The URL can be used to link to this page

December_11_2013_Agenda_Packet41G� � CSC' ,�� w �' w ,,a��, �»� AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2013 7:00 P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 5:00 P.M. — Closed Session: There will be a Closed Session Pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2- 3711(A)(7), for Consultation with Legal Counsel Regarding the Matter of County of Frederick, Virginia v. Russell 150, LC, Currently Pending in the Circuit Court of Frederick County, and /or any Claims Related Thereto, Where Such Consultation or Briefing in Open Meeting Would Adversely Affect the Negotiating or Litigating Posture of the Public Body, and for Consultation with Legal Counsel Regarding Specific Legal Matters Concerning the Russell 150 Community Development Authority Assessments and Requiring the Provision of Legal Advice by Such Counsel. 5:45 P.M. —Board of Supervisors Work Session with the Frederick County School Board 7:00 P.M. — Regular Meeting -Call To Order Invocation Pledge of Allegiance Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Board should adopt the Agenda for the meeting. Consent Agenda: (Tentative Agenda Items for Consent are Tabs: H, I, J, K, and T) Citizen Comments (Agenda Items Only, That Are Not Subject to Public Hearing.) AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2013 PAGE 2 Board of Supervisors Comments Minutes: (See Attached)------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- A 1. Regular Meeting, November 13, 2013. County Officials: 1. Waste to Energy Presentation by Frederick - Winchester Service Authority Director. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- B 2. Resolution Consenting to New Projects to be Undertaken and Financed By the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority Pursuant to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility Intermunicipal Agreement and Other Matters Therewith. (See Attached) -------------------------------------- - - - - -- C 3. Committee Appointments. (See Attached) -- 4. Request from Frederick County School Finance Director to Consider FY14 School Construction Fund Budget Adjustment and Schedule Public Hearing Date. (See Attached)-------------------------------------------- - - - - -- E 5. Request from the Commissioner of the Revenue for Refund. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- F 6. Revised Resolution for Navy Federal Credit Union. (See Attached)---- - - - - -- G 7. Resolution Supporting First Day Introduction Requirement for Bills with Local Fiscal Impacts. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------- - - - - -- H Committee Reports: 1. Technology Committee Report of November 6. 2013. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 2. Technology Committee Report of December 4, 2013. (See Attached)- - - - - -- J 3. Public Works Committee. (See Attached) K 4. Finance Committee. (See Attached)--------------------------------------------- - - - - -- L AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2013 PAGE 3 5. Transportation Committee. (See Attached) -- Public Hearing: M Twelve Month Outdoor Festival Permit Request of Belle Grove Plantation. Pursuant to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 86, Festivals; Section 86 -3, Permit Required; Application; Issuance or Denial; Fee; Paragraph D, Twelve Month Permits. All Events to be Held on the Grounds of Belle Grove Plantation, 336 Belle Grove Road, Middletown, Virginia. Property Owned by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- N Planning Commission Business: Public Hearing: Height Waiver Request for Carmeuse Lime &Stone, Inc. — Request from Lawson and Silek, P.L.C. on Behalf of Carmeuse Lime &Stone, Inc. to Allow the Construction of a 200 Foot Tall Kiln at the Existing Clearbrook Quarry Located off of Quarry Lane in the Stonewall Magisterial District. The Property is Identified by Property Identification Number 33 -A -144. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- O 2. Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village, Submitted by Painter - Lewis, P.L.C., to Rezone 51.26 Acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to 46.26 Acres of RP (Residential Performance) District and 5 Acres of B2 (General Business) District with Proffers. The Property is Located on the West Side of Route 522 (Front Royal Pike), Approximately 1,000 Feet South of the Intersection of Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) and Route 645 (Airport Road), and is Identified by Property Identification Number 64 -A -18 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. (See Attached) ---------------------------------------------- - - - - -- P Other Planning Items: 1. Rezoning Application #06 -13 — Proffer Revision of Silver Lake, LLC. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- Q 2. Revised Master Development Plan #03 -13 —The Townes at Tasker. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- R AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2013 PAGE 4 3. Request for Pump &Hall Permit — 186 Star Tannery Road, Star Tannery, Virginia. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- S 4. Road Resolutions: (See Attached) - - -- a. Wakeland Manor Subdivision, Phases 7, 12, 13, and 14. b. Fieldstone Subdivision; Channing Drive. Board Liaison Reports (If Any) Citizen Comments Board of Supervisors Comments Adjourn 'i 1 FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' MINUTES REGULAR MEETING November 13, 2013 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on Wednesday, November 13, 2013 at 7:00 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Roam, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA. PRESENT Chairman Richard C. Shickle; Charles S. DeHaven, Jr.; Christopher E. Collins; Gene E. Fisher; Robert A. Hess; Gary A. Lofton; and Robert W. Wells CALL TO ORDER Chairman Shickle called the meeting to order. INVOCATION Supervisor Hess delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice - Chairman DeHaven led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA - APPROVED County Administrator Jahn R. Riley, Jr. advised he had no changes to the agenda. Upon a motion by Vice�Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the agenda by the following recorded vote: Richard C, Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E, Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye CONSENT AGENDA - APPROVED Administrator Riley offered the fallowing items for the Board's consideration under the consent agenda: - Parks and Recreation Commission Report � Tab E; - Public Works Committee Report —Tab G; - Joint Finance Committee Report —Tab H; and - Road Resolutions � Tab R. Upon a motion by Supervisor DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Wells, the Board approved the consent agenda by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye CITIZEN COMMENTS Mark Regan; Stonewall District, congratulated board members on their re- election. He spoke regarding the proposed height waiver request of Carmeuse, He stated that he resides across from Stonewall Elementary School and noted that several students attending the school suffer from asthma. He distributed a handout from Carmeuse regarding safety of the limestone. He asked the Board to deny this requesf. He asked that Carmeuse be given one year to install an ambient monitor to monitor the air quality. He concluded by call for a denial of this request. Don Butler, Stonewall District, read the following statement: "MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MR. RILEY, AND FREDERICK COUNTY STAFF, MY NAME IS DON BUTLER, I RESIDE AT 120 BUCCANEER COURT, STEPHENSON, VA 22655 IN THE SNOWDEN BRIDGE SUBDIVISION. I APPEAR HERE THIS EVENING TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED WAIVER FOR CARMEUSE TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT LIMIT FROM 45 ' TO 200' TO ERECT A STR UCTURE AT ITS PLANT IN THE STONEWALL DISTRICT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS AND ASKA FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WAIVER. THE WINCHESTER STAR RANANARTICLE ON NOVEMBER 7, 2013 STATING r►a THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED 9 -0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER. THE STAR SAID THAT THERE WAS NO PUBLIC COMMENT, THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE FORWARDED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THE NEXT WEEK HO W CAN THERE BE P UBLIC COMMENT WHEN MOST OF THE STONEWALL RESIDENTS DID NOT KNOWABOUT THE CARMEUSE REQUEST? A WAIVER DOES NOT REQUIRE PUBLIC NOTICE. THE ONLY WAY TO KNOW WOULD BE TO CHECK THE AGENDA OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. AFTER FIVE YEAR OF RECESSION, CHECKING THE PLANNING COMMISSIONAGENDA IS NOT THE HOT B UTTON IT WAS TEN YEARS AGO. I DON'T THINK THE STONEWALL RESIDENTS HAVE HAD MUCH OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT. I THINK A WAIVER TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT FROM 45 ' TO 200' IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT AND SHOULD HAVE HAD MORE PUBLIC NOTICE. I OFFER MY APOLOGY TO CARMEUSE IF THEY DID HA VE A P UBLIC MEETING WITHAREA RESIDENTS TO DISCUSS THE 200' HEIGHT WAIVER WHICH I MAYNOT HAVE BEENAWARE OF. IT IS MY HOPE THAT TONIGHT' S REVIEW IS INFORMATIONAL WITHA VOTE COMING IN THE FUTURE. THIS WOULD GIVE STONEWALL CTIZENS TIME FOR COMMENT. MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE STRUCTURE ITSELF BOILS DOWN TO TWO QUESTIONS. HOW WILL IT BE LIGHTED, AND HOW MUCHADDITIONAL TRAIN TRAFFIC WILL RESULT WITH THE INCREASED PRODUCTION. WILL THE LIGHTS BE INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL? OTHER THAN THE REQUIRED LIGHTS FOR AIR TRAFFIC WILL THE LIGHTS BE ON 24/7/365? TRAINS,.I USE THE R UMBLING AND THE WHISTLE OF THE 5: I S AM TRAIN AS MY ALARM CLOCK .I MIGHT NOT WANT TO HEAR IT AT 2 AMIN THE MORNING. HAS CARMEUSE DONE A STUDY ON HOW MANY MORE TRIPS A DAY THE TRAIN MAY MAKE, OR HOW MANY MORE ADDITIONAL CARS? MYLAST QUESTION.. WHAT DOESA WAIVER REALLY MEAN? IFAPPROVED, IS IT TIME SENSITIVE TO BE BUILT BYA CERTAIN DATE? WOULD TT ALLOW CARMEUSE TO BUILD A SECOND 200' STRUCTURE IN THE FUTURE ASA MATTER RIGHT? DOES THE WAIVER RUN WITH THE LAND..IF CARMEUSE SELLS ITS BUSINESS, WOULD THE WAIVER TRANSFER TO THE NEW OWNER? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING. " BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS There were no Board of Supervisors' comments. MINUTES - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board approved the minutes from the October 9, 2013 regular meeting by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye COUNTY OFFICIALS INTRODUCTION OF NEW HANDLEY REGIONAL LIBRARY DIRECTOR Mr. John Huddy, Director of Handley Regional Library, appeared before the Board to introduce himself. INTRODUCTION OF NEW SHENANDOAH AREA AGENCY ON AGING DIRECTOR Ms. Cathy Galvin, Director for Shenandoah Area Agency on Aging, appeared before the Board to introduce herself and provide an update on some of the services SAAA provides to the community. COlVIMITTEE APPOINTMENTS APPOINTMENT OF MILAN R. MAJAROV AND DALE T 1VIAZA TO THE GRIEVANCE PANEL - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board appointed Milan R. Majarov and Dale T. Maza to the Grievance Panel. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye 4 Robert W. Wells Aye APPOINTMENT OF RANDY CARTER AS STONEWALL DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION - APPROVED Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board appointed Randy Carter to fill the unexpired term of Ran Hodgson as Stonewall District representative to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Term expires June 23, 2014 The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye REAPPOINTMENT OF CHUCK DEHAVEN AND ROBERT A. HESS TO THE NORTHERN SHENANDOAH VALLEY REGIONAL COMMISSION -- APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board reappointed Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. and Robert A. Hess to the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye REAPPOINTMENT OF GARY R. GATES AS STONEWALL DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION - APPROVED Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board reappointed Gary R. Oates as Stonewall District representative to the Planning Commission. This is a four year appointment. Term expires January 1 I, 2018. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye REAPPOINTMENT OF JAMES W. GOLLADAY JR. AS FREDERICK COUNTY BUSINESS REPRESENTATIVE TO THE WIN -FRED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - APPROVED Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board reappointed James W. Golladay, Jr., as Frederick County Business Representative to the Winc- Fred Economic Development Commission. This is a three year appointment. Term expires January 31, 2017, The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S, DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye RE VEST FROM COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE FOR REFUNDS - APPROVED Administrator Ailey advised this was a request from the Commissioner of the Revenue for a General Fund supplemental appropriation and to authori2e the Treasurer to refund BMW Financial Services NA, LLC the amount of $4,484.10 for vehicles sold or moved out of state for 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013. The refund includes personal property taxes and registration fees due to proration. Upon a motion by Vice�Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye Administrator Riley advised this was a request from the Commissioner of the Revenue for a General Fund supplemental appropriation and to authorize the Treasurer to refund GE Capital Auto Lease the amount of $3,293.22 for vehicles sold or moved out of state for 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013. The refund includes personal property taxes and registration fees due to proration. Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr, Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye COMMITTEE REPORTS BUSINESS FRIENDLY COMMITTEE REPORT �- AUTIIORIZED CREATION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND FORWARDED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WORK SESSION At the July 10, 2013 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, the Board voted to accept the report from the Frederick County Business Climate Assessment Citizens' Committee. At the August 7 14, 2013 meeting, the Board forwarded the phase I recommendations to the respective committeesldepartments for evaluation. The phase I recommendations were: 1. Public Information Officer 2. Signage Along Major Routes Entering Frederick County 3. Establishment of an Economic Development Authority 4. Review and Evaluation of the Master Development Plan Process 5. Simplification of the Landscape Ordinance 6. Reduction in Proffer Requirements This memo transmits the committees' respective recommendations on the following: Public Information Officer The Human Resources Committee considered this item at its October 4, 2013 meeting. After some discussion, the Committee recommended approval of the creation of the position of Public Information Officer. The creation of this position would make it eligible for funding consideration during the upcoming budget cycle. {See Attached.) Establishment of an Economic Development Authority The Winchester- Frederick County Economic Development Commission established a workgroup consisting of county residents and /or individuals who have a business within Frederick County. The Committee recommended the existing Industrial Development Authority be converted to an Economic Development Authority. The attached memo outlines the additional steps needed to facilitate this conversion. {See Attached.) It is important to note that no action by the General Assembly or change in State Cade language is required to change the name of the Industrial Development Authority to the Economic Development Authority. However, a State Code change would be required if the Board desired to put a member of the board of supervisors on the Economic Development Authority. lZeductian in Proffer lze uirements The Development Impact Model Oversight Committee conducted a re- evaluation of the current Development Impact Model, taking into account current economic conditions. The Committee discussed the possibility of offering credits for proffered transportation improvements above those typically expected to address transportation impacts. Ultimately, the Committee recommended approval of a policy modification to enable credit for transportation. (See Attached.) It was further noted in the report that the Committee would continue to re- evaluate the model to see if further modifications would be appropriate. Those additional areas of study include: - Tax contributions that may result from new residential development, - Tax contributions that may result from new commercial development associated with a residential development proposal. Staff recommends the Soard hold a work session in the future to discuss and review the committees' proposed recommendations. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board authorized staff to move forward with the creation of a.n Economic Development Authority by July 1, 2014 and seek authorization from the General Assembly to choose the format. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins -Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye PARKS AND RECREATION COMMI55ION REPORT — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The Parks and Recreation Commission met on October 8, 2013. Members present were: Marty Cybulski, Kevin Anderson, Greg Brondos, Jr., and Ronald Madagan. Members absent were: Patrick Anderson, Christopher Collins, Gary Longerbeam, Charles Sandy, Jr., and vacant appointment from Stonewall District. Items Requirin�Board of Supervisors Action: None Submitted for Board Information Only:_ 1. Building and Grounds Little's Free Library —The Buildings and Grounds Committee recommended not installing "Little's Free Library" along the Bike/Pedestrian Trail at Sherando Park due to vehicular access and the proposed location, potential vandalism, and not being able to control the content of the books that are dropped off, 2. Building and Grounds FY 2015 Capital Improvements Program —The Buildings and Grounds Committee recommended the approval of the Capital Improvements Plan for FY 2015 as submitted, second by Mr, Brondos, motion carried unanimously {4W0). The Parks and Recreation FY15 Capital Improvements Program recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Department for review by the Planning Commission. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE - APPROVED The HR Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Friday, October 4, 2013 at 8:00 a.m. Committee members present were: Supervisor Robert Hess, Supervisor Robert Wells, Supervisor Chris Collins, and Citizen Member Dorrie Greene. Committee members absent were: Citizen Member Barbara Vance and Citizen Member Beth Lewin. Also present were: Assistant County Administrator Kris Tierney, County Attorney Rod Williams, NRADC Superintendent Tim Whitley, and DSS representative Delsie Butts. ** *Items Requiring Action * ** 1. Approval of new Human Resource Policies. - APPROVED The Committee recommends adoption of the two new HR policies outlined below and included in the Board of Supervisors' packet. Information Technology Usage This newly created policy combines two current IT policies: 1. Acceptable Use Guidelines for Internet Services (1998) 2. Security _Acceptable Use Policy (2004) The proposed policy updates and combines all of the County's technology resources and outlines to our employees expectations of: monitoring, retention, use, and privacy. The Technology Committee recommends approval of the new policy. Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the Information Technology Usage Policy. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye Work for Hire This newly created policy addresses ownership rights of copyrightable material. Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor Wells, the Board approved the Work for Hire Policy. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A, Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye 2. Creation of the Public Information Officer position to facilitate funding consideration during the Fiscal Year 20142015 budget cycle. The Committee recommends approval to create the position of Public Information Off cer, Should the Board adopt to create it, the position can then be subject to funding consideration during the upcoming budget cycle. Supervisor Hess moved to approve the creation of the Public Information Officer position with funding subject to consideration in next year's budget. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Collins. Supervisor Lofton stated he could not support this motion until after the work session so the board could talk about existing positions filling those duties. Supervisor Fisher stated he had the same questions as Supervisor Lofton. Supervisor Collins stated there was a need far the position. Supervisor Hess withdrew his motion and Supervisor Collins withdrew his second. Supervisor Lofton moved to postpone action on this request until after the board's work session. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Fisher. Administrator Riley noted the creation of this position would be part of the Board's work session pertaining to recommendations from the Business Friendly Committee and he was not seeking action this evening. i1 Supervisor Lofton withdrew his motion. Supervisor Fisher withdrew his second. The Board took no action on this item. ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** L None PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The Public Works Committee met on Tuesday, October 29, 2013 at 8:00 a.m. All members were present. The following items were discussed: ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 1. Results of Needs Assessment Study The director of public works provided the committee members with draft copies of the needs assessment study performed by OWPR for the county school administration and county government administration. The committee members will have an opportunity to review this information in preparation for the next scheduled meeting. (Attachment 1} 2. Alternative Site Location for the New Round Hill Fire and Rescue Station and Associated Social Ha11 The committee reviewed and unanimously endorsed an alternative site location for the new Round Hill Fire and Rescue Station and Associated Social Hall. The developer of Silver Lake Development is currently revising the proffers of the original development to reflect this new site located off of National Lutheran Boulevard on Corporate Place. These revisions will be submitted to the board at their December 2013 meeting. (Attachment 2} 3. Stormwater Ordinance Update Deputy Director of Public Works, Mr. Joe Wilder, provided the committee with a brief status update on the proposed Stormwater ordinance. Basically, a draft Stormwater ordinance has been developed and will be submitted to the committee for their review during a meeting to be scheduled for December 3, 2013. It was suggested that a draft copy of this ordinance should also be submitted to each board member well in advance of their December 11, 2013 meeting to allow sufficient time for review. The goal of this time table is to meet a draft submission requirement to the Department of Environmental Quality on or before December 1 S, 2013. It is anticipated that the final approval by the board, including a public hearing, will be in February 2014. The actual ordinance will take effect on July 1, 2014. 4. Impacts of Affordable Health Care Act on the Status of Part -time Employees 12 The director of public works indicated that the human resources (H.R.} department is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of the Affordable Health Care Act on the status of part -time employees. Based on preliminary information provided by H.R,, it is anticipated that this act could affect part -time employees that average 30 hours or mare per week. The actual impact may vary depending on the age of the employee. To date, public works has 26 part -time employees which average 30 hours or more per week. A majority of these employees work as attendants at our citizens' convenience sites. We will await further direction from H.R. before making any changes to the part -time work schedules. 5. Supplemental Appropriation Request from Building Inspections Mr. John Trenary, building official, presented a request for a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $15,000 to fund apart -time receptionist for the remainder of the current fiscal year, This appropriation will be derived from the additional revenue generated by permit fees. The request was unanimously endorsed by the committee and will be forwarded to the finance committee for their consideration. (Attachment 3) 6. Summary of Fiscal Year 2012/2013 RecyclinglLitter Programs The attached memorandum from Gloria P�affinburger, solid waste manager, presents a brief summary of the past fiscal year's recycling /litter programs. In addition, this memorandum highlights the usage at our refuse convenience sites located throughout Frederick County. {Attachment 4) 7. Miscellaneous Reports a. Tonnage Report (Attachment 5) b. Recycling Report {Attachment G) c. Animal Shelter Dog Report (Attachment 7) d. Animal Shelter Cat Report (Attachment 8) JOINT FINANCE COMMITTEE — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The Joint Finance Committee met on Thursday, August 7, 2013 at 5:00 A.M., in the First Floor Conference Roam, County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. Present were Chairman Richard Shickle and Charles S, DeHaven, 3r., Frederick County representatives; and John Willingham, and Milt McInturff, City of Winchester representatives. Others present: john R. Riley, Jr„ County Administrator; lay E. Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator; Dale Iman, City Manager; Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney; Anthony Williams, City Attorney; Mary Blowe, Finance Director City of Winchester; Cheryl Shiffler, Finance Director, Frederick County; Doug Hewett, Assistant City Manager; Patrick Barker, Executive Director of the Winchester - Frederick County Economic Development Commission; .loch Phelps, Chairman of the Winchester - Frederick County Economic Development I3 Commission; John Huddy, Director of Handley Regional Library; and Vic Bradshaw, The Winchester Star. Mr. Shickle called the meeting to order. ��For Information Oniy * ** UPDATE /STATUS OF OUTSIDE AGENCY FUND1fNG The committee reviewed each locality's funding of outside agency requests. Mr. Riley advised this was being presented for information only. He advised the last time this was discussed the County was awaiting the outside agency presentations. He went on to say no changes were made to the funding requests for the current fiscal, but those presentations set the stage for next year's budget discussions. Mr. Iman stated the City would like to have that information as it becomes available during the budget process. Mr. Willingham gave a brief overview of the City's process for considering outside agency requests. He noted Council considered the services provided and the benefit to the citizens. Once that information was obtained Council developed a funding memorandum of understanding for that agency. UPDATE /STATUS OF EDC MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Mr. Riley briefly reviewed the history of the proposed updated memorandum of understanding for the Economic Development Commission. He noted this item was discussed at the committee's last meeting. At that meeting, the City had discussed concerns regarding the frst draft of the MOU and presented a revised MOU, which outlined a number of issues or performance measures they felt should be addressed. Mr. Riley then deferred to the county and city attorneys for further discussion. City Attorney Anthony Williams advised that he and the county attorney exchanged letters and had a phone call yesterday. He went on to say the county attorney would look at both versions of the MOU (i.e. county and city }, attempt to combine the two in some fashion, and send it to him for review. The drafts would be presented to each of the governing bodies. He explained the overall concept would be to create a formalized agreement that: Recognizes the EDC as a joint operation between the City and County; Contains some performance standards; and Removes the need for EDC to go through the outside agency process. Mr. Williams noted both governing bodies would need to adopt an ordinance establishing the EDC. Chairman Shickle expressed his disappointment at being back to "square one ", with creation documents to go back to both governing bodies. 14 Mr. Riley asked Mr. Willingham if the parties wanted the EDC to continue to function as it currently exists. He went on to ask if this was the time to discuss if particular joint functions were up to date with how each locality dealt with issues. Chairman Shickle stated it seemed unreasonable to ask the EDC to function through November without funding. He went on to say if the funding did not materialize then it would fall to the County to make up the difference. Mr. Willingham responded that City Council would fund the budget commitment this year. He went on to say they were committed to doing that. He concluded by saying they could discuss the MOU as a standalone issue. Mr. Riley asked if this was a relationship that needs to continue. Mr. Willingham responded that he would bring it up with City Council at their next meeting. He went on to say he would be interested in hearing the County's thoughts as well. Mr. Iman advised that Mr. Barker and Mr. Deskins, Director of the Winchester EDA, had met on two or three occasions and agreed on the performance standards listed in the City's draft MOO. Mr. Barker responded that he had provided a much larger list of performance measures, but the City EDA Director only picked about 30% of the items submitted. He went on to say if there was that much duplication of services then maybe the structure and relationship needed to be re- evaluated. Administrator Riley stated that for this fiscal year it is business as usual; however, both bodies would have agendas to finalize for the next fiscal year. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Joint Finance Committee will be Thursday, February 13, 2014 at 8:00 a.m. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 a.m. FINANCE COMMITTEE - APPROVED The Finance Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 at $:00 a.m. All members were present. Item was 1 was approved under consent agenda. Upon a motion by Vice- Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board approved the consent agenda by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye 15 Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye 1, The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental app riation in the amount of $33.,8.65. This amount represents a DMV Highway Safety Grant. See attached memo, p. 4W5. — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. 2. The Finance Director requests a General Fund su lemental a ro riation in the amount of $1,526,665 and a School Capital Proiects fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $8QQ,882,79. These amounts represent one time funding for capital purchases from the FY2Q 13 year surplus. See attached information, p. 6 -8. The committee recommends approval. — APPROVED. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Nay Robert W. Wells Aye 3, The School Finance Director requests a General Fund and a School Cperatin� Fund su lemental a ro riation in the amount of $97 Q 11.71. This amount represents designated funds received in FY2Q 13. See attached memo, p. 8. The committee recommends approval. -- APPROVED. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye 4. The Commissioner of the Revenue requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $1,377.SQ^ This amount represents proceeds from the Sheriff sale to be ]b used far vehicle repair and maintenance. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 9. The committee recommends approval. — APPROVED. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye 5. The Assistant County Administrator requests a General Fund su lemental a ro riation in the amount of $17,765. This amount represents proceeds from the Sheriff sale to be used for building repair and maintenance. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 10 -11, The committee recommends approval. -- APPROVED. Upon a motion by Vice_ Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Charles S. DeHaven, Jr Christopher E. Collins Gene E. Fisher Robert A. Hess Gary A. Lofton Robert W. Wells Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye INFORMATION ONLY 1. The Finance Director provides a Fund 10 Transfer Report for FY2014, See attached, p. 12. 2. The Finance Director provides Fy2014 financial statements for the period ending September 30, 2013. See attached, p. 13 -23. 3. The Finance Director provides the FY2014 Fund Balance Report far the period ending September 30, 2013, See attached, p. 24, 4. The Youth Development Center sends a note of thanks for the County's continued support. See attached, p. 25. i7 5. The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) has awarded the County the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the FY2014 Budget document. This is the 28`h consecutive year the Frederick County has received this achievement. See attached, p. 26 -27. -- APPROVED MOTION OF CONGRATULATIONS. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board congratulated the finance director and her staff for a j ob well done. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE - APPROVED The Transportation Committee met on October 28, 2013 at 8:30 a.m. Members Present Members Absent Chuck DeHaven (voting} Mark Davis (liaison Middletown) James Racey (voting) Gene Fisher (voting} Lewis Boyer (liaison Stephens City} Christopher Collins (voting) Gary Oates (liaison PC) ** *Items Requiring Action * ** 1. Revenue Sharing Application - APPROVED Attached please find the draft application and map for Snowden Bridge Blvd from Route 11 North traveling eastward to a bridge over the CSX rail line and stopping just west of Mulburn Road. Previously, this project has awards of $1.3 million in economic development access funds toward completion of this project. However, as we have continued to promote this project changes in planning for the CSX rail line have led to a requirement of a significantly larger bridge and associated increase in cost. In partnership with the developers of the Graystone Development, it was determined that the project could be better supported through the revenue sharing program. It should be noted that if this application is successful, the economic development access funding previously allocated towards this project would be released, since they cannot be used to match revenue sharing funds. 1$ Motion by Mr. Racey and seconded by Mr. DeHaven to recommend support. Motion passed unanimously. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the resolution of support For the Revenue Sharing Program for FY 201 S. WHEREAS, the County of Frederick desires to submit an application for an allocation of funds of up to $4,033,350 through the Virginia Department of Transportation Fiscal Year 2015 Revenue Sharing Program; and WHEREAS, $4,033,350 of these funds are requested to fund Snowden Bridge Boulevard — Phase T; and NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors supports this application for an allocation of up to $4,033,350 through the Virginia Department of Transportation "Revenue Sharing Program ".. ADOPTED, this 13t� day of November, 2013. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye 2. Capital Improvement Plan Staff presented the Capital Improvement Plan recommendations from last year's update to the committee along with recommended changes. Based on VDOT feedback, some additional modifications were made and endorsed by the committee. Attached please find last year's adopted priorities and the updated recommendations from the committee. 3. Road Construction Priorities The Staff and committee members inquired whether a comprehensive update to road construction priorities within the County should be undertaken. Staff suggested that the CIP transportation priorities list does a good job of highlighting this for the County. The Committee accepted the Staffi s recommendation. 4. Other 19 PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 165 ZONING, ARTICLE VI -- BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, PART 601 DIMENSIONAL AND INTENSITY RE UIREMENTS 165 - 601.02 DIMENSIONAL AND INTENSITY RE UIREMENTS PART 608 EM EXTRACTIVE MANUFACTURING DISTRICT, b165- 608.06 HEIGHT_LIMITATIONS. ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS PARKYNG BUFFERS AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES PART 201 SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS 165 - 204.28 HEIGHT WAIVERS IN THE EM EXTRACTIVE MANUFACTURING Mi LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND M2 INDUSTRIAL GENERAL DISTRICT. THESE ARE REVISIONS TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE EM, Ml, AND M2 ZONING DISTRICTS WITH A BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WAIVER AND ADDITION OF SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS. — APPROVED AS AMENDED. Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised this was an ordinance amendment to increase the height allowance in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), M1 (Light Industrial), and M2 (Industrial General} Zoning Districts. The proposed amendments would allow the Board of Supervisors to grant a waiver to the height restrictions in those districts. The waiver provision would allow the Board to consider the appropriateness of a requested height increase while providing the applicant with an irrevocable approval. She went on to say supplementary use regulations had been prepared to address architectural renderings, additional screening, and other necessary conditions. She concluded by saying the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Kristen Laise, Executive Director of Belle Grove Plantation, spoke against the proposed amendment. She noted Belle Grove's property was adjacent to a Carmeuse facility in Middletown and they were concerned about this waiver. She noted the proposed ordinance amendment does not provide for public notice or public comment. She asked the Board to 20 include such provisions before passing this amendment, She then presented the following letter from the National Trust for Historic Preservation: "November 13, 2013 The Honorable Richard C. Shickle Chairman, Frederick County Board of Supervisors 107 N Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Chairman Shickle: I am writing on behalf of the National Trust for Historic Preservation to express our opposition to the proposed amendment to Chapter 165 Zoning of the Frederick County Code, which is being considered during tonight's meeting of the Board of Supervisors, As we understand it, the proposed amendment would allow the Board of Supervisors to waive the existing maximum height limitation of 45 feet in certain areas of Frederick County in order to permit construction of taller industrial structures, such as a 200 foot -tall lime kiln currently proposed by Carmeuse Lime &Stone. The proposed amendment, as drafted, would permit the County to issue a waiver for any tall industrial structure unless it would "negatively impact adjacent uses. " The National Trust is the owner of historic Belle Grove Plantation (c. 1794), a cultural heritage tourism destination in Frederick County and a National Historic Landmark With Belle Grove, Inc., the National Trust is a Key Partner of Cedar Creek &Belle Grove National Historic Park, which includes aver 3, 700 historic acres. Carmeuse Lime &Stone owns, operates, and intends to expand a quarry immediately adjacent to Belle Grove Plantation and the National Historical Park. If one were proposed the National Trust would not support the construction of a tall industrial structure near Belle Grove Plantation or the National Historical Park. Nor do we support the proposed amendment to Chapter 165. If the Board of Supervisors does decide to amend Chapter 165 to allow waivers of the 45 foot height limitation in the Extractive Mining, Light Industrial, and Industrial General zoning districts, we encourage the Board to consider the following recommendations: 1. Chapter 165 should require waiver applicants to provide actual notice of their application to all property owners and to the stewards of alI public property which may be impacted by structures exceeding the 45 foot height limitation. 2. Chapter 165 should require waiver applicants to submit for review and public comment an environmental impacts analysis, including architectural renderings and viewshed studies, to allow the Board of Supervisors —and the interested public _ to assess the potential visual, atmospheric, and audible impacts ofproposed tall industrial structures. 2i 3. Chapter 165 should require that the Board of Supervisors consider all potential direct, indirect, and cumulative adverse impacts which maybe caused by proposed tall industrial structures. 4. If a waiver is granted, chapter 165 should require the waiver applicant to avoid minimize, and/or mitigate any and all adverse impacts to property caused by the structures exceeding 4S feet. 5. Finally, Chapter 16S should protect the existing uses and reasonably foreseeable future uses of adjacent property. Importantly, Chapter 165 also should protect other property owners' right of quiet enjoyment against interference by the owner /operator of industrial structures exceeding the 45 foot height limitation. Scenic vistas are an integral part of the natural beauty and historic character of the Shenandoah Palley. Residents live here and visitors travel here from across the globe to enjoy the Valley's incomparable natural, scenic, and historic assets. Tourism is an economic generator and job creator in Winchester and Frederick County. In fact, visitors to Virginia contributed over $21 Trillion to the Virginia economy in 2012, a 4 percent increase over 2011. The National Trust urges the Board of Supervisors to carefully consider its options before amending the Frederick County Code to facilitate construction of tall industrial structures, especially those which would permanently undermine private and public efforts to conserve the natural beauty and historic character of Frederick County. Thank you for considering the views of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Sincerely, /,r /David J. Brown David J. Brown" Mark Regan, Stonewall District, asked the Board to deny this ordinance amendment. There being no further public comments, Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Supervisor Hess asked what would be required to add a public hearing or public notice requirement to the ordinance. County Attorney Rod Williams responded the Board could add those requirements tonight and it would not require a new hearing on the proposed ordinance. Chairman Shickle asked how best to hold the public hearing (e.g. Board level or Board and Planning Commission). zz County Attorney Williams responded that it would be advisable to hold the hearing at both the Planning Commission and Board level. Supervisor Fisher stated he would support Supervisor Hess's request because without a public notice provision he could not support the proposed amendment. County Attorney Williams advised the public notice provision could be addressed as item #5 in 8165- 204.28. The question came up regarding the effect of this ordinance change on the waiver request that was scheduled to be considered later in the meeting and whether or not the public notice requirements would apply to that request. County Attorney Williams responded the waiver request would be subject whatever ordinance the Board approved, If the approval contained a public hearing requirement then it would have to go through the public hearing process. Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the ordinance amending Frederick County Code, Chapter 165 Zoning, Article VI — Business and Industrial Zoning District; Part 608 — EM Extractive Manufacturing District; Part 601 Dimensional and Intensity Requirements; Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 201 — Supplementary Use Regulations; g 165- 201,03 — Height Limitations Exceptions; Part 204 — Additional Regulations for Specific Uses; 8165 - 204.28 � Height Waivers in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), M1 (Light Industrial), and M2 (Industrial General} District, with the waivers to be subject to a public hearing. WHEREAS, an ordinance to amend Chapter 165 Zoning, to allow the Board of Supervisors to waive the maximum height in the EM, M1, and M2 Zoning Districts; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance at their regularly scheduled meeting on November 6, 2013; and 23 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance at their regularly scheduled meeting on November 13, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that the adoption of this ordinance to be in the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 Zoning, Article VI — Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Part 608 — EM Extractive Manufacturing District, Part 601— Dimensional and Intensity Requirements; Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 201 -� Supplementary Use Regulations, g165�201.03 — Height Limitations Exceptions, Part 204 — Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, 8165- 204.28 — Height Waivers in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), M1 (Light Industrial) M2 (Industrial General) District are amended to allow the Board of Supervisors to waive the maximum height in the EM, M1, and M2 Zoning Districts. ARTICLE VI BUSINESS AND 1NDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Part 608 — EM Extractive Manufacturing District § Ib5- 608.01 intent. The intent of the Extractive Manufacturing District is to provide for mining and related industries, all of which rely on the extraction of natural resources. Provisions and performance standards are provided to protect surrounding uses from adverse impacts. it is also the intent of this article to avoid the encroachment of incompatible uses on the borders of the EM District. *All other sections remain unchanged § 165 - 608.06 Height limitations. Pk3- st�rast�r�s��excee��- #eete+gl- iT—The maximum structure helght,s�a!! be 45 feet. The, Baard o Su ervlsors ma waive the 45 oot hei ht !lmitatlart ravlded that !t w!1! nat ne ptivel im pct adiacent uses. !rt order to consider the waiver, the applicant must submit all irtfarmation artd Adhere to requirements specified by � 165 - 204.28. !rt no case shell any,structure exceed 200 feet in,helpht. 24 ARTICLE VI BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Part 601 — Dimensional and Intensity Requirements § 165 - 501.02 Dimensional and intensity requirements The following table describes the dimensional and intensity requirements for the business and industrial districts: Article II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES 165- 204.28. Height Waivers in the EM (Extractive ManuJac(urin� }, MI (Light Industrial? and M2 frndustrial General) District: Waiver requests for height increases in the EM, Ml and M2 Zonini� Districts, shall adhere to the followin requirements: 1. Architectural renderings of the proposed structure shall be submitted for review by the , Planning Commission and the Board o Su ervisors° 2. The Board of Supervisors may reauire buffer and screening elements and/or additional distance when 25 District Requirement B1 B2 B3 OM M1 M2 Front yard setback on primary or arterial highways (feet) 50 50 50 50 75 75 Front yard setback on collector or minor streets (feet) 35 35 35 35 75 75 Side yard setbacks (feet) - - 15 15 25 25 Rear yard setbacks (feet} - - 15 15 25 25 Floor area to lot area ratio {FAR) 0.3 1.0 1.0 2.0 1,0 1,0 Minimum landscaped area (percentage of lot area) 35 15 25 15 25 15 Maximum height {feet} 35 35 35 60 60 * 60 *In the MI and M� Districts the Board o Su ervisors ma waive the 60 oot hei ht limitation rovided that it will not ne ativel im act ad'acent uses. In order to consider the waiver the app icant must submit all information and adhere to requirements speciired by t? 165- 204.28 __ In no case shall any structure exceed ^ISO feet in height. Article II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES 165- 204.28. Height Waivers in the EM (Extractive ManuJac(urin� }, MI (Light Industrial? and M2 frndustrial General) District: Waiver requests for height increases in the EM, Ml and M2 Zonini� Districts, shall adhere to the followin requirements: 1. Architectural renderings of the proposed structure shall be submitted for review by the , Planning Commission and the Board o Su ervisors° 2. The Board of Supervisors may reauire buffer and screening elements and/or additional distance when 25 deemed necessary ta�ratect existing adiacent uses; 3. The Board afSupetvisors may require additional conditions as deemed necessary; 4. This waiver shall not be permitted to increase the hei�ht_af any si,�na�e regulated by � IbS- 20L07. S. The Plantain CtJn�rnissir�n and the Board n Su err�isors shall bald n public lrearin nr nn � hei ht waiver request. Article YT SUPPLEMENTARY' USE REGUI✓AT10NS, PARKING, )BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES Part 201 — Supplementary Use Regulations § 165 - 201.03 height limitations; exceptions. B, Exceptions to height requirements. (4) Automated storage facilities in the OM, Ml and M2 Zoning Districts and automated manufacturing,�cilities in the MI and M2 Zoninp Districts shall be exempt from the maximum height requirement. �-l�a -- s�c#�e� . Such exemptions shall be approved by the Frederick County Fire Marshal. in no case shall the height of these facilities exceed 100 feet in height unless K�aiverl_hy tl2e Board nt'Supervisnrs to accordance with � 16..5 -601. U2. This amendment shall be in effect on the day of adoption, Passed this 13th day of November, 2013 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr, Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 165 ZONING ARTICLE III TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TDR PROGRAM PART 302 SENDING AND RECEIVING PROPERTIES, x165- 302.01 SENDING PROPERTIES, x1:65- 302.03, CALCULATION OF DEVELOPMENT RUGHTS. REVISIONS TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TO UPDATE THE TDR DENSITY RIGHTS TABLE, INCLUDE A PROVISION FOR CONTIGUOUS LOTS AND ADDITION OF A TDR DENSITY CONVERSI �� -- ��••�� ON RATE FOR RECEIVING PROPERTIES. _APPROVED. Vice - Chairman DeHaven abstained from this item due to a conflict of interest. 26 Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised this was a proposed amendment to the Transfer of Development Rights {TDR} Ordinance. She noted: - Revision #1 pertained to the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR} Density Table to be consistent with changes made to the RP Ordinance. - Revision #2 pertained to Contiguous Sending Properties by allowing for the use of contiguous properties. - Revision #3 pertained to the Density Rights Conversion Rate. She concluded by saying the Planning Commission recommended approval of these amendments and staff was seeking Board action on this item. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Bruce Carpenter, Gainesboro District and Director of the Frederick County Farm Bureau, advised the Farm Bureau unanimously endorsed the proposed ordinance amendments. The members felt it would add value and would allow the landowners to take advantage of their land. He went on to say if the program does not provide a good value then it would not be used. Paul Anderson, President of the Frederick County Farm Bureau, spoke in favor of the proposed ordinance amendments. He stated it was getting harder and harder to sell land due to the County's ordinances. He thought this was a great program and has a lot of merit. He urged the Board to approve the amendments. There being no further comments, Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Supervisor Collins moved to approve the ordinance amending the Frederick County Code Chapter 16� Zoning, Article lII � Transfer of Development Rights (TDR} Program, Part 301 Establishment and Purpose, 8165- 301.02 Applicability; Part 302 -- Sending and Receiving 27 Properties, §165- 302.01 Sending Properties, §165- 302.02 Receiving Properties, §165 - 302.03 Calculation of Development Rights. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Lofton. WHEREAS, an ordinance to amend Chapter 165 Zoning with regard to the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR} Ordinance as follows; (1 }updates to the Transfer of Development Rights {TDR} Density Table; (2} an addition that allows the use of contiguous parcels for TDR transfers; and (3) inclusion of a density right conversion that would apply to density rights being applied to receiving properties; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance at their regularly scheduled meeting on October 16, 2013 and November 6, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance at their regularly scheduled meeting on November 13, 2013; 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; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 Zoning, Article III _Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program, Part 301 — Establishment and Purpose, § 165- 301.02 Applicability; Part 302 — Sending and Receiving Properties, § 165- 302.01 Sending Properties, § 165- 302.02 Receiving Properties, § 165- 302.03 Calculation of Development Rights are amended as follows: (1 }updates to the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Density Table; {2} an addition that allows the use of contiguous parcels for TDR transfers; and {3) inclusion of a density right conversion that would apply to density rights being applied to receiving properties. ARTICLE III Transfer of Development Rights {TDR) Program Part 301— Establishment and Purpose. §165 - 301.01. Purpose. Pursuant to the authority granted by §§ 15.2 - 2316.1 and 2316.2 of the Code of Virginia, there is established a transfer of development rights (TDR) program, the purpose of which is to transfer residential density from eligible sending areas to eligible receiving areas and/or transferee through a voluntary process for permanently conserving agricultural and forestry uses of lands and preserving rural open spaces, and natural and scenic resources, The TDR program is intended to supplement land use regulations, resource protection efforts and open space acquisition programs and encourage increased residential density where it can best be accommodated with the least impacts on the natural environment and public services by: A. Providing an effective and predictable incentive process for property owners of rural and agricultural land to preserve lands with a public benefit; and 28 B. Implementing the Comprehensive Policy Plan by directing residential land uses to the L7rban Development Area (UDA }; and C. Providing an efficient and streamlined administrative review system to ensure that transfers of development rights to receiving areas are processed in a timely way and balanced with other county goals and policies, and are adjusted to the specific conditions of each receiving area. §165- 301.02. Applicability, The procedures and regulations in Article III of Chapter 165 shall apply to the transfer of development rights from land qualifying as sending properties to land qualifying as receiving properties and/or to a transferee. Land utilizing transferred development rights may be subdivided at an increased density above the base density specified by Tables I -3 � °�� `��° � in § 165- 302.03 in applicable receiving areas. All development utilizing transferred development rights shall conform to the guidelines contained in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. §165 - 301.03. Right to Transfer Development Rights; General Provisions. A. A development right shall be transferred only by means of documents, including a covenant to which Iirederick County is party and any appropriate releases, in a recordable form approved by the Director of Planning and Development or his designee. The covenant shall limit the future construction of dwellings on a sending property to the total number of development rights established by the zoning of the property minus all development rights previously transferred in accordance with this chapter, any development rights previously extinguished or limited as a result of a recorded covenant against the property, the number of development rights to be transferred by the proposed transaction, and the number of existing single - family detached dwellings on the sending property. If a sending property contains no dwelling units, a development right equal to that for one singleWfarnily dwelling must be maintained for the property, except that, for properties larger than one hundred (100} acres, one development right equal to that for one singleWfamiIy dwelling must be maintained for each multiple of one hundred (100} acres, or fraction thereof, contained within the sending property. B. Each transferor shall have the right to sever all or a portion of the rights to develop from the parcel in a sending district and to sell, trade, or barter all or a portion of those rights to a transferee consistent with the purposes of § 165 - 301.01 so long as the conditions of § 165 - 301.03Aare met. C. Any transfer of development rights pursuant to this Chapter authorizes only an increase in maximum density and shall not alter or waive the development standards of the receiving district, nor shall it allow a use otherwise prohibited in a receiving district. 29 D. Transfer of development rights shall not be available for the following: 1) Portions of lots owned by or subject to easements (including, but not limited to, easements of roads, railroads, electrical transmission lines, gas or petroleum pipelines} in favor of governmental agencies, utilities and nonprofit corporations. 2) Land restricted from development by covenant, easement or deed restriction. E. Any transfer of development rights shall be recorded among the land records of Frederick County, Virginia. F. Value of transferable development rights. The monetary value of transferred development rights is completely determined between the seller and buyer. Part 302 _Sending and Receiving Properties §165- 302,01. Sending Properties. A. Far the purposes of this chapter, a sending property must be an entire tai parcel or lot qualified under §165�302.O1B of this section. Sending areas may only be located within the rural areas outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA), and zoned RA (Rural Areas }, as described in the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the RA Zoning District of this Chapter. A sending property shall be maintained in a condition that is consistent with the criteria in this section under which the sending was qualified. B. Qualification of a sending property shall demonstrate that the site contains a public benefit such that the preservation of that benefit by transferring residential development rights to another site is in the public interest, according to all of the following criteria: 1} Designated in the Comprehensive Policy Plan as Rural Area; 2} Designated on the Zoning Maps of Frederick County as being zoned RA (Rural Areas) and be located outside of the Urban Development Area (UDA} and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA }; 3} Designated on the Sending Areas Map; 4} Comprised of at least twenty (20) acres in size; and 5} Qualified for subdivision in accordance with Chapter 144 of the Frederick County Cade including, but not limited to, meeting all state road and access requirements. For TDR ur oses i the sendin ro er consists o more than one arcel a land at least one 30 lot must meet all the subdivision requirements of Chapter .144; this lot shall be deemed t_he primary lot. Additional parcels that do not meet the subdivision requirements but are contiguous to the primary lot may be added to the sending property, if they are all under common ownership. For purposes of this section, lots divided by a street are considered Conti uous i the lots would share a common lot line i the street was removed. C. If a sending property has any outstanding code violations and /or unpaid taxes, the owner shall resolve these violations, including any required abatement, restoration, or payment of penalties or taxes, before the property may be qualified as a sending property in the transfer of development rights program. §165 - 302.02. Receiving Properties. A. Except as provided in subsections B and C of this section, in order to be eligible as a receiving property, a property must be: 1) Located in one of the following zoning districts: a. RP (Residential Performance) District; b. R4 (Residential Planned Community) District; or c. RA (Rural Areas) District and 2} Designated on the Receiving Areas Map; 3} Served by public water and public sewer; 4} Served by state - maintained roads or have the ability to utilize private roads in the RP District as permitted by Chapter 165 or Chapter 144. 5} Located within the Urban Development Area (UDA} or a designated and defined Rural Community Center as identified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan; and 6} Identified in the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan for residential land uses. B. A property is not eligible as a receiving property if the transfer of development rights to the property would adversely impact regionally or locally significant historical resources or naturally sensitive areas as specified in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. C. A property is not eligible as a receiving property if the property is located within the airport support area as identified by the Comprehensive Policy Plan. D. If a receiving property has any outstanding code violations andlor unpaid taxes, the owner shall resolve these violations, including any required abatement, restoration, or payment of penalties or taxes, before the property maybe qualified as a receiving property in the transfer of development rights program. 31 E. A receiving property may accept development rights from one or more sending properties, up to a maximum density specified in Tables 1 -3 ��nd- ��Ie --� in § 165- 302.03. §165- 3U2.U3. Calculation of development rights. A. The number of residential development rights that a sending property is eligible to send to a receiving property and/or transferee shall be determined by applying the sending property base density established in subsection C of this section to the area of the sending property after deducting all the following; 1. Development rights previously transferred in accordance with this chapter; 2. Development rights previously extinguished or limited as a result of a recorded conservation easement or similar covenant against the property; 3. The number of existing single - family dwellings on the sending property; 4. The amount of any submerged land {i.e., lakes, ponds, streams), floodplains, and steep slopes as determined by Frederick County GIS Data. 5. The amount of any land contained within easements (including, but not limited to, easements of roads, railroads, electrical transmission lines, gas or petroleum pipelines) in favor of governmental agencies, utilities and nonprofit corporations. B. If a sending property contains no dwelling units, a development right equal to that for one single - family dwelling must be maintained for the property. Properties with over 100 acres shall be required to retain the number of development rights required in accordance with Section 165- 301.03A. C. For the purposes of calculating the amount of development rights a sending property can transfer, the square footage or acreage of land contained within a sending property shall be determined by a valid recorded plat or survey, submitted by the applicant property owner and that has been prepared and stamped by a land surveyor lacensed in the Commonwealth of Virginia. D. For the purposes of the transfer of development rights program only, sending sites zoned RA (Rural Areas) shall have a base density of one dwelling unit per five acres for transfer purposes. E. Any fractions of development rights that results from the calculations in subsection A of this section shall not be included in the final determination of total development rights available for transfer. F. Development rights from one sending property may be allocated to more than one receiving property and /or transferee and one receiving property and /or transferee may accept development rights from more than one sending property. 32 G. The determination of the number of residential development rights a sending property has available for transfer to a receiving property andlor transferee shall be documented in a TDR LETTER OF INTENT to issue a TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE issued by the Director of Planning and Development or his designee, pursuant to the provisions of this Part 302.05 of Chapter 165, and shall be considered a final determination, not subject to revision. Such a determination shall be valid only for purposes of the transfer of development rights program and for no other purpose. Any changes to the proposed sending property shall void any issued letters of intent. H, A sending property transferee may extinguish TDR density rights, sever and hold TDR density rights, sever and sell TDR density rights, or apply TDR rights to a receiving property in a receiving district in order to obtain approval for development at a density greater than would otherwise be allowed on the land in the receiving district, up to the maximum density or intensity outlined in the table below: Table 1 Maximum Density Allowed in Zoning Districts through Transfer of 33 *See r 65- 402.05 or maximum 25. r -SO SO.r + 6 b r 0 r0 ercenta e o multi anvil housin RP Residential Performance) Mult�amily Residential,Buildin�s & NIA 20 24 Age Restricted Multifamily „a� ,..,,.,,,.. Garden A tments ra _ rs Townhouse sin le anvil attached IO _ r5 R4 (Residential Planned Community) >100 4 � r0 I. TDR density rights may be converted to bonus density rights by an increase in the residential density on the receiving property, based on the conversion factors in the table below: Table 2 Maximum Density Allowed in Zoning Districts through Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program 1. Allowable sending area_bonus density remains subject to the maximum density provisions outlined in Table 1 of §165- 302.03H. 2. If properties located in Sending Area #1 (designated Agricultural and Forestal District) that have transferred bonus density rights are subsequently withdrawn from the designated sending area (the designated Agricultural and Forestal District), the total number of density rights transferred, including bonus density rights, shall be counted against any future subdivision ability of the property. 3. When TDR densi ri hts area lied to a receivin ro er the densi ri ht to housin a conversion rate shall be outlined in the table below. Such densi conversions shall be demonstrated on the Master Develo meat Plan or the receivin ro er . Table 3 TDR Denssty Right Conversation Rate 34 §1G5- 302.04. TDR Sending Property Development Limitations. A. Following the transfer of residential development rights, a sending property that has retained part of their development rights may subsequently accommodate remaining residential dwelling units on the sending property consistent with the requirements of the RA {Rural Areas} District and all requirements of the Frederick County Code. A sending property that has retained part of its development rights may also transfer the remainder of the eligible rights through the transfer of development rights program. B. On sending properties with environmental features as outlined in § 165- 3�2.�3A, the development rights shall be severed from the areas outside of the specified environmental features. If development rights are retained on the sending property, future subdivision of the parcel cannot occur on the areas where development rights have already been severed. C. The limitations in this section shall be included in a deed covenant applicable to the sending property. §165- 342.45. Sending Property Certification. A. The Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall be responsible for determining that a proposed sending property meets the qualifications of § 165- 302.01. The Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall render a determination or denial under this subsection within sixty (6Q} days of the date of submittal of a completed sending property determination application. If the determination is that a property meets the qualifications of §165- 3�2.�1, the Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall issue the determination in the form of a LETTER OF INTENT to issue a TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE. A LETTER OF INTENT issued under this subsection shall be valid until the development rights are severed and extinguished through the transfer process, or unless applicable zoning changes are approved that would affect the sending property, or unless the property is developed. 8. Determinations of sending property qualifications under subsection A of this section are appealable to the Board of Supervisors by filing a notice of appeal with the Director of . Planning and Development or his designee within thirty (30) days of the date of the determination. 35 Unit Sin le Famil Attached 1 TDR Density Right =1.5 Dwelling Units fractions must be rounded ,(*all dawn T Multifamily I TDR Densi Ri ht =1.75 Dwellin Units *all ractians must be rounded down §1G5- 302.04. TDR Sending Property Development Limitations. A. Following the transfer of residential development rights, a sending property that has retained part of their development rights may subsequently accommodate remaining residential dwelling units on the sending property consistent with the requirements of the RA {Rural Areas} District and all requirements of the Frederick County Code. A sending property that has retained part of its development rights may also transfer the remainder of the eligible rights through the transfer of development rights program. B. On sending properties with environmental features as outlined in § 165- 3�2.�3A, the development rights shall be severed from the areas outside of the specified environmental features. If development rights are retained on the sending property, future subdivision of the parcel cannot occur on the areas where development rights have already been severed. C. The limitations in this section shall be included in a deed covenant applicable to the sending property. §165- 342.45. Sending Property Certification. A. The Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall be responsible for determining that a proposed sending property meets the qualifications of § 165- 302.01. The Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall render a determination or denial under this subsection within sixty (6Q} days of the date of submittal of a completed sending property determination application. If the determination is that a property meets the qualifications of §165- 3�2.�1, the Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall issue the determination in the form of a LETTER OF INTENT to issue a TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE. A LETTER OF INTENT issued under this subsection shall be valid until the development rights are severed and extinguished through the transfer process, or unless applicable zoning changes are approved that would affect the sending property, or unless the property is developed. 8. Determinations of sending property qualifications under subsection A of this section are appealable to the Board of Supervisors by filing a notice of appeal with the Director of . Planning and Development or his designee within thirty (30) days of the date of the determination. 