PC_11-05-75_Meeting_MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
• Held in the Board of Supervisors Room, November 5, 1975
PRESENT: Elmer Venskoske, Vice Chairman; C. Langdon Gordon;
Frank Brumback; Richard Madigan; Manuel DeHaven
ABSENT: Keith Williams, Chairman
CALL TO ORDER
The Vice Chairman called the Meeting to Order in the absence of the
Chairman and announced that the first order of business is the approval
of the Minutes of the Meetings of October 1 and October 15, 1975.
MINUTES - APPROVED AS PRINTED
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Manuel DeHaven and
approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Gordon; Madigan; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of
• Frederick, Virginia does hereby dispense with the reading of the Minutes
of October 1 and October 15, 1975.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of
Frederick, Virginia does hereby approve the Minutes of October 1 and
October 15, 1975 as printed.
H.U.D. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
Frederick County application for H.U.D. Community Development Funds for the
Fiscal Year of 1975 -1976.
Action - Recommende Approval
Ronald Berg stated that the deadline for Block Grant application will
be sometime in the month of December (he was not informed of the exact date).
He said that HUD has limited funding so they are going to look at applica-
tions this year of $500,000 or less (They hinted that, because we exceeded
that figure, we were not successful last year.).
Mr. Berg referred to the memorandum from his office to the Planning
Commission dated November 5, 1975 in which he recommended for the Commis -
f • sion's consideration that two (2) projects be applied for -- water service
for Sunnyside (application of $180,000); and water and sewer service for the
Freetown area (application of $65,000).
al +
(PC 11/05/75) P. 2 ,
Mr. Berg continued that it would mean that water service for Greenwood
Heights and Burning Knolls (at a cost of $554,500) would have to wait until
• another year. He added that application can be made for items other than for
water and sewer and now is the time to consider them. He said that these
items are; for example, recreation facilities, libraries and some housing
money available -- not schools or public office buildings.
Mr. Berg also stated that Public Hearings have been advertised for Novem-
ber 10 and 12, 1975 for the purpose of gathering public input. He also said
that the applications would be for one - hundred percent (100 %) grant funding
and if no changes are made in the application except the amount of monies,
that last year's application may be updated.
Upon motion made by Richard Madigan, seconded by Manuel DeHaven and
approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Gordon; Madigan; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
• BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick
Virginia does hereby recommend to the Board of Supervisors for the County of
Frederick, Virginia that application be made for H.U.D. Community Development
Grant Funds in the amount of $180,000 to serve Sunnyside with water and
$65,000 to supply Freetown with water and sewer.
LAKESIDE SEWER AND WATER COMPANY
Certificate of Convenience and Necessity for Virginia Lakeside Sewer and
Water Company.
Action -- Recommended Re- Considered
Mr. Berg stated that on September 10, 1975 the Board of Supervisors
approved their portion of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
for Lakeside Water and Sewer Company. He said this approval was forwarded
to the State Corporation Commission where a service area is assigned to an
applicant. He showed the Commission the service area (outlined in red) on a
map and said that it included Lakeside Estates Subdivision and a portion of
Wakeland Manor. He stated that representatives are at the meeting to apply
• for additional areas to be added to the public facility company's service
area.
Mr. Berg then showed the Commission the drainage area for that sewage
treatment plant.
r.
(PC 11/05/75) P. 3 `
Mr. William A. Johnson appeared before the Commission, representing
Mr. Glaize, Mr. Bowman, Mr. Home V. Hack, Mr. Daniel A. Corlaw and Mr.
is
Shackleford.
He stated that
these gentlemen are all
upstream
landowners
from
the area for
which Virginia
Lakeside Water and Sewer
Company
has applied
for
a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity before the State Corpora-
tion Commission. He stated that a protest has been filed on behalf of these
i
clients, on the granting of that Certificate on the following grounds.
Mr. Johnson stated that, first by way of history, the Lakeside Water
and Sewer Company originally asked for initiated procedings before the State
Corporation Commission and in 1969 the approval was given to that application
by the Board of Supervisors. He stated that that application was for a tract
of land that was said to contain three - hundred -sixty (360) acres and that the
result of granting that application is that that water and sewer company
becomes the franchisee, the person with the responsibility for water and
sewer in that area. He also said that in that sense the county, in this case
® the County Sanitation Authority, yields to that private company the responsi-
bility for water and sewer in that specific area.
Mr. Johnson further stated that in 1975 the successor to Lakeside Devel-
i
opment was a company called Danac, who by then had formed a corporation
called Virginia Lakeside Water and Sewer Company.that had made application
for a different service area before the State Corporation Commission. He
said that it appeared to them that when they asked the Board of Supervisors
for its approval that it failed to point out to the Board that it was asking
for a different service area. He said that the specific resolution and
preambles that were adopted by the Board of Supervisors on September 10, 1975
recite that, whereas the old Lakeside originally applied for 'and was granted
approval for three - hundred -sixty (360)- acre service area and whereas the
Code . . . Mr. Johnson read the following to the Commission . . .
• "...whereas the Code of Virginia prohibits the transfer of the Certificate
of Convenience and Necessity to a successor in interest and whereas Section
56 -265.3 required the Board of Supervisors to approve the application of
Virginia Lakeside Water and Sewer Company for Certificate of Public Conven-
ience and Necessity pursuant to the requirement of Chapter 1:07.1 of the Code
r (PC 11/05/75) P. 4 Iq
of Virginia entitled Utilities Facilities Act. Now therefore be it resolved
that upon examination of the application of Virginia Lakeside Water and
Sewer Company for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity in the .
area aforementioned..."
• Mr. Johnson stated that he wished to direct that the only area afore-
mentioned was the three - hundred -sixty (360)- acre area.. Mr. Johnson continue(
reading . . .
"...The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County does hereby grant approval
for said petition..."
Mr. Johnson stated that the service area plat that is now on file with
the State Corporation Commission includes a tract of about twenty (20) acres
acres approximately of land that was the land of Ralph Wakeman, adjacent
landowner, but only that portion. He further stated that the action of 1975
was not a mere reaffirmation technically necessitated because of the fact
there had been a change in title of the real estate, as was suggested in
those preambles.
Mr. Johnson stated that another thing that happened in the meantime was
• that the Lakeside had; in 1971, 1 believe, or 1972, after the first appli-
cation but before the second; entered into a contract which the present
owner acknowledges to be valid and binding again -- obligating that company
to water and sewer a tract of Mr. Wakeman's that contains almost four - hundred
(400) acres, some of which lies within the black - outlined drainage area that
Mr. Berg had marked on the map and some of which also lies in an area that
would be sewerable into this system by a lift station (a little downstream).
Mr. Berg pointed to the sewerable area, that Mr. Johnson just.mentioned,
on the map to the Commission.
Mr. Johnson stated that he was respectfully bringing this matter to the
Commission's attention for whatever action it thinks is appropriate to get-
ting in the proper posture before the Board of Supervisors; which may want to
re- consider its approval, in the light of these facts.
• Mr. Johnson showed the Commission that he had drawn and pointed out the
drainage basin and the area Mr. Wakeman had contracted, as well as the area
for which Lakeside has a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity.
azT) - .
P, (PC 11/05/75) P. 5
Manuel DeHaven asked if the applicant could accommodate that much area
(400 acres).
•
Mr. Johnson stated that he
did not know enough
about the application to
a
answer Mr. DeHaven's question.
Mr. Wakeman
to sign a
Wellington Jones stated that the area outlined in red is the service are
that they request and the area outlined in black is the natural drainage
basin. He stated that he believed that the plant is designed at 120,000
gallons per day which is for three - hundred (300) connections.
Mr. Madigan stated that he thought Lakeside Utility did not have a Cer-_
i
tificate of Convenience and Necessity before contracting with Mr. Wakeman.
Mr. Johnson replied that he was correct.
Mr. Madigan stated that since that time the sewage treatment plant has
been sold to a subsidiary who had to assume the obligations made by Lakeside
Water and Sewer Company; which goofed it up from the ver beginning. He said
that you will probably try to rescind everything that we done and start
• out fresh.
Mr. Johnson agreed with Mr. Madigan and said that ... or at the very
least expose to the Board what we see as the problem, and if after knowing
all that they still won't grant their approval...
