PC_12-07-77_Meeting_Minutes•
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board of Supervisors' Room December 7, 1977
PRESENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman; Frank Brumback, Vice Chairman;
Manuel C. DeHaven; James Golladay, Jr.; W. French Kirk;
Elmer Venskoske; Herbert L. Sluder
ABSENT: Thomas Rosenberger
CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman called the meeting to Order and proceeded to the First Order
of Business.
Minutes of the Meeting -- November 16, 1977 -- Approved with Corrections
•
page 354 - change Greg Hutchinson to read "Glen Williamson, assistant
Commonwealth's attorney."
Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr., seconded by Elmer Venskoske and
approved by the,following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.;
Venskoske; Brumback; Chairman - YES
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby approve the minutes for the meeting of November 16, 1977
with corrections.
Request by Robert Solenberger to discuss a zoning matter.
Mr. Robert Solenberger, President of Fruit Hill Orchard, Inc., appeared before
0
the Commission and stated that he owns property on Route 669 and 670 next to the
West Virginia line. He stated that he owns a packing shed that is located in
an area that was not zoned appropriately and the building was not in use at this
�8
time. He stated the building had been vandalized several times and he would like
to see it put to some kind of use, however, it was to far away from his orchards
for him to use it. Mr. Solenberger stated that he had made a request several years
ago to have the property rezoned but at that time, the Commission did not show a
desire to rezone the property because it would be spot zoning, therefore, he had
356
(P /C 12/07/77) p 2
• withdrawn his application. Mr. Solenberger stated that he would like to know if
the Planning Commission would consider rezoning the property now or if it would
be a waste of his time and theirs to apply. Mr. Solenberger said that when
he withdrew his original application, the Commission had said they were going to
do something about the non - conforming buildings in Frederick County but to his
knowledge nothing had resulted.
Mr. Solenberger stated that perhaps a Conditional Use Permit could be issued
so that his building could be put to use. Mr. Solenberger pointed out that he
really didn't want to have the property rezoned, he just wanted to be able to
rent out his building so that it could be put to use instead of being destroyed.
The Commission carried on a discussion with Mr. Solenberger and decided that
they needed to do something about non - conforming buildings in the County.
Mr. Berg told the Commission he could have some recommendations for them at
• their January 18th meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
CUP No. 010 -77 of the Frederick County Fair Association.
Action - Recommend Approval
Mr. Berg told the Commission this was an application to renew the conditional
use permit for the.Frederick County Fair association. He stated the proposed uses
were: (1) to provide space for camping units for people connected with a carnival,
circus, rodeo, flea market, or similar activity, whenever that event is being
held on said fairgrounds during the calendar year 1978; (2) to provide space
for camping units of the Wally Byam Caravan Club during the week preceding and the
weekend of the Shenandoah Apple Blossom Festival in April- -May 1978; (3) to
provide space for camping units of the Wally Byam Caravan Club during their
• weekend rally in August 1978. Mr. Berg added the request was being made for a
permit to run on a calendar..year basis.
357 —�
(P /C 12/07/77) p 3
Roger Crosen, President of the Frederick County Fair Association, appeared
• before the Commission and stated that they were not intending,to run a year round
campground, however, they need to have the permission for the events listed above.
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven, seconded by Elmer Venskoske, and approved
by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Chairman - YES
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia-does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of this
Conditional Use Permit for the Frederick County Fairgrounds #010 -77.
SITE PLAN
No. 026 -77 for Z & M Sheet Metal, Incorporated located in the Gilpin Industrial
Park:
Action - Recommend Approval
Mr. Berg told the Commission the Z & M Sheet Metal, Inc., was under contract
to buy a five (5) acre lot in the Gilpin Industrial Park. He stated the property
• would be used for a manufacturing plant and warehousing. Mr. Berg said that a
sixty (60) foot right -of -way had been proposed to serve the property behind the lot.
He said there would be no outside storage on the property. The driveway entrance
had been approved by the Highway Department and the Health Department had approved
the septic system for the building and that the parking spaces were adequate for
the proposed building.
