Loading...
PC_10-01-03_Meeting_MinutesMEETING MINUTES • OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING • Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on October 1, 2003. STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Planning Director; Abbe S. Kennedy, Senior Planner; Jeremy F. Camp, Planner II; and, Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; Roger L.I Thomas, Vice Chairman/Opequon District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Pat Gochenour, Red Bud District; Marie F. Straub, Red Bud District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District; Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Gene E. Fisher,ICltizen at Large; Richard C. Shickle, Board of Supervisors Liaison; Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. • COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) - 09/25/03 Mtg. Commissioner Thomas reported that the DRRS is continuing discussions on the parking of semi - trailers and tractors in RP -zoned areas; he said the DRRS provided the staff with ideas and suggestions on how to proceed. Commissioner Thomas said that the DRRS also discussed other items to pursue over the next several months. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1162 -2- • PUBLIC HEARING The Virginia Department of Transportation and the Frederick County Planning Commission, in accordance with Section 33.1 -70.01 of the Code of Virginia, will conduct a joint public hearing. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public comment on the proposed Secondary Six -Year Plan for Fiscal Years 2004/05 through 2009/10 in Frederick County, and on the Secondary System Construction Budget for Fiscal year 2004/05. i All projects in the Secondary Six -Year Plan that are eligible for federal funds will be included in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which documents how Virgi is will obligate federal transportation funds. Action - Recommended Approval Planner Jeremy F. Camp presented the 2004 -2005 Frederick County Secondary Road Improvement Plan to the Commission. Planner Camp said the major road improvement projects have undergone no major changes this year. He reported that Avlor Road, in two sections, remain' the top priority, followed by Warrior Drive, Greenwood Road, and Sulphur Springs Road. He said the hardsurface road improvement projects have not undergone any priority changes, however, there is a significant change due to the initiation of the Rural Rustic Road Program by VDOT. He noted that currently, Adams' Road is the only road in Frederick County within this program which allows the County the option for paving roads currently on the hardsurfacing improvement list to be overlaid with tar and chip instead of the normal surface material. Planner Camp said the top five priorities for the hardsurface road improvement projects were Adams Road, in two sections, Back Creek Road, Gough Road, and Ebenezer Church Road. Planner Camp continued, stating that on September 2, 2003, the Transportation Committee recommended approval of the 2004 -2005 Secondary Road Improvement Plan as presented tojthe Commission. Planner Camp said there were no citizen comments at the meeting. i Mr. Benjamin (Ben) Lineberry with VDOT, Edinburg Residency, came forward to provide information on the status of Warrior Drive, which was a question raised by the Commission. Mr. Lineberry said there were delays because of issues dealing with the construction design for crossing Wrights Run, however, the completion date is scheduled for sometime in the Fall of this year. Mr. Jerry Copp with VDOT, Edinburg Residency, came forward to answer questions regarding the status of Hollow Road, the funding procedures for Greenwood and Sulphur Springs Road, and to provide a description of the guidelines for VDOT's Rural Rustic Program. In light of the 500 vehicle trips maximum guideline for the rural rustic roads, a member of the Commission questioned the county's ability to control growth on those roads in light of by -right development on five -acre tracts in rural areas. Chairman DeHaven called for public input, however, no one came forward to speak. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Ours, I 0 Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1163 -3- . BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the Secondary Six -Year Plan for Fiscal Years 2004 /05 through 2009 /10 in Frederick County, and on the Secondary System Construction Budget for Fiscal year 2004 /05 as presented. Request for Expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to include the entire area of a 98.7768 acre parcel which is located approximately three quarters of a mile east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), on the north side of Brucetown Road (Route 672). The parcel is identified by Property Identification Number 34 -A -11, and is located in the Stonewall Magisterial District i i Action - Recommended Approval Senior Planner Abbe S. Kennedy stated that the Planning Staff has received a request from Triad Engineering, Inc. to include approximately 98 acres of land, currently zoned EM (Extractive Manufacturing) into the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA); she noted that a portion of the site is currently located within the SWSA. Planner Kennedy stated that the catalyst for this request is the following item on the Planning Commission's agenda this evening, a rezoning request to down zone the property from EM to M 1 (Light Industrial). She said that both the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors have discussed this SWSA expansion request and by action of the Board of Supervisors on September 10, 2003, the staff has been instructed to schedule the SWSA request for public hearings. Mr. Ty Lawson, the attorney representing the applicant, was present to answer questions from • the Commission. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Kurt Waldruff, a resident at 2206 Brucetown Road, expressed his concern that the entire 98 -acre parcel was being proposed for inclusion in the SWSA and for rezoning for a 125000 square foot building; he questioned the applicant's intent for the remainder of the property. Mr. Waldruff had concerns about the traffic impacts as well as the anticipated water usage. In addition, he commented that the neighborhood meeting hosted by the applicant was not well - advertised or posted and he believed that many residents were unaware of the meeting. Ms. Trudy Franklin, a resident at 2494 Brucetown Road, expressed her concerns about the existing traffic situation on Brucetown Road and her concern for neighborhood safety and property damage. She said that Brucetown Road has no shoulders and the daily volume of truck traffic is almost intolerable; she counted 30 trucks in less than %2 -hour period which continues daily for about four hours. Ms. Franklin said that she spoke to someone at VDOT in Edinburg regarding a No Through Truck Traffic restriction on Brucetown Road and she would like to have that pursued. She mentioned that porches are located two feet off the road, there are mailboxes six inches from the road, and telephone poles are less than 12 inches off the road; she said that 18- wheelers are traveling on this road on their way from the quarry. She reported that she has had damage to her property; she stated that the road is dangerous and the trucks are destructive. Ms. Franklin remarked that before any approvals take place for industrial growth in this area, she wouldl like to see: 1) a is Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1164 -4- • no through truck traffic restriction on Brucetown Road; 2) improvements to the existing roads for safety; and, 3) no industrial traffic through Brucetown. Ms. Kathy Whitier, a Brucetown resident, commented that during the summer months, Clearbrook Park produces considerable traffic and there are occasions on weekends when there are 100 vehicles lined up along Brucetown Road. She said that her home is 10 feet off the road and she is very much impacted by the existing traffic on Brucetown Road. Ms. Whitier said that before future development takes place, the impacts on the existing homes and roads needs to be studied. Mr. Kenneth Y. Stiles, a resident and dairy farmer in the Stonewall District, pointed out that the sole question before the Commission on this request is the question of the extension of the SWSA; he commented that for at least 25 years, the County has been making continual efforts to get a water line to Brucetown and, hopefully, a sewer line also. Mr. Stiles said that if this particular area was included in the SWSA, it would bring those lines closer to Brucetown; and, more importantly, it would be at the point where the line is out of the rock and near shale. He said that the cost of extending the line through the limestone has always been the prohibitive factor; he said that a number of studies were done and grants applied for. In conclusion, Mr. Stiles said that the closer the line gets, the sooner the service can ultimately be looked forward to in Bmcetokm. Mr. Arthur (Art) L. Bragg, a resident of Brucetown, came forward to address the traffic situation. It was Mr. Bragg's opinion that this 98 -acre tract was being considered for a future industrial park. Mr. Bragg stated that Brucetown Road can not handle the traffic for that kind of use. Mr. Bragg suggested that Woodside Road (Rt. 671) be utilized as the access for any future industrial use on that property. • Since everyone had been given an opportunity to speak, Chairman DeHaven i closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Commissioner Light commented that when this request came before the Com 1 prehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS), it was viewed as a good business which the County should try to accommodate; however, since that time, there has been no commitment from the applicant on how the traffic concerns will be addressed. Commissioner Light was hesitant about placing 100 acres of M1 -zoned land in the SWSA without knowing how Brucetown Road, from the quarry to Rt. 11, and the intersection of Brucetown Road, Hopewell Road, and Rt. 11, will function. He realized that traffic didlnot apply to the SWSA, however, he believed it was a package deal and the traffic impacts needed to be mitigated. He added that this parcel is served by rail, gas, and electric, all within I -81 access; he said the potential for intensive uses and traffic exists and the Commission needs to know how it can be safely handled. *Commissioner Light moved to table the SWSA request to allow further study by the Planning Staff and VDOT of the traffic impacts, particularly, any possible solutions at the intersection and Brucetown Road that would create safe traffic flow, if the requested 100 acres of rezoned land fed into the area, and to provide a recommendation to the Commission. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Straub and was passed by the following majority vote: YES (TO TABLE) Straub, Gochenour, Watt, Light, Kriz, Fisher, Rosenberry NO: Unger, Morris, DeHaven, Thomas, Ours, Triplett is Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1165 -5- • *(PLEASE NOTE: COMMISSIONER LIGHT'S MOTION WAS RESCINDED LATER IN THE MEETING; A NEW MOTION WAS MADE, SECONDED, AND VOTED ON BY THE COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE SWSA EXPANSION.) Rezoning 910 -03 of Frederick Land Company, LLC, submitted by Triad Engineering, to rezone 98.7768 acres from EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District to MI (Industrial Light) District. This property is located approximately three quarters of a mile east of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11), on the north side of Brucetown Road (Route 672), and is identified with Property Identification Number 34 -A -11 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval Senior Planner Abbe S. Kennedy acknowledged that the request to down -zone the subject parcel from EM (Extractive Manufacturing) to M 1 (Light Industrial) zoning is fundamentally in conformance with the land use policies ofthe Comprehensive Policy Plan; however, the impacts to the existuig infrastructure, specifically, transportation, sewer, and water, have not been clearly addressed by the applicant in the submitted rezoning request. She said there were no guarantees from the applicant within the rezoning request limiting the square footage of M 1 use, nor any guarantees on traffic generation which could mitigate the impact to Brucetown Road and Rt. 11. Also, she pointed out there are no guarantees as to how any road improvements that may be required to mitigate the impact of this proposal or any future site plans for the entire 98 -acre • industrial site will be addressed. In addition, no traffic impact analysis was submitted - the rezoning request. Planner Kennedy continued, noting that VDOTs comments include a number of transportation improvements that will need to be addressed and she read those for the Commission. She commented that none of these road improvements are offered in a guarantee to the County as part of the rezoning propos al; in addition, none of the mentioned road improvements are listed on the County's Six -Year Tracisportation Plan. She added that the submitted proffer statement, although not signed by the owner or notanzed, states that following the approval of a site plan and building permit for an initial 125,000 square -foot facility, plus ancillary uses, the property owner will prepare and submit atraffic impact analysis for any subsequent projects on this property. She further added that no specific use has been identified in the impact analysis statement by the applicant, nor identified in a proffer statement, therefore, any allowed use within the M I District could occur on the 98 -acre site. In conclusion, she stated that no generalized development plan has been submitted that would identify the number, size, or location of this or any future proposed M 1 facilities that could occur as a result of the approval of this rezoning. Commissioner Thomas pointed out that this request was for a down zoning, which is a less - intensive use than what is already allowed on the property; he said the projected impacts should focus on the difference in the level of traffic that would be experienced from this site being completely developed as an extractive mining site compared to being completely developed as an M1 site. Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence interjected that the staff looks to the applicant to provide details to assist in the analysis and to show projected impacts on the road system; he said that without this impact study, the traffic impacts are all speculation at this point in time. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1166 • Mr. Ben Linebury with VDOT, Edinburg Residency, was asked whether VDOT had received any of the information referred to by Director Lawrence. Mr. Linebury stated that VDOT has not received a traffic impact analysis that would bear the information Director Lawrence mentioned. Mr. Ty Lawson came forward on behalf of the applicant and stated that this property is a potential site for the Maryland- Virginia Milk Producers Cooperative Association, Inc. for a milk balancing facility. He said the proposed user of this site is a cooperative of dairy farmers, wholly) owned by dairy farmers, and exists solely for the benefit of the dairy farmers involved in the co-op. Mr. Lawson explained that similar sites are being evaluated in Maryland, West Virginia, and Virginia in the sense that they