Mr. Johnson stated that he did -not know all there is to know about the
situation;
for instance,
he
had seen
a
letter from Danaciasking
Mr. Wakeman
to sign a
waiver (Spring
of
1975).
He
said that Mr. Wakeman had
planned to
comply and instead Danac, without explanation, put in application to the
State Corporation Commission.
Mr. Madigan stated that he could see why a public utility should service
the entire drainage area, if possible, and he could see leaving part of the
drainage area out of the Resolution and then making it not feasible for the.
Frederick County Sanitation Authority to service that are
Mr. Johnson opinioned that it would then be out of the County's hands.
Mr. Madigan (asking Mr. Whitacre's opinion) said that it 'looks like the
Board of Supervisors should rescind resolutions and start over again.
r (PC 11/05/75) P. 6
Mr. David Whitacre, Attorney, stated that he had come in too late to
hear all of the discussion.
• Mr. Madigan asked if notice had been given of today's hearing.
Mr. Berg stated that on October 28, 1975 letters went out to Elmer W.
Verguson, Henry H. Whiting and William A. Johnson as notification of the
intent of Engineering Committee meeting, Planning Commission meeting, Fred-
erick County Sanitation Authority, as well as Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Madigan asked if these were sent to Danac.
Mr. Berg replied that Elmer W. Verguson is the representative of Danac.
Mr. Henry Whiting stated that the area shown on the map in red reviews
poor planning and it pre -empts anyone else from serving the upstream area --
'no one economically can serve that once someone else pre -empts the heart of it-
Mr. Whiting suggested that the Commission consider making a recommenda-
tion to the Board of Supervisors that they (Board) consider all these facts
and in good planning for future water and sewer expansion they should encom-
pass the logical area. He said that he thought the area should be shown in
black and the area encompassed by the contract (contract is a matter of
public record). He said that he suggests that the recommendation should be
that the Board consider that it should serve the area designated in black
(drainage basin) plus the area shown by the contract -- that's just good
planning.
Mr. Madigan asked Mr. Whiting if he could use this suggestion for a
motion.
Mr. Whiting said that it was alright with him.
Mr. Madigan stated that he makes Mr. Henry Whiting's recommendation a
Motion as a recommendation for the Board of Supervisors.
Vice Chairman asked if any other Commission members had any questions.
Mr. DeHaven stated that he thought that the Commission should make a
• study before acting upon this subject. He asked how many acres over the
entire area would be open for water and sewer.
Mr. Johnson stated that the numbers that he was aware of are that there
as
is about four - hundred (400) acres in the red - outlined area, about
r (PC 11/05/75) P. 7
three - hundred - seventy -five (375) acres more of Wakeman's land that lays
largely to the side and approximately five- hundred (500) acres upstream.
Mr. Madigan said that Mr. Johnson was talking about the drainage area.
Mr. DeHaven stated that getting an R -2 or R -3 in that whole entire area
would involve...
Mr. Madigan,stated that sewers are slated for thatiarea anyway eventual
because the Regional Plan will take care of that; if we ever get it.
Mr. DeHaven said that it will involve seven - thousand to eight- thousand
(7,000- 8,000) people in that area with water and sewer you wouldn't have to
have one - quarter (1/4)- acre lots -- twelve- thousand (12,000) square footlds.
Manuel DeHaven suggested that this subject go backi,to the Board of
Supervisors and if they see fit that it come back to the Planning Commission,
rather than decide on it, we would have more of a chance to make a study rn it
Mr. Madigan stated that that was what he was doinglwith his motion.
Vice Chairman asked if anyone seconds Mr. Madigan's motion.
Langdon Gordon seconded Mr. Madigan's motion.
Mr. DeHaven asked if the Commission could hear the motion again.
Mr. Madigan asked to have the recommendation read back to the Commisson.
Since the motion wasn't written down Mr. Madigan asked Mr. Whiting to
re -state the motion.
Mr. Whiting asked if the tape could be played back.
Upon motion made by Richard Madigan, seconded by Langdon Gordon and
approved by the following vote:
Vice Chairman; C. Langdon Gordoxr Frank Brumback;
Richard Madigan; Manuel DeHaven -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend that the Board of Supervisors consider the
area designated in black (drainage area) be served plus the area shown by the
Contract (between Virginia Lakeside Sewer and Water Company AND Mr. Ralph
Wakeman)
I
• CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
DOWLING COMPANY, INC. -- To erect one (1) location sign (40' X 40 advertis-
ing Holly Farms Chicken -- located between Routes 11 and 81, just north of
Kernstown Interchange 69, in Back Creek Magisterial District.
Action -- Recommended Approval Q�J—
r I (PC 11/05/75) p. 8
Ronald Berg showed the Commission the proposed location of the sign on
the map and said that the property belongs to Mrs. Elizabeth Engle.
40
Mr. Bob Cooper;
Dowling Company,
Inc.
representative;
appeared before thl
Commission and stated
that there are
three
(3) signs bn�the
property and two
(2) in the area that we would like to put this sign. He stated that they
have a contract with Mrs. Engle to the effect that any time the land is used
or sold or developed that we would have ninety (90) days within which to
remove said sign.
Mr. Cooper stated that the sign is intended to advertise the newly-
established Holly Farms Chicken restaurant by the Safeway on Valley Avenue,
i
South. He also stated that the Virginia Department of Highways will approve
the sign subject to the approval of the County
Mr. Langdon Gordon asked Mr. Berg if this is compatible with existing
sign regulations.
Mr. Ronald Berg stated that it is.
• Langdon Gordon spoke about the proposed Sign Ordinance dealing with this
very problem; as well as the proposed Land Use Plan.
'Vice Chairman asked for any objections to the proposed sign.
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven, seconded by Vice Chairman (due to
lack of a second -- to get motion up for a vote) and approved by the follow-
ing vote:
DeHaven; MadigaK,; Vice Chairman -- YES
Brumback; Gordon -- NO.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning, Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend a Conditional Use Permit be issued to Dowling
Company, Inc. to..erect one (1) location', sign (40'.^X Holly —
Farms Chicken -- ,located between Routes 11 and 81, just North of Kernstown
InterchangeT79; in Back Creek Magisterial District'. ,
The Vice Chairman declared a recess until 3:00; at which time the re-
zoning Public Hearings were scheduled.
• The Commission reconvened by order of the Vice Chairman.
REZONING
An Ordinance to amend the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance adopted November
1, 1973 to rezone 1.35 acres, more or less, of J. P. DARLINGTON, fronting
160 feet on the South side of Route 669, beginning approximately 400 feet
West of intersection with Route 670; in Stonewall Magisterial District; from
Agricultural, General (A -2) to Business, Limited (B -1). df
(PC 11/05/75) p. 9
Action -- Recommended Denial
Ronald Berg read to the Commission the application of Mr. J. P. Darling-
ton with the proposed use of future retail store to serve existing and pro-
posed residential areas. He said that it is proposed that a store and /or
service station be constructed.
Langdon Gordon asked to be on record as not participating in any of Mr.
Darlington's rezoning applications today. j
Mr. J. P. Darlington appeared before the:::Commission and stated that his
idea in asking for this rezoning is to provide a sort of convenience store so
that people will not have to ride so far for small incidental idems (such as
a loaf of bread, a quart of milk, etc.).
I
Mr. Madigan asked exactly where on Route 670 is the location.
Mr. Berg showed the map location to the Commission:
Mr. Darlington stated that it is Whitehall Road (Route 669) and Route
670 at Gordondale
® Mr. Madigan asked if this store will be more like a Seven = Eleven (7 -11).
Mr. Darlington stated that he intended for it to be on the order of a
local convenience store with no big stock of things.
Mr. Madigan asked how many homes in this area would be served by the
store.
Mr. Darlington stated that there are seventy -two (72) homes; not count-
ing further down the road between there and Route 81 and back the other way.
Richard Madigan asked how many lots are yet to be developed in that area
Mr. Darlington replied that there are seventy -one (71) lots of three
(3)- acre and larger remaining to be developed.
Mr. Madigan stated that that would total about one - hundred -fifty (150)
to two - hundred (200) homes in that same area.
Mr. Darlington stated that he had ten (10) more lots at the end of
® Ayers land at the West Virginia line; which are five (5)- and ten (10)- acre
lots.
