Loading...
PC_02-20-80_Meeting_MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board of Supervisors' ?fleeting Room, 2/20/80 PRESENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman; Frank Brumback, Vice - Chairman; Elmer Venskoske; W. French Kirk; Manuel C. DeHaven; James Golladay, Jr.; Kenneth Stiles (not present until late in meeting); Herbert Sluder CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order. The first order of business was the consideration of the minutes of February 6, 1980. Mr. Kirk noted one correction on Page 4, adding the word "the" before "staff" in the third paragraph. There being no further corrections, Mr. Kirk made a motion that the minutes be approved as corrected. This was seconded by Mr. Golladay and passed unanimously. BIMONTHLY REPORT In answer to Mr. Golladay's question, Mr. Riley explained that the Louis H. Foltz Site Plan had been submitted and will be pending until such time as a rezoning takes place, Mr, Riley explained that this is located behind the car wash on Route 50, Mr. DeHaven requested that this site plan in particular come before the Planning Commission. Mr. Riley noted that he would start submitting Site Plans to the Planning Commission for those in commercial zones for review. Next, in answer to Mr. Golladay's question, Mr. Riley noted that the Richard Neff Construction Company is located near Middletown and that it borders Technicon Route 81 and a residential area on its southwest. Mr. Riley also noted that this Site Plan will come before the Planning Commission. Mr. Riley commented that all site plans will be brought before the Commission for clarity until things are ironed out. Chairman Gordon also noted that the Kerns Conditional Use Permit should also be thought about before the March meeting. Chairman Gordon explained that there was an informal meeting on this about eighteen months ago, Chairman Gordon noted that at that time the petitioner voluntarily withdrew the request because of circumstances. The Bimonthly report was accepted as information. 914 Planning Commission Minutes -2- 2/20/80 FOREST LAKE ESTATES SITE PLAN REVIEW Chairman Gordon stated that the next item on the agenda is the discussion of the Forest Lake Estates Site Plan. Mr. Riley explained that this mobile home park is situated on Route 636 east of Stephens City. In answer to Mr. Gordon's question, Mr. Riley noted that in the first section there are approximately 283 lots. Mr. Sluder then explained that the sewer system and water plant would both be under the Bureau of Waste Water Treatment and the State Water Control Board. Mr. Riley commented that, from what he could determine, the Court approved this conditional use permit and gave them sixty days to file an approved site plan which was accomplished. Mr. Riley noted that it appeared that staff has no choice but to process the site plan which was submitted in pUffev Mr. Golladay next read Judge Woltz's commentary regarding Forest Lake Estates which further explained the requirements to which the Site Plan must conform, Mr. Brumback noted that the Commission's position should be clarified with regard to the Forest Lake Estates Site Plan. \ 1980 PLAN OF WORK Chairman.Gordon next opened disucssion on the Plan of Work for •:1 Mr. Riley commented that all the goals for 1980 hinge on the comprehensive rezoning. Mr. Golladay next asked how difficult it is to establish an Agricultural District. 915 Planning Commission Minutes -3- 2/20/80 Mr. Riley explained that the most difficult part is setting up the local advisory committee and the establishing of a criteria. Mr. Riley continued explaining that a great deal of the burden is on the landowner in drawing up the boundaries, etc, In answer to Mr. Gordon's question, Mr, Riley explained that, once a District is established, all types of planning activities taking place in and around the District will have to take second place to the established District,and its goals. Chairman Gordon then asked how this would relate to the County taking steps to preserve prime agricultural land. Mr. Riley explained that a local advisory committee will be setting up the criteria for reviewing the applications when they come in. Mr. Riley noted that the criteria for the establishing of Districts should reflect the County's overall plans for conserving prime agricultural land. Chairman Gordon then accepted the Plan of Work for 1980 as information. PUBLIC HEARINGS Request for a Conditional Use Permit for Powlen Equipment Company, #025 -79, for a construction equipment distributorship and sales office. ACTION - Approved Mr. Sluder reported that the septic system has been uncovered and commented that fill had been placed on top of it. Mr. Sluder further described the system as not being the greatest in the world but also noted that it would not ever present a public health problem. Mr. Powlen, President and Mr. Lee Potterfield, Marketing Manager next came forward and introduced themselves to the Commission. Mr. Powlen 916 Planning Commission Minutes -4- 2/20/80 further explained that the occupancy of the building in the past has been 20 -25 persons in the one building and 4 -6 persons in the other. Mr. Powlen added that Powlen Equipment Company did not anticipate having more than 6 and, in the future, perhaps a maximum of 15 persons. Mr. Sluder noted that should the system fail there would be two alternatives; one, shut down and vacate the building and, two, install an alternative system. Mr. Brumback next confirmed that the petitioners are aware of the conditions.of the septic system, noting that it would be their responsi- bility in the future, Mr. Brumback then made a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approval of this conditional use permit with the condition that it be reviewed and renewed annually by staff provided all conditions placed on the conditional use permit have been met, This was seconded by Mr. Kirk and passed unanimously. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County'Planning Commission recommend to the Board of Supervisors approval of this conditional use permit with the condition that it be reviewed and renewed annually by staff provided all conditions placed on it have been met. Mr. Colladay questioned why there was a need of an annual review when there are no conditions placed on the permit. Mr. Brumback noted that in that zone there are certain criteria that must be met in the zoning ordinance. By general concensus, the Commission confirmed that the foregoing motion, second and approval was what was intended and passed. Mr. Powlen explained that their company prided itself on being very concerned in the community and supportive of many local community activities. Mr. Powlen also explained that their company is conscious of the historical value in the area and hoped they will be a business the 917 Planning Commission Minutes -5- 2/20/80 County will be proud to have locate in the area. HOME OCCUPATION - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Mr. Riley next presented the proposed ordinance amendment change, noting that in August of 1979 the conditional use permit requirement was taken out of all zones except accessory structure in Agricultural Districts, This amendment, Mr. Riley explained, would take out the require- ment for a conditional use permit for an accessory structure and make the ordinance more uniform. Mr. Riley also explained that the Intent Section of R -1 and R -2 should have the last sentence deleted to eliminate a conflict, Mr. Golladay noted that this had been worked on for a long time and the Planning Commission finally decided on home occupations in all the Districts, with the Agricultural Districts being the only Districts to have home occupations in an accessory structure. Chairman Gordon noted that the Planning Commission is on record as wanting conditional use permits in residential zones. Chairman Gordon noted that the Commission might be going in the wrong direction by eliminating any further. It might be better, Chairman Gordon continued, if what was originally intended but not passed by the Board was reinstated. Mr. Riley explained that he was looking at this from an enforce- ment angle. At this point in the meeting Mr. Stiles entered. Chairman Gordon noted that the Home Occupation Amendment which the Planning Commission agreed upon had been tabled by the Board of Supervisors. By general concensus, it was decided to start work on this again and perhaps bring it back up at a joint meeting some time in the future. 918 Planning Commission Minutes -6- 2/20/80 OFF- STREET PARKING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CHANGE Chairman Gordon noted that the proposal seems more restrictive than what is in the ordinance now. In answer to Mr. Stiles' question, Mr. Riley noted that this proposal would replace what is in the ordinance now and further noted that the proposal would take out the question of interpretation by spelling out requirements. Mr. Riley also noted that the standards in the proposal have been taken from other zoning ordinances. Mr. Brumback noted that spelling everything out allows everyone to play by the same rules. Mr. Riley noted that being more specific would enable the staff to answer questions from the citizenry more efficiently. Mr. Stiles next asked if, in some instances, the ordinance asks for too many parking spaces now. Mr. Riley noted that in the instance being referred to, it is subject to interpretation because it is not spelled out in the ordinance. Mr. Golladay asked if this amendment proposal could be set up as a policy statement and guideline. Mr. Venskoske commented that he thought it would be better to spell out the requirements as in the proposal. Chairman Gordon noted that having things in black and white is becoming more important as far as the courts are concerned. Chairman Cordon also explained that they do not want to become unreasonable. Mr. Colladay further commented that this proposal is too restrictive, specifically pointing out the requirement for all- weather parking surfaces. By general concensus, it was agreed that part (b) "Specific requirements" is needed, 919 Planning Commission Minutes -7- 2/20/80 Chairman Gordon then asked staff if they could attempt to eliminate some of the restrictive nature of the proposed amendment and let the Commission look at it again in the future, Mr. Golladay then expressed that, from what he could determine, if the Ordinance restrictions were more stringent than the Highway Department's, there could not be a legal question regarding County approval. Mr. Riley noted that entrance requirements are not spelled out in the ordinance. If you have no specifics, continued Mr. Riley, "intent" means nothing. Chairman Gordon then asked if there is anything the Planning Commission can do about entrances on Site Plans. Mr. Riley noted that the only thing the Planning Commission can do presently is to have the Highway Department as a reviewing agency Chairman Gordon then noted that it may be up to the Planning Commission to initiate something to correct the problem of specifics for entrance requirements. Mr. Brumback suggested that the sooner the Planning Commission gets to work on this situation the better. There being no further business, Mr. Golladay made a motion that the meeting be adjourned. This was seconded by Mr. Venskoske and passed unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, Joh R. Riley, ecre ary � # • • • • • =11