PC_03-16-77_Meeting_MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
• Held in the Board of Supervisors' Room March 16, 1977
PRESENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman; Frank Brumback, Vice Chairman;
Manuel C. DeHaven; James Golladay, Jr.; Thomas B. Rosenberger;
Elmer Venskoske '
ABSENT: George G. Snarr, Jr.; R. Wesley Williams
CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman Called the Meeting to Order and proceeded to the First Order of
Business.
MEETING MINUTES -= March 2, 1977 -- Approved as Written
Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr., seconded by Elmer Venskoske and approved
by the following vote: DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
i
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby approve the Minutes of the Meeting of March 2, 1977 as written.
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TRANSPORTATION PLAN (Comprehensive Plan)
i
Action - Recommended Approval
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Elmer Venskoske and approved by
the following vote: DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of said County of
the Transportation Plan Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
Frederick County's 1976 -77 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
Action - Recommended Approval
Mr. Berg stated that pre - application on behalf of the Frederick County Sanitation
Authority in the amount of $446,000 had been accepted by H.U.D. to'serv approxi-
mately 156 lots in the Burning Knolls area with wastewater collection lines. He
said that the County is now invited to submit a formal application as being in
196
PF
(PC 03/16/77) p 2
keeping with the County's long -range planning. He then explained the formula used
to update last year's goals in accordance with last year's performance for use
with the formal application; as well as the method used to calculate the three -year
goal.
Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger, seconded by Frank Brumback and approved
by the following vote: DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of said County of
the HOUSING and URBAN DEVELOPMENT Community Development Block Grant in the amount of
$446,000 to be formally submitted.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Frederick County's Local Planning REVIEW for WASTEWATER COLLECTION FACILITY
Action - In Conformance with the Land Use Plan
Upon motion made by Manuel C. DeHaven, seconded by James Golladay, Jr. and ap-
proved by the following vote: DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
• BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby state the Wastewater Collection Facility to be in conformance
with the Land Use Plan.
SITE PLANS
Common street to serve the commercial properties of Harry F. Stimpson Jr. and
Joe Allen (Site Plan # 037 for Kentucky Fried Chicken) located on Route 277.
Action - Deferred
Mr. Berg stated that the proposal is for a sixty -foot (60') right -of -way, thirty
feet (30`.) each from Messrs. Stimpson and Allen,:to serve the rear portion of two
(2) commercial properties. This would, he said, total between the two properties
four (4)-commercial entrances and one (1) subdivision entrance. He suggested the
Commission consider the precedent of Mr. Allen's site plan; in that light he felt
the individual request would be reasonable. He stated that the Zoning Ordinance
• clearly states that a service road can be required.
197
J
(PC 03/16/77) p 3
William A. Johnston appeared before the Commission on Mr. Stimpson's behalf.
•
•
The Commission mostly agreed that it was in favor of a service road with a
minimum of entrances.
Mr. Johnston objected to a service road because it would be economically pro-
hibitive; because it may not be effective without being continuous; and because
his client should not necessarily carry the expensive burden as his responsibility
only.
Mr. Berg agreed with Mr. Johnston that Mr. Allen had indicated he would be in
favor of splitting this right -of -way as proposed; however, without altering his
original site plan.
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by James Golladay, Jr., and ap-
proved by the following vote; DeHaven - NO,
Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Brumback;
Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
BE IT RESOLVED, That-the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby defer this proposal until an opinion can be obtained from legal
counsel of what can be legally required of the applicants.
No. 038 Brady T. Ellis Sr. (Stephenson Industrial Park) for remodeling existing
buildings for warehousing, and 15 office units with storage space.
Action - No Recommendation
r�
U
Mr. Berg stated that zoning had been approved for this request. He then quoted
from the review comments of March 7, 1977 by Gene Millar, Sanitation Supervisor,
Frederick - Winchester Health Department:
"This is to advise that both written and verbal approval was given to Messrs.