F (PC 11/05/75) P. 10
Manuel DeHaven stated that Exxon had had a station in that vicinity
•
that had closed; so would it pay to open up a convenience store.
he was only contemplating groceries. He further stated that it (gasoline
station) could feasibly be in conjunction with the grocery store; however.
Mr. Darlington stated that he did not have in mind a gasoline station;
Mr. DeHaven stated that two - hundred (200)- foot frontage is required
by the Zoning Ordinance in all Districts except in B -1 Zoning and you, Mr.
Darlington, only have one - hundred -sixty (160) feet.
Frank Brumback asked why Mr. Darlington wanted a store if the road
doesn't carry much traffic.
Mr. Darlington stated that he was talking about the local people that
•
live right close by the location.
I
Mr. Brumback asked Mr. Darlington if there is or is not much traffic.
Mr. Darlington stated that there would be traffic to and from the store,
of course.
Vice Chairman asked if anyone wished to express opposition to this re-
zoning Request.
Opposition
Mr. William Luther appeared before the Commission in opposition and
stated that he had lived in that neighborhood for thirty -five (35) years.
He stated that only one (1) family lives there. He saidithat he shares the
Duncan Run with Mr. Darlington. He :said that the road is always under water
and he lost three (3) crops due to bad drainage. He stated that KOA had to
run twenty -seven (27) perk tests before results. He said that on the other
side of Route 670 there is a new house every one - hundred (100) feet. He
stated that people complain that the water stinks and Mr. Darlington only
cleaned the Run out once.
Mr. Madigan asked Mr. R. Wesley Williams, Health Department, his opinion
•
of the soil in that area.
Mr. Williams stated that he is not familiar with this particular lot
and soil can change from one lot to the next and he did not know if Mr. Luther
was referring to well water or etc. ,
(PC 11/05/75) P. 11
Mr. Berg stated that there is a report from the Health Department under
Item Seven (7) of the Commission's Agenda; then showed the Commission on the
® map. He stated that there are eighteen (18) acres for residential and thirty
three (33) acres for residential or two (2) separate locations.
I
Opposition
Mr. Roy Cooper appeared before the Commission in opposition and presenter
the Commission with a petition that he stated was in behalf of the surround-
ing community containing fifty -two (52) signatures opposing the rezoning from
A -2 to B -1. He stated that he had personally taken this petition to almost
every home in the immediate area upon which this business would depend for
its income and of all the people that he talked to only three (3) didn't
object to a store in this location. He said that sincelthere are already
six (6) stores in that area (four of which are hardly more than a mile from
the proposed location) and he failed to see how any real community service
could be done by rezoning. He stated that any business the store would
® receive would be coming from the stores already in the area which he did not
believe were at their fullest capacity now. He said that he felt the store
was not..needed because it is proposed in an agricultural - residential area
that is located away from the main highways and would obtain business only
from the surrounding communities. He said that every signee of the petition
lives within one -half (1/2) mile of the proposed store Vocation and conse-
quently the people that would be most effected if the request is approved.
Rohn + +al
Mr. J. P. Darlington appeared before the Commission in rebuttal and
stated that he is not too experienced in a local convenience store but he
still thought it would be worthwhile to the people in the area. He said
that he has a buyer with this purpose in mind and therefore must feel it is
worthwhile. He also said that he is not applying for rezoning to gain more
® money for. allot ,`just`for:.thenconvenience of a store located there.
r
i
(PC 11/05/75) P. 12
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven, seconded by Frank Brumback and
approved by the following vote:
® DeHaven; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick
Virginia does hereby recommend denial of the rezoning application of Mr. J.
P. Darlington to rezone 1.35 acres, more or less, fronting 160 feet on the
South side of Route 669, beginning approximately 400 feet West of inter-
section with Route 670; in Stonewall Magisterial District; from Agricultural,
General (A -2) to Business, Limited (B -1). i
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Manuel DeHaven and
approved unanimously,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick
Virginia does hereby declare closed Executive Session to discuss legal
matters.
RECONVENED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven, seconded by Frank Brumback and
I
approved unanimously,
® BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick
Virginia does hereby declare it is reconvened for Public Hearings.
REZONING
An Ordinance to amend the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance adopted November
1, 1973 to rezone 51.80 acres, more or less, of J. P. DARLINGTON; from Agri-
cultural, General (A -2) to Residential, Limited (R -2); located in Stonewall
Magisterial District as follows:
33.15 acres, more or less, fronting 3900 feet on the South side
of Route 669, beginning approximately 560 feet West of inter-
section with Route 670.
18.65 acres, more or less, fronting 2080 feet on the West side
of Route 670, beginning approximately 200 feet South of inter-
section with Route 669.
Action -- Recommended Deni
Ronald Berg read the application to the Commission.
Mr. J. P. Darlington appeared before the Commission and stated that he
is requesting rezoning for the purpose of building moderate - priced homes;
which are more in demand than high - priced homes. He said that the majority
® of the people who live in the homes on the other side of the road aren't
newcomers to Frederick County but they probably lived with their parents
before they acquired property; therefore they are taxpayers rather than
(PC 11/05/75) P. 13
renters, etc. He stated that as to the soil each lot has been evaluated
by the Health Department that he was assuming has been reported upon.
® Vice Chairman read the Health Department's report of October 16, 1975
and signed by Mr. Herbert L. Sluder:
"Soil conditions in this proposed forty -seven (47)- lot subdivision appear
to be generally satisfactory for subsurface sewage disposal systems. Three
(3) lots on South end of Route 670 are highly questionable. Two (2) or
three (3) lots on Route 669 will probably not be satisfactory because of a
wide drainageway, or limestone rock outcropping. A definite decision cannot
be made on all lots until at least temporary boundary lines are established."
Mr. Darlington stated that he had talked with the Highway Department
and that Mr. King had stated that the Highway Department did not object.
Mr. Darlington stated that there definitely is a surface drainage prob-
lem on the other side and that if the rezoning application is approved he
agrees to furnish the drainage easements on that side. He also stated that
the drainage problems were not caused by him -- that they were already in
existence.
® Vice Chairman stated that he didn't think the surface drainage would be
as important as family sewage.
Manuel DeHaven asked Mr. Darlington if an underground stream ran through
the property.
Mr. Darlington replied that there is not one to his knowledge. He said
that he is only aware of an above - ground stream that wen' to Solenberger's
property.
Mr. DeHaven asked if Mr. Darlington had already had well problems within
the subdivision that was just completed.
Mr. Darlington stated that he didn't have those wells drilled and that
he had no knowledge of that and that he didn't even have the homes built.
Opposition
Ms. Jan Fadeley appeared.before the Commission with petitions in opposi-
tion to the rezoning request. She said that these petitions are presented
by more than one - hundred (100) citizens of Frederick County who are opposed.
She�stated3 that Frederick County needs new housing that will produce a
desirable impact on its, citizens rather than having subdivision which create
(PC 11/05/75) P. 14
new problems for the County.
to one (1) teacher. She further stated that by grade levels the ratio of
A.M. kindergarten and grades three (3) and four (4) already exceed the
County enrollment goals of one to three (1 -3) students per class. She said
that increasing class size beyond our present numbers would definitely
jeopardize the education of our children. She also said that if rezoning
were approved it could mean forty -eight (48) new families in the area; ._
perhaps sending one - hundred (100) more students to Stonewall School that
i
would be a major setback in the education of our children. She stated that
buses would be overcrowded because many of our buses already make two (2)
trips each morning and afternoon. She stated that, as parents, they object
to these possible consequences of the proposed rezoning.
® Ms. Fadeley stated that new homes automatically mean more traffic --
Routes 661 and 669 (ROADS traveled to reach the proposed rezoning) are nar-
row, winding and heavily used by cars, agricultural vehicles and trucks, etc.
She said that additional traffic would be hazardous but iwidening these roads
could be expensive. She stated that Route 670, along which sixteen (16) of
these homes are proposed, is at present only a narrow dilrt lane that would
require many thousands of tax dollars to become a paved road. She stated
that the tax liability is of the citizens and not the developer. She stated
that they object to the traffic hazards and the tax increase.
