Loading...
PC_12-01-76_Meeting_Minutesi MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION • Held in the Board of Supervisors Room December 1, 1976 PRESENT: C. Langdon Gordon, Chairman; Frank Brumback, Vice Chairman; Manuel C. DeHaven; James Golladay, Jr.; George G. Snarr, Jr.; Elmer Venskoske; Thomas B. Rosenberger; R. Wesley Williams ABSENT: None CALL TO ORDER The Chairman Called the Meeting to Order and proceeded to the First Order of Business. MEETING MINUTES -- November 3, 1976 -- Approved as Written • Upon motion made by James Golladay, Jr., seconded by Elmer Venskoske and approved by the following vote: Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Rosenberger; Brumback; Chairman - YES: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby approve the Minutes of the Meeting of November 3, 1976, as written with no corrections. Mr. Berg stated that the Sanitation Authority had prepared a plat of the Sunnyside Report by VARIANCE COMMITTEE -- Accepted area upon which they had indicated the property lines and those housing units that had contracted for service. He said that it became evident that each house probably would be lacking in yard area, setback from roadway, lot width, side yards, and rear yards indicating different circumstances for each homeowner. He said that the com- mittee had decided that each should be applied for individually to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the present time in the Sunnyside area. It was the Commission's consensus of opinion that the Secretary send a letter to • the Board of Zoning Appeals about Sunnyside. Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger, seconded by Frank Brumback and approved by the following vote: Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Rosenberger; Brumback; Chairman - YES: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby accept the report by the Variance Committee as follows: 161 i (PC L2/01/76) p 2 The Variance Committee met November 3, 1976 and discussed at some length the method for handling the need for relief from yard and area requirements in the Sunnyside area. The committee believes that the problems each homeowner in Sunnyside will experience • are so individual that there is no blanket solution that will both provide the owner with relief, and protect the neighbors from excessive encroachment. Because of this feeling, the committee recommends no action be taken at this time, and that applica tions should be referred to the Board of Zoning Appeals Should this system prove unworkable, alternatives can be explored utilizing the improved information available at the time. Report by VACANT & NONCONFORMING BUILDINGS COMMITTEE -- Adopted Upon motion made by George G. Snarr, Jr., seconded by James Golladay, Jr. and approved by the following vote: Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Rosenberger; Brumback; Chairman - YES: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby adopt the report by the Vacant and Nonconforming Buildings Committee as follows: The committee met November 3, 1976 to discuss the difficulty posed by the re -use of nonconforming buildings. It was decided that they are much the same as the yard re- quirement problem in Sunnyside. Each building poses its own special problem, and each should be considered on its merit. The committee's recommendation is that no amendments need be made in the Zoning Ordinance at this time. Transportation Plan (Comprehensive Plan) • Mr. Berg stated that the roughdraft the Commission had received was prepared by the Lord Fairfax Planning District Commission. He suggested a Work Session to discuss the goals and future transportation patterns for the community. He asked the Commission how much public input would they prefer prior to final writing of the Plan. Mr. J. W. Chiles, Jr. Resident Engineer, Edinburg Office of the Virginia Depart- ment of Highways and Transportation, appeared before the Commission to discuss the subject roughdraft. He said that basically the Highway Department maintains the County's secondary road system under the Byrd law of 1932. He emphasized that local input would be of great interest to his department. Mr. Reginald C. King Assistant Resident Engineer, Winchester Office, Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, opined that some of the lists included projects that have been completed as being incomplete, and that he would be glad to assist in updating this information. is Mr. Chiles stated that the needs for the secondary system are pretty apparent. He said that the department doesn't need to do a great deal of studying to determine what 162 (PC 12/01/76) p 3 is necessary as far as immediate