Loading...
PC_05-19-04_Meeting_MinutesMEETING MINUTES • OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on May 19, 2004. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman /Stonewall District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Pat Gochenour, Red Bud District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; George J. Kriz, Gainesboro District; Marie F. Straub, Red Bud District; John H. Light, Stonewall District Cordell Watt, Back Creek District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Charles F. Triplett, Gainesboro District; and Gene F. Fisher, Citizen at Large; Gary Dove, Board of Supervisors' Liaison; Barbara Van Osten, Board of Supervisors' Liaison; and Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Christopher M. Mohn, Deputy Planning Director; Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator Jeremy F. Camp, Planner II, Mark R. Cheran, Planner I; and Renee S. Arlotta, Clerk. • CALL TO ORDER Chairman Del -laven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) Commissioner Light reported that the CPPS will have a meeting on the Rural Areas study on Monday evening. Commissioner Light said that one of the topics being discussed is conservation easements and there is a workshop about tax credits and conservation easements on Thursday, June 10, 2004 in Clarke County. He said that he had a few applications, if anyone is interested in attending. 0 Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1295 -2- • Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) - 05/14/04 Training Session & 05/18/04 Regular Meeting Commissioner Gochenour reported that the FIRAB had their first training session on May 14, 2004, and discussion covered various topics from getting organized and establishing by -laws to conducting business and meeting procedures. She said the second training session will be held on Thursday, June 3, 2004, from 1:30 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. In addition, Commissioner Gochenour reported that the HRAB held their regularly scheduled meeting on May 18, 2004. She noted that the HRAB discussed two items: 1) the review of the Newtown Village rezoning proposal, submitted by Patton, Martin & Associates, P.L.C,; which seeks to rezone 111.7373 acres from RA to R4; and, 2) the review of the Adams Development Group rezoning proposal, submitted by Greenway Engineering, which seeks to rezone 59.71 acres from RA to B3. She reported that potentially significant historical structures were identified and numerous recommendations were provided by the HRAB on both proposals. Economic Development Commission (EDC) - 05/07/04 Mtg. Commissioner Thomas reported thatthe EDC received a very informative presentation from students at James Wood High School on the demographics of people moving into Winchester- Frederick County Area. He said the EDC also discussed the work planned for the EDC for the upcoming year. Sanitation Authority - 05/18104 Mtg. Commissioner Fisher reported that the Authority presented a capacity study report to DEQ regarding the Parkins Mill Treatment Plant; the capacity study is basically a three- phased plan for increasing the flow capacity. He said the Authority hopes to start construction next year for completion by 2008. Commissioner Fisher said that the Authority's Engineer /Director, Wellington Jones, reported that water production is down, however, the Northern Plant has significantly reduced the demand for City water supplementation of the County's water supply. Winchester Planning Commission (WPC) - 05/18/04 Mtg. Commissioner Ours reported that the WPC discussed a request by Westminster- Canterbury for a change in their original development plan; the main areas they are seeking to revise are streets and parking, setbacks, landscaping, and some of the buildings. Commissioner Ours said that at some point, a portion ofthese changes will be coming to the Frederick County Planning Commission, as the Westminster- 0 Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1296 -3- Canterbury property lies in both the City and the County. • PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit #07 -04 of Roy R. Messick, Jr., for re- establishing a non - conforming use for a hog pen. This property is located at 686 Marple Road (Rt. 654) and is identified with P.I.N. 41 -A- 163B in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions County Planner Mark R. Cheran stated that in accordance with the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, a legally non- conforming use that has been discontinued due to abandonment may be re- established by obtaining a conditional use permit (CUP). Planner Cheran explained that this proposed use is to re- establish a hog pen that was in operation prior to April 26, 1995, when Frederick County adopted a hog farming ordinance. He said that this ordinance has setbacks for hog operations of 200 feet from an adjoining property used for human habitation. Because the proposed use can not meet the current requirements of the ordinance, the applicant has applied to re- establish the hog pen. Planner Cheran next read a list of conditions recommended by the staff. Mr. Roy R. Messick, Jr., the applicant