Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 24, 1988 Regular Meetingl0 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Super- visors was held on August 24, 1988, at 11:00 A.M., in the Board of Supervisor's Meeting Room, Frederick County Courthouse, Loudoun Street Mall, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT: Kenneth Y. Stiles, Chairman; Robert M. Rhodes, Vice - Chairman; Dudley H. Rinker; Roger L. Crosen; L. A. Putnam and Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order and asked that everyone observe a moment of silence in absence of a Minister. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Stiles stated that under "County Officials ", he would like to bring the Board members up -to -date on the Frederick- Winchester Service Authority. Mr. Riley stated that the Sanitation Authority had prepa an agreement dealing with gravity flow that he would like for the Board to review and approve. Mr. Stiles requested that Tab F, Marvin Dove, be moved to the first item on the Agenda as Mr. and Mrs. Dove and their Attorney were present at this time. Mr. Rinker noted that the Parks and Recreation Commission met on August 23 and he had a report from the Commission that he would like for the Board to act on. Upon motion made by Dudley H. Rinker, seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the Agenda was adopted as amend- ed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Crosen noted that in the minutes of June 30, 1988, P 12, under the "Personnel Committee Report ", that Mr. Rinker was the one that seconded the motion and not he as the minutes stated. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the minutes of the regular meet- ing of June 30, 1988 were approved as amended. M Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the minutes of the regular meet- ing of July 13, 1988 were approved as submitted. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the minutes of the special meet- ing of July 25, 1988 were approved as submitted. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ON BURNING RESCINDED Mr. Stiles announced that the emergency ordinance on burn- ing would be rescinded at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS SUBDIVISION REQUEST - HACK LOTS - APPROVED This item was for the Board's information only as the staff had administratively, as instructed by the Planning Commission, approved these plats due to a hardship case. SUBDIVISION REQUEST - MARVIN DOVE - APPROVED Mr. Watkins, Planning and Development Director, presented this request and stated that the Planning Commission had recom- mended approval. Mr. Orndoff asked how many lots would this be divided into. Mr. Watkins replied that this was not known at this time. Mr. Weiss, Attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Dove, appear- ed before the Board and stated that there were no plans at this time to develop either of the lots from the size they currently are. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. and passed unanimously, the subdivision request of Marvin Dove was approved. SUBDIVISION REQUEST - BATTLEFIELD PARTNERSHIP - APPROVED Mr. Watkins presented this request and stated that the Plan- ning Commission recommended approval. Mr. Ralph Gregory appeared before the Board to answer any questions they might have. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the subdivision request of Battle- field Partnership was approved. 20 SUBDIVISION REQUEST - BATTLEFIELD PARTNERSHIP - LOTS 11 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 AND 19 - APPROVED Mr. Watkins presented this request and stated that the Plan ning Commission recommended approval. Mr. Ralph Gregory was present to represent this request. Mr. Rinker asked where the entrance was scheduled to be. Mr. Gregory replied beside the Marathon Bank property. Upon motion made by Dudley H. Rinker, seconded by Robert M. Rhodes and passed unanimously, the subdivision request of Battle field Partnership, Lots 11 through 19, was approved. ROAD RESOLUTIONS - BRENTWOOD TERRACE, THE VILLAGE AT DE Mr. Watkins presented the following road resolutions for acceptance into the Secondary System of the Virginia Department of Transportation: Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Virginia Department of Transportation is hereby requested to add the following roads tc the Secondary System of Frederick County pursuant to Section 33.1 -229 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended: Cloverdale Court, Brentwood Terrace, Section I, 757.35 feet (0.14 of a mile) from the intersection of Route 659 at Valley Mill Road to 757.35 feet or 0.14 mile South of Route 659, as described in Deed Book 646, Page 393, dated April 27th, 1987. Pebble Brook Lane, Brentwood Terrace, Section I and II, 414.88 (0.08 of a mile) from 50 feet or 0.01 mile East of Cloverdale Court to 50 feet or 0.01 miles West of the intersection of Astoria Court, as described in Deed Book 646, Page 393, dated April 27th, 1987. Astoria Court, Brentwood Terrace, Section II, 554.72 feet (0.11 of a mile) from the intersection of Pebble Brook Lane to 554.72 feet or 0.11 miles South of Pebble Brook Lane. AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right -of -way of 50 feet as described in the above Deed Book and referenced page numbers with necessary easements for cuts, fill and drainage. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Virginia Department of Transportation is hereby requested to add the following roads t the Secondary System of Frederick County pursuant to Section 33.1 -229 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended: 21 Aspen Drive, the Village at Lakeside, Section II -A; 226.92 feet (0.04 of a mile) from 137.31 feet or 0.03 mile Northeast of the intersection of Route 1082 (Willow Oak Circle) to the intersection of Somerset Drive, as described in Deed Book 621, Page 768, dated July 16, 1986. Somerset Drive, the Village at Lakeside, Section II -A and IV; 1,047.12 feet (0.20 of a mile) from 52.1 feet or 0.01 mile Southeast of the intersection of Aspen Drive to 50 feet or 0.01 mile Northwest of the intersection of Chinkapin Drive, as described in Deed Book 637, Page 816, and Deed Book 637 and 808, dated January 7, 1987. Hackberry Drive, the Village at Lakeside, Sections II -A, III and IV; 1,335.04 feet (0.25 of a mile) from 50.8 feet or 0.01 mile Southwest of the intersection of Somerset Drive to the intersection of Chinkapin Drive, as described in Deed Book 621, Page 768, dated July 16, 1986. Lakeview Court, the Village at Lakeside, Section II -A, 311.79 feet (0.06 of a mile) from the intersection of Hackberry Drive to 311.79 feet or 0.06 mile Southwest of the intersection of Hackberry Drive, as described in Deed Book 621, Page 768, dated July 16, 1986. Crystal Lake Court, the Village at Lakeside, Section III; 438.34 feet (0.08 of a mile) from the intersection of Hackberry Drive to 438.34 feet or .08 mile East of the intersection of Hackberry Drive, as described in Deed Book 627, Page 762, dated September 12, 1986. Sugar Creek Court, the Village at Lakeside, Section III, 239.34 feet (0.08 of a mile) from the intersection of Hackberry Drive to 239.34 feet or 0.08 mile Northeast of the intersection of Hackberry Drive, as described in Deed Book 627, Page 762, dated September 12, 1986. Golden Pond Circle, the Village at Lakeside, Section IV; 706.04 feet (0.13 of a mile) from Somerset Drive intersection to Chinkapin Drive intersection, as described in Deed Book 627, Page 762, dated September 12, 1986. Chinkapin Drive, the Village at Lakeside, Section IV, 991.71 feet (0.19 of a mile) from Somerset Drive intersection to 328.7 or 0.06 mile Northeast of the intersection of Hackberry Drive, as described in Deed Book 637, Page 816, and Deed Book 637 and 808, dated January 7, 1987. AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right -of -way of 50 feet as described in the above deed book and referenced page numbers with necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. Upon motion made by Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Virginia Department of Transportation is hereby requested to add the following road to the Secondary System of Frederick County pursuant to Section -- 33.1 -229 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended: Highview Road, Opequon Estates, Section I & II, Block A, 1,124 feet (.21 of a mile) from the intersection of 1330 Riverdale Circle to 1,124 feet+ or .21 mile Northwest to the cul -de -sac, as described in Deed Book 473, Page 19, dated October 12, 1976. 