PC_12-02-92_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
December 2, 1992.
PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; John
R. Marker, Vice Chairman /Back Creek District; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee
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.
ABSENT: Todd D. Shenk, Gainesboro District
Planning Staff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Planning Director /Secretary;
W. Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator; and Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning
Director
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 21,
1992. Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Thomas, the minutes of October
21, 1992 were unanimously approved as presented.
BIMONTHLY REPORT
Chairman Golladay accepted the bimonthly report for the Commission's
information.
3575
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Stephens City /Frederick County Joint Planning Committee
Mrs. Copenhaver reported that the Stephens City /Frederick County Joint Planning
Committee is resuming discussion on Route 11 North and South of Stephens City and they are
also discussing a possible western bypass around the Town of Stephens City.
Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) - 10117/92 Mtg
Mr. Tierney said that the HRAB discussed the Plaque Program and organization
of a design competition. Mr. Watkins said that the HRAB also received a report from the
Planning Commission concerning the Commission's thoughts on historic properties designation.
Informal Discussion Regarding the Preliminary Master Development Plan for James R.
Wilkins III. This property is located along Route 659 (Valley Mill Road) in the Shawnee
Magisterial District.
No Action
Mr. Bruce Edens of Greenway Engineering & Surveying and Ritchie Wilkins,
property owner, were present to discuss their proposal for the development of 76 apartment units
and 86 townhouses on 18.684 acres located along Route 659 between Dowell J. Howard
Vocational Center and Brookland Heights subdivision.
The Commissioners were concerned about the drainageway (or intermittent stream)
that ran through the center of the townhouse area and requested that the applicant address issues
related to that drainageway.
The applicants felt that the amount of water that ran through the townhouse area
was minimal. Mr. Edens said that a storm sewer system will pick up any water from the parking
and road areas and direct it to the stormwater management area located next to Brookland
Heights.
Since this was an informal discussion, no action was taken by the Commission at
this time.
3576
3
Resolution Regarding Route 37
A discussion ensued between the staff and commissioners on the Route 37 project
concerning significant impacts on businesses and industries by four of the proposed alternatives.
Six alternatives plus a "no- build" alternative were being considered in the draft environmental
impact statement for the Route 37 project. Alternatives A, D, E, and F would connect with I -81
at a full cloverleaf interchange located where the existing diamond interchange is currently
located on I -81 at Route 11 North.
In a previous worksession discussion about this issue, it was determined that the
construction of a cloverleaf would greatly impact the businesses at this location. As a result,
Maguire Associates were requested to conduct a study concerning other ways to design the
cloverleaf, particularly moving it to the south; however, based on Maguire's analysis, the staff
concluded that no matter how the interchange was designed, there would still be significant
impacts on the businesses and industries at this location. The businesses surrounding this area
would no longer have access onto 1 -81 at this location and this would be nearly as much of an
impact as "taking" those businesses.
The other two alternatives follow a route further north and do not affect this
interchange area. These two alternatives leave the diamond essentially as it is.
Alternatives A, D, E, and F are the most direct and shortest routes. It was felt
that because these alternatives have the lowest construction costs and shortest travel times, they
should be included in the study as alternatives. If they are not included as alternatives, it was
felt that the Federal and State review agencies would ask the county why the routes were not
considered.
Staff read a proposed resolution that was being considered for adoption by the
Board of Supervisors for their meeting of December 9, 1992 stating that the Board would not
support any Route 37 East alternative that would severely disrupt or significantly remove existing
residential neighborhoods, businesses or commercial areas; and, because of the concern for
existing commercial areas, the Board would also not support any alternative that would disrupt
or remove the majority of businesses at the existing Route 11 North interchange on Interstate 81
or other similar locations.
The Planning Commission was in agreement with the statements in the resolution
and unanimously endorsed the resolution upon motion made by Mr. DeHaven and second made
by Mr. Marker.
3577
F1
Route 642 Resolution
The staff noted that all the plans have essentially been completed for the
improvements to Route 642 and funding sources have been developed. The staff read a proposed
resolution that was being considered for adoption by the Board of Supervisors for their meeting
of December 9, 1992. The resolution requested that VDOT officially recognize the County's
intention to have the realignment project start at the intersection of Route 642 and Route 647.
The Planning Commission was in agreement with the statements in the resolution
and unanimously endorsed the resolution upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by
Mr. Thomas.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Conditional Use Permit #014 -92 for Windy Hill Business Park for an off - premise business
sign. This property is located at the intersection of Route 522 South and Route 1370 and
is identified by PIN #64B000A0001300 in the Shawnee District.
Action - Approved
The staff reported that the proposed sign would meet allowed ordinance
dimensions if no larger than the indicated 10' X 10'. The sign must be setback at least 10' from
the road right -of -way and is restricted to a maximum height of 35'. A building permit and a
permit from VDOT is required for this sign.
The staff also noted that Mr. Baker intends to construct a sign that would eliminate
four other signs (his tenants) that are currently located on this particular corner.
Mr. Thomas C. Baker, the owner of Windy Hill Business Park, was available for
questions.
Commissioners felt the appearance of this intersection would be improved by
incorporating several signs onto one sign and upon motion by Mr. Wilson and seconded by Mr.
Mr. Romine,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
approve Conditional Use Permit #014 -92 for Windy Hill Business Park for an off - premise
business sign to be located at the intersection of Route 522 South and Route 1370 (Windy Hill
Drive) with the following conditions:
The sign shall be installed and maintained in compliance with the Frederick County
Zoning Ordinance.
3578
Q
2. The sign shall be properly permitted as required by the Virginia Department of
Transportation.
Summary of Comprehensive Plan Public Meetings
The staff reported that the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee held
its annual fall meetings this year on October 26 and November 2. The format of the meetings
was somewhat different than previous years. The Subcommittee invited numerous county
departments and agencies to participate. Those which were involved included the Parks and
Recreation Department, Engineering and Inspections, Economic Development, Sanitation
Authority, Health Department, School Board, and the Planning Department. Each organization
set up a display which was intended to focus on future planning efforts. Members of the public
were free to browse and take in the various exhibits.
Both the staff and Planning Commissioners felt that although attendance was low,
of those who did attend, the reaction to the new format was very positive.
ADJOURNMENT
No further business was discussed and the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m..
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Watkins, Secretary
( ),44 r �'4 — Z'—�
Ja es W. Golladay, Jr., C ' man
3579