Loading...
PC_09-21-88_Meeting_MinutesMEETING MINUTES of the FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room in the Old Frederick County Court House, 9 Court Square, Winchester, Virginia, on September 21, 1988. PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: Frank H. Brumback, Chairman; James W. Golladay, Jr., Vice - Chairman; Carl M. McDonald; Manuel C. DeHaven; Beverly Sherwood; Kenneth Y. Stiles; Marjorie H. Copenhaver; and George L. Romine Also present were: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary; and Stephen M. Gyurisin, Advisory. ABSENT: S. Blaine Wilson CALL TO ORDER Chairman Brumback called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. BIMONTHLY REPORT The Commission and staff discussed pending applications. Mr. Gyurisin reported that the staff had received a site plan for a maintenance shed at Sherando Park. Mr. Gyurisin said that the shed will consists of two 40' X 60' structures. Chairman Brumback instructed the staff to proceed with administrative approval of the plan. COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee Mr. Golladay reported that the Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee had a joint meeting with the Sanitation Authority on September 20, 1988. The discussion centered on the relationship of the Comprehensive Plan to water and sewer. Transportation Committee Mr. Golladay said that the Transportation Committee will meet on Monday, October 3, 1988 to begin work on the Secondary Road Plan and non -hard surface improvements. 2752 C, - 2 - Sanitation Authority Mrs. Copenhaver reported the following information from the last Sanitation Authority meeting: The Abrams Creek plant has now been diverted to the regional plant; A bid has been received on the decholorination unit for Stephens Run, which was mandated by the State Water Control Board; Work on the airport interceptor will be finished late this month and the Route 50 East work completed in November; The Wrights Run and Lakeside interceptors are under construction. Mrs. Copenhaver also reported that as of October 1, 1988, builders will be required to have sewer permits in order to obtain building permits. She said that builders will be required to pay 50% of the connection fee for the sewer permit plus either connect to the sewer or have a building under construction within 180 days. This will eliminate any stockpiling of sewage permits. SUBDIVISION Final subdivision plat of Lenoir City Company of Virginia for the subdivision of one 4.9379 acre industrial lot (Lot 7), located in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Approved Mr. Tom Gilpin, with Lenoir City Company of Virginia, was present to answer questions from the Commission. Upon motion made by Mr. DeHaven and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously approve the final subdivision plat of Lenoir City Company of Virginia for one 4.9379 acre industrial site (Lot 7) located on the southeast side of Tyson Drive in the Stonewall Industrial Park, Stonewall Magisterial District. PUBLIC MEETING Revised Preliminary Master Development Plan #001 -88 of Hampton Chase for 80 townhouses and 31 single-family zero lot line houses on 22.06 acres, zoned RP, in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - Tabled Mr. Watkins said that the revisions proposed are: 1) The primary access will be to the City's Apple and Van Fossen Streets instead of to Fort Collier Street in the Fort Collier Industrial Park; and, 2) Includes 2753 - 3 - a possible future right -of -way connection to Fort Collier Street and Smithfield Street (to be planned, but not constructed). Mr. Watkins said that this version eliminates "thru" traffic from the industrial park into the City. Mr. Watkins read a memorandum from Tim Youmans, the Winchester City Planning Director, concerning this project. Upon motion made by Mr. Golladay and seconded by Mr. Stiles, the letter was made a part of the official record as follows: 2754 - 4 - 01U of Pinr4nttr, 'Pirginin ROUES CITY HALL MEMORANDUM 22001 TO: Steve Gyurisin, Deputy Planning Director, Frederick County FROM: Timothy Youmans, Planning Director, City of Winchester RE: Hampton Chase Development Proposal DATE: September 21, 1988 We recently received a revised version of the Hampton Chase Development Project which shows a total of 31 Single - Family Detached, Zero Lot Line units and 80 Townhouse units with access being provided fran the stub ends of Apple Street and Van Fossen Street at the northerly boundary of the City. While immediate and future connections to existing City streets had been included in earlier versions of the master plan, they were always provided in addition to a proposed connection to Fort Collier Street at the northeasterly corner of the site. The City is concerned about the traffic impact that the current proposal will have on the existing residential street network in the Virginia Avenue