35 C. The Director of Planning and Development shall be responsible for maintaining permanent records of action taken pursuant to the transfer of development rights program under this Article III of Chapter 165, including records of letters of intent issued, certificates issued, deed restrictions and covenants known to be recorded, and development rights retired, otherwise extinguished, or transferred to specific properties and/or transferees. D. Responsibility for preparing a completed application for a determination that a proposed sending property meets the qualifications of § 165 - 302.01 rests exclusively with the applicant /property owner. An application for a transfer of development rights to issue a transfer of development rights LETTER OF INTENT shall contain: l } A certificate of title far the sending property prepared by an attorney admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia; 2) Five copies of a valid recorded plat or survey, of the proposed sending parcel and a legal description of the sending property prepared by a land surveyor licensed in the Commonwealth of Virginia; 3) A plan showing the existing and proposed dwelling units and any areas already subject to a conservation easement or other similar encumbrance; 4} A completed density calculation worksheet for estimating the number of available development rights; 5} The application fee as set forth in the Development Review Fees adopted by the Board of Supervisors; and 6} Such additional information required by the Director of Planning and Development or his designee as necessary to determine the number of development rights that qualify for transfer. E. A transfer of development rights i,ETTER OF INTENT issued by the Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall state the following information: 1) The name of the transferor; 2) The name of the transferee , if then known; 3) A legal description of the sending property on which the calculation of development rights is based; 4) A statement of the size, in acres, of the sending property on which the calculation of development rights is based; 5} A statement of the number of development rights, stated in terms of number of dwelling units, eligible for transfer; 6} If only a portion of the total development rights are being transferred from the sending property, a statement of the number of remaining development rights, stated in terms of number of dwelling units, remaining on the sending property; 36 7) The date of issuance; 8) The signature of the Director of Planning and Development or his designee; and 9) A serial number assigned by the Director of Planning and Development or his designee. F. No transfer of development rights under this ordinance shall be recognized by Frederick County as valid unless the instrument of transfer contains the transfer of development rights certificate issued under this section. §165- 302.06. Instruments of Transfer. A. An instrument of transfer of development rights shall be reviewed and approved as to the form and legal sufficiency by the County Attorney and, upon such approval, the County Attorney shall notify the transferor or his or her agent, who shall record the instrument with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and shall provide a copy to the Commissioner of the Revenue. An instrument of transfer of development rights shall conform to the requirements of this section and shall contain the following: 1) The names of the transferor and the transferee; 2) A legal description and plat of the sending property prepared by a land surveyor licensed in the Commonwealth of Virginia; 3) The transfer of development rights certificate described in §165- 302.03F; 4} A covenant indicating the number of development rights remaining on the sending property and stating that the sending property may not be subdivided to or developed to a greater density than permitted by the remaining development rights; 5) A covenant that the transferor grants and assigns to the transferee and the transferee's heirs, assigns, and successors a specific number of development rights from the sending property to a receiving property and /or a transferee; b) A covenant by which the transferor acknowledges that he has no further use or right of use with respect to the development rights being transferred; and 7) A covenant that all provisions of the instrument of transfer of development rights shall run with and bind the sending property and maybe enforced by Frederick County. B. An instrument of transfer of development rights shall be recorded prior to release of development permits, including building permits, for the receiving property. Part 303 — Transfer Process and Development Procedures. §165- 303.01. Transfer Process. Development rights shall be transferred using the following process: A. Following approval of the sending property determination application and issuance of the LETTER OF INTENT as described in § 165 - 302.05, the Director of Planning and Development or his designee shall issue the TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 37 CERTIFICATE, agreeing to a transfer of development rights in exchange for the proposed sending property deed covenant to which Frederick County is a party. If a sending property with a TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE changes ownership, the certificate may be transferred to the new owner if requested in writing to the Department of Planning and Development by the parson {s) that owned the property when the certificate was issued, provided that the documents evidencing the transfer of ownership are also provided to the Department of Planning and Development. B. In applying for receiving property or receiving person approval, the applicant shall provide the Department of Planning and Development with one of the following: 1) A TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE issued in the name of the applicant; 2) A TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE issued in the name of another person or persons and a signed option to purchase those TDR sending property development rights; or 3) A TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE issued in the name of the applicant or another person {s} and a copy of a signed option to purchase those TDR sending property development rights. C. The receiving property applicant and /or transferee shall deliver the documentation outlined in § 165 - 303.01 B for the number of TDR development rights being severed or transferred and the TDR extinguishment document to the County. D. Development rights from a sending property shall be considered transferred to a receiving property and /or a transferee and extinguished when the extinguishment document for the sending property has been recorded. §165- 3U3.U2. Development Approval Procedures. A. A request to utilize transferred development rights on an eligible receiving property must be in the form of a Master Development Plan and a Subdivision Design Plan submitted to the Department of Planning and Development in accordance with the Zoning and Subdivision regulations contained in Chapters 165 and 144 of the County Code. B. All subdivisions for receiving properties zoned RA (Rural Areas) utilizing development rights shall be subject to the same requirements as property zoned RP (Residential Performance) and shall not qualify for the standards specified in § 144 -31 of the Frederick County Code. C. A final recorded plat for a subdivision using transferred development rights shall contain a statement setting forth the development proposed, the mooning classification of the property, 38 the number of development rights used, and a notation of the recordation of the conveyance required by § 165- 302.06. This amendment shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Supervisor Hess noted in 2009 the Board adopted its care values and that item number 2 "a government concerned with long range planning that protects our rural heritage and directs its future growth through planned infrastructure " is supported by this ordinance. Chairman Shickle stated, after a lot of thought, he could not support this because we are changing the use in the receiving areas without a public hearing. Supervisor Hess asked Chairman Shickle if his concerns would still exist without the proposed amendment. Chairman Shickle responded yes. He went on to ask if it would be possible to interject a public hearing process into this procedure. Planning Director Eric Lawrence advised that by law this has to be an administrative process and the Board could not deny a request based on a public hearing. There being no further discussion, the ordinance amendments were approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Nay Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Abstain Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye OTHER PLANNING ITEMS REZONING APPLYCATION #OS -13 _- GOVERNOR'S HILL — REQUEST TO REVISE PROFFERS RE: TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS AND ENVIRONMENT SECTIONS. - APPROVED 39 Deputy Planning Director - Transportation John Bishop appeared before the Board regarding this item, He advised this was a request to revise the proffers associated with Rezoning #10 -08, as it relates to the transportation improvements. Deputy Director Bishop advised there were two minor revisions far consideration. The first was the removal of the navigation easement for the airport. The second was an updated reference to the armory access road. The mare substantive change was the phased completion of Coverstone Drive. Originally the completion date was to be November 2015; however, the time table has been increased to a completion date of November 2025. This change was in recognition of current market conditions and would allow the applicant to avoid a proffer default, Supervisor Fisher noted the applicant stated they would provide noise treatment for the residential uses. He went on to say he would check back in the future to see what was done beyond best practices. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved Rezoning #OS -13 Froffer Revision of Governor's Hill. WHEREAS, Rezoning #U5 -13 Proffer Revision of Governor's Hill, submitted by Pennoni Associates, Inc., to revise the proffers associated with Rezoning #10 -08 relating to the "Transportation Enhancements" and "Environment" sections of the proffers was considered. The proffer revision, originally dated September 2, 2008, with a final revision dated September 26, 2013, removes items that have already been dealt with or are proposed to be dealt with by others and changes the date of performance provision for road improvements from 2015 to 2025. Development triggers for road improvements remain in place, so if economic conditions improve and the development is able to move forward sooner, the road improvements will also move forward. The deadline for installation of a left turn lane and median crossover to access Raven Pointe remains in place unchanged. The properties are located approximately one mile east of Interstate 81 on the south side of Millwood Pike (Route 50 East), and across from Sulphur Springs Road (Route 655), and The Ravens Subdivision, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification Numbers 64- A�-83, 64- A -83A, 64 -A -86, 64 -A -84, 64- A -85, 64 -A -86, and 64 -A -87. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public meeting on this rezoning on October 16, 2013 and forwarded a recommendation of approval; and 40 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public meeting on this rezoning on November 13, 2013, and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code Zoning is amended to revise the proffers associated with Rezoning #10 -0$ relating to the "Transportation Enhancements" and "Environment" sections of the proffers. The proffer revision, originally dated September 2, 2008,with a final revision dated September 26, 2013, removes items that have already been dealt with or are proposed to be dealt with by others and change the date of performance provision far road improvements from 2015 to 2025. Development triggers for road improvements remain in place, so if economic conditions improve and the development is able to move forward sooner, the road improvements will also move forward. The deadline for installation of a left turn lane and median crossover to access Raven Pointe remains in place unchanged. This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 13`� day of November by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shrckle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye EM XTRACTIVE MANUFACTURING DISTRICT HEIGHT WAIVER REQUEST — CARMEUSE — POSTPONED UNTIL DECEMBER 11, 2013 MEETING. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board postponed this item until the December 1 1, 2013 public hearing. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye [�� Robert W. Wells Aye COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN AMENDMENT (CPPA} RESOLUTION TO STUDY THE MCCANN- SLAUGHTER PROPERTY - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the resolution directing staff to undertake a land use study to evaluate the future land use of the McCann - Slaughter properties and surrounding area, near the intersection of Martinsburg Pike (Route 11 }and Old Charlestown Road {Route 761 }. WHEREAS, the McCann - Slaughter parcels are identified by Property Identification Numbers 44 -A -40 and 44 -A -25B in the Stonewall Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the McCann- Slaughter parcels contain approximately 160 acres, near the intersection of Martinsburg Pike and Old Charlestown Road, on both sides of McCann Road and adjacent to the CSX Railroad; and WHEREAS, the properties are collectively designated in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan for various types of land uses, including Developmentally Sensitive Areas and Industrial. Future Route 37 traverse parcel 44 -A -25B and the properties are located with the Sewer and Water Service Area {S W SA }; and WHEREAS, the request for consideration of this land use study for the McCann - Slaughter properties was sponsored and presented to the Board of Supervisors by the Stonewall Magisterial District Supervisor on October 9, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors supported the Stonewall Magisterial District Supervisor's request to place a Resolution on the next available Board of Supervisors' agenda. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED that the Board of Supervisors directs the Planning Commission to study and return to the Board of Supervisors a Comprehensive Plan study, specifically pertaining to the future land use of the McCann- Slaughter parcels, identified by Property Identification Numbers 44 -A -40 and 44 -A -25B, and surrounding area. Passed this 13�' day of November, 2013 by the following recorded vote; Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye 42 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #03 -13 FOR THE TOWNES AT TASKER — INFORMATION ONLY. Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised this was a master development plan to develop 10.2541 acres of land zoned RA {Rural Areas) District with a total of 49 single family attached (townhouse) units. The property is located in the Urban Development Area and Sewer and Water Service Area. It will be accessed via one entrance on Tacker Road. She went on to say this was a transfer of development rights receiving property and, at full build out, could include SO residential units. She concluded by saying this was being presented to the Board for information only. Dave Holliday, applicant, stated a rezoning of this property might have been quicker than using the transfer of development rights program. He thanked Senior Planner Perkins for her assistance throughout this process. He noted that as a result of the transfer of development rights program 350 acres of agricultural and forestal property were saved. He concluded by saying that he agreed with Chairman Shickle that some type of public notice might be appropriate. p.m. REQUEST TO SCHEDULE WORK SESSION The Board scheduled a work session or Friday, December 6, 2013 beginning at 12:00 ROAD RESOLUTIONS - APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. a. KENDALL MILLS SUBDIVISION, PHASE 2 WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM -4.3 fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County; and 43 WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Form AM -4.3 to the secondary system of the state highways, pursuant to 33.1 -229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees clear and unrestricted right -of- -way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. This item was approved under consent agenda. b. RUTHERFORD CROSSING — MILTON RAY DRIVE WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM -4.3 fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick county; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Form AM -4.3 to the secondary system of the state highways, pursuant to 33.1 -229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees clear and unrestricted right -of- -way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. 44 This item was approved under consent agenda. c. SOUTHERN HILLS STICKLEY DRIVE EXTENSION WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has provided this Board with a sketch and a VDOT AM -4,3 form dated Ob112113 depicting the additions, discontinuances, and abandonments required in the Secondary System of State Highways as a result of Project Southern Hills Stickley Drlve Extension which sketch is hereby incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the portions of old road identified to be discontinued are deemed to no longer serve public convenience warranting maintenance at public expense; and WHEREAS, the new road serves the same citizens as those portions of old road identified to be abandoned and those segments no longer serve a public need; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Commissioner to abandon from the Secondary System of State Highways those portions of old road identified by the sketch to be abandoned, pursuant to Section 33.1 -155, Code of Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add to the Secondary System of State Highways, those portions of road identified by the sketch to be added, pursuant to Section 33.1 -229, Code of Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board concurs with the discontinuance as part of the Secondary System of State Highways, those portions of road identified by the sketch to be discontinued, pursuant to Section 33.1 -150, Code of Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees clear and unrestricted right -of- -way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. This item was approved under consent agenda. BOARD LIAISON REPORTS There were no Board liaison reports. CITIZEN COMMENTS Dody Stottlemyer, Shawnee District, congratulated those board members who got re- elected, She stated there was a dissenting voice regarding the Transfer of Development Rights �5 (TDR) program. She stated that long -term this seemed to be a cap and trade program for land. She went on to say she lived above the Townes at Tacker and she could give the Board an update on how it was working. She stated there was a lot of things to still be worked out and perhaps that needed to start at the State level. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS Supervisor Fisher advised the Board that the draft stormwater management program would be coming to them at their December 11, 2013 meeting. He stated this was just a draft and not the final document, but they should receive a copy before that meeting. �nYnrTb�r UPON A MOTION BY VICE - CHAIRMAN DEHAVEN, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR FISHER, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THI5 BOARD, THI5 MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED. (8:50 P.M.} �r� O -� .� O U a� o �� a� c�a �� -�� o � •= �� ca .� .� ca .� N U cn P►dh .� N � � U � � � a� � � O ■ °o °o °o °o °o °o °o °o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °o °o °o °o °o °o °o °o l0 � N O 00 l0 � N -I � -I � -I � -I i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? 9£ -S£ �l� S£ -ti£ �l� ti£ -££ �l� ££ -Z£ �l� Z£ -Z£ �l� Z£ -0£ �l� 0£ -6Z �l� 6Z -8Z �l� 8Z -LZ �l� LZ -9Z �l� 9Z -SZ �l� SZ -tiZ �l� �Z -£Z �l� £Z -ZZ �l� ZZ -ZZ �l� TZ -OZ �l� OZ -6Z �l� 6Z -8Z �l� 8Z -LT �l� LZ -9Z �l� 9Z -ST �l� SZ -tiT �l� O O O I� I..P) N I� O N N rl r-I C6 J L a--+ U N w N U .� N i U °o °o °o °o °o M 0 0 0 0 0 °o °o °o °o °o N 0 0 0 0 0 � � o � o O � � � � a� as � � a� - U_ � �� y G1 J N � i U_ U_ � •y •� � � � U � ca � t Vf W V � � � � � M r-I N r-I O � O N - � N r-I r-1 r-I O N r-I r-I O r-I O r N N ` O O I r r-I O O N Ql O 00 O O N O n O O N n O O 0 v� 0 0 N O O O N O m 0 0 N m 0 o °o ° °o ° °o ° °o � � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °o ° °o ° °o ° °o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �y �y �_ �� y i� �� %� ll� �� #� �Y L y �J ._ V a� � � � � � '� o o > � a� �o � V cn •- O � a-+ O � � ,� O a-+ V _ W � � c� .- � � c� � V � � O Z V 0 a� c� °' � s V � o *, o � 0 o a� o � o *, .- o � V � 0 LL �N � � �r�- � � O � � � N � � � Z � � •- � � � � �= s � cn � � � � � � � V _ � � � � � � � O � � Q � V CC �J ._ V a� � � � � � '� o o > � a� �o � V cn •- O � a-+ O � � ,� O a-+ V _ W � � c� .- � � c� � V � � O Z V �--� N � � � O � � O �_ L .� O A � Ca N U � • � Ca Ca � U N � N Ca N � � � �_ � �_ ,� � � m . . N r O V O N w a �� ►�. U .L �--� U _N IN T O �--� �--� Ca O O .� Q � � A �U � �--� A � � � � � �> O �� O U O N N � � � � O � � U � Q � � O O � z � � . . N �--� U �--� Ca l T .� � N � � � .-• O A � � � � � +� N � � � Q A � M � O � � {�} � CV � �}' � � � � U � � � � N � � � �� O � Ca N � N N �--� � to +� O � �--� Ca O i Ca Q i U � N � �--� � � O Q �--� � ��+ Ca Ca �t� N N � _ � O � � O � � � � � w z z � � w � � o a� � � � °' � O �--� N � � � O � � O �_ L .� O A � Ca N U � • � Ca Ca � U N � N Ca N � � � �_ � �_ ,� � � m . . N r O V O N w a �� ►�. U .L �--� U _N IN T O �--� �--� Ca O O .� Q � � A �U � �--� A � � � � � �> O �� O U O N N � � � � O � � U � Q � � O O � z � � . . � O C � O M U � '� O N `i t � V _ T w _ � ++ (p J 1 c 0 o +� U v O � O � .� � � (�,) � o N O O O M O r-I N C C O a N a O O � O O O � � � � � vi � � o vi Op C �� O � O N O C OOi O N i � N Q 0 C vi O Li p U O � — O � '� N � � N � � � C O f6 O U � C � f6 � � M � � C � f6 yj .� i Q- '� Q Q � N N N � N � .� O O C Q O �' � 7 O � � N � Q � C � (� ��v� ' q.... ,�.� *r� 'I� G /w. �� O O O O O O O � � � � o L.ri L.ii � � o � � � N m ono N rl rl N O rl � I� � � p1 N N N m � � � � � .O �, � O � � � � ca � � O � O � � � ,v � � � � � � � � � � � > X w � U t�A � � � .� � aj DC � vi � '� � � U � � � �..+ a--+ U � � v � _ � w O 0 � � � .� U .i � N � cri � � � O W � N � c/1 °' � � °' � W��z i +� c�a �,��z � � O m o o �� oc o � a o �, �, o o� O z o az zi- aQ i- �/ I� li ^�^ 1�i\ J _3 A�/� i/ L O O O O I O O O '✓ O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N '�%• H .; V •• • J: �� LL LL M LL 0 M LL N LL N LL N N LL N � } N LL N � } N LL N N L}L N N N L}L r-I N N LL 0 � } N LL rl O LL r-I Ql � � LL i--I 00 L}L r-I i^-I LL Ln r-I l0 � � LL r-I z W C7 0 U 7 C C a a U LL �. 0 U 7 C C a a U LL N U C N N �_ I 0 0 0 0 0 � 0 0 0 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � � � � � � � � � z W C7 0 U 7 C C a a U LL �. 0 U 7 C C a a U LL N U C N N �_ I • � i O ca '- O � � � N � � � N � � � � o a � aA — � ago � � � � � � a� � � � �j i o � N V � � � � V i W � _ L% � � ._ a� � � a� �� ,� � V � � � V N � � � � � � � � � � � > c�i� � � O � � � � a� V� cn O V a� � � �, ,o N a� � a � � � � W � � .i ca � a •— a� W � � � � LL •N i O •- � �_ � � c/1 .� m 0 H 0.1 h H 0.1 .y �.--� -� �.+ 0� 0� a a v O V H V a-+ 0 V V L O i a ago •� ca c/i W • �� V ca i �° a� a V O a •�. O O O O O M {/�- ai 3 GJ GJ DC 3 Z a� i ._ ca N .O a� �� U i a °o 0 ^ O O N ^ N ,� � � �, aA aA .� .� > > .� .� U U ~ ._ ._ ._ � � � U � � a� s W V J � � � a �+ V LL NO i t V � �= +.+ p v V � .� 0 N p� O +.+ a � Q� � � .. � � � � �_ � s � o •� L ^N' W ca � o � � V � � t V i i � � � o o � ,� � I Z I V I C7 I V ca i �° a� a V O a •�. O O O O O M {/�- ai 3 GJ GJ DC 3 Z a� i ._ ca N .O a� �� U i a °o 0 ^ O O N ^ N ,� � � �, aA aA .� .� > > .� .� U U ~ ._ ._ ._ � � � U � � a� s W V J � � � �1 �� J ._ V �--� V i O O .� C� C� V z • N Q O N N U .� O O U N W �..� V i �_ O � � O � O � O � O � O � �' O � - O �V N � O � .� � � _ O � � � � � � � � � •- � � � � � � � a--� � � � � � � � V � � � � `~ � O � Q � v oc • • • �J ._ V �--� V i O O .� C� C� V z • N Q O N N U .� O O U N Frederick - Winchester S'erviceAuthorhy Post Office Box 43 Winchester, Virginia 22604 Office: 107 North Kent Street County Office Complex Winchester, Virginia 22601 1- 540 - 722 -3579 To: Richard C. Shickle — Chairman Gene E. Fisher — Shawnee District Gary A. Lofton —Back Creek District Charles S. Dehaven, Jr. — Stonewall District Robert A. Hess — Gainesboro District Christopher E. Collins —Red Bud District Robert W. Wells — Opequon District John R. Riley — County Administrator From: Jesse W. Moffett, Executive Director — Frederick- Winchester Service Authority Date: October 29, 2013 Reference: Resolution Consenting to New Projects to be undertaken and financed by the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority THE ISSUE: Request made of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to approve Consent Resolution providing consent to the Frederick Winchester Service Authority to move forward with the proposed Waste -to- Energy Project at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. BACKGROUND: The Frederick -W inchester Service Authority has been evaluating cost cutting options that would be viable to stabilize or reduce the continuing escalation of operational costs. It is projected that operational costs at the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility, that serves the City of Winchester and portions of Frederick County will increase almost three fold over the next twenty years. The Authority's initial evaluation was focused on the energy component of the operations since it is nearly 20% of the operating costs at the facility. Couple that with what we have seen over the past 10 years, a 105% increase in cost with electrical consumption increase of only 3 %, and one can sees the concern with future escalations. This energy usage evaluation uncovered a number of other areas that could be a source of significant operational costs, those areas being chemical costs (122 %)and sludge disposal costs (277 %)and their impact on the operations, 58% of operating costs. Placing our focus on these three components we found that it was a worthwhile undertaking to look at the total operational process if the following objectives could be achieved: Process changes would result in a more efficient operation at lower costs and no capacity impact. Cost saving could financially support the capital investment to implement these process changes. Process changes would have benefits outside of just facility operations. • Changes would insure that already identified capital needs would be addressed without driving up costs to our users. ($26,000,000.00 over next 20 years) Saving would result in a stabilization of future operational rates It was quickly noted that the driver of the continuing operational cost escalation was biosolids production volume and the manner in which it is processed and dewatered for disposal. Conclusion, if the volume can be reduced so can other associated costs. Through this extensive energy audit it became clear that, by utilizing the long established process of digestion together with energy recovery, significant cost saving could be achieved. So we are proposing for your consideration a Waste to Energy Project which through the installation of a digestion /cogeneration facilities and upgrades and enhancements to other existing processes, we can accomplish the following: • 68 %reduction in electrical expense resulting in a $500,000.00 savings annually. • 52 %reduction in chemical costs resulting in a $570,000.00 savings annually. • 43% reduction in landfill tipping fees resulting in a $220,000.00 savings annually and the elimination of 8,600 tons of waste going to the landfill annually. • These savings translate into life cycle cost savings of $41,800,000.00. If one is to compare the additional life cycle capital costs of $57,900,000.00 to fund this project, it is apparent that operating savings alone leaves the project short of a breakeven venture by $16,100,000.00. To have a viable project the digestion /cogeneration facilities have been sized to accommodate outside waste streams. The facility as proposed will allow for receiving of food and beverage high strength waste, outside sludges from other municipal facilities, oil and grease wastes, and dairy and cheese waste by- products. We have had extensive discussions with our existing local industries and have received very positive responses to the level that we are having detailed long term contract discussion which would yield $400,000 or greater in annual revenues. The Economic Development organizations view this as a major recruitment tool for the region because waste management is such a critical component in facility siting. At this stage of the financial evaluation we are projecting that outside high strength revenues at start up will be $630,000.00 annually. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This proposed project would require the issuance of over $51 million of Revenue Bonds by the Frederick- Winchester Service Authority. While this is a significant amount of additional debt, the 20 -year financial projections that have been prepared by FWSA show that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority would save approximately $7.2 million in annual operating and debt service costs over life cycle period of twenty years when comparing to a scenario that would be "Business as Usual ". It should be noted that the majority of these projected savings occur during the latter 10 years of the 20 year period. It should also be noted that there is some financial risk in moving forward with this project if the financial assumptions used over the 20 -year period do not prove to be accurate. However, we view the assumptions, and escalation factors as being a conservative scenario. The proforma for this project has been reviewed numerous times by the Contractor (Energy Systems Group), our consultant ARCADIS -US and our financial advisor and has been found to be a reasonable and supportable evaluation of the project's financial viability. As part of the pending contract, Energy Systems Group is guaranteeing $1,290,000.00 in annual operational savings and for the first five years $630,000.00 in outside revenues. RECOMMENDATION: That the Frederick County Board of Supervisors adopt the attached Consent Resolution.supporting the Waste to Energy Project. Frederick - Winchester Service Authority's Green Energy Project A Benefit to Citizens and Businesses of the Community In continued support of its mission to abate pollution by wastewater treatment and comply with ever increasing environmental standards, the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) proposes a uniquely innovative project that reduces its long term operating costs to citizens and the community while providing a new resource to businesses and future economic development. The Green Energy Project will capture the untapped energy hidden in municipal sewage and food processing waste to produce methane gas, a renewable fuel, through the process of anaerobic digestion. This methane will become the fuel to create up to 825 kilowatts of green electricity to power the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. In addition, the project includes a variety of infrastructure improvementsthat reduce the plant's annual operating costs and its impact on the County landfill, extending the life of that important community resource. Finally, the facility will harvest phosphorus from the digested waste, a rare element that is an essential ingredient for fertilizer and crop production. From its inception, FWSA set four clear objectives for the project: 1. Reduce the need for future rate increases to citizens — leveraging the project's cost savings to cover its debt service. 2. Future savings of $20,000,OOOfor the Community- when compared to currently planned operating and capital costs, 3. A fully upgraded facility -with existing capital and compliance needs included — eliminating the need for another large capital investment in the near future. 4. Newtapabilitiestosupportfuturecommunityeconomicdevelopment- increasingthelikelihoodof securing and increasingjobs and the tax base in Winchester and Frederick County Reduce the need for future rate increases to citizens The graph below shows FWSA's future share of FWSAbudget— comparing its current path of that which results from the Green Energy Project. The chart's blue line - FWSA's current path -shows the FCSA's share will rise from $3.5M to nearly $7.5M over the next twenty years. In contrast, the green line -the Green Energy project - shows a stable cost of $S.OM for the next twenty years. The project helps eliminate the need for future rate increases and provides over $8.6M in future cost savings. A Savings of $20.000,000 for the Community The Gree�rgy project creates new debt service, savings in operating costs, and new revenues from the acceptance of high strength food waste. When compared to the current operating and capital improvement plan, the Green Energy Project creates a total savings of $22M over the project life. Of this $22M, the FCSA's portion of the savings is $14.3M, as show in the table on this page. The Impact of the Green Energy Project on future costs for the FCSA $7,000,000.00 .__— .�.__._.__�� omparrson ---- _._.______. -_w-. �.___ $ 6, 000, 0 00, 00 ._---------- - - - - -_ --------- - - - - -- - - -- $4,000,000.00 - - - -_- _. _ ` �_r �_... �_.____.__- ...__.___..__._ - -- $3,000,000.00 - �._____ _.,_ -- Business As Usual $2,000,000.00 __ The Green Energy Project creates .flVrin savings - ----- - - - - -- - -- -- T for the FCSA Green Energy Project ($7,000,000.00 _ - __-- -� - - - - -- - II$- -- --—- - - - - -- - 'CY '°Y 'CY 'OY 'PY jDY SOY 'PY 'OY '�Y 'CY �zy ,js 'id; '20, '2? �9 1ce '2cQ `�O, .p� 3� .ZS �Ij �Zy �� 1� 1y. �j �9 3f �� .PS. A fully ungraded facilitX A benefit of the Green Energy Project is that it includes and resolves nearly all of the existing treatment infrastructure needs that must be done to keep the Opequon Plant meeting its treatment obligations for the next 20 years. The project includes a combination of needed wastewater treatment infrastructure upgrades, improvements for improved operational efficiency, and green energy production, as shown in the table. New capabilities to support future community economic development Currently, there is not a municipal wastewatertreatmentfacility regularly accepting food processing waste within 100 miles. Market research shows that The Green Energy Project_($42.8M) Treatment Infrastructure Renewal {$29.3M� ■ New anaerobic digesters and supporting infrastructure ■ New sludge dewatering facility ■ Improved wastewater disinfection system ■ Treatment plant control system upgrade ■ Emergency power system ■ Improved wastewater aeration system Operational Efficiency Improvements ,($1.2M) ■ Building energy management control system ■ Lighting and mechanical system improvements Green Energy and Resource Generation ($12.3M) ■ New cogeneration facility producing up to 825 kilowatts of electricity ■ Food waste receiving facility ■ Phosphorus recovery system many food processors in the Shenandoah Valley are trucking their waste several hundreds of miles for disposal. This approach is expensive and does not support the sustainability initiatives of either the food companies or their customers. FWSA's project creates a new local, cost - competitive and reliable waste management solution for the food processing industry keeping waste disposal costs low for local industry, keeping existing industry in place and attracting new industry seeking friendly communities that support and facilitate sustainable organic waste disposal practices. It also creates a valuable new source of revenue for FWSA —one that would not be possible without these new facilities. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA, CONSENTING TO NEW PROJECTS TO BE UNDERTAKEN AND FINANCED BY THE FREDERICK - WINCHESTER SERVICE AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE OPEQUON WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY INTERMUNICIPAL AGREEMENT AND OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, the County of Frederick, Virginia (the "County "), the City of Winchester, Virginia (the "City "), the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (the "Sanitation Authority ") and Frederick - Winchester Service Authority (the "Service Authority ") have entered into the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility Intermunicipal Agreement dated as of April 16, 2008 (the "Intermunicipal Agreement "), for the purposes of providing for the construction of such wastewater treatment facilities as are agreed upon from time to time and the financing, operation and maintenance of all such facilities and for providing security for the bonds to be issued by the Service Authority in connection with such facilities; WHEREAS, pursuant to such Agreement and its predecessor, the Service Authority has undertaken from time to time the construction, expansion and improvement of the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility (the "Facility ") and has issued from time to time revenue bonds to finance such undertakings; WHEREAS, the Service Authority has determined to undertake a series of projects at the Facility that will provide some or all of the improvements as further described in the executive summary attached hereto as Exhibit A (collectively, the "New Projects "); WHEREAS, the Service Authority has further determined to finance the New Projects by the issuance of one or more additional series of revenue bonds (the "Bonds ") pursuant to the Agreement of Trust dated as of October 1, 1985, as supplemented and amended from time to time (collectively, the "Trust Agreement "), secured in part by the payments to be made in accordance with the terms of the Intermunicipal Agreement; WHEREAS, pursuant to Article III of the Intermunicipal Agreement, the Service Authority has requested the consent of the County, the City and the Sanitation Authority with respect to the undertaking of the New Projects and the issuance of the Bonds; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA: 1. The Board of Supervisors (the "Board ") of the County approves and consents, for purposes of the provisions of Section 3.1 of the Intermunicipal Agreement, to the Service Authority's undertaking of the New Projects and the issuance of the Bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $53,000,000, for the purposes of financing the New Projects, funding debt service and operating reserve funds and paying related issuance costs. 2. The Board acknowledges that the Bonds will be payable from and secured by amounts received by the Service Authority from the payments assessed under the Intermunicipal Agreement. 3. The Board authorizes and consents to the inclusion of County information in the Official Statement (in its preliminary and final forms) to be prepared by the Service Authority for purposes of marketing the Bonds and hereby directs County staff to assist the Service Authority in the preparation of such County disclosure. 4. The County Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver such documents and certificates as are necessary to enable the Service Authority to issue the Bonds and to finance the New Projects, including, but not limited to, a continuing disclosure agreement and closing certificates requested by the Service Authority and its bond counsel. Any other County official so designated by the County Administrator is hereby similarly authorized and directed to execute and delivery such documents and certificates. 5. All other acts of the officers of the County, heretofore or hereafter taken, that are in conformity with the purposes and intent of this Resolution and in furtherance of the issuance and sale of the Bonds and the financing of the New Projects by the Service Authority are hereby approved, ratified and confirmed. 6. Nothing in this Resolution or in the Intermunicipal Agreement is or shall be deemed to be a lending of the credit of the County of the City to the Service Authority or to any holder of any of the Bonds or to any other person, and nothing herein contained is or shall be deemed to be a pledge of the faith and credit or the taxing power of the County or the City within the meaning of the Constitution of Virginia. 7. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. The undersigned [Deputy] Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, hereby certifies that the foregoing constitutes a true and correct extract from the minutes of a meeting of the Board of Supervisors held on , 2013, and of the whole thereof so far as applicable to the matters referred to in such extract. I hereby further certify that such meeting was a regularly scheduled meeting and that, during the consideration of the foregoing resolution, a quorum was present. Members present at the meeting were: Members absent from the meeting were: Members voting in favor of the foregoing resolution were: Members voting against the foregoing resolution were: Members abstaining from voting on the foregoing resolution were: WITNESS MY HAND and the seal of the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, this day of , 2013. [SEAL] 3 John R. Riley, Jr. Clerk, Board of Supervisors County of Frederick, Virginia TO: Board of Supervisors FROM. John R. Riley, Jr., County Admini trator DATE:. December �, -:2013 COUNTY of FREDERICK doisn R. i�aley, dr. County Administrator 54D/665 -5666 Fax 540/667 -0370 E -mail: jriley @ co.fredericic.va.us RE:: Committee Appointments fisted below are the vacancieslappointments due through February, 2011. As a reminder, in order for everyone to have ample time to review applications, and so -they can be included in the agenda, please remember to submit applications prior to Friday agenda preparation; Your assistance' is greatly appreciated. VACANClESIOTHER MPO Citizens Advisoiy Committee LCAC� Tim Stowe - Frederick County Representative 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens -City, VA 22655 Alan Toxopeus - Frederick County Representative 1579 Cedar Creek Grade Winchester, VA 22601 .