Loading...
PC_03-06-91_Meeting_MinutesI MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on March 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; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee 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 taff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary; Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Director; Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II; and W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator 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. Marker, the minutes of February 6, 1991 were unanimously approved as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman Golladay accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's L' information. COMMITTEE REPORTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 3/4/91 Mta. Mrs. Sherwood reported that the subcommittee reviewed the stormwater 3260 I 2 ' management study. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE - 3/4/91 Mte. Mr. Tierney reported that the Committee discussed the primary road allocations and are not recommending any changes from last year. The Committee also received a presentation from Thomas Christoffell, Director of the Planning District Commission, promoting ride- sharing. Mr. Tierney reported on the March 6 presentation by Transportation Secretary Milliken who spoke on what is occurring state -wide in the transportation area. There was also a tour to view transportation needs throughout the city and county. 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 Mr. Watkins stated that this item was tabled at the February 6 meeting because the Commission requested additional information from the Sanitation Authority about alternative sites. Mr. Golladay said that the Commission received a number of letters of opposition. Upon motion made by Mr. DeHaven and seconded by Mrs. Sherwood, the letters from Ralph and Mary Ogle, Mr. and Mrs. Samuel L. McCall III, Mr. Ralph W. Hines, Robert and Deanna Sager, Harlan C. Keplinger, Edna and Bobby Chesnut, and Mr. and Mrs. Robert Aylor were made a part of the official record. (letters at end of minutes) Mr. Charles Maddox, Jr., with G. W. Clifford & Associates, was representing the Sanitation Authority. Mr. Maddox gave a presentation on five alternative sites for the elevated water storage tank in the Stephens Run Watershed. In summary, Mr. Maddox's recommendation to the Sanitation Authority was to construct a million gallon tank at the Route 642 site, couple that with the line under I -81 ' connecting with the 24" main on Route 11 and the selection of a site south of Route 277 for use at some point in the future for a half million gallon tank. 3261 I 3 Mr. Stiles suggested that the Authority include in their list of alternatives the rear portion of the Sherando Park/Sherando High School site so there will be little impact on residential properties. Ms. JoAnn McCall, a realtor and resident of Plymm Owens Subdivision, was concerned about the depreciation of her property value. Mrs. McCall said that she did not receive any notification that the Plymm Owens subdivision was being considered as a location for the water tower. She felt that a residential subdivision was not a good location for a water tower. Mr. Ralph Hines, representing citizens from the Aylor /Middle School area, thanked the Planning Commission for allowing the study of alternative sites. Mr. Hines endorsed the recommendation given by Mr. Maddox. 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 subdivision request of the Frederick County School Board for 60 days to allow the Sanitation Authority to study the proposal by Mr. Maddox and present their recommendation to ' the Commission. --------------- - - - - -- Revised Master Development Plan and Subdivision Request of Hampton Chase for 114 lots, zoned RP, in the Stonewall District. Action - Approved Mr. Miller said that this subdivision came before the Commission at their January 16th meeting, at which time the applicant expressed a desire to eliminate the curb and gutter from the proposed extension of Butler Avenue. As this constituted a change from the approved MDP, the Commission tabled the request until such time that the MDP was revised to reflect the desired changes. The revisions included the deletion of curb and gutter from the extension of Butler Avenue through to Fort Collier, the elimination of the proposed stub road at the western edge of the property that would allow a future connection to Smithfield Avenue, and the relocation /design change to the connection with Fort Collier. Staff recommendations were for approval of the subdivision, contingent upon Board of Supervisors approval of the revised MDP and all review comments being adequately addressed. Mr. David Holliday, the owner /developer, said that he planned to eliminate curb and gutter from the 29 zero -lot line units; however, a portion of Butler Avenue will have curb and gutter acting as a transition from the city. He said that the townhouses will be curbed /guttered, storm sewer will be provided, underground electric will be provided, there will 3262 I 4 be a detention pond, a second entrance will be provided, and the major access to Fort Collier will be ditch - lined. Mr. Charles Maddox, Jr., engineer with G. W. Clifford & Associates, was representing Holliday Construction Company, the owner /developer of this subdivision. Mr. Maddox said that the road design has implemented a very important strategy for the county in their Comprehensive Transportation Plan. He said that Mr. Holliday put his project on hold while an adjoining property owner came in for site plan approval in order to be able to line up with a major commercial entrance across Ft. Collier Road