Ms. Fadeley read from the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Page 14,
a portion of the Statement of Intent for Article Five (5) Residential, Limit3d
(R -2): °
"This district is composed of certain quiet, low - density residential areas
® plus certain open areas where similar residential development appears likely
to occur. The regulations for this district are designed to stabilize and
protect the essential characteristics of the district, to promote and en-
courage a suitable environment for family life where there are children, and
to prohibit all activities of a commercial nature. To these ends, develop-
ment is limited to relatively low concentration..."
2 '�
Ms.
Fadeley stated that at this
stage STONEWALL SCHOOL kindergarten
®
through
fifth grade enrollment is at
five - hundred (501) students with twenty -
one (21)
classes and an instruction
average ratio of twenty -four (24) pupils
to one (1) teacher. She further stated that by grade levels the ratio of
A.M. kindergarten and grades three (3) and four (4) already exceed the
County enrollment goals of one to three (1 -3) students per class. She said
that increasing class size beyond our present numbers would definitely
jeopardize the education of our children. She also said that if rezoning
were approved it could mean forty -eight (48) new families in the area; ._
perhaps sending one - hundred (100) more students to Stonewall School that
i
would be a major setback in the education of our children. She stated that
buses would be overcrowded because many of our buses already make two (2)
trips each morning and afternoon. She stated that, as parents, they object
to these possible consequences of the proposed rezoning.
® Ms. Fadeley stated that new homes automatically mean more traffic --
Routes 661 and 669 (ROADS traveled to reach the proposed rezoning) are nar-
row, winding and heavily used by cars, agricultural vehicles and trucks, etc.
She said that additional traffic would be hazardous but iwidening these roads
could be expensive. She stated that Route 670, along which sixteen (16) of
these homes are proposed, is at present only a narrow dilrt lane that would
require many thousands of tax dollars to become a paved road. She stated
that the tax liability is of the citizens and not the developer. She stated
that they object to the traffic hazards and the tax increase.
Ms. Fadeley read from the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Page 14,
a portion of the Statement of Intent for Article Five (5) Residential, Limit3d
(R -2): °
"This district is composed of certain quiet, low - density residential areas
® plus certain open areas where similar residential development appears likely
to occur. The regulations for this district are designed to stabilize and
protect the essential characteristics of the district, to promote and en-
courage a suitable environment for family life where there are children, and
to prohibit all activities of a commercial nature. To these ends, develop-
ment is limited to relatively low concentration..."
2 '�
(PC 11/05/75) P. 15
Ms. Fadeley stated that this development, along road frontages, cannot
achieve this INTENT and low density and concentration are very important to
® those of us who live in Stonewall District. She stated that the degree of
development already permitted in that District alarms the citizens and pro-
vides them reasons to object to this rezoning request.
kL
She stated that all of the strips of land that are being considered are
in an area with DRAINAGE PROBLEMS. She stated that photos and statements by
neighborhood residents can support this fact. She alsolstated that they felt
that.rezoning this agricultural land for these purposes and providing indivi-
dual water and sewage disposal systems would create a health hazard.
Ms. Fadeley asked if the present County pattern in new housing construc-
tion force our TAXES continually higher to pay for the needed County services.
She stated'that during the first nine (9) months of 1974 three - hundred - forty-
six (346) permits were issued for new residences which were to cost;$8,088,070
of which only one - hundred - sixty -five (165), or forty -seven percent (47%),
® were for homes with construction costs of $23,000 or less. She stated that
during the same nine '(9) months of 1975 three - hundred - thirteen (313) build-
ing permits were issued for new residences at a total of $6,921,580 for
construction costs; however, two- hundred - twenty (220), or seventy percent
(70%), of those permits were for houses with building costs were $23,000 or
less. She concluded that there is no way of the County providing SERVICES
to all these new families when the property tax base is dwindling at a fast
pace unless present property owners suffer a huge tax increase; in other
words, that current construction trends throughout the County are resulting,
in seventy percent (700) of the new lower - priced houses which net so little
in taxes that a raise in property taxes for all the citizens in the County
is inevitable. She stated that Stonewall seems to have more than its share
of low- priced homes already.
® Ms. Fadeley urged the Commission to consider -- do the constituents
whom I represent benefit from this rezoning and am I truly considering the
future of Frederick County?
(PC 11/05/75) P. 16
Opposition
Mr. Charley Boyd, who lives in Stonewall District, appeared before the
®
Commission
in
opposition
and
showed the Commission pictures that were taken
October 18
and
19, 1975
(with
no rain that weekend, -but during the previous
week). He stated he was present at a previous meeting some months ago when
I
Mr. Darlington requested what he had referred to as "The Gordondale Area on
Route 669" at which time the susceptibility of flooding'was pointed out to
the Commission by two (2) gentlemen (one lived in West Virginia and the other
on this side of the line whose names he did not recall for certain. He said
that a statement was made that residents would get wet feet when they walked
out of their house and one member of the Commission replied that maybe some
people would not mind getting their feet wet -- maybe that reply was intended
as a touch of humor, but today it could return to haunt him.
Mr. Boyd stated that the pictures he had presented to the Commission
were of the lawns of the houses built on the rezoned tract since that time
® and, as can be plainly seen, it takes no effort to get wet feet.
Mr. Boyd stated that the Commission also had pictures before it of the
rezoning request of today that he hoped it would note the low - lying, wet
area. He said that since the Master Plan shows Gordondale as a flood plain
area was the Commission's first decision a wise one and how possibly could
Health Permits have been issued in an area such as this; and, thirdly, since
the majority of the constructed homes in Gordondale are now owned by young
couples should we even consider letting Mr. Darlington even continue a
developing business.
He stated that the area before the Commission is agricultural,and so far
Mr. Darlington has done nothing but build along the highway where he can get
the highest prices with the least outlay.
Opposition
® Mr. William Luther appeared before the Commission in opposition and
stated that some of his property runs on Route 669 approximately one (1)
mile West of the rezoning request location. He said that three (3) weeks
F (PC 11/05/75) P. 17
ago he was called during the middle of the night when a man plowed up ninety
(90) to one - hundred (100) feet of fence during a one -man accident -- the road
®
is very curvy and narrow;
and
the neighbor's
children
jump
from the
roadside
and could easily be hurt.
He
spoke of the
feasibility
of
increased
taxes tha
he could not afford.
Opposition
Mr. C. C. McLellan appeared before the Commission in opposition and spok
of the aesthetic value of countryside after retiring and moving from Washing-
ton, D. C. approximately four (4) months ago to property that he had had to
look for for two and one -half (2 -1/2) years. He said that he and his wife
have enjoyed it until now. He said that there was a Master Plan that
excluded Stonewall District from being developed into houses. He.stated that
he is located within one (1) mile of the proposed rezoning and he does concur
one - hundred.percent (100 %) with Ms. Fadeley and Mr. Boyd. He further stated
that he is bitterly opposed to the proposed rezoning.
® Opposition
Mr. Roy Cooper appeared before the Commission in opposition and stated
that this type of development is stripping too much good farmland of road
frontage and leaving the rest of the land to grow up in waste. He said that
if it were to be a development with central water and sewer or something to
serve as an advantage to the County or community it would be a more needed
development. He said that after the developers have left,the rest of the
community has to stay and live with all the additional wells, septic systems,
additional traffic, overcrowded schools, land left behind to grow up in waste,
etc. He stated that the community already has water drainage problems, sewer
odors and a large number of homes. He further stated that the Land Use Plan,
if it had passed, would most likely have stopped this type of farmland
ruinage. He expressed his concern that by the time it is adopted all the
• farmland in their area will already be stripped and ruined.
Mr. Cooper spoke.of Mr. Darlington's offer to give the Highway Depart-
ment Right -of -Way for water drainage if the rezoning is approved.
r (PC 11/05/75) P. 18
Mr. Cooper stated that if Mr. Darlington truly had the community in mind
why has this easement not already been given whether he gets it rezoned or
® not? He disagreed with Mr. Darlington's statement that the drainage problem
was not self inflicted because it was created from the water runoff from the
homes that were already built in the area that Mr. Darlington had opened up
for development even though he may not have done the actual construction.