22 AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right -of way of 60 feet as described in the above Deed Book and referenced page numbers with necessary easements for cuts, fill and drainage. Upon motion made by Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Virginia Department of Transportation is hereby requested to add the following road to the Secondary System of Frederick County pursuant to Section 33.1 -229 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended: Glendobbin Court, Glendobbin Hills, Section III; 1,475 fee (0.28 of a mile) from Route 673 to the dead -end, as described i Deed Book 639, Page 176, dated January 30, 1987. AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right -of way of 50 feet as described in the above Deed Book and referenced page numbers with necessary easements for cuts, fill and drainage. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Virginia Department of Transportation is hereby requested to add the following road to the Secondary System of Frederick County pursuant to Section 33.1 -229 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended: Aspen Drive, Lakeside Estates, Section II; 97.31 feet (or 0.02 of a mile) from 40 feet or 0.01 mile Northeast of the intersection of Route 1082 (Willow Oak Circle) to 137.31 feet 0.03 mile Northeast of the intersection of Route 1082 (Willow Oak Circle), as described in Deed Book 393, Page 651. AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right -of -way of 60 feet as described in the above Deed Book and referenced page numbers with necessary easements for cuts, fill: and drainage. TREASURER ADDRESSED THE BOARD RE: UPDATE ON DELINQUENT TAXES Mr. Orndoff, Jr., Treasurer, appeared before the Board and presented each Board member with up -to -date printouts of delin- quent real estate and personal property taxes. He explained to the Board his plans for collecting these taxes. Mr. Orndoff discussed with the Board publishing this list of delinquent tax- payers in the local paper. It was the consensus of the Board that this be referred to the Finance Committee for their review and recommendation. RMAN STILES GAVE UPDATE TO T HE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS r a+t�ty i 23 Mr. Stiles stated that the City of Winchester is currently operating the Opequon Wastewater Reclamation Plant on Route 7 with the City flow at 3.94m. gallons a day. He further stated that the City allocation is 4.1m. gallons per day. Mr. Orndoff asked about the rates that the County will be paying. Mr. Wellington Jones, Engineer /Director of the Sanitation Authority, explained that the rate charge by the Frederick- Winchester Service Authority is $1.71 per 1,000 gallons. Mr. Crosen stated that he did not feel the County should be paying for something that they are not using. Mr. Jones explained that there had been an increase in connection fees. The fee is currently $2,000 per connection and the cost had been $800. The Board discussed future expansion of the plant and what this would mean to both localities. RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT - WINCHESTER- FREDERICK COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented this request. Upon motion made by Roger L. Crosen, seconded by Robert M. Rhodes and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: WHEREAS, the Winchester - Frederick County Historical Society is seeking grant funds from the Department of Conservation and Historical Resources, Division of Historic Landmarks; and, WHEREAS, the Winchester - Frederick County Historical Society is actively preparing to identify local historical resources and recommend policies to provide protective measures to sites and structures throughout Frederick County; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Commission's update of the Comprehensive Plan will be greatly enhanced by the information and policies developed by the efforts of the Winchester - Frederick County Historical Society, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors supports the efforts of the Winchester - Frederick County Historical Society to apply for historical grant funds to supplement local efforts to identify and preserve Frederick County's historical resourses. RESOLUTION FOR EXTENSION OF ROUTE 277 WATER LINE - APPROVED Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: rol n. MEA WHEREAS, the County of Frederick desires to have a water line extended along Route 277 from the intersection with Route 641 to the Sherando Park. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Sanitation Authority does hereby agree to extend a water line along Route 277 from the intersection with Route 641 to Shera Park, provided: The Board of Supervisors agree to fund the cost of the li with one -half of the amount being a loan with no interest the first ten years, and 5% annual interest for the next twenty years with payment due in full at the end of the term. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that contingent on the approval of the Board of Supervisors, the Authority authorizes the Chair man to initiate the design of the project. WATER SERVICE - STEPHENS CITY QUARRY - APPROVED Mr. Wellington Jones presented this request and stated that the Sanitation Authority had approved the following resolution at their meeting on August 8, 1988. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Robert M. Rhodes and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: WHEREAS, the Frederick County Sanitation Authority has a contract with the City of Winchester for the purchase of up to 2.0 million gallons per day of water, through the year 2000, and WHEREAS, the Authority is currently experiencing growth at a rate which will cause the demand for water to exceed the 2.0 mgd within the next fifteen years, and WHEREAS, the Authority desires to have a reliable source of water after the year 2000. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Authority does hereby set forth its desires and intentions to evaluate sources of water that can provide an adequate supply through the year 2030, and develop a plan to interconnect the water service areas to provide transmission of water throughout the Authority's system., GRAVITY FLOW SEWER AGREEMENT - APPROVED Mr. Jones presented this agreement to the Board. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt this was something that had been needed for some time. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Robert M. Rhodes and passed unanimously, the Gravity Flow Sewer Agreement was approved. A copy of this agreement is on file in the Office of the County Administrator. COMMITTEE REPORTS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT 25 Mr. Watkins presented this report and stated that it was for the Board's information only: The Frederick County Transportation Committee met on August 1, 1988 and acted upon the following: All members of the Committee were present. Airport Road / Bufflick Road (Route 645) The Committee recommended that the Board of Supervisors proceed with the appropriate resolution to abandon that portion of Bufflick Road being replaced. Industrial Access Funding Requests Butler Manufacturing (Woodbine Road, Route 669) The Committee recommended approval of the industrial road and rail improvement request for Butler Manufacturing. Winchester Woodworking Extension (Victory Lane, Route 728 The Committee recommends that the Board of Supervisors pro- ceed with condemnation of the needed right -of -way from Bartlet Tree Company to complete the initial project to Glaize Manufac- turing. The Committee recommends that this extension to Winchester Woodworking be tabled until the condemnation is complete and the right -of -way is available. The Committee recognized that the Butler Manufacturing request was the highest priority for Frederick County's Industrial Road and Rail Fund, with Winchester Woodworking as the second priority, pending right -of -way resolution. The Committee set a public hearing date of December 5, 1988 for secondary road improvement requests. The Committee learned the status of and discussed the following: - Hudson Avenue, rural addition - Current primary and secondary road projects - Senseny Road and Meade Drive improvements - Route 11 South and Route 522 South speed limit reductions - Oversize trucks permitted on Route 11 LAW ENFORCEMENT AND COURTS CO MMITTEE REPORT 26 Mr. Crosen, Chairman of the Law Enforcement and Courts Committee, presented the following report: The Law Enforcement and Courts Committee met on Thursday, August 11, 1988, 4:00 A.M., in the Conference Room. Present were Roger L. Crosen, Chairman of the Committee; Larry P. Cover - stone; Charles R. McIlwee; Captain John E. Liggett of the Sheriff's Department and John R. Riley, Jr., County Administra- tor. Robert M. Rhodes was absent. The Committee discussed the following: Rnard Action: Request to Create Part -Time Clerical Pos ition - Approved The County Administrator advised the Committee that he felt it appropriate to hire part time clerical staff to type incident reports rather than requiring investigators and road deputy positions to type same. It would take law enforcement personnel considerably less time to dictate a report into a dictaphone an( have it transcribed in a uniform manner by said clerk the folloN ing day. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Roger L. Crosen, seconded by Robert M. Rhodes and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Nnn Artinn- Dog License Fee The Committee felt that the fees should remain the same and that a comprehensive enforcement program be initiated to ensure purchase of dog licenses. It was also suggested that another rabies clinic be conducted in the near future. Special Prosecutor's Resignation The Committee was aware that the Special Prosecutor for the Drug Task Force had resigned and inquired as to the future of the program. Mr. Stiles requested that the entire Drug Task Force Program be looked into. INFORMATION SERVICES COMMITTEE RE PORT Mr. Rinker, Chairman of the Information Services Committee, presented the following report and stated that it was for the Board's information only and no action was necessary: 27 The Information Services Committee met on Thursday, August 18, 1988, at 11:00 A.M., in the Conference Room. Present were Dudley H. Rinker, Chairman of the Committee; William 0. Bauserman; Charles B. Tyson, Information Services Director; John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator and the CNS Group. L. A. Putnam and James L. Beaukema were absent. The Committee submits the following: Discussion of Information Systems Study Andrew Grant, President of CNS Group, presented the first phase of a three phase report analyzing our current and future automative needs (see attached). The report as outlined provides the Board with a comprehensive assessment of where we are today with our information systems. We are currently in a mode where we are making some progress but at the same time not utilizing our system to its fullest potential. The next two phases of the report will provide us with those crucial recommendations on how to successfully automate for the future. I urge you to read this report and be familiar with it from a management prospective. PUBLIC WOR COMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Orndoff, Sr., Chairman of the Public Works Committee, presented the following report: The Public Works Committee met on Wednesday, August 17, 1988, at 7:30 A.M., at the Holiday Inn East. Present were Board members Charles W. Orndoff, Sr. and L. A. Putnam; Committee members Col. (Ret.) W. Wayne Miller and Keith A. Tubandt; County Administrator John R. Riley, Jr; Assistant County Administrator Stephen F. Owen; Director of Code Administration Kenneth L. Coffelt; and Woody Brooking with the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development. The following items were discussed: Items Requiring Action Fire Inspections and Protection The Committee discussed Mr. Coffelt's request to create a Fire Inspector II position, promote Doug Kiracofe thereto and to 28 upgrade a Building Inspector I position to a Building Inspector II. The Committee recommends approval (this item was also recc mended by the Personnel Committee). This was acted upon under the Personnel Committee Report. vicious Courts Ordinance - Referred to the Law Enforcement ttee The Committee recommends amending the County Code to deal with vicious dogs that habitually kill other dogs or domestic animals. This can be accomplished by advertising for public hearing an ordinance to amend Section 4 -1 -8 of the County Code (pursuant to Section 3.1- 798.117 of the State Code) by adding the words "dogs or domestic animals" to "livestock and poultry" now mentioned. This was referred to the Law Enforcement and Courts Committee. 250th Anniversary Time Capsule - Approved The 250th Anniversary Committee wants to bury a time cap- sule in the Old Courthouse lawn with a small marker above ground, which will be opened in 50 years. The Committee recom- mends approval. Upon motion made by Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Landfill Dump Truck Appropriation Transfer - Approved The Committee recommends approval of a Landfill appropria- tion transfer from contingency in the amount of $15,000 to pur- chase a used dump truck. The existing dump truck blew an engine several weeks ago and is not worth repairing. Upon motion made by Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Lakeside Trash Compactor Request - Approved The Committee recommends that the Board approve the establishment of a new trash compactor in the Lakeside area as soon as possible. That one and two others approved but not built in 1987 -1988 will require a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $90,000 from fund balance, at approximately $30,000 each. 29 Upon motion made by Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Tradesmen Certification Standards - To Be Discussed Further The Committee recommends Board approval of further study and discussion with area builders of the adoption of the 1987 Virginia Tradesmen Certification Standards. This program would allow the County to test and certify electricians, plumbers and mechanical contractors as competent to work in the County. Mr. Riley explained that this was just being studied at this time. Mr. Stiles stated that he was not in favor of this. This is to be explored and discussed. Items Not Requiring Action Landfill Expansion The Committee directed staff to continue negotiations for the purchase of additional Landfill acreage. Old Landfill Lease Request The Committee reviewed a request to lease part of the old Landfill North of Route 50 East. Before final action is recom- mended, the Committee will want to review proposed uses for the land and also will only consider a short term lease. Animal Shelter Management Contract The Committee reviewed the new contract for animal shelter management services with Sheila Bland. Ms. Bland is the current Clerk at the old kennel. The contract includes expanded hours of operation. Monthly Tonnage Report See Attachment 3. PERSONNEL COMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Putnam, Chairman of the Personnel Committee, presented the following report: The Personnel Committee met on Tuesday, August 16, 1988, with all members present and submits the following report and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for consideration. Request from Director of Code Administration - Approved 30 The Committee reviewed a request from the Director of Code Administration to promote Mr. Doug Kiracofe from Inspector I to Fire Inspector II (Salary Increase $1,838 /Fringes $459 for a total of $2,297) and to add an additional Inspector II position (Salary $19,589 /Fringes $4,897 for a total of $24,486). The total cost of this proposal is $26,783. The Committee recom- mends approval of this request. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Request from Planning and Development Dir ector - Approved The Committee reviewed a request from the Planning and Development Director to add a Zoning Administrator position at Range 23 (Salary $26,242 /Fringes $6,560 for a total of $32,802) and to upgrade the Deputy Director of Planning and Development position to a Range 23 (Salary increase $2,901 /Fringes $725 for a total of $3,626). The total cost of this proposal is $36,428. The Committee recommends approval of this request. The Committee further recommends that the County investi- gate the feasibility of hiring a County Engineer for plans review and public works responsibilities. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Request from Sheriff The Committee reviewed the attached request from the Sheriff for a part -time Clerk Typist position at a cost of $5,125 and recommends approval of same. This was acted upon earlier under the "Law Enforcement and Courts Committee Report ". Request from Division of Court Services - Approved The Committee reviewed a request from the Director of the Division of Court Services to upgrade one of the Co- Coordinator positions in his department to an Assistant Director position a' a Range 23 (Salary increase $7,645 /Fringes $1,911 for a total o: $9,556). The Court Services Director advises that no County funds are needed to implement this upgrade. The Committee reco mends approval of this request. 