so that a good traffic plan could be implemented. Mr. McDonald felt that curb and gutter should not be eliminated, especially adjoining the city, because of the appearance and maintenance of standing water. It was pointed out that Apple Street will be curbed /guttered with sidewalks to its intersection with Butler Avenue and Butler Avenue will be curbed /guttered on the left side with a road side ditch on the right. Upon motion made by Mr. DeHaven and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby approve the subdivision application and revised master development plan of Hampton Chase for 114 lots (29 ' zero lot line /85 townhouses) located adjacent to the Winchester /Frederick County line, 143' northeast of Green Street at the end of Butler Avenue and Apple Street in the Stonewall Magisterial District. The vote was: YES (TO APPROVE): Marker, Copenhaver, Sherwood, Golladay, DeHaven, Wilson, Romine, Rinker, Thomas NO: McDonald PUBLIC HEARINGS 1991 REVISIONS TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN. PRIMARY REVISIONS CONCERN HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND RURAL ISSUES. A MAP CHANGE IS INCLUDED FOR A BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL AREA ON ROUTE 522 SOUTH. Action - Approved I Mr. Watkins summarized the significant revisions for the Commission, as follows: 3263 I 5 1) Historic Preservation - Policy additions include statements on the process, standards and methods for historic preservation which were prepared by the Historic Resources Advisory Board. 2) Rural Issues - Additions include general goals, standards and methods for rural preservation which were prepared by the Rural Issues Subcommittee. 3) Land Use Plan Map and Sewer and Water Service Area Map - A new industrial area and business corridor is proposed at the intersection of new Route 642 and Route 522 South. The sewer and water service area would be expanded to include this area. There were no public comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve the 1991 Revisions to the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan. 1991 -92 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN Mr. Watkins reviewed the top projects in the 1991 -92 Capital Improvements Plan which included school renovation projects, county offices and the Sherando High School. He said the Commission needed to review the plan and send recommendations to the Board as soon as possible so that it could be used in budget deliberations. It was recommended that the administrative offices be put at the bottom of the list as number 27 and that Sherando High School be moved to number 5 along with moving the funding to the upcoming year. It was also recommended that an indoor swimming pool be added to the list. Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Thomas, n BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the 1991 -92 Capital Improvements Plan for Frederick County with the changes noted above. (The revised CIP Plan is attached at end of minutes) DISCUSSION ON CAR WASHES IN THE BI DISTRICT Mr. Watkins said that the staff received a request from Mr. Frank DeHaven to allow car wash operations as a permitted use in the BI (Neighborhood Business) Zoning District. 3264 I 6 This request was brought before the Ordinance Subcommittee at their regular meeting in January and the committee voted to allow the use provided that adequate language was established. The language was drafted to allow the use with certain conditions which would be described in the supplementary use regulations under car washes. Mr. Bill Tisinger, attorney for Mr. Frank DeHaven, was present to answer questions. Some of the Commissioners felt that car washes were not appropriate in a residential neighborhood and that allowing them would set a precedent for other business uses. Other commissioners felt that the language presented was not adequate. The Commissioners unanimously agreed, however, that the amendment should be advertised for public hearing for the Commissions' first meeting in April. 1991 -92 WORK PROGRAM FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Mr. Watkins submitted the Planning Department's 1991 -92 Work Program for the Commission's review and comments. --------------- - - - - -- ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, r Watkins, Golladay, Jr., 3265 e s ti 150 Harmon Street Stephens City, Virginia 22655 March 1, 1991 Mr. Robert Watkins P. 0. Box 601 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Mr. Watkins: Thank you for giving us the opportunity to voice our objection to the proposed construction of the 150 foot water tank the Frederick Co. Sani- tation Authority and school superintendent planned to install on the .55 acre tract of land.belonging to the Aylor School and adjoining Plymn- Owen Estates subdivision. The manner in which this business was attempted to be transacted by par- ties Mr. Malcolm and Mr. Jones would be extreamely distasteful to all citizens of this good country. It appeared as though they were attempting to complete this as a private transaction between themselves; as though it were not a concern of the citizens living in the area - -nor was it any of their business what they did with the property which the school board owned. If this tank were installed on land from the Aylor School Tract, the tank would stand 6 times higher than the tallest building in any direction around the tank. It would completely obstruct and fill the view of any person look- ing at it from as far away as 1/2 mile. No matter what style tank used, it would be out of place and objectionable to look at by our neighborhood and school children. This would cause property values to go down requiring a reappraisal of the homes in the area. If a water tank is needed