Brady T. and Shirley C. Ellis to use the existing septic tank and subsurface
drainfield for their proposed manufacturing facility as long as the number of
employees did-' not exceed 7. This approval was given on March 29, 1976 and was
based on one eight -hour shift. There can be no change by this office as to the
number of employees that will be allowed to use this existing sewage disposal
system."
Mr. Berg stated that the highway department had indicated the entrance to be
satisfactory. He suggested a statement be submitted outlining definite plans
for the two (2) buildings on the property because the present proposals are too
vague to make an accurate review.
ij
I
(PC 03/16/77) p 4
Lenny Ellis appeared before the Commission. He stated that their plans for
fabrication of scaffolding had been delayed; therefore, they would like to take
• advantage of the M -1 zoning of the property to derive an income. He explained
that he had experienced difficulties of acquiring building permits because of
the requirement to locate restroom facilities in each building that is occupied.
Mr. Berg opined that it would be necessary to know which buildings would be
occupied versus which would be non - occupancy buildings with specific definitions.
Herbert L. Sluder Resident Sanitarian, Frederick - Winchester Health Department,
stated that the second septic system had not been previously mentioned. He said
that the drainfield that had been installed in 1973 would be suitable for seven
(7) employees on an eight -hour shift. He also said that the location of a restroom
did not matter to his department, but a second drainfield would have to be inves-
tigated before an opinion could be ventured.
Mr. Ellis stated that he would like to proceed with plans because he did not
• care to lose two tenants. He asked what he may go ahead and get some approval on.
Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger, seconded by Manuel C. DeHaven and
approved by the following vote: DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby forward the above proposal to the Board of Supervisors of said
County with no recommendation.
POLICIES and PROCEDURES
N
Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr., seconded by Frank Brumback and ap-
proved by the following vote: DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby initiate as a procedural policy that Site Plans must be re-
submitted if the application is to be amended.
is
199
(PC 03/16/77) p 5
SUBDIVISIONS
OPEQUON ESTATES, ® II, Blocks A & B, 31 lots, Stonewall Magisterial District, B -2
• Located on Route 664. Individual wells and septic systems. Health department ap-
proved. Streets and easements highway department approved.
Action - Recommended Approval
Mr. Berg stated that the roadways would be state - maintained, serving individual
lots. He recommended $111 per lot as Recreation Impact Fee.
James R. Wilkins appeared before the Commission, and stated that the final plat
only reflected minor survey line changes to the preliminary plat.
The Commission discussed the frontages of his proposal with Mr. Wilkins.
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by James Colladay, Jr. and approved
by the following vote: DeHaven; Colladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of said County of
Opequon Estates subdivision, Section II, Blocks A and B, 31 lots, located in Stone-
wall Magisterial District.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
• SUBSTANDARD ROADWAYS in Large -Lot Subdivisions
Mr. Berg stated that members of the Commission and Board had individually men-
tioned to him the difficulty of substandard roadways existing in largeilot subdi-
visions with lots of five acres and above. Specifically, he said, this means that
a number of these subdivisions have been brought to record without beiig subject
to state or county requirements, and someday these roadways may become res-
ponsibility.
Mr. Brumback also mentioned the lack of control in effect for family variances
to these subdivisions.
Mr. Berg stated that various counties differ in their approach toward regulations
depending upon the amount of urbanization each one has. He suggested a state,
stone - surface standard for these roadways so that the highway department could accept
them, if they were surface - treated and dedicated. Also, he said, the amount of
right -of -way should be regulated as well as the design to eliminate sharp corners, etc.
200
(PC 03/16/77) p 6
•
X
•
Mr. Rosenberger suggested that at least a Staff Review be made to varify if each
development is planned to meet a specific set of minimum standards.
A moratorium possibility of sixty (60) days was discussed -- whether or not it
would cause a rush of recorded large -lot subdivisions.
The motion made by Elmer Venskoske to recommend approval of a sixty -day morator
ium to the Board of Supervisors, seconded by Frank Brumback, was defeated by the
following vote:
DeHaven - ABSTENTION,
Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske - YES,
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - NO.
