Loading...
PC_11-15-78_Meeting_MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, November 15, 1978. PRESENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman; Frank Brumback, Vice Chairman; James Golladay, Jr.; W. French Kirk; Thomas Rosenberger; Elmer_Venskoske ;__ Herbert L. Sluder ABSENT: Manuel DeHaven CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order and proceeded to the first order of business. Minutes of the Meeting -- November 1, 1978 -- Approved as Submitted Upon motion 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 approve the minutes of the meeting of November 1, 1978 as submitted. The motion passed by a unanimous vote. BIMONTHLY REPORT The bimonthly report was discussed and accepted as information. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Conditional Use Permit #015 -78 -- request by Anton Papierniak for retail sales of estate wines, off Route 622, located in Back Creek District. Action -- Recommend Approval Mr. Berg read the application and stated there would be no new buildings constructed. He stated the existing barn would be remodeled into a winery and it would be used for retail sales. 565 (P /C 11/15/78) p 2 Anton Papierniak, applicant, appeared before the Commission and told them the bank barn would be used for the winery. He stated he-.had considered putting a small addition on the east end of the barn for the retail sales area. Mr. Papierniak stated the wine would be made from the vineyards on his property only, and it would produce a dry dinner wine. He stated he would not have more than twenty acres in vineyards and at full production there would be about five hundred (500) gallons of wine per acre. A discussion was held regarding the private roadway. Mr. Papierniak noted that he and a neighbor maintain the roadway. The commission decided that this proposal was for a small winery and it;would not generate a traffic problem. A brief discussion followed on the different licenses and requirements in operating a winery. Mr. Papierniak told the Commission that he would obtain a consultant to set up the operation. 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 recommend approval to the..Board. of a one year permit. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES SITE PLAN Site Plan #023 -78 -- request for approval by Doug Toan for a warehouse in the Gilpin Industrial Park, Stonewall Magisterial District. Action -- Recommend Approval Mr.-.Berg told the Commission the7site plan was for a 30,000 square foot storage building to be located in the Gilpin Industrial Park on Lenoir Drive. Mr. Berg stated there would be no..one staying in the building, therefore, there would be no toilet facilities at this time. It was noted that the deed restrictions stated that Mr. Toan would have to hook on to the central water and sewer lines when they were completed to .the park. 566 (P /C 11/15/78) p 3 Doug Toan, applicant, appeared before the Commission and stated he was proposing to build a storage facility for'dry goods. A discussion was held and Mr. Toan stated that he had plans for two more buildings in the back of the property. A discussion was held on the toilet facilities. Mr. Sluder, Sanitation Supervisor,for the Frederick - Winchester Health Department, stated that he had questioned the lack of facilities but the BOCA laws supersede the Health and Building Department laws and the BOCA laws state that no toilet facilities are needed for a storage building. A %discussion was held regarding the fact that Mr. Toan did not own the property at this time. Mr. Toan stated he was under contract contingent on site plan approval. Mr. Berg noted that the site plan could be held by the staff untill Mr. Toan purchased the property and the deed was recorded. The Commission held a discussion on paving the driveway. Mr. Berg noted that Mr. Toan would be paving the driveway entrance, however, the rest of the driveway would be of crushed stone. There was a discussion on the problems of requiring a lot of paving. Mr. Berg stated that the Commission should be consistent in their requirements concerning site plans in the park. The Commission stated that they felt the requirement of paving the driveway entrance was sufficient. Mr. Berg explained that no one in the park had paved their properties as of now, therefore each of the site plans could be reviewed in order to maintain consistency with the paving requirements. Upon motion made by Frank Brumback 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 Site Plan with the following requirements: the entrance driveway should be paved and there be no outside storage. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; Golladay, Jr..;. Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES 567 (P /C 11/15/78) p 4 Mr. Berg led the Commission in a discussion regarding a request from the Highway Department in reference to the Southern Loop proposal. He stated the Highway Department had asked them to review the proposal and make comments. Mr. Berg listed the following questions that the Commission should deal with: (1) Has there been any opposition to this project? (2) Will it disrupt a Community or its planned development? A discussion was held and it was noted that the proposal was in a flood plain. The Commission discussed the drainage problems that would be created. The consensus of the Commission was that more information should be made available regarding the water run off. Mr. Brumback stated that he wondered what effect this proposal would have on the City's Planning and on the County's development. The Chairman stated that he felt they should consider that all proposals have - pluses and minuses, but he felt they should not overlook the fact that the Southern Loop would be very beneficial to the residents of the County as well as the City. Mr. Rosenberger. stated that there were many problems that he could foresee and many of them were related to other government bodies -- Sanitation Authority, Public Works, etc -- and he felt they should pursue the proposal with these different bodies. Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr. and.seconded by W. French Kirk, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby table this proposal until the Commission members are able to have answers to their questions. The motion passed by the following vote: Kirk; Golladay, Jr:; Venskoske; Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman -- YES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Mr. Berg presented the Commission members with a-.copy aworksheet - he.would like to send to the School Board, Department of Public Works, Parks and WE (P /C 11/15/78) p 5 Recreation, County Administrator with regards to the Courthouse projects and to the joint corrections and confinement projects for the regional jail. Mr. Berg stated that each department would be asked to complete the worksheet with their projected capital improvements. Mr. Berg also presented a table on "Debt Service on Current and Estimated Debt Service on Proposed Frederick County School Building Program "; and a table showing the Fiscal years' expenditures and income. He stated both tables had projected figures. He told the Commission that with the projections there would be more expenditures than income. A discussion was held about the projections and Mr. Berg pointed out that the projections were based on previous audit information. Mr. Berg stated that if someone would request a rezoning for residential development then the Commission could use the information that would be provided on Fiscal Impact by the Daniel Robinson and Associates and they could estimate what the impact of that development would have on the County—Mr. Berg stated the Commission could then compare the impact with the Capital Improvements Program and see if the proposal would take the County beyond what they had to spend. Mr. Berg told the Commission the work sheet would be filled out annually and recommended to the Board before they work on the budget and they could work on the two together. Mr. Berg maintained this arrangement would take a lot of the guess work out of the budget. The consensus of the Commission was to send out the worksheets. A discussion was held and it was decided to limit the worksheets to list land, buildings, or anything else that amounts to $5,000 or more and has an anticipated- life of ten years or more. 95-1 (P /C 11/15/78) p 6 FISCAL IMPACT STUDY A discussion was held on the summary report that had been presented by Daniel Robinson & Associates regarding the Fiscal Impact Study. Mr. Berg stated they had taken three existing subdivisionsand put them through the process to show how it worked. Mr. Berg explained that Subdivision #1 was 1/4 acre lots with central water and sewer, Subdivision #2 was one acre lots with state maintained roadways, and Subdivision #3 was .8 acre lotstwith septic systems and wells and no state maintained roadway (a strip development). Mr. Berg stated this report showed what a single family development cost. He stated that by using the Fiscal Impact Report, the Commission could talk with a developer about a proposal and determine the impact the proposal would have on the County. It was noted that the Commission members should take time to review the summary report and then invite Spencer Elmore of Daniel Robinson & Associates to attend a meeting and answer any questions they might have. Agricultural Districts Mr. Berg presented the Commission with a handout that had been prepared on a Agricultural Zoning District. The handout listed a general description of the zoning district, the setback requirements, permitted uses, and the general size of a lot for building. Mr. Berg stated that a handout was being prepared for both Agricultural Zoning Districts and the Residential Zoning Districts. A lengthy discussion was held on the two agriculture districts. Mr. Berg noted that the A -1 and A -2 districts were mainly different in their permitted uses. He stated the A -2 district was almost a Business Zone. The Commission discussed changing the lot size so that both zones required the same amount of land for building. The consensus was that the Commission members would like to have some more information relating to the..soil, and the economic analysis.before they could make a decision on changing the lot size. 0 570 (P /C 11/15/78) p 7 ADJOURNMENT Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr., seconded by Frank Brumback 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. Respectfully Submitted, ly r H. Ronald Berg, Secretary C. Langdo Gordon 571