Opposition
Mr. Eugene Hoover appeared in opposition before the Commission and
stated that a couple years ago he purchased some property from Mr. Darlington
of approximately thirty (30) acres. He stated that oft1p last three (3) houses
that were put in at Gordondale, the last two.(2): at least, were a prolonged
period of time before the footers were dug to put in thelfoundations that
I observed. He stated that the first cement truck to arrive sank in about a
foot which immediately.filled up with water that comes from a spring on his
(Mr. Hoover's) land. He stated that his son purchased one of those houses
• and has to use Mr. Hoover's water for drinking because his son's water con-
tains an offensive odor. He further stated that until the citizens say,
"No ", to some of this rezoning there are going to be people that buy and sell
property to be left stripped and disclaim credit because they only initiated
it. He stated that he is not faulting Mr. Darlington for trying to make a
profit because he himself does the same thing by buying and selling property,
but not at the expense of adjoining property owners. He stated that, as
citizens of Frederick County, they have the right to ask the Commission to
vote against this rezoning request and /or table it until a later date. He
stated that perhaps the proposed Land Use Plan should be considered in the
Commission's decision (it's probably a good program from what I have checked
on it). He further stated that unless the Commission votes this request
down he didn't think it would be doing its duty as representatives.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED MR. NICELY TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COMMISSION to speak
of the percolation tests that he had performed on this property.
Mr. Nicely stated that he had performed twelve (12) perk tests in the
r (PC 11/05/75) P. 19
area per the procedure that was outlined when these tests were required.
He stated that ten (10) of these tests established a flow rate of normal
® drainfields while the other two (2) would require oversized drainfields. He
spoke of the surface drainage and easements that would be required; but, of
course, the property would have to be subdivided later.
Mr. R. Wesley Williams addressed Mr. Hoover's remark that no water was
placed in backhoe diggings for percolation tests. He stated that soil is
not evaluated by that method. He stated that any time that a backhoe is
on property is not a percolation test -- you don`t put water in it. He
stated that a percolation test is performed in,a hole approximately three (3)
feet in diameter or smaller. He further stated that soil is not evaluated
by a percolation test but rather by visual inspection for texture which is
the purpose of a backhoe (to dig down approximately three or four feet). He
stated that a soil survey is in progress in Frederick County by a soil
scientist from VPI. He continued that the only time a percolation test is
• performed is when soil is found that is "marginal" (not black, not white --
in the gray zone). He said that in cases such as these a percolation test
is performed to determine the flow rate -- as Mr. Nicely did. He stated
that.there is nothing on the books of the State of Virginia (which the Health
Department does not like) that pertains to wells. He stated that the only
thing they have to do with individual water supplies is in location of a
i
specified number of feet from a drainfield. He specified that odorous water
is not indicative of contamination -- it could be due even to iron content.
Rebuttal
Mr. J. P. Darlington stated that, upon hearing the opposition, he had
come to two (2) conclusions; he is the villain.and, according to Mrs.
Fadeley's percentages, there must be an overwhelming demand for that type
of housing.
• Mr. Brumback asked Mr. Darlington what dollar value did he consider
moderately - priced housing to be.
Mr. Darlington replied that "today" he would think it to be up in the
$25,000 to $28,000 class and largely, by far, the only way that the vas
r (PC 11/05/75) P. 20
majority of people can buy any kind of home is through the Farm Home Admin-
istration program; otherwise they wouldn't be able to touch buying a home
becuase of the requirements.
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven, seconded by Frank Brumback and
approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick
Virginia does hereby recommend denial of the rezoning application of Mr. J.
P. Darlington to rezone 51.80 acres, more or less, from Agricultural, Gen-
eral (A -1) to Residential, Limited (R -2); located in Stonewall Magisterial
District due to safety, health and welfare consideration of the citizens.
REZONING
An Ordinance to amend the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance adopted November
1, 1973 to rezone 13.1 acres, more or less, of J. P. DARLINGTON, fronting
approximately 1548 feet on the East side of Route 661, beginning approximately
4000 feet North of intersection with Route 663; in Stonewall Magisterial
District; from Agricultural, General (A -2) to Residential, Limited (R -2).
Action -- Recommended, Denial
Ronald Berg read the application to the Commission.
• Mr. J. P. Darlington appeared before the Commission and stated that what
he had previously stated apparently had no influence and that he considered
it useless to say anything further on this rezoning request because it is
similar to those that had already been turned down.
Opposition
Ms. Jan Fadeley appeared before the Commission in opposition and refer-
red to the petition containing one - hundred - thirty -two (132) signatures that
she had presented against the requested rezoning.
Ms. Fadeley stated that the figures that she had previously quoted also
apply to this request. She stated, in reply to Mr. Darlington, that, though
the market for low -cost houses may be predominant at this time, the County
cannot afford construction of seventy percent (70 %) of this type of house
because the tax base is not there to support the necessary services.
• Opposition
Mr. C. C. McLellan stated that his previous opposing statements also
apply to this rezoning request.
' (PC 11/05/75) P. 21
Opposition
Mr. Charley Boyd appeared before the Commission in opposition and stated
®
that
this property
is also
low -lying and it was also under water at the time
the
pictures were
taken of
Gordondale.
Opposition
Mr. Eugene Hoover spoke from the audience stating that he would like to
reiterate that everything he had previously stated would apply equally as
well to this property.
Vice Chairman read the report dated October 16, 1975 from the Frederick
County Health Department and signed by Mr. Herbert L. Sluder:
"Proposed Lots 1 -5 appear satisfactory. Lots 6 -9 appear unsatisfactory.
Lots 10 and 11 appear satisfactory."
Mr. J. P. Darlington stated that he had nothing more to add because it
had.all been said.
Mr. Nicely stated from the audience that he had been on this property
• many times and that he didn't think surface drainage applied as an issue
because there is a stream behind the proposed houses (about 350 -400 feet
from the highway).
Frank Brumback commented that the issues involved are very important and
that this rezoning request is a serious consideration. He said that it is
a lot easier to be sitting on the other side of the tableland not have to
make the decision. He stated that the Commission does not want to obstruct
the free - enterprise system but on the other hand it must consider large
blocks of land that will have a tremendous long -range impact on the entire
community as well as protection of the prospective property purchasers.
Mr. DeHaven stated that he is familiar with the tract of land and had
seen the flooding due to a stream that runs directly behind it. He further
stated his opinion that the drainfields will have to go close to the Run or
• be in the front yards.
Mr. Brumback stated that he would like the general public to know that
these tracts of land can be broken up into five (5)- acre tracts witho t
appearing before the Commission. °2 �#
I—J�" A
F (PC 11/05/75) P. 22
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven, seconded by Frank Brumback and
approved by the following vote:
® DeHaven; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend denial of the rezoning application of Mr. J.
P. Darlington to rezone 13.1 acres, more or less, fronting approximately
1548 feet on the East side of Route 661, beginning approximately 4000 feet
North of intersection with Route 663; in Stonewall Magisterial District; from
Agricultural', General (A -2) to Residential, Limited (R -2') due to the safety,
health and welfare consideration of the public.
An Ordinance to amend the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance adopted November
1, 1973 to rezone 30.3611 acres, more or less, of Monte Vista Associates,
fronting 914.51 feet on the East side of Route 11 South, I beginning approxi-
mately 1300 feet South of Middletown Corporate limits; in Opequon Magisterial
District; from Agricultural, General (A -2) to Industrial; Limited (M -1).
Action -- RecommendedlDenial
Ronald Berg read the application to the Commission and stated that it is
proposed that the property be used for light industry compatible with adjoin-
ing facilities. He stated that the initial use planned for twelve (12) acres
• will be a plant for reprocessing urethane roller covering that is used by..the
paper industry; by Stowe- Woodward Industries, Inc. He said that it is pro-
posed that one building be constructed with undetermined future buildings.
Mr. Charles Ewing appeared before the Commission as representative of
the applicant, Monte -Vista Associates, and stated that the proposed uses for
i
the Stowe - Woodward Division of S -W Industries, which is headquartered in
i
Massachusetts, that manufactures and, in this case, recycles urethane rollers
for the paper industry. He stated that these rolls are very much like a
very large fan belt and are used to carry paper in the paper processing
industry that occasionally need refurbishing; which is the prupose of the
proposed installation.