are close to I -81, however, the other sites are properly zoned and have utilities. He mentioned that this site is immediately adjacent to the water treatment plant, which is of particular interest for the user, and two comers of the property already fall within the S W SA. He pointed out that sealed tankers will be used for transport, not dump trucks that would be associated with a quarry, and because of the location to I -81, trips will be west -bound to 81 and then north and south to various points in the country. Mr. Lawson added that a traffic study has been commissioned from Mr. John Callow of Patton, Harris, Rust, & Associates, Inc. and their traffic study produced to this point confirms that the Level of Service (LOS) that exists today will not be degraded, if this plant comes on line. Mr. Lawson explained that the numbers used for the study, 150 trucks per day and 50 employees per day, were intentionally inflated, although the more realistic figures would be approximately 20 -40 trucks per day. He said that even at the higher number, the existing LOS is not degraded. In order to be suitable for this proposed used, he said that this site needs to have the extension of the SW SA to include the property, the property needs to be down -zoned from EM to Ml, and utilities need to be extended to the property. Mr. Lawson reminded the Commission that • this site is being evaluated along with others and because the other sites being evaluated i n have these deficiencies, time is of essence. Mr. Lawson next described what a milk - balancing facility does. Briefly, he said the facility accepts raw milk directly from farms and processes it into products such as butter, condensedlmilk, cream, and powdered milk which are in turn sold to other industry, primarily the baking industry. IHe noted that a significant amount of distilled water comes out of this process when the milk is converted to other products; this facility is projected to generate up to 300,000 gallons per day of distilled water. Mr. Lawson explained that when evaluating the other sites, a criteria considered included which sites would have a use for the distilled water and the Frederick County Sanitation Authority has expressed an interest in capturing this by- product. Mr. Lawson continued, stating that they have been working with VDOT and Frederick County on a proffer that deals specifically with traffic and an outline of their proposal would be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration, as follows: 1) The owner of the property will agree to install trip counters, which record all vehicles entering and exiting the property on a daily basis; 2) The owner will agree that once a predetermined number of trips are reached, a traffic study will be commissioned by the owner; 3) The owner, working and cooperating with VDOT and Frederick County, will agree at that time, what traffic improvements need to be installed to address any issues raised by the study, which are attributable to any increased vehicle trips generated by activities on the property; that cooperation will include the pursuit by all parties of industrial access, revenue sharing, and/or any other program available to fund said improvements; and, 4) If the programs and other cooperation are unsuccessful, the owner will agree to install the improvements before it proceeds with any further development of the property that will yield increased vehicle trips. r 1 U Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1167 -7- • In conclusion, Mr. Lawson stated that it has been expressed that there is a concern about rezoning this property somewhat hypothetically, and this situation is unusual, not only for a down zoning, but that it is for a specific use. This owner has no difficulty and will agree that any rezoning by the Board of Supervisors will either be contingent on or will not occur, unless this owner commits to this facility, which means the owner commits to purchase the property and install the facility that has been described. 1 Chairman DeHaven called for questions for Mr. Lawson from the Commission. Commissioner Straub pointed out that the proposed 125,000 square -foot facility will occupy approximately three acres; she was concerned why all of the 98 acres was being requested for rezoning and she questioned the applicant's intentions for the remainder of the property. She also inquired iftheiapplicant would be willing to proffer out any uses in the M 1 District for the remaining acreage. She rem azk I that there was not a significant amount of the property currently inside the SWSA. Mr. Lawson replied that the only use proposed at this point is to build the facility that has been described. He added that they are hoping there may be opportunities to expand into other facilities involving milk producers which relate to their business of generating and marketing milk. i Commissioner Rosenberry was concerned about moving forward on a rezoning without having an impact study or a proffer. He remarked that it would be difficult for the Commission to make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors without the benefit of reviewing those documents. Commissioner Rosenberry asked Mr. Lawson if