Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 25 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes.18 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on Wednesday, January 25, 2012, at 7:15 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, PRESENT Chairman Richard C. Shickle; Christopher E. Collins; Charles S. DeHaven, Jr.; Bill M. Ewing; Gene E. Fisher; Gary A. Lofton; and Ross P. Spicer. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Shickle called the meeting to order. INVOCATION Reverend Ross Halbersma, New Hope Alliance Church, delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice - Chairman Ewing led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA — APPROVED AS AMENDED County Administrator John R. Riley, Jr. added a request to dispose of surplus property as item number 3 under county officials. Upon a motion by Supervisor DeHaven, seconded by Vice - Chairman Ewing, the Board approved the agenda as amended. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye CITIZEN COMMENTS Jay L. Marts, Gainesboro District, stated he was pleased to see the old Gainesboro School had been offered for sale. He noted this was not a good time to increase taxes on people. He went on to say the state was considering raising the food and gas taxes. He suggested, in lieu of a tax increase, that the implementation of some initiatives be delayed. He asked where the county was with fee for service. He suggested implementing merit increases instead of across the board raises for employees. He suggested the board sell additional surplus property as a means of generating revenue. He concluded by saying if we wanted to see spending cuts then we Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25112 ITI need to change public education through increased class sizes and online curriculum for secondary schools. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS There were no Board of Supervisors' comments. MINUTES - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the minutes from the January 11, 2012 regular meeting by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E: Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye COUNTY OFFICIALS RESOLUTION ( 4037 -12) IN HONOR OF RHODA W. KRIZ AS A MEMBER OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY EXTENSION LEADERSHIP COUNCIL - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Spicer, the Board approved a resolution in honor of Rhoda W. Kriz as a member of the Frederick County Extension Leadership Council. WHEREAS, Rhoda W. Kriz served as a member of the Extension Leadership Council of the County of Frederick, Virginia, from January 26, 2000 through January 26, 2012; and WHEREAS, she ably served as an active member of the Extension Leadership Council during her 12 years; and WHEREAS, Rhoda Kriz's love of 4 -H and Extension began long before her tenure on the Extension Leadership Council; and WHEREAS, Rhoda Kriz was an advocate for Extension as demonstrated by her involvement in numerous organizations; and WHEREAS, she served as State Chairman of Citizenship and Community Outreach Education Committee, charter member of the Virginia State Advisory Council; charter member and president of the Virginia 4 -11 Foundation; member of State Extension Leadership Council; Member of the Southern Lay Group; member of task force to develop a volunteer orientation program for Extension volunteers; and member of task force to develop Iesson plans on using volunteer experience for career and school advancement; and WHEREAS, Rhoda Kriz was the recipient of numerous awards, to include: Friend of Extension; National 4 -H Alumni Award; and Virginia Volunteerism Award; and WHEREAS, her dedication and performance of her duties on behalf of Extension and Frederick County brought honor to herself and the Extension Leadership Council of Frederick County. Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 s ., NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors does hereby express its sincere appreciation to Rhoda W. Kriz for her unselfish and outstanding service to the citizens of Frederick County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a true copy of this resolution be presented to Rhoda W. Kriz for a job well done. ADOPTED this 25` day of January, 2012. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S, DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS CHAIRMAN'S ANNUAL COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS — CITIZEN MEMBERS Chairman Shickle advised the following additional citizen members had agreed to serve for 2012: - Ronald E. Wilkins, Public Safety Committee - Gannon Nordberg, Information Technology Committee - Brian Madagan, Information Technology Committee. PROPOSED DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY AT 317 S. CAMERON STREET — PUBLIC HEARING AUTHORIZED Administrator Riley advised that the County received a purchase contract for the vacant Court Services building (aka the old jail) located at 317 S. Cameron Street. This property is jointly owned by the City of Winchester and Frederick County. The proposed purchase contract has a purchase price of $395,000, which would be split equally between the city and the county. He went on to say staff was seeking authorization to schedule a public hearing at the Board's February 22, 2012 meeting on the disposition of the property. Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board authorized the public hearing on the disposition of 317 S. Cameron Street. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 COMMITTEE REPORTS FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT - APPROVED The Finance Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 8:00 a.m. All members were present. An FY 2013 Budget work session immediately followed. Finance Committee 1. The Sheriff requests a General Fund Fund 10 sLipplemental a ppropriation in the amount of $7,635.14 This amount represents reimbursements for prisoner extraditions. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 1. The committee recommends approval. — Approved. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman Ewing, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye 2. The School Finance Director requests a School Debt Service Fund (Fund 71) sLipplemental appropriation in the amount of $137,181 This amount represents funds required for an interest payment on the Qualified School Construction Bond (QSCB) issue. No additional local funds are required. See attached memo, p. 2. The committee recommends approval. — Approved. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman Ewing, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye 3. The School Finance Director requests a School Construction Fund (Fund 60) supplemental appropriation in the amount of $600,000 for road improvements to the Amherst Street campus. Funding is requested from proffer funds designated to the schools. See attached memo, p. 2 -5. The committee recommends approval. — Approved. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman Ewing, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01125/12 4. The Finance Director provides a draft Finance /Audit Committee Charter for your review and approval. See attached, p. 6 -8. The committee recommends approval. — Approved. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman Ewing, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the Finance /Audit Committee Charter by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye 5. The Public Works Director provides a Shawneeland 10 -year budget projection for discussion. See attached, p. 9. No action required. Budget Work Session 1. The Finance Director provides information for FY 2013 budget discussion. See attached, p. 10 -20. ***Information Only* * 21 -24. 1. The Finance Director provides a Fund 10 Transfer report for FY12. See attached, p. 2. The Finance Director provides an FY12 Unreserved Fund Balance report. See attached, p. 25. 3. The Finance Director provides financial statements for the period ending December 31, 2011. See attached memo, p, 26 -38. PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HE ARING - TASKER ROAD COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN AMENDMENT (CPPA)— AN 11.35 ACRE CHANGE IN LAND USE CLASSIFICATION FROM INSTITUTIONAL TO RESIDENTIAL. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF TASKER ROAD AND NORTH OF RUTHERFORD LANE APPROXIMATELY 0.7 MILES SOUTH OF I -81 EXIT 310 INTERCHANGE IN THE SHAWNEE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. — RESOLUTION #038 -12 - APPROVED Deputy Director of Planning Michael T. Ruddy appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised he was the only Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment received this year. It was a request to change the land use designation for an 11.35 acre parcel located on Tasker Road. The applicant was requesting a change in designation from institutional to residential. He went on to say the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee and the Planning Commission recommended approval. He concluded by saying staff was seeking Board approval of this proposed amendment. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01125/12 There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Spicer, the Board approved the amendment to the Frederick County 2030 Comprehensive Policy Plan, the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. WHEREAS, an amendment to The Frederick County 2030 Comprehensive Policy Plan to amend the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan for an 11.35 acre change in Land Use Classification from Institutional to Residential, was considered. The property is located on the east side of Tasker Road and north of Rutherford Lane, approximately 0.7 miles south of 1 -81 exit 310 interchange, identified as Parcel 86 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. This amendment was reviewed by the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS), and the Planning Commission during their regularly scheduled meetings; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs. Subcommittee (CPPS) recommended approval of an amendment on November 14, 2011; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this Comprehensive Policy Plan amendment on January 4, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this Comprehensive Policy Plan amendment on January 25, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the adoption of this Comprehensive Policy Plan amendment to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in good planning practice. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the Frederick County 2030 Comprehensive Policy Plan be amended for an 11.35 acre change in Land Use Classification from Institutional to Residential. This ordinance shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Passed this 25 day of January, 2012 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye PUBLIC HEARING - 2012 - 2013 CA PITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP)._ THE CIP IS A PRIORITIZED LIST OF CAPITAL PROJECTS REQUESTED BY VARIOUS COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES. THE PLAN IS CREATED AS AN INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENT TO ASSIST IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COUNTY'S ANNUAL BUDGET. IF ADOPTED, THE CIP IS A COMPONENT OF THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. -- RESOLUTION 9039 -12) - APPROVED Deputy Director of Planning Michael T. Ruddy appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this was the public hearing on the 2012 -2013 Capital Improvement Plan. The proposed plan conforms to the Comprehensive Plan and has been endorsed by the Planning Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01125/12 E Commission. He noted this year's plan contains 92 projects, which is an increase over last year. The proposed plan contains four maps that identify the general location of the projects listed. Chairman Shickle asked if there had been any changes to the plan since the Board voted I to send it to public hearing. Deputy Director Ruddy responded that some of the location numbers had been removed from the Parks & Recreation map, but there was no substantial change. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no citizen comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Spicer, seconded by Vice - Chairman Ewing, the Board approved the 2012 -2013 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed 2012 -2013 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for Frederick County on January 4, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Commission recommended approval of this plan at their regular meeting on January 4, 2012 and determined that the projects contained in the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) conform to the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this plan during their regular meeting on January 25, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors supports the priorities for capital expenditures contained in the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and has determined that the projects contained in the Capital Improvements PIan (CIP) conform to the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as follows: The Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the 2012 -2013 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for Frederick County, Virginia as an element of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Passed this 25 day of January, 2012 by the following recorded vote. Richard C, Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — CHAPTER 165, ZONING ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS PARKING BUFFERS AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES PART 204 ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES SECTION 165 - 204.19 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES COMMERCIAL — REVISIONS TO THE COMMERCIAL TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Minute Book Nu m ber 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 193 OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE. — SOLUTION 4040 -12) - APPROVED Director of Planning and Development Eric Lawrence appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this was a proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance regarding telecommunications facilities. The proposed amendment contained three changes: - Changes to introductory language to include recognition of a 15.2- 2232(A) Code of Virginia review in the ordinance. - Addition of language that states there must be a need for a facility. - Clarifying that co- location efforts should extend to buildings and structures generally and not just existing telecommunication towers. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments and forwarded a recommendation of approval. Director Lawrence then reviewed the proposed application fee schedule. He stated the amount of staff time devoted to reviewing and preparing these applications was similar to that of other communities and staff would recommend an application fee of $7,000 per year. He concluded by saying staff was seeking two actions from the Board: adoption of the ordinance and approval of the fee schedule. Supervisor Spicer questioned the size of the signage permitted in section B.3. because the 1.5 square feet seemed small. Director Lawrence responded that was the requirement for advertising signage. He noted that street addressing signage was governed by a different requirement. Supervisor Lofton asked if the property criteria applied to all properties or only adjoining properties. Director Lawrence responded the criteria were meant to cover the general area or location of the proposed tower. Supervisor Lofton asked if the criteria applied to the properties in the 2000' boundary for notification. Director Lawrence responded the criteria were mainly there for the adjoining properties. Supervisor Fisher asked if the Historic Resources Advisory Board reviewed section B.2. regarding monopole -type construction. Director Lawrence responded that section of the ordinance was adopted in 1996, but the Historic Resources Advisory Board had not commented on this language recently. Supervisor Fisher asked if that section should be sent back to the HRAB for review. Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 194 Supervisor Lofton stated the type of construction should be in the context of where the proposed tower would be located and the surrounding properties. He went on to say a monopole should not be the end all. Director Lawrence responded that staff could take section B.2, back to the Development Review and Regulations Committee and the HRAB for review and any necessary changes. Supervisor Spicer suggested striking the last part of that section might give the Board and applicant more flexibility. Chairman Shickle advised that he noticed Albemarle County looked at the number of notifications being mailed and included that in their fee calculation. He asked if that was something staff had looked at as well. Director Lawrence responded that staff had reviewed the State Code to see if the county could charge the applicant based upon the number of individual mailings, but in consultation with the county attorney, they did not believe we could go that way. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Jay Marts, Gainesboro District, spoke in opposition to the proposed amendments because he felt the 2,000 feet boundary seemed small to him. In addition, he opposed the proposal based upon the questions that had been raised during the board's discussion. There being no further public comments, Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Chairman Shickle asked the county attorney to confirm that a variable fee could not be charged. County Attorney Roderick Williams responded that staff was correct. Supervisor Lofton responded to Mr. Marts' comments by stating he had asked for a 3,000 foot boundary, but we ended up at 2,000 feet. He went on to say he was sensitive to Mr. Marts' comment, but we have to draw a line someplace. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved the ordinance amending Frederick County Code Chapter 165 Zoning, Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, 165- 204.19 Telecommunications Facilities with staff to review the language in section B,2. WHEREAS, an ordinance to amend Chapter 165, Zoning to revise the commercial telecommunication facility requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, was considered; and Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01125/12 IMAM WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance on January 4, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance on January 25,2012 WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that the adoption of this ordinance to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in good zoning practice; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 Zoning, Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, 165- 204.19 Telecommunications Facilities is amended to revise the commercial telecommunication facility requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. This amendment shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, And Regulations For Specific Uses § 165- 204.19 Telecommunications facilities, commercial. T- int o f thi f i to ensiff that g Ai rt of No commercial telecommunication seetion €aeilities facility shall be sited constructed or operated except pursuant to a oec throw u' e conditional use permit issued through the public - heafig process defined in Part I03 Article I of this chapter. Commercial telecommunication facilities that locate on existing structures and towers shall be exempt from the conditional use permit requirement. The issuance of a conditional use permit for the siting construction, and operation of a commercial telecommunication faeffi ies f ili is permitted within the zoning districts specified in this chapter, provided that ursuant to Section 15.2 -2232 A o the Code o Vir inia. 1950 as amended) the general location or approximate location, character, and extent of such f acilities is substantial) in accord with the adopted comprehensive plan or part thereof and that adjoining properties, surrounds residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas and properties of significant historic value are not negatively impacted. A. Information required as part of the conditional use permit application and that the Plannin Commission and the Board of Supervisors m_ ay consider in acting on the application shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1 Information reizardinz the need for the Lacility, including but not necessarily limited to usa a statistics operational data and maps and re orts showinz current and anticipated radio frequency propagation. (1) JQA map depicting the search area used in siting each the proposed commercial communications facility. (2) (3)ldentification of all service providers and commercial telecommunication facility infrastructure within a proposed search area. The applicant shall provide confirmation that air attempts to collocate on are existing structures or towers teleee~~intmie ati� f ew have been made and if such attempts were unsuccessful, the reasons so (3) (4) Documentation issued by the Federal Communications Commission indicating that the proposed commercial telecommunication facility is in compliance with the Federal Communication Commission's established ANSUIEEE standards for electromagnetic field levels and radio frequency radiation. (4) LQAn affidavit signed by the landowner and by the owner of the facility stating that he/she is they are aware that heAhe either or both of them may be held responsible for the removal of the commercial telecommunications facility as stated in § 165 - 204.19B(7)." Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of ©V2542 I B. I the Board of Supervisors grants a conditional use permit under this section the The following standards shall then apply to any property in which a commercial telecommunication facility is sited, in order to promote orderly development and mitigate the negative impacts to adjoining properties residential eLogerfies, land use patterns, scenic areas and properties of si ni scant historic value: (1) The Planning Commission may reduce the required setback distance for commercial telecommunication facilities as required by § 165- 201.03B(8) of this chapter if it can be demonstrated that the location is of equal or lesser impact. When a reduced setback is requested for a distance less than the height of the tower, a certified Virginia engineer shall provide verification to the Planning Commission that the tower is designed, and will be constructed, in a manner that if the tower collapses for any reason the collapsed tower will be contained in an area around the tower with a radius equal to or lesser than the setback, measured from the center line of the base of the tower. In no case shall the setback distance be reduced to less than 112 the distance of the tower height. Commercial telecommunication facilities affixed to existing structures shall