Loading...
PC_04-16-97_Meeting_MinutesI" r • MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on April 16, 1997. PRESENT: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John R. Marker, Vice- Chairman/Back Creek District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; George L. Routine, Citizen at Large; W. Wayne Miller, Gainesboro District; Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: Terry Stone, Gainesboro District STAFF PRESENT: Kris C. Tierney, Planning Director; Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director; Eric R. Lawrence, Planner II; Michael T. Ruddy, Planner I; Renee' S. Arlotta, Minutes Recorder. • CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19,1997 Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Morris, the Commission unanimously approved the February 19,1997 minutes as presented. MINUTES - MARCH 5,1997 Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Routine, the Commission unanimously approved the March 5, 1997 minutes as presented. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 16, 1997 Page 42 -2- is BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman DeHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) - 04/14/97 Mtg. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the CPPS discussed future land uses for the Route 37 West area, which encompasses the area north of the Frederick Center (DeGrange property), fronting on Route 37 and up to and including Route 522. She said that the Committee also heard a presentation on road improvements between Tasker Drive and the old Macedonia Church Road. Transportation Committee - 04/01/97 Mtg. Mr. Thomas reported that the Transportation Committee discussed a proposed rating system to evaluate roads for establishing priorities for the Secondary Road Improvement Plan. He said that the Committee's recommendation will be discussed this evening. • Economic Development Commission Mr. Routine reported that a new Industrial Sites Representative was appointed and has been introduced to stall.. Sanitation Authority - 04/15/97 Mtg. Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the Miller Heights and Boundary Avenue water improvements have been completed. Winchester Planning Commission (WPC) - 04/15/97 Mtg. Mr. Ours reported that the WPC held a public hearing on a rezoning for property immediately south and adjacent to the new Walmart Supercenter on south Pleasant Valley Road, and is being rezoned from Ml (Light Industrial) to CMl (Commercial) Zoning. He said the expectation for this area, in and around Lowes and Walmart, is that it will be developed commercially. Mr. Ours stated that the original intention several years ago was that this area would be light industrial and warehousing, however, the complexion of that area has E Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 16, 1997 Page 43 3- is changed greatly. DISCUSSION ITEMS Presentation by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority's Engineer/ Director, Mr. Wellington Jones, Concerning the County's Long -Range Water Supply and Transmission Plan No Action Required Mr. Wellington Jones, Engineer/ Director for the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, introducer) himself and Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr., Engineer. Mr. Jones presented the Sanitation Authority's Long -Range Water Supply and Transmission Plan which was developed over the past six to seven years. Mr. Jones identified the water supply sources within the County and the anticipated amount of water available from each source. He then presented the projected future demands and identified the proposed location of transmission lines needed to distribute the water supplies to customers. He said that the plan covered a 50 -year period (1995 - 2045). The water sources identified by Mr. Jones were: Stephens City Quarry 3 -4 mgd; Bartonsville Well Field 1 -2 mgd; Tower Park Well Field 1 -3 mgd; and Cedar Creek 10 mgd. He said that the total water capacity was between 15 -19 mgd. The 1995 demand was 2 mgd and projected future demands were: 2010- 4 mgd; 2025 - 8 mgd; 2045 - 17 mgd. Mr. Jones next spoke about the transmission plan and how to get the water to the customers. Mr. Jones said that at the end of the year 2000, the County's contract with the City of Winchester to purchase 2 mgd will cease. He said that the City has stated that they do not have surplus capacity to sell water to the County and, therefore, will not be able to extend the contract. Mr. Jones said that this was fine; as shown from the water supplies identified, the County has an adequate supply for its needs. He said that what needs to be provided is enhanced transmission capabilities so that we can get the water from the treatment plant to other areas, especially to the areas north of Winchester where there are high industrial demands. In summary, Mr. Jones said that the Authority feels they have identified adequate supplies; that the plan will offer flexibility (from the standpoint of multiple sources of water); the plan is feasible; the plan complies with County's Comprehensive Plan; and, the plan offers redundancy and reliability (multiple sources are more reliable). There were several questions from the Commission. Commission members asked if the Tower Park and Bartonsville Well sites were Authority property and if not, how would the sites be acquired. Mr. Jones replied that the Authority does not now own those and will have to acquire the well sites. Mr. Jones said that the Authority may have to acquire them through proffers; and hopefully, they will not have to condemn, but the Authority is not adverse to that. Commission members asked if there were any water sources in the northern part of the County. Mr. Jones replied that they have considered some; but generally, they are sources that do not have a great quantity of water and if they have to provide treatment, it could get expensive. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 16, 1997 Page 44 -4- • Regarding the well sites, both Tower and Bartonsville, Commission members inquired what the effects of digging wells and pulling out many million gallons of water would do to the well acquifers of homeowners and fawns in that area. Mr. Jones said that they've addressed that question before with the Stephens City quarries. He said that in developing these sites, you've got to make sure that they are engineered and designed in such a fashion that the water supply is not depleted, but instead, you withdraw a safe yeild daily. He explained that these well fields will probably draw water from an acquifer that is down around 1,000'. Mr. Jones said that they did not anticipate or believe that it will affect residential wells in the area; however, if it does, they will have to address it. Regarding the 1 Omgd drawn from Cedar Creek, Commissioners asked what kind of flow would remain. Mr. Jones said that the flow averages 60 mgd. He said that they have a concept whereby they can strip the higher flow off of the creek and when the creek is flowing at a lower level, they won't pull any flow off at all. He said that they are hoping to install off -stream storage. Discussion Regarding a Proposed Rating System for Secondary Road Improvement Projects Recommended Approval Mr. Wyatt said that this item is a proposal to create a new policy for ranking secondary road improvement projects in Frederick County. Mr. Wyatt gave some history regarding this project. Staff felt that if a new policy was created for rating road improvement projects, the secondary road improvement projects of • both major and hard surface roads should be given consideration. He said the information presented reflects both categories. He explained that the proposal uses a point system; whereby, if a higher intensity or serious condition exists, the road would be assigned a higher point. Mr. Wyatt explained the evaluation criteria and corresponding weights for both the major road improvement plan and the hard surface improvement plan. Mr. Wyatt said that the Transportation Committee discussed several concerns at their meeting. He said the Committee felt the topic of school bus travel needed a high weight value and they increased the weight from 2 to 5, which is the highest weight category on the plan. Secondly, the Committee felt the description for average daily traffic count should reflect current conditions. The third issue was time on the road plan and the Committee felt this category should be utilized and credits given for roads that have been on the plan for certain time increments. Fourth, they felt the Land Use Plan category should be expanded to provide points for master planned properties and the category of conformance with the comprehensive plan should be increased as well. Mr. Wyatt next explained how a road would become a candidate for weighted evaluation. He said that the major road improvement category currently has 33 projects and the rating system would be applied to all the roads on that list. He said that the hard surface section has 28 and only the projects qualified for funding would be rated. Mr. Wyatt said that an "unscheduled- unprioritized'list for all the other projects would be created in order of priority and once a road is removed from the plan because it has received funding, then another road would be chosen from the list. Mr. Jerry Copp, VDOT's resident Engineer, said that VDOT has already obtained right -of -ways for some of the roads and significant monetary investment has already been made. Mr. Copp said that a tremendous amount of money has already been put on the major projects on a long -term basis in preliminary Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 16, 1997 Page 45 -5- • engineering. He said that even the third priorty has had a significant amount of money put into it. Mr. Copp believed this plan to be a valuable tool. He recommended, however, that it be implemented on a pilot -basis for a few years and then re- evaluated at the end of that time, just in case some things were missed. Commission members discussed with Mr. Copp issues involved with grandfathering certain roads on the plan and it was decided that there was justification to treat major roads differently from hard surface roads with regard to grandfathering. It was determined that all of the roads on the major list that have advertisement dates should be grandfathered because of the significant amount of money that has already been invested in them. On the hard surface improvement listing, however, significant money has not been invested until the project is close to its advertisement date. They decided to grandfather the #1 project because the advertisement date was three months off, but felt no compelling reason to grandfather #2 and #3 on that list. MT. Bruce Armstrong, resident of Laurel Grove Road in the Back Creek District, gave the Commission some history of how he and a neighbor, Mr. Rhodes, became involved in the project of pursuing a rating system. Mr. Armstrong was in support of the new system. Commission members supported the new rating system. They felt the old system was misleading for citizens as far as how soon their road project would be completed once it was on the plan. They also felt the new rating system would eliminate some of the inconsistencies experienced in the past with scheduling roads for improvement. Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommended • approval of the Secondary Road Plan Rating System for Hard- Surface Roads and Major Road Improvements with the following caveats: 1) the weight designated for the category "time on the road plan" should be reduced from 3 to 2; 2) this plan should be considered as a pilot program for two years and then re- evaluated; 3) only the first project on the hard surface road plan which has been advertised should be grandfathered; and, 4) on the major road improvement plan all of the projects that have advertisement dates or have a substantial engineering and planning investment from VDOT should be grandfathered. Discussion Reearding Proposed Corridor ADpearance and Development Desien Standards No Action Required Mr. Wyatt said that as a result of discussions at the Planning Commission Retreat, the Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) was asked to undertake three projects, one of which was corridor appearance and development design standards. Six items were identified for revision: 1) entrance spacing requirements for arterial and collector road systems; 2) boulevard entrance design for arterial road systems; 3) freestanding and building - mounted signage; 4) parking lot locations and setbacks; 5) landscaping enhancements including maintenance requirements; and 6) building components and underground utilities. Mr. Wyatt said that he would discuss signage and underground utilities and Mr. Ruddy will discuss parking lots. Mr. Wyatt presented the sign and underground utilities proposal. �J Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 16, 1997 Page 46 • As far as signage was concerned, Commission members felt that what staff had presented was the direction they wanted to go in. Commissioners stated that they would like to see one principal sign with, for example, the business park's or shopping center's name and then the other offices or store names names smaller on the same sign or on the individual buildings. They did not want to see a lot of individual small signs for each business in all varieties and sizes. Commissioners also discussed the possibility of allowing more than one sign on a site for large businesses with more than one entrance or a large site. They discussed current standards on entrance spacing, but decided this method would actually permit far too many signs. They felt the proposal, as written by staff- - "allowing one sign per road frontage," would go a long way towards cleaning up the sign situation and would be easier for everyone to live with. Mr. Ruddy next presented the parking lot enhancements which included three main principals: the raised island situation, the setback situation, and the screening situation. He discussed each one while presenting slides of each. Commission members favored the proposal and felt it was a step in the right direction. Several facets of the plan were discussed. One was the height of the berms and the fact that over time, they essentially go flat. Discussion of increasing the height was pursued, but staff pointed out that the berm is to be 3' above the finished elevation of the parking lot; and secondly, in a 30' setback, a 3 -to -I slope could be maintainable, but a 2 to 1 would be more difficult. Staff noted that if a 3 -to -1 slope is utilized, a minimum of at least 18' would be needed to create the berm itself It was pointed out that if the intent is to also provide an opportunity for bicycle paths or sidewalks, the whole 30' cannot be used for an earth berm. The subject of allowing the staff some discretion to work with the developer /designer was also discussed. It was noted that the staff is constantly challenged in terms of allowing flexibility and certainly, a • situation will come up where these regulations will not make sense and the staff would be requiring someone to do something that everyone agrees was really not appropriate. The Commission and staff were in favor of plugging in some sort of discretion by way of a Planning Commission or staff waiver to give someone an out. The Commission also wanted the staff to add some definitions. They also felt it might be worthwhile to consider some standards to address installation and maintenance. In conclusion, staff asked if it was the Commission's desire for the DRRS to draft standards pertaining to lighting, for example, height of structure, type of fixture, amout of wattage, etc. The Commission was unanimously in favor of having the committee look into this. Joint Frederick County/ Stephens City Planning Committee - 04/15/97 Mtg. Mr. Thomas reported that the Joint Frederick County/ Stephens City Planning Committee had their second meeting and a chairman, Ray Ewing, was elected. He said that a meeting will be held every fourth Tuesday of the month at 5:00 p.m. at the Stephens City Town Hall. Mr. Thomas said that there are five concerns that the committee is going to address: I) water service area protection; 2) the quarry recharge area protection; 3) groundwater protection; 4) land development in and around Stephens City; 5) boundary adjustments between Stephens City and Frederick County. 1 0 Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 16, 1997 Page 47 -7- • ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, s C. Tierney, ec ry Charles S. DeHaven, Chairman (Jr.) • • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of April 16, 1997 Page 48