and property owner, stated that in 1975 he constructed a wooden structure on his property to contain hogs as part of the family farm. By approximately 1997 -1998, the wooden structure had deteriorated and because of other financial obligations, he did not replace the structure or the hogs. Last year, he built a fully- enclosed concrete structure with the intention of raising hogs. He did not know an ordinance requiring setbacks was in place; he said a county inspector visited the site to inspect the structure. Commission members inquired how far the pen was from the property line and if there was a location on the property where the 200 -foot setbacks could be met. Mr. Messick said that because of the terrain and nature of the property, any other location would not be conducive for him to take care of his animals. He said the pen was 27 feet from the property line at its closest point. He planned on having two - to- three hogs and possibly, if a litter was produced, there would be eight additional animals for a short time. Mr. Messick assured the Commission that the hogs were for family use only. Chairman DeHaven called for public comment and the following persons came forward to speak in opposition: Mrs. Laura Stewart, adjoining property owner at 732 Marple Road, provided the Commission with handouts and photographs she had prepared and she asked the Commission to deny Mr. Messick's request for a CUP. Mrs. Stewart said that she and her husband moved into their home in 1994 and at that time, there was no hog pen or wooden structure. She was concerned about potential health risks to herself and other neighbors due to the unfavorable land features and the fact that her property was lower in elevation than Mr. Messicks. She said that Mr. Messick has not maintained his property or fences in the past and the Messick's cows have gotten onto her property on numerous occasions. She said that she was concerned that run off from the hog pen would contaminate her water supply. Mrs. Stewart preferred that Mr. Messick move the hog pen to another location on his I 1 -acre property. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1297 4- Mr. Stephen Stewart, adjacent property owner at 732 Marple Road, stated that Mr. Messick owns 1 1 acres and lie could not understand why Mr. Messick would want to place his hogs less than 250 feet from another residence and within close proximity to a drinking water supply. He said that a number of homes have been built along Marple Road and the community has grown. Mr. Stewart also spoke about the potential health risks associated with hog waste and the terrible odor that emanates from the hog pen. Mr. Stewart described the land as swampy and because of the contour of the land, he feared the water run off from the hog waste would contaminate his well water. He also believed the hog pen would affect his ability to sell his home. Ms. Sandra Kueglar, a resident on Marple Road, reported that the hog pen did indeed prevent Mr. and Mrs. Stewart's home from being purchased by a prospective buyer. Ms. Kueglar said the value of Mr. and Mrs. Stewart's home has plummeted. She added that she has also witnessed the hog waste running downhill from the Messick's property. Board of Supervisors' Liaison, Mr. Gary Dove, commented that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) had drafted a new hog ordinance last year. He said the ordinance was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission; however, the Board of Supervisors denied the amendment because a representative from the Farm Bureau, Mr. Paul Anderson, believed the ordinance should not be restricted tojust one type of farm animal. Mr. Dove noted that Mr. Messick worked about four months with the DRRS in helping to formulate the amendment. Commission members pointed out that this property was within an agricultural area and under the Right -to -Farm Act, Mr. Messick is permitted to raise hogs on his property; however, the issue remains that Mr. Messick cannot meet the 200 -foot setback on both sides of his 211- foot -wide parcel. Additionally, the question of whether to re- establish the non- conforming use issue needed to be resolved. They also pointed out that Mr. Messick was not proposing a hog operation, but simply wanted to raise the hogs for his own use. Other members said they would be more comfortable with the CUP if the number of hogs allowed was reduced and the distance from the property lines increased to 25 feet. Still other Commissioners did not believe they could support the request because of the neighbors' objections. Upon motion made by Commissioner Goehenour and seconded by Commissioner Straub, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #07 -04 of Roy R. Messick, Jr. to re- establish a non - conforming use for a hog pen at 686 Marple Road (Rt. 654) with the following conditions as recommended by the staff. I. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The hog pen shall be fifteen (15) feet from property lines. 3. No more than twenty-five (25) hogs allowed. 