he would consider delaying the rezoning until those documents were completed or if he could present something in writing to the Planning Commission as a guarantee. Mr. Lawson continued to state that the proffers and other information will be completed in time for the Board's hearing. • Commissioner Rosenberry inquired if the applicant could address the roa improvements recommended by VDOT that were listed in the staff's report. Mr. Lawson stated that their pending traffic study indicates that the improvements recommended by VDOT were not warranted by this facility on the roads as they exist today. Mr. Lawson stated that if, in the future, their use generates that traffic count, the applicant is committed to do another traffic study and is committed to making the improvements needed. Commissioner Fisher asked for clarification on the number of acres that will be needed for this facility, including the parking, accessory structures, etc. He also had questions on when the trips generated would trigger the traffic studies and on what acreage the studies and restrictions would be based. Commissioner Thomas asked Mr. Lawson if the traffic study could calculate the potential maximum trips per day, if the property was fully developed as an extractive mining site, including the distribution of the types of traffic and trips, and then what could be expected if the entire 98 acres were developed as an MI site. Commissioner Thomas said he would be interested in knowing if there would bean increase or decrease in traffic. Commissioners Straub and Gochenour wanted to see something in writing, by way of guarantees for the Commission, so that they could make a recommendation to the Board based on facts. Commissioner Morris said that Mr. Lawson made reference to the possibility of a conditional zoning of some sort, by suggesting that he would be willing to put in writing that rezoning would be completely dependent upon this company coming to this site. The Commission's legal counsel, Mr. Jay Cook, advised • that Frederick County can not engage in conditional zoning. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1168 • Commissioner Morris believed all of the Commissioners were supportive of this particular industry and were sensitive to the associated time frame; he appreciated the fact that the Commission knew up front what specific industry was coming. He said that he would hate to see the Commission do anything that would immediately side track the entire discussion of this particular industry coming to Frederick County and lose it because of fumbling with procedures and rules. However, he shared the feelings previously expressed about the lack of a written proffer approved by the County Attorney and some of the transportation issues. As a minimum, he hoped the Commission might officially designate some type of resolution stating that the Commission was very much in favor of this particular project, so that during negotiations, some goodwill would be expressed, even in the lack of procedural discussions, that the County is working through the process. i At this point, Chairman DeHaven commented on procedural issues, noting that this item would not qualify for an actual rezoning until such time as it is included in the SWSA. Chairman DeHaven pointed out that the previous request, which was tabled, will not be able to be reconsidered by the Commission until the first meeting in November, at the earliest, because of advertising requirements. He said that unless the Commission would care to reconsider their decision to table, the SWSA issue will not be dealt with by the Commission until the first meeting inNovember, at the earliest, although it would not preclude the Commission from making a recommendation concerning the rezoning request. Chairman DeHaven next called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Kenneth Y. Stiles, a resident of Stonewall District and a member /owner of the Maryland - Virginia Milk Producers Association, stated that it makes no financial difference whatsoever to the dairy • farmers in Frederick County whether this facility is located in Frederick County, Berkeley County, or Washington County, Maryland because it has no financial impact from that standpoint. Mr. Stiles said that as for other uses on the site, mindful that he could not speak for the co -op, but the co -op's headquarters are in Reston, Virginia and at some point, it would make sense to relocate that facility to this location. Mr. Stiles remarked that the Commission's previous decision to table the SWSA request without asking the applicant how n it would affect their time table was irresponsible and could tilt the decision of the applicant i another direction. Mr. Stiles was not in favor of holding up the application because of procedural issues. Mr. Stiles continued, addressing the following issues: 1) this was, in fact, a down- zoning; 2) the nature of the traffic generated will be different than if the property was used as EM; 3) the use will generate tax revenue for the County; this plant will have a significant amount of machinery and equipment, which is subject to the machinery and tools tax; many individuals believe the County needs to aggressively