(See Aftached Ros #er} (The County currently has finro..vacancies- on -the MPO Cifizens Advisory Committee. Sfaff has been advised that Tim Stowe has resigned as ' fhe Frederick County representative due ; to his appointment as the Stephens City Representative on -the lVlPO Technical Advisory Committee: Mr. Stowe has served on the Citizens Advisory Committee since inception.: Mr, Alan Toxopeus has passed away. According to MPO By -Laws, the Citizen's Advisory Commiftee shall be composed of individuals representing a diverse background in the Win -Fred County region _and shall provide citizen input, review, comments and recommendations - to the MPO. Appointments are made by each locality with the County and City having three representatives and one from Stephens City.) 107 North Kent Street ®Winchester, Virginia 22601 Memorandum- Board of Supervisors Decernber �4, 2013 Page 2 Planning Commission Brian Madagan = Opequon District Representative 147 Blackburns Ford Drive Stephens City, VA 22655 Term :Expires: 04/07/17 dour year term {Staff has been advised that Mr. Madagan has resigned effective lUovember 4, 2013.] Commun'i Folic and Mana ement Team CPMT :Greta Cherry W Parent Representative 112 :corral Drive Stephens :City; VA 22655 :: Term Expires:. 06/30714 Two yearaerm {Ms: Greeta Cherry has resigned.- CSA Coordinator Jackie Jury and CPN1T staff is attempting to get recommendation {s} :for appointment- and apon receipt, :will forward same to the Board of Supervisors at a :future meeting.) Extension 1Leadership Council Edward J Keenan - Shawnee District Representative 840 Careers Valley F�oad Winchester, VA :22602 Home: (540)667 -4816 Term Expires:: 01/25114 Four yearterm {Mr. Keenanhas resigned ) DECEMBER -20'13 Memorandum -Board of Supervisors December 4, 2013 Page 3 Teem Expires: 12/31/13 Fire -year term (There :: are seven members on the .Board of Zoning Appeals. Recommendations: for appontmentJreappontment are made 6y the Board of Supervisors and submitted to the Judge of the Frederick County Circuit Court for final appointment} JANUARY 2014 Industrial De�elanment Authoi-i Beverley; B. Shoemaker = Opequon District Representative P: 0. Box 480 Stephens City; VA :.22655 Home: ; (540)869 -828 Term Expires: 01123/14 Four year term Planrnng;Comm�ssion Christopher M. Mohn --.Red Bud District RaPresentative 316 Ridge Road Winchester, VA 22602 Home: (540)678 -1366 - Term Expires: ':•01127114 Four year'- term Charles F. Dunlap -Red Bud District Representative 401 Lynneha�en Drive Winchester, VA :22602 Home: (540 }323 -738 Term :Expires: 0112T11 � Four year term FEBRUARY 2414 II�ETROPgLITAN PLANNI{VG ORGANIZATIgN CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chair Vice Chair S ecretary/T'reasu rer R. William Bayliss, III Wait Cunningham Martha Shickle Frederick Tim Stowe Stowe Engineering/Construction 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 (0) 540- 336 -0656 (1~) 540 - 869 -9167 Email; timstowenstowecompanies.com Walt Cunningham 1366 Greenwood Rd. Winchester, VA 22602 (H} 540 - 667 -7825 Stephens City Kelly Renshaw Shoe Buckle Court Stephens City, VA (H) (540) 868 -1526 Email: khenshaw(a,ci.winchester.va.us Winchester R. William Bayliss, III I'.�. Box 18 Winchester, VA 22604 {O) 540- 667 -9700 Email; rbayliss[a),wachoviasec.com Dr..Tohn Crandell 408 Fairmont Ave. Winchester, VA 22601 (�} 540 - 722 -0751 Email: crandell(a,comcast.net Alan Toxopeus Citizen 1579 Cedar Creek Grade Winchester, VA 22601 (H} 540- 662 -7469 Email: tox shentel.net VACANT ]1TSVRC Staff' Martha Shickle, Executive Director — Email: mshickle nsvre ion.or Karen Taylor, Transportation Program Manager — Email: kta for nsvre ion.or 400 Kendrick Lane, Suite E, Front Royal, VA 22630 (0) 540 - 6368800 {F) 540 - 635 -4147 � � �� Virginia Cooperative F�cfiensian — Frederick County 147 N. Kent Str�set Winchester, Virginia 22601 540.865.5699 Fax: 540.722.8380 email: marksutphin @vt.edu http :l /offices.ext,vt.eduffrederickl MEMORANDUM TO. John, Riley, County Adrr>inistrator FROM: Mark Sutphin, VCE- Frederick Unit Coordinator SUBJECT: Reappointment of Heather McKay � Ruth Boden to the Frederick County Extension Leadership Council; Election of Chaix &Vice Chaix DATE: November 13, 2413 In October 2012, Heather McKay was appointed to fill an unexpired vacant Merx>ber -at -Large term on the Frederick County Extension Leadership Council. Heather's terxn expires orr February 13, 2014. Virginia Cooperative Extension — Frederick County would like to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that Heather McKay be reappointed to a full term as an ELC Member -at- Large. Heather is an active young membex of the Frederick County agriculture community and provides great insight and leadership to Extension. Ruth Boden's Member -at -Large term expires February 13, 2014. Virginia Cooperative Extension -°- Frederick County would like to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that Ruth Boden be reappointed to another full term as an ELC Member -at- Large. Ruth has also served as a representative on the State ELC for two consecutive terms. Her current state term is scheduled to end June 2014. Ruth is a very active 4 -H leader and volunteer as well as an integral agriculture comxnuzaity membex iurr Frederick County and we greatly value her as an advisor to Extension. At the September 4, 2413 meeting of the Fzederick County ELC, Robert (Bob) Meadows was elected as Chairperson and Helen Lake was elected as Vice - Chairperson for calendar year 2014. lnvenf the Future ir�ni� V1R{'siNIA POLYTECHNIC €NSTiTUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY ��C� #��i� Extension €s a Joint program of VErginia Tech, Virginia State University, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and state and Ipcal governments. �� Virginia Cooperative Extension programs and employmentare open tp all, regardieas of race, color, natipna! vrlgin, sex, religion, age, disd6i31ry, pall #leaf beliefs, aexvatorient @ #Epn,geneticinfarmatlon, marital, famiy, orve# eran9tatus, want'otherbasisprotectedM�aw. pnequaEopportunfty /afF>fmativaartipnemployer. �/¢JJ144/�xt,�� .: _ :. -: ,.. t�� =��5tar'�� ,.:iii Si.t.?i_F� rats i?,r� ��r t: ° =l�=�'i4: r =r�w�� ;�� Executive Director of Finance fryel @frederick.k12.va.us ��111�'iB2O��2 GATE: November 19, 2013 �� t� TO: Cheryl 5ttiffier, Director of Finance — County of Frederick c� �^ �_�� FROM: Lisa K. Frye, Executive director of Finance - FCPS �'.,`�� .o,,, a �,r��c!; ��:��, � � fir, �c �' �Ti;tLa�:r�`�^.�", ^. C::'.. �� SUBJECT: FY14 Budget Adjustment � Schaot Construction Fund ,� "� ` ;'� °�-' ��' At their meeting, November 18, 2013, the School Board approved the following budget adjustment, subject to approval by the Board of Supervisors. Reauested Action: FYZ014 School Construction Fund budget adjustment in the amount of $45,500,000, which Is the remaining appropriation needed for the replacement Frederick County Middle School Baclteround: The estimated total project cost of the replacement Frederick County Middle School at the Route S22 North site is $49,500,000. This estimate encompasses the components for the turnkey project including land, design, engineering, site improvement, construction, equipment, and furnishings. The project is targeted for completion by mid -2016. The project currently has $4,000,000 appropriated for initial project costs. The School Board procured land adjacent to Gainesboro Elementary School, proceeded with design, and is nearing the point to seek solicitation for construction bids. Appropriation of the remaining estimated project cost is requested, which is $45,500,000. It is requested consideration of this budget adjustment 6e placed. on the agenda for the December 11, 2013 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, at which time a public hearing and subsequent action could be set for January $, 2014. Thank you. C: David T. Sovine, Superintendent John R. Riley, County Administrator November 12, 2013 MEMORANDUM Frederick County, Virginia Ellen E. 1Viurphy Commissioner of fhe Revenue !07 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Phone 540 -665 -5681 Fax 540 - 667 -6487 email emurphy @co.frederick.va.us TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors Ms. Cheryl Shiffler, Finance Director Mr. Roderick Williams, County Attorney Mr. Jay Tibbs, Clerk of the Board FROM: Ellen E. Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue �, � � ,` �� RE: Memo for Supplemental Appropriation: American Telephone and Telegraph Exoneration per State Corporation Commission assessments. Please provide authority for the Finance Director to have a supplemental appropriation to cover the refund request of: $4,536.44 to American Telephone and Telegraph based on the assessment adjustment made by the State Corporation Commission as part of their annual locality adjustments. Refund is for 2013 taxes. Total supplemental appropriation needed is $4,536.44. MEM ®1zANDUM TO: Ellen E. Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue Frederick County Board of Supervisors CC: john R. Riley, fir., County Administrator FROM: Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney DATE: November 19, 2013 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Roderick B. Wiiliams County Attorney 540/722 -83 S 3 Fax 5401667 -0370 E -mail rwillia @co. frederick.va, us RE: Refund �- American Telephone &Telegraph -State Corporation Commission Adjustment 1 am in receipt of the Commissioner's request, dated November 7, 2013, to authorize the Treasurer to refund American Telephone &Telegraph the amount of $4,536.44, for an adjustment to the 2013 annual public service corporation assessment based on information as required from the State Corporation Commission (SCC). Pursuant to the provisions of Section. 58.1- 3981(A) of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), I hereby note my consent to the proposed action. Further pursuant to Section 58.1- 3981(A), the Board of Supervisors will need to a , - t request, as indicated in the Commissioner's memorandum. �. �--__ Roderick B. Williams County Attorney Attachment 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 November 7, 2013 TO: FROM: RE: Frederick County, Virginia �Ilen �, IVl'urphy Commissioner of the Revenue 907 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22609 Phone 540 -665 -5689 Fax 540 - 667 -6487 email: emurphy @co.frederick.va.us Mr. Roderick Williar�ns, County Attorney Frederick County Board of Supervisors Ellen E. Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue Exoneration AMERICAN TELEPHONE &TELEGRAPH —STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION ADJUSTMENT �' ;. Please allow the Treasurer to refund $4,536.44 to American Telephone &Telegraph for an adjustment to the 2013 annual public service corporation assessment based on information as required from the State Corporation Commission (SCC). Refund is in the normal course of activity relating to the assessment and reporting done by the SCC to all localities on the realty and personalty of public service corporations in line with their charge of providing values for taxation by localities. The request for refund appears in order and all backup information has been examined, approved, and retained by Commissioner of the Revenue staff. Exoneration total is $4,536.44. Date: 11/07/13 Cash Register: COUNTY OF FREDERICK Time: 13:8:19 Cashier: Register: OPPN Customer Name: A_T & T CORD Drawer: RWC Soc. Sec. No.. C��tomer Transactions: (FS= Review) Total Transactions: 468 Dept_ Ticket No. FRQ B�11Date Charge Penal.t Int Amount Paid Balance PS2013 � 00140001 �1 4 15 2013 1.53- � �-- I , ��=�_ PS2013 00000100002 002 4/15/2013 4533.36- 4533.38- - PS2013 00000140002 002 4/15/2013 1.53- 1.53- Comment ..............: DO NOT REFUND -NEEDS BOARD APPROVAL Old /New Promise Date.: Total: $4536.49-- - No. of Transactions: � Amount to Pay: F3 =Exit F4= Accept Payment F7 =Pay Sills Separately F21= Command Line F15 =Show Penalty /Int WINCHESTER FFtEDEkICK COUNTY VIF�GINIAfDC DATE: December 4, 2013 T0: Jahn R. Riley, Jr. County Administrator FROM: Patrick Barker, CEcD Executive Director RE: Revised BOS Resolution for NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION Attached for your review and action is a revised Board of Supervisors resolution for the expansion of NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, A provision that approves and appropriates the Governor's Opportunity Fund payment was somehow absent from Tina! version which the Board of Supervisor approved in June. NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION wild expand its member service operation in Frederick County. They will make a $20 million investment to construct an additional facility and add 400 new jobs. The credit union serves all Department of Defense military and civilian personnel and their families. Frederick County, Virginia, successfully competed with Florida. ! would like to request these items be inserted into the Board of Supervisors' next available meeting. - Thanks for your help. ! am available if you have any questions or comments on the materials for this project. Attachment; • 605 Resolution Your Move. fur Cornrn�tment. I�eI11111�11AlAwwlllll1111111111 1�� 11�w11�11/ ___ -- -- 45 East Boscawen Street e Winchester, VA 22641 e 544 -b65 -4973 •Fax 540- 772�4b44 a wwwwirNa.com From: McDaniel, Kyle [mallto:Robert.McDaniel fairfaxcoun ov] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 11:33 AM To: McDaniel, Kyle Subject: First Day Introduction Requirement Message Sent on Behalf ofSupervisor Pat Herr,r;ty,,, Chair, Governor's Task Force, or Local Government Review: Dear Local Government Official, Over the last two years, the Governor's Task Force for Local Government Mandate Review has examined in great detail mandates on local governments and the means through which they are enacted. What has emerged from this work is a clear understanding and recognition that the local government f scal impact review process needs to be improved. As we have seen over the last two years, the focus on the fiscal impact of mandates has had a positive result in recent General Assembly sessions, and the number of bills referred for fiscal review has increased. Prior to 2010, a first day introduction requirement was in place to ensure that any bill enacting a local mandate would be sufficiently analyzed by the Commission on Local Government prior to its being considered by the General Assembly. Unfortunately, in 2010 this provision was removed and now only bills pertaining to the Virginia Retirement System must meet this requirement. Under the current system of review, there are not enough resources for bills to be properly reviewed for fiscal impact within the given time constraints imposed by the current filing deadlines. The Task_ Force believes that the magnitude of the problems caused by a lack of adequate review of local mandate bills prior to their passage necessitates the reinstatement of the first day filing requirement. We believe proper fiscal impact analysis will result in fewer bills with local fiscal mandates making it through the General Assembly. The Task Force has made the reinstatement of the f rst day introduction requirement for all bills with a local fiscal impact its primary recommendation this year. Going into the 2014 General Assembly Session, the Task Force is asking local governments to include their support for this change in their legislative agendas as well as the passage of resolutions by Boards of Supervisors, and City and Town Councils in favor of the change. For your consideration, a sample resolution is attached. The Task Force thanks you for your attention and consideration of this critical matter. Together, Governor McDonnell, the Task Force and local governrnents have made historic progress in the repeal of dozens of local mandates, creating a new awareness of the impact of local mandates, and eliminated numerous additional "mandates" via discussion with state agencies and executive action. Your support of the reinstatement of the first day introduction requirement will go a long way to reducing the burden of mandates placed on the Commonwealth's 3241oca1 governments, We are continuing our review of local mandates and encourage you to continue to identify and refer mandates you believe should be reviewed by sending suggestions to MandateRelief�dhcd.Vir ig•nia. ov On behalf of the Task Force I thank you for your support of our efforts. Sincerely yours, ,tom. Patrick S. Herrity Chair, Governor's Task Force for Local Government Mandate Review Springfield District Supervisor, Fairfax County Board of Supervisors �. xyl� MCDa�d�� 1�rP.R. Policy Director Office of Supervisor Pat Herrity Fairfax County Board of Supervisors O: 703 -451 -8 873 C:571- 425 -7584 Kee in Touch with Su ervisor I -Terri Website 1 Newsletter 1 Facetrook / LinkedIn MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Walter T. Banks, IT Director DATE: October 6th, 2013 COUNTY OF FREDERICK RE: Board of Supervisors Information Technology Committee Report Information Technologies (540} 665 -5614 The Board of Supervisors Information Technology Committee met on Wednesday, November 6, 2013 at 8:15 A.M., in the First Floor Conference Room, County Administration Building 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. Present were Gary Lofton, Chairman, Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., and Quaiser Absar. Committee members absent were: Bob Wells, Todd Robertson, and Brian Madagan. Others Present included: Walter Banks, IT Director; Kris Tiemey, Assistant County Administrator and Alisa Scott, Administrative Assistant. The committee submits the following: ** *Items NOT Requiring Board Action * ** Walter Banks gave updates on Microsoft's announcement that they will no longer support Microsoft XP Operating Systems. The IT department is currently confirming the amount of operating systems and computers it will need to replace over the 2014 -2015 budget year in response to this announcement. A global strategy of implementing annual updates using a percentage of inventory method was discussed. Walter Banks discussed upcoming trials and demos for virtual desktops and Help Desk Software. Walter Banks and Kris Tierney discussed the Broadband Public Meeting Agenda for November 14th to format the meeting according to the goal of facilitating the improvement of broadband in Frederick County. Respectfully Submitted, Gary A. Lofton, Chairman Charles Dehaven Jr. �, �� Walter T. Banks IT Director BOS Tech Committee What's New? ,. N ®ember 6t�, 2 ®� 3 � Discuss Microsoft's announcement that they will no TII°f'�E: �: � 5 drrl longer support Microsoft XP Operating System and what this means to the county. Purple C ®nference Ro ®m 'Discuss upcoming trials and demos for virtual 107 N Kent Street desktops and Help Desk Software • Review the Agenda for the Broadband Public Meeting that is taking place on November 14t ". • Note: There will be no actionable items for this meeting, however we expect actionable items for December or January's meeting. MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Walter T. Banks, TT Director DATE: December 4, 2013 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Information Technologies (540) 665 -5614 RE: Board of Supervisors Information Technology Committee Report The Board of Supervisors Information Technology Committee met on Wednesday, December 4, 2013 at 8:15 A.M., in the First Floor Conference Room, County Administration Building 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. Present were Gary Lofton, Chairman, Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Quaiser Absar, and Todd Robertson. Committee members absent were: Bob Wells and Brian Madagan. Others Present included: Andrew Robbins, Commonwealth's Attorney's Office; Cheryl Sniffler, Finance Director; Sharon Kibler, Assistant Finance Director; Walter Banks, IT Director; Kris Tierney, Assistant County Administrator; Patrick Fly, GIS Manager; and Alisa Scott, Administrative Assistant. The committee submits the following: * * *Items Requiring Board Action* None * * *Items NOT Requiring Board Action* 1. Recommendation to forward to the Finance Committee a request for supplemental appropriation for the purchase of Software Unlimited case management system for the Commonwealth Attorney's Office in the amount of $140,000.00, with a portion of the funds ($40,000) to increase host and storage to expand current environment. The software is part of a state -wide replacement due to the current software, VCAIS no longer offering support potentially resulting in loss of all data and functionality. Through the Commonwealth's Attorney's Services Counsel (CASC), over 35 offices have banded together and j oined Prince Edward county in submitting an RFP. The winning vendor is Software Unlimited offering significant savings to offices that purchase their programming packages through the CASC consortium. The vendor and pricing have been reviewed by Mr. Banks and met with approval alongside two recommendations. The first recommendation is that the Premium Document Package be purchased in order to allow a paperless office and access to all files everywhere, including the courtroom. The second recommendation is that additional hardware be purchased in order to provide adequate data storage. Mr. DeHaven stated he would recommend this request be forwarded to the Finance Committee for purchase this fiscal year, if the quote expires before the end of the fiscal year, which would result in the County not being able to take advantage of the $13,000 discount. However, if the quote can be extended into the next fiscal, he would prefer this item be included as part of next year's budget. Upon a motion by Mr. DeHaven, seconded by Mr. Robertson, the Committee unanimously recommended the Finance Committee approve a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $140,000.00, with funds to be taken from unreserved fund balance, (See Attachment). 2. IT Director provides a list of computers with XP operating systems that are in need of replacement due to Microsoft no longer offering support and subsequently resulting in a high security risk to the network. The windows XP operating system will be discontinued as of Ari12014. The committee agreed that the list should be refined to include strictly needed computers, broken out by department, in order of importance. The committee requested a justification from each department as to the amount/ type of computers needed for operations. Each department head should write a qualifying statement. This list will be reviewed prior to the January 8, 2014 BOS IT Committee meeting and at that time the BOS IT Committee will forward a recommendation to the Finance Committee with supporting quotes. Respectfully Submitted, Gary A. Lofton, Chairman Charles Dehaven, Jr. Quaiser Absar Todd Robertson ��_�� .� =mss Walter T. Banks IT Director COUNTY o� FREDERICK Department [�f Public Works saolss5 -s6a3 FAX: 5401s78 -4682 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Public Works Committee Report for Meeting of December 3, 2013 DATE: December 5, 2013 The Public Works Committee met on Tuesday, December 3, 2013, at 8:00 a.m. All members were present. The following items were discussed: ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 1. Needs Assessment Study The committee discussed the results of the needs assessment study that had been performed by OWPR, Inc. for a proposed new county office complex. The study included the potential ten (10) year office needs for the county government administration and the county school administration. The results of the study indicated a total needs of 164,128 square feet. However, it was the consensus of the committee that there were areas that could be reducedand /or shared to fit within the 150,000 square feet highlighted in the recent PPEA proposal. This conclusion will be forwarded to the board for their consideration. It should be noted that Mr. David Ganse abstained from any discussion on this topic because of a possible conflict of interest. 2. Stormwater Ordinance Update Deputy Director of Public Works, Mr. Joe Wilder, indicated that he is incorporating additional minor changes dictated by the Department of Environmental Quality (D.E.Q.) in the proposed stormwater ordinance. The revised draft will then be presented to the stormwater committee on December 18, 2013 for their final review and comment. In order to meet the January 15, 2014 draft submittal deadline imposed by D.E.Q., Mr. Wilder requested that he be permitted to send the draft ordinance accompanied by an executive summary directly to the board in time for their scheduled January 8, 2014 meeting. He plans to attend this meeting to answer any questions pertaining to the proposed ordinance. 3. Brief Discussion of Fiscal Year 2014/2015 Budgets The director of public works presented a brief overview of the proposed fiscal year 2014/2015 budgets with an emphasis on the two (2) non - general fund budgets, Shawneeland and the landfill In order to comply with the limited time schedule dictated by the finance department, the director requested Public Works Committee Report Page 2 December 5, 2013 that the committee convene a meeting on January 7, 2014 at 8:00 a.m. to review the fiscal year 2014/2015 budget submittals. 4. Miscellaneous Reports a) Tonnage Report (Attachment 1) b) Recycling Report (Attachment 2) c) Animal Shelter Dog Report (Attachment 3) d) Animal Shelter Cat Report (Attachment 4) Respectfully submitted, Public Works Committee Gene E. Fisher, Chairman David W. Ganse Gary Lofton Whit L. Wagner Robert W. Wells James Wilson By � Harvey . St Snyder, Jr., P. . Public Works irector HES /rls Attachments: as stated cc: file t: \Rhonda\PW COMNIITTEE\ CURYEARCOMREPORTS \12- 3- 13pwcomrep.doc ATTACHMENT 1 COUNTY o� FREDERICK Department of Public Works 54U1665 -5643 FAX: 5401678 -4682 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee �} FROM: Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works 77 SUBJECT: Monthly Tonnage Report - Fiscal Year 13/14 DATE: November 7, 2013 The following is the tonnage for the months of July 2013, through June 2014, and the average monthly tonnage for fiscal years 03/04 through 12/13. FY 03 -04: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 16,348 TONS (UP 1,164 TONS) FY 04 -05: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 17,029 TONS (UP 681 TONS) FY OS -06: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 17,785 TONS (UP 756 TONS) FY 06 -07: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 16,705 TONS (DOWN 1,080 TONS) FY 07 -08: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 13,904 TONS (DOWN 2,801 TONS) FY 08 -09: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 13,316 TONS (DOWN 588 TONS) FY 09 -10: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 12,219 TONS (DOWN 1,097 TONS) FY 10 -11: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 12,184 TONS (DOWN 35 TONS) FY 11 -12: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 12,013 TONS (DOWN 171 TONS) FY 12 -13: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 12,065 TONS (UP 52 TONS) FY 13 -14: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 13,117 TONS (UP 1,052 TONS) MONTH FY 2012 -2013 FY 2013 -2014 JULY 12,596 13,514 AUGUST 13,934 13,343 SEPTEMBER 11,621 12,345 OCTOBER 12,863 13,266 NOVEMBER 12,598 DECEMBER 10,728 JANUARY 11,054 FEBRUARY 9,776 MARCH 10,636 APRIL 13,074 MAY 13,396 JUNE 12,508 HES /gmp V �E A H O a w (7 Z U w ATTACHMENT 2 L(7 N O 00 O O O O O O O O V CO � I� 00 C V O ('') O N O L(7 O 00 CO CO O O L(7 O L(7 (� 00 I� N� ('� O O V I� ('� a0 CO O V V O N 00 N CO O J L(7 O L(7 � - - - - N CO � CO O V O O 00 L(') N � 00 00 V 00 V V O - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O - Q ('� C V O O N CO I� CO a0 V O 00 N L(') O O O ('� O V V� � � L(7 0 0 � CO N O N V CO N O O ('') O O 00 ('') CO I� O V O O O � � V � O � CO V ('') O ('') O 00 CO CO N � V ('') O V ('') ('') ('') � N�� V� ('') N N N N N N N N N N N � L(7 O O O L(7 00 00 I� 00 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V d a0 a0 V V V ('� I� O O H a0 � N a0 ('� a0 V N 00 � V Q ('� � O� V O CO � ('� � a0 O N O N CO � CO � a0 N � L(') I� a0 ('� � � N O a0 � N O V L(7 CO � 00 � V 00 � U a0 V V V � � � � N N (� N V O I� S O N (� I� � V V CO ('7 V N ('7 O �� N ('7 � � I� � � � � � � � � O O O O O O O O O O O V O I� 0 0 � � UI 00 O 00 00 ('') L(7 00 L(') V 00 O N 00 CO � I� CO O � V CO ('') CO CO O CO I� � � V I� 00 00 O O � W J ('') ('') a0 CO N N V I� � V a0 N � ('') CO N V N W V V CO V O O 00 CO ('') O O 00 00 I� � Cp � N� V V V V V ('� ('� N � O CO (� W O� O N � 00 N 00 O J ('') O 00 L(') I� CO � N O �( N N N � W H � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O W CO ('') V a0 N � �� A N O N CO a0 � O N V � I� CO � 0 r � � V L(7 00 00 � 00 CO 2 � A N N I� O O O O O O I� ('') O W N O � a0 ('� CO a0 L(') � � CO L(') O N N U a0 a0 CO CO O V I� a0 CO O CO ('� N U ai�oao oaoov�v�ri� ai O �ao�co oa�oa�oaNO��v a00o c� O N O 00 O O CO CO V N ('') � N � � L(7 CO � I� O O O O � � V O V 00 CO N N O N O 00 � CO � CO O O ('') 00 L(') O O CO � W 00 ('') O � V O 00 00 CO ('') 00 I� � � V � N I� � O O O O CO d V V ('') � � 00 N V L(') 00 � V ('') N ('') � �� CO X 0 0 ('') O Q 0 0 0 � � � N O O O ('') O I� 00 N� V 00 O L(') 00 � ('') O L(') V� V V N I� O CO �� V ('� V I� CO V a0 CO � ('') � d � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � N O CO � � Cp � Cp V CO CO V � Cp � N 00 ('') 00 � � � � � O J� Cp O� a0 O� V I� CO V V 00 N N � V L(7 00 V O I� N O CO W I� � O� O a0 a0 V CO N L(7 N L(7 L(7 � � L(7 O a0 O� CO O O W QI � CO � O � N � a0 CO � O � a0 � � ('� � V N N � CO V 00 H U � (� O O O O� V N N N ('') N N N N N N V V V � � � � O V L(7 L(7 V CO V O V ('') ('') V 00 L(') I� O � � � V I� V � ('') J Z 00 L(') O O O � a0 � ('') 00 00 N V I� 00 ('') � � ('') V CO CO I� CO O 00 V � O a0 � a0 V I� a0 V V V 00 L(') ('7 � L(7 ('7 L(7 V � � QI Q (� (� N ('') ('') � ('') N N ('') L(� � N � � 0 0 0 0� (� (� a0 � U � V V V V N � � � � � � � � A N N ('� (� O O O O O 00 O N CO 00 O O � V CO O O O O L(7 O L(7 CO N � V V V CO a0 ('') N� a0 N N N � N�� V � CO O H O a0 � � V � CO I� O ('� ('� V ('� O N I� CO N N� O� N V � � V a0 Q � 00 ('') CO � O 00 00 O N V O O ('') V CO � 00 I� V CO � I� � J ('� ('� ('� ('� V S O I� � N a0 O O O� V 00 O I� a0 ('� � (O � d � V (� (� (� (� N N � � � � � � � � � N � O (� O O O O O O O L(7 � O N V I� � CO � O�� N V CO 00 � V 00 O 00 O ('') 00 00 I� � ('') CO CO N O N 00 � V 0 0 0 I� � � (n V ('� � � � � ('� � CO a0 O V ('� � a0 CO N CO V � N � O I� ZO �± CO � � � V ('� � O ('� N V O a0 O � ('� O CO N N � ('� � � a0 I� CO a0 � � CO V N CO O O L(� V V � L(� ('� N O a0 I� � V JJJQ (� O a0 O �� CO �� V V V V V V ('� L(7 N -p U' � O � � (6 = J M N � O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0�� O O � z Ji�aH> UZm�� }zQN�00aor�(O�nvMN�00aor�(O� Q �� W U D W Q W Q d Q� H O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 � � Q � 0 z � � LL � � � O O O � Q � � � } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } Q LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL H 0 N M r O N i LL W J W 2 J Q �_ Z Q 0 i O m W 2 H U W Z O U Y U W 0 W W H O d W O 0 � _ w� �z O DO�n�naorn � W � co �n �n �n N � X � w Q Z U � Z W W d Q D o 0 0 0 0 U � U U W Q W O Z o 0 0 0 0 W W D Y D w U O �n �n N � rn �N� � �n �_ 0 D W Q M O O � � J M M M M � U W 0 W � N I� � O � O O M � � � 0 Q Q W � z M 0 0 0 M � W m Y �' � U (n W W ca � �(�� r o•c 00 U � Q Y +�', � z — `� o � ° � O �U oY C�QO��N O � L � �.. O � :� � �U m N o J � W � p� o 0 � Z � � Z�naocorn � M M� � �� U Y r �� L ��// r LL Q i L U 2 � � o O � z Q O � 0 � Z M O L N � � O � � M N o � 2 E O � � o LL c � = J O J� w U O w Z m Q� Q z� ��QcnOzo��Q�� ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 4 O = � � 0 Z O � � N o 0 � � � M 00 � r r r r � � x Q W U Z � Z W W d Q D o 0 0 0 0 U � U U W � J Q W Zorn��n `� � Z � N M M � - W D Y D W � O (O (O O � O��co� d N N � N o0 D D W �_ Q � � N � 00 J U W H � O D w w � WO � N � � � H 0 U Q Q W � z 00 � I� O M O W 00 Y U W W � (n � (O O O I� m U Z_ � O 2 � � Q� N M N O O m Q' m 0 J W W � Z Z� O M N M W � � Q 2 H ~ Q Z 0 O � � � � N � Q��n�n rn = O � � � � � Z � O U = J Q ZJC�W� >UZm��Z� ��QcaOzo��Q�� COUNTY of FREDERICK Finance Department Cheryl B. Shiffler Director 540/665 -5610 Fax: 540/667 -0370 E -mail cshiffle @fcva.us TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Finance Committee DATE: November 20, 2013 SUBJECT: Finance Committee Report and Recommendations The Finance Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Wednesday, November 20, 2013 at 8:00 a.m. All members were present. (D) Items 1 and 3 were approved on consent agenda. 1. (D) The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $125. This amount represents donations received. No local funds required. See attached memos, p. 4 — 5. 2. The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $18,346.70. This amount represents proceeds from the public auction to be used to purchase mobile radios. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 6. The committee recommends approval. 3. (D) The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $2,390.83. This amount represents reimbursements for travel and extraditions. No local funds required. See attached memos, p. 7 — 9. 4. The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $11,401.88. This amount represents State reimbursements due to the County for prisoner extraditions. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 10. The committee recommends approval. 107 North Kent Street •Winchester, Virginia 22601 1 Finance Committee Report and Recommendations November 20, 2013 Page � 2 5. The Director of Public Works requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $15,000. This amount represents funds required to retain the part -time receptionist position in the Building Inspections Department. Revenue is currently exceeding projections. See attached memo, p. 11 -12. The committee recommends approval. 6. The Winchester Regional Airport Director requests an Airport Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $2,669.96. This amount represents an insurance reimbursement for roof damage of the FBO building. See attached information, p. 13 —19. The committee recommends approval. 7. The Finance Committee Chairman requests discussion on a potential donation from Redbud proffers for historic preservation to the Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation. The committee recommends designating $50,000 from Redbud historical proffers for the final debt payment on the Huntsberry property. 8. The Finance Committee Chairman presents a memo concerning the FY 2015 budget and the Finance Director provides a budget calendar. See attached information, p. 20 — 21. INFORMATION ONLY 1. The Finance Director provides a Fund 10 Transfer Report for FY 2014. See attached, p. 22. 2. The Finance Director provides FY 2014 financial statements for the period ending October 31, 2013. See attached, p. 23 — 33. 3. The Finance Director provides the FY 2014 Fund Balance Report for the period ending October 31, 2013. See attached, p. 34. 2 Finance Committee Report and Recommendations November 20, 2013 Page � 3 Respectfully submitted, FINANCE COMMITTEE Charles DeHaven Judy McCann - Slaughter Ron Hottle Angela Rudolph Richard Shickle Gary Lofton By �� 3 � a ROBERT T. WTLLTAM50N Sheriff 1080 Coverstone Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540) 662 -6168 1Fax (540] 504 -6400 TO :Angela Whitacre, Treasurer's Office FROM :Sheriff R. T. Williamson SUBJECT :Donation —Honor Guard DATE :October 22, 2013 NdA.�OR R. C. ECKMAN Ch ief Deputy Attached is a check, along with a copy of a letter, from Top of Virginia Regional Chamber in the amount of $100.00. This amount represents a donation to the Sheriffis Office Honor Guard. We are requesting this amount be posted to revenue line 3010- 018990W0006. A memo will be sent to Finance requesting appropriation. Thank you. RTW /asw Attachment Ce Finance Department °� � `�, � �"` r x111 C.S• 10�2��13 4 ��CK �� ROBERT T. WILLIAM50N Sheriff COUNTY SHEIZIFp�s oFFIC� J� 1080 COVERSTONE DRIVE WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22fi02 540/662 -6168 FAX 540/722 -4001 TO Angela Whitacre, Treasurer 5 �'��'° FROM Sheriff R. T. Williamson SUBJECT Donation -- Animal Control DATE November 6, 2013 MAJOR R.C. ECKMAN Chief Deputy Attached please find a check in the amount of $25.00. This check represents a donation to the department, earmarked for Animal Control. We are requesting this amount be posted to revenue Iine 3010 - 018990 -0006 (10CR). We will send a separate memo to Finance requesting appropriation. Thank you. i.r; ��, c4 .... -5 : .. r, ,t 0]014 L!(epheeks �i- 888- 5Y4�3Y97 WYrr.lileshedf.com L _ICIli�Fl. i� RR- 47R157d ,. 0 YYILLt qVt TER, VA 22fi91 � �'�.:.` `....... ,;�,if.�I��.p2:_ - n_-�_.._ �.- -- - - _ ........ .. TO :Angela Whitacre — Treasurer's Office FROM :Sheriff R. T. Williamso � SUBJECT :Sale Proceeds DATE :October 22, 2013 Attached is a check in the amount of $18,346.70. This amount represents the department's proceeds from the public auction held September 25, 2013. We are requesting this amount be appropriated into revenue line 3010 - 015020 -0007. A separate memo will be sent to Finance requesting appropriation into our operating budget. Thank you. RTW /asw Attachment Cc Finance Depar4ment c�s !0)2,��,3 6 Ft�e�� ROBERT T. WILLIAMSON Sheriff ,__ � y fr � 1080 Coverstone Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540)662 -6168 Fax (5401504 -6400 TO :Angela Whitacre, Treasurer's Office FROM :Sheriff R. T. Williamson � � SUBJECT Reimbursement - Training DATE :October 22, 2013 1VIAJOR R. C. ECKMAN Chief Deputy Attached you will find an envelope containing $376.16 in cash. This amount represents reimbursement from the Department of Forensic Science for lodging for a training conference attended by department employees. We are requesting this amount be posted to 3010 - 019110 -0058. A separate memo will be sent to Finance requesting appropriation into our budget. Thank you. —� � � ` � � �� RTW /asw Attachment Cc: Finance Department C.S• I�Iutlt� ROBERT T. WLLLIAMSON Sheriff _ .. a r 1080 Coverstone ])rive Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540)662 -6168 �'ax (540) 504 -6400 TO :Angela Whitacre, Treasurer's ffice FROM Sheriff R. T. Williamson S SUBJECT :Reimbursement - Extradition DATE :October 22, 2013 MAJOR R. C. ECKIVIAN Ch ief Deputy Attached is a check from the Commonwealth of Virginia — Circuit Courts in the amount of $1964.67. This amount represents reimbursement for two extraditions. We are requesting this amount be posted to 3010 - 019110 -0058. A separate memo wi11 be sent to Finance requesting appropriation. Thank you. �fl D — � � i � — � � ® — � b RTW /asw Attachment Cc Finance Department c �_ �� \:� \,� ��ick F� ROBERT T. WILLIAMSON Sheriff heriff►$ c@ 1080 Coverstone Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540) 662 -6168 Fax (5401 504 -6400 TO :Angela Whitacre, Treasurer's Office FROM :Sheriff R. T. Williamson SUBJECT :Reimbursement — Training DATE :October 22, 2013 MAJOR R. C. ECKIVIAN Chief Deputy Attached please find a cashier's check in the amount of $50.00. The Virginia State Police reimbursed Inv. Galbreath for meals and travel charges (baggage fees} for attendance at the ICAC Conference held in August. We are requesting this amount be pasted to revenue Line 3010- 019110 -0058. A separate memo will be sent to Finance requesting appropriation. Thank you. RTW /asw Attachment Cc: Finance Department. � � � � �� D ��R�C� .