PC_02-21-79_Meeting_Minutes(PC 2/21/79) p. 1
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, Feb.21, 1979
PRESENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman; Frank Brumback, Vice - Chairman;
Manuel DeHaven; James Golladay, Jr.; W. French Kirk;
Elmer Venskoske;Thomas Rosenberger; Herbert L. Sluder
CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman called the meeting to order and proceeded to the first
order of business.
-----------------------
BIMONTHLY REPORT
Mr. Rosenberger questioned the staff on pending site plans; North
Shell Service station was closed, Greenwood Baptist Church case is routine,
except that surveyor has not furnished final copies, said Ms. Stefen; Mr.
Berg reported that Doug Toan's site plan is being held until property is
conveyed, and a meeting was upcoming with representatives for Winchester
Mall. Ash Hollow plans were withdrawn by the developer for redrafting and
resubmission: a subdivision with 60 town houses. New submittal date: 2/21/79.
To questions on subdivisions, Mr. Berg answered that (1) Garland
Cather subdivision had been approved by Board but Mr. Cather is away;
(2) in Windy Hill the roadway, water and sewers must be in before release;
(3) Carpenter lots have been approved and will be released when final sig-
nature is obtained; (4) Mr. Sluder said on Strawson subdivision that weather
conditions made for delay.
Bimonthly report was accepted as information.
---------------------------
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Conditional Use Permit No. 002 -79 -- request by Alvah Harding Long for double -
faced off - premise sign, tabled from Jan. 17, in Shawnee District.
611
(PC 2/21/79) p. 2
Action -- Recommend Approval
Mr. Guthrie from Guthrie Art & Sign Company appeared for the petitioner,
who also came forth. Mr. Guthrie declared that no proliferation of this type of
sign was planned, and that four, in fact, had been removed in period since last
meeting. Mr. Guthrie acknowledged that this large sign, though not planned as
a lighted sign, could be so if client desired.
Opposition was offered by Mr. Arthur Gooden, a next -door neighbor, who
objected on basis of loss of property value.
.vir. Golladay called attention to the fact that the proposed sign would
be at a curve in the road and thus constituted a danger.
Upon motion made by Mr. Kirk, seconded by Mr. Venskoske,
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission for the County of
Frederick, Virginia, deny request for conditional use permit to A. H. Long.
The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk ;DeHaven;Golladay;Venskoske;
Brumback;ROSenberger;Chairman - YES
Conditional Use Permit No. 020 -78- - James L. Powell for nonconforming business,
Route 11, Middletown, Opequon District.
It was agreed to carry forward this petition until March 1 meeting after
it was ascertained that no time limit is involved; plan has not yet been received
and reviewed by staff.
Conditional Use Permit No. 003 -79- - Betty W. Nicholson Stonewall District,
Route 11 North. Proposed use is not provided for in zoning ordinance. Local
2335 of I.A.M.A.W. plans to use for Union Hall.
Action -- Recommend one -year permit
Asked for background, Mr. Berg explained that the building was constructed
and used as the Highway Tabernacle Pentecostal Holiness Church, and more recently
as a dwelling. Two meetings per month are planned by Union, with attendance of
about 12 persons at one meeting and 35 at the other. If permit is issued, it will
be to Local 2335 and not to Mrs. Nicholson.
612
(PC 2/21/79) p.3
Steve R esn appeared for Mrs. Nicholson, and Steve Spade, President,
for I.A.M.A.W. Local 2335. No one was present who objected to conditional use
permit. Mr. DeHaven as owner of an adjoining property abstained, but spoke on
behalf of Ken Lloyd, owner of adjacent property, as being opposed.
In discussion of notification of owners of adjoining land, it appeared
that Mr. Lloyd had not been notified as Clerk's Records did not show his name
as an owner; one notification, addressed to Thomas, was returned.
Mr. Sluder's opinion was asked on possible water and drainage problems.
He stated that unless large affairs,like dances,were given, there did not appear
to be any difficulties. Union representative stated that no dances were to be
given there. The possibility of picnics was touched upon lightly, and Ms.
Stefen cautioned that CUP would be needed in event entertainments were planned.
In a discussion on parking, the Union representative said no parking was
contemplated in a field where Commission members had thought parking might be
objectionable.
The Chairman remarked that the situation was one over which control
could be exerted, and that Mr. Lloyd's not having been notified was chief problem.
Upon motion by Mr. Rosenberger, seconded by Mr. Brumback, it was moved
to approve as staff recommended;
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of Frederick County recommend
approval of Use Permit No. 003 -79 for one year to the Board of
Supervisors.
The motion was passed by the following vote: Kirk;Golladay - -NO;
DeHaven-- ABSTAIN;Venskoske;
Brumback;Rosenberger;
Chairman - -YES
Conditional Use Permit No. 004 -79 -- request by Eston L. Keeler for an antique
and gift shop in Brucetown in Stonewall District.