needs, which is what they are concerned with. He also said that a subdivision, recreation facility, etc., makes a difference in these • needs, also. He stated that the department presents to the Board of Supervisors each year a long- range, six -year plan and a two -page money -flow sheet -- all of which are subject to change. He said that the department is maintaining a "pay -as- you -go" basis. He also stated that the department has a policy to not pave roads of less than fifty Vehicles per day traffic count -- 100 vehicles per day would be more practical. He emphasized that the department is required to base its approval of entranceway appli- cations on the basic criteria of sight distance, safety factors from the engineering point of view, stipulating that the driveway can be put in safely and provide adequate access and drainage, including adequately -sized drainage pipe. Mr. Rosenberger asked if they would recommend a service road rather than a lot of entrances to which Messrs. King and Chiles replied that they cannot limit the number of entrances to a highway because they are required to provide an access, but that they would be in favor of the County taking initiative to do so. • Mr. Berg summed up what he thought should be addressed in a "goals section" of the Plan, and asked again if the Commission preferred public input prior to further work on it. Mr. Snarr stated that he agreed with Mr. Chiles that a public meeting may be repiti- tious of the annual Board of Supervisors meeting. The Chairman stated that it should be considered again prior to another Public Hearing. PUBLIC HEARINGS Requested citizen views on housing and community development needs in conjunction with the "_County's application for a grant for community facilities from the U.S. Dept. of HOUSING and URBAN DEVELOPMENT under the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM as set forth in the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. Action - None Mr. Berg explained that, as a part of the County's application (above), two (2) public hearings will be held for citizen comment to be included in same (above). He • stated that those projects for which the County had applied were those that received the highest priority from the Board of Supervisors for HUD monies. 163 i (PC 12/01/76) p 4 Mr. J. 0. Renalds, III, County Administrator, stated that the Commission could expand on the two projects subject to the public hearings, if it so desired. He • stated that the primary goal of the applications is for upgrading of county housing. He said that the County would have to show what progress it has made so far with money that was allocated for the current year. He said that he felt the County's major needs had been addressed for the near future, and that HUD will expect the County to addressahow it will improve substandard, low and moderate income housing. He also said that he understood that Farmers' Home Administration had cut down on their budget which would curtail their help as it had been received in the past. It was the Commission's CONSENSUS that ample time was allowed for citizens to speak, even though none responded Zoning Map Amendment Petition No. 023 -76 of DENNY'S, INC. Dennis T. and Mildred COLE, Rt. 7, Box 81, Winchester, Virginia, and T. 'Earl HAINE$ Rt. 7, Box 841, Winchester, Virginia, hereby request that 32.521 acres, more or less, located on the North side of Rt. 659 (Valley Mill Rd:.), approximately 7/10 miles from intersection with Rt. 7, now zoned (R -2) Residential- Limited be rezoned (M -1) Industrial- Limited (31.494 acres, • more or less), and now zoned (B -2) Business - General and (R -2) Residential- Limited (45,000 sq. ft., more or less) be rezoned (M -2) Industrial - General. These properties are designated as Parcel Nos. 54(A)107, 55(A)42, 55(A)40, 55(A)32A, 33 on tax maps 54 and 55 and are in Stonewall Magisterial District. Action - 20.839 Ac. w a s Deferred and Balance Recommended Approval Mr. Berg stated the proposal is for 354.69 feet of frontage, 1400 feet of depth, and use as an industrial park. He said that water and sewer will be available from the Sanitation Authority, and Mr. King (Highway Department) had approved the driveway permit. Messrs. Cole and Haine s- , appeared before the Commission, and discussed the property locations and current zoning respectively. Mr. Cole stated that the industrial park,would be served off of Route 7. Mr. Haines stated that his property had been zoned in 1966 back a distance of 500 feet for a trucking company, and that with the new land map he got only 300 feet • This would not allow enough room for a warehouse, he said, because it already contains a garage and office. 