4. Any change of use or modification will require a new conditional use permit. r1 I� Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1298 - 5 - • The majority vote was: YES (TO APPROVE) Straub, Gochenour, Unger, DeHaven, Thomas, Ours, Kriz, Fisher, Triplett NO: Watt, Morris, Light (Commissioner Rosenberry was absent from the meeting.) PUBLIC MEETING Master Development Plan #02 -03 for Regents Crescent, submitted by Bowman Consulting, for both residential and commercial uses on 11.58 acres, zoned RP (Residential Performance) and B2 (Business General). The property is located on Frederick Pike (Rt. 522 North), approximately 450 feet south of Oakside Lane, in the Sunnyside neighborhood, and is identified with P.I.N. 53 -A -53 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Tabled Planner Jeremy F. Camp provided the background information and noted that the residential component of the development will consist of up to 70 residential uses, consisting of townhouses and cluster units. Planner Camp said that two waivers are being requested. First, a waiver to the entrance spacing requirements along Rt. 522 North is being requested to accommodate a proposed commercial entrance which would be 90 feet versus the required 200 feet. The second waiver requested is to allow individual lot access to be greater than 500 feet from a public road. He said the applicant is proposing a public road into the development which would then branch out into the wider portion of the RP -zoned land with a private road network; at some points, the 500 feet required by the ordinance would be exceeded. Planner Camp said that the Planning Commission may allow this distance to be as much as 800 feet, if an enhanced circulation network is provided through a loop road system, which this applicant is providing. Planner Camp informed the Commission that yesterday, Mr. David Frank of Bowman Consulting, the design company representing the owner, informed the Planning Staff of a modified plan which would impact the private road network, the storm water improvements, and the utility line locations. Planner Camp said the staff suggested that the applicant request a tabling of consideration of the master development plan in order to prepare a completed application package with revised review agency coinments; however, the applicant desired to make a presentation to the Planning Commission this evening. Mr. Ty Lawson, an attorney with the firm Lawson & Silek, P.L.C. and Mr. David Frank of Bowman Consulting were available to represent the applicant, Sovereign Homes, Inc. Mr. Lawson presented the master development plan to the Commission and he described the two waivers being requested. It was pointed out by a member of the Planning Commission that the B2 line on the blue print provided by the applicant was different than what was depicted on the County's zoning map; this discrepancy was a concern because the buffering between the residential and business areas would require • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1299 Q increased setbacks. Mr. Frank provided a boundary line survey plat prepared by Dove & Associates, dated May, 2001. Mr. Frank said that the notch shown far into the property is actually much closer to Route 522 • than what is shown on the zoning map. Mr. Frank said that approximately two years ago, he met with the County's Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Patrick T. Davenport, and Mr. Davenport made a determination on where the zoning district boundary was intended to be. Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Patrick T. Davenport, was present and confirmed for the Commission that the zoning district boundary did indeed go to the corner of the Peacemaker property and the boundary shown on the engineered plat was correct. Mr. Frank spoke briefly concerning the existing access easement for the three residential properties to the north. Mr. Frank said that the applicant is providing a safer access for those property owners from their existing access easement to Trafalger Square, the proposed state road that will be intersecting with Route 522. He explained that the applicant's property will actually have two access points to Route 522, however, the only people using the second access point would the three private landowners adjacent to this property. Board Liaison, Barbara Van Osten, inquired if the revision to the master development plan would change the density of the project. Mr. Frank replied that the master development has an allowable density of 70 residential units and the new layout falls below that density. A member of the Commission had concerns about building structures and roads on this property because of the amount of rock present and there were also questions regarding whether any of the existing trees would remain. Mr. David Robbins with the Architecture Collaborative, the architectural design firm for the project, stated that they were aware of the rock conditions and planned to use Georgian -style, three -story structures with no basements. He said that they also chose a network of roads that disturb the • existing soil as little as possible and that works with the contours of the ground. Mr. Robbins added that their plans are to have the perimeter of the site remain as wooded as possible. Chairman DeHaven called for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Wayne