�g� ROBERT T. WILLIAMSON Sheriff OpUNTY SHE��,5 1080 COVER5TONE DRIVE WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 540/662 -6168 FAX 540!722 -4001 TO :Cheryl Shiffler — birector of Finance OFFI� FROM :Sheriff Robert T. Williamson ��-�""°"`i BATE :November 19, 2013 SUBJECT :Budget Line; 3102- 5505 -001 Prisoner Transports /Extraditions MAJOR R.C. ECKMAN Chief Deputy We currently are carrying a deficit of $3,721.31 in our prisoner transport /extradition line item. We are holding $11,401.88 in state reimbursements due to an illness in the Secretary of the Commonwealth's office. With the absence afthe Secretary, we are unable to receive the necessary Travel Orders to attach to the reimbursements. Unfortunately, the Commonwealth of Virginia will not reimburse for travel unless we have in hand the Travel Orders. We have received verbal authorization for each of these extraditions. We have been advised, as of yesterday, that the employee has returned from her medical leave and we expect to begin receiving the travel orders soon which will allow us to request reimbursement. However, since Frederick County is not the only jurisdiction that falls under these circumstances, we are not certain how soon reimbursements will be forthcoming. As you are aware we are required, by law, to perform extraditions as ordered by the courts regardless of whether or not we have funding in our line item. I am requesting this correspondence be hand carried to the Finance Committee on 11/20/13 as an addition to the normal agenda. This request would be for a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $11,401.88 with the understanding that when these funds are reimbursed by the Commonwealth they would be appropriated to the General Fund. RTW /asw 10 DATE: October 24, 2013 TO: Finance Department THROUGH: Harvey E. Strawsynder Jr.,PE, Director of Public Works FRONT: John S. Trenary, Building Code Official SUBJECT: Funding Request of Part -Time Receptionist Position lr�spectiorbs Departrr�ent 3ohr� S. Trenary, Belding C3f�ciai 540/665 -5b50 Fax 540/f7�3 -062 The Building Inspection Department is requesting a supplemental appropriation of $15,000 to maintain the services of our current Part Time Receptionist through the end of the current FY 13114 budget year_ The part -dine position is currently filled and has been funded by the transfer of department funds since August 12, 2013. The Inspection Department has shown an increase of $46,000 in revenue through the first three months of FY13l14 compared to the same period FY12/13. The increase in activity has justified the necessity to fill the position due to the increase work load placed upon or Design Review Specialists that were sharing duties in this position. The Inspections Department revenue in FY13114 should far exceed the projected revenue by the amount requested. Thank you for this consideration on this matter and if you have any questions or need additional information please contact me. 147 ��a ��r�i Str��t � 1��chester, �iir�inia 226fl1 nspectian Department Revenue In ormation far Part -Time Supple,me0tai Funding Revenue Collected in FY 2012 $695,273 Revenue Collected in FY 2013 $719A32 Revenue Projected in FY 2014 $632 500 Revenue Collected: July through September 2012 - $168,471A0 July through September 2013 - $215,060.00 Increase of $46,589 January through September -2012 - $ 465,100.00 January through September — 2013 - _$_572,700:00 Increase of $107,600.00 October -2012 Permit Rev. $47,064 October- 2013 Permit Rev. $59,269 Increase of $12,205.00 12 _ �`� Vw11N�FIE�TER RE�ID�IAL AIRPORT �� 491 AIRPOFIT RQAD s��r� TME 4VINChiEST�R, VIFkGIhilA 22602 TCP �F \'NIA (�4D) 662 -��a6 hlOf �ii��1'1'1 � To: Cheryf 5hiftler, Finance l7irecEor, Frady rick County GC: John R. F�iley, Administrator, Frederick County Jennifer Place, Risk Manager, Frederick Cauniy Gene Fisher, i= rederick Go•.�nty Board �f Supervisors �r�pm: Renny Manuel, ❑irector, L�iinchester fgional Airport Date: hlo��ernber �, 203 Re: 5upplementaf Approprlartion for lfehicle Repairs Reimbursed by Insurance Claim I respec�Fully request a supplemental appropria #inn to the line ikem in Fur:d 97 far Repair and Maintenance Buildings and Grounds in the amaunk licked below: expense Line: 4- 017��1Q9a- 3�- Od4 -OD5 Repair &Maintenance Bldg & Grounds �2,68�,96 Revenue Line: �#a be assigned} Insurance Claim Reimbursement $2.669.98 pn October 3, FO'13 there was an accident at the Fred l3ase Operators �FBO� building awned by the Airport Authority caused by one of the tenants Aero 5enrices of L�inchestsr. The owner was putting nikrogen into a jet airY�raft tires and due to a faulty gauge the tires ��as ower inFlated and exploded, The owner sustained � serious injury to his righ #arm and hand when the tine and rim shot straight up in #a the air_ The tire went : hrough khe roof of the FBO building leaving a gaping hale and when it c�m� hack down an top of the roof it damaged additional panels. Lantz ��nstrtrctlon of Winchester immediately responded to the airport to place a temporary patch on the roof in order to preverrt anp damage irside from forecaster adverse weatl-rer. The airport is insured through 1�ACORP under the County of Frederick and � claim was immediartel}r submitted to them. The ropf sustained $3,700.04 in damage and the insurance carrier has Issued the airport a check for $2,669.95 af#er the S1,(}OO.Qa �ieduotible- Ip�irs urill he made by Lard Construction Company of Winchester. I have atkached a copy of the insurance estimate for the repairs along ikh copies o` the insurance reimbursement forwarded #� m e from Jennifer glace, Frederick County Finance Department. Thank you far your continued support and assistance_ If you require add�onal information ar have any questions, please do not hesitate to con #act ma. 13 COUNTY of FREDERICK Finance Department Cheryl B. Shiffler Director 540/665 -5610 Fax: 540/667 -0374 E -mail: cshiffle{aco.frederick.va.us MEMORANDUM TO: Renny Manuel, Regional Airport FROM: Jennifer L. Place, Finance Department DATE: November 6, 2013 SUBJECT: Insurance Reimbursement Attached is a copy of a check received in the amount of $2,669.96 for the property claim dated October 3, 2013 where the hangar roof was damaged when a tire exploded. This amount represents the estimate from East Coast Claims Service minus the $1,000 deductible. if you would like these funds appropriated to your budget, please send the Finance Department a memo requesting appropriation to forward to the Finance Committee. If you have any questions, please give me a call. 107 North Kent Street ®Winchester, Virginia 22641 14 October 30, 2013 Frederick County Jennifer Place 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 F�t��f� Geun�y N0� � � �i3 �'lnanc� �c��anm�rr¢ Virginia Association of Counties Group Self - Insurance Risk Pool Participant: Winchester Regional Airport Authority Claim Number: 299A2043086143 Date of Loss: 10/03/2013 Dear Jennifer: ,� v��,y .�,� �x � � r rr 308 Market Street, sE, Suites 1 � 2 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 540.345.8500 ralif�ee 888.822.6772 fex.540.345.5330 tollfree 871.212.8599 Enclosed please find a VACoRP property damage check in the amount of $2,669.96 for repairs to the airport hangar roof damaged when the fire exploded. Payment was issued based on the enclosed report from East Coast Claims. The $1,000 deductible was subtracted. Should you have any questions regarding this payment, please feel free to call our office. Sincerely, r r' Terri Dillard Claims Specialist Enc. -check 15 Claim # 13 -101bb t' �� Coverage BLDG Ad;uater East Coast Ciaims SerVicc, NC Kevin Pearce Octobcr 23, 2013 Coverage - Building Phone (800) 277 -6403 I'ax (888} 856 -9111 Insurcd Winchester Re�orwl Airport Autlzorily Address 491 Airport. Rd, Winchester, VA 26002 Phone Number (540) 722 -8285 Policy # Ins Claim # Date oY Loss 10/3/2013 Ins Cmnpaay Vaca Risk MaJZagcrrzcnE Programs (Attu: Tcrri Dillard) Roflf ($9' A Sl' (2)) 14,418 sf Roof Acpl. Cost Dcpr. ACV �EstimatP 'Totals $3,699.y6 $().00 $3,fi99.9fi Price Database Legend A[1 prices front TCD 12cA901 w = Write -ui * = ModiCcd Esti�uate (MS/B 0410) _ -1 - _ _ Oct 23, 2013 Claim# 13 -1016G 16 Repl. Cost Depr, ACV OP RD Remove Metal Roof Panel, Standing Seani 1.17 SQ (c� $42.26 x $49.44 $0.00 $49.44 Replace Metat Roof Panel, Standing Seam 1.17 SQ �� $1,143.93 �` $1,338.40 $0.00 $1,338.40 RC7TlOVC Mcial Roof Pancl, St<�nding Scam 1,77 SQ (c!? $42.20 ° $49.44 $O.QU $49.44 Tcztzporary Patch Rcplacc Mctal Roof PancY, Standing Scam 1,17 SQ (ci; $790.89 " $925.34 $O.OU $925.34 Tcmporary Patclz Rczttovc Insulation, Fibcz%oan�i 117 SF (n� $().l7 " $19.89 $U.UO $19.89 Rcplacc lrtsulation, Fibctboard 117 SF (n� $3,42 * $400,14 $0.(10 $40U.i4 Repair Insulation Pacing„ Vinyl 117 SF (h?, $2.31 "' $270.27 $OAO $270.27 Tear Ozrt Haight Allowance, Roof Covering 3 Story 3.34 SQ (a} $13,G0 " $45.42 $0.00 $4.5.42 Rcp]acc Hcight Allowancc, Roof Covering, 3 Story 3.34 SQ �a), $19.31 " $64.50 $U.(H) $64.5 {} Special Bucket Lift 32' 4 BA (�� $134.28 ' $537.12 $0.00 $537. i2 X3,699.96 50.00 X3,699.96 Acpl. Cost Dcpr. ACV �EstimatP 'Totals $3,699.y6 $().00 $3,fi99.9fi Price Database Legend A[1 prices front TCD 12cA901 w = Write -ui * = ModiCcd Esti�uate (MS/B 0410) _ -1 - _ _ Oct 23, 2013 Claim# 13 -1016G 16 August Z, 2� 13 Winchester Regional Aamp�� Airpork Roan �Vinch�ster Vii, X2602 PR �`]EI�It� t�ooi'repnir l�'r�cierieir ��pun,ty, VA l and OanstructtQn Winchester C��d1L g F�c�'o�tsi�an� wv Clow a Licrnsc wv aoz�s7 MD CI�€s A Liccasr. 5►17{lt8 5di'aMCaetifwaiian� iQ6i3 The undersigned proposes to provide all labor, materials and equipment necessary to complete all work addressed in this pragas�l. This wank is in accordance with all the following noted (checked) documents; x this proposal (review scope of wank) plansldrawings prQVided by identify, slaecificatior►s provided by identi r addanda provided by .�identi� sketches (sec attached) P s d Pro eck Summa �- Remove temporAry roof patch and install new raofpanels to permanently fix the roafdamaged during "tireJwheel" accident ��1 Aviation brive -A Vilinohester, VA 2602 � a4l?p666 -0130 � www.Ecwconstruction . cvm 17 scoPE o� �oRrc inclusions:,�furnish materials and installs 1 - Remove existing roof patch 2 - Install two new roof panels (3' x 39') 3 - Pasten securely to each other and surrounding panels 4 - Checkl7'ighten existing roof screws of existing roof on a radius of 20' diameter from hole 5 -� Infill fiberglass insulation and patch vinyl facing IwloteslUualificafions: 1 - All work shall be performed during normal working hours. 2 -All work shall be performed in compliance with OSHA standards. 3 •- Owner shall provide water and power for construction activities at no charge to LCW Allowances fif acv? included in the tsroposal value: I -N:A $ N.�A H]nit�s.; 1 - N.�A $ N.'A Exclusions• ] - Testing or Abatement of asbestos or lead containing items, if any. 2 Cost of temporary roofrepair i'roposal Z'alue - Total: All work shall be completed in a professional, workman -like manner, for a total amount af; Three Thousand Seven llucrdred IDollars� 3 7d1U.Qtl Options: NfA Breakda�vn• NIA ��1 1�viattt�n �riv� �'�incE�osri�r, 1f,� 2��0� � ��C?- Gf5 -Qt3Ct � w�w�.(cwcc5n�truct�can.cc�m `, 1 �. Pro„�aseci S�ehcdule. Anticipated design and aptrruval period calendar days Material shipping 2I calendar days Anticipated construction period ?. calendar days Anticipated punch -out period calendar days Total anticipated schedule 23 calendar days C011�l'�C� �8l'lYt�' — LGW shall hold this proposal valid far a period of thirty (aft} calendar days, -- LCW is licensed and fully insured (including workers compensation }. — LCW does not require any depasik to initiate the construction after signatures of agreement. -- LCW wilt bill monthly, with payments due within l5 days of receipt afinvaiee. Final payment is duo within 30 calendar days of cornpletion. — Any additianai work Soli! proceed with the execution of a signed change order stating the value of work, ar a '1' &M calculation, along with any extension nt'the construction time. — This work shall commence with the execution of the fallowing noted (checked} agreement: X LCW praposallagreernentwlth signatures (both parties sigh the belc►w agreement} AIA contract documents with signatures (bath parties) Purchase order (both parties} Kcspeatiully subtt�itted, _., � � Steven L. I?iehl Vice President 2�1 Aviation Drive 1!Y #rtchester, VA �26Ct2 S�&0�66S�Qy3� vvvuw.Ecwaonstructiran.aom 19 �` �� C�UN ®f F'I)E1�ICK MM�pRYRIq John R. Riley, Jr. 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 hoard of Supervisors 540/665 -5666 540/667 -0370 fax Robert W. Wells Richard C. Shickle - Chairman ®pequon District Charles S. DeHaWen, ,tu -Vice Chairman Cliristoplaer E. Collins Stmnewall Distract Red Bud District Gary A. Lofton Gene E. Fisher Back Creek District Shawnee Distract Robert A. Hess Gainesboro Distract November 12, 2013 Dear John; fn an attempt to help find budget direction and aid staff in appropriately prioritizing budget requests and suitably recommending proposed budget cuts or alloca #ing resources, f offer the following recommendations. We would al! like to see a reduction, but it is anticipated that the property tax rates wilt remain constant. The annual use of up to 4.3 million of fund balance funding would continue to be considered to balance the FY 2015 budget. We should attempt to allocate new funding with the schools on a basis consistent with the current funding allocation. The independent salary survey expected to be completed in early 2014 should help to quantify our compensation and benefit package needs. Developing a plan and setting goals to address identified needs should be a budget priority, We should consult with an outside firm to conduct an analysis of appropriate staffing levels by department in order to predict needs and develop a plan to insure right sizing as we move forward. There is a desire to identify and quantify deferred capital investments to accomplish the development of a prioritized plan to catch up on these issues, Since ely, � �� Chuck Dehaven 107 l�Iorth Kent Street • �nehester, Virginia 22601 Budget Calendar FY 2014 -2015 Ndonth Action November 20, 2013 Budget discussion at Finance Committee meeting outlining priorities including budget memo from Finance Committee Chairman November 22, 2013 Budget materials sent to all departments and outside agencies December 13, 2013 Budget requests from departments and outside agencies due back to Finance Department January 15, 2014 Finance Committee /Budget Worksession; Budget Scenario discussion 8:00 a.m. January 22, 2014 Joint budget meeting with School Board and Board of Supervisors; School Board presents School Board budget to Board of Supervisors /Possible Budget Worksession February 5, 2014 Budget Worksession —Board of Supervisors 8:00 a.m. February 12, 2014 Budget Worksession —Board of Supervisors 6:00 p.m. February 13, 2014 Joint Finance Committee with City of Winchester to discuss outside agencies 8:00 a.m. February 19, 2014 Finance Committee /Board of Supervisors Budget Worksession 8:00 a.m. February , 2014 School Board budget public hearing February 26, 2014 Budget Worksession —Board of Supervisors 6:00 p.m. March 5, 2014 Budget Worksession —Board of Supervisors final worksession before budget advertisement 8:00 a.m. March 10, 2014 Budget Advertisement to Winchester Star for publishing March 17, 2014 Public Hearing Advertisement in newspaper March 26, 2014 FY 2014 — 2015 Budget/Tax Rates Public Heating April 9, 2014 FY 2014 _ 2015 Budget Adoption May -July, 2014 Preparation of Adopted Budget Document and submission of budget for award April 10 -23, 2014 Printing and Distribution of Tax Bills Apzi128, 2014 Tax Bills mailed July 1, 2014 Implementation of Fiscal Year 2014 — 201 S 21 FY14 OCTOBER 2013 BUDGET TRANSFERS PAGE 1 DATE DEPARTMENT /GENERAL FUND REASON FOR TRANSFER FROM TO ACCT CODE AMOUNT 10/1/2013 FIRE AND RESCUE NEW HIRES 10/13 3505 1001 000 016 4,230.64 FIRE AND RESCUE 3505 1001 000 006 (4,230.64) FIRE AND RESCUE 35051001 000 062 3,835.36 FIRE AND RESCUE 35051001 000 026 (3,835.36) FIRE AND RESCUE 3505 1001 000 090 240.99 FIRE AND RESCUE 3505 1001 000 007 (240.99) 10/1/2013 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SALARYADJUSTMENTS 12011001 000 031 (2,145.00) COUNTY ATTORNEY 12021001 000 002 2,145.00 COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE 12091001 000 066 7,310.52 COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE 12091001 000 062 3,539.94 REASSESSMENT /BOARD OF ASSESSORS 12101001 000 042 (7,310.52) REASSESSMENT /BOARD OF ASSESSORS 12101001 000 042 (3,539.94) REASSESSMENT /BOARD OF ASSESSORS 12101001 000 005 3,007.55 REASSESSMENT /BOARD OF ASSESSORS 12101001 000 042 (3,007.55) COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY 22011001 000 OSl 2,665.08 COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY 22011001 000 048 (2,000.00) COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY 22012012 000 000 (665.08) 10/16/2013 COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE HIRE FULL TIME POSITION 12091001 000 061 (17,280.96) COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE 12091001 000 069 17,280.96 10/16/2013 SHERIFF MONTHLYCOMCASTCHARGES 31025204 000 000 (924.00) SHERIFF 3102 5299 000 000 924.00 10/29/2013 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY BALANCE LINE ITEM 1220 3005 000 000 (2,730.00) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 1220 5506 000 000 2,730.00 10/29/2013 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ESRI SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE 1220 3005 000 000 (8,000.00) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 1220 3005 000 002 8,000.00 10/29/2013 INSPECTIONS PART TIME 34014003 000 002 (2,000.00) INSPECTIONS 34011003 000 000 2,000.00 10/29/2013 OTHER MPO INVOICES 1224 3002 000 000 (1,000.00) OTHER 1224 5604 000 025 1,000.00 10/29/2013 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS WEATHER SERVICE ANNUAL FEE 35065204 000 000 (1,650.00) PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS 3506 3010 000 000 1,650.00 10/31/2013 REFUSE COLLECTION PAY INVOICE 4203 3010 000 000 (1,000.00) REFUSE COLLECTION 4203 3002 000 000 1,000.00 11/1/2013 PARKS MAINTENANCE CERTIFIED POOL OPERATORS 7103 5506 000 000 1,300.00 RECREATION CENTERSAND PLAYGROUNDS 7104 5506 000 000 (1,300.00) 22 County of Frederick General Fund October 31, 2013 ASSETS FY14 FY13 Increase 10/31/13 10/31/12 (Decrease) Cash and Cash Equivalents 43,207,554.92 34,914,699.49 8,292,855.43 *A Petty Cash 1,555.00 1,555.00 0.00 Receivables: 2,135.00 0.00 Taxes, Commonwealth,Reimb.P /P 42,817,467.16 42,493,130.80 324,336.36 Streetlights 16,605.09 18,597.58 (1,992.49) Commonwealth,Federal,45 day Taxes 53,889.95 32,197.54 21,692.41 Due from Fred. Co. San. Auth. 734,939.23 734,939.23 0.00 Prepaid Postage 2,956.95 3,242.47 (285.52) GL controls (est.rev / est. exp) (8,289,279.60) (10,708,957.36) 2,419,677.76 (1) Attached TOTAL ASSETS 78,545,688.70 67,489,404.75 11,056,283.95 LIABILITIES Transportation Reserve 377,396.00 Accrued Liabilities 447,757.47 622,763.79 (175,006.32) *B Performance Bonds Payable 398,955.56 1,539,519.14 (1,140,563.58) *C Taxes Collected in Advance 63,850.46 30,014.87 33,835.59 Deferred Revenue 42,875,249.81 42,532,966.03 342,283.78 *D TOTAL LIABILITIES 43,785,813.30 44,725,263.83 (939,450.53) EQUITY Fund Balance Reserved: Encumbrance General Fund 412,920.61 142,160.62 270,759.99 (2) Attached Conservation Easement 2,135.00 2,135.00 0.00 Peg Grant 190,138.00 128,354.00 61,784.00 Prepaid Items 949.63 949.63 0.00 Advances 734,939.23 734,939.23 0.00 Employee Benefits 93,120.82 93,120.82 0.00 Courthouse ADA Fees 177,748.15 124,084.63 53,663.52 Historical Markers 17,254.92 17,221.08 33.84 Transportation Reserve 377,396.00 438,300.00 (60,904.00) *E Animal Shelter 335,530.02 325,780.61 9,749.41 Proffers 2,841,408.30 2,305,873.65 535,534.65 (3) Attached Economic Development Incentive 550,000.00 550,000.00 0.00 *F Star Fort Fees 0.00 0.00 0.00 VDOT Revenue Sharing 436,270.00 436,270.00 0.00 Undesignated Adjusted Fund Balance 28,590,064.72 17,464,951.65 11,125,113.07 (4) Attached TOTAL EQUITY 34,759,875.40 22,764,140.92 11,995,734.48 TOTAL LIAB. &EQUITY 78,545,688.70 67,489,404.75 11,056,283.95 NOTES: *A The cash increase can be attributed to an increase in fund balance. *B The difference is a result of employer health insurance costs being collected a month in advance. *C Performance bonds decreased $1.1 million due to completed projects and pay out of the bonds for the county to complete the project. *D Deferred revenue includes taxes receivable, street lights, misc. charges, dog tags, and motor vehicle registration fees. *E Due to Rt. 11 N. Project(Board Action 2/27/13). *F The current $550,000 represents Carmeuse Lime and Stone local incentive. 23 BALANCE SHEET (1) GL Controls FY14 FY13 Inc /(Decrease) Est.Revenue 129,418,188 123,074,342 6,343,846 Appropriations (57,368,956) (57,701,538) 332,582 Est.Tr.to Otherfds (80,751,432) (76,223,922) (4,527,510) Encumbrances 412, 921 142,161 270, 760 2,841,408.30 (8,289,280) (10,708,957) 2,419,678 (2) General Fund Purchase Orders Outstanding Purchase Orders @10/31/13 DEPARTMENT Amount Description Bowman Library 25,000.00 Roof Resurface Commissioner of the Revenue 2,983.14 Envelopes EDC 2,883.30 Dell Server Designated Other Projects Detail 2,734.40 EDC Luncheon &Panel Discussion Fire &Rescue 10,190.59 Lighting,Lightbars, Siren, Misc.Equip. Bridges 32,771.19 2014 Ford F -250 Historic Preservation 19,239.15 Uniforms Other 12,510.00 EMS Custom Cabinet Parks 5,138.25 Chemicals for Pools FIRE &RESCUE 18,009.90 Fall T- Shirts TOTAL 7,446.30 Staff Uniforms 1,307,008.84 13,214.00 Fertilizer &Seed Refuse Collection 143,832.32 Earthwork and Underground Electrical for Gainesboro Citizens Site 2,841,408.30 5,960.00 Concrete Wall /Slab for Gainesboro Citizens Site Stop Lights 57,950.00 Trash Compactor /Receiver Can Sheriff 3,658.07 Body Armor Total 49,400.00 Sungard OSSISoftware Total 412,920.61 Designated Other Projects Detail Beginning Balance 10/13 Administration Designated Bridges (3)Proffer Information Historic Preservation 80,000.00 Other 38,217.00 SCHOOLS PARKS FIRE &RESCUE Projects TOTAL Balance (c�10 /31/13 1,307,008.84 224,730.17 378,377.25 931,292.04 2,841,408.30 Designated Other Projects Detail Beginning Balance 10/13 Administration 153, 340.04 Bridges 44,900.00 Historic Preservation 80,000.00 Library 38,217.00 Rt.50 Trans.lmp. 10,000.00 Rt. 50 Rezoning 25,000.00 Rt. 656 & 657 Imp. 25,000.00 RT.277 162, 375.00 Sheriff 24,460.00 Solid Waste 12,000.00 Stop Lights 26,000.00 BPG Properties /Rt.11 Corridor 330,000.00 Total 931,292.04 Other Proffers @10/31/13 (4) Fund Balance Adjusted Beginning Balance 10/13 31,300,526.02 Revenue 10/13 17,471,868.79 Expenditures 10/13 (19,781,483.58) Transfers 10/13 (400,846.51) 10/13 Adjusted Fund Balance 28,590,064.72 24 1:7�U��10�9 General Property Taxes Other local taxes Permits &Privilege fees Revenue from use of money and property Charges for Services Miscellaneous Recovered Costs Intergovernmental: Commonwealth Federal Transfers TOTAL REVENUES EXPENDITURES: General Administration Judicial Administration Public Safety Public Works Health and Welfare Education Parks, Recreation, Culture Community Development TOTAL EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Operating transfers from / to Excess (deficiency)of revenues &other sources over expenditures & other uses Fund Balance per General Ledger Fund Balance Adjusted to reflect Income Statement @10/31/13 County of Frederick Comparative Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance October 31, 2013 FY14 FY13 YTD 10/31/13 10/31/12 Actual Appropriated Actual Actual Variance 87,168,379.00 4,385,774.92 3,756,007.17 629,767.75 (1) 28,429,460.00 5,212,416.91 5,160,097.50 52,319.41 (2) 956,610.00 463,393.01 362,240.96 101,152.05 (3) 131,120.00 87,404.93 169,370.70 (81,965.77) (4) 2,309,230.00 717,744.46 735,991.44 (18,246.98) 5,250,878.22 521,295.00 128,404.14 164,787.08 (36,382.94) 955,238.46 937,202.00 1,036,701.10 604,430.59 432,270.51 (5) 8,949,891.66 5,431,962.61 5,086,392.60 345,570.01 (6) 15,000.00 8,066.71 3,350.08 4,716.63 (7) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 129,418,187.66 17,471,868.79 16,042,668.12 1,429,200.67 9,544,128.07 2,612,363.94 2,213,029.40 399,334.54 2,187,869.06 643,772.34 619,933.69 23,838.65 27,985,448.86 10,516,872.04 9,360,752.63 1,156,119.41 4,453,149.42 1,386,715.03 1,146,451.87 240,263.16 6,985,132.00 1,927,141.62 1,992,440.92 (65,299.30) 56,493.00 14,123.25 14,123.25 0.00 5,250,878.22 1,725,256.90 1,613,462.63 111,794.27 2,573,139.76 955,238.46 556,702.98 398,535.48 59,036,238.39 19,781,483.58 17,516,897.37 2,264,586.21 (8) 79,084,149.48 400,846.51 4,629,288.52 (4,228,442.01) (9) (8,702,200.21) (2,710,461.30) (6,103,517.77) (3,393,056.47) 25 31,300,526.02 23,568,469.42 7,732,056.60 28,590,064.72 17,464,951.65 11,125,113.07 (1)General Property Taxes FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease Real Estate Taxes 1,594,967 1,546,211 48,756 Public Services (3,346) (6,204) 2,858 Personal Property 2,498,573 1,910,054 588,519 Penalties and Interest 185,951 201,494 (15,543) Credit Card Chgs. /Delinq.Advertising (17,497) (17,836) 339 Adm.Fees For Liens &Distress 127,127 122,287 4,840 Meals Tax 4,385,775 3,756,007 629,768 (2) Other Local Taxes Local Sales and Use Tax 1,987,589.81 1,942,474.90 45,114.91 Communications Sales Tax 227,533.36 232,797.97 (5,264.61) Utility Taxes 631,418.16 593,690.42 37,727.74 Business Licenses 653,747.57 753,235.60 (99,488.03) Auto Rental Tax 27,600.27 40,196.37 (12,596.10) Motor Vehicle Licenses Fees 122,080.44 132,150.46 (10,070.02) Recordation Taxes 419,947.96 447,462.91 (27,514.95) Meals Tax 1,022,269.21 910,742.22 111,526.99 Lodging Tax 118,861.13 106,188.35 12,672.78 Street Lights 1,125.00 808.66 316.34 Star Fort Fees 244.00 349.64 (105.64) Total 5,212,416.91 5,160,097.50 52,319.41 (3)Permits &Privileges Dog Licenses 18,740.00 15,969.00 2,771.00 Land Use Application Fees 3,575.00 3,200.00 375.00 Transfer Fees 919.57 821.70 97.87 Development Review Fees 125,686.20 101,459.24 24,226.96 Building Permits 237,181.36 180,284.50 56,896.86 2% State Fees 1,298.13 1,013.88 284.25 Electrical Permits 28,442.00 21,775.00 6,667.00 Plumbing Permits 3,110.00 3,985.00 (875.00) Mechanical Permits 16,635.75 15,272.64 1,363.11 Sign Permits 810.00 990.00 (180.00) Permits for Commercial Burning 100.00 125.00 (25.00) Explosive Storage Permits 200.00 100.00 100.00 Blasting Permits 165.00 75.00 90.00 Land Disturbance Permits 24,480.00 16,820.00 7,660.00 Sewage Installation License 200.00 300.00 (100.00) Residential Pump And Haul Fee 300.00 50.00 250.00 Transfer Development Rights 1,550.00 - 1,550.00 Total 463,393.01 362,240.96 101,152.05 (4) Revenue from use of Money 39,507.10 41,840.72 (2,333.62) Property 47,897.83 127,529.98 (79,632.15) *1 87,404.93 169,370.70 (81,965.77) *1 The Sale of Stephens City School($99,025 in FY13) 26 (5) Recovered Costs FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease Recovered CostsTreas.Office 42,156.00 42,577.25 (421.25) Worker's Comp 400.00 450.00 (50.00) Purchasing Card Rebate 117,213.04 - 117,213.04 Recovered Costs- IT /GIS 25,421.90 - 25,421.90 Reimbursement Circuit Court 4,467.09 4,619.06 (151.97) Clarke County Container Fees 19,570.83 20,294.76 (723.93) City of Winchester Container Fees 13,878.24 3,428.21 10,450.03 Refuse Disposal Fees 27,342.52 18,714.10 8,628.42 Recycling Revenue 38,548.77 44,640.24 (6,091.47) Sheriff Restitution 9.36 - 9.36 Fire &Rescue Merchandise (Resale) - 25.60 (25.60) Container Fees Bowman Library 417.23 273.13 144.10 Restitution Victim Witness 3,908.00 1,496.16 2,411.84 Reimb.of Expenses Gen.District Court 9,299.38 12,375.33 (3,075.95) Reimb.PublicWorksSalaries - 41,682.00 (41,682.00) Winchester EDC - 36,000.00 (36,000.00) Reimb.Task Force 15,292.14 15,059.52 232.62 C &P Jail - (60.00) 60.00 EDC /Recovered Costs - 480.00 (480.00) Sign Deposits Planning - (200.00) 200.00 Reimbursement Street Signs 679.20 1,989.60 (1,310.40) Grounds Maintenance Frederick Co.School 108,986.26 58,334.86 50,651.40 Comcast PEG Grant 31,520.40 15,282.80 16,237.60 Proffer -Other 5,000.00 5,000.00 - Fire School Programs 16,971.00 13,330.00 3,641.00 Proffer Sovereign Village 14,634.92 14,634.92 - Proffer Lynnehaven - 16,891.55 (16,891.SS) Proffer Redbud Run 64,540.00 64,540.00 - Clerks Reimbursement to County 3,956.38 3,641.56 314.82 Proffer Canter Estates 4,087.97 - 4,087.97 Proffer Village at Harvest Ridge 6,156.00 6,156.00 - Proffer Snowden Bridge 217,299.86 130,440.40 86,859.46 Proffer Meadows Edge Racey Tract 181,296.00 10,072.00 171,224.00 Sheriff Reimbursement 53,886.61 21,261.54 32,625.07 Proffer Cedar Meadows Proffer 9,762.00 - 9,762.00 Proffer Westbury Commons - 1,000.00 (1,000.00) Total 1,036,701.10 604,430.59 432,270.51 27 (6) Commonwealth Revenue 10/31/13 10/31/12 FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease Motor Vehicle Carriers Tax 37,981.90 34,612.37 3,369.53 Mobile Home Titling Tax 13,211.19 19,662.98 (6,451.79) State PP /Reimbursement 2,610,611.27 2,610,611.27 - Recordation Taxes 163,801.85 154,634.04 9,167.81 Shared Expenses Comm.Atty. 94,028.26 107,878.63 (13,850.37) Shared Expenses Sheriff 558,875.80 561,833.40 (2,957.60) Shared Expenses Comm.of Rev. 51,322.88 47,450.91 3,871.97 Shared Expenses Treasurer 39,248.25 34,003.18 5,245.07 Shared Expenses Clerk 106,376.68 98,676.92 7,699.76 Public Assistance Grants 1,115,911.61 1,143,972.69 (28,061.08) Litter Control Grant 15,502.00 17,573.00 (2,071.00) Emergency Services Fire Program 33,557.00 28,410.00 5,147.00 Recycling Grant - 5,489.94 (5,489.94) DMV Grant Funding 6,054.78 18,907.66 (12,852.88) DCJS &Sheriff State Grants - - - JJCGrant Juvenile Justice 64,180.00 64,180.00 - Rent /Lease Payments 75,993.35 95,777.20 (19,783.85) Spay /Neuter Assistance -State 331.55 272.65 58.90 State Reimbursement EDC 400,000.00 - 400,000.00 VDEM Grant Sheriff 5,600.58 - 5,600.58 Wireless 911 Grant 16,388.14 5,910.76 10,477.38 State Forfeited Asset Funds 4,176.86 6,012.25 (1,835.39) Victim Witness Commonwealth Office - 25,055.75 (25,055.75) Social Services VOCA Grant - 3,325.00 (3,325.00) F/R OEMS Reimb. 2,142.00 2,142.00 - IT /GIS Grant 16,666.66 - 16,666.66 Total 5,431,962.61 5,086,392.60 345,570.01 County of Frederick General Fund October 31, 2013 (7) Federal Revenue FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease Federal Forfeited Assets 8,066.71 182.80 7,883.91 Federal Grants Sheriff - 3,167.28 (3,167.28) Total 8,066.71 3,350.08 4,716.63 (8) Expenditures Expenditures increased $2,264,586.21 in total. General Administration increased $399,334.54 and reflects the $273,899.92 telephone system upgrade to Cisco VOIP solutions. Public Safety increased $1,156,119.41 and included the Sheriff's department cost of the IT Virtualization Project, implementation of the Sungard OSSI software, and equipment for IT upgrades including servers, PC's, printers and licenses totaling $420,689.75 year to date. The Sheriff's department also purchased a 2014 Ford Explorer for $25,875. Additionally, Inspections purchased a 2013 Ford F150 for $20,952 and Fire and Rescue a Lifepak 15 for $65,995.97 and two Chevrolet Tahoes totaling $58,747. Also, County local share for the Jail increased $133,752 through the 2nd quarter of FY14 over the previous year. Public Works increased $240,263.16 due to the earthwork and concrete wall /slab costs of $186,853.33 for the Gainesboro citizens site. The Community Development increase of $398,535.48 reflects the $400,000 Economic Development Commission incentive for McKesson Medical Surgical and Navy Federal Credit Union (See previous page (6) on Commonwealth revenue for the $400,000 State Reimbursement EDC. Transfers decreased $4,228,442.01. See chart below: (9) Transfers decreased $4,228,442.01 FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease School Operating 218,891.94 3,575,373.34 (3,356,481.40) Shawneeland 0.00 597.36 (597.36) Debt Service County 150,730.16 140,602.16 10,128.00 Jail Fund 0.00 972.98 (972.98) Operational Transfers 31,224.41 911,742.68 (880,518.27) Total 400,846.51 4,629,288.52 (4,228,442.01) *1 Decrease includes $1.1 million Reappropriation in FY13 and the $2.2 million 10/10/12 Resolution *2 Decrease includes one -time employer payments in FY13 and the timing of insurance charge -outs 29 *1 *2 NOTES: *1 The cash balance at 10/13 compared to the previous year decreased; however the revenue less expenditures increased $414,756.99 year to date due to the timing of revenue received from local contributions. *2 Total fund balance increased $370,788.16. The beginning fund balance was $2,155,709.80 that includes adjusting entries, budget controls for FY14($521,421.00), and the year to date revenue less expenditures of $1,208,730.59. Current Unrecorded Accounts Receivable- FY2014 Prisoner Billing: 39,662.20 Compensation Board Reimbursement 10/13 449,838.78 Total 489,500.98 30 County of Frederick FUND 11 NORTHWESTERN REGIONAL ADULT DETENTION CENTER October 31, 2013 ASSETS FY2014 FY2013 Increase 10/31/13 10/31/12 (Decrease) Cash 5,298,287.19 5,491,450.27 (193,163.08) *1 Accounts Receivable Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 GL controls(est.rev /est.exp) (363,966.37) (861,840.43) 497,874.06 TOTAL ASSETS 4,934,320.82 4,629,609.84 304,710.98 LIABILITIES Accrued Operating Reserve Costs 2,077,528.07 2,004,040.97 73,487.10 TOTAL LIABILITIES 2,077,528.07 2,004,040.97 73,487.10 EQUITY Fund Balance Reserved Encumbrances 13,773.36 153,337.64 (139,564.28) Undesignated Fund Balance 2,843,019.39 2,472,231.23 370,788.16 *2 TOTAL EQUITY 2,856,792.75 2,625,568.87 231,223.88 TOTAL LIABILITY &EQUITY 4,934,320.82 4,629,609.84 304,710.98 NOTES: *1 The cash balance at 10/13 compared to the previous year decreased; however the revenue less expenditures increased $414,756.99 year to date due to the timing of revenue received from local contributions. *2 Total fund balance increased $370,788.16. The beginning fund balance was $2,155,709.80 that includes adjusting entries, budget controls for FY14($521,421.00), and the year to date revenue less expenditures of $1,208,730.59. Current Unrecorded Accounts Receivable- FY2014 Prisoner Billing: 39,662.20 Compensation Board Reimbursement 10/13 449,838.78 Total 489,500.98 30 County of Frederick Comparative Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance 10/31/13 FUND 11 NORTHWESTERN REGIONAL ADULT DETENTION CENTER FY2014 FY2013 REVENUES: 10/31/13 10/31/12 YTD Actual Appropriated Actual Actual Variance Interest - 2,686.91 2,819.98 (133.07) Sale of Salvage &Surplus - 76.00 - 76.00 Supervision Fees 45,000.00 13,672.30 13,661.00 11.30 Drug Testing Fees 5,500.00 1,125.00 1,891.46 (766.46) Work Release Fees 384,616.00 100,497.90 97,433.17 3,064.73 Federal Bureau Of Prisons 0.00 1,375.00 0.00 1,375.00 Local Contributions 5,888,444.00 2,765,382.50 2,520,599.25 244,783.25 Miscellaneous 15,000.00 2,597.25 25,448.21 (22,850.96) Phone Commissions 120,000.00 26,987.77 25,572.84 1,414.93 Food &Staff Reimbursement 100,000.00 29,845.20 23,325.66 6,519.54 EIec.Monitoring Part.Fees 83,767.00 16,262.96 21,834.95 (5,571.99) Employee Meal Supplements 200.00 42.50 0.00 42.50 Share of Jail Cost Commonwealth 997,975.00 0.00 233,609.00 (233,609.00) Medical &Health Reimb. 57,600.00 18,134.85 16,250.24 1,884.61 Shared Expenses CFW Jail 4,947,976.00 1,247,278.14 1,285,361.20 (38,083.06) State Grants 249,551.00 66,869.00 68,111.00 (1,242.00) Local Offender Probation 242,437.00 62,151.00 62,527.00 (376.00) DOC Contract Beds 0.00 0.00 6,840.00 (6,840.00) Bond Proceeds 0.00 221,000.00 0.00 221,000.00 Transfer From General Fund 4,755,887.00 2,233,501.00 2,100,721.98 132,779.02 TOTAL REVENUES 17,893,953.00 6,809,485.28 6,506,006.94 303,478.34 EXPENDITURES: 18,271,692.73 5,600,754.69 5,712,033.34 (111,278.65) Excess(Deficiency)of revenues over expenditures 1,208,730.59 793,973.60 414,756.99 FUND BALANCE PER GENERAL LEDGER 1,634,288.80 1,678,257.63 (43,968.83) Fund Balance Adjusted To Reflect 2,843,019.39 2,472,231.23 370,788.16 Income Statement @10/31/13 31 County of Frederick Fund 12 Landfill October 31, 2013 ASSETS Cash Receivables: Accounts Receivable Fees Accounts Receivable Other Allow.Uncollectible Fees Fixed Assets Accumulated Depreciation GL controls(est.rev /est.exp) TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES Accounts Payable Accrued VAC.Pay and Comp TimePay Accrued Remediation Costs Retainage Payable Deferred Revenue Misc.Charges TOTAL LIABILITIES EQUITY Fund Balance Reserved: Encumbrances Land Acquisition New Development Costs Environmental Project Costs Equipment Undesignated Fund Balance TOTAL EQUITY TOTAL LIABILITY AND EQUITY FY2014 131,732.55 FY2013 1,048,000.00 Increase 0.00 10/31/13 3,812,000.00 10/31/12 1,948,442.00 (Decrease) 0.00 30,038,381.60 3,050,000.00 28,472,428.86 1,565,952.74 *1 549,319.41 601,512.84 (52,193.43) *2 88.00 172.00 (84.00) (84,000.00) (84,000.00) 0.00 43,287,786.24 42,516,271.35 771,514.89 (23,311,767.48) (21,543,603.09) (1,768,164.39) (2,513,233.00) (4,469,979.62) 1,956,746.62 47,966,574.77 45,492,802.34 2,473,772.43 159,728.90 134,423.76 25,305.14 11,791,736.42 11,653,036.50 138,699.92 *3 0.00 47,620.17 (47,620.17) 88.00 172.00 8( 4.00) 11,951,553.32 11,835,252.43 116,300.89 0.00 131,732.55 (131,732.55) *4 1,048,000.00 1,048,000.00 0.00 3,812,000.00 3,812,000.00 0.00 1,948,442.00 1,948,442.00 0.00 3,050,000.00 3,050,000.00 0.00 26,156,579.45 23,667,375.36 2,489,204.09 *5 36,015,021.45 47,966,574.77 33,657,549.91 45,492,802.34 2,357,471.54 2,473,772.43 NOTES: *1 The increase in cash can be attributed to the increase in fund balance. *2 Landfill receivables decreased $52,193.43. Landfill fees at 10/13 were $450,675.49 compared to $431,824.73 at 10/12 for an increase of $18,850.76. Delinquent fees at 10/12 were $167,118.98 compared to $94,933.39 at 10/13 fora decrease of $72,186.59. *3 Remediation increased $138,699.92, and includes $111,998.00 for post closure costs and $26,701.92 interest. *4 There were no encumbrances at 10/31/13. *5 Total fund balance increased $2,489,204.09. The beginning fund balance was $28,478,302.42 that includes adjusting entries, budget controls for FY14($1,320,360.00), ($1,178,000.00) carry forwards of unsed FY13 funds for projects, ($974,334.47), for FY13 audit adjustments that include depreciation, equipment and capital projects, and the year to date revenue less expenses $1,150,971.50. 