Loading...
PC_06-07-78_Meeting_MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board of Supervisors' Room June 7, 1978. PRESENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman; Frank Brumback, Vice Chairman; Manuel DeHaven; James Golladay, Jr.; W. French Kirk; Thomas Rosenberger; Elmer Venskoske; Herbert L. Sluder ABSENT: None. CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the Meeting to order and proceeded to the first order of business: Minutes of the Meeting - May 3, 1978 -- Approved as Submitted May 17,1978 -- Approved with Correction page 449 -- line 16 -- add "Hollis" to "Mr. Marshall" Upon motion made by Frank Brumback and seconded by Elmer Venskoske, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby approve both sets of minutes (May 3, and May 17) as submitted with the one correction. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES SITE PLANS Site Plan #010 -78 -- request for approval of a High's Store in the Frederick Mall Shopping Center. Action -- Recommend Approval Mr. Berg told the Commission that several weeks ago the Board of Supervisors had approved a three (3) lot subdivision for the Frederick Mall Shopping Center located on Route-522 and Fox Drive. He stated at the time of approval, the Board of Supervisors had.requested that the Site Plans for these three lots be presented before the Commission and the Board for their examination and to see how the traffic volume could be handled. Since the Apple Pie Ridge High School Campus is being built close to this location the Board also wanted to know the type of buildings 451 (P /C 06/07/78) p_2 that would be proposed. Mr. Berg told the Commission this request was the first for the three lots. He stated that the developer had removed a portion of the curbing along Route 522, North, and they would be replacing At with new curbing so that they would have a deceleration lane coming off Route 522. Mr. Berg told the Commission the Highway Department had approved this arrangement and it also met with one of the Board requirements of providing a means for the traffic to _. come off Route 522. Mr. Berg pointed out that the High's store was proposing to front the store on Route 522 with a blank wall facing the traffic coming out of Winchester. He suggested that the facade not face Route 522 as proposed because the blank wall and the trash container would not be attractive to the people traveling the road. Billy J. Tisinger, attorney substituting for Harry K. Benham, III of Harrison and Johnston attorneys at law (representative of this site plan for Shenandoah Valley National Bank, Trustee) appeared before the Commission. Mr. Tisinger stated that Mr. Berg had stated all the facts but he added that the County did not have the authority to say how a building would be located on the lot. He also maintained that the dumpster would be put inside an enclosure next to the building so that it would not be an eyesore when the Shopping Center was built. A discussion followed and Mr. Tisinger stated that they could fence the dumpster. A discussion followed on the entrances proposed for the mall. Mr. Berg pointed out that the entrances had been recommended by the Alan Voorhees Associates, Inc., transportation, environmental and urban planning consultants. More discussion followed on the block wall. Mr. Tisinger told the Commission, windows could not be put in the side of the building because of the need for shelving space and also a concern for saving energy by reducing the amount of heat required. Mr. Tisinger stated they could put bricks on the side for an aesthetic view. A brief discussion followed. 452 (P /C 6/07/78) p 3 Upon motion made by Thomas Rosenberger and seconded by James Golladay, Jr., BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of this Site Plan with the store facing Route 522 with the restrictions that the trash container should be placed in such a manner where it would not be shown, and instead of a block wall the sides should be brick that would be attractive to the general public. The motion passed by the following vote: Venskoske; Brumback -- NO Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES Site Plan No. 012 -78 -- request for approval of a model home to front Route 642 near the intersection with Route 37. Action -- Recommend Approval Mr. Berg told the Commission this site plan was for a model home and sales unit that would be located fronting Route 642. The proposal was for a driveway to come in fromiRoute 642tand extend to the back of the model home with sixteen (16) parking spaces, and a building to be built in the back of the property for storage and possible machine work. Mr. Berg stated that the developer felt that paving the entire road area from Route 642 would be to expensive for this type of operation,:.therefore, it was requested that the paving area extend from Route 642 to the front of the model home. Mr. Berg noted that the storage building was not definite as to its use and,therefore, he was suggesting that the building be deleted from the site plan until further details would be available and the building could meet the specified requirements of the Ordinances. He stated the entrance had met with Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation requirements, the Health Department had approved:the septic system, and the sedimentation control was shown on the site plan. Mr. Charles Heath, applicant, appeared before the Commission and showed them a photograph of the model home he was proposing to build. He stated he would like to keep the house back off Route 642 as he had proposed but if he had to pave the entire area, then he would have to put the.house closer -to the road. Mr. Heath. 