31 Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Information Services Director Evaluation - To Be Done in Executive Session The Committee reviewed the Information Services Director's evaluation and recommends approval of same. This is to be done in Executive Session. FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Rhodes, Chairman of the Finance Committee, presented the following report: The Finance Committee met on Tuesday, August 9, 1988. All members were present. The following items require Board action: Request from the Sheriff for a General Fund Appropriation Transfer in the Amount of $1,550 - Approve No local money is required. See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Request from the Sheriff for a General Fund Appropriation Transfer from Contingency in the Amount of $5,125 Request from the Sheriff for a general fund appropriation transfer from contingency in the amount of $5,125 for additional secretarial help. See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval. This was acted upon under the "Law Enforcement and Courts Committee Report ". quest from the Sheriff for a General Fund Appropriation ansfer from Contingency in the Amount of $2,868 - N cessary at This Time Request from the Sheriff for a general fund appropriation transfer from contingency in the amount of $2,868 for salary expenses. See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval. This is not necessary at this time. st from the Chief of Corrections for a General Fund oriation in the Amount of $38,000 - Approved 32 Request from the Chief of Corrections for a general fund appropriation for jail repairs in the amount of $38,000. See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. st for a General ngencv in the Am iation Transfer from Request for a general fund appropriation transfer from tingency in the amount of $2,000 from Special Love, Inc. See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley R. 11 Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. on st for a General Fund iation Transfer from Approved Request for a general fund appropriation transfer from contingency in the amount of $2,500 from Tri- County O.I.C., Inca See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval provided the City of Winchester participates. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H.I Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. est for a General Fund Ap ro riation Transfer from inqencv in the Amount of 300 - Approved Request for a general fund appropriation transfer from con- tingency in the amount of $300 from the Chamber of Commerce. This is for the purchase of signs. See attached letter. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Outstanding Encumbrances at June 30, 1988 - Approved Attached is a list of outstanding encumbrances at June 30, 1988. They need to be appropriated for payment at this time. See attached memo from the Finance Director. General Fund $211,926.00 Landfill 10,585.10 Division of Court Services 1 Sanitary District 111,974.15 Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. L Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. 33 Request for the Following General Fund Appropriation Transfer for the Gypsy Moth Program - Approved Because the operation is growing, it has become necessary to segregate all related expenses of the program. The Committee recommends approval. Transfer From: 10- 8202 - 5604 -45 Donation $50,518 10- 8101 - 1001 -31 Salary (Planning) 15,338 10- 8101 - 2001 -00 FICA 1,152 10- 8101 - 2002 -00 VSRS 934 10- 8101- 2005 -00 Hospital 939 10- 8101 - 2006 -00 Group Insurance 104 10- 8101 - 2011 -00 Workers Comp. 350 Total ,335 Transfer To 10- 8102- 3002 -00 Professional Services $36,000 10 -8102- 3004 -02 Repair & Maintenance - Vehicle 500 10- 8102 - 3006 -00 Printing and Binding 1,000 10- 8102 - 3007 -00 Advertising 100 10- 8102 - 4003 -01 Central Stores - Office Supplies 500 10- 8102 - 4003 -02 Central Stores - Gasoline 500 10- 8102 - 5204 -00 Postage & Telephone 2 10- 8102 - 5401 -00 Office Supplies 500 10- 8102 - 5413 -00 Other Operating Supplies 4,318 10- 8102 - 5506 -00 Travel 2,000 10- 8102 - 5801 -00 Dues & Association Memberships 100 10- 8102 - 8001 -00 Lease /Rent of Equipment 3,000 10- 8102 - 1001 -31 Salary 15,338 10- 8102 - 2001 -00 FICA 1,152 10- 8102 - 2002 -00 VSRS 934 10- 8102 - 2005 -00 Medical 939 10- 8102 - 2006 -00 Group Insurance 104 10- 8102 - 2011 -00 Workers Compensation 350 Total 68,335 Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. st from the Sanitary District Manager fo r an Request from the Sanitary District Manager for a Sanitary District appropriation in the amount of $3,500 for rent. See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Request from the Division of Court Services for FY 89 Appropriation in the Amount of $7,500 - Approved See attached memo for detail information. No additional local funds are required. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Request from Parks and Recreation for a General Fund Sunnlemental Appropriation in the Amount of 0,000 - 34 Request from Parks and Recreation for a general fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $70,000 for a maintenance shed. See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval provided excess funds FY 87 -88 be used to fund the project. Also, attached is a year end financial report of the Parks and Recreation Department. This item was tabled. n st from the Sheriff for a General Fund e Amount of 33,51 - Approved iation The Sheriff is requesting a general fund appropriation of $33,513 in order to fund an on -board undercover deputy. See attached memo. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H.I Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. n st from the Sheriff for a General F und Appropriation The Sheriff is requesting a general fund appropriation in the amount of $41,834 in order to establish two positions as outlined on the attached memo. Of this amount only $7,084 woul be local funds. Currently, the cost of locally funded correc- tional officers is shared by the City and County based on the number of prisoner days. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H.I Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. st from Parks and Recreation for General Fund oriation Transfers Due to Program Changes - Approved The Committee recommends approval. See attached schedule. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Request from the Superintendent of Schools - Approved The following correspondence from the Superintendent of Schools is attached. A. Request for appropriation of the unobligated local funds FY 88 -89 in the amount of $469,010. 1. $50,000 - Blue Cross /Blue Shield. 2. $50,000 for Textbook Fund. 3. Undetermined amount to repair roof at James Wood Ridge Campus. 35 This was approved by the Board earlier with the understanding that a firm price would be given by the School Board and that this expenditure would come from Fund Balance. 4. Remaining amount to be applied towards construction of the outdoor athletic facilities at James Wood Ridge Campus. Per Dr. Walker, final figures will be available very soon. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, that $500,000 be appropriated for this project with this remaining in the Board's budget. The Committee recommends approval of items one and two. They also recommend cost figures be submitted before three and four are approved. They feel there are other needs, such as, buses and textbooks that should be addressed before the athletic facilities. B. Financial reports from the school and explanation of excess funds. Upon motion made by Roger L. Crosen, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, to have $300,000 restored to Fund Balance and further, by motion of Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., - 11 seconded by Robert M. Rhodes and passed unanimously, that the School Board is to obtain prices on air conditioning Frederick County Middle School with these excess funds. Request from the Finance Director to Transfer $500,000 from the General Operating Fund to the James Wood Ridge c Facilities Construction Fund - At the end of June 30, 1988, the excess school operating funds reverted to the general fund per the Code of Virginia. This brings the total funds approved for this project FY 88 -89 to one million dollars. The Committee recommends approval. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the above was approved. These funds are to stay in the Board of Supervisor's budget II and not transferred to the School Board's budget. The following are attached for your information: 1. The School Finance Director has prepared a summary of their March quarter transfer of funds. 36 2. The Compensation Board has responded to our request fo medical expense reimbursement. 3. The Board approved and County Administrator approved General Fund transfers have been prepared by the Budget Analyst. 