pursue developing this sector of the economy; 4) employment; 50 jobs are projected; 5) the traffic, both trucks and employees, is distributed over 24 hours a day, which will ameliorate the impact to a degree. Mr. Stiles expressed concern about two other issues: he mentioned that when a rezoning comes up for discussion, the applicant is frequently asked what uses he is willing to proffer out; he said that if there is a use in the MI Zone that is not suitable, it should be removed from the ordinance so it's not allowed in the first place. Finally, Mr. Stiles expressed support for the individuals stating their concerns about the traffic through Brucetown. He remarked it was no place for heavy -duty trucks, particularly milk trailers or quarry trucks, and he would fully support any efforts by the Commission and the Board to prohibit through truck traffic on the section of road that leads directly through Brucetown to the bridge. Mr. David (Dave) Kollar, Chairman of the Winchester - Frederick County Economic Development Commission (EDC), briefly described his background and experience in the field of economic Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1169 MGM • development in this area and the state. Mr. Kollar said that one of the lessons he has learned in his capacity over the previous 12 years, particularly in regards to business and industrial development, is that there are two things that local government frequently has no control over —one of them is timing, and sometimes timing is everything, and the other was perception. Mr. Kollar advised that getting good - quality industry to locate in a community doesn't happen overnight and is not easy; he said there is not a cornucopia of businesses that are waiting to locate in a community —it is an effort. He said the perceptions that the community puts forth by decisions made often turns green lights into yellow lights. Mr. Kollar continued, stating the Winchester - Frederick County Economic Development Commission (EDC) responds to applicants who inquire about the community, especially when one of those applicants fits one of the five cluster industries sought by the EDC -- technology and health, food, printing, plastics, and metals. Mr. Kollar said the EDC responds professionally and quickly because in business and industry, time is money. He said the proposed user is one of those sought -after clusters that, quits frankly, this community is doing quite well with. Mr. Kollar hoped that the Commission could move forward on this because this was an industry that works well in our community and is a high -tech facility. Mr Kollar said that he has toured the facility, and has spent a number of hours at the facility, and from his personal inspection, he can state that this is a high - quality client. Mr. Kollar pointed out that one of the nice benefits from this facility is the water that Mr. Lawson spoke of, he said that any water treatment facility is going to tell you that if they have access to distilled water, it is a plus. Mr. Kollar said that he also serves on the Air Quality Board for the community and although there is truck traffic associated with this use, it will bring truck traffic closer from the producers to the processor; consequently, the net affect will probably be a reduction in truck pollution. He concluded by saying the user was a Virginia Company and, in many ways, it is one of our own. • Mr. Kurt Waldruff, a resident on Brucetown Road, argued the point that if the applicant was truly committed, then the application package would be complete and it is not. Mr. Waldruff said that the applicant was not prepared, there are no guarantees, and the applicant is placing the onusl on the Planning Commission. Mr. Waldruff wanted to know what distilled water was exactly; was it potable or was it gray water? He questioned who would pay for the water and sewer usage. It was Mr. Waldruff's contention that there certainly would be an increase in vehicles because the land is currently a vacant field. He remarked that there was some reason why this property has not been used for extractive manufacturing. Mrl Waldruff didn't believe an entrance to the site could be achieved from Brucetown Road; in fact, he believed there was no access to the property. Ms. Kathy Whitier had several questions which included: what type of cleaners are going to be used to clean the milk products; what process is used to remove the distilled water from the raw products; is the raw product heated in some way; and will the use impact air quality. Ms. Whitier asked the Commission what would happen to the M 1 Zoning on the property, if this proposal is passed and the user decides not to locate here. Since everyone had been given an opportunity to speak, Chairman DeHaven closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Lawson returned to the podium to address some of the concerns raised by the citizens and the Commission. Mr. Lawson explained that no products would be burned and the distilled water is a result of the evaporation process. He also clarified that this applicant is positively stating that they will not pursue the rezoning, unless a decision is made to commit to go to this site. He