453 (P /C 06/07/78) p 4 stated the storage building would be for storing additional logs and small supplies and also they would be doing some small carpentry work in preparation for building the houses. A discussion followed about-the storage building and Mr. Berg pointed out that the building had not been designed, therefore, he felt there was not enough information to consider it. Mr. Heath stated he was willing to remove the storage building from the Site Plan and present it at a later time when the building was designed. The Commission held a brief discussion. Mr. Sluder, sanitarian from the Health Department, stated he did not foresee any problem with the storage building. He added Mr. Heath would probably have to put in another small drainfield for the building. Upon motion made by Frank Brumback and seconded by Manuel DeHaven, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia, does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of the Site -Plan No. 012 -78 with the deletion of the storage building. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES SUBDIVISION Request for subdivision approval for one (1) lot fronting old Route 522. Action -- Recommend Approval Mr. Berg told the Commission this was a request for one lot fronting Garber Road and consisting of 20,000 square feet. He stated the lot would be used for a Chiropractic clinic. Donald Garber, applicant, appeared before the Commission and told them the lot was between Bigman's Restaurant and the first single family home on Garber Road. 454 (P /C 06/07/78) p 5 Mr. Golladay asked about the drainage problem that had existed in the area. Mr. Garber stated the drainage problem had been corrected. He told the Commission they had put a.culvert in at an angle and the water now drained onto an open lot. A brief discussion followed. Upon motion made by W. French Kirk and seconded by Manuel DeHaven, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of this subdivision request. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES PUBLIC HEARINGS Zoning Map Amendment Petition No. 004 -78 of Clark E. Copenhaver Sr., Jack Shapiro and Ralph J. Curry of T /ACS & C ;,c /o Thomas C. Baker, RR X13, Box;. Winchester, Virginia, hereby requests that 4.18 acres, at Kernstown between U. S. Route 11, South and Battaile Drive on State Route 652 now zoned Business - General (B -2) and Industrial- General ( -2 ) be rezoned: Industrial- Limited, ( -1 ). This property is designated as parcel numbers 98 and 107 on Tax Map Number 63 and'is in Shawnee Magisterial District. Action -- Recommend Denial Mr. Berg told the Commission the property was located at Kernstown between Route 11 South and Battaile Drive on Shawnee Drive (Rt. 652) and consisted of 4.18 acres. The applicant was proposing to use the property for warehousing. Mr. Berg stated it was proposed that a total of 60,000 square feet in several different buildings be erected; the size of the buildings would depend on the tennant's requirements. Thomas Baker, optionee for the property, appeared before the Commission and told them he was asking for the property to be zoned:one zoning and he was asking for an up- zoning. He stated the buildings would be used strictly for storage and no employees would be on the site. Mr. Baker stated the buildings would be built one at a time. 455 (P /C 06/07/78) p 6 There was some discussion and the Commissioners showed a concern because the City of Winchester had not responded with a comment on the sewer hook -up. Mr. Berg stated he had no way of knowing if arrangements could be made for the connection. It was noted that the area of the property in question was listed in the Land Use Plan as an Industrial area. It was also noted that the property faced a Residential section. The Commission discussed the traffic that would be added to the area from the warehousing and also the noise from the trucks. Mr. Golladay asked Mr. Baker if the Church that adjoined the property had any objections to the noise from the trucks. Mr. Baker stated that the.Church had been notified of the public hearing and he had talked with them and they had no objections. Mr. Baker stated that they were aware that half the property was already zoned M -2. Mr. Baker told the Commission he had planned to build five (5) small buildings and two (2) larger ones on the property. Mr. Brumback stated his concern for the residents because he maintained that when the buildings were leased out it would be hard to control and there could be quite a bit of disturbance created. nnoneTTTnM Marshall Glass, resident of Shawnee Drive, appeared before the Commission and stated he lived directly across from the property in question. He stated he was concerned about the zoning change and what effect it would create for the neighbor- hood. He questioned how the property had received the M -2 zoning in the first place. Mr. Glass stated he wondered what effect a drainfield (if one were involved) would have on the residents wells. He showed a concern for the amount of dust�:and the effects. 