32 County of Frederick Comparative Statement of Revenue,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance October 31, 2013 FUND 12 LANDFILL FY14 FY13 YTD REVENUES 10/31/13 10/31/12 Actual Appropriated Actual Actual Variance Interest Charge 0.00 1,142.94 2,424.67 (1,281.73) Interest on Bank Deposits 40,000.00 17,790.52 15,211.79 2,578.73 Salvage and Surplus 0.00 43,755.90 52,297.20 (8,541.30) Sanitary Landfill Fees 4,632,600.00 1,575,305.55 1,509,551.80 65,753.75 Charges to County 0.00 116,697.44 117,233.48 (536.04) Charges to Winchester 0.00 31,659.92 33,295.96 (1,636.04) Tire Recycling 70,000.00 46,441.22 36,362.64 10,078.58 Reg.Recycling Electronics 40,000.00 15,429.60 19,688.00 (4,258.40) Miscellaneous 0.00 3,293.70 4,301.00 (1,007.30) Wheel Recycling 120,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Charges for RTOP 0.00 2,408.69 0.00 2,408.69 Renewable Energy Credits 0.00 43,167.18 0.00 43,167.18 Landfill Gas To Electricity 403,660.00 125,463.49 178,875.68 (53,412.19) Waste Oil Recycling 9,544.05 6,202.59 3,341.46 State Reimbursement Tire Operation 0.00 0.00 6,120.00 (6,120.00) TOTAL REVENUES 5,306,260.00 2,032,100.20 1,981,564.81 50,535.39 Operating Expenditures 4,928,993.00 881,128.70 1,007,018.69 (125,889.99) Capital Expenditures 2,890,500.00 0.00 657,529.31 (657,529.31) TOTAL Expenditures 7,819,493.00 881,128.70 1,664,548.00 (783,419.30) Excess(defiency)of revenue over expenditures 1,150,971.50 317,016.81 833,954.69 Fund Balance Per General Ledger 25,005,607.95 23,350,358.55 1,655,249.40 FUND BALANCE ADJUSTED 26,156,579.45 23,667,375.36 2,489,204.09 K�j County of Frederick, VA Report on Unreserved Fund Balance October 31, 2013 Unreserved Fund Balance, Beginning of Year, July 1, 2013 Prior Year Funding & Carryforward Amounts C/F Dare C/F Fire Company Capital Return unspent Parks proffer C/F Forfeited Assests Return unspent SCFR proffer C/F DSS phone system C/F VDEM grant (71) (217,280) (13,681) (62,561) (29,004) (50,000) (7,008) Other Funding /Adjustments Kraft incentive (325,000) Tax refunds (13,472) Sheriff gap pay (135,062) Round Hill station design (403,648) Airport capital (499,004) New 911 phone system (50,000) Gainesboro Convenience Center (99,061) Parks & Rec maintenance building donation (25,000) Fire &Rescue reimbursement Gear Clean (4,429) Tevis St (377,396) ICAC grant 78,614 Eliminate Kelly Day (354,506) Fund Balance, October 31, 2013 34 33,888,096 (379,606) (2,207,964) 31,300,526 � � i ' Department of Planning and Development 5401665 -5651 FAX: 5401665 -6395 r MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director - Transportation — • _�. RE: Transportation Committee Report for Meeting of November 25, 2013 DATE: December 4, 2013 The Transportation Committee met on October 28, 2013 at 8:30 a.m. Members Present Chuck DeHaven (voting) James Racey (voting) Christopher Collins (voting) Lewis Boyer (liaison Stephens City) Gary Oates (liaison PC) 1. Members Absent Mark Davis (liaison Middletown) Gene Fisher (voting) ** *Items Requiring Action * ** Speed Study Request —Cedar Creek Grade Attached, please find the request from VDOT for County concurrence on a speed study for Cedar Creek Grade between Route 37 and the City line of Winchester. Staff has also attached a map of the current speeds in this area. The Committee considered the item and noted the heavy traffic flows, entrance configurations, and geometries of the area. Some consideration was given to extending the study to include the intersection with Jones Road, but this was not done. MOTION: Mr. Collins made a motion, seconded by Mr. Racey to recommend that the Board endorse the completion of a speed study on Cedar Greek Grade between the interchange with Route 37 and the Winchester City line. Motion passed unanimously. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 •Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 ��Items Not Requiring Action�� 2. Capital Improvement Plan VDOT staff was on hand to provide updates on Route 277, Exit 310, Exit 313, and Route 37 projects. Staff can arrange for similar updates to the Board of Supervisors if so desired. 3. County Road Projects Staff provided brief updates on the Tevis Street Extension and bridge project as well as the Snowden Bridge Blvd. project. 4. Other JB /pd From: John Bishop To: Diane Walsh Subject: FW: Speed Study Rt. 622 Cedar Creek Grade Date: Monday, November 18, 2013 2:49:28 PM From: Carter, Edwin (VDOT) [ mailto: Edwin.Carter @vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 11:14 AM To: John Bishop Cc: Balderson, Clifton M. (VDOT); Logan, Donald D. (VDOT); 'Perry Eisenach' Subject: Speed Study Rt. 622 Cedar Creek Grade John, The City Of Winchester is considering a request fora 132 unit multi - family development on the north side of Cedar Creek Grade just inside the City limits, across from the intersection of Stoneleigh Dr. They are considering lowering the existing speed and have requested that VDOT consider lowering the existing speed limit coming into the City from Rt. 37. We have agreed to perform a speed study on this route pending concurrence from Frederick County. We would like for the Transportation Committee to consider this request for action by the Board at their next meeting. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Ed Edwin Z. Carter Assist. Residency Administrator VDOT- Edinburg Residency (540)984 -5605 Fax (540) 984 -5607 Edwi n. Ca rterC�VDOT. Vi ra i n ia. Gov October 30, 2013 Mr. John Riley, County Administrator County of Frederick 107 North Kest 5t. Wznchestex, Virginia 22601 Dear Mr. Riley, .f�r' � <5�� / �� i '§f �� ! k ocr ��: � �� tie: �:� �w ��- `� �m C �., rJ . c�... \v .;., z {d �d, y . � i _ L. 1 � 3 ��L t� .A 3, Please find attached $elle Grove Plantation's Application For Ouidoor Festival Permit This application is for a12 month January to December 2014 pexmit. $elle Grave Plantation intends to bold its usual schedule of events including Of Ale &History Beer Festival and Vintage Belle Grove Wine Festival. Please contact me with any questions. Many t�s. Sincerely, M Richard H. ogle, Program Assistant BELLE GROVE PLANTATION P. O. SOX 537 MIDDLETOWN, VA 22645 PHONE: 540 - 869 -2028 EAX: 540 -869 -9638 avavw.bellegrove . org APPLICATION FOR OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA Name of Applicant: Telephone Number(s): � ti home office ❑ cell 11 home 1:1 office ❑ cell Name of Festival: 1 °- G. % 1 Cost of Admission to Festival: Business License Obtained: Yes ❑ No Address: M�R r Name(s): Address: ('NOTE: Applicant may be required to provide a statement or other documentation indicating consent by the owner(s) for use of the property and related parking for the festival.) Name(s): Address: ('NOTE: For festivals other than not- far - profit, promoter may need to check with the Frederick County Commissioner of Revenue to determine compliance with County business license requirements; in addition, promoters who have repeat or ongoing business in Virginia maybe required to register with the VA State Corporation Commiss'son for legal authority to conduct business in Virginia.) Address.,�. Name of Person(s) or Group(s): � ( Applicant may need to update information as performers are booked for festival event.} 1. Attach a copy of the printed ticket or badge of admission to the festival, containing the date(s) and time(s) of such festival (may be marked as "sample "). ❑ copy attached OR copy to be provided as soon as available 2. Provide a plan for adequate sanitation facilities as well as garbage, trash, and sewage disposal for persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved bythe VA Department of Health (Lord Fairfax Health District). 3. Provide a plan for providing food, water, and lodging for the persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the VA 4. Provide a plan for adequate medical facilities for persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the County Fire Chief or Fire Marshal —A the i—i fi— —A 5. Provide a plan for adequate fire protection. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the County Fire Chief or Fire Marshal and the local fire and Provide a plan for adequate parking facilities and traffic control in and around the festival area. (A diagram may be 7. 8. State whether alcoholic beverages will be served: 1p(ES o NO If yes, provide details on how it will be control fed." (NOTE: Evidence of any applicable VAABC permit must also be provided and posted at the festival as required. Applicant may need to confirm with the VA ABC that a license Is not required from that agency in order for festival attendees to bring their own alcoholic beverages to any event that is open to the general public upon payment of the applicable admission fee.) State whether any outdoor lights or lighting will be utilized: L7 YES NO If yes, provide a plan or submit a diagram showing the location of such lights an the proximity relative to the property boundaries and neighboring properties. In addition, show the location of shielding devices or other equipment to be used to prevent unreasonable glow beyond the property on which the festival is located. Applicant makes the following statements: A, Music shall not be rendered nor entertainment provided for more than eight (8) hours in any twenty -four (24) hour period, such twenty -four (24) hour period to be measured from the beginning of the first performance at the festival. B. Music shall not be played, either by mechanical device or We performance, in such a manner that the sound emanating therefrom exceeds 73 decibels at the property on which the festival is located. C. No person under the age of eighteen (18) years of age shall be admitted to any festival unless accompanied by a parent or guardian, the parent or guardian to remain with such person at all times. (NOTE: It may be necessary to post signs to this effect.) D. The Board, its lawful agents, and /or duly constituted law enforcement officers shall have permission to go upon the property where the festival is being held at anytime for the purpose of determining compliance with the provisions of the County ordinance. 1, the undersigned Applicant, hereby certify that all information, statements, and documents provided in connection with this Application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. In addition, Applicant agrees that the festival event and its attendees shall comply with the provisions of the Frederick County ordinance pertaining to festivals as well as the festival provisions contained herein. re of Applicant Date: �� _,� � �� -- ` �t DL" A5__15t__5 a THE BOARD SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVOKE ANY PERMIT ISSUED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE UPON NON - COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS. Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner. M Subject: Public Hearing - EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District Height Wavier Request — Carmeuse Lime & Stone, Inc. Property Identification Number (PIN #): 33 -A -144 " S Date: December 5, 2013 Staff has received a request from Lawson and Silek.. P.L.C., on behalf of Carmeuse Lime & Stone, Inc. to allow the construction of a new kiln at the existing Clearbrook quarry located off of Quarry Lane in the Stonewall Magisterial District. The requested waiver is for the construction of a kiln, with the skin ", up to 200 feet in height. The proposed kiln structure would be more than 1,000 feet from the closest adjacent property (north /east). The Applicant has provided architectural renderings of the structure as well as photographs of the structure. The architectural renderings show the kiln with and without the "skin" which is a screening element of the top portion of the kiln structure. The Planning Commission considered this waiver request at their meeting on November 5, 2013; the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested waiver for a kiln up to 200 feet in height with the "skin ". The Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance amendment on November 13, 2013 meeting that allowed the maximum height in the EM District to be waived up to 200 feet with a Board waiver following a public hearing. Due to the addition of the public hearing requirement, the waiver request must be taken back through the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this waiver request on December 4, 2013; there were no citizen comments and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the requested waiver for a kiln up 1a) 200 feet in height with the "skin ". Staff is seeking a decision from the Board of Supervisors on this height waiver request. Please contact me if you have any questions. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachment: 1. Request Letter. 2. Architectural Renderings of the Structure. 3. Photographs of the structure. 4. Overall site layout. CEP /pd 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Click in this box to return to the 12/05/13 BOS Memorandum LAWSON AND SILEK, P.L.C. 120 EXETER DRIVE, SUITE 200 POST OFFICE BOX 2740 WINCHESTER, VA 22604 TELEPHONE: (540) 665 -0050 FACSIMILE: (540) 722-4051 October 15, 2013 THOMAS MOORE LAWSON TLAWSON(7n,LSPLC.COM Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Director Candice Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner Frederick County Department of Planning & Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 VIA HAND - DELIVERY Dear Candice and Eric: Re: Waiver Application Our File No. 462.022 Enclosed please find an Application for a Waiver or Ordinance Exception to allow for a waiver of the height restriction in an EM zone to 200 feet. I understand this waiver application is to be heard concurrently with the ordinance amendments regarding waivers for height restrictions in EM, MI and M2 zones. Please confirm the schedule for these hearings so that I may be in attendance. Thank you for your attention to these matters. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. TML :jk Enclosure cc: Carmeuse Lime & Stone, Inc. Very t 1 urs, Tho as oore ws j r a I K I FRONT ROYAL ADDRESS: POST OFFICE BOX 602, FRONT ROYAL, VIRGINIA 22630, TELEPHONE: (540) 635 -9415 • FACSIMILE: (540) 635 -9421 • E -MAIL: JSILEK*LAWSONANDSILEK,COM APPLICATION FOR A WAIVER OR ORDINANCE EXCEPTION Applicant /Agent: O -N Minerals (Chemstone) Company d /b /a Carmeuse Lime & Stone, Inc. Address: 11 Stanwix Street, 21 st Floor, Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Phone Number: (412) 638 -1581 Property Owner's Name ( if different from applicant Address: Phone Number: Contact Person ( different from applicant Thomas Moore Lawson, Esquire /Lawson and Si►ek, P.L.C. Phone Number: (540) 665 -0050 Waiver request details (include specific ordinance requirements to be waived): waiver of height limitation in EM zone to 200 feet to allow for installation of new kiln (Section 165 - 608.06) Property Location (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): 508 Quarry Lane between the intersection of Route 11 with Brucetown Road (Route 672) and Walter Milts Lane (Route 836) Parcel Identification /Location: 33 -A -144 Magisterial District: Stonewall Zoning and Current Use: Zoning District: EM Current Use: quar Attachments: Adjoining Property Owners List x Existing /recorded and Proposed Plats x * ** *For Office Use Only * * ** FEES FOR WAIVER OR ORDINANCE EXCEPTION AND CHECKLIST: ➢ $500.00 Attachments Existing/recorded and proposed plat(s) Y Completed adjoining properties info.. sheet(s) Y Receipt #: Received by: Date: (Initials) Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street • North Building • 2n Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone: (540) 665 -5651 - Fax: (540) 665 -6395 1 ° o 0 0 c E u � v m u a o E L � x c o X ry U L z J Y N Z J Y i LU LU r) Ln 2 z J LU z O cr- Ll w w 0 V) Y H 0 2 H Z J Y w H Z O LL L, 0 11 I V f „ MR v L t y. 40 / « t A- P,i Ad e Y I� wis L99ZZ VINID&A 'DdnOSVai , =:, ..= , '-, " ...... ...... . N0lSWVdX3 NIN ]Wll 00 advno d]iS]HDNIM ]Snmm is is 'S3iVlD0SSV 9 VIS110d 40 N1 VD S VISHOOF 9N 9 3WIl 3Sn3Wa VONVSO 969L A NVId 31 DNIMVd(I 335 3NII HDIVW P lz aanssi� Iva 1 A IVW U Y TIA p LLJ LU hii, �\ g= N§ \ �� \ t LLJ zY a,� Y \ ,�Q g, \\ z u < LU LU LU Q) SB 1 2 c z gN N � v � I � � I = Lu3 Lu� uc -LL ■�� 1 O�® t59ZZ VINIO70A'0 969L a1s S s i N ou v 1 NOISNtldX3 NIIX 3Wfl 9 lNa - . tlONtl . Aaatl00 a3153NJNIM 3sn3WatlJ '7N1 'S31tlDO5stl9 3NOls 9 3W1'I 35f13Watl9 11®NX3 3115 lNa3A0 EL canssl 31tl0 I I ` I I R I n 5= I � I �— I g �° ' I 8 y3F I I s ; I sf� � I I \ rv�j�\ I3h ¢(jU I IUN�g� I I W =�V2� _ I -- ------ \1 PlrJ 11 T - / N O I li g II I Va � � 2 �/ 2� hry. / ' W a 1� I vv '^g I I I - i15_o AvIW��IW� - as ia oeti W v —v c� v _ �L p I I m mQ — y2} REZONING APPLICATION #03 -13 Madison Village Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: December 2, 2013 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director Reviewed Planning Commission: 08/21/13 11/06/13 Board of Supervisors: 12/11/13 Action Public hearing; Action - tabled 90 days Public Hearing; Approval Pending PROPOSAL To rezone 51.26 acres from RA (Rural Area) District to 46.26 acres of RP (Residential Performance) District and to 5 acres of B2 (General Business) District with proffers. LOCATION The property is located on the west side of Route 522, approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE 12/11/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: Following a public hearing at their November 6, 2013 meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Madison Village Rezoning request, RZ 903 -13. Previously, the Planning Commission tabled this application for 90 days at their 08/21/13 meeting. This provided the Applicant time to address the items discussed during the Planning Commission meeting, including the extension of the roads to the adjacent properties in a timely manner, and the establishment of a minimum residential density consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It also provided an additional opportunity for the Applicant to meet with the adjacent property owner to come to an agreement over access issues (at the time of the meeting, the Applicant and adjacent property owner had met on several occasions but had not yet come to an agreement). The Applicant revised their proffer statement (dated September 5, 2013) to address the two items identified by staff. More specifically, the Applicant modified their proffer statement to provide for a minimum number of four hundred twenty (420) residential units; this would ensure a minimum residential density of approximately eight units per acre, and to include triggers for the completion of the identified public road connections to the west and to the south by the 312 residential occupancy and the 420 residential occupancy, respectively. The Madison Village rezoning application is generally consistent with future land use designations of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan which provide guidance on the future development of the property. Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any further issues raised by the Board of Supervisors, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Board. Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 2 Followinz the required public hearinz, a decision rezardinz this rezonin application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 3 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. Reviewed Planning Commission: 08/21/13 11/06/13 Board of Supervisors: 12/11/13 Action Public hearing; Action - tabled 90 days Public Hearing; Approval Pending PROPOSAL To rezone 51.26 acres from RA (Rural Area) District to 46.26 acres of RP (Residential Performance) District and to 5 acres of B2 (General Business) District with proffers. LOCATION The property is on the west side of route 522, approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS 64 -A -18 PROPERTY ZONING RA (Rural Area) PRESENT USE Vacant /Agri cultural ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Vacant (Russell 150) South: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential/Vacant East RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential B2 (Business General) Vacant West: RA (Rural Area) Use: Vacant /Agri cultural Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 4 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: Please see attached comments. Fire and Rescue: Plan approved. Public Works Department: Indicate the location of the existing overhead power lines on the generalized development plan and future MDP. We anticipate that the private development will be served by a private waste hauler. Department of Inspections: N/A Frederick County Sanitation Authority: Per your request, a review of the proposed rezoning has been performed. The Frederick County Sanitation Authority offers comments limited to the anticipated impact/effect upon the Authority's public water and sanitary sewer system and the demands thereon. The parcel is in the water and sanitary sewer area served by the Authority. Based on the anticipated usage, water capacity is presently available. Sanitary sewer treatment capacity at the waste water treatment plant is also presently available. Conveyance capacity and layout will be contingent on the applicant performing a technical analysis the existing sanitary sewer system within the area to be served and the ability of the existing conveyance system to accept additional load. Both water and sanitary sewer facilities are located within a reasonable distance from this site. Please be aware that the Authority does not review or comment upon proffers and /or conditions proposed or submitted by the applicant in support of or in conjunction with this application for rezoning, nor does the Authority assume or undertake any responsibility to review or comment upon any amended proffers and /or conditions which the Applicant may hereafter provide to Frederick County. Service Authority: No comment Frederick - Winchester Health Department N/A Parks & Recreation: Rezoning application appears to contain verbage which address the County Development Impact Model. Winchester Regional Airport: No comments. Frederick County Attorney: Please see attached letter dated May 14, 2013, from Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney. Frederick County Public School: Please see attached letter date June 28, 2013, from K. Wayne Lee, Jr., LEED GA Planning Department: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not Significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule review of the rezoning Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 5 application by the HRAB. According to the rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the property nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. Planning & Zonin2: 1) Site History The property is currently zoned RA (Rural Areas) and has historically been used for agricultural and residential land uses. The original Frederick County Zoning for this property as identified on the Winchester Quadrangle is AI (Agricultural general). In 2012, a single five acre lot was subdivided from this parent tract adjacent to Route 522 which contained the existing residential land use. Directly to the north of this site is the Russell 150 property which was rezoned for residential and commercial land uses in 2006. Two smaller B2 (Business General) properties adjoin this site at its proposed entrance to Route 522. These properties, the Shepherd Properties were rezoned at around the same time. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The 2030 Comprehensive Plan is the guide for the future growth of Frederick County. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan provide guidance on the future development of the property. Appendix I includes the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan as an approved Area Plan. The property is located in the UDA (Urban Development Area) and the SWSA (Sewer and Water Service Area). The 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies the general area surrounding this property with a high density residential land use designation. In general, the proposed residential designation for this property is consistent with this residential land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed residential density is consistent with the residential densities of the RP section of the Zoning Ordinance which was recently updated in implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the introduction of a small area of commercial land use provides for a mix of uses in conjunction with each other, also an element of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The CIP (Capital Improvements Plan), a component of the Comprehensive Plan, has identified the general area of this property, along Route 522 south, as a location for a smaller scale park that would be designed to serve the anticipated additional residents in this area. Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 6 3) Site Suitability /Environment The property is well suited to future development. It is relatively open, flat land with small areas of slopes and wetlands associated with drainage across the site. The site does contain a pond on the northern property line, close to the entrance road to the site. This pond will be preserved during the development of the site and used as a recreational feature. Access to the site will be directly to Route 522 via a new public street entrance designed for the proj ect. This new public street will contain bicycle and pedestrian accommodations as called for in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. This public street will be extended to provide access to adjacent properties as the development progresses. It should be satisfied that the extension of the public street network occurs in a timely manner and key connections are made to adjacent properties. 4) Potential Impacts Transportation. The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan recognizes Route 522 as an improved major arterial road. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan recognizes a minor collector road that runs east -west from Route 522 over to future Warrior Drive. Interparcel connections are also apotential as this project develops, in particular, to the property to the south. Recent traffic volumes on Route 522 in the vicinity of the site showed the average annual daily traffic was 15,220 vehicles per day. The Applicant's TIA projects traffic on Route 522 to be 26,585 vehicles per day in 2026. The proposed impacts to Route 522 at the site entrance will be significant. The proposed project will have a single entrance on to Route 522. In order to mitigate the impacts of the project, the Applicant will implement the following improvements; Installation of a traffic signal at the proposed entrance and right and left turn lanes on Route 522, dual eastbound left turn lanes from the project entrance, and a roundabout internal to the project at the commercial area. The Applicant's TIA further addresses the traffic impacts of this project. Schools. This development, along with other anticipated developments, will require construction of new schools and support facilities to accommodate increased student enrollment. The Applicant is addressing this impact through their recognition of the County's Development Impact Model values which provides a value for the capital impacts of the proposed development. The Applicant is addressing the other capital impacts identified in the development impact model by proffering the appropriate values to mitigate any potential impacts. Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 7 5) Proffer Statement — Dated April 22, 2013 (Final Revision dated September 5, 2013) A) Generalized Development Plan The applicant has provided a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of the street providing access to and through the project, residential and commercial land use areas, and improvements at the Route 522 entrance. The GDP also shows the location of potential roundabouts internal to the site and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. B) Land Use The applicants have proffered a limit to the total number of residential units to six hundred forty (640). - The Applicant has modified their proffer statement (dated September 5, 2013) to provide for a minimum number of four hundred twenty residential units (420). This would ensure a minimum residential density of approximately eight units per acre. C) Access Management. The applicant has proffered the signalization of the intersection of the site driveway and Route 522. In addition, the Applicant has proffered five initial transportation improvements and right of way dedication to support the sites access. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are also proffered internal to the project along the public roads. D) Transportation The Applicant has also proffered to construct the internal road system as shown on the GDP which includes interparcel access and connections to adjacent properties. Proffer 6 a) and b) detail the extension of the public road system to the adjacent properties. - The Applicant has modified their proffer statement (dated September 5, 2013) to include triggers for the completion of the identified public road connections to the west and to the south by the 312 residential occupancy and the 420 residential occupancy, respectively. E) Community Facilities The Applicant has proffered a monetary contribution to community facilities to offset the impact of the residential development. The amount per single family detached, attached, and multifamily dwelling unit is consistent with the County's Development Impact Model values for 2013. The Applicant has proposed an alternative payment program for the multifamily units which is generally acceptable to the County Attorney and Staff. The Applicant has also included a provision for a reduced contribution in the case of any age restricted components of this development, proffer 10. Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 8 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 08/21/13 PLANNING COMMSSION MEETING: The Madison Village rezoning application is generally consistent with future land use designations of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan which provide guidance on the future development of the property. A couple of elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated to ensure that they fully address the impacts associated with this rezoning request. The Planning Commission should pay particular attention to the transportation impacts; in particular the extension of the roads to the adjacent properties is proffered at the time of the Master Development Plan for the project. Specific commitments as to the timing of these extensions are not proffered. Also, it is important to recognize that there is no minimum limitation placed on the development to ensure the more intensive development of this site. Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any issues raised by the Planning Commission, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF THE 8/21/13 MEETING: Commission members had questions regarding the anticipated impacts on local schools and whether the proj ect would be developed in phases. It was observed from the TIA that the north - bound, left -turn lane Level of Service would drop to Level D at build out, and the applicant was asked what methods would be used to mitigate this situation. A Commissioner asked what recreational aspect was anticipated in working with the Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department. In addition, an issue was raised regarding the density and the land use designation. In reviewing the GDP and the proffers, a Commissioner observed the documents were fairly generic with residential use and didn't provide the Commission with any assurance the project would be a mix of single - family attached and multi - family. There was concern about the applicant's rational for not designating on the GDP or by proffer that this proj ect would be a mix of single - family attached and multi - family, so there would be consistency when the MDP is submitted and no question concerning the housing type_ An adjoining property owner, Mr. Michael Shepherd came forward to speak during the public comment portion of the hearing. Mr. Shepherd owned two adj oining parcels (PINS 64 -A -14 and 64 -A -15) which were rezoned to B2 (Business General) by the Board of Supervisors on April 14, 2004. Mr. Shepherd said he recently learned that Madison, LLC will need to vacate his properties' entrances and exits and grade the front of his property to meet sight distance requirements for VDOT. He said he contacted the applicant for the purpose of arranging a land swap in exchange for his frontage. He also desired for the applicant to extend their deceleration lane approximately 100 -120 feet for access into his property. Mr. Shepherd said his two parcels are legally separated and he was concerned his southernmost parcel would be left with no exit. In addition, he said there is a spite strip issue to the south, where his connector road comes in from Rt. 522; he said the applicant has a small portion of land between their road and his southernmost boundary which is not significant enough to act as a buffer. Mr. Shepherd would like for the applicant to increase the distance there slightly. Mr. Shepherd said at this time, no agreement on any of these issues has been reached between him and the applicant. Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 9 Discussion ensued between the staff, the Commission, and the applicant's attorney as to whether or not an agreement between the two landowners should be reached prior to rezoning. The Planning Staff believed the access would be accommodated. The Planning Staff reported the applicant improved their proffer statement to insure those road connections would be done with the first phase of development prior to occupancy, to ensure the access would not only be there for the applicant's project, but also for the two commercial properties as well. The Staff pointed out the public hearing sign had not been posted on the property for a few days and believed it would be appropriate to postpone a decision until the property could be properly posted to meet legal requirements. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to table the rezoning for 90 days to allow the property to be properly posted with a public hearing sign. (Commissioner Oates abstained from voting; Commissioners Madagan and Marston were absent from the meeting.) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 11/06/13 PLANNNG COMNHSSION MEETING: The Planning Commission tabled this application for 90 days at your 08/21/13 meeting. This provided the Applicant time to address the items discussed during the Planning Commission meeting, including the extension of the roads to the adjacent properties in a timely manner, and the establishment of a minimum residential density consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It also provided an additional opportunity for the Applicant to meet with the adjacent property owner to come to an agreement over access issues. Finally, this also allowed the site to be posted again and the public hearing to be adequately noticed. The Applicant revised their proffer statement (dated September 5, 2013) to address the two items identified by staff. More specifically, the Applicant has modified their proffer statement to provide for a minimum number of four hundred twenty (420) residential units; this would ensure a minimum residential density of approximately eight units per acre, and to include triggers for the completion of the identified public road connections to the west and to the south by the 312 residential occupancy and the 420 residential occupancy, respectively. At the time this report was made, the Applicant and adjacent property owner have not come to an agreement. The Madison Village rezoning application is generally consistent with future land use designations of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan which provide guidance on the future development of the property. Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any further issues raised by the Planning Commission, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Planning Commission. Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 10 Followinz the required public hearinz, a recommendation regardinz this rezoninz application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planninz Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF THE 11/06/13 MEETING Mr. John Lewis with Painter- Lewis, P.L.C. and Mr. Benjamin Butler, attorney, were representing this project. Mr. Lewis said they have worked on the four issues raised by the Planning Commission. The first issue, regarding the minimum density, was resolved by placing the minimum and maximum densities, which are in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, within the proffer statement. The second issue, the timing of construction of the internal roads, is detailed within the proffers and is tied to the various phases of the project. The third issue, regarding the disappearance of the public hearing sign, has been resolved and the sign has been reposted and is visible today. The fourth issue, obtaining a grading easement to facilitate the construction of their entrance from Route 522, has not yet been resolved with the adjacent property owner. Mr. Lewis said two draft agreements have been exchanged, but no resolution has been arrived at this time. He said it was incumbent upon the applicant to reach an agreement in order for this project to move forward. Mr. Lewis requested the Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on this application in its current state. Mr. Michael Shepherd, the owner of the two B2 -zoned lots adjacent to the Madison Village project, to the south and west, said no final agreement has been reached regarding the access and easements. He had filed a site plan for his properties prior to the last public hearing and he was prepared to move forward with his plan. Mr. Shepherd was not opposed to the Madison Village project as a practical matter; however, he said the outstanding issue is how the road could go in without grading easements and his buildings so close to the edge of his property. The Chairman commented the original application had a number of different types of residential units and asked if that same variety was present in this revised submittal. Staff replied the minimum number of residential units has been established in the proffer at 420 and the maximum at 640; all housing types are represented. There were no citizen comments. Commission members discussed whether approval of the rezoning should be contingent on an agreement being reached between the applicant and the adjoining property owner. From the Planning Commission's obligation in terms of the application materials and the proffers, they believed the General Development Plan provided the locations where those access points should be provided to ensure there is interconnectivity; however, it was incumbent on the two property owners to work out a mutually- agreeable arrangement to facilitate that. They believed this was a private element and the Commission and staff had done what it can do and should do to ensure the framework is there. It was also recognized this rezoning application was in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Frederick County Codes. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval. (Note: Commissioner Oates abstained from voting; Commissioners Dunlap, Kenney, and Madagan were absent from the meeting.) Rezoning #03 -13 Madison Village December 2, 2013 Page 11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE 12/11/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: Following a public hearing at their November 6, 2013 meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Madison Village Rezoning request, RZ #03 -13. Previously, the Planning Commission tabled this application for 90 days at their 08/21/13 meeting. This provided the Applicant time to address the items discussed during the Planning Commission meeting, including the extension of the roads to the adjacent properties in a timely manner, and the establishment of a minimum residential density consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It also provided an additional opportunity for the Applicant to meet with the adjacent property owner to come to an agreement over access issues (at the time of the meeting, the Applicant and adjacent property owner had met on several occasions but had not yet come to an agreement). The Applicant revised their proffer statement (dated September 5, 2013) to address the two items identified by staff. More specifically, the Applicant modified their proffer statement to provide for a minimum number of four hundred twenty (420) residential units; this would ensure a minimum residential density of approximately eight units per acre, and to include triggers for the completion of the identified public road connections to the west and to the south by the 312 residential occupancy and the 420 residential occupancy, respectively. The Madison Village rezoning application is generally consistent with future land use designations of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan which provide guidance on the future development of the property. Confirmation of the issues identified in the staff report, and any further issues raised by the Board of Supervisors, should be addressed prior to the decision of the Board. Followinz the required public hearinz, a decision re- ardin this rezonin application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. 64 A f2 522 PLACE Subdivisiol � G•iilG�433 O - -� D -n r� -o O m ? i G�G�A3 Clago ' GflG1 Q�i t REZ0313- QQ� 64 A 18 . ............ O Applications Q Parcels Building Footprints tG1m 131 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) HE (Higher Education District) M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) - R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R6 (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District) i 1 f 0 64DA5 64DA6 64D A 7 64DA8 64D, 64D bac A 14 64e a 13A 64C A 15 64i 64C A 16 64C .• z 1: bac a 16A 64C 2 14� 64C 28 64C 2 13 64C27 64C 2 6 ' 64C 2 1 64C 2 5 64C �' 2 10 64C24 • 64C23 � 625 642 64C2.1 64A. 64 A 42 r I �64A41 ■P n C� Subdi -`nC� I & REZ # 03 - 13 Note: Frederick County Dept of Madison Village Planning & Development PINS: 107 N Kent St 64 - A - 18 Suite 202 e RA to RP (46.26 Ac.) Winchester, VA 22601 RA to B2 (5 Ac.) 540 - 665 - 5651 Map Created: July 30, 2013 Staff: mruddy 0 212.5 425 850 Feet Proffer Statement Madison Village Parcel TM #64 -A -18 RA TO RP /132 WITH PROFFERS Rezoning #: Property: PARCEL ID: 64 -A -18 Area: 51.26 acres Recorded Owner: Madison Farms, LLC Applicant: Madison II, LLC 558 Bennys Beach Road Front Royal, Virginia 22630 Project Name: Magisterial District: Original Date of Proffers: Revision Date: Madison Village TM #64 -A -18 Shawnee Magisterial District April 22, 2013 July 12, 2013 September 5, 2013 Prepared by: PAINTER- LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 Tel.: (540) 662 -5792 email: office @painterlewis.com Job Number: 1201007 PROFFER STATEMENT Madison Farms, LLC-TM#64-A-18 Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the undersigned applicant proffers that in the event that the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County shall approve Rezoning Application # for the rezoning of parcel TM# 64-A-18 from RA to RP/B2 with proffers, the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions set forth in this proffer except to the extent that such conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the owner and such are approved by the Board of Supervisors in accordance with the Code of Virginia and the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. These proffers shall be binding on the owner and their legal successors or assigns. IQ - .1 0 1 9 9 =1 1.) Generalized Development Plan The owner proffers to develop the property in general conformance with the Generalized Development Plan (GDP) dated 7/2/13, identified as "Generalized Development Plan TM #64 -A -18, 51.26 Acres" and which is attached to the proffer statement, for the purpose of identifying the proposed zoning changes to the parcel, the general location and form of the parcel access, and improvements to Route 522. Approximately five acres will be rezoned to B2, Business General District, and approximately 46.26 acres will be rezoned to RP, Residential Performance District. Attached to the proffer statement is a "Plat of Rezoning" dated July 1, 2013 which delineates the proposed zoning areas. 2.) Residential Density The owner proffers to limit the maximum number of residential units to six hundred forty (640). The owner proffers to limit the minimum number of residential units to four hundred twenty (420). 3.) Right of Way Dedication The owner proffers to dedicate a ten foot strip of land along the frontage of Parcel TM# 64 -A -18 to the Virginia Department of Transportation for the purpose of facilitating future improvements to Route 522. This dedication will occur prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit for the property. 4.) Initial Transportation Improvements The owner proffers to dedicate the necessary land for road improvements and to construct the internal road system as generally shown on the GDP. Implementation of certain of these improvements as approved by VDOT and Frederick County will be completed prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit for the property. These improvements will include: a) The design and construction of a right turn lane southbound on Route 522 into the parcel; page 2 PROFFER STATEMENT Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 -A -18 b) The design of one northbound left turn lane on Route 522 into the parcel; c) The design and construction of a full movement public street entrance into the property including one west bound lane, two eastbound left turn lanes, one east bound right turn lane, and bicycle /pedestrian facilities; d) The design and construction of a roundabout at the western limits of the commercial area unless it is determined by the Virginia Department of Transportation that an alternate intersection design is required. e) The design and construction of a public street to the northern limits of the parcel to allow connection to Parcel TM #64 -A -12 as generally shown on the GDP. 5.) Interparcel Access The owner agrees to provide the necessary ingress and egress easements to allow vehicle access for the benefit of Parcel TM #64 -A -14 and Parcel TM #64 -A -15, to and from the public roads described in Items 4.c and 4.e above subject to approval by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 6.) Other Transportation Improvements a.) A public road will be extended to the western limits of the parcel to allow future connection to Parcel TM #64 -A -124 as generally shown on the GDP. The road will include the design and construction of a roundabout at the intersection of the proposed roads unless it is determined by the Virginia Department of Transportation that an alternate intersection design is required. Construction of this road will be completed before the three hundred twelfth (312 residential unit receives an occupancy permit. b.) A public road will be extended to the southern limits of the parcel to allow future connection to Parcel TM #64 -A -21 as generally shown on the GDP. Construction of this road will be completed before the four hundred twentieth (420 residential unit receives an occupancy permit. 7.) Route 522 Traffic Signal In the event that the Virginia Department of Transportation notifies the owner that a warrant study is required at the intersection of Route 522 and the access to the parcel, the owner hereby proffers to complete said warrant study within three months of the notification. If, after reviewing the warrant study, the Virginia Department of Transportation notifies the owner that a traffic signal is warranted at the intersection of Route 522 and the access to the parcel, the owner hereby proffers to undertake and complete the design and construction of the traffic signal within one year of the signal warrant notification. 8.) Bicycle /Pedestrian Facilities The owner proffers to install bicycle and pedestrian facilities generally along the proposed public road routes and as part of the construction of said roads. Construction details and phasing will be submitted as part of a Master Development Plan for the project. page 3 PROFFER STATEMENT Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 -A -18 9.) Residential Development Impact Offset Contribution a. Single Family Detached and Single Family Attached: The owner proffers to pay to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia the amount of $19,600 per single family detached dwelling unit and $13,062 per single family attached unit prior to the time that the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for each unit. b. Apartments — The owner proffers to pay to the Treasure of Frederick County, Virginia the amount of $11,339 per apartment unit in accordance with the following: Payment of the amount determined will be made prior to the time of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each apartment building in a Phase and as follows: (i) Ten (10 %) Percent of the amount determined in cash or its equivalent; (ii) The Balance of the Impact Fee in the form of a bond, secured by cash (or its equivalent) or by a letter of credit from County approved financial institution, payable five (5) years from date, and payable to the Treasurer of the County of Frederick, Virginia. 10.) Age- Restricted Residential Development Impact Offset Contribution a. Single Family Detached and Single Family Attached: The owner proffers to pay to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia the amount of $2,869 per single family detached dwelling unit and $2,181 per single family attached unit prior to the time that the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for each unit. b. Apartments — The owner proffers to pay to the Treasure of Frederick County, Virginia the amount of $2,187 per apartment unit in accordance with the following: Payment of the amount determined will be made at the time of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each apartment building in a Phase and as follows- (i) Ten (10 %) Percent of the amount determined in cash or its equivalent; (ii) The Balance of the Impact Fee in the form of a bond, secured by cash (or its equivalent) or by a letter of credit from County approved financial institution, payable five (5) years from date, and payable to the Treasurer of the County of Frederick, Virginia. 11.) Property Owners Association The residential development will be made subject to a Property Owners Association (POA) that shall be responsible for the ownership and maintenance of all property areas not privately owned or dedicated to public agencies. The POA shall be provided other responsibilities, duties, and powers as are necessary and customary for such associations. In addition to other responsibilities as assigned, the POA shall be responsible for solid waste disposal programs and the maintenance of streets, parking areas, buffer areas, recreational features, lighting and landscaping. page 4 PROFFER STATEMENT Madison Farms, LLC- TM #64 -A -18 The conditions proffered above shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in the interest of the owner. In the event that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grant this rezoning and accepts these proffers, then these proffers shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to the other requirements of the Frederick County Code. Submitted "dv i® Behalfibf Madisa'S II./LLC City /County of Commonwealth Of Virginia. The foregoing instrumen was acknowledged before me this _ day of 67 a � 201 1 - i Vol, Notary Public 11° Notary Registration number: / J MY Commission Expires Sepfember 30, 2018 My commission expires: page 5 SAIIOd Z• Ls Woo•simalja}uiod®aoijjo : ioW3 S833NION3 26L9 — Z99 (0179) :aliWisoo3 ONIlInSNOO z 8 L - d - t9# Ni Z6L9 — Z99 (0179) :auoydalal �— Wd 109ZZ HINIOalA 'aHS3HONIM 1NAWdMDADG GIZ1WHANAJ on 311ns '3ovao N33ao avo30 L18 :103MO Jd '3'�'d `SIM3 J 3 a — B — zu ❑o w {- — F— O W W W L 0 J ao 9eL 3a z I / N 1 F- Off' O ❑ ' LU LL W °� �; I a Igo ' F. a m I ICI l I as I� rout Ro I P:ik Rt. 52 — ` a 2* 1 i W a 'L QI 1 T a z a U F— ` n`C m m m z! \� Qe �. F" I ❑ Lu I O � � �\` p I • ll \ a J- � i i i o ; v F— Z \ }.�\ v U U I a cfl W JZ m z L / \ \ F—M O / w. ab 1 �Q 1 If LU / NQ Cl OZ U �\ 1 ❑ ¢ P: LL W LU i _+ Z a O W d la a U w m O O \ \ �I o � AP I V19, 61 O O o o Q00 V R 150 SPE, LLC 64-A-12 5 85 Uf W Z.g: RM 71 5 U.: V .. N N85 1459.J5 _11o io & c" z ; . i c a 6� A 15 f__Z&;;F_. MId w-A-13A z.q: 82 At B2: 5.00 ACRES R-600. 00 L 172.55' N 8575 c IIo 8JJ7' ..-Id F. 11. b 64C -A -16 RP 14 g 2 -n �.26 RP: 46.26 ACRES 0 : 64 A-16 mg; 0 , 'i t - o C R.W.U.. z. Gw I.i - 0 6.C-2-7 t Jun Z�,: W v U 41. T, w 2-6 z i': W 4C-2-4 Z-kn: RP Jr 1 I z[M.g: '421W 457.851t��\ "C-2-4 04-0 z.m�g! EFG 11 — UC 61]4 Z.m.g Qn.ft. N =4A 8 1 " " " - — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- 0-1— Michel T 640 - -3 I -- — -- — -- - — -- — D.WW &Wp�. LLC A "-A-21 — -- — -- 300 0 300 Scale in Feet PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. PROJECT: SURVEY: NA C. I.: NA PLAT OF REZONING 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 MADISON VILLAGE DRAWN BY: JOB NO,: Winchester, Virginia 22601 TM#64—A— 18 P—L 1201007 SCALE: DATE: Telephone (540)662-5792 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SHOWN 711113 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 SHEET: ENGINEERS Email office@pointeriewis.com I POR AMENDMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD OF SUPERVISORS November 6, 2013 - Recommended Approval December 11, 2013 ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #03 -13 OF MADISON VILLAGE WHEREAS, Rezoning #03 -13 of Madison Village, submitted by Painter- Lewis, P.L.C., to rezone 51.26 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to 46.26 acres of RP (Residential Performance) District and 5 acres of B2 (General Business) District with proffers dated April 22, 2013 and last revised on September 5, 2013 was considered. The property is located on the west side of Route 522, approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road. The property is further identified with P.I.N. 64 -A -18 in the Shawnee Magisterial District WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public meeting on this rezoning on August 21, 2013 and a public hearing on November 6, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on December 11, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to rezone 51.26 acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to 46.26 acres of RP (Residential Performance) District and 5 acres of B2 (General Business) District with proffers. The conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner are attached. PDRes 437 -13 This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 11th day of December, 2013 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Gene E. Fisher Christopher E. Collins Robert W. Wells Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes 437 -13 :i=VL•l: 11: [t Y ' " a aN } fet k 3 i le + IW O s` { a s r y +: ' r .. 1. .. .. a. �+ �_ti b r�� " -oY Vii.. -� � .F IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT for Madison Village Parcel TM# 64 -A -18 Route 522 — Front Royal Pike Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia April 22, 2013 Revised: July 1, 2013 Prepared for: Mr. David Madison Madison II, L.L.C. 558 Bennys Beach Road Front Royal, Virginia 22630 Prepared by: PAINTER- LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 Tel.: (540)662 -5792 email: office @painterlewis.com Job Number: 1201007 IMPACT ANALYSIS %'- _ ATEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS section page i. INTRODUCTION 2 A. SITE SUITABILITY 3 DEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW 3 COORDINATION WITH FREDERICK COUNTY LONG RANGE PLANS 3 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN 4 STEEP SLOPES 4 MATURE WOODLANDS 4 WETLANDS 4 SOILS 4 B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES 5 C. TRAFFIC 5 D. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT 6 E. WATER SUPPLY 6 F. DRAINAGE 7 G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES 7 H. COMMUNITY FACILITIES 7 SCHOOLS 7 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT MODEL 7 EMERGENCY SERVICES 8 PARKS AND RECREATION 8 GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES 8 LIBRARY 8 I. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES 9 J. CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELDS 10 IMPACT ANALYSIS ATEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 L INTRODUCTION Madison II, LLC (the owner) is the owner of 51.26 acres of land contained in a single parcel located on the west side of Route 522 near its intersection with Airport Road in Frederick County, VA. The parcel (the site) is currently zoned RA (Rural Areas District) and is identified by Tax Identification Number 64 -A -18. The applicant is requesting to rezone the property from RA, Rural Areas District, to RP, Residential Performance District and B2, General Business District. The intended purpose of the rezoning is to enable the applicant to develop the site for mixed use residential and commercial purposes in accordance with the requirements of the current Zoning Ordinance of Frederick County. The location of the parcel is shown on the map below. 0 IMPACT ANALYSIS ,_ ATEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 A. SITE SUITABILITY DEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW The site has about 750 feet of frontage on Route 522. Route 522 is currently a minor arterial road and a major north -south roadway between Route 50 and the southern boundary of the county. Access to the parcel will be from Route 522 via new public streets which will conform to the county long range transportation plans. The description of RP zoning in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance identifies four basic land use characteristics which should be encouraged: (1) Efficient land use patterns that create high quality neighborhoods that are attractive and pedestrian oriented; (2) Densities that promote a compact and efficient use of land; (3) Reduced housing and public facility costs; (4) Energy efficient housing and housing patterns; (5) Sustainable and Environmentally sensitive land use. The owner is proposing to construct a mixture of multifamily buildings and townhouses on the parcel. Section 165 - 402.05 establishes the maximum allowed density for the RP district. The maximum density allowed for multifamily residential building is 20 units per acre. The maximum density allowed for townhouses is 10 units per acre. The maximum number of residential units planned for the parcel is 640 or a maximum gross density of 12.5 units per acre. According to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the intent of the B2 district is to provide large areas for a variety of business, office and service uses. General business areas are located on arterial highways at major intersections and at interchange areas. Businesses allowed involve frequent and direct access by the general public but not heavy truck traffic on a constant basis other than that required for delivery of retail goods. General business areas should have direct access to major thoroughfares and should be properly separated from residential areas. Adequate frontage and depth should be provided, and access should be properly controlled to promote safety and orderly development. Nuisance factors are to be avoided. The establishment of a commercial area at the intersection of Route 522 and the main access road into the development will provide a broader tax base for the county, a location for businesses to serve the local community, and will promote walkability and connectivity within the neighborhood. COORDINATION WITH FREDERICK COUNTY LONG RANGE PLANS The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use (EFLUP) identifies the site for future, high density residential use. A zoning designation of RP will be in conformance with the EFLUP. The County Comprehensive Plan identifies this parcel as in close proximity to an Urban Commercial Center. In general, the plan encourages high density 3 IMPACT ANALYSIS ` �TEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 residential development near commercial centers in order to enhance walkable access to employment, shopping, and employment. By reserving a small portion of the parcel for commercial use, the goal of integrating services within a residential setting can be realized. The Frederick County Eastern Road Plan identifies Route 522 at the site as a future "Improved Major Arterial" Road. Route 522 is currently a five lane urban road with two through lanes and a center turn lane contained within a right of way that is approximately 115' wide at the site. Long range transportation improvements may require the expansion of the right of way width to accommodate additional turn and travel lanes. The owner will dedicate right of way along the parcel frontage to accommodate these long range plans if required. The road plan also calls for the development of east -west roads that will connect Route 522 with land that is adjacent to the east side of Interstate 81. These roads will be new minor collector roads. The owner will dedicate right of way through the parcel to accommodate the road network. 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN FIRM Community Panel Number 51069CO218D shows the subject area to be outside of any special flood hazard area. STEEP SLOPES Steep slopes are defined by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as land areas where the slope exceeds 50 %. There is less than one acre of steep slopes that has been identified on the site. LAKES AND PONDS One pond has been identified on the site. This pond will be preserved during the development of the site and used as a recreational feature. WETLANDS Approximately 88,315 square feet of wetlands have been delineated on this site. On June 25, 2012, the Northern Virginia Regulatory Section of the US Army Corps of Engineers issued an approved jurisdictional determination for the wetlands areas. The requisite permits will have to be obtained to allow disturbance of jurisdictional wetlands. It is the intention of the owner to preserve the majority of the wetlands by the establishment of a riparian buffer along the length of existing streams and the preservation of the existing pond. SOILS According to the Soil Survey of Frederick County, the site contains the following soil types: • Clearbrook channery silt loam, 913: This soil is shallow, 2 to 7 percent slope, and poorly drained. It is found on summit areas and consists of residuum formed from acid shale and sandstone. 4 IMPACT ANALYSIS ATEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 • Clearbrook channery silt loam, 9C: This soil is shallow, 7 to 15 percent slope, and poorly drained. It is found on hillside areas and consists of residuum formed from acid shale and sandstone. • Weikert -Berks channery silt loam, 41B: This soil is shallow, 2 to 7 percent slope, and well drained. It is found on hillside areas and consists of residuum weathered from acid shale. • Weikert -Berks channery silt loam, 41C: This soil is shallow, 7 to 15 percent slope, and well drained. It is found on hillside areas and consists of residuum weathered from acid shale. • Weikert -Berks channery silt loam, 41D: This soil is shallow, 15 to 25 percent slope, and well drained. It is found on hillside areas and consists of residuum weathered from acid shale. These soils will typically provide adequate support for small commercial and residential structures. The shallow bedrock will be removed by machine and in many cases, reused for fill. Storm water management facilities will be shallow. Road construction should be easily accommodated. Infiltration as a means of providing Best Management Practices will likely not be available as an option. B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The parcel to be rezoned is located in an area that is generally rural in character but one that has been identified by the comprehensive plan for high density residential development. Currently the properties along the northwest, west, and southwest borders are zoned RA and are vacant. Due north is the Russell 150 project land where the zoning is RP -B2. This land remains vacant but has been planned for townhouse development. At the northeast corner of the parcel there are two small parcels that are zoned B2 and are currently vacant. The remaining land which lies on the west side of Route 522 and which borders the parcel, is zoned RA and is used for residential purposes. On the east side of Route 522, there are numerous single family residential parcels zoned RP. C. TRAFFIC The subject property is located on Route 522 approximately 4500 feet north of its intersection with Papermill Road and approximately 2000 feet south of its intersection with Airport Road. At the location of the site, Route 522 is currently a five lane urban road section with a center turn lane contained within a 115' + /- right of way. A Traffic Impact Analysis has been prepared for the rezoning application by Stowe Engineering, PLC. The TIA is based on 640 residential units and 5 acres of commercial use. According to figures from the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Average Annual Daily Traffic on Route 522 in 2009 in the vicinity of the site was 15,220 vehicles per day. The TIA projects traffic on Route 522 to be 26,585 vehicles per day in the year 2026. The proposed project will have a single entrance on Route 522. At the design 5 IMPACT ANALYSIS ATEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 build out of the parcel, impacts to Route 522 at the entrance will be significant. In order to mitigate the impacts, the following improvements will be implemented. 1. Installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of the proposed project entrance and Route 522; 2. Installation of a right turn lane southbound on Route 522; 3. Installation of left turn lane northbound at the project entrance; 4. Installation of dual eastbound left turn lanes at the project entrance; 5. Installation of a roundabout at the entrance to the commercial areas. D. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT The site is inside the limits of the Frederick County Sewer and Water Service Area. The development will be serviced by the county sewer system. Any existing drain fields on the property will be located and appropriately abandoned at the time of development. There is no direct access to sewerage facilities, that is, there are no terminal manholes on the property. The nearest sanitary sewer is located in the Route 522 right of way near Longcroft Road. A lift station will be constructed on the parcel and a force main will be constructed to this manhole. Additional sewage demand is estimated according to the following: Sewage demand from the residential portion of the project will be based on 40 persons per acre at 75 gpcd. The gross residential acreage is 46.2 acres with an estimated demand of 138,600 gpd. Sewage demand from the commercial portion of the project will be based on 200 gpd per 1,000 square feet of retail. Five acres of commercial area will support approximately 54,450 square feet of building area resulting in an estimated demand of 10,890 gpd. The total estimated sewage flow from the project will be 149,490 gpd. This is a reasonable estimate of the new sewer demand and will be used to determine the adequacy of the receiving sewer conveyance system E. WATER SUPPLY The site is inside the limits of the Frederick County Sewer and Water Service Area. The development will be serviced by the county water system. Any existing wells on the property will be located and appropriately abandoned at the time of development. The water main is located adjacent to the west side of the Route 522 right of way. The project infrastructure development will include making connection to the existing water main in two locations to create a loop in the network. New water main will be extended to the adjacent properties to the south and west to accommodate future development. Additional water demand is estimated to equal the sewage demand: 149,490 gpd. H. IMPACT ANALYSIS ATEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 F. DRAINAGE A complete aerial topographic map of the parcel has been completed. This site has gentle to moderate slopes. The majority of slopes range from 1 percent to 15 percent. Storm water runoff flows from west to east toward Route 522 then continues on the Buffalo Lick Run. With the development of this site a storm water management system would be implemented to control any added flow created by the increased impervious areas. G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES The nearest citizens' trash facility is located at the main landfill off of Sulphur Springs Road approximately three miles north and east of the site. In general, the collection of solid waste from the proposed development will be accomplished by a private hauler. It is estimated that the residential development will generate approximately 4.5 pounds of solid waste per person per day that will be transported to the landfill. Based on an assumption that the project will accommodate 40 persons per acre, the amount of solid waste will be approximately 8,316 pounds per day. The commercial portion of the project will generate approximately 100 pounds of solid waster per day per acre equating to 500 pounds per day. Tipping fees are currently $45 per ton for commercial haulers. No additional solid waste disposal facilities will be required for the proposed development. It is estimated that $70,650 in tipping fees will be paid to dispose of 1,570 tons of solid waste annually. H. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT MODEL The Frederick County Development Impact Model (D.I.M.) is utilized to determine the fiscal impacts of residential rezoning requests. The applicant will meet the financial requirements of the D.I.M. SCHOOLS Public schools which are located in proximity to the site include Armel Elementary School, Admiral Richard E. Byrd Middle School, and Millbrook High School. The proposed development will likely contribute between 100 and 200 students to the K -12 school system. The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model calculates a projected capital cost for school construction impacts attributable to residential development. The owner agrees to proffer a monetary contribution to the local school system. See the attached Proffer Statement 7 IMPACT ANALYSIS ` . ATEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 EMERGENCY SERVICES Police protection is provided by the Frederick County Sheriff's Department. The nearest fire and rescue facility is the Millwood Station Fire and Rescue Company 21 located at 250 Costello Drive. The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model calculates a projected capital cost for emergency service facilities attributable to residential development. The owner recognizes the importance of emergency services, and agrees to proffer a monetary contribution to the local emergency responder. See the attached Proffer Statement. PARKS AND RECREATION The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model calculates a projected capital cost for additional recreation facilities needed to serve residential developments. The owner recognizes the importance of parks and recreation amenities, and agrees to proffer a monetary contribution to the county for development of parks and recreation facilities. See the attached Proffer Statement. GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITES The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model calculates a projected capital cost for additional general government facilities needed to serve residential developments. The owner agrees to proffer a monetary contribution to the local government. See the attached Proffer Statement. LIBRARY The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model calculates a projected capital cost for additional library facilities needed to serve residential developments. The owner agrees to proffer a monetary contribution to the local library system. See the attached Proffer Statement. IMPACT ANALYSIS %'--. ATEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 9 IMPACT ANALYSIS ,- TEMENT Madison Village - TM# 64 -A -18 Year Civil liar 13:rfileiields 3363 Fistwillchcswr 1802 first Kcrnsto n 3 1 S63 St+rhhcn�ons Thhnt 1 1963, Secc>tl l Winchester 1864 Third Willchcuu 6 1961 'Third Winchestcr 7 I S64 Calm Ci e ,, k 8 I,W '11rird wnrciaesier `) 1864 S cond t era davit Sites (Fortifications) tf7 ho'kins Mill Baucry 1 1864 Whiter Line 12 <arri"brookeRedoubt 13 Illll trine Works 14 tr }thf'orp lavr�nchn7ents 1 Star Falz 16 Furt Collier 17 T.ie- /;1" 'Iaenchcs _._, rw tVli Wp;r �tev Civil War yaffie. olds \a Ljc ', 5l 1 J. CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELDS A copy of the Civil War Battlefields and Sites map has been included below. The subject parcel does not lie within any defined Civil War Battlefield sites. *a w W a r -Avi ��, � lefi d And 10 0 O,n1 2 5 5 1 4 , 1 " FS.__ "iit €.c, Executive Summary The Madison Village Development Project is requesting rezoning of 51.33 +/- acres from Rural Agriculture to RP Residential Performance and B -2 Business for the development of 480 apartments, 160 townhouses, and 107,000 sq. ft. (gross floor area) of retail shopping. This change will contribute additional traffic into the roadway network, therefore this Traffic Impact Study was prepared to evaluate those traffic impacts. The Frederick County Comprehensive Plan; Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area Plan designates the property's future land use as high density residential. The current zoning surrounding the property is Residential Performance to the north, south and east. To the west the zoning is Rural Agriculture. Two nearby developments that have been rezoned but not yet built were included in the background traffic evaluation. These are the Russell 150 project and the Freedom Manor project. To achieve acceptable traffic operations in the 2026 design year, the following improvements are recommended: 1. A traffic signal at the intersection of the site entrance and Front Royal Pike. 2. A southbound right turn lane on Front Royal Pike at the entrance. 3. A northbound left turn lane from Front Royal Pike at the entrance. 4. An eastbound dual left turn lanes at the site entrance. 5. A round -a -bout at the entrance to the commercial areas. Even with these improvements the level of service for the NB left turn movement into the site drops to D in the design year 2026. However, other planned transportation improvements in the area such as East Tevis Street and Warrior Drive will be taking traffic from Front Royal Pike prior to 2026. It is the professional opinion of this author that this level of service will increase with the completion of these other projects. Therefore, with the above listed improvements in place, the transportation impacts of this rezoning are believed to be manageable and acceptable for this project setting. Table of Contents ExecutiveSummary ......................................................................................................... ............................... i Introduction.................................................................................................................... ..............................1 Purpose....................................................................................................................... ..............................1 StudyObjectives ......................................................................................................... ..............................1 BackgroundInformation ................................................................................................. ..............................1 Transportation Improvements Assumed .................................................................... ..............................1 Transportation Improvements Planned ...................................................................... ..............................1 DevelopmentDescription .............................................................................................. ............................... 