Action -- recommend one -year permit
The following discussion turned on private right -of -way at present
cooperatively maintained; petitioner stated that should use caused by customers
613
(PC 2/21/79) p,. 4
become heavy, he would assume a greater responsibility toward maintenance. He
explained that planned business was a means of giving his wife some employment
which her health otherwise prevented. In reply to questions on parking space
he said that yard sales in past had led to no difficulties on road or in parking.
No opposition was presented.
Mr. DeHaven expressed reluctance to interfere with small home businesses,
and spoke of knowing part of Mr. Keeler's earnings proceeded from refinishing
antiques. He made no objection other than the question of maintenance of right-
of-way and related problems.
Motion for approval of ConditionalUSe Permit was made by Mr. DeHaven,
seconded by Mr. Golladay,
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of Frederick County,
Virginia, recommends to the Board of Supervisors approval of one -year Conditional
Use Permit to Eston L. Keeler.
The motion was passed by the following vote: Kirk;DeHaven;Golladay;
Venskoske;Brumback;
Rosenberger; Chairman - -YES
SITE PLAN
Plan No. 002 -79 -- proposed use by Northwestern Workshop, Inc for office, storage,
production, classroom on Smithfield Avenue Extended in Fort Collier Industrial
Estates in Stonewall District.
Action -- Recommend approval
Mr. Berg, asked to summarize, said a one -story 100 x 210 metal building
is proposed, all requirements have been met, and all reviewers have approved.
The Highway Department does not maintain the roadway. The site plan provides
for right -of -way and road improvement all the way back to Frederick County
School Board property. A paved parking aea is planned.
Mr. Jack Ireland and Mr. Bruce Dawson appeared for petitioner. In discussion
which ensued as to ownership of Brick Kiln property, Mr. Ireland said that the
owners were in Baltimore. He said the Workshop had discussed the roadway with
the City.
Mr. Rosenberger mentioned past difficulties between City and County over
614
(PC 2/21/79) p. 5
Smithfield Avenue Extended. Mr. Berg described a portion of the right -of-
way as being enclosed by fencing at brick kiln.
Jack Ireland's letter to the Chairman was made a part of the proceedings,
and appears herewith:
NORTHWESTERN WORKSHOP, INC.
329 N. Cameron St.
Winchester, Va. 22601
Feb. 13, 1979
Mr. Langdon Gordon, Chairman
Frederick County Planning Commission
1001 Berryville Ave.
Winchester, Va.
Dear Langdon:
I will be appearing before the Frederick County Planning Commission at its
next meeting, February 21, 1979 regarding the move of the Northwestern Work-
shop, Inc. to our proposed new location on Smithfield Avenue Extended, between
the Brick Kiln property and that owned by the Frederick County School Board.
I have talked with Albert Robinson of Oil Heat and Burner Service, and with
Melton Wright about maintaining the road leading to our property. Mr. Wright
states he cannot commit the School Board until they have a meeting, but Mr.
Robinson has assured me that they will cooperate with us in maintaining Smith-
field Avenue Extended.
In the event neither of the other parties are able to participate, be assured
that the Northwestern Workshop will maintain the road leading,into its property.
Should you need any more information, please call me.,'
Sincerely,
s /Jack
t /Jack R. Ireland, Chairman
Northwestern Workshop Building Committee
JRI:d
cc: Ron Berg
Mr. Ireland in reponse to questioning projected an average of 20 cars
maximum, with most clients being bussed and getting out at Smithfield entrance
He further explained that there are at present 75 workers, and the number is
expected to rise to between 125 and 150.
It was brought out in discussion that the difficulty in making a
connecting roadway is the nature of the terrain.
615
(PC 2/21/79) p. 6
Mr. Brumback moved for approval, Mr. Kirk seconded:
BE IT RESOLVED, that Planning Commission of Frederick County, Virginia,
recommend approval of Site Plan 002 -79, Northwestern Workshop, Inc. to the
Board. of Supervisors.
A five - minute break was called.
The next Agenda item, a discussion of home occupation with Larry
Ambrogi, was postponed as Mr. Ambrogi was unable to be present but held open
in case he might appear.
--------------------------
Discussion of policies and procedures
for review of request for zoning variance
Report from Ms. Stefen: Examples were given at previous meeting of
Planning Commission of cases later presented (on February 20, 1979) to the
Board of Zoning Appeals. Ms. Stefen explained that several procedures were
possible, among which Planning Commission could choose. For example, applic-
f
ations are now supposed to be reviewed by the P.C. with option to make recom-
mendations. As the B.Z.A. meets every other month, there will be sufficient
time for P.C. review. options include staff work -up of recommendations which
P.C. can examine along with applications; or transmittal from staff to Planning
Commission without work -up. Queried as to the procedural change, Ms. Stefen
indicated that she had discovered in the State Code a previously unnoticed in-
struction that a copy of applications be submitted to the local Planning Com-
mission, which may then give a recommendation to the B.Z.A. or appear as a party
to hearings. Ms. Stefen-read the passage under discussion: "The Zoning Adminis-
trator shall also transmit a copy of the application to the local Planning Com-
mission, which may send a recommendation to the Board or appear as a party at
the hearing." This established that such a proceeding is not required.