Mr. Ewing stated that the property is located immediately North of the
Western Union computer facility .(that was also developed by Monte Vista Asso-
ciates). He stated that they have satisfied themselves that, not only does
the projected use meet the standards of M -1 Zoning, but even further that it
is a desirable light industry that is very compatible with the existing
Western Union computer facility which he felt is a great asset to the County.
_:zr -Y. it .
(PC 11/05/75) P. 23
Mr. Ewing continued that the application is for seventeen (17) acres
in addition to this particular use that is the balance of the thirty (30)
® acres located North toward Middletown with the contemplated use as similar
light industry that would also be compatible with Western Union and the Stowe-
Woodward facility. He stated that it is included at this time because it is
a land remnant and for the purpose of setback clarification.
Mr. Brumback asked how many employees are anticipated.
Mr. Ewing stated that it will have one - hundred (100) employees with
about fifty (50) per shift.
Mr. Brumback asked what the annual payroll would be.
Mr. Ewing stated that he did not know.
Vice Chairman asked if there would be any waste water connected with
this industry.
Mr. Ewing replied that there would be the domestic sewage of approxi-
mately 2,000.gallons per day as well as a similar amount of water used for
cooling purposes only at a total of 4,000 gallons per day that is not con-
taminated water. He stated that Middletown has agreed to accept this flow
into their Town system by way of a pumping station that was previously con-
structed for the Western Union facility.
Mr. DeHaven asked if Middletown would also furnish water.
Mr. Ewing stated that the retailer is the Town of Middletown and the
wholesaler is the City of Winchester.
Vice Chairman asked the amount of anticipated solid waste from the
processing plant.
Mr. Ewing stated that he had been assured that there would be none.
Mr. Gordon asked if all the land between Routes 11 and 81 would be used.
Mr. Ewing stated that it would all be included as far as the zoning is
• concerned.
Vice Chairman asked when the construction is anticipated to begin.
Mr. Ewing stated that the Stowe - Woodward people would like to begin
construction upon the rezoning approval; in the year of 1975. 5-
777FTj
(PC 11/05/75) P. 24
Ronald Berg stated that this would be an extension of M -1 zoning.
Mr. Berg also stated that Stowe - Woodward Industries would be using
U
twelve (12) acres of the thirty (30) acres owned by Monte Vista Associates.
Mr. Ewing stated that the general long -range plan is for general light
industrial development; however, there are no firm plans at this moment.
Historical Interest
Mr. George Smith who is employed by the National Trust for Historic Pre-
0
servation, the owner of Belle Grove (an adjoining land holder and National
Historic Landmark along with Cedar Creek Battlefield) and stated that he
did not wish to speak in opposition to the rezoning application. He stated
that he was asked by the National Trust and the Belle Grove Council (a group
of individuals from Frederick County, Winchester and the region -- who advise
the National Trust on the use of Belle Grove and its development) to express
their opinion that they do not oppose the application for rezoning. He stated
that they are conscious of the economic welfare of Frederick County and,
from their investigation, they feel that S -W Industries would be compatible
to what is presently there in Western Union. He 'further stated that, at the
same time, they had asked him to express their concern for the structure that
is known as the " Orndorff House" (or the old Heater House) located on this
I
tract and is presently being used, - -he believed, as a residence for under-
privileged. He stated that it is, in a sense, a landmarklunto itself and
I
they would hope that the tract developers would give thorough consideration
to adaptive re -use of that existing structure.
Mr. Smith stated that he was also asked to express, for the record, that
r
they are unalterably opposed to the rezoning of the acreage presently part of
the Cedar Creek Battlefield that is located West of Route 11 and is owned by
Monte Vista Associates (this was done at the time western Union tract was
rezoned) that consists of about one - hundred - twenty (120) acres and has sit-
uated upon it an eighteenth century dwelling that they feel is important to
the Heritage of the people of Frederick County.`
u
Mr. Ewing commented on Mr. Smith's statements when he said that the
initial development of twelve (12) acres does not include the Orndorff House A
(PC 11/05/75) P. 25
He said that it is a substantial building that does have out buildings in
fairly good shape. He stated that they do not entertain any plans to do any-
thing with it other than to keep it occupied and their prosepcts were, hope-
fully, that it can be used in its present configuration. He stated that they
certainly weren't applying for a demolition permit for the Orndorff mansion.
Mr. Ewing stated that they are in the process of conveying to Western
Union Telegraph Company the land located across Route 11 on a long - standing
agreement that was made about five (5) years ago. He stated that he had no
idea of what was planned and he only knew that it is- presently zoned Agri-
cultural.
Mr. Gordon asked Mr. Ewing if S -W Industries would require more than
twelve (12) acres for their use. He stated that the Commission and the Count
is concerned that land not be rezoned without their knowing the anticipated
use.
Mr. Gordon stated that it was his understanding that there is no ordi-
nance .stating that Orndorff House could not be demolished -- no guarantee.
Mr. Ewing stated that, if he were not mistaken, it would require a site
plan (if not a demolition permit) to do anything with the structure -- there
are safeguards for the County to address itself to any proposed use in the
future of the underlying land for the Orndorff mansion. H'e suggested that
there is no jeopardy to the County in rezoning.
Mr. Brumback stated that it is a fact that the County needs a good tax
base for which this area was planned. He stated that Middletown supplying
the water and sewage is on the plus side and, on the other hand, there is
only one chance to save historical buildings (the Commission would like to
protect them for future generations).
Mr. Brumback expressed his concern that application was for thirty (30)
acres with only twelve (12) acres with planned use at the present time and
i eighteen (18) acres vaguely planned for the future.
Mr. Gordon stated that the Commission is concerned about the preser-
vation of historical landmarks and that he realized Mr. Ewing may not be
7
� in a position to further comment on that subject today. A
P (PC 11/05/75) P. 26
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Langdon Gordon and
approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Gordon; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend approval of the rezoning application of Monte
Vista Associates to rezone 30.3611 acres, more or less,'fronting 914.51 feet
on the East side of Route 11 South, beginning approximately 1300 feet South
of Middletown Corporate limits; in Opequon Magisterial District; from Agri-
cultural, General (A -2) to Industrial, Limited (M -1).
REZONING
An Ordinance to amend the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance adopted November
1, 1973 to rezone 1.84 acre, more or less, of LEON R. FLEISHER and WILLIAM
J. DOLIANTE, located at the intersection of Route 11 South and Route 706; in
Back Creek Magisterial District; from Residential, General.(R -3) to Business,
General (B -2).
Action -- Recommended Denial
Ronald Berg reminded the Commission that the application was tabled
indefinitely from the July 3, 1975 meeting and read the application to the
Commission; stating that there is no use or constructionlplanned at this time.
Mr. Harry Benham appeared before the Commission to r I epresent the rezon-
ing applicants and stated that the property is located in, Kernstown on the
West side of Route 11 across from Rubbermaid plant and next to an attractive
old house that sets within twenty (20) feet of the highway and on the other.
side of the C'& S. Bank. He stated that it sets on the NW corner of Route 11
and Route 706 that runs West.
He stated that there are only two (2)
zoned B -2 (the other lot being the white,
Bryce):.
The Commission examined the map.
lots on that location that are not
I
columned house owned by Mr. Paul
Ronald Berg stated that the Public Hearing was advertised for July with
the mailing having been done since, but it was not advertised as a Public
Hearing for this meeting.
Mr. Benham stated that the reason they had asked for tabling at the July
40 meeting was because of the future "use" concern. He stated that the appl'i-
cants do not yet have a prospective purchaser and are not in a position to
designate the permitted "use ".
F (PC 11/05/75) P. 27
U1
He said that the applicants are residing in the Northern Virginia Area and
purchased the property in 1961, while it was zoned Commercial, with a brick
building on it and made application for the erection of a bowling alley. He
stated that they tore down the brick house; then decided to withhold construc
tion. He said that when the area was rezoned in 1973 this parcel was includes
in the Residential zoning without the applicants being aware of it, had
advertised it for sale locally, entered into a contract in the process of
selling it last September.
Ronald Berg stated -that the tract was rezoned July 1, 1971 at the requeEt
of adjoining property owners.
Mr. Benham stated that one of the applicants will be moving to the
West Coast and that is the reason for requesting a rezoning -- so that it can
be sold and then the Commission could be advised of what the buyer planned
to use it for.
