Loading...
PC_02-06-91_Meeting_MinutesI rw I a 2Y0 0&k'uMv01P021 I OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on February 6, 1991. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; Beverly Sherwood, Vice - Chairman; John Marker, Back Creek District; Manuel C. DeHaven, Stonewall District; Carl M. McDonald, Gainesboro District; Douglas Rinker, Citizen at Large; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Citizen at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Citizen at Large; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; and Kenneth Y. Stiles, Board Liaison. Planning Staff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary and W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator ABSENT: S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District CALL TO ORDER Chairman Golladay called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. --------------- - - - - -- MINUTES Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. McDonald, the minutes of December 19, 1990 were unanimously approved as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman Golladay accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. COMMITTEE REPORTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Mr. Romine said that he attended a Virginia State Economic Development Commission meeting in Richmond on February 5. 3241 225 I 201 I I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2/4/91 Mtg. Pa It was reported that preliminary results of the storm - water management study were presented at this meeting. ORDINANCE SUBCOMMITEE Mr. Thomas reported that the B1 District was given by Mr subcommittee members was to have Planning Commission. a presentation on car washes in DeHaven. The consensus of the issue brought before the TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE - 2/4/91 Mtq. Mr. Golladay reported that the Committee reviewed the consultant's report for traffic improvements. SUBDIVISIONS Subdivision Application of the Frederick County School Board to subdivide one RP (Residential Performance) lot for the placement of an elevated water storage tank. This property is located on the south - western side of State Route 641 in the Opequon District. Action - Tabled 1 Chairman Golladay read a letter that he received from Thomas Malcolm, school superintendent, concerning this subdivision application. A motion was made by Mr. DeHaven and seconded by Mr. Romine to make the letter a part of the official record. This motion was unanimously approved. (letter at end of minutes) Wellington Jones, Engineer/ Director of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, gave a presentation on the water storage tank and the reasons why this site was selected. Mr. Thomas inquired about the feasibility of choosing another site as far as capital improvements were concerned. Mr. Jones replied that the site selected had existing 12" water lines and outside of this area, there were smaller diameter lines that would be insufficient to carry the quantity of water necessary to provide the proper service. Mr. Thomas inquired about an on- ground storage system and Mr. Jones noted that the problem with this type system is that it 3242 I C Q requires pumping. He noted that the topography in this area is fairly flat. Mr. Stiles inquired about the possibility of locating the tank on the Sherando Park property that was designated for the new school. Mr. Jones said that if this site was used, a much higher tank would be required and his engineers quoted a cost of $4,000 for every foot added. Also, the site would not provide reliable service. Mr. Stiles inquired about other sites. Mr. Jones said that whichever site is chosen, it will probably be within a residential area because that is where the service is needed. Mr. Jones said that the tank will provide better and more reliable service to their customers and the site selected met all of their criteria. Mr. Stiles noted that this site was not chosen as an alternative to the Route 642 site and that the Sanitation Authority had plans to put tanks on both sites. Mr. Jones confirmed this. He said that the Sanitation Authority is undergoing another water distribution study update to integrate their entire system. Mr. Jones said that the study points to a need for another water storage tank on Route 642 to serve the Kernstown area. Mr. Stiles inquired about the possibility of locating tanks on the quarry property west of Stephens City, assuming that the Sanitation Authority moves forward in conjunction with Stephens City, to develop a water supply from the quarries. Mr. Jones said that the problem with this location is that the tank would be remote from where the demand for water exists. Chairman Golladay called for anyone in the audience who wished to speak. Mr. Eds Coleman, attorney on behalf of property owners in the Plymn Owens Subdivision, presented a petition which raised the following concerns: 1) lack of notification to local residents; 2) safety concerns; 3) the possibility of creating a surrounding flood plain area; 4) impact on property values; and 5) waiving of the requirement for a master development plan. Chairman Golladay read the concerns on the petition. Upon motion by Mr. DeHaven and second by Ms. Sherwood, the petition was made a part of the official record by unanimous vote. (petition at end of minutes) Mr. Ralph Hines, an adjoining property owner, requested that the Sanitation Authority look at alternative locations. Mr. Hines said that the tank was unsightly and would negatively affect property values. The Commission discussed alternative locations with Mr. 3243 203 I Jones, such as another site on property near Jamesway and Transportation's property. 