be exempt from setback requirements, provided that they are located no closer to the adjoining property line than the existing structure. (2) Monopole -type construction shall be required for new commercial telecommunication towers. The Board of Supervisors may allow lattice -type construction for new telecommunication towers when existing or planned residential areas will not be impacted and when the site is not adjacent to identified historical resources. (3) Advertising shall be prohibited on commercial telecommunication facilities except for signage providing ownership identification and emergency information. No more than two signs shall be permitted. Such signs shall be limited to 1.5 square feet in area and shall be posted no higher than 10 feet above grade. (4) When lighting is required on commercial telecommunication facility towers, dual lighting shall be utilized which provides daytime white strobe lighting and nighttime red pulsating lighting unless otherwise mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration or the Federal Communications Commission. Strobe lighting, shall be shielded from ground view to mitigate illumination to neighboring properties. Equipment buildings and other accessory structures operated in conjunction with commercial telecommunication facility towers shall utilize infrared lighting and motion- detector lighting to prevent continuous illumination. (5) Commercial telecommunication facilities shall be constructed with materials of a galvanized finish or painted a noncontrasting blue or gray unless otherwise mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration or the Federal Communication Commission. (6) Commercial telecommunication facilities shall be adequately enclosed to prevent access by persons other than employees of the service provider. Appropriate landscaping and opaque screening shall be provided to ensure that equipment buildings and other accessory structures are not visible from adjoining properties, roads or other rights -of- way. (7) . Any antenna or tower that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such tower shall remove same within 90 days of receipt of notice from the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. Removal includes the removal of the tower, all tower and fence footers, underground cables and support buildings. If there are two or more users of a single tower, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the tower. If the tower is not removed within the ninety -day period, the County will remove the facility and a lien may be placed to recover expenses. C "Existing structure or tower" for purposes of this section shall mean any man -made object havine an ascertainable stationary location on or in land or water, whether or not it is affixed to the round, which object is at least fifty percent of the height of the proposed commercial telecommunications facility. Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 Passed this 25 day of January, 2012 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Chairman Shickle asked for discussion on the proposed fee increase. Supervisor DeHaven stated the proposed fee seemed to be in the middle of what other jurisdictions do. Supervisor Lofton stated that he believed the proposed fee would foster co- location. Upon a motion by Supervisor DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the fee increase for commercial telecommunication tower conditional use permit applications. (Resolution #040 -12) WHEREAS, on November 9, 2011 the Frederick County Board of Supervisors directed staff to review the Conditional Use Permit application fees for new telecommunication tower facilities; and WHEREAS, on December 14, 2011 the Frederick County Board of Supervisors discussed an increase in the application fee for Conditional Use for new commercial telecommunication tower facilities; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors wants to ensure that the application fee for new conditional use permits for commercial telecommunication tower facilities adequately covers all expenses incurred by the County; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the conditional use permit application fee for new commercial telecommunication tower be increased to $7,000. Passed this 25 day of January, 2012 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — CHAPTER 165 ZONING ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS PART 101 GENERAL PROVISISION SECTION 165 - 101.02 DEFINI'T'IONS AND WORD USAGE; ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS PARKING BUFFERS AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES, PART 201 SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, SECTION 165- 201.08 PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES — RIPARIAN BUFFERS. REVISIONS TO THE RIPARIAN BUFFER REQUIREMENTS OF Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE. — POSTPONED FOR UP TO 90 DAYS Director of Planning and Development Eric Lawrence appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this was a proposed ordinance amendment of the riparian buffer requirements to allow disturbance of riparian buffers for public and private utilities, public facilities, access to property or roads, buffer restoration or enhancement projects, creation of wetlands, pedestrian, recreational and /or bicycle trails. He went on to say the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments. He concluded by saying staff was seeking action by the Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Lofton asked if this proposal impacted fencing. Director Lawrence responded no, this proposal was intended to guide development. Supervisor Fisher advised that Public Works was looking at the private road issue and they have seen a lot of creek crossings. Director Lawrence responded