Loading...
PC_11-04-92_Meeting_MinutesMEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on November_- 4, 1992. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; John R. Marker, Vice Chairman /Back Creek District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District; Todd D. Shenk, Gainesboro District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; Ronald W. Carper, Gainesboro District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Manuel C. DeHaven, Stonewall District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; and Beverly Sherwood, Board Liaison. Planning Staff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Planning Director /Secretary; W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator; Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director; and Evan A. Wyatt, Planner II CALL TO ORDER Chairman Golladay called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES The first order of business was the consideration of the minutes of October 7, 1992. Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Romine, the minutes of October 7, 1992 were unanimously approved as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman Golladay accepted the bimonthly report for the Commission's information. 3567 2 COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee Mrs. Copenhaver reported that both Comprehensive Plan public meetings were held and excellent displays and presentations were prepared. Mrs. Copenhaver felt the approach was good, however, public attendance was poor. Subdivision Application #010 -92 of Jacob Moreland to create two lots from a 55.931 square foot parcel. This property is located on the east side of U_S_ Route 522 South, 850' south of Route 776, in the Shawnee District and is identified with PIN #64B000A0000870. Action - Approved Mr. Miller stated that there was an existing, nonconforming business located on the property, Stop & Shop Grocery. Mr. Miller said that two existing sheds located along the front southern boundary are part of a ground water monitoring facility and are to be removed when that project is complete. He added that a variance for the temporary building was obtained by the applicant's son -in -law. Mr. James Ray Goode said that he was the son -in -law of Mrs. Beverly S. Moreland, the owner of the property. He said that the property is a gift from Mrs. Moreland and he plans to build his home at this site. The Commission felt that this division complied with the requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and upon motion made by Mr. Wilson and seconded by Mr. Shenk, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of subdivision application #010 -92 of Jacob Moreland for two single- family residential lots from a 55,931 square foot parcel zoned RP (Residential Performance), located in the Shawnee District. REQUEST FOR RELIEF OF SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS -- GEORGE P. COUSSOULOS PROPERTY Action - Approval 3568 c3 Mr. Miller said that Mr. George P. Coussoulos wishes to divide a 28.3152 -acre tract of RA (Rural Area) Zoned land into two parcels. The subdivision ordinance requires a 50' right -of -way for a shared private driveway, which is required in this case; however, Mr. Coussoulos's property has only 23 foot of road frontage on Route 608. Mr. Miller said that since Mr. Coussoulos has not been able to acquire additional land from adjoining property owners, he is requesting relief from the Subdivision Ordinance requirements. The staff recommended approval to allow the land division as depicted with the stipulation that the parcels could not be further divided unless the required right -of -way was obtained. Mr. George P. Coussoulos stated that he wanted to divide the property into two lots for house sites and there would be a shared private driveway out to Route 608. Mr. Coussoulos said that the property had only 23 foot frontage when he purchased it. Mr. Coussoulos said that apparently, a Mrs. Whetzel had originally owned the entire parcel and in 1977, she sold what is now Parcels A and B and kept approximately 2.4 acres for herself. He said that apparently, at that time, there were no requirements for frontage onto a state road. Mr. Miller said that Mr. Coussoulas has been very cooperative and has made every possible attempt to acquire the needed right -of -way. Mr. Miller also noted that there was good sight distance at this location. Chairman Golladay called for anyone wishing to speak in favor or opposition to this request, but no one came forward. The Commissioners felt that according to the subdivision ordinance, an appeal of this type may be granted if there was a particular hardship. They felt that in this case, the hardship was that the property was acquired before the adoption of the minimum right -of -way requirement (about one -year ago with the new rural regulations) and another hardship was the pre- existing peculiar shape of the property. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the request by Mr. George P. Coussoulos for relief of the Subdivision Ordinance requirements. PUBLIC HEARINGS Conditional Use Permit #013 -92 of the Independent Order of Odd Fellows for a lodge and community park. This property is located on the north side of Middle Road approximately one mile from U-S. Route 11, just across the Winchester City Line, and identified by PIN #630000A000004D in the Back Creek District. 