4 the Aylor property, the 20 -acre the Virginia Department of Mr. Stiles said that some people are erroneously under the impression that this tank is to serve the Wheatlands project. Mr. Stiles said that if and when Wheatlands develops, they will probably have to put in their own water tank for service. Mr. Stiles requested that the Commission table this request for two to four weeks and ask the Sanitation Authority to come back with a technical and cost analysis of two or three alternative sites. In this way, the Commission would have all the information on which site is the most cost - effective and which provides the best possible service. He also requested that the analysis include an estimate of the number of homes within a 500- 1,000 feet radius. Mr. Thomas' feelings were that a water tank was severely needed in this area; that water pressure and service had deteriorated significantly over the last two to three years; there had been an increase in the number of outages because of system failures and water pressure has fluctuated wildly during certain times of the year and even daily; he felt the tank needed to be placed within the center of use and where there are existing lines; and he was hesitant to put it at another location where it would cost more money to build and operate. Mr. Joe Bishop, Plymn Owens property owner, requested that the property owners be allowed to review the cost and technical analysis after it was completed. Mr. Bishop was also concerned about the safety of people around the tank. Mr. Harley Keplinger, Plymn Owens property owner, felt that the Stephens City site was chosen based on its tax base. Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Rinker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously table the Frederick County School Board Subdivision Application to allow Mr. Jones an additional four weeks to study alternatives and present cost estimates and other locations in priority for recommendation to the Planning Commission. PUBLIC HEARINGS Rezoning application #001 -91 of H.F.G Partnership to rezone 2.692 acres from M1 (Industrial Limited) to B2 (Business General) for B2 3244 2®5 I 227 5 uses. This property is located at Route 11 South to Marathon Drive, east to Sulky Drive to the end of the cul -de -sac, in the Back Creek District. Action - Approved Mr. Watkins noted that the site was located in an existing business and industrial park in the urban development area and in an interchange area. It was noted that this rezoning represents a zoning boundary adjustment between a B2 and an M1 area. Before any subdivision occurs, a master development plan would be required. Mr. Ralph Gregory, a partner in the H.F.G. Partnership, was available to answer questions from the Commission. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Ms. Copenhaver, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve Rezoning Application #001 -91 of H.F.G. Partnership, c/o Ralph S. Gregory, to rezone 2.692 acres from M1 (Industrial Limited) to B2 (Business General) for B2 uses. Rezoning Application #002 -91 of Forrest L. Brown to rezone 3.626 acres from B1 (Business Limited) to B2 (Business General) for general merchandise stores and miscellaneous retail. This property is located on the south side of Route 50, two miles west of the 37 bypass in the Back Creek District. Action - Approved Staff noted that some potential traffic impacts should be expected, however, the proposed rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and existing patterns of use and zoning. Mr. Forrest Brown, the applicant, was present to answer questions from the Commission. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Ms. Copenhaver, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve Rezoning Application #002 -91 of Forrest L. Brown to rezone 3.626 acres from B1 (Business Limited) to B2 (Business General) for general merchandise stores and miscellaneous retail. --------------- - -- - -- 3245 I l Conditional Use Permit #020 -90 of Vicki L. Patterson for an artist studio. This property is located in the Orchardale Subdivision off of Route 670 in the Stonewall District. Action - Approved Staff noted that from the time the application was submitted to the time staff visited the site, the detached garage became attached through an enclosed breezeway to Mrs. Patterson's home; therefore, the use is no longer considered a cottage occupation. Staff gave Mrs. Patterson the option of proceeding or withdrawing the application. Mrs. Patterson chose to proceed with the conditional use permit in the event her business expands to include one employee. Mrs. Vickie Patterson was present to answer questions from the Commission. Since Mrs. Patterson was not required to obtain a conditional use permit at this time, Mr. Stiles suggested that she continue with her operation and if an employee was needed in the future, then apply for a permit at that time. Mrs. Patterson said that since she had already completed all the paperwork, she opted to continue with obtaining the permit. Upon motion made by Mr. DeHaven and seconded by Mr. McDonald, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve Conditional Use Permit #020 -90 of Vickie L. Patterson for an artist studio with the following condition: 1) If the use, occupancy or ownership of the property changes, this conditional use permit shall expire and a new permit will be required. No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, L 7O'7 4 - 7 Robert W. Watkins, reS etary f4 0 ' .