Mr. Fred Showalter of Howard Shockey & Sons, Inc., appeared before the
Commission and stated that the building was planned to be completed in April of
1978. He added they did not intend to use the whole lot.
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven, seconded by Frank Brumback and approved
by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.;
Venskoske; Brumback; Chairman - YES
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
•
358 .
(P /C 12/07/77) p 4
does hereby recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors with the restrictions
• that if any additional development is made to this five acre tract it would have
to come before the Commission for approval.
The Chairman read the following letter which he had received from the
Winchester- Frederick County Historical Society:
S. Roger Koontz, Chairman
Frederick County Board of Supervisors
9 Court Square
Winchester, Virginia
Dear Roger:
The Board of Directors of the Winchester - Frederick County Historical Society has
unanimously adopted a resolution requesting that the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors give immediate and serious consideration to the enactment of an
Historic Zoning Ordinance, pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 15.1 -503.2 of the
State Code relating to Preservation of Historic Sites.
Frederick County, although separated from Orange County in 1738, officially had
its beginning in 1743 when the county government was established. It is the
oldest Virginia county west of the Blue Ridge.
• In Frederick County there are many old homes, churches, and sites which are
reflective of our early history and which deserve recognition and protection.
The County Government should be proud of its heritage, and take the proper steps
for the preservation and proper designation of these locations.
We note with approbation your decision... to mark many of the county roads with
their old names -- i.e., "Cedar Creek Grade ".
Hoping for your prompt and favorable action, I remain
/s/ Ben Belchic, President
Winchester- Frederick County
Historical Society
Phc: Langdon Gordon, Chairman
Frederick County Planning Commission
PUBLIC HEARING
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, Chapter 18, SUBDIVISION OF LAND,
ADOPTED January 14, 1976.
• Mr. Berg told the Commission this was essentially the ordinance that had been
passed by emergency legislation of the Board of Supervisors' on October 24, 1977.
359
Pr (P /C 12/07/77) p 5
He stated the changes had been made to regulate large lot subdivisions and also to
•
regulate
the roadway
requirements. Mr.
Berg
stated that
the regulations would
require a
fifty.;(50)
foot right -of -way
graded
twenty -four
(24) feet in width
and that there be a stone base sixteen (16) feet wide and six (6) inches deep.
Mr. Berg stated that the roadways also had to have adequate provisions for
natural and storm drainage water, and that the roads could not exceed a ten (10)
percent slope. Mr. Berg added that each deed covenant should state that these
class 3 roadways will be private roadways and that they can not become public road-
ways until they are brought up to standards by the property owners. He stated that
the Recreational Subdivisions continue to be exempted from these roadway require-
ments and that the roadway requirements for other residential and commercial
districts will not change except that the County will now have a minimum right-
of -way requirement of fifty (50) feet rather than sixty (60) feet and twenty -two
(22) feet of paved surface rather than twenty -four (24) feet.
• The Chairman asked for persons in favor to speak at this time. Since no
one appeared in favor, he asked for those opposed.
Opposition
Charles Kirkland, land surveyor, appeared before the Commission representing
R. M. Larrick and Samuel G. Lehman. Mr. R. M. Larrick appeared with Mr. Kirkland.
Mr. Kirkland stated that Mr. Larrick had owned- approximately 1,000 acres of land
and that part of it had been subdivided and part of it had not, and that the
subdivided land had mostly twenty -five (25) foot rights -of -way. Mr. Larrick stated
that most of the land was being sold for recreational purposes and the people
did not live there full time. Mr. Kirkland told the Commission most of the
property had been platted and he felt there should be some relief extended to the
people who had been caught in the middle by the emergency legislation. Mr. Larrick
stated he was not against the Ordinance as such, however, he thought the altitude
• of the land and its intended uses should be taken into consideration.
Mr. Randolph Larrick, attorney at law, appeared before the Commission and
360 A
' (P /C 12/07/77) p 6 \
•
stated that he felt a great deal of discretion should be left to the
administrator. He stated he mostly felt there should be some policy to give
some relief for existing problems.