Mr. Berg said that he felt it would be easier to acquire copies of plats of the
last eighteen months, or a year, for examination. He said that he would have to
discuss this item with the highway department; and that any change to the Subdivi-
sion Ordinance would be subject to review by the City of Winchester for which they
are allowed sixty days.
It was the Commission's consensus that Mr. Berg provide some right -of -way and
roadway requirement recommendations and plat copies of idle, recorded large -lot
subdivisions for the Commission's review.
the collection of such data. He suggested using an impact statement (to be supplied
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
COST OF SINGLE- FAMILY DWELLINGS / Impact Committee Report)
Mr. Berg stated that the planned use of informational data would greatly influence
by the developer) for compilation of a data base. He said that the Commission may
wish to consider whether or not such an impact statement should be required.
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by James Golladay, Jr. and approved
by the following vote: DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Rosenberger; Chairman - YES:
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby enter into the Minutes of the Meeting of March 16, 1977, the
following report as presented by Mr. Brumback:
"The committee has studied the cost of single - family dwellings from several stand-
points, without conclusive results. The information compiled, using the best data
available, cannot be relied upon for future decisions or actions because of the com-
plexity of the subject. There are many areas where serious errors are possible.
201
(PC 03/16/77) p 7
Another difficulty in dealing with impact figures is the context within which
they will be used. If we know that a single - family residence does not pay its
way (and it appears that they do not) then what use is to be made of this data?
• If the desire is for general information for the Commission or Board, then the
committee findings will give a general picture of the situation. If; on the other
hand, the data available were to be used to reject applications or to propose fees,
then a very thorough (and expensive!) study is required to give hard data..
The best alternative available is to begin compiling a data base. The state le-
gislature adopted enabling legislation to permit localities to require a develop-
ment impact statement as a part of,a subdivision submission. There should be a
study made as to whether or not the County Code should be amended to meet these
requirements."
OLD ZONINGS / Impact Committee Report
Mr. Brumback reported that sizable parcels,of land had been zoned for activities
that have not materialized, or that were poorly planned for facilities and services
for which the County is responsible. He suggested that these rezonings had been
secured for speculative reasons, or to obtain zoning far ahead of the intended use
to avoid the increasingly detailed scrutiny of the Planning Commission and Board
of Supervisors. He recommended that his committee prepare an evaluation of the
• older rezonings of this nature to determine whether or not they are in keeping
with the Land Use Plan for the purpose of deciding if the Commission would wish to
recommend to the Board of Supervisors amendment of the zoning maps. Perhaps, he
said, a time limit could be established for this purpose.
Mr. Rosenberger suggested that a percentage could also be used as albasis for
zoning map amendment.
Mr. DeHaven suggested that a time limit of two to three years be used, then the
property should be reverted to agricultural.
The Chairman stated the Commission's consensus that Mr. Brumback's report be
accepted, and the committee should prepare a recommendation of the old, inactive
rezonings, as compared with the Land Use Plan.
Commercially Zoned Roadway Frontages
• Mr. Berg stated that when the first Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1967,
frontages along Routes 522, 50 and 7 had been zoned commercial. At that time,
202
(PC 03/16/77) p 8
the depth of commercial zoning was four hundred feet (400'), and when the zoning
maps were redrafted in 1973, that depth was maintained. -- in several uses this
0 is too much commercial depth as it extends into some residential subdivisions.
He suggested the Commission recommend to the Board the reconsideration of these
areas because a residential permit cannot be issued in commercial zoning. He
said that he would submit an adjustment to the Commission of this business zone
to prevent future problems.
Mr. Berg further stated that the problem came to light with a recent application
in the Darville Subdivision, located off Route 522 North, and he requested the Com-
mission to recommend to the Board the immediate relief for this individual.
The Chairman stated the Commission's consensus that this item be forwarded to
the Board of Supervisors.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Elmer Venskoske and approved
unanimously,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning'.Commission for the County of Frederick, Vir-
ginia does hereby adjourn its meeting; there being no further business
THERE BEING NOTHING FURTHER TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED.
Respectfully Submitted,
H. Ronald Berg, Secretary
N[todr / a
C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman
is
203