neighborhood of the City. In particular, our concerns center around the increased traffic resulting from Townhouse development which would now necessarily enter and exit the site through a medium density zoning district which currently limits development to single family homes on lots of at least 8000 square feet in area. As discussed with the developer's engineer and County staff, the use of Apple Street is logical given that it will distribute traffic in both directions on Green Street. The provision of a connection to Van Fossen Street, however, presents the likelihood of Van Fossen becoming a raceway especially given the convenient alignment of the entrance drive into the townhouse portion of the project. This is of special concern given the presence of school children crossing Van Fossen to get to the Virginia Avenue Elementary School.-Prior to the latest .plan revision, residents of the townhouse project would have been more inclined to enter and exit the site from Fort Collier Street which offers better access to Route 11 and the Interstate highway. The City is very concerned with the designation of the two "Possible Future Right -of- ways" shown connecting to Fort Collier and Smithfield Avenue. These right -of -ways hopefully would be dedicated and perhaps improved to better assure that they would be utilized at such time as adjacent development permits. Given the zoning along Smithfield Avenue /Brick Kiln Road (which permits townhouse and multifamily uses) as well as the recent improvements near the westerly intersection of Brick Kiln Road and Route 11, it is desirable to pursue this connection. Likewise, a connection to Fort Collier Street would allow for direct connection to Baker Lane which presents a more desirable connection to Route 7 and the Interstate. ..zhc CAPr(2Ta - 5 - While Section 17 of the City Charter does provide for Council approval of street connections as proposed for this project, we would hope that the concerns expressed herein can be worked out and that the impact on the City streets and neighborhoods can be minimized. Along these lines we would ask that construction traffic not utilize the proposed connections to the City streets and that a connection be made to Fort Collier at least during construction of the development. We appreciate the cooperation we have received to date from the applicant and the County Planning staff and hope that a mutually beneficial alternative can be developed. 2756 - 6 - Mr. Charles Maddox, Jr., Engineer with G. W. Clifford & Associates, was present to represent this plan. He said that the Board of Supervisors felt that two entrances were necessary for this development and they requested that the plan be modified. Mr. Maddox explained that the City has a dedicated right -of -way adjoining this property at four locations and it was difficult to determine another access point. Additionally, he said that the City did not look favorably on a connection between their residential neighborhood and a primarily industrial road, especially with a "straight- line" connection. Mr. Maddox suggested a connection to Butler Avenue in lieu of Van Fossen, which ends in a cul -de -sac and would eliminate a straight -line connection. Mr. Maddox compared the use, density, and traffic of the proposed development with that presently occuring on adjoining city property and noted that it was not significantly different. He added that no units would be built within the setback lines of possible future right -of -ways. Mr. Stiles said that the problem with showing future right -of -ways was that there was no guarantee the road would be constructed once all the houses were built and sold. Mr. Stiles felt that more time should be allowed, to see if the property for the Fort Collier Street extension could be acquired. Upon motion made by Mr. Stiles and seconded by Mr. DeHaven, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously table Revised Preliminary Master Development Plan #001 -88 of Hampton Chase in order to allow time to acquire property for a future right -of way connection. This proposal is for 80 townhouses and 31 single- family zero lot line lots located adjacent to the City /County line, just northeast of Battle Avenue and Van Fossen Streets, in the Stonewall Magisterial District. PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit #010 -88 of The Elks Club of Winchester, Inc. for the construction of a fraternal lodge on vacant land in the Back Creek District. Action - Denied Mr. Watkins presented a letter of opposition from Charles W. Doughty, Senior Evangelist of the Church of Christ at Mountain View. Upon motion made by Mr. Stiles and seconded by Mr. Golladay, the letter was made a part of the official record, as follows: 2757 Charles W. Doughty, Minister. CHURCH OF CHRIST AT MOUNTAIN VIEW September 14, 1988 Frederick County Planning Commission P.O. Box 601 