Mr. Charles Kirkland appeared before the Commission representing Mr.
Samuel G. Lehman., He stated Mr. Lehman - owned land on Route 616 and when he
had bought the property in 1967, he had contracted with as many as thirty people
to give them a deed at cost. Mr. Kirkland said that now the ten years are
up and Mr. Lehman-has to deliver the deeds. Mr. Kirkland added he felt the
administrator should be allowed to make some decisions about the grades, depth
ratio, etc.
Margaret Starliper, resident of Frederick County, told the Commission she
IPJ
had one five acre lot that was accepted and recorded in the Clerk's office after
the emergency legislation, therefore, it was in violation of County Code. She
stated that she felt the emergency legislation had been done hastily and she
felt the persons who were caught in the middle needed some relief.
Mr. Berg stated that at the present time, the Ordinance allowed the
administrator to grant administrative variances on lots fronting state maintained
roadways.
Mr. Brumback stated that he felt most of the people that had spoken against
the Ordinance were not really against it they were just asking for some relief
for the existing problems.
Mr. Venskoske stated that he thought the Ordinance was good and there was
already some administrative relief allowed in the Ordinance.
Mr. Golladay stated that he felt some lot owners do not want a twenty -four
•
foot road back to their lot and they do not mind going up an eighteen foot decrease slope
He told the Commission roads are too expensive in some cases and he felt a good
shale.road was adequate. Mr. Golladay stated he definitely felt some relief
should be given to the existing problems.
361
i
(P /C 12/07/77) p 7
9
• Mr. Brumback stated that it is a fact that a road has to meet the state
standards if it is to later become a part of the state road system.
Mr. DeHaven asked who would inspect the roads in the subdivisions.
Mr. Berg told him the staff would inspect the roads.
A lengthy discussion was held about the road requirements and expenses
and the fact that some subdivisions don't want these large roads.
The Chairman stated he felt it was the consensus of the Commission that
a work session be held with the Board of Supervisors before the Board would
hold their public hearing on this Subdivision Ordinance amendments.
Zoning Map Amendment Petition No. 016-77 - submitted by the Frederick County
Planning Commission for James L. and Mary Bowman P. 0. Box 6, Stephens City,
Virginia, Rodger L. and Joan R. Sager P. 0. Box 128, Stephens City, Virginia,
and Howard R. and Katherine G. Mills P. 0. Box 99, Stephens City, Virginia,
who hereby request that approximately three (3) acres on Route 11 South at
Stephens City now zoned Residential - General District (RR = 3) be rezoned:
• Business - General District ( -2 ). These - properties are designated by Property
Identification Numbers 74A2(4)10, 74A2(A)4, and 74A2(A)5 and are in the
Back Creek Magisterial District.
Action - Recommend Approval
Mr. Berg told the Commission that on June 3, 1972, Mr. and Mrs. James L.
Bowman had made a request to have the zoning changed to Business on his property.
Mr. Berg stated that the rezoning application was passed by.the Planning Commission
and by the Board of Supervisors in August of 1972, however, the zoning was not
recorded-on the maps and the maps were adopted in 1973 without the correct zoning
for the Bowman property.
Mr. Golladay stated that Mr. Mills and Mr. Sager were presently using their
property for Business purposes and since Mr. Bowman had had the property rezoned
earlier and due to staff error it was not recorded, he felt it should all be
zoned Business.
LJ
362
(P /C 12/07/77) p 8
•
James Bowman appeared before the Commission and stated that he didn't
know that his property was not zoned Business.
Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr., seconded by Manuel DeHaven and
approved by the following vote: Kirk; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.;
Venskoske; Brumback; Chairman - YES
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend approval of this Zoning Map Amendment Petition
No. 016 -77 to the Board of Supervisors to be zoned from R -3 to B -2.
SITE PLAN
No. 030 -77 for Dawson Investments located in the Stine Industrial Park.
