower will allow more co- locators structurally, but in this • case, the vertical height limits what can be placed. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for citizen comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Crockett made a motion to recommend approval of the waiver request. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Madagan and passed by a majority vote. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of a waiver request by AT &T Corporation, submitted by Greenway Engineering, to allow a 120 -foot, lattice -type telecommunications tower in lieu of a 120 -foot, monopole -type telecommunication tower as approved within Conditional Use Permit #05 -10. The majority vote was: YES (TO REC. APPROVAL) Unger, Crosen, Ambrogi, Manuel, Triplett, Mohn, Madagan, Crockett NO: Oates, Kriz, Lemieux, Wilmot (Note: Commissioner Thomas was absent from the meeting.) A proposed amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 202, Off - Street Parking, Loading and Access, 165- 202.01, Off - Street Parking; Parking Lots. This amendment will provide a revision to the curb and gutter requirements for parking areas. Action — Recommended Approval Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, stated that staff has been requested to draft an amendment to the zoning ordinance to revise the curb and gutter requirement for parking areas. Ms. Perkins stated the zoning ordinance currently requires curb and gutter around the entire perimeter of parking lots in all zoning districts, with the exception of B3, OM, M1, and M2, which were revised in 2009. She explained that the original amendment requested was to utilize header curb within parking lots, eliminating the concrete gutter pan when not necessary for the drainage of storm water. Ms. Perkins said this item was emailed to the DRRC (Development Review and Regulations Committee) on September 20, 2010. She noted the DRRC had concerns over the request as submitted by the applicant and requested it be revised. The DRRC discussed the durability of the use of only header curb within parking areas and the fact it would not hold up as well as curb and gutter. They believed that when parking areas are adjacent to buildings and a sidewalk with a turndown curb is used, the elimination of the gutter pan may be appropriate, but the remainder of the parking areas should be constructed utilizing curb and gutter, either CG -6 or CG -6R. Ms. Perkins stated that based on the comments and concerns received by the DRRC, the draft amendment was revised to only allow for the elimination of the gutter when the storm water drains away from the curb and only for parking areas that abut buildings when sidewalks with turndown curbing are used. She said with those changes, the DRRC • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2698 Minutes of November 3, 2010 recommended the ordinance amendment be forwarded to the Planning Commission for discussion. The • Planning Commission discussed the item at their October 6 meeting; the Commission was in favor of the proposed amendment as revised and forwarded it to the Board for discussion. Although the Board forwarded the proposed amendment forward for public hearing, Board members expressed concern over the curb and gutter requirements contained within the zoning ordinance and its affect on storm water management and water quality and they directed the Public Works Committee to look into additional revisions to the curb and gutter requirements. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for citizen comments. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Planning Commission members were in favor of the amendment as presented by the staff. Upon motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Kriz, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of a proposed amendment to the Frederick Count' Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article II, Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 202, Off - Street Parking, Loading and Access, 165- 202.01, Off - Street Parking; Parking Lots. This ordinance amendment will provide a revision to the curb and gutter requirements for parking areas. (Note: Commissioner Thomas was absent from the meeting.) • OTHER • MIDDLETOWN AREA ACTIVITIES Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, stated the Town of Middletown is interested in a boundary line adjustment with the County. Mr. Lawrence said the Town held a community meeting to discuss their intent with their constituents. He said when the Town met with the County to ask for support, the County's response was for a Steering Committee to be formed to better understand the situation. Mr. Lawrence explained the Steering Committee, consisting of members of the Board of Supervisors and the Town Council, was established and has met over the past four -to -five months to discuss potential land uses in this area. Based on whether there is community support for those land uses, those ideas will be taken to the next level to talk about how to provide public utilities and whether or not the boundary line adjustment is ultimately appropriate for this location. Mr. Lawrence said his intention was to bring the Planning Commission up -to -date quickly because the land use plan exercise has just started. Mr. Lawrence showed the location, which was just east of the Interstate Interchange and is approximately 300 -320 acres in size. He said the land use concepts talked about are predominantly commercial and industrial opportunities. He said 28 acres of commercial business and about 160 acres of technology are envisioned, possibly utilizing the OM District. A few transportation elements are also being considered. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2699 Minutes of November 3, 2010 -7- Mr. Lawrence stated that a public comment meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, • November 18, 2010, at 7:00 p.m., at the Middletown Fire Hall. Mr. Lawrence said they were seeking a general consensus between the elected officials and residents of that area before going further. ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and upon motion by Commissioner Kriz and second by Commissioner Madagan, the meeting adjourned at 730 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, Wilmot, Chairman Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary • • Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2700 Minutes of November 3, 2010