Mr. Benham stated that the location is logically commercial use and is
•
actually being used for commercial purposes.
He stated that he had a letter there from Mr. Bryce (adjoining land-
owner) indicating that he had no personal objections; and no one appeared at
the former Public Hearing. He further stated that either the owners or
tenants of all the adjacent houses had been contacted personally.
Mr. Gordon stated that he is a member of the church it the area and he
did not believe it was a conflict of interest. He said that he did not think
the people of the church knew of this being considered. He stated that he
did not think the church members would object to the rezoning but rather to
not knowing what would be built there.
Mr. Benham stated that the seller would be glad to include a covenant
on the land to restrict "use ".
David Whitacre stated that conceivably the second buyer could leave out
• the restrictive deed covenant because it would not be with the County but
rather with the purchaser and seller.
Mr. Brumback stated that he preferred the applicants knowing the anti -
pated use before the Commission considers rp,nn;nrt °�Z 5 - 0 7 /
pr (PC 11/05/75) P. 28 q
Mr. Benham stated that all the other tracts in that area are B -2 over
which there would be no control and this property should be included.
®
He
asked if the church
would like -to
attend a meeting to discuss the
rezoning
request.
Mr.
Gordon stated that
the County
is not in favor of blank endorsements
and that the church has no bearing on the application. He stated that he
thought it should be the policy of the Planning Commission and the Board
of Supervisors to tentatively, at least, know what will be the use.
Mr. Brumback stated that he agreed with Mr. Gordon also considering a
reversed B -2 zone situation. He said that he would be in favor of the appli-
cant reapplying with a sign property posted, etc., so the public would be
informed.
Upon motion made by Langdon Gordon, seconded by Manuel DeHaven and
approved by the following vote;
DeHaven; Gordon; BrumbacK- Vice Chairman -- YES.
• BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend denial of the rezoning application of Leon R.
Fleisher and William J. Doliante, located at the intersection of Route 11
South and Route 706; in Back Creek Magisterial District; from Residential,
General (R -3) to Business, General (B -2) because the Commission cannot pre-
judge something without a known use.
REZONING
An Ordinance to amend the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance adopted November
1,1973 to rezone 27 acres, more or less, of Daniel E. Willmore, located on
the North side of Route 694, approximately two - tenths (2/10) miles East of
intersection with Route 522; in Gainesboro Magisterial District; from Agri-
cultural, Limited (A -1) to Residential, Limited (R -2).
Action -- Recommended Denial
Ronald Berg read the application to the Commission and stated that it is
proposed that the property be used for single - family residential dwellings.
Langdon Gordon stated that he would abstain from participating in this
rezoning request.
Mr. Daniel E. Willmor-e appeared before the Commission and stated that
• Route 694 is wide, paved road that represents a major intersection with Route
522 of which the property is within one - thousand (1000) feet. He said.that
there is also a store located at the intersection and the property is a A)
very short distance from Leary's School (that has a considerable enrollment A
(PC 11/05/75) P. 29
and a number of instructors). He stated that a number of the people that
would live on the tract are already residents of the County because he had
•
been approached by
teachers of
Leary School
and
relatives
of neighboring
landowners re the
possibility
of purchasing
land
in this
area.
Mr. Willmore stated that the ground has a good frontage. He said that
no percolation tests have been performed with the exception of Lot Seven (7).
He stated that he owns ninety -three (93) acres and plans to farm the
balance.
Mr. Willmore said that the alternative would be to sell five (5)- acre
tracts that he felt would create an identical burden on the County but with
I
less planning permitted to the County. He stated that he would build paved
roads if the request is approved over which the County would have control.
He stated that he believed granting the rezoning would not be placing
a precedent of rezoning agricultural land because of its location.
Mr. Brumback asked Mr. Willmore what the road width is.
• Mr. Willmore replied that he understands that it is forty (40) feet
Right -of -Way with eighteen to twenty feet (18 -20') of paving and is the main
road to Unger.
Mr. Berg stated that he had received no report from the Health Departmert
Opposition
Mr. John Boyd appeared before the Commission in oppos and asked if
this request could be tabled again.
Mr. Willmore stated that he had requested a soil evaluation test from
the Health Department, but the matter has been a little complicated as he
had corn on the property which he did not want to ruin.
The question of Public Hearing date being properly posted was discussed.
Mr. Willmore stated that he was not guilty of subtrafuge.
Mr. Boyd stated that many people had appeared at the last meeting in
• opposition and that he would hate to see the issue tabled over an incident
that he did nt know to be correct (referring to the posted date).
Mr. Boyd also stated that, even though he is the only speaker, he repre,-
J
sented eighty -six (86) people. /� ,
(PC 11/05/75) P. 30
•
Mr. Boyd reiterated some of the previous arguments presented at the
Planning Commission meeting of October 1, 1975: population impact; uncertain
ty of County taking on too much until it knows the direction it will develop;
aesthetic reasons; lifestyles and farming operations would be altered; the
Summit is already in that end of the County; and the people that signed the
petition will be the majority that will be effected by such a development.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Manuel DeHaven and
•
approved unanimously,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia -does hereby declare closed Executive Session to discuss legal matters
I
RECONVENED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Manuel DeHaven and
approved unanimously,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for thel�County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby declare it is reconvened for Public Hearings.
Opposition
Mr. Larry Brannon appeared before the Commission in oppostion to the
rezoning request of Mr. Daniel E. Willmore (A -I] to (R -2) and stated that he
is a landowner near the property.
He stated that.if the request is granted he would have to discontinue
farming because the Health Department would stop him fromispraying. He said
that the land is excellent for farming. He said that he objected to the pos-
sibility of raised taxes.
Mr. Brannon stated that during a Spring thaw the bottom goes out of the
road and- not visible to a driver that can cause accidents -- he had seen
a four -wheel drive vehicle stuck there
He said that the bottom also goes
out on Route 695.
He stated that the ground is highly absorbent and he believed that if
•
a road were built it should be done above ground (elevated).
Mr. DeHaven asked what depth wells are in that area.
Mr. Boyd stated that he believed a well depth should be one- hundred-
fifty to two - hundred feet (150- 200 � A
(PC 11/05/75) P. 31
Opposition
Mr. Frank Whitacre appeared before the Commission in oppostion and
® stated that his property adjoins Mr. Willmore's property on the East.
He stated that he was concerned about the number of houses to be con-
tained on the small acreage. He said that he is not opposed to constructing
because he does a little of it himself, but he is opposed to one (1)- acre
lots as well as the possibility of overcrowding the County's schools.
Mr. Boyd stated that everyone with whom he had talked was not in dis-
favor of developing the land, but rather to one (1)- acre tracts as opposed
to five (5)- acre tracts (which they would be in favor of).
He also noted that a number of developers were signees of the petition.
Opposition
Mr. George Whitacre appeared before the Commission in opposition and
stated that he owns the land North of Mr. Willmore becuase of the spray
problem. He stated that he is opposed to one (1)- acre lots -- not five (5)-
• acre lots.
Opposition
Mrs. Beth Boyd appeared before the Commission in opposition and stated
that the people who already live in that area will be carrying a financial
burden if the rezoning is approved due to the additional services that
the County will need to provide.
Rohn + +al
Mr. Willmore stated that the reason he originally purchased his property
was because it is good agricultural ground. He stated that the reason he
would like to use less than five (5)- acre tracts is the fact that FHA will
not finance five (5)- acre tracts. He said that relatives of some of the
petition signees were among those that had inquired about buying property
from him. He stated that it may end up with about three (3)- acre tracts
40 and that he intends to place some type of restriction on the size.
Mr. Willmore stated that Route 694 holds up quite well and is on the
same ground. He stated that the ground does leak water, but he
(PC 11/05/75) P. 32
believe there would be any sanitation problems -- he would, however, welcome
a sanitarian's opinion. He said.that there would be problems with the
• spring with five (5)- acre tracts as well as with one (l)- acre tracts. He
said that these houses are more than one - quarter (1/4) mile from the orchards.
Mr. Willmore stated that he appreciates the aesthetic reasons for the
people moving to a rural area.
He said that Routes 694 and 522, where they intersect, make a prime
location for a fairly dense housing area that he was proposing.
He stated that he didn't believe the Commission would be setting a
precedent of approving rezoning applications for agricultural land.