456 (P /C 06/07/78) p 7 of the vegetation removal, and the influence on the amount of added drainage from the property. Mr. Glass stated he would like to see the property zoned Residential. OPPOSITION Betty Jo Glass (Mrs. Marshall Glass) appeared before the Commission and stated that she liked where she lived and she would not want the environment changed. She stated the driveway to the property would be directly across from their driveway and the traffic on weekends would be undesirable. A discussion was held on the width of Shawnee Drive, and the effects of the traffic and the noise. Upon motion made by Thomas Rosenberger and seconded by Manuel DeHaven, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia, does hereby deny this rezoning request because the Commission feels that a smaller piece of property should be asked to be rezoned and a certain building should be designed so that the residents would know exactly what was being proposed. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES Mr. Golladay made a comment that he didn't feel the application should be heard since the comments from the city of Winchester on the availability of water and -sewer had not been received. Zoning Amendment Petition No. 005 -78 submitted by the Frederick County Planning Commission who hereby requests that the properties bounded by Interstate 81 on the West, by Senseny Road on the South, by Greenwood Road on the East, and by Route 7 on the North which generally includes the subdivisions of Shenandoah Hills, Frederick Heights, Green Acres, Rolling Fields, Country Club Estates, Brookland Heights, and Heritage Hills now zoned Residential- Limited ( -1 and R -2) be rezoned: Residential- General ( -3 ). These properties are in Shawnee Magisterial District. Action -- Recommend Approval Mr. Berg stated this rezoning was referred to the Commission by the Board of Zoning Appeals. He stated most of the lots in this area meet the requirements of the R -3 zoning. 457 (P /C 06/07/78) p 8 A brief discussion was held. There being no one to speak for or against this amendment the following motion was made by W. French Kirk and seconded by James Golladay, Jr., BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia, does hereby recommend approval of this rezoning request to the Board of Supervisors. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 21, ZONING, ADOPTED OCTOBER 13, 1976, TO AMEND SECTIONS: 21 -1, 21 -6, 21 -10, 21- 36(e), 21- 44(e), 21- 52(h), Article XVII, 21 -144, 21- 147(g), 21- 148(x), 21- 148(y), 21- 149(e), 21- 157(e) and 21- 157(f). Action -- Recommend Approval Mr. Berg told the Commission this was a public hearing:to change the Zoning Ordinance having to do with changes to the flood plain district, the site plan requirements, and to add hospitals with a Conditional Use Permit to the R -1, R -2, and R -3 zonings. He stated the Flood Plain section tracts the minimal Federal Insurance Administration requirements. Mr. Sluder asked if the flood plain section would preclude septic systems in the flood plain areas. Mr. Berg stated the section would not preclude septic tank systems but it would require certain designed modifications to the water and sewerage treatment plants. A brief discussion followed. There being no one to speak for or against this amendment the following motion was made by Manuel DeHaven and seconded by W. French Kirk, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of this change to the Zoning Ordinance. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES 458 (P /C 06/07/78) p 9 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 18, SUBDIVISION OF LAND ADOPTED OCTOBER 13, 1976 TO AMEND SECTIONS: 18 -2, 18 -24, 18 -25, 18 -26, 18 -27, 18 -32.1, 18 -35.1, 18 -46.1, 18 -47, 18 -67, 18 -69, 18 -73, 18 -74. Action -- Recommend Mr. Berg told the Commission this was a public hearing to make a change to the Subdivision Ordinance dealing with the flood plain requirements, the roadway requirements, and large lots. Mr. Berg stated that when these changes were approved the County would be in full compliance with the requirements for the full Flood Insurance Program effective on July 17. A brief discussion was held. There being no one to speak for or against this amendment the following motion was made by James Golladay, Jr. and seconded by Frank Brumback, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of this change to the Subdivision Ordinance. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES GENERAL Mr. Rosenberger stated that he would like to clarify a statement that had been made after the joint meeting with the City of Winchester and the County Planning Commissioners. Mr. Rosenberger stated that he had made it quite clear that there was a traffic problem on Route 642 and he thought the City and the County could do something as a joint body to alleviate this problem. He stated that the remark made by the City was very critical of the Commission when they said the Commission should have made a recommendation that the City approve or disapprove the Apple Acres Subdivision and he strongly disagreed with them. Mr. Rosenberger stated that he did not feel the County should tell the City to approve or disapprove anything if it was in the City and likewise he didn't feel the City should tell the County to approve or disapprove something that is in the County. Mr. Rosenberger stated that the County had held two work sessions with the Highway Department and he 459 (P /C 06/07/78) p 10 believed they now had a firm commitment that Route 642 would be completed with a forty -five (45) foot road surface by October 1979. He added that if the City of Winchester did not move along at the same timetable as the County "come October 1979, the neck of the bottle would be at the City limits ". JOINT CAPITAL FACILITIES PROGRAM Mr. Golladay told the Commission that the Joint Capital Facilities Committee had recommended to the Board of Supervisors and the City Council to accept a contract with VVKR Partnerships to come up with a plan not to exceed $28,500 on a six (6) month timetable. Mr. Golladay stated the plan should be available by December so that the local planning could start for the program. WORKSESSION Proposed Study of Fiscal Impact Mr. Berg told the Commission that some weeks ago, Mr. Elmore from Daniel A. Robinson and Associates, had made a presentation to them to do a Capital Improvements Program and a study of fiscal impact of residential development on the County. He stated the need still exists to get some idea of what residential development is costing the County in terms of revenues and services provided. Mr. Berg stated he had requested Mr. Elmore to present a proposal of what work he could do to make a fiscal impact study. He told the Commission the fee of $6,000 would be available through Federal Counter Cyclical Funds which had been allocated to this project. Mr. Berg stated the proposal was to study all the various aspects of the cost of development and balance it against a very thorough study of the revenues derived. Mr. Berg stated that the item of revenues is very difficult because it includes studies of the state and federal revenues that are received based upon the population. 460 (P /C 06/07/78) p 11 Mr. Rosenberger stated that he had objected very strongly to the project when it was presented before, therefore, he would like to say that he would be in favor of this phase of the study as presented. A brief discussion was held. Upon motion made by Thomas Rosenberger and seconded by Elmer Venskoske, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby move that this study be made by Mr. Elmore of Daniel A. Robinson, Associates. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk;.DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES LFPDC Comprehensive Plan A discussion was held on neighborhood parks as listed in the LFPDC Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Berg pointed out that these parks would be a grassy, open area with play equipment such as swings. He.stated the Senseny Road School is used as a park with ball fields therefore it would be a neighborhood park. Mr. Berg pointed out the County Recreation Plan talks about sharing facilities between the Recreation Commission and the School Board. Mr. Berg told the Commission the LFPDC Comprehensive Plan listed in their introduction that the policies of this report should be used as input to and not as a substitute for local plans. A brief discussion followed in which A -95 review grants were discussed and Mr. Berg told the Commission that local planning had higher priority than the district plan. He stated the only way the County could have problems getting this grant money would be if they decided to do some.project that was not covered in either plan. Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr. and seconded by Thomas Rosenberger, 461 (P /C 06/07/78) p 12 BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia.does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of this Lord Fairfax District Comprehensive Plan with the following recommendations: that the policies of this Lord Fairfax Planning report are to be used as input and not as a substitute for the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MAP REVISIONS Mr. Berg told the Commission that needed to decide what they were going to do about the new mapping system. He stated they needed to decide whether they were going to make adjustments, down zone property or leave property that people had had rezoned alone. A brief discussion was held and it was decided that a night meeting would be held to discuss these maps. A meeting was set for Tuesday, June 27 at 7:30 PM. GENERAL Mr. Brumback stated he would like to see a master plan on the area of Fox Drive and the Apple Pie Ridge area. He recommended that this be brought up at another meeting. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr., seconded by W. French Kirk and approved unanimously, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby adjourn its meeting; there being no further business. THERE BEING NOTHING FURTHER TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. Respectfully Sub mitjtteed�,� C,�f NJG.ci wl' H. Ronald Berg, Secretar C. Langdo Gordon, Chairman 462