next referred to the comments made about proffers. Mr. Lawson stated that he previously pointed out for the record what the applicant intends to r� Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1170 -10- • do and proffer as part of this project. He said that somehow, this has been turned around to suggest shame on the applicant for not making certain proffers. Mr. Lawson suggested to the Commission the illegality of that request and that a county can not demand proffers from any applicant. He stated that proffers are things offered from applicants and it is very dangerous to slip into the other side of things and suggest there are certain demands of applicants, no matter who it is. Mr. Lawson remarked that he was being forthright in telling the Commission what the applicant is in the process of doing and what the applicant is willing to do, if this site is selected; he said he could put these items in writing and the Board could decide if they want to accept them. Commissioner Kriz inquired why the entire 98 acres were needed rather than just the ten acres. Mr. Lawson replied that it is what is for sale; there is not a subdivided tract that is for sale. Referring to the timing involved, Mr. Lawson said that to suggest that not only does this property need to! be rezoned, but subdivided as well, could not occur in the time frame available. Mr. Lawson noted that the applicant also owns and operates a site in Howard County, Maryland, which they have owned since 1957. He explained that the site is 225 acres, the plant is approximately the same size as the one proposed for Frederick'County, and the remainder of the property is in corn and soybean. Mr. Lawson expressed his hope that the Frederick County site, with its extra acreage, would be an opportunity for them to expand their facility. Commissioner Gochenour inquired if the applicant could provide the information intended for the Board to the Commission to aid in making a recommendation; she also inquired about the traffic improvements on Page 5 of the staff report that were suggested by VDOT. Mr. Lawson stated again that the preliminary traffic analysis they have done indicates there is no degrading of service if this facility were to be placed on that property today and, therefore, those improvements are not warranted as a a result of this facility coming onto the property. Nevertheless, he said they are agreeing, and he referred to the four items • that he previously read into the record, to placing traffic counters on the road exiting the property so that an actual count can be made and if a pre- designated number is exceeded, that number to be determined by VDOT, Frederick County, and the owner which indicates service is degraded on Brucetown Road, then that number will trigger a second study; he stated that whatever that second study dictates, then those improvements will be made. He conunented that the difficulty about responding tonight is that the facility proposed is all there is; it is difficult to proffer for some hypothetical that is not in their plans. Again, Mr. Lawson stated that they will not put this application before the Board for final rezoning approval, unless there is a commitment to locate this facility on this particular property. Commissioner Morris commented that the Commission may have missed something in the applicant's presentation about who is actually purchasing this property and for what purpose. Commissioner Morris said that in this particular case, it is not a developer or a land speculator who is purchasing this property with subdivision in mind. He said the entire property is being purchased by the milk co-op. He remarked that since they are not real - estate intended or developers, one would have to assume they have no intention of further subdividing this land for any other particular use, other than the milk cooperative. Commissioner Ours remarked if the potential for this industry came before any other community, it would probably be greeted with much excitement; however, the Commission seemed to be throwing out roadblocks. He commented that this industry will have a positive impact on water use, it will provide jobs, and it supports the agricultural nature of the county. Mr. Ours understood the concerns of the residents in that area, however, he believed the problem that needed to be addressed was caused by the existing extractive manufacturing business, not the potential business under consideration. He was also appreciative of knowing who the user of the property was; he noted that with the furor over a possible tax increase, this industry would help to increase the revenue base of the county. r� U Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1171 -11- Commissioner Thomas agreed with the points made by Commissioner Ours. Commissioner Thomas said that during his long tenure on the Planning Commission, he can not remember the Commission ever trying to extract proffers or reproach an applicant for attempting to down -zone a property. He stated that this is not agricultural property, regardless of what the use is; he said the entire property could be mined, a much more intensive use than 98 acres of an M 1 site. He believed this use