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Mr. Watkins, Speaking for our Eldership here, along with hundreds of members of my congregation and thousands of Christians throughout the county, may I present this dictum for your serious consideration. Our congregation overlooks route 37 to the north and our neighbor congregation the Blueridge Brethren faces 37 to the west. We have that in common. We also have another issue in common..., we are justly horrified at the idea of an alcohol distributing institution existing side by side the congregation, whether it be the E.L.K.S. or any other institution. This is not to say 'that I, or any other Christian leader chose to single out E.L.K.S. for a private vendetta (as a civic organization they espouse some good causes); but it is a violation of the Christian conscience to distribute strong drink. (Habakkuk 2:15.) The question in point here is, will the Believing Community be offended by the decision of our elected officials to permit an institution that no matter how noble some of its causes, will cater to the impudence of its members. It would be a yoke upon The Brethren Church, an almost unbearable burden to be forced to drive past an institution of drinking, guffaws an invariable drinking to attend a revival, or worship at a house of prayer. It would be just as ostensibly incongruent to have such a club in our backyard as to have one in the church yard. Whether we be Christian or not, our government has always respected the Christian conscience of the community. Hum / b G , I / y,S�mitted, 1 - eharl / W. 7Dog�ht Senior Evan CWD /ms 2758 Route 11 South ♦ Post Office Box 2702 *.Winchester, Virginia 22601 0 703 - 869 -2244 Mr. John Rosenberger, President of the Elks Club, and Mr. Lee Ebert, surveyor, were present to represent the Elks Club. Mr. Rosenberger gave a short presentation on the ideals and functions of the Elks Club. Mr. Rosenberger noted that they were willing to work with the Blue Ridge Grace Brethren Church on any physical problem, ie: location of the driveway, parking lots, and evergreen screening. Chairman Brumback called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition and the following people came forward: Mr. Bob Roper, Chairman of the Building Committee for the Blue Ridge Grace Brethren Church, reiterated the church's positions from the last meeting: 1) The church has a sizeable monetary investment in their facility; 2) They have a master plan for future expansion in place and plan on developing their entire ten acres; 3) They feel that if the Elks Club located next to them, it would put their building plans in jeopardy; 4) Traffic would have a negative influence on services and the safety of their children. Mr. Roper noted that the church established at this location first and the Elks Club never approached them before they purchased the adjoining property. Mr. Roper said that they met with representatives of the Elks Club, at the Planning Commission's request; however, no progress was made at that meeting. Mr. Roper felt that the church and the Elks Club were incompatible and that future problems were inevitable. Mr. Kenneth Unger, Moderator at the Blue Ridge Grace Brethren Church, said that he contacted some of the churches in Frederick County for support. Mr. Unger read the three letters he received. Upon motion made by Mr. Stiles and seconded by Mr. Dellaven, the letters were made a part of the official record, as follows: 2759 - 9 - VJnrnI - aclorry Uinil eel lt/efhochil C4urcA STEPHENSON, VIRGINIA PASTOR'S STUDY 30 Wilkins Drive Telephone: Winchester, VA 22601 (703) 662 -9226 September 10, 1988 Frederick County Supervisors Frederick County Courthouse Winchester, Virginia 22601 Members of the Board of Supervisors: I am writing this letter in support of the position of Blue Ridge Grace Brathren Church'lin opposition of the building of an Elks Lodge next to their house of worship. Any church is more than just a gathering of its members for Sunday worship and study. It is a community that gathers often in differents forms of fellowship inside and outside the church thorughout the week. I believe that the placing of an Elks Lodge next to the church could and would result in tension and conflict for both the Elks and the church due to differing types of fellowship and social gatherings. I think that as you consider this matter there arises the need to look at the expectations of the church as it settled in its area with the hope of an atmosphere neighborhood that would be conducive to their worshiping community. Thank You, Xhu pecitf lye, I 1.LI r Phili ps, Pastor 2760 10 _ Valley Bible Church Stephens City, Virginia August 20, 1988 RE: Elks Club Application Conditional Use Permit Frederick County Planning Commission 9 Court Square Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Planning Commission embers: As the chairman of the board of Valley Bible Church, I am writing in support of the opposition by Blue Ridge Grace Brethren Church to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit to the Elks Club of Winchester. I can fully appreciate and understand why the Blue Ridge Grace Brethren Church is opposed to the Elks Club being located next to their building. As a new church, we are looking for land to build on. We would not consider land next to an organization or establishment where alcoholic beverages were sold. In our minds that fosters a life style that we are opposed to. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, / Herbert A. Birchenough 2761 - 11 - She n a ndoah Vall Baptist Church PASTOR, ERIC FARE P.O. BOX 249 • STEPHENS CITY, VIRGINIA 22655 -0249 CHURCH OFFICE - 869 -0600 August 15, 1988 Fred. County Planning Commission 9 Court Square Winchester, Va. 22601 Dear Sirs: As a Bible- believing Church in the Winchester- Frederick County area, we would stand beside the Blue Ridge Grace Brethren Church in opposition to the proposed building of the new Elks Club adjacent to the Church. I am sure that the Elks Club people participated in many fine community service projects in the past. However, we do not believe that they clearly understand the deep feelings and convictions of Bible- believing Christians which have prompted such diverse community opposition. We do understand that the Elks Club has a right to build their structure, but we would hope that they would consider the reasonable limits imposed by the Zoning Board. The decision.on where to build should be made by decency and sensitivity to the deeply held sentiments of their neighbors, the Blue Ridge Grace Brethren Church. The final decision should not be made on First Amendment or financial grounds, but on respect to the faith of our neighbors. The Elks Club should exercise responsibility and a bit of charity, which are not the equivalent of zoning censorship. Sincerely in Christ T� Eric G. Farel Pastor EGF /lf 2762 - 12 - Mr. Golladay asked if the Elks Club was considering selling the front portion of their property. Mr. Ebert replied that under the county ordinance, their 10 -acre tract could be subdivided into two 5 -acre tracts. Mrs. Sherwood commented that a church use is permitted by right in an agricultural zoning district; however, a fraternal organization use is only permitted with a conditional use permit. Mrs. Copenhaver said that she believed that the Elks Club use on the parcel of land located next to the church was an incompatible use and she, therefore, moved for denial of the Elks Club conditional use permit. This motion was seconded by Mr. McDonald. Other members of the Planning Commission also felt that the issue of compatibility was a legitimate concern. They believed that the owners of a piece of property had the right to use their property as they wished, within the provisions of the zoning ordinance; and if neighbors did not like how a person used their property, they did not have the right to prohibit the owner from using his property. The Commissioners felt it was not the role of the Planning Commission to pass judgement on the righteousness or wrongfulness of what any organization does. They felt, however, that the issue of compatibility of uses was a legitimate concern of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby deny Conditional Use Permit #010 -88 of The Elks Club of Winchester, Inc. for the construction of a fraternal lodge on Cedar Creek Grade, Virginia Route 622, directly east of the Blue Ridge Grace Brethren Church, in the Back Creek Magisterial District. The vote on this request was: YES (TO DENY): DeHaven, Golladay, Sherwood, Stiles, McDonald, Copenhaver, Brumback NO: Romine PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE ON THE PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR NEW DOMINION FOR PATIO HOMES Mr. Watkins said that the New Dominion Preliminary Master Development Plan was discussed at the Commission's last meeting and was tabled for more review time. Mr. Bruce Edens, President /Engineer with Greenway Engineering 6 Surveying, presented the New Dominion plan to the Commission. Mr. Edens said that their target market is retired couples. He noted that this was one of the reasons for designing small, low- maintenance yards. The Commission discussed the density of the project, the private driveways, impervious surface, compatibility with surrounding uses, and 2763 — 13 — parking. The Commissioners felt that the 20 patio homes proposed should have architectural uniformity and the site should have a designated area for trash receptacles. They were also concerned about accessibility for emergency vehicles. No action was needed by the Planning Commission at this time. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission had no further business to discuss and adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Robert W. Watkins, Secretary Frank H. Brumback, Chairman 2764