- J64g6& J mes W. Gol aday, J ., Chairman 3246 - 7 - Frederick County Public Schools f 1415 Amherst Street Post Office Box 3508 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -2708 Telephone: (703) 662 -3888 Superintendent of Schools February 5, 1991 Mr. Wellington Jones Engineer Director Frederick County Sanitation Authority P.O. Box 618 Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Jones: Following a lengthy discussion at today's school board meeting, I was requested to express the board's concerns regarding the process used in planning for the construction of an elevated water storage tower on land formerly owned by the school board and adjacent to Robert E. Aylor Middle School. As you' will recall, the school board passed a resolution in August, 1990, declaring seven - tenths of an acre of land at Robert E. Aylor Middle School surplus and returned ownership to the county. Subsequently, in October, 1990, the board of supervisors transferred the land to the sanitation authority for construction of the proposed water tower. Mr. Ralph Hines, in addition to several other citizens of the Aylor area (Mr. Darnley Hodge, Ms. Joanna McCall, and Ms. Freda Courtney), spoke to the board today regarding this matter. Mr. Hines is of the opinion that since the deed to the land on which the water tower is to be constructed has not been officially transferred from the school board to the sanitation authority, it is still under our control and the board could act to prevent the construction of the water tower. I shared with Mr. Hines and others attending today's meeting that this is not possible. According to Mr. Lawrence Ambrogi, commonwealth attorney, the land in question does, in fact, belong to the sanitation authority regardless of whether or not the deed has been formally recorded. Another concern of Mr. Hines and one to which our board is sympathetic is the manner in which information was provided to the public concerning the planned construction of the water tower. The group addressing the board felt that, until approximately two weeks ago, specific information concerning the scope of this project had not been readily available. Mr. Hines feels that the public notices that were placed in the local media did not contain sufficient information concerning the construction of the water tower. Mr. Hines acknowledged that an opportunity to present his concerns has been provided at the February 6 planning commission meeting and again on February 11 at a public hearing being conducted by the sanitation authority. However, he feels that a decision has already been made in this matter and that the school board is the only avenue open to him to remedy this situation. 3247 r' - 8 - r Mr. Wellington Jones Page 2 February 5, 1991 Please understand that the school board nor Z wish to enter into your area of responsibility as director of the sanitation authority. My purpose in writing this letter is to communicate to you concerns that were brought to our attention at today's meeting. If you have questions regarding this matter, please contact me at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, R. Thomas Malcolm Superintendent of Schools U 1 RTM:mcc PC: � rederick County Planning Commission Frederick County Board of Supervisors Frederick County School Board Ms. Joanna McCall 3248 - 9 - DISADVANTAGES AND CONCERNS OF THE COMMUNITY 1. Property values will decrease. 2. Unsightly to subdivision. 3. Temptation to vandalism. (Become an artist palet). High power rifles - target 4. Safety - no guarantee this will withstand weather conditions -high winds, hurricanes, tornadoes, lightning to the motors. Also airplanes and helicopters travelled this direct route especially Martinsburg cargo planes. Sprayer planes for gypsie moths. Potomac Edison power line checks. Too much of a chance to take with school children on the premises. We're just asking for problems. 5. Motors in the tower will constantly be a disturbance to neighbors. 6. Insurance rates will go up for the surrounding areas as well as the school because we then become a . "HIGH RISK" insured. Flood plain rate. 7. Neighborhood would have to be re -assed since property values will drop - . S. It's. absurd that no fence is being considered for around the tower. A break in with a ladder to the top would be a high risk to someone who would try to attempt suicide. 9 9. Disclosing to a potential buyer the hazards of this 'tower -would eventually deteriate the neighborhood that for 20 years has catered to upper class citzens. Neighbors look for good neighbors when prospecting for a home. 10. Disclosing the hazards to a potential client on behalf of the seller- property will sit at market value -it will sell at a loss -thus bringing in undesired people when this subdivision has a reputation of reputable people.. 11. We're sitting right on the fault for an earthquake..... the east coast predictions are within the next 7 to 10 years. 12. Community feels that this been railroaded down their throats since they were not informed properly. CONCERNS FOR SCHOOL BOARD TO CONSIDER BEFORE SIGNING DEED..... 1. Please review the above in Rood faith and conscience both from a parent and from a child!s view. 2. Community feels that you did not realize the whole picture when you decided to sell this land. All PACTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO YOU ALONG WITH THE COMMUNITY AWARENESS. 3. An eoviromental impact study should be done for the safety of the community as well as the effect on the enviroment. 4. Water towers are placed in fields not in subdivisions. Could you in good faith and conscience sell this land ? 5. Give the community a chance to have an opportunity to speak and research with a civil engineering company - - -- Anderson and Associates out of Blacksburg would be an impartial party. The Petition signed by the people has expressed the fine job that you have done in The past and they would like your continued support on this project. It is in your hands and your hands only - - -all we're asking is a "FAIR CHANCE ". 3249