3569 4 Action - Tabled for 60 days Mr. Miller said that a portion of this property (0.159 acres out of the total 13.583 acres) is located within city limits. He said that a letter was received from the City Planning Director, dated October 8, 1992, stating concerns regarding the portion of property within city limits. Highlights of the letter were: 1) the 60 foot right -of -way from Middle Road into this property will need to be built to city standards and dedicated to the city by deed of dedication; 2) if public utilities are needed, they would need to be installed during street construction; 3) the developer will need to indicate how he will reduce impacts on adjoining property owners by stormwater management and buffers; and 4) the developer needs to indicate in writing to the city that the 0.159 acre portion of this tract within the city will not be utilized for uses not allowed in the low residential zoning of the City of Winchester. Mr. Eds Coleman, attorney, was present on behalf of the Loyal Order of Odd Fellows. Mr. Coleman said that the park would be along the nature of a private park used by permit only. He said that the Odd Fellows requirements would prohibit gambling or the construction of a bar room. Mr. Richard Madigan, Trustee for the Loyal Order of Odd Fellows, reiterated Mr. Coleman's statement that their intent for the park would be for private use by members and leased to outsiders for a fee in order to recoup some of the operating and maintenance costs. Chairman Golladay called for anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor or opposition and the following persons came forward: Mr. Charles E. Jeter, adjoining property owner, said that the drainage problem in this area is severe. Mr. Jeter distributed photographs of his property to the Commission and stated that about 100 feet of his front yard gets flooded in wet weather. He said that the property in question has been stripped twice of top soil. Mr. Jeter also stated that both he and his neighbors heard that the County Parks and Recreation Department was to become involved in creating a "community park" here with ballpark diamonds, lights, etc. Mr. Jeter was concerned what effects a public use area would have on his property. Mr. Dick Helm, adjoining property owner and an agent with Glaize Developments, was concerned about the intensity of facility uses and the resulting impacts (accesses, traffic, aesthetics) on adjoining properties. Mr. Helm said that primarily, his feeling was that wedding receptions, private parties, dining rooms, etc., were essentially commercial uses and he felt it was inappropriate for a commercial use to be surrounded by low density residential housing. Mr. Edward J. Riordan, adjoining property owner, asked about fencing because he was concerned about people taking short-cuts across his property from the park to Cedar Creek Grade. Mr. Riordan asked how the Odd Fellows planned to "police" the park area in order to enforce the no- drinking policy. He was also concerned if the tree line at the rear of the 3570 I.7 property would remain and also where each facility was planned to be located on the site. The Commissioners were generally in favor of the project, but felt that more detailed information concerning the development of the site (drainage, location of facilities, accesses, fencing, etc.), in the form of a site plan, needed to be submitted so that decisions could be made to protect adjoining properties. Other questions needed to be answered by the applicant, such as if the park would be public or private and whether or not alcohol consumption would be permitted. The Commissioners suggested that the applicant may want to consider an engineering study, especially because of drainage concerns, and a feasibility study on the costs involved. Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Wilson, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously table Conditional Use Permit #013 -92 of the Independent Order of Odd Fellows for 60 days in order to allow time for the applicant to submit clarification on the permit application and to submit a site plan. An amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 21, Zoning Ordinance, Article IX, Neighborhood Business District, Section 9 -1 -1, Allowed Uses, to include restaurants as an allowed use. Action - Approved Mr. Wyatt said that the Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DR &RS) recommended approval of this amendment with the understanding that this use would pertain to restaurants that are part of a shopping center, serve food on premise or on a carry-out basis, and that do not include nightclub activities. He said that the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (SIC) distinguishes between restaurant and nightclub uses. The amendment presented contains the appropriate SIC Code for restaurant use. Chairman Golladay called for anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor or opposition to the amendment. No one came forward. The Commission was in favor of the amendment and upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Thomas, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 21, Zoning Ordinance, to revise Article IX, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 9 -1 -1, as follows: 3571 M 9 -1 -1 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT, B -1 ALLOWED USE STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION (SIC) Restaurants 5812 An amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 21, Zoning Ordinance, Article 111, Supplementary Use Regulations, to create Section 3 -23 to provide Use Regulations for restaurants in the B -1 (Neighborhood Business) District. Action - Approved Mr. Wyatt said that this amendment to Article III provides restrictions to the restaurant use if it is located in the B -1 (Neighborhood Business) Zoning District. Discussion ensued on the maximum percentage of floor area a restaurant could occupy within a shopping center. Some Commissioners felt the recommended 35% was too restrictive, especially in small B -1 shopping centers, and felt the figure should be raised to 50 %. Other Commissioners noted that considerable B -1 Zoning was located near residential neighborhoods and a restaurant covering 50% floor area could be quite large; and, in this particular area, would generate considerable traffic on a road that is in poor condition. Upon motion made by Mr. DeHaven and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the amendment to Chapter 21 of the Frederick County Code, Article 111, Section 3 -23, Supplementary Use Regulations, as presented, to create Article 3 -23 to provide Use Regulations for restaurants in the B -1, Neighborhood Business Districts, as follows: 3 -23 RESTAURANTS Restaurants located in the B -1, Neighborhood Business, Zoning District shall meet the following requirements: 3 -23 -1 Restaurants are not permitted to have drive through window service. 3 -23 -2 Restaurants are only permitted to be located within a shopping center containing at least three other business units. 3572 ri 3 -23 -3 Restaurants are not permitted to exceed thirty -five (35) percent of the total floor area within a shopping center. DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE METHODS TO PRESERVE HISTORIC SITES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY Mr. Tierney said that numerous discussions have been held at the Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) level on ways in which the County could improve its historic preservation effort, particularly at the master development plan and rezoning stage. He said that the HRAB would like to see procedures developed that would place the County in a better position to negotiate with potential developers of historic property. The HRAB has proposed that the County identify parcels throughout the county that are indisputably of some historic significance, so that a developer knows at the onset that the property is important and if it is to be developed, it will have to be done in such a way as to be sensitive to the historic nature of the property. Mr. Tierney said that the HRAB does not want to be too restrictive, but simply to let the developer know that there are some issues which need to be addressed. He said that the HRAB has put together a list of some 150 properties throughout Frederick County and this list could be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan as a means of notifying potential developers of their historic importance. He also suggested having the HRAB act as a reviewing agency on master development plans and rezonings which involve historic properties. Mr. Ray Ewing, Chairman of the HRAB, recalled the Caleb Heights review that took almost one year to complete. Mr. Ewing stated that if procedures were in place, it would save time for the developer and the County Commission and Board. He felt that historic properties should be identified and developers should know at the onset that the county feels the site is significant. Mrs. Mary Jane Light, member of the HRAB, said that she has read statistics whereby the designation of a property as historically significant increases its value. Mrs. Light felt that the county was obligated to preserve its historic resources. She suggested notifying property owners by letter that the HRAB has found their property to be historically significant and ask them if they would object to their property being placed on the HRAB's list. Some of the Commissioners were concerned that designating a property as historically significant may create a financial impact on the original owner by reducing the property's commercial value. They felt that the property may not be as attractive to a potential developer because of the historical restrictions placed upon it by the county. Other Commissioners felt that it would be preferable for a developer to know what the county and private interest groups expect at the onset, rather than waiting until Planning Commission or Board meetings. They also felt a responsibility to the community to recognize historically significant sites for future generations. 3573 p The consensus of the Commission was that a middle ground approach might be to incorporate into the master development plan application that historical issues must be shown and addressed -- without identifying county properties on an official list -- similar to the way we require a developer to identify and address floodplains, wetlands, woodlands and steep slopes. They also felt it was a good idea to use the HRAB as a reviewing agency for master plan applications. No official action was taken at this time. ADJOURNMENT No further business was discussed and the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.. 3574 Respectfully submitted,