Loading...
PC_09-25-79_Meeting_MinutesMINUTES OF MEETING OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING CONIMISSION Held in the Board of Supervisors' Room, September 25, 1979 PRESENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman; Frank BrLmlback, Vice- Chairman; Elmer Venskoske; W. French Kirk; Manuel DeHaven; James Golladay, Jr.; Herbert Sluder. ABES ENT: Thomas B. Rosenberger The Cha irman called the meeting to order. Chairman Gordon noted that the first order of business isthe discussion of the Gilpin Industrial Park. Mr. Reginald King of the Highway Department noted that reducing the speed limit was not as simple as putting the signs along the road in the park. Mr. King stated that making it legal would require an engineering study. Chairman Gordon commented that the need for this is only based upon the one citizen crnanent at the last Planning Commission meeting. In answer to Chairman Gordon's question, Mr. King noted that a reduction in speed to under 45 m.p.h. is unlikely due mainly to the fact that this area is predominantly rural. Mr. DeHaven noted that there are only two residents in this area and questioned the need for a speed reduction. :sir. Golladay asked, if this request was granted, would it be automatically updated in a set amount of years or would another separate request be made. Mr. King stated that there is no limit on the amount of studies that can be done. Mr. King continued saying, that should the conditions change, the area could be reviewed again. Mr. Golladay then asked how hard it would be to extend that service road out and tie it into Route 37 with an exit? Mr. King noted that Route 37 is a limited access highway. 813 (P /C 9/25/79) Page 2 Chairman Gordon noted that this situation should be watched and a request for a study submitted at the time a problem in this area should arise. Chairman Gordon next addressed the concern of the Commission with regard to the impact of this industrial park on Welltown Pike. Chairman Gordon noted that Mr. Chiles of the Highway Department talked with the Commission at one time. Chairman Gordon noted that there would seen to be problems down the road and the Commission would like now to deal with the situation. Mr. King noted that Route 661 is now only carrying roughly 25 -30% of its capacity. Mr. King also noted that 54% of the traffic caning out of Route 661 turned right (or south) and a right -turn lane could be installed if needed. Mr. Brumback stated that the Planning Commission needs to know the long -range plans in order to address the future expansion of this industrial park. Mr. King noted that it usually takes four years to improve a needed, heavily used road. Mr. Brumback then asked if it might be a good idea to include this particular portion of Route 661 on a six year or ten year plan, considering what this particular area could generate in traffic. Mr. King stated that Routs 661 is one of the best secondary roads in the County. Cha irman Gordon next asked Mr. King what the Highway Department's position would be for a private developer extending the money necessary to do something of this nature. Mr. King noted that this is done and that industrial access funds could be used to improve an existing road. Mr. King also noted that this type of thing would have to wait until the industries cane in. Cha irman Gordon then asked if the Highway Department would accept developers monies for such an expenditure. 814 (P /C 9/25/79) Page 3 Mr. King acknowedged they would. Cha irman Gordon explained that the Planning Commission's concern is because of the large amount of acreage in this industrial park. Mr. King suggested that Lenoir Drive could be extended to run parallel with Route 37, except for the fact that the new high school will be located in the area. Mr. King suggested that Route 672 could possibly be upgraded. Mr. Thomas Gilpin stated that he could not see why this could not be put on the six year plan. Mr. King noted that the Highway Department and Board of Supervisors should sit down and work this thing out, since it is not just up to the Highway Department. Mr. Golladay then asked Mr. King if the industrial developer should help the Highway Department decide where roads go or is it totally left up to the State. In the area of Industrial Access Funds, Mr. King replied, the developer would provide the right -of -way and the maximum for any one County is $225,000, leaving anything over this up to the developer. Mr. Golladay then asked if another access off a limited access highway would be possible. Mr. King acknowledged that you could if they meet the Federal Highway Adminis- tration minimum requirements. Cha irman Gordon then related that the Planning Commission and the Highway Department can work together on such matters. Chairman Gordon next addressed the subject of proposed changes in the M -2 section regarding Conditional Use Permits. Mr. Riley further explained that another request to expand an existing use has been received concerning the construction of a pole shed on an existing site and 815 (P /C 9/25/79) Page 4 a concrete slab. Mr. Riley suggested that by putting this company through the normal process, winter will be on them before the construction could start. Mr. Riley continued stating that he just wanted to talk about this amendment to Section 21 -128. Mr. Riley then read a suggested change to the Commission, which would allow administrative approval for expansions of under 50 %. Mr. Brmuaback noted that 50% of a small business and 50% of a large business might cause problems, noting that perhaps this should be tied together with something other than percentage of size. Mr. Riley then asked if perhaps the clause "will not significantly alter the use intended" is good enough protection and el the percentage. Mr. Riley continued, saying that this change is suggested to help the individual who wants to protect equipment that is exposed to the weather by putting up a shed, etc. Mr. Golladay questioned locking indicators into this ordinance such as increase to traffic, etc. Mr. Venskoske cemented that a change in this Section would take the handle off control of this zoning. Mr. Brumback noted that minimizing the process would eliminate the public input into decision making. Mr. Riley commented that if the Planning Commission wants to treat everything the same in an M -2 zone, then it should be left as it is. Chairman Gordon noted that it is the general concensus of the Planning Commission to leave this as it is written. Mr. Golladay added that there could be a problem handling two requests, basically the same, but for different areas in the County. Mr. Riley noted that perhaps the entire M -2 Section should be looked over with reference to requiring a Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit Petition, and the period of time involved for Public Hearing. Mr. Riley suggested that he could look into what other areas are doing in this regard. MM (P /C 9/25/79) Page 5 Chairman Gordon noted the next item on the agenda is a report from the Down Zoning Committee. Mr. Riley noted that the first areas to be addressed should be the areas that are in direct conflict with the Land Use Plan. These have already been ascertained, Mr. Riley continued, by the Planning Commission. Mr. Riley noted that the committee decided they needed a firm commitment by the Board of Supervisors on the direction they would like to follow on this overall dawn zoning. Chairman Gordon noted that thoughts may have changed from six months ago, as taxation is now going to be based on zoning. Mr. Riley commented that the time consuming effort may have already been done and that now it should be reviewed and the problems addressed. Mr. Golladay stated, in review, that what needs to be decided is should the Board be asked for a commitment on a comprehensive down zoning or do we want to continue on a piecemeal basis. Mr. Riley noted that the Planning and Development budget could not afford a piecemeal rezoning, since it would be absorbing the costs involved for advertising. Chairman Gordon noted that it has not been decided yet if a fee will be requested. It was the general concensus of the Planning Commission that they are in need of a commtment from the Board on ccmprehensive rezoning before they go any further since this should be a Board decision. There being no further business, Mr. Venskoske made a motion to adjourn. This was seconded by Mr. Golladay and passed unanimously. HW.