4. In May, 1988, the Board approved an appropriation transfer in the amount of $5,000 for travel of students to national functions for FY 87 -88. See attached memo. For FY 88 -89, the Committee recommends that any requests for this pur- pose be submitted to them and the Board, at which time a deci- sion will be made on a case -by -case basis. 5. The Airport Manager presented an update on their build- ing plans. They know they will have cost overruns in the future, and will be back to ask for more local funding when present funding is expended. They anticipate such cost overrun: to cost the County and City approximately $70,000 each. 6. The City is requesting the County approve an ordinance regarding Law Library fees for filing civil suits. The Committee recommends Frederick County keep the fee at $2. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT Mr. Rinker, Board Liaison on the Parks and Recreation Commission, presented the following report: The Parks and Recreation Commission met on August 23, 1988.1 Members present were: Robert Roper, Carole Ambrogi, Patricia Perry, Carmen Rio, Donald Wilson and Dudley Rinker. The following action was taken on agenda items: Letter from Susan Shelhamer, Indian Hollow Elementary School Ms. Shelhamer submitted a request for impact funds for a softball backstop and permanent soccer goals at the school. The remaining balance of impact fees for the Gainesboro District is $316.57. The equipment requested would cost approximately $3,000. It was the consensus of the Commission to write a letter to Ms. Shelhamer explaining why the Commission could not approve the request based on unavailability of funds. Mr. Doran, Acting Parks and Recreation Director, will into this. Consideration of Surplus Funds - Approved 37 The Commission voted unanimously to approve $20,000 in sur- plus monies for the purchase of two dump trucks for use by the Department. Upon motion made by Dudley H. Rinker, seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the above was approved. Update on Pool Project Scheduled to go back out to bid the first week in September. The State Highway Department has notified the Department that they will build the roadway at a cost of $95,000. Construction on the pools is expected to begin in October. The Highway Department would like confirmation from the County by September 9 regarding the proposed construction date. The Commission unanimously agreed to ask the State Highway Department for an extension date of October 30 to coincide with the bid due date. No action was necessary. Review of Proposed Road at Sherando Park The Commission learned of the proposed road through a news- paper article and had not been consulted previously. The road is proposed to be built on the park property across from Route 277 from Sherando Park, adjacent to the Fredericktowne develop- ment. It was the consensus of the Commission that all proposals affecting Parks and Recreation facilities be presented to the Commission for consideration and action. No action was necessary. SANITARY DISTRICT FEES FOR EXTERNAL PROPERTY OWNERS - APPROVED Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the following policy was approv- ed: Whenever the principal access to any section is provided over the roads of Shawneeland, then the section owner agrees to pay to the Shawneeland Sanitary District or its successors in interest, at such time as the District requires, one hundred sixty dollars ($160.00) per year for the upkeep and maintenance of said roads, while said sections or parcels are unimproved. If improvements are added, as defined by the Sanitary District, then such additional amounts will be paid, as may be uniformly required, in such instance by the Sanitary District, from time to time. BOARD RETIRED INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION 38 Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Roger L. Crosen and passed unanimously, the Board retired into Executive Session in accordance with Virginia Code, 1950, as amended, Section 2.1 -344, Subsection A (1) to discuss personnel. BOARD WITHDREW FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the Board withdrew from Executiv Session. BOARD RECONVENED INTO REGULAR SESSION Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the Board reconvened into Regular Session. EVALUATION OF CHARLES B. TYSON, JR., INFORMATION SERVICES DIRECTOR - APPROVED Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the evaluation of Charles B. Tyson, Jr., Information Services Director, was approved. Upon motion duly made, seconded and passed unanimously, it was ordered that the Board of Supervisors adjourn until 7:15 P.M. this date. CHAIRMAN CALLED MEETING TO ORDER AT 7:15 P.M. Mr. Stiles called the meeting to order and stated that if the Board members had no objections, he would request to move Tab U, "Revised Preliminary Master Development Plan - Frederi towne Estates ", to the first item on the Agenda and a request from Butler Manufacturing for Industrial Rail Access Funds to added at the end of the Agenda. The Board concurred with these requests. REVISED PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FREDERICK - TOWNE ESTATES - TABLED Mr. Stiles stated that there had been a lot of discussion concerning this request. He explained that there is 112 acres in this tract known as the old Nichols property located East of the development known as Fredericktowne and that it had been zoned residential since 1973. He further explained that there are currently two points of access to this property and that this plan has been on file with the County for approximately two 39 and one half years but was tabled due to water and sewer not being available and at this point, neither the Stephens Run or Lakeside plants can be expanded. Mr. Stiles further stated that the Parkins Mill Plant is scheduled to be completed next summer with a capacity of one -half million gallons a day. He stated that as part of the approval of the master development plan, the development will be allowed to proceed, but no final occupancy will be permitted until the Parkins Mill Plant is completed. He explained that there is no proposal at this time to put a road through any part of Sherando Park in order to have access to and from this property. Mr. Stiles stated that neither he, Mr. Golladay, Planning Commission member; nor Dudley Rinker felt that two streets will be sufficient to handle the traffic that will be generated from this subdivision, however, the County will continue to study traffic flow in this area. Mr. Stiles outlined what area the Highway Department would be working on in this immediate area with regard to traffic lights, road widening, etc. Mr. Charles Maddox, of G. W. Clifford and Associates, appeared before the Board on behalf of this request. He ex- plained the lot sizes that were planned and that the houses that will be constructed will be compatible to those that are current- ly in Fredericktowne. He further explained that the Highway Department is looking at Westmoreland Drive as the road to handle the traffic flow for this subdivision and that a request has been made for certain stop signs to be changed. Mr. Raymond Sandy, resident of Opequon District, residing on Route 277, appeared before the Board to present petitions from area residents opposing any road being built in Sherando Park and stated that the residents of this area were apprecia- tive of the consideration shown by the Board in not building a road through Sherando Park. Upon motion made by Dudley H. Rinker, seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, to accept the petition of County d' residents opposing any road being built in Sherando Park for benefit of residents of Fredericktowne Estates Subdivision. Mr. Stiles, by way of a map, pointed out where the property being discussed is located, as well as other property in the immediate area that is proposed for future development. Mrs. Ida Musser, resident of Opequon District, residing on Route 277, appeared before the Board and stated that she did no feel the Board should ever build a school on the County propert North of Route 277 as has been discussed as she felt this shoul always be retained solely for recreation. Mr. Crosen stated that he was disappointed that a back exi was not going to be done from this property and further, if it becomes necessary in the future that a new high school is neede in this area and the County does not build on this property, then in his opinion they will be making a mistake as he felt Clearbrook and Sherando Parks are all the parks that the County needs. Mr. Putnam explained that in his opinion, another exit is needed from this property other than Westmoreland Drive, but he did not feel it should for any reason go through the park. 11 Mr. Riley noted that perhaps some of the adjoining propert owners would be willing to donate some of their land to have this exit road built. Upon motion made by Dudley H. Rinker, seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, for this request to go back to the Planning Commission for further study of open space and other ways of exit from this property. SUBDIVISION REQUEST - E.T.S. PROPERTIES - APPROVED Mr. Watkins presented this request and stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions. Mr. Dave Holliday appeared before the Board on behalf of his request. Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Robert M. Rhodes and passed unanimously, the subdivision request of E.T.S. Properties was approved. PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN - HAMPTON CHASE - TABLED 41 Mr. Watkins presented this request and noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval. Mr. Stiles noted that there was no access to the property. Mr. Orndoff asked how many entrances and exits the plan called for. Mr. Chuck Maddox, of G. W. Clifford and Associates, appeared before the Board and stated that one entrance and one 11 exit was called for on the plan. Mr. Orndoff asked whether certain streets could be connected in order to handle the traffic. Mr. Stiles explained that you should not mix commercial and residential traffic. Mr. Crosen asked why the City would object to using VanFossen street. Mr. Stiles replied that it is too narrow. Mr. Delmar Bayliss, Realtor, appeared before the Board and stated that he is involved with the sale of this property and the City had assured him that a letter would be delivered in time for tonight's meeting stating that the City had no 11 objection to the exit by using Apple Street and he did not know why the letter was not delivered. This request was tabled until more information on access is available. SED PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN - WESTSIDE ION - APPROVED Mr. Watkins presented this request and stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval. Mr. Chuck Maddox was present on behalf of this request. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the revised preliminary master development plan of Westside Station was approved. STAR FORT ESTATES - TABLED — 11 Mr. Watkins presented this request and stated that the Plan- ning Commission recommended approval with the understanding that an on site detention must be incorporated in the final plan and the drainage problem resolved. 4�t Mr. Stiles asked if adjoining property owners had been noti fied of this meeting. Mr. Watkins replied no. Mr. Bruce Edens, Surveyor, appeared before the Board on behalf of this request. He further stated that there would be an area that would serve as a holding pond rather than have the water going into the neighbors backyards. Mr. Stiles explained that he wanted the Highway Departmentll to look at this again and have all adjoining property owners notified. Mr. Orndoff stated that he had visited the site and he fel the water would flow back into the City if Braddock Street is upgraded. Mr. Ron Brown, Attorney, appeared before the Board on be- half of Messrs. Harris and Saunders and stated that this reque was presented to the Planning Commission in February and again in May and he felt his clients had done all that was required them to have this request approved. Mr. Dennis Hinkle, resident of Locust Avenue, appeared be- fore the Board to oppose this request and stated that drainage and access are the problems with this request. Mr. Jerry Newlin, resident of Wyatt Street, appeared beforE the Board to oppose this request as drainage in this area is b and he felt a project such as this would only make it worse and the traffic flow is also a problem. Upon motion made by Charles W. Orndoff, seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, to table this until the area in question is reviewed by the Highway Department. BOARD APPROVED SALE OF CERTAIN LOTS IN THE SHAWNEELAND SANITARY DISTRICT Mr. Wayne Miller, Manager of the Shawneeland Sanitary District, appeared before the Board to request Board approval for the sale of certain lots in Shawneeland that have been donated to the Sanitary District. Ms. Dianne Clevenger, owner of a lot in Shawneeland, appear ed before the Board and stated that she had purchased a lot and 43 was told that it did perk and now she is being told that it does not. Mr. Stiles stated that this would be checked into. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the sale of thirty -nine (39) lots, as noted, which have been donated to the Sanitary District, was approved. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 6, BUILDINGS; ARTICLE I, IN GENERAL; TO RESCIND SECTION 1-7p APPLICATION FEES-- HEALTH DEPARTMENT - APPROVED Upon motion made by L. A. Putnam, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the ordinance amendment to rescind Section 1 -7, Application Fees, of the Frederick County Code, Chapter 6, Buildings; Article I, was approved. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER Upon motion made by Roger L. Crosen, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the following ordinance amendment was approved: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 10, FIRE PROTECTION; ARTICLE I, BURNING OF LEAVES; SECTION 1 -1 -1 TO READ AS FOLLOWS: During the period from May 16th to the last day of February each year, such burning is done between the hours 7:00 A.M. and 12:00 Midnight. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 21, ZONING; TO AMEND ARTICLE VI; MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS - APPROVED Mr. Watkins presented this request. Mr. Stiles noted that Section 6 -5 -2.8 was incorrect and should be changed. Upon motion made by Robert M. Rhodes, seconded by Dudley H. Rinker and passed unanimously, the following ordinance amendment was approved with the above mentioned Section corrected: 6 -1 STATEMENT OF INTENT The purpose of the master development plan (MDP) is to promote orderly and planned development of property within Frederick County. It is the purpose of the master development plan to insure that such development occurs in a manner that suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious with adjoining property, and is in the best interest of the general public. The master development plan shall be used to illustrate the characteristics of the property proposed for development and of 44 surrounding properties. The master development pl shall serve as a preliminary subdivision plan. 6 -2 WHEN A MASTER PLAN IS REQUIRED 6 -2 -1 A preliminary master development plan and a final master development plan shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Development for Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approval prior to any subdivision or development of property in a of the following zoning districts: RP, Residential Performance MH -1, Mobile Home District B -1, Business Neighborhood District B -2, Business General District B -3, Industrial Transition District B -4, Business, Shopping Center District M -1 Light Industrial District M -2 Industrial General District. The master development plan shall at least include all contiguous land under single or common ownershi in the above zoning districts. 6 -2 -2 A preliminary MDP may be submitted with an application for a rezoning but shall not be considered binding until approval of a final MDP. 6 -3 WAIVER OF MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUIREMENTS 6 -3 -1 RP AND MH -1 DISTRICTS - The Director of Planning anf Development may waive the requirement of a MDP in the Residential Performance District or the Mobile Home District Community if the proposed property fo7 subdivision or development: 6 -3 -1.1 Contains ten or less traditional detached single family dwelling units, and; 6 -3 -1.2 Is not an integral portion of a property proposed of planned for future development or subdivision, and; 6 -3 -1.3 Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding properties and land uses, and; 6 -3 -1.4 That such a development does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of the Residential Performance Zoning District, the Mobile Home Community District, and the intent of this article. 6 -3 -2 M -1 and M -2 DISTRICTS - The Director of Planning anc Development may waive the requirement of a MDP in the M -1 (Industrial Limited) Zoning District or the M -2 (Industrial General) Zoning District if the proposed subdivision or development: 6 -3 -2.1 Includes no new streets, roads, or right -of -ways, does not further extend any existing or dedicated street, road, or right -of -ways, and does not significantly change the layout of any existing or dedicated street, road, or right -of -ways, and; 6 -3 -2.2 Does not propose any storm water management system designed to serve more than one lot and does not necessitate significant changes to existing storm water management systems designed to serve more than one lot, and; 45 6 -3 -2.3 Is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for future development or subdivision, and; 6 -3 -2.4 Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding properties and land uses, and; 6 -3 -2.5 That such development does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of this chapter. 