He further stated that he did not believe he would benefit financially
much more from building one (1)- acre than five (5)- acre tracts due to the
i
road building cost involved and he would end up with a lot more leftover.
land for his personal use.
Mr. Willmore stated that he did not wish to be in emotional opposition
• to the petitioners. He said that he thought it made morel sense to build
under a controlled situation on two (2)- acre or three (3)- acre tracts
i
closer to the road than on five (5)- acre tracts -- that it answers all of
the objections of today.
Mr. DeHaven asked how long he had owned the property)
Mr. Willmore stated that he had owned ninety -three (9 ' 3) acres since
October, 1974 and had farmed it since that time and would prefer to keep it
all but the price of living and low farming profit make that prohibitive.
Opposition
Mr. John Boyd stated that Route 694 is truly in bad shape even thought
it is resurfaced every year approximately and'there is definitely housing
being provided.
Upon motion made by Manuel DeHaven, seconded by Frank Brumback and
• approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
(PC 11%05/75) P. 33 N
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend denial of the rezoning application of Daniel
E. Willmore, to rezone 27 acres, more or less, located on the North side of
Route 694, approximately two - tenths (2/10) miles East of intersection with
• Route 522; in Gainesboro Magisterial District; from Agricultural, Limited
(A -1) to Residential, Limited (R- 2).for the safety, health and welfare of
the public.
SITE PLANS
REIMERS ELECTRA STEAM, INC. -- To construct a warehouse k80' X 98.8') --
located on the West side of Route 11, North; approximately 3/10 miles South
of intersection with Route 669, in Stonewall MagisteriallDistrict.
Action -- RecommendedlApproval
Ronald Berg stated that the site plan is for a new warehouse building
with no new employees anticipated as well as no sanitary facilities necessary
to require Health Department approval; which meets all setback, side yard
and boundary requirements that will not add to the traffic and is to be used
strictly for storage.
Mr. DeHaven stated that he lives next door to the applicant and that
their business is successful enough to require additional storage.
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Langdon Gordon and
approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Gordon; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for thelCounty of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend approval of the site plan of Reimers Electra
Steam, Inc. to construct a warehouse (80' X 98.8 located on the West side
of Route 11, North approximately three - tenths (3/10) miles South of inter-
section with Route 669; in Stonewall Magisterial District.
SITE PLANS
STOWE - WOODWARD INDUSTRIES -- To construct a 50,000 square foot plant --
located on property which Monte Vista Associates is requesting rezoning.
Action -- Recommended Approval
Mr. Ronald Berg stated that the site plan application is located on
property owned by Monte Vista Associates for which the Planning Commission
recommended approval to the Board of Supervisors.
He stated that it is a twelve (12)- acre parcel bounded by Routes 81 and
• 11, with the access road presently being used by western Union that the
Highway Department believes to be adequate
to the Commission.
Mr. Berg showed the map location
� �r
(PC 11/05/75) P. 34
Mr. Berg stated that there will be a rise between the plant location
is
•
and Route 11 to prevent highway visibility of it and that forty -eight (48)
parking spaces will be provided. He said that the loading dock will be
located on the back side of the pre - streesed concrete building and also not
i
visible from Route 11 and showed the Commission the location of the pumping
station and sewer lines.
Vice Chairman asked Mr. Berg if the Commission is being asked to consider
something out of order because the Board of Supervisors not yet approved
the rezoning application.
Mr. Berg stated that the Vice Chairman is correct, but the applicant is
pressed for time -- if Frederick County could get anything approved by
November they would like to begin construction; plus thel that they
would very much like to locate in the County. He said that this is the
reason for expediting the rezoning application of Monte Vista Associates
as well as this site plan application.
Mr. Whitacre stated that the Commission's approval would be legal if
stated as being subject to the Board of Supervisors' approval of the rezon-
ing application.
Mr. DeHaven stated that this is the kind of tax base!the County needs.
Upon motion made by Langdon Gordon, seconded by Frank Brumback and
•
approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Gordon; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend approval of the site plan application of
Stowe - Woodward Industries to construct a 50,000 square foot plant located
on property that Monte Vista Associates is requesting rezoning; subject to
the approval of the Board of Supervisors of Said rezoning application of
Monte Vista Associates.
SUBDIVISION
FOSTER SUBDIVISION -- One (1) lot fronting Route 660 in Stonewall Magis-
terial District. Highway approved. Existing septic system.
Action -- Recommended Denial
Mr. Ronald Berg stated that the application has met Health Department
approval and contains an existing house.
(PC 11/05/75) P. 35
He stated that the difficulty is that the son -in -law and daughter's
house was built on land belonging to Mr. Foster and he will not convey the
•
required acreage --
the property is
38,666 square feet; not the required
40,000 square feet
(non- conforming
lot).
Mr. Berg stated that there is a fence line along the rear of the prop-
erty beyond which Mr. Foster.does not wish to convey his property.
Mr. Berg stated that Route 660 goes North from Route 7, by way of
location for the Commission.
Mr. Berg stated that there is a 2,000 square foot Right -of -Way dedica-
tion (reason Mr. Foster does not wish to give away any more land).
The Commission discussed setting a precedent of exceptions and involving
itself in family problems.
Mr. Berg stated that he had suggested to the applicants that they move
the fence line further back and grant Mr. Foster the right to continue farm-
ing there as long as he lives; which Mr. Foster flatly refused.
• Upon motion made by Langdon Gordon, seconded by Frank Brumback and
approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Gordon; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend denial of Foster Subdivision of one (1) lot
fronting Route 660 in Stonewall Magisterial District.
SUBDIVISION
GORDONDALE, Section 4 -- One (1) lot (Virginia) fronting Route 670 in Stone -
Wall Magisterial District. Health and Highway approved. Berkeley County,
West Virginia approved.
Action -- Recommended Approval
Langdon Gordon stated that he wished to abstain from participating in
this'application.
Ronald Berg stated that Lot Twelve (12) will have the house in Virginia
40
with the remaining three (3) lots in West Virginia.
Upon motion made by Manuel.DeHaven, seconded by Frank Brumback and
approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES
Langdon Gordon -------------- - - - - -- ABSTAINED.
(PC 11/05/75) P. 36
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend approval of Gordondale, Section Four (4),
Lot Twelve (12) subdivision application fronting Route 670 in Stonewall
Magisterial District.
• SUBDIVISION
SOUTHVIEW, Section 2 -- Twelve (12) lots on Route 850 (extended). Septic
tanks and well. Health and Highway approved.
Action -- Recommended Approval
Ronald Berg stated that Lot Twenty -Five (25) does now meet Health
Department approval. He said that the subdivision will be provided with
i
central water; served by a central well; contain 30,000 square foot lots;
and have one - hundred (100) foot frontage.
Upon motion made by Frank Brumback, seconded by Lan'gdon Gordon
and approved by the following vote:
DeHaven; Gordon; Brumback; Vice Chairman -- YES.
I
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby recommend approval of Southview, Section 2, subdivision
application of twelve (12) lots on Route 850 (extended).
• STEP ONE GRANT
Proposal Discussed
Middletown, Virginia
Action -- None
Mr. Berg stated that the Step One Grant for the Town;of Middletown
which is now operating a lagoon that will have to be, in a few years, brought
up to standards for which they are going to apply for Federal funding to
regionalize their plant -- means they will have a much enlarged drainage area
Mr. Berg showed the Commission the proposed drainage area on the map
that will be located on agricultural land. He said that there is no great
urgency at the moment and that it will have an influential impact on the
County.
Mr. Brumback stated that it will be a lengthy process due to the fact
that there are plants located in that area that must be considered.
• Vice Chairman stated that there is a Work Session scheduled for the
Commission for December 17, 1975 at which time the Commission will further
discuss this proposal.
�5�
(PC 11/05/75) P. 37
ADJOURNMENT
Upon motion made by Vice Chairman, seconded by Manuel DeHaven and
• approved unanimously,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Planning Commission for the County of Frederick,
Virginia does hereby adjourn its meeting.
THERE BEING NOTHING FURTHER TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION, THE MEETING
WAS ADJOURNED.
Respectfully submitted,
/ I
H. Ronald Berg, Secretary
r.
ith Williams, Chairman
•
•
a
6(D