for this area, it is not for the needs of the existing homes and businesses. These could not have been built if water and sewer were not available and sufficient for their demands at the time they were built. If a tank is needed to allow further expansion and development within the County, please install the tank in an area which will not destroy the es- thetics and property values of the homes already built. Many sites are available which are zoned commercial and would be more suit- able for a water pressure tower. Please give your utmost attention to approval of other sites more suitable. Sincerely yours, /6 ARilph and Mary Ogl i ;e j. 3266 162 Harmon Street Stephens City, Virginia 22655 a March 1, 1991 Thank you for giving us the opportunity to.voice our objection to the proposed construction of,the 150 foot water tank the Frederick Co. Sani- tation Authority and school superintendent planned to install on the .55 acre tract of land belonging to the Aylor School and adjoining Plymn- Owen Estates subdivision. The manner in which this business was attempted to be transacted by par- ties Mr. Malcolm and Mr. Jones would be extreamely distasteful to all citizens of this good country. It appeared as though they were attempting to complete this as a private transaction between themselves; as though it were not a concern of the citizens living in the area - -nor was it any of their business what they did'with the property which the school board owned. If this tank were installed on land from the Aylor School Tract, the tank would stand 6 times higher than the tallest building in any direction around the tank. It would completely obstruct and fill the view of any person look- ing at it from as far away as 112 mile. No matter what style.tank used, it would be out of place and objectionable to look at by our neighborhood and school children. This would cause property values to go down requiring a reappraisal &-the homes in the area. If a water tank is needed for this area, it is not for the needs of the existing homes and businesses. These could not have been built if water and sewer were not available and sufficient for their demands at the time they were built. If a tank is needed to allow further expansion and development within the County, please install the tank in an area which will not destroy the as- *_hetics and property values of the homes already built. Many sites are available which are zoned commercial and would be more suit- able for a water pressure tower. Please give your utmost attention to approval of other sites more suitable. 'Sinc� rely yours-., Mr: and Mrs. Samuel L. McCall, III 3 2 6 v 1 . t E3 t 9 Ralph & Lynda Hines 199 Harmon Street Stephens City,VA 22655 March 1, 1991 Robert Watkins P. O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Watkins, I would like to take this opportunity to make you aware of my opposition to the construction of the water tower on Aylor Middle School grounds. It will decrease the value of my real estate by 10 to 15% and make it difficult for me to resale the property at a later date. This home is my most important investment and I feel that the county should protect my investment by not building this structure so close to my home. Not only will my property be decrease in value but then I would have to request that my property be reassessed in light of this terrible event. Our quiet desirable neighborhood would no longer be desirable to me but require me to move at considerable loss to me. A water tower should not be placed in a residential area as a matter of policy and I urge you to not approve the site as proposed by the sanitation authority. Please note that the sanitation authority will be proposing alternative sites and I assure you that the site located at the Kernstown eight acre site is their site of choice now. The original site is no longer their site of choice because they have rethought their needs and future plans and I have been told that they would embrace the Kernstown site for their water tower. It fits very well into their future development plans. Let me take this opportunity to thank you for your concern and for giving the citizens an opportunity for their voices to be heard. I can not accept this water tower and you can make sure that this tower does not become a permanent structure in this nice area. Very ttrrully� y�ours ,9 - alph' W. Hines ?. X3268 March 1, 1991 Robert Watkins P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Watkins, s In addition to the reasoning on not building the water tower for safety purposes, realtors estimate that it may decrease the value of our homes between 10 % -15 %. Also our community is encircled by a beautiful wooded area and the tower would take away from the natural surroundings. In researching the downfalls of the water tower being built in our areaa. I found that our Insurance rates could increase, there may be difficulty in marketing our homes, and property would have to be reassessed do to decrease of value. I appreciate the fact there must be a water tower built. However, I feel that there are many other options for the site on which this tower could - be built. Plymn Owen subdivision and surrounding areas have had a reputation of being a well presented community with safe surroundings. I as well as other home owners in the area feel that the water tower may have the potential of endangering the homes and children around it. IncludingAylor Middle School students as well as Sun Rise Play School Children. io These are only a few points of concern. I wish you to reconsider the building of the water tower in our neighborhood. I am very proud of our community and wish to keep it safe for our homes and families. s j, . Li L Sincerely, Y �'�,�G n _� Harlan C. Keplinger 3269