those projects required land disturbance permits and other permits from the Department of Public Works. Supervisor Fisher stated the issue that we have is citizens who end up on the wrong end because higher levels of government rollover. He went on to ask if this ordinance is not passed would it stop development until some design criteria for these stream crossings are in effect. He concluded by saying he believed the county needed to stop improperly constructed structures being placed across streams. Director Lawrence responded that we need to make citizens aware that permits are needed to construct creek crossings. He went on to say the riparian buffer is something that is shown on the U.S. Geological Survey maps and this proposed ordinance creates a 35 foot buffer on either side of the waterway. Supervisor DeHaven stated we have a lot of issues out there that have existed for years and to have an ordinance that prevents that, he did not think that was where we wanted to end up. Director Lawrence advised this proposed ordinance loosens, but also clarifies what can cross the riparian buffer. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 Supervisor Fisher stated he was not opposed to what was being proposed, but he saw this as an opportunity. He explained people are not getting the proper permits for creek crossings and there is nothing that tells them permits are required. He suggested postponing this item for a while in order to get a comfort level. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board postponed action on this item for up to 90 days in order to review the possible implications. Supervisor Lofton requested that staff bring back the pertinent ordinances that dovetailed with this proposal. There being no further discussion, the above motion was approved by the following recorded vote; Richard C. Shickle Nay Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — CHAPTER 165 ZONING ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES PART 202 OFF - STREET PARKING LOADING AND ACCESS SECTION 165- 202.03 MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESS; AND, CHAPTER 144 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, ARTICLE V DESIGN STANDARDS SECTION 144 -17 STREETS SECTION 11448 SIDEWALKS AND PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS AND SECTION 144 -24 LOT REQUIREMENTS — REVISIONS TO ALLOW ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS TO IMPLEMENT LOW IMPACT DESIGN TECHNIQUES IN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TO INCREASE THE CUL -DE -SAC LENGTH REOUIREMENT ORDINANCE APPROVED AS AMENDED Director of Planning and Development Eric Lawrence appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised these were proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance to allow for alternative designs to implement low impact design techniques in residential development. The proposed changes would allow for the waiver of curb and gutter requirements, alternative material for sidewalks, and an increase in the private road length from 1,000 feet from a state maintained road to 1,200 feet. He went on to say the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments. Director Lawrence briefly reviewed a proposed bonding policy to guarantee the applicant would implement the appropriate design and monitoring techniques. Chairman Shickle stated he would have been happier if these items had been included as part of the application submission instead of separate policy. Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01125/12 Director Lawrence suggested using the draft document as a guideline. Supervisor Lofton advised that the word "Submission" show in §144.18 C. should be "Subdivision ". Supervisor Spicer asked how the proposed Board of Supervisors' waiver was changing the approval process, in particular would the process be lengthened. Director Lawrence responded that staff waivers streamlined the process. If waivers had to go through the Planning Commission and the Board additional time would be added to the process. He estimated three weeks would be added to the approval process. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no citizen comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the ordinance amending Frederick County Code Chapter 165, Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses; Part 202 Off - Street Parking, Loading and Access, 165- 202.03 Motor Vehicle Access; Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land, Article V Design Standards, 144.17 Streets, 144.18 Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways, 144.24 Lot Requirements. WHEREAS, an ordinance to amend Chapter 165 Zoning and Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land to revise the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance to allow for alternative designs to implement low impact design techniques, was considered. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance on January 4, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance on January 25, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that the adoption of this ordinance to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in good zoning practice. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165, Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses; Part 202 Off - Street Parking, Loading and Access, 165- 202.03 Motor Vehicle Access; Chapter 144 Subdivision of Land, Article V Design Standards, 144.17 Streets, 144.18 Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways, 144.24 Lot Requirements, are amended to revise the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances to allow for alternative designs to implement low impact design techniques. This amendment to be in effect on the day of adoption. Supervisor Spicer expressed concern about giving the Board of Supervisors the sidewalk waivers is "getting into the weeds ". Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 II Chairman Shickle asked if he wished to propose an amendment. Upon a motion by Supervisor Spicer, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board amended the motion to have the Board of Supervisors adopt the ordinance to amend the ordinance to give the Zoning Administrator authority to waive the sidewalk requirement instead of the Board of Supervisors. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Chapter 165 — Zoning Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, And Regulations For Specific Uses Part 202 — Off - Street Parking, Loading and Access § 165- 202.03 Motor vehicle access. A. New driveways. (14) Private roads providing lot access to multifamily and single - family small lot housing, as permitted in §144 -24 of the Subdivision Ordinance, shall be a minimum of 20 feet in width. The pavement design for the private roads shall include eight inches of aggregate base material, Type I, Size No. 21 -13, and shall be paved with a 165 No. psy asphalt concrete, Type SM -2A, surface treatment. In addition, curb and gutters, standard curb CG -6, CG -7 or roll -top curb and sidewalks shall be provided along private roads; however, the Planning Commissie Zoning Administrator may approve a waiver of sidewalks on private streets, provided that another recreational amenity is substituted for the sidewalk. Additionally, the Zoning Administrator may waive the requirement for curb and gutters and allow alternate pavement design to accommodate low impact design provided that the private road design is determined to be acceptable by the Director of Public Works. Chapter 144 — Subdivision of Land Article V Design Standards § 144.17. Streets. B. Street layout. The layout, width, grade, design and location of all streets shall conform to the approved final master development plan, the standards contained in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan, Virginia Department of Transportation requirements and the following regulations: (2) Provisions shall be made for the continuation of planned, existing or platted streets on adjoining parcels. The design of such streets shall be coordinated in terms of location, width, grades and drainage. Such continuations shall be made to provide access to adjoining parcels, to provide for streets identified in the Comprehensive Plan and to provide for safe and adequate traffic patterns and access. Such continuations may not be appropriate where they provide for access between substantially different uses or where they will result in adverse traffic impacts on existing neighborhoods or existing traffic patterns and access. Where no lots front on the road, the Planning Commissia Board Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 M of Supervisors may require the design and grading of the right -of -way to conform to the Virginia Department of Transportation standards with a minimum of temporary or permanent seeding. § 144.18. Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways. C. All sidewalks and walkways shall be a minimum of five feet wide. Sidewalks shall conform to VDOT standards. Alternative walkways rh be appr o v ed b th Pla "YY• � J ai5 dministra „a designs and construction materials for sidewalks and walkw„ s may be Y,....._.. approved by the Subdivision Administrator to accommodate low impact design. ,These alternative desi ns and materials shall only be permitted when acceptable to the Subdivision Administrator and when approved by the Director of Public Works and the Building OfFciaL § 144.24. Lot requirements. C. Lot access. All lots shall abut and have direct access to a public street or right-of-way dedicated for maintenance by the Virginia Department of Transportation. (2) Single - family small lot housing, single- family attached housing and multifamily housing, (a) Lots in subdivisions to be used for the following housing types, as defined by Chapter 165, Zoning, need not abut public streets: [1] Duplexes. [2] Multiplexes. [3] Atrium houses. [4] Townhouses. [5] Weak -link townhouses. [6] Garden apartments. [7] Single - family small lot housing. [8] Age - restricted multifamily housing. (b) When such lots do not abut public streets, they shall abut private roads, parking lots or access easements. The length and extent of private roads, driveways and parking aisles providing access to lots shall be minimized, and public streets shall be provided in larger subdivisions when substantial distances are involved. Individual lots shall be no more than 500 1,000 feet from a state - maintained road, as measured from the public street along the rp ivate access road. The Plafming Corimnission Board of Supervisors may allow lots to be located as much as X88 1,200 feet from a state - maintained road in cases where enhanced circulation is provided with a driveway loop. The above amended motion and ordinance were approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Ross P. Spicer Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye BOARD LIAISON REPORTS There were no Board liaison reports. CITIZEN COMMENTS Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12 MINE There were no citizen comments. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS There were no Board of Supervisors' comments. ADJOURN UPON A MOTION BY VICE - CHAIRMAN EWING, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR FISHER, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED. (8:30 P.M.) 1 Richard C. Shickle Chairman, Board of Supervisors r erk Ri y, Jr. Board of Supervisors Minutes Prepared By: <LA1 Jay E. kiVbs Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors Minute Book Number 37 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 01/25/12