6 -3 -3 B -1 B -2, B -3 AND B -4 DISTRICTS - The Director of Planning and Development may waive the requirement of a master development plan in the B -1 (Business Neighborhood), B -2 (Business General), B -3 (Industrial Transition), or B -4 (Business Shopping Center) if the proposed subdivision or development: 6 -3 -3.1 Contains less than five acres in the B -1 District and less than ten (10) acres in the B -2. B -3 or B -4 Districts, and; 6 -3 -3.2 Includes no new streets, roads or right -of -ways, does not further extend any existing or dedicated street, and does not significantly change the layout of any existing or dedicated street, and; 6 -3 -3.3 Does not propose any storm water management system designed to serve more than one lot and does not necessitate significant changes to existing storm water management systems designed to serve more than one lot, and; 6 -3 -3.4 Is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for future development or subdivision, and; 6 -3 -3.5 Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonius with surrounding properties and land uses, and; 6 -3 -3.6 That such development does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of this chapter. 6 -4 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCEDURES 6 -4 -1 REVIEW CONFERENCE - Prior to submission of a preliminary master development plan for approval, the applicant shall request a review conference with the County staff. The purpose of the review conference is to review and discuss the nature of the proposal in relation to the requirements of the County Code and to discuss the preparation of a master development plan. 6 -4 -2 PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE - Applicants who are proposing a development with a mixture of housing types or uses or with housing types or uses that are different from those on adjoining properties shall request a pre - application conference with the Planning Commission. Applicants for other types of development proposals may request such a conference. 6 -4 -2.1 The purpose of the pre- application conference shall be to discuss the proposal in relation to the requirements of the County Code and to obtain advice on the preparation of the master development plan. 6 -4 -2.2 At the pre - application conference, the applicant shall provide a land use plan describing the following: 6 -4 -2.2.1 The general location of the site. 46 6 -4 -2.2.2 The general location of proposed roads. 6 -4 -2.2.3 The general location of proposed uses, environmenta areas, housing types or open space. 6 -4 -2.2.4 The uses on adjoining properties. 6 -4 -2.3 The Planning Commission may, at its sole discretion make or refuse to make recommendations as the resul of the pre - application conference. Any recommendations made by the Planning Commission at or in response to the pre - application conference shall not be binding upon the applicant or upon the Planning Commission in its review of the preliminar master development plan. 6 -4 -3 PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN - Applicants shall submit forty -two (42) copies of the preliminary MDP to the Department of Planning and Development, together with completed application materials required by the Department of Planning and Development. Final approval of the preliminary master development plan shall be given by the Board of Supervisors. 6 -4 -3.1 Applicants shall provide comments on the proposed development from various agencies or developments as required by the Department of Planning and Development. The submission shall be complete and the application shall commence when the plans, application materials, and agency comments have been received by the Director of Planning and Development, when a review conference has been held, when a preapplication conference has been held, if required, and when the preliminary master development plan has been reviewed by the Design Review Committee, if required. 6 -4 -3.2 The Director of Planning and Development may require the applicant to present the preliminary master development plan to a design review committee for review. The Committee shall make recommendations to the Planning Commission concerning whether the plan meets the requirements of the Frederick County Code. 6 -4 -3.3 When the submission is complete, the Director of Planning and Development shall submit the plans, application materials and comments to the Planning Commission for their consideration. 6 -4 -3.3.1 The Planning Commission shall act on the preliminary master development plan within sixty (60) days of the date of submission. The Planning Commission shall either approve the plan, approve it with required changes, or deny the plan. If the Planning Commission fails to act withn sixty (60) days, the plan shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors without recommendation. 6 -4 -3.3.2 The Planning Commission shall notify the Board of Supervisors of its action on the proposed preliminary master development plan and of any required changes or reasons for denial. If the preliminary master development plan is denied by the Planning Commission, the applicant may choose to withdraw the application and resubmit it with changes as a new plan, rather than proceeding to the Board of Supervisors. 6 -4 -3.4 Following the action of the Planning Commission, copies of the plan, application materials, and agency comments shall be submitted to the Board of 47 Supervisors for their consideration. The Board shall either approve the preliminary master development plan, approve it with required changes, or deny the plan. 6 -4 -3.5 Preliminary master development plans submitted to the Board of Supervisors for review shall not be substantially changed from plans reviewed by the Planning Commission. Changes may be made that were required by the Planning Commission. Other substantial changes to the plan shall require that the Planning Commission review the plan as a new preliminary master development plan. 6 -4 -4 FINAL MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN - Applicants shall submit fourteen (14) copies of the final master development plan to the Department of Planning and Development. Final approval of the final master development plan shall be given by the Director of Planning and Development. 6 -4 -4.4.1 The Director shall approve the final master development plan if a preliminary master development plan was approved by the Board of Supervisors and if all required changes have been made and all requirements of the County Code have been met, within sixty (60) days of its submission. Failure of the Director to act in sixty (60) days shall be deemed approval. 6 -4 -4.4.2 Site plans or final subdivision plats may be submitted concurrently with final master development plans for review according to the procedures set forth in Chapter 21, Article XIX, and Chapter 18 of the County Code. Any such plans may be considered concurrently by the Planning Commission and may be referred to the Board of Supervisors for approval. 6 -4 -5 CHANGES TO APPROVED PLANS - Changes to an approved master development plan shall occur only after approval by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors using the procedures required for the approval of a new plan. The Director of Planning and Development may approve minor changes without following the full procedures, if such approval does not violate the intent of this chapter and section. Such minor changes shall not include changes in the density or intensity of development, changes to entrance or street layout, changes to stormwater layout or other major design changes. 6 -5 PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUIREMENTS 6 -5 -1 A preliminary MDP shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. The preliminary MDP is to serve as a conceptual review plan and is not intended to show the location of individual lot lines or structures. 