Peacemaker, adjoining property owner, said that the original plan showed a 100 - foot buffer adjacent to the front and sides of his home. Ile said that because the townhouses were changed to single - family, he will not now have a buffer against the new development. In addition, Mr. Peacemaker pointed out that he has a 20 -foot right -of -way easement from Route 522. Ile said that from looking at the plat, he gets the impression that his 20 -foot right -of -way is not being recognized across the entire 150 -foot frontage of his lot. Mr. Jeff Whetzel, said that he was one of the property owners along the private easement, along with Mr. Peacemaker and Mrs. Lentz. Mr. Whetzel said that he did not want the state road connection offered by the applicant; he said there was nothing to stop people from the new development from coming over onto his private drive. He also was not pleased by the fact that they were no longer going to have a buffer between their homes and this new development. Mr. Whetzel was also concerned that the right -hand turn access off of Route 522 was not going to be long enough to handle the speed of traffic, nor would it be able to accommodate the amount of traffic that would be generated by the development. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1300 -7- Next, there was a discussion about whether the revised plan could be sent forward to the Board. The applicant's representatives stated that the only change on the revised plan was a reduction in the road network and the change of housing types from townhouses to single family; they believed the changes would not affect any of the comments received by the reviewing agencies. The Planning Staff commented that none of the reviewing agencies had seen the revised plan. Chairman Del -laven said that although the proposed changes were minor, he preferred to see a Fire and Rescue review because a different road network had been proposed. He pointed out that if the connection was 60 -80 feet with only a 24 -foot pavement section, he would prefer to have Fire and Rescue's reassurance that emergency vehicle access was indeed satisfactory in the case of a multi -alarm situation. Other Commissioners agreed and, in addition, had concerns about forwarding a uncompleted or incorrect application package to the Board of Supervisors. Commissioner Light made a motion to table this master development plan until such time as the applicantcould submit a completed revised application package to the staffwith revised review agency comments. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Ours and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously agree to table Master Development Plan #02 -03 of Regents Crescent, submitted by Bowman Consulting, for both residential and commercial uses on 11.58 acres, zoned RP (Residential Performance) and B2 (Business General), until such time as the applicant could submit a completed revised application package to the staff with revised review agency comments. (Commissioner Rosenberry was absent from the meeting.) • Master Development Plan 405 -04 of Charming Drive, Phases 9 and 10, Fu -Shep Properties, submitted by Eastern States Engineering, for 220 total dwelling units consisting of 149 single - family small lot dwelling units and 71 multiplex dwelling units. The property is located at the northern terminus of Morning Glory Drive (Rt. 1400) and Canyon Road, approximately 2,300 feet north of Senseny Road (Rt. 657), and is identified with P.LN.s 55 -A -209, 55 -A -211, 55 -A -213, and 65 -A -40, in the Red Bud District. Action - Recommended Approval Planning Director Eric R. Lawrence stated that the necessary review agency comments that were absent from the application have since been received by staff on May 18, 2004, and were handed out to the Planning Commission this evening. He said that this submittal now makes this master development plan application complete. Director Lawrence pointed out three planning issues which still remained to be addressed. Those issues included the need for a community center to be located on site; the need to identify all riparian buffers on the site; and the need for residential separation buffers. Director Lawrence reported no significant outstanding issues from the reviewing agencies, however, the Public Works Director /County Engineer has requested that the master development plan identify wetlands and storm water management locations. Director Lawrence concluded his presentation by noting that the density, access, and road system were consistent with what is allowed by the ordinance. Mr. Ty Lawson, an attorney with the firm Lawson & Silek, P.L.C. was available to represent • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1301 the applicant, ToII Brothers, L.P. Mr. Lawson presented a brief history of the Channing Drive project to the Commission. • Members of the Planning Commission raised the suggestion that both Canyon Road and Morning Glory Drive be opened for residential traffic, rather than funneling all the traffic through Canyon Road alone. Mr. Lawson pointed out that both Canyon Road and Morning Glory will need to comply with state standards and have