The Chairman summarized: Does the P.C. or does it not want to be involved?
LIP
(PC 2/21/79) P. 7
Mr. Brumback, "put on the spot," expressed the view that when he was
serving on the B.Z.A. the staff recommendations were more nearly followed than
at present. He raised the question: "How easy is it for an applicant to go to
another body and get an ordinance changed ?" The concern is that the ordinances
can be overturned, go "down the drain." At the time Mr. Brumback served, he had
the impression that this was intended strictly for hardship cases.
The B.Z.A. position of "hardship" was read out from the minutes, 12/19/78,
page 5. Mr. Swift told the Board he was concerned about the granting of variances
for things they considered hardships; as defined in the Frederick County Zoning
ordinance, they are essentially the same as in the State Code. The Board of
Zoning Appeals took the position that each case had to be considered individually.
Mr. Brumback emphasized that there is ample time if the Planning Commission
wants to review, and expressed the wish on his part to know the nature of ap-
plications, actions taken, and dispositions made.
Mr. Rosenberger spoke of unwillingness for P.C. to make recommendations
to the B.Z.A., and made a distinction between offering "input" and recommending.
Mr. Berg then made the point that it's important for the Planning Com-
mission to know where there are problems with the ordinance
Ms. Stefen clarified: P.C. can offer "information only," make recom-
mendations, or do neither. She asked the P.C.'s preference as to what form
she should employ in sending along applications to them.
Mr. Brumback spoke out strongly for the relevance of B.Z.A. actions
on the continuing work of the planning body and his wish to express his
individual views, at least.
Mr. Golladay summed up that no policy would be set at present. Mr. Kirk
and Mr. Golladay are to meet with the B.Z.A. and get their ideas.
The next meeting of the B.Z.A.will be on April 17, 1979, at 3:25.
Presentation and Discussion
of the Final Report of the
Capital Facilities Committee
617
(PC 2/21/79) p. 8
Mr. Berg spoke from the booklet prepared for the joint committee.
The question was raised as to how this report would fit into the Capital
Improvements Program. Mr. Berg said in response that working from the book
in question alone would be an effort taking place in a vacuum'; that the full
financial context must be considered in order to determine priority, post-
ponement, etc. The approach will be through work sheets provided by School
Board, Public Works, each group's determination based on dollars available
and consequent juggling of priorities. "The Capital Facilities Plan is an
implementation tool of the Comprehensive Plan as permitted by the State Govern-
ment," Berg quoted. "If the locality does have a Comprehensive Plan, then major
capital items come through the Planning Commission, for comment as to its
appropriateness to that plan."
At present, the report under discussion is in the hands of the City
Council and the Board of Supervisors for determination, the Report to be accepted
or rejected, and the matter of the next move.
Mr. Renalds was queried as to the status: he replied that next week the
position about schools should be ready,after which assessment is to be made as
to what's needed, and in what time period.
When asked about the possible effects of two municipal bodies working
jointly, Mr. Renalds said, as to whether this situation increases strain,
that it had not yet been decided how to split the costs in a joint complex;
that the usual solution is on a square footage basis, but there are complications,
such as whose land it stands on. Court and office facilities are, though,
but one facet of Capital Improvement Program, if a large facet.
Mr. Renalds pointed out that there was an existing fund for capital
improvements, though not a large amount: the several hundred thousand dollars
in this account is a far cry from two million, if indeed our share is to be
half of the $4 million Court Complex. The hard decision, he said, is what
you're going to build, and when, and what you're willing to pay for what you're
mm
(PC 2/21/79) p. 9
going to get.
Mr. Renalds stressed that the governing body makes policy as to what
to do, after which they must decide how to do it; it may take several years
to raise the money for any capital facilities. A referendum may not pass.
Deciding what is necessary is the Board of Supervisors' policy decision.
Mr. Brumback asked if a judge could demand action on court facilities.
Mr. Renalds declined the question as depending on interpretation of the
Code, and surmised that it had in fact happened in some localities. He added
that the need for space was the reason for the plan. In answer to Mr. Brumback's
asking how long before this must be done, Mr. Renalds said that was the big
question.
The Chairman suggested that this should be received as information,
since it appeared not to be in a stage in which recommendation could be made.
A consensus was called for as to a joint meeting with the Board.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission work out a joint meeting
with the Board of Supervisors on the final report of the Capital Facilities
Committee.
The vote on this was unanimous.
The final item of the agenda pertained to I -66; Mr. Berg said that the
term "study of I -66" was a misnomer, that the study would be on the impact
of the roadway upon this area. Mr. Berg also confirmed the date of a meeting
in Ellicott City, Maryland, of interest to the Planning Commission, and in-
quired how many might be able to make the trip on March 8 at 1, on the
Howard County staff program, how it began, and their successes to date.
It was moved, seconded, and unanimously passed to adjourn.
619
(PC 2/21/79) p. 10
i "
H. Ronald Berg, Secretary
C. .d Gordon,