would be a benefit to the community with very little negatives. Commissioner Morris said that he did not want to take a chance of losing this particular industry because of formality and policy issues. Commissioner Morris said that he alsolhad trust in the applicant's promise that this will not be brought before the Board of Supervisors for a rezoning if they do not have a commitment from this company. He believed there was enough before the Commission in good faith on everyone's part to make an exception to the requirements. Chairman DeHaven agreed with the comments made by Commissioners On Thomas, and Morris. Chairman DeHaven stated that our community strives to encourage, accept, and accommodate a new industrial family into the area. He had no doubts that most any community in the nation would welcome this applicant. Although he agreed it was a stretch from the Commission's normal procedures because there was less than the ful]<letailed information the Commission prefers to see, he pointed out that the Commission was solely an advisory panel and the final decision is made by the Board of Supervisors. Chairman DeHaven believed this would be a win -win for the community and he was confident the issues could be addressed. Commissioner Light stated that when considering land for inclusion in the SWSA, it is assumed that the land is being prepared for future development. Commissioner Light said the problem in this particular case is the insufficient roadway, with insufficient traffic evidence, and an unsafe situation. He said • it did not seem out of line for him to request a traffic study to prepare the property for a safe situation before placing it within the SWSA. Commissioner Light stated that if it would be appropriate, he would withdraw his previous motion to table the SWSA request. He said he was unaware of the timing for advertising when he made the motion, although, after reading the rezoning package, it appeared to be incomplete and did not address the traffic issues. He said he certainly supported the use; it is the cleanest industry possible, however, he believed the transportation segment was an unsafe situation. A briefcounsel was made with the Commission's legal attorney concerning the appropriateness of Commissioner Light withdrawing his previous motion. Commissioner Straub read from her copy of Robert's Rules of Order. It was determined that the vote could be rescinded if done at the same meeting by someone who voted in favor of the previous motion. Commissioner Light moved to reconsider his previous motion to table. This motion was "seconded by Commissioner Thomas and passed unanimously. Commissioner Light next moved to approve the request for expansion of the SWSA to include the entire area of the 98.7768 -acre parcel in question. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kriz. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the request from Triad Engineering, Inc. for the expansion of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) to include the entire area of a 98.7768 -acre parcel, identified with P.I.N. #34 -A -11 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1172 -12- • Many of the Commissioners were displeased about the incompleteness of the rezoning application package because the information required is typically evaluated in detail; they believed there were many unanswered issues. However, because the proposed use was an outstanding industry presenting good economic development potential for the County and because of the urgency of timing for the proposal, the Commission decided to go along with the rezoning. Upon motion made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Triplett, BE IT RESOLVED, That by a majority vote, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Rezoning # 10 -03 of Frederick Land Company, LLC, submitted by Triad Engineering, to rezone 98.7768 acres from EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District to Ml (Industrial Light) District. This property is located approximately three quarters of a mile east of Martinsburg Pike (RouteI 11), on the north side of Brucetown Road (Route 672), and is identified with Property Identification Number 34 -A -11 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. The majority vote was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE REZONING) Straub, Watt, Unger, Morris, Light, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Fisher, Triplett, Rosenberry, DeHaven NO: Gochenour OTHER • FORWARD REOUEST TO TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE TO CONS] OF EAST -BOUND TRUCK TRAFFIC ON BRUCETOWN ROAD (RT. 672) Commissioner Thomas made a motion for the Planning Commission to send a request to the Transportation Committee to consider the initiation of the process to attempt to restrict east -bound through truck traffic on Brucetown Road (Rt. 672), beyond the existing Chem -Stone entrance. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours and passed un— mcusly. ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. by a unammous vote. Resp ctfully subm itte �J Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman i Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Page 1173