Go to: OVERVIEW (SaveOurCounty) DETAILS (listener) PLANNING SCHOOLS ENVIRONMENT EROSION     Report corrections & broken links to Webmaster Get updates on local issues

STAFF REPORT

PROJECT: SHENANDOAH PROFESSIONAL CENTER & MINI STORAGE

DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 2002

A Neighborhood Compatibility Meeting for Shenandoah Professional Center & Mini Storage was held on November 13, 2002 at 10:00 am., in the County meeting room located at 108 East Washington Street in Charles Town. A complete description of the project can be found in File Z02-05 in the Planning Commission Office located at 104 East Washington Street in Charles Town. Doug Llewellyn, David Leonard and Trish Sanderson were present on behalf of the project. Ms. Sanderson presented the project for the record.

Many concern were raised including but not limited to; property values; view shed to Harpers Ferry; traffic problems; buffers; traffic signals; fencing of property; impact on emergency services; effect on wetlands and groundwater; light pollution; and, incompatible with surrounding neighborhood

The developer agreed to the following and they are therefore resolved. The developer agreed to:

1. Shielded lighting throughout the site including the intersection with a minimum number of lights and a lighting plan;

2. Standing seam nonreflective roof on all mini storage unit buildings;

3. Storm water management plan provided at the Community Impact Statement stage;

4. Sign no larger than 5x4 no higher than 15 off of the ground;

5. Clarification of traffic data provided with the inclusion of the office building at the Community Impact Statement stage;

6. Dense double row buffer of fairly opaque evergreens a minimum of 6 high at maturity along Route 27 (Bakerton Road);

7. Minimal lighting throughout the project and motion lights or card key lighting when someone is present;

8. .Wetland delineations to be provided with the Community Impact Statement;

9. Provide no more than the minimum number of parking spaces required by the County Ordinances;

10. Outside lights for the office building being turned off at midnight unless people are working in the building due to special circumstances or motion lights being provided for the office building;

11. Principal entrance being moved to no less than 100 from Route. 340 unless the Department of Highways objects;

12. Providing new landscaping around the professional building with plants that are long life and evergreen;

13. 3-D architectural plan showing materials, size and elevation being provided at the Community Impact Statement stage;

14. Petition the Department of Highways to install a sign prohibiting left turns from Route 340 to Route 27 (Bakerton Road) for trailers;

15. Prohibition on outside storage;

16. No offsite glare from the project;

17. Providing an Army Corps of Engineers map which shows intermittent streams and acquiring a letter from them stating whether nor not there are intermittent streams on the site; and.

18. Seeking a letter from theDepartment of Highways that what is being proposed will not negatively impact the area.

The developer did not agree to the following and they are therefore unresolved. The developer did not agree to:

1. Relocate all entrances to Dam #3 Road;

2. Building facades to be brick or wood;

3. Building facades to be brick, wood or stone;

4. Non-illuminated sign;

5. No chain link fencing;

6. Containment of contaminant leaks within or immediately surrounding the storage units;

7. Opaque or solid fencing which matches the vegetation;

8. On or off-site wa ter storage for fire protection;

9. Permeable paved surface if allowed by County Ordinances;

10. Storm water management plan to include an environmental impact study to show types of pollutants associated with this type of development, and how to treat and prevent them from leaving the site;

11. Detain the 1 year storm and allow for gradual release over a 24 hour period;

12. Detain the 2 year storm and allow for gradual release over a 24 hour period;

13. Detain the 10 year storm and allow for gradual release over a 24 hour period;

14. Detain the 100 year storm and allow for gradual release over a 24 hour period;

15. Reduce the number of storage units to ten (10);

16. Fencing around the professional building be stone or brick and no more than 4 in height;

17. Sign for the professional building being no larger than 3x4x4 in size;

18. Needs assessment study for storage facility provided at the Community Impact Stazement stage; and,

19. Wrought iron and stone fencing around the mini storage facility.

Mr. Raco did not allow the following as a compatibility issues:

1. Applicant apprising the Planning Commission of a lawsuit between the parties prior to the issuance or denial of the Conditional Use Permit;

2. Applicant providing a letter from the Environmental Protection Agency as to whether nor not the site is a wetland; and,

3. Applicant providing a letter from the Historic Landmarks Commission.

Since there are unresolved issues, a public hearing has been scheduled for December 10, 2002. The hearing will take place before the Planning Commission at their regularly scheduled meeting which begins at 7:00 pm. It will take place in the County meeting room located at 108 East Washington Street in Charles Town. Testimony will be limited to the resolution of the unresolved issues,

This report was prepared by Paul J. Raco, Director of Planning and Zoning.