state road connections. He noted that the applicant will construct a seamless connection to Morning Glory Drive, however, it will be barricaded, per a court order. Mr. Lawson next addressed the issues raised by the staff. It was noted that the neighborhood community center planned with the original master plan was designed to accommodate capacity from all three properties included within the collective Charming Drive development. However, the applicant has plans to restore the existing structure located on the other side of the lake, converting it into an additional community center. He said that access would be via the trail system across the dam. Mr. Lawson said that the applicant was seeking a waiver for the residential separation buffer adjacent to the Manning & Ross property because they believed the natural 50 -foot buffer was preferable to creating a man -made 25 -foot buffer. Mr. Lawson said that no riparian buffers or wetlands would be disturbed and these features would be designated on the master plan. Some members of the Planning Commission raised the issue of restricting all construction traffic to the 75 -foot fee simple right -of -way owned by the applicant and allowing only residential traffic on Morning Glory and Canyon Drive for safety reasons and to ease traffic congestion. The legality of prohibiting use of state - maintained road connection was raised. "rhe viability of construction traffic using the 75 -foot right -of -way was questioned because of its existing impassable terrain. Both Commissioners Ours and Thomas believed that the County needed to take steps to mitigate the impact of new construction • on existing residential neighborhoods. Commissioner Thomas believed it was appropriate for the Board of Supervisors to recommend that the developer be required to restrict construction traffic to the 75 -foot right - of -way and to open up both Morning Glory Drive and Canyon Road to residential traffic only. Chairman DeHaven nextcalled for public comments and the following persons came forward to speak: Mr. Dan Busby, the President of the Senseny Glen Home Owners Association (HOA), inquired about obtaining permanent access to Senseny Glen's common area through the Charming Drive development. Mr. Busby explained that the 1 -IOA owns 10.216 acres of open space which they are responsible to maintain, however, they have no access. Mr. Busby also spoke in length about the impact of construction traffic on existing homeowners in Senseny Glen. He presented a written transcript of the concerns he raised to the Commission and he asked that the Senseny Glen HOA be informed of any future actions that may affect Senseny Glen. Ms. Cindy Cornwell, a resident of 211 Senseny Glen Drive, spoke about the speeding problem they currently have in their development and the safety issues it presents. Ms. Cornwell was concerned about the possibility of construction traffic going through her neighborhood and she preferred that construction traffic use the 75 -foot right -of -way rather than Morning Glory or Canyon Road. Shealsospoke about the possible disturbance of wetlands. Ms. Joan Schnieder, a homeowner in Senseny Glen, spoke in favor of the plan, citing the possibility of increased property values. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1302 M Members of the Commission were hesitant to send the plan forward to the Board of Supervisors because neither the staff nor the Commissioners had an opportunity to review the agency comments that were just submitted. Other members of the Commission believed that unresolved issues remained regarding infrastructure and access. In light of these concerns, a motion was made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kriz to recommend approval of the master development plan for Phases 9 and 10, subject tothe applicant satisfactorily addressing all agency comments. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Master Development Plan #05 -04 of Charming Drive, Phases 9 and 10, Fu -Shep Properties, submitted by Eastern States Engineering, for 220 total dwelling units consisting of 149 single - family small lot dwelling units and 71 multiplex dwelling units, subject to the applicant satisfactorily addressing all agency comments. The majority vote was as follows: YES (TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL) Triplett, Fisher, Kriz, Ours, Thomas, DeHaven, Light, Morris, Unger, Watt NO: Gochenour, Straub (Commissioner Rosenberry was absent from the meeting.) Upon motion made by Commissioner Ours and seconded by Commissioner Morris, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to incorporate the letter submitted by Mr. Dan Busby, the President of the Senseny Glen HOA, a part of the official record. Upon motion made by Commissioner Kriz and seconded by Commissioner Ours, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to incorporate the comments and exhibits submitted by Ms. Stewart as part of the official record. ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and the Planning Commission adjourned by a unanimous vote at 10:10 p.m. S. DeHaven, Jr., Lawrence, Secretary • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of May 19, 2004 Page 1303