164 Pr (PC 12/01/76) p 5 Opposition Mr. Marvin Dove and Mrs. Norene Dove appeared before the Commission in opposition. • Their reasons were cited as: property de- evaluation, increased traffic, apartment houses (not townhouses), and trailers -- that it should be reserved as R -2 zoning. The Commission discussed the following points in relation to the petition: a) Should business, residential and industrial zones be adjacent to each other? b) Land Use Plan recommendations. c) Use of water and sewer to provide the best tax base. Upon motion made by George. - G. Smarr, Jr., seconded by Frank Brumback and approved by the following vote: Smarr, Jr.; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Rosenberger;,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 said County the following: Zoning Map Amendment Petition No. 023 -76 of DENNY'S, INC. Dennis T. and Mildred COLE, Rt. 7, Box 81, Winchester, Virginia, and T. Earl HAINES Rt. 7, Box 841, Winchester, Virginia, hereby request that 11.682 acres, more or less, located on the North side of Rt. 659 (Valley Mill Rd.), approximately 7/10 miles from intersection with Rt. 7, now zoned (R -2) Residential- Limited be rezoned (R -6) Multifamily - Residential (10.655 acres, more or less), and now zoned (B -2) Business - General and (R -2) Residential - Limited (45,000 sq. ft., more or less) be rezoned (M -2) Industrial - General. These • properties are designated as Parcel Nos. 54(A)107, 55(A)42, 55(A)32A, 33 on tax maps 54 and 55 and are in Stonewall Magisterial District. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby defer the M -1 portion of Zoning Map Amendment Petition No. 023 -76 of DENNY'S, INC. (20.839 acres, more or less) until their next meeting. SUBDIVISIONS OPEQUON RIDGE 0 I (R -1) Stonewall 13 lots - Individual wells and septic tanks. Health and Highway approved. Fronting Routes 664 and 660. Action - Recommended Approval Messrs. Bill J. Tisinger and Fred L. Glaize, III appeared before the Commission. Mr. Berg stated that the property was recently zoned R -1 (SEE ZMAP No. 018 -76). He said that the lots are approximately three acres and larger; that the Health Department had approved each lot, and the Highway Department had approved the pro- posal with the inclusion of a drainage easement to be added between lots 4 and 5. Mr. Tisinger stated that the subdivision includes five-acre-parcels (Section II) • to the rear of the three -acre lots (Section I), and that these two sections would be on the same deed of dedication; and that both sections basically follow the 165 • 0 (PC 12/01/76) p 6 preliminary plan that was presented with the Zoning Map Amendment Petition. The Commissin discussed the highway easement dedication of ten feet for Route 664 and thirty feet for Route 660. Upon motion made by Manuel C. DeHaven, seconded by George G. Snarr, Jr. and approved by the following vote: Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr Venskoske; Rosenberger; 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 said County of the sub- division application of OPEQUON RIDGE Section I for thirteen lots. SITE PLANS CEDAR CREEK HILLS - A townhouse development in the City of Winchester off Route 622 that abuts the city- county line. Preliminary layout of proposal that is owned by W -D Company, Inc: Action - No Opposition • r 1 U Mr.-Berg showed the location in relation to Route 622 (Cedar Creek Grade). The Commission discussed the planned roads for the proposal in relation to whether or not they would prefer extension into the County because this would encourage sub- division development. Mr. Berg expressed pleasure at having been asked by the City to comment. Upon motion made by George G. Snarr, Jr., seconded by Manuel C. DeHaven and approved by the following vote: Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr'.; Venskoske; Rosenberger; Brumback; Chairman - YES: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby wish to express appreciation for the opportunity to review and comment on the Site Plan of CEDAR CREEK HILLS townhouse development within the City of Winchester, Virginia, off Route 622. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby also wish to state that it has no opposition to the subject Site Plan application of CEDAR CREEK HILLS. No. 037 ALLEN PROPERTY (B -1) Opequon Magisterial District / Restaurant Facility Located at the corner of Routes 277 and 1012. Entrances proposed to Routes 277 and 1012, with a 60 -foot right -of -way to serve the rear of the property -- the restaurant to use the 60- foot✓ right- of- way - rather.than a:-driveway on Route 277. Action - Returned to Staff for Changes and Approval Mr. Berg stated that this ten=acre site had been approved by the Highway Depart- went for entrances, reminding the Commission that the Highway Department is required 166 stating that he represented Mr. Joe Allen (landowner), accompanied by Mr. Eds Coleman He stated that the restaurant location on this property is flexible, and that he did not know how the rest of the property may be developed. He said that Mr. Berg's proposal would create considerable expensive rock excavation and inefficient traffic flow. Mr. Showalter also said that the sixty -foot right -of -way may not necessarily be where staff recommends. The Commission discussed with Messrs. Showalter and Coleman theadjoining land uses, school bus traffic, possible future development of the rest of Mr. Allen's ten acres, the legal right of the Commission to require a service road access, and proper loca- tion of the sixty -foot right -of -way. • A motion by George G. Snarr, Jr., seconded by Manuel C. DeHaven, to recommend to the Board approval of the Site Plan No. 037 of ALLEN PROPERTY was defeated by the following vote: Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Rosenberger; Brumback; Chairman - NO, Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven - YES. The Commission discussed an entrance to Route 277 with a sixty -foot right -of -way to a service road, with provisions for the service road. Mr. Berg stated that future changes to this property would require application at which time requirement for the service road may be included. Upon motion made by George G. Snarr, Jr., seconded by Manuel C. DeHaven and approved by the following vote: Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Rosenberger'; Brumback; Chairman - YES: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby direct Site Plan application No. 037 of ALLEN PROPERTY be changed prior to Staff approval, as follows: a) Sixty -foot right -of -way be reserved and maintained only back to the point of an entranceway. • b) The thirty -five foot entranceway on Route 277 be omitted. c) Result will be that access may be gained either from Route 1012 or the sixty -foot right -of -way. 167 (PC 12/01/76) p 7 to approve entrances as long as all requirements are met. He said that the resta- urant ,(Kentucky Fried Chicken) would be located in one corner, and recommended that • the entrance to Route 277 be deleted with the restaurant entrance on Route 1012, and off the access road. Mr. Fred Showalter (Howard Shockey and Sons, Inc.) appeared before the Commission stating that he represented Mr. Joe Allen (landowner), accompanied by Mr. Eds Coleman He stated that the restaurant location on this property is flexible, and that he did not know how the rest of the property may be developed. He said that Mr. Berg's proposal would create considerable expensive rock excavation and inefficient traffic flow. Mr. Showalter also said that the sixty -foot right -of -way may not necessarily be where staff recommends. The Commission discussed with Messrs. Showalter and Coleman theadjoining land uses, school bus traffic, possible future development of the rest of Mr. Allen's ten acres, the legal right of the Commission to require a service road access, and proper loca- tion of the sixty -foot right -of -way. • A motion by George G. Snarr, Jr., seconded by Manuel C. DeHaven, to recommend to the Board approval of the Site Plan No. 037 of ALLEN PROPERTY was defeated by the following vote: Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Rosenberger; Brumback; Chairman - NO, Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven - YES. The Commission discussed an entrance to Route 277 with a sixty -foot right -of -way to a service road, with provisions for the service road. Mr. Berg stated that future changes to this property would require application at which time requirement for the service road may be included. Upon motion made by George G. Snarr, Jr., seconded by Manuel C. DeHaven and approved by the following vote: Snarr, Jr.; DeHaven; Golladay, Jr.; Venskoske; Rosenberger'; Brumback; Chairman - YES: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby direct Site Plan application No. 037 of ALLEN PROPERTY be changed prior to Staff approval, as follows: a) Sixty -foot right -of -way be reserved and maintained only back to the point of an entranceway. • b) The thirty -five foot entranceway on Route 277 be omitted. c) Result will be that access may be gained either from Route 1012 or the sixty -foot right -of -way. 167 (PC 12/01/76) p 8 ADJOURNMENT Upon motion made by the Chairman, seconded by Elmer Venskoske 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 Submitted, H. Ronald Berg, Secretary C. Langdo7 Gord 11 J El 168