6 -5 -2 SPECIFICATIONS OF A PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN All required items shall be shown clearly on the plan. All preliminary MDPs shall be prepared in accordance with the following specifications: 6 -5 -2.1 The scale shall be 1" = 100' or larger (the ratio of feet to inches shall be no more than 100' to 1 or at a scale acceptable to the Director. The scale 48 6 -5 -3 CONTENTS OF A PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN I THE RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE DISTRICT 6 -5 -3.1 The preliminary MDP shall contain a conceptual plan showing the location and functional relationship between all proposed housing types and land uses, including the following information: 6 -5 -3.1.1 A land use plan showing the location, arrangement and approximate boundaries of all proposed land uses. 6 -5 -3.1.2 shall be sufficient so that all features are discernable. 6 -5 -2.2 No sheet shall exceed 42" in size unless approved by the Director of Planning and Development. If the 6 -5 -3.1.3 MDP is prepared on more than one sheet, match lines shall clearly indicate where the sheets join. 6 -5 -2.3 All MDPS shall include a north arrow, a scale, and a 6 -5 -3.1.4 legend describing all symbols. 6 -5 -2.4 A boundary survey of the entire property related to 6 -5 -3.1.5 true meridian and certified by a certified Virginia surveyor, architect or engineer, with all dimension: in feet and decimals of feet, is required for all MDPs. 6 -5 -2.5 The total area of the tract or property shall be specified on the MDP. 6 -5 -2.6 The topography shall be shown at contour intervals acceptable to the Director. 6 -5 -2.7 The title of the proposed project; the date, month, year the plan was prepared or revised; the name of the applicant(s), owner(s), and contract owner(s); and the names of the individual or firms preparing the plan shall be clearly specified. 6 -5 -2.8 A schedule of phases, with the approximate location of phase boundaries and the order in which the phases are to be developed, shall be provided. 6 -5 -2.9 The use of all adjoining properties shall be clearl designated on the MDP. 6 -5 -2.10 An inset map shall be provided showing the location of the project along with the location of all existing or approved public roads, streets, or right -of -ways within 2000 feet of the boundaries of the project. 6 -5 -3 CONTENTS OF A PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN I THE RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE DISTRICT 6 -5 -3.1 The preliminary MDP shall contain a conceptual plan showing the location and functional relationship between all proposed housing types and land uses, including the following information: 6 -5 -3.1.1 A land use plan showing the location, arrangement and approximate boundaries of all proposed land uses. 6 -5 -3.1.2 The approximate acreage in common open space, in each use and housing type, and in roads, streets, of right -of -ways for each phase and the total development. 6 -5 -3.1.3 The location and approximate boundaries of proposed housing types conceptually shown in accord with residential performance dimensional requirements. 6 -5 -3.1.4 The proposed number of dwelling units of each type in each phase and in the total development. 6 -5 -3.1.5 The location and approximate boundaries of existing environmental features including flood plains, lake; and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater retention areas, steep slopes and woodlands. 49 6 -5 -3.1.6 The location of environmental protection land to be included in common open space. 6 -5 -3.1.7 The approximate acreage of each type of environmental protection land, the amount and percentage of each type that is to be disturbed, and the amount and percentage of each type to be placed in common open space. 6 -5 -3.1.8 The amount, approximate boundaries and location of common open space, with the percentage of the total acreage of the site to be placed in common open space. 6 -5 -4.1.2 The existing environmental features including floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater detention areas, steep slopes and woodlands as defined. 6 -5 -4.1.3 The proposed location and arrangement of all streets and utility systems. 6 -5 -4.1.4 The proposed location of entrances to the development from existing public streets. 6 -5 -3.1.9 The location and general configuration of recreation facilities, with a general statement of the types of recreational facilities to be provided. 6 -5- 3.1.10 The location and extent of proposed buffers with statements, profiles, cross - sections, or examples clearly specifying the screening to be provided. 6 -5- 3.1.11 The proposed location, arrangements, and right of way widths of roads and streets and the location of proposed access to surrounding properties. 6 -5- 3.1.12 The location and arrangement of street entrances, driveways and parking areas. 6 -5- 3.1.13 The approximate location of sewer and water mains with statements concerning the connection with and availability of existing facilities. 6 -5- 3.1.14 A conceptual plan for stormwater management with the location of stormwater facilites designed to serve more than one lot. 6 -5- 3.1.15 Calculations describing all proposed bonus factors _ with the location of and specifications for bonus improvements, when proposed. 6 -5- 3.1.16 The location and treatment proposed for all historical structures and sites as identifed on the Virginia Historical Landmarks Commission Survey for Frederick County. 6 -5 -4 CONTENTS OF A PRELIMINARY MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN THE M -1 (INDUSTRIAL LIMITED) DISTRICT, THE M -2 (INDUSTRIAL GENERAL) DISTRICT, THE B -1 (BUSINESS NEIGHBORHOOD) DISTRICT, THE B -2 (BUSINESS GENERAL) DISTRICT, THE B -3 (INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION) DISTRICT, OR THE B -4 (BUSINESS SHOPPING CENTER) DISTRICT 6 -5 -4.1 The preliminary MDP shall contain a conceptual plan showing the location and functional relationship between streets and land uses, including the following: 6 -5 -4.1.1 A conceptual plan showing the location and arrangement of proposed uses. 6 -5 -4.1.2 The existing environmental features including floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater detention areas, steep slopes and woodlands as defined. 6 -5 -4.1.3 The proposed location and arrangement of all streets and utility systems. 6 -5 -4.1.4 The proposed location of entrances to the development from existing public streets. 50 6 -5 -4.1.5 A conceptual plan for stormwater management and description and the location of all stormwater facilites designed to serve more than one parcel. 6 -5 -4.1.6 The location and treatment proposed for all historical structures and sites as identified on the Virginia Historical Landmarks Commission Survey for Frederick County. 6 -5 -4.1.7 All proposed buffering and screening required by this chapter. 6 -5 -4.1.8 The use of adjoining parcels and the location of II adjoining streets and utilites. _- 6 -6 SPECIFICATIONS OF A FINAL MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN 6 -6 -1 The final master development plan shall conform wit the requirements in Sections 6 -4 and 6 -5. 6 -6 -2 Descriptions of changes made since approval of the preliminary master development plan or as required with approval of the preliminary master development plan. 6 -6 -3 An approval block and signature lines for the Director of Planning and Development. 6 -7 MASTER DEVE LOPMENT PLAN STANDARDS AND IMPROVEMENTS 6 -7 -1 The final MDP shall contain individual sheets drawn to the specifications of Article XIX, Site Plans, and Article V, Residential Performance Zoning District, Bonus Regulations for each bonus improvement or bonus facility proposed for a densit, bonus on the final MDP. MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS BUTLER MANUFACTURING ACCESS - APPROVED Review Conference I with Staff I Pre Application I Conference with I Planning Commission I Submission of Preliminary MDP, Application and Comments to Staff I Design Committee I Reviews Preliminary MDP I Submission to PC and PC Approval, Approval I with Changes or Denial Submission to Board of Super visors I Approval with Denial Approval Changes I Final MDP Approved I by S taff I Final MDP I Approved by Staf I Final Subdivision I or Site Plan to PC I Final Subdivision I or Site Plan to I I PC I BUTLER MANUFACTURING ACCESS - APPROVED 51 Mr. Watkins presented this request. Upon motion made by Charles W. Orndoff, Sr., seconded by L. A. Putnam and passed unanimously, the following resolution was approved: BE IT RESOLVED, The Virginia Department of Highways is hereby requested to provide Rail Access Funding to extend a rail spur to the Butler Manufacturing site pursuant to Section 33.1- 221.1:1 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board does guaran- tee the right -of -way for the proposed rail extension. UPON MOTION DULY MADE, SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, IT WAS ORDERED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ADJOURN. Chaff man, Board df Supervisors Clerk, Board of Supe isors