Action - Tabled
Mr. Berg told the Commission Dawson Investments had an agreement to
•
purchase a five acre tract of land in the Stine Industrial Park. He stated
Dawson Investments proposed to build a warehouse and office spaces. Mr. Berg
stated the parking spaces proposed were adequate to serve the proposed building,
and that additional parking spaces and room for truck delivery would be to the
rear. Mr. Berg stated that the Sanitation Authority had stated that a sewer
line could be built to their main line but it would have to be at the owners'
expense. Water would be provided by a six inch line coming in from the proposed
street, and fire protection would be available. Mr. Berg told the Commission
the main issue with this petition was that the lot adjoins the Frederick County
School Board property and Mr. Stine.had proposed that a roadway be built to serve
this lot and connect with Smithfield Avenue. Mr. Berg stated that the site plan
had been sent to the City of Winchester for comment and they had made the following
remarks:
1. The proposed right -of -way leading to Route 11783 should not be approved
at this time due to the following:
•
A. Traffic using this road would travel on Smithfield Avenue, which
is zoned primarily for multi - family residential, and is a congested
street.
1
363
I
i
(P /C 12/07/77) p 9
B. Smithfield Avenue narrows to a right -of -way of only 40 feet
at its intersection with National Avenue, which is inadequate
• for the traffic anticipated.
2. The use of the proposed right -of -way to the east should be encouraged.
This could eventually connect to Baker Lane, and could be a controlled
access collector street, thereby limiting traffic conflicts. This
would allow a much better traffic flow to the east, which would not
encroach upon existing residential neighborhoods in the City.
Mr. Berg stated that it would be advisable to extend Brooke Drive, a street
in the Industrial Park, to serve the Dawson lot.
Edmunds H. Coleman, III, attorney representing Fort Collier Farms, told the
Commission that it would not be feasible to build Brook Drive to serve this one
lot. He stated it would be more advantageous to connect with the private
road going by the school board property and end the road at the edge of the
Dawson lot.
C. Bruce Dawson, proposed property owner, appeared before the Commission
and stated he had plans to put three buildings on the property, however, he
• was only going to put one building there at this time and it was to be leased
to Harris Intertype. Mr. Dawson stated that they would be employing about
twenty employees. He added time was of the essence and the building needed to
be put up by spring.
A lengthy discussion was held about the proposed road and Brook Drive.
The consensus of the Commission was that they abide by the City's wishes and
not create any more congestion on Smithfield Avenue.
They suggested that Mr. Dawson have another set of site plans introduced
and propose another entrance to the property.
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven and failing by lack of a second.
i
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend approval of this site plan to the Board of
Supervisors.
•
364
1
(P /C 12/07/77) p 10 1
` Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr., seconded by Elmer Venskoske and
• approved by the following vote: DeHaven - NO
Kirk; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske;
Brumback; Chairman - YES
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby table this Site Plan 11030 -77 of Dawson Investments until
the meeting of December 21,1977.
SITE PLAN
No. 029 -77 for Everett G. Emerson located in the Gilpin Industrial Park.
Action - Recommend Approval
Mr. Berg told the Commission this was a one acre lot in the Gilpin
Industrial Park. He stated that Mr. Emerson had proposed a thirty foot by
forty foot (30' x 40') building for storage purposes, and had allowed parking spaces
for ten people. Mr. Berg stated that a permit would have to be obtained from the
Highway Department for the proposed entrance. Mr. Berg pointed out that several
• modifications would have to be made in order for the entrance to comply with the
Highway Department's standards. He told the Commission Mr. Emerson had also
indicated there would be an area for a wood company and an area for storing the
Johnny Blue Portable toilets.
Mr. Everett Emerson, property owner, appeared before the Commission and
stated that his business could not be seen from Route 11 and that it was
located directly behind Crown, Cork and Seal. He stated a six foot ribboned
fence with a barb wire top would be installed around the lot.
Mr. Douglas-Grimm, adjoining property owner, appeared before the Commission
and stated that he thought Mr. Emerson's business looked like a junkyard. He
showed photographs to the Commission of Mr. Emerson's property. He stated he
was not against Mr. Emerson's business but he felt it could be maintained in a._ -
• neater manner.
365