1 SiteLocation ................................................................................................................ ..............................1 Descriptionof the Parcel ............................................................................................ ............................... 2 GeneralTerrain Features ........................................................................................ ..............................2 Location within Jurisdiction and Region ................................................................ ............................... 2 Comprehensive Plan Recommendations .................................................................... ..............................2 CurrentZoning ............................................................................................................ ..............................4 StudyArea Description ................................................................................................... ..............................5 StudyArea .................................................................................................................. ............................... 5 Proposedand Existing Uses ............................................................................................ ..............................5 ExistingUse ................................................................................................................ ............................... 5 ProposedUses & Access ............................................................................................ ............................... 5 NearbyUses ............................................................................................................... ............................... 6 ExistingRoadways ....................................................................................................... ..............................6 ExistingTraffic Conditions 2012 ..................................................................................... ............................... 8 DataCollection ............................................................................................................ ..............................8 Analysis....................................................................................................................... ..............................8 Background Traffic Conditions (2020) ........................................................................... .............................12 Analysis.......................................................................................................................... .............................12 Trip Generation & Distribution ...................................................................................... .............................14 TripGeneration .......................................................................................................... .............................14 TripDistribution ......................................................................................................... .............................15 2020 Build -out Conditions ........................................................................................... ............................... 20 Analysis...................................................................................................................... ....._.......................20 Recommended Roadway Improvements ..................................................................... ............................... 24 DesignYear (2026) ....................................................................................................... ............................... 26 Analysis.................................................................................................................... ............................... 26 QueueAnalysis ............................................................................................................... .............................30 Pedestrianand Bicycle Traffic ...................................................................................... ............................... 30 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... .............................30 Appendices Appendix A Traffic Count Data Appendix B Synchro LOS and Queue Reports Appendix C HCS Multi -Lane Highway Appendix D Pre -Scope of Work Meeting Form Appendix E Cost Estimate Appendix F Traffic Volume Computations Introduction Purpose This Traffic Impact Study has been prepared to support the request for the rezoning of the property known as Madison Village Development. The project will create 480 apartments, 160 townhouses and 107,000 sq. ft. (gross floor area) of retail shopping. Study Objectives The objectives of this study are to determine: 1. The impacts on traffic operations that may occur within the study area as a result of constructing this project. 2. Future connectivity to pedestrian and bicycle facilities that may result from the construction of the project. Background Information Transportation Improvements Assumed One transportation improvement near the proposed project has been assumed to be in place prior to the project getting under way. It is the extension of East Tevis Street to its connection with Route 522. Transportation Improvements Planned A review of the VDOT Six year Improvement Plan showed one planned construction project in the vicinity of this proposed rezoning, the East Tevis Street project. A review of the 2012/13 — 2017/18 Secondary Road Improvement Plan for Frederick County, VA showed one planned roadway improvement in the vicinity of this project; the east Tevis Street project. East Tevis Street is planned to connect Pleasant Valley Road in Winchester to Front Royal Pike about miles north of this project. The schedule for the East Tevis Street is undefined in either plan. Development Description Site Location The subject property is located west of US Route 522 (Front Royal Pike), south of Airport Road, and north of Papermill Road. Figure 1 shows the location of the project and the outline of the property. Description of the Parcel The property on which the Madison Village Development is planned is a 56.33+ acre tract with frontage on Route 522. A rezoning is being sought for 51.33 of the 56.33 acres. General Terrain Features The site and surrounding areas have rolling grades with slopes that drain to the east. Route 522 runs north -south adjacent to the eastern property boundary of the rezoning area. Location within Jurisdiction and Region The subject property is located in the Shawnee magisterial district, Frederick County, VA. Comprehensive Plan Recommendations The 2030 Frederick County Comprehensive Plan and Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area Plan calls for the subject property to be developed with high density residential uses. Surrounding properties are designated as high density residential use to the north and west, and residential uses to the east and south. The property is located within the Sewer and Water Service Area and the Urban Development Area. Figure 2A highlights the subject property on the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area land use plan. Figure 1 Project Location Map (n.t.s.) The Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area Plan also shows a north -south major collector roadwayjust west of this property with a parallel multi -use trail. Figure 2B highlights the subject property on the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area Transportation Plan. 'f` , rt. * � _ ;✓'f s�, fir' V r= PROJECT LOCATIO N Figure 2A Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area Land Use Plan (n.t.s.) 3 r + • Rx + • f Q � t � `� ++ k i VI PROJECT +� f !+ LOCATION � « + e V. r• Figure 26 Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area Transportation Plan (n.t.s.) Current Zoning The current zoning on the subject site is RA (Rural Agriculture). The requested zoning is RP Residential Performance and B -2 Business. Surrounding lands to the north, south, and east are zoned RP. To the west the land is zoned RA. 4 PROJECT LOCATION E � X i '1 Figure 3 Current Zoning Map with Project Location Shown (n.t.s.) Study Area Description Study Area For the purposes of this Traffic Impact Study, the study area is limited to the intersection of the proposed project entrance road with Route 522. There are no additional major intersections within 2000 feet of the site. Proposed and Existing Uses Existing Use The existing site is vacant land except for one house. Proposed Uses & Access The proposed use for the property is housing and specialty retail. Access to the site will be provided via a new east -west roadway which will intersect with Route 522. A * Zoning lid i =' S _KM II t st ;t a ptC cvt7miC e „a :1C +rte to'Af r t : ne+ tr t. ♦"� EAti (C ) d,S 4Pm" t ,� VhUGH<< 4ai a,;rk� ,y Parks RJ �R'<tfrN:alf arm i ann;.n�Rr[y«" PROJECT LOCATION E � X i '1 Figure 3 Current Zoning Map with Project Location Shown (n.t.s.) Study Area Description Study Area For the purposes of this Traffic Impact Study, the study area is limited to the intersection of the proposed project entrance road with Route 522. There are no additional major intersections within 2000 feet of the site. Proposed and Existing Uses Existing Use The existing site is vacant land except for one house. Proposed Uses & Access The proposed use for the property is housing and specialty retail. Access to the site will be provided via a new east -west roadway which will intersect with Route 522. A Nearby Uses The existing land uses near the proposed site are: • North — vacant land • West— vacant land and 1 -81 • South — limited housing and Shenandoah Memorial Park • East - housing Existing Roadways Figure 4 shows the existing roadways near the subject property. The typical section for Route 522 adjacent to the project is a 5 -lane paved surface with a mountable curb & gutter. Future Transportation Improvements The subject property is located in the Virginia Department of Transportation's Staunton District, and Edinburg Residency area of responsibility. A review of the VDOT Six year Improvement Plan showed one planned construction project in the vicinity of this proposed rezoning, the East Tevis Street project. A review of the 2012/13 — 2017/18 Secondary Road Improvement Plan for Frederick County, VA showed one planned roadway improvement in the vicinity of this project; the east Tevis Street project. East Tevis Street is planned to connect Pleasant Valley Road in Winchester to Front Royal Pike about miles north of this project. The schedule for the East Tevis Street is undefined in either plan. Existing Traffic Conditions 2012 Data Collection To analyze the existing traffic conditions, AM and PM traffic volumes were counted on Route 522 along the project frontage. These counts are included in Appendix A of this report. A'K factor' was applied to the PM peak hour volumes to obtain the average annual daily traffic (AADT). The 'k' factor of 0.084 and percent trucks of 12% was obtained from the VDOT Daily Traffic Volume Estimates for 2011. Analysis Since there is not an existing intersection at the point being analyzed, traffic conditions were analyzed using the HCS Multi -Lane Highway traffic modeling software. The existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes are shown in figure 5, the existing lane geometry and levels of service are shown in figure 6, and the modeling results (levels of service) are shown in tabular form in Table 1. o � a� n. n. o �c m o a Q w Q U N 0 H H 0 Z P f0 fie% °a 10013 °1 N �r L F � o f - � bA , bA I z LL ^y paPeCm� \ \Q'Oaa r"1 N C � R bA �I f �549(5 99 ) 449(69 y N j C L 0 Y v CC G d L O Y v C d Q rr�^ V1 4-o O a a �Q CC O ° uoa j o 1 Cd N N � � r Qapetm`\\910 a ta O O � • � CC N O N r � AlA1 � v w J Q u 0 0 z Table 12012 Existing levels of Service Type of AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Control Delay I Queue Delay Queue LOS (sec) (feet) LOS (sec) (feet) North- South: Front Royal Pike (US 522) none NB Thru A A SB Thru A A iE Background Traffic Conditions (2020) Background traffic conditions are those that are expected to exist without the proposed rezoning and associated development. These were established by increasing the existing 2012 traffic volume by 0.5% per year to the build -out year of 2020. The growth factor of 0.5% was determined by VDOT Staunton District Planning staff and is based on the historical and anticipated growth in traffic volumes in the project area. The roadway network in the study area is unchanged from the Existing Conditions (2012 conditions). Two other development projects in the vicinity of this project have been rezoned, but not yet constructed, and therefore were included in the background traffic volumes. The traffic associated with the freedom Manor project was obtained from the ITE Trip Generation manual and the traffic for the Russell 150 project came from the approved Traffic Impact Analysis for the project dated 11/1/2004, prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associates. The result is shown in Table 2. Table 2 Other Developments Contributing to Background Traffic Trips from Other Developments on Route 522 at Madison Village Entrance AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Northbound 129 212 Southbound 79 260 Analysis Since there is not an existing intersection, the 2020 Background traffic conditions were analyzed using the HCS Multi -Lane traffic modeling software. The AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 7, and the lane geometry and level of service are shown in Figure 8. The modeling results (level of service) are tabulated in Table 3. 12 Avg. AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Daily Land Use Code Amount Trips In Out Total In Out Total Freedom Manor Single Family Detached Residence 210 70 749 15 44 58 49 29 78 Russell 150 Retail (per 1000 sq ft) 820 440 17,802 232 148 381 800 866 1,666 Office Park (per 1000 sq ft) 710 264 2,817 359 49 408 52 322 374 Townhouse /Condo 230 294 2,558 21 101 122 gg 48 146 Total Trips from Other Developments 23,926 627 343 969 999 1,265 2,264 Trips from Other Developments on Route 522 at Madison Village Entrance AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Northbound 129 212 Southbound 79 260 Analysis Since there is not an existing intersection, the 2020 Background traffic conditions were analyzed using the HCS Multi -Lane traffic modeling software. The AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 7, and the lane geometry and level of service are shown in Figure 8. The modeling results (level of service) are tabulated in Table 3. 12 O M S - Y fD N c d c d O 2 Y ' rc N d Q w Q U vi O H H O � z y a � �0 O ~ ��oa W013 of v 1 E„� •., l7 N F �'n9su��aeW o f I LO 'v� e N i O C � N � D b� w t 7ools3s) 547( —► 5 " 0 o Y 4J a a 0 Y 4J Q � V1 O a "d �e/�oif �uoa� of v N �angsuq,e � :� �d • W o C LU y U w L a� wo QaPe��d \� °aa 'b O � b V C M S M O N O N r AtAt 00 AN ^ .ICI 7 W J Q u N O H H O Z Table 3 2020 Background Level of Service Type of AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Control Delay Queue Delay Queue LOS (sec) (feet) LOS (sec) (feet) North- South: Front Royal Pike (US 522) none NB Thru A A S Thru A A 15 Trip Generation & Distribution Trip Generation Trip generation for the project uses was developed using Trip Gen 2013 based on the 9 th edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual. The peak traffic volumes on the adjacent streets for the AM and PM periods were used with apartment and townhouse uses and the peak hour generator rates were used for the specialty retail land uses to arrive at the traffic volumes. For the townhouses, 80% of the traffic was generated using the VDOT Staunton District trip generation spreadsheet, and the remaining 20% was generated from the TripGen 2013 ITE Trip Generation rates. Land uses and trips generated are summarized in Table 4. The percentage of heavy vehicles was estimated at 2% based on the ITE Trip Generation Handbook data. Internal Capture trips are those "captured" within a mixed use development. With the mixture of housing and retail uses, internal capture rates were computed as follows: • For the AM peak hour, the smaller of 5% residential or 5% retail trips generated; For the PM peak hour, the smaller of 10% residential or 10% retail trips generated; For 24 hour traffic, the smaller of 15% residential or 15% retail trips generated. These computations and the assignment of the values are shown in Table 4. Pass -by trip reductions accounts for site trips drawn from the existing traffic stream on an adjacent street, recognizing that trips drawn to the site would otherwise already be on the adjacent street regardless of the development's existence. Pass -by trip reduction allows a percentage reduction in the trips associated with retail uses. While VDOT Traffic Impact Analysis Regulations call for the pass -by rates used to be those reported in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, the Handbook does not contain a pass -by rate for land use 814, Specialty Retail. To acquire a pass -by rate, a number of similar retail uses were examined in the Handbook and the pass -by rate of 25% was selected as representative of Specialty retail. The pass -by trip reduction computations are shown in Table 4. Table 4 Trip Generation 5% 10% 15% of of of Internal Capture Trip Computations AM PM AADT AM PM Dail Residential trips 340 419 4,421 1 17 1 42 1 663 Retail trips 732 537 4,742 16 Avg. AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Land Use ITE Code Amount Tri s In Out Total In Out Total Apartments 220 480 3,192 48 197 245 192 106 298 80% Townhouses (VDOT trip gen rate) 230 128 1,043 18 63 81 67 38 104 20% Townhouses (ITE trip gen rate) 230 32 186 2 12 14 11 6 17 Specialty Retail Center 5 ac 826 107 4,742 351 381 732 301 236 537 Gross New Trips 640 9,163 419 653 1,072 571 386 956 Internal Capture Trips Residential -663 -6 -11 -17 -25 -17 -42 Retail Pass-by Trip Reduction @ 25% 826 107 -1186 -88 -95 -183 -75 -59 -134 Total New Trips 7,314 325 547 872 470 310 780 5% 10% 15% of of of Internal Capture Trip Computations AM PM AADT AM PM Dail Residential trips 340 419 4,421 1 17 1 42 1 663 Retail trips 732 537 4,742 16 Trip Distribution Trips generated by the development were assigned to the roadway network based on a distribution developed with representatives from VDOT and Frederick County during the scoping meeting. All new trips are planned to pass through the project entrance at Front Royal Pike, while the commercial related trips will depart from the main roadway at the round -a -bout. The trip distribution percentages are shown in figure 9 and the assignment of the new AM and PM peak hour trips is shown in figure 10. 17 LU J 00 U V) O H O z 0 O N b� C� a v ° T a 1�1 0 0 1p&oii 1 u013 0 1 o V � /ll-1 o Cd •� O ��/ D l N i N Un i�o N M a �d �eN 1 uo" N \+/ r� oa a O ' Pap b � C � � Q CA N W G1 cj b� W o a) �o M. v a a o v - a Q J U V) O H H O z V CCZ oh o �etiob luoa� °1 y v l7 C'V �� f `n o ' a� w O � a o � QaQ A ° � ^C bA �C Vi 186(12 Y r o(o) CC C ~ r o(o) 186(245) �5(9) � O N O fl p 186(125) Ln 227(30 0 7 = 6(8) Ln N 1 � m � r � y. N O O. O ~ p ca C 4) 'O �N 2020 Build -out Conditions without Improvements The 2020 build -out conditions combine the background traffic f o r t he year 2020, and the traffic that is forecasted to result from the development of this project. The total of this traffic is called the build -out condition and is forecasted to occur in the year 2020. Analysis The 2020 Build -out AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movements were analyzed using the Synchro 8.0 traffic modeling software. The AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 11, and the lane geometry and level of service are shown in Figure 12. The modeling results (levels of service, delay and 95% queue) are tabulated in Table 5. 20 o _ = N Y (II N a a L • f9 N � c d G Q W Q U V) O O Z r/� �Q o v �e/lo2f IUO 13 of v N F CN ��n4sw�'pW - LO 0-1 ■ O L � W ^C a bA � cC O as N o Q aQ � G� GC bA J 661( 186(246) 6(9) 186(12 498(941) �� 0(0) 227(300) --� 6(8) ` *� � mry 0 o � m v a � -- U o y O v � a � Q F,y O U U U a lQ T 7; O W Ju013 of v F LD N W �� o f � C , O 6 cl O bA pa �i QaQec V O • CC CC O r V nlAl M � O —► `�_ AN N N a m N _ U w J ..M V �I N 0 H H 0 Z Table 5 2020 Build -out Level of Service, Delay, and 95% Queue Length North- South: Front Royal Pike (US 522) NB AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Type of Control Approach LOS I Delay Queue Approach LOS Delay I Queue EB LOS (sec) (ft) LOS (sec) (ft) North- South: Front Royal Pike (US 522) NB LT Stop Sign NB Thru SB Thru SB RT EB LT EB RT B 11.1 26 F F 505.9 398 B 14.4 63 C 22.4 91 F F See See note 1 note 1 C 17.5 51 23 NB A 9.8 A 6.2 East -West: Site Entrance WB A 7.8 B 10.4 North- South: Commercial Round -a- SB A 7.1 A 7.5 Entrances Bout EB B 10.5 A 6.7 1. Due to the severity of the movement failure, these values were not computed by the modeling software. 23 Recommended Roadway Improvements Due to the volume of traffic being generated by the development, the intersection at the site entrance fails (level of service F) without a traffic signal. To achieve acceptable traffic operations in 2020 at Build Out and 2026 in the design year, the following improvements are recommended: 1. A traffic signal at the intersection of the site entrance and Front Royal Pike. 2. A southbound right turn lane on Front Royal Pike at the entrance. 3. A northbound left turn lane from Front Royal Pike to the entrance. 4. An eastbound dual left turn lane at the site entrance. 5. A round -a -bout at the entrance to the commercial areas. Although an analysis of the round -a -bout was not scoped for this project, an analysis was performed within Synchro to evaluate the westbound entrance traffic transitioning from two lanes to one lane prior to the round -a -bout. The Build out and design year analysis indicate no problems, and a visual review in Sim - Traffic also showed no problems with this transition. Even with these improvements the level of service for the NB left turn movement into the site drops to D in the design year 2026. However, other planned transportation improvements in the area such as East Tevis Street and Warrior Drive will be taking traffic from Front Royal Pike prior to 2026. It is the professional opinion of this author that this level of service will increase with the completion of these other projects. Therefore, with the improvements recommended in this report, the transportation impacts of this rezoning are believed to be manageable and acceptable for this project setting. The levels of service resulting from these improvements are shown in figure 13. 24 7 o � Y fC N CL a /A Cr" l L W O Y co p a CL Q L� H 3 �a O C x N CIA F ��n4su��eW LO o [ , 1 p W W D � oa a et V C • QaQ Qn I� O L b u u z RR ^' f� AAA) H MA) A c(o) /� M LL w H W O a Q Bks) 1' AN �► N Z Z m M v �n _ y i, D L b� J .,g u N O H H 0 Z Design Year (2026) The design year for the project is six years beyond the completion of the project, which in this case is the year 2026. Analysis The 2026 Design Year AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movements were analyzed using the Synchro 8.0 traffic modeling software. AM and PM peak hourtraffic volumes are shown in Figure 14, and the lane geometry and level of service are shown in Figure 15. The modeling results (levels of service, delay and 95% queue) are tabulated in Table 6. 26 o co a� a a L Q � c d G Q W Q (J O z v � V ■ a g/�Oa }Uoai of L C� 7 ' N •� �ang LO CC rp ■ C � et � C • Qa e N � eC ^p W �I V V Z V.187(120) u CA: r 6�gtgsal r ol0) 186(245) 5(8) cr. Z H W R lg6l ) J 513 (956) � Q Q 224(30 Z z c a 0 n Y m aJ a a 0 aaj V a •; a y V1 O a uoai of �etioi! .� N S•n F ��n9sui�aeW o LO V W a� y a � � e, ° CC e.,e rn bA � A w O v R A' AN LL cm) 0: Z ~ H w y v Q bI1 Z Z — C7 h w J Q U N 0 H H 0 Z U 0) d (II � N 7 (n O p = J Y (B 0) t d U O` o o_ Q C O U 00 o C N G1 c J v v cr 7 v I 0 Ln O1 B U R ❑ T O cn � O Q 41 = J 0 Y °O N Q Q J O Q G1 c > O J U (n L a) 0 m J v o � c C OA v O N O N lD v -6- m a) c r- 0 U 0) w c 14- Q1 N M O (D (D CO N 00 M 4 D) f` M N N N ,, L q r- 00 O r ❑ Q U m U U m U U 'ia (D N r r U LO Q m Q Q 00 O) N O) "l: (D 00 0 _ Lq N O t2 O 00 f` r U Q U m U m Q Q Q m m m m u 0 Y a J U '� c � e' J ()f C E O O W O LL w_ U c s m m m m m m m m m m Z Z (n (n W W Z 3: (n W o c -o O c ,, c O o of m cn n 0 Y a T O U '� c � e' N N C E O O W O LL w_ U c s (n O O L) U) V- 0 co O C Z W Z W N Queue Analysis At a signalized intersection, a queue forms while vehicles wait to advance. An analysis was performed to evaluate the back of the queue for the 50th and 95th percentile of the queue. The 50th percentile maximum queue is the maximum back of queue on a typical traffic signal cycle. The 95th percentile maximum queue is the maximum back of queue with 95th percentile traffic volumes when traffic does not move fortwo signal cycles. The queues associated with the 95 percentile maximum queue are shown in Tables 5 and 6. As traffic volumes increase over time, the queue associated with left turning movements will increase as will the queue associated with the thru movement that opposes the left turn movement. This is reflected in the Design Year analysis. Pedestrian and Bicycle Traffic To identify any previously planned pedestrian and /or bicycle facilities in the project area, the Senseny /Eastern Frederick Urban Area Transportation Plan was reviewed. The plan shows a proposed multi -use trial to the west of the Madison Village property (see figure 26). Provisions will be made for a future connection to this and other off -site trails which may come to the site. Additionally, within the development, facilities will be provided to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian movements, and a multi -us trail is planned along Route 522 at the east side of the project. Conclusions The Madison Village Development rezoning will contribute additional traffic into intersections along Front Royal Pike. A traffic signal is required at the entrance to the site, along with the associated turn lanes and pavement markings, to manage the traffic associated with the development. Even with these improvements the level of service for the NB left turn movement into the site drops to D in the design year 2026. However, other planned transportation improvements in the area such as East Tevis Street and Warrior Drive will be taking traffic from Front Royal Pike prior to 2026. It is the professional opinion of this author that this level of service will increase with the completion of these other projects. Therefore, with the improvements recommended in this report, the transportation impacts of this rezoning are believed to be manageable and acceptable for this project setting. 30 Click in this box to return to the John Lewis page you were previously viewing Page 1 of From: Tim Stowe [timstowe @stowecompanies.com] ant: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 8:20 AM To: 'Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT)'; 'Bishop, John. (VDOT)' Cc: mcheran @co.frederick.va.us; 'John Lewis'; 'Short, Terry (VDOT)'; 'Ingram, Lloyd (VDOT)'; 'Ge, Ruixin (VDOT)'; Rhonda Funkhouser Subject: RE: TIA & Rezoning for Madison Village, Parcel TM# 64 -A -18, Route 522 - Frederick County Attachments: Madison Village Traffic Study.zip Matt, As requested I have reviewed and considered the review comments you provided in your email on June 11, 2013, and I offer the following responses. 1. The AADT and Truck percentage inputs to the HCS+ model were not correct for all scenarios. Please correct and update all related tables and figures. Response - The AADT and Truck percentages have been reviewed and updated where needed. The truck percentages on Route 522 are 12% as documented in the report. For all other roadways, a 2% truck percentage was used based on ITE Trip Generation Handbook data for retail developments. Text discussing the origin and use of this 2% value has been added to the report text. 2. Referencing Figure 7 and 8, the traffic volumes on the side streets should also be updated to the 2020 scenario. Response - In a meeting with Richard Ge on June 25 it was found that this comment was making reference to the route numbers that were shown on the side streets, not a traffic volume. The route numbers have been removed to avoid future confusion. 3. Referencing Table 4 on Page 16, no explanation is provided regarding why 107k sq ft was used for Specialty Retail Center. Is that the leasable area? Also, the trip generation results are not correct based on ITE (8th Edition) rates. Response — The description of the retail area has been updated as requested to reflect the 107 sq. ft. as the gross leasable area. Also, TripGen 2013 software was used to update the trip generation data. TripGen 2013 uses data from the 9 th edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual. 4. Figure 10 on Page 19; please provide trip distribution information within the site. Response - The requested distribution has been added to this figure. 5. Figure 12 on Page 22, the lane configuration at the entrance intersection is not consistent with the Synchro model. Please correct. Response — This has been updated. 6. Please include a signal warrant analysis to justify the proposed signalization of the entrance intersection. Response - As discussed and agreed to in the meeting on June 25, the signal warrant study will be needed at a later time, after the project is open to traffic. The proffers will be modified to reflect the developer's responsibility for this analysis when he is notified by VDOT of the need. 7. Table 5 on Page 23 shows that the eastbound left -turn at the entrance intersection has -1 second delay during both AM and PM peak. Please check the model and correct. Response — This has been updated. 8. Referencing Table 5 and 6, overall intersection performances and approach performances need to be included in the tables. Response — Table 5 has been updated to show the approach LOS, but since this is an unsignalized analysis, there is no intersection LOS to show. Table 6 has been updated to show the approach and intersection LOS. (( Bike and Pedestrian facilities are recommended along Route 522 frontage. Response — a multi -use trail is planned along Route 522 as was previously and is currently indicated in the proffers and cost estimate. 7/3/2013 Page 2 of io. Please provide a prelinjinary cost estimates for the proposed improvements. Response — A cost estimate was previously included in Appendix E of the Traffic Impact Study submittal. The cost estimate has been updated and is in Appendix E. ;opies of the updated Traffic Impact Study and its appendices are being sent to via snail mail this date; one set for your records and one set for the District Planning staff. I am also providing a CDROM containing the updated Synchro and HCS files. All of these data files, as well as the report and its appendices, are attached. Please provide your acceptance of this study at your earliest possible convenience. Tim Stowe Stowe Engineering, PLC 540.336.0656 From: Funkhouser, Rhonda (VDOT) [mailto: Rhonda .Funkhouser @VDOT.Virginia.gov] On Behalf Of Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 1:39 PM To: Bishop, John. (VDOT) Cc:'mcheran @co.frederick.va.us'; Tim Stowe; John Lewis; Short, Terry (VDOT); Ingram, Lloyd (VDOT) Subject: TIA & Rezoning for Madison Village, Parcel TM# 64 -A -18, Route 522 - Frederick County Our District Planning Section has completed their review of the subject study and rezoning and offers the following comments for your review and consideration: • The AADT and Truck percentage inputs to the HCS+ model were not correct for all scenarios. Please correct and update all related tables and figures. • Referencing Figure 7 and 8, the traffic volumes on the side streets should also be updated to the 2020 scenario. • Referencing Table 4 on Page 16, no explanation is provided regarding why 107k sq ft was used for Specialty Retail Center. Is that the leasable area? Also, the trip generation results are not correct based on ITE (8` Edition) rates. • Figure 10 on Page 19; please provide trip distribution information within the site. • Figure 12 on Page 22, the lane configuration at the entrance intersection is not consistent with the Synchro model. Please correct. • Please include a signal warrant analysis to justify the proposed signalization of the entrance intersection. • Table 5 on Page 23 shows that the eastbound left -turn at the entrance intersection has -1 second delay during both AM and PM peak. Please check the model and correct. • Referencing Table 5 and 6 overall intersection performances and approach performances need to be included in the tables. • Bike and Pedestrian facilities are recommended along Route 522 frontage. • Please provide a preliminary cost estimates for the proposed improvements. Should you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call. Matthew B. Smith, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer VDOT - Land Development Clarke, Frederick, Shenandoah & Warren Counties 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 Phone # (540) 984 -5615 Fax # (540) 984 -5607 7/3/2013 Click in this box to return to the page you were previously viewing r COUNTY of FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722 -8383 Fax 540/667 -0370 E -mail: rwillIa@co.frederick.va.us May 14, 2013 VIA E -MAIL — officena painterlewis.com — AND REGULAR MAIL John C. Lewis, P.E. Painter - Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Re: Rezoning Application — Madison Farms, LLC property, Parcel Number 64 -A -18, consisting of 51.2± acres — Proffer Statement dated April 22, 2013 Dear John: You have submitted to Frederick County for review the above - referenced proposed proffer statement (the "Proffer Statement ") for the proposed rezoning of the indicated property (the "Property ") in the Shawnee Magisterial District from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the RP (Residential Performance) District (part), subject to proffers, and to the B2 (General Business) District (part), subject to proffers. I have now reviewed the Proffer Statement and it is my opinion that the Proffer Statement would be in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following comments: The rezoning generally, Proffer 1, and the Generalized Development Plan — With the owner now proposing a split zoning of the Property, part to be RP and part to be B2, the County will need an actual metes and bounds delineation of the respective proposed zoning areas, as part of the application for this rezoning. This is the only means to ensure sufficient definiteness as to any rezoning action that may be approved. 2. Proffer 2 - Staff will want to confirm that the proposed RP part of the Property is capable of being developed with as many as 640 residential units, after giving consideration to, among other things, density requirements, open space requirements, and infrastructure needs. Also, to the extent that the Property cannot accommodate 640 residential units, consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and any other applicable limitations, the owner should be aware that a proffer statement can in no way operate 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 John C. Lewis, P.E. May 14, 2013 Page 2 to override ordinance limitations by, for example, allowing any greater number of residential units. Proffer 3 - The proffer might better state that the dedication will occur prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 4. Proffer 4 - For clarity, the proffer might also state that the owner will dedicate the necessary land for the road improvements, in particular with respect to those abutting Route 522 and /or in the vicinity of the site entrance intersection. Also, the proffer might better state that the improvements will be completed prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 5. Proffer 4c - For clarity, the proffer might better indicate that the improvements will be located at the intersection of the development access with Route 522. 6. Last paragraph, second line - "In the even" should be "In the event ". I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as it is my understanding that that review will be done by staff and the Planning Commission. Sincer. - ours, l v / Roderick B. W' liarhi County Attorney cc: Michael Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director of Planning and Development (via e -mail) Click in this box to return to the page you were previously viewing ' Frederick County Public Schools K. Wayne Lee, Jr. LEED GA . Coordinator of Planning and Development . leew @frederick.k12.va.us June 28, 2013 Mr. John Lewis Painter - Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Madison Village Rezoning Dear John: Frederick County Public Schools has reviewed the Madison Village rezoning application submitted to us on May 7, 2013. We offer the following comments: 1. The cumulative impact of this development and other developments in Frederick County will require construction of new schools and support facilities to accommodate increased student enrollment. Based on the proposed 12.5 unit per acre maximum gross density, the maximum densities allowed for single - family attached units and multifamily units, and the maximum proposed number of units of 640, we estimate that there will be a maximum of 384 townhomes and 256 apartments in this development. These units will house 187 students: 50 high school students, 45 middle school students, and 92 elementary school students. In order to properly serve these additional students, Frederick County Public Schools would spend $1,952,000 more per year in operating costs (or $3,050 per unit per year) and $7,168,000 in one -time capital expenditures (or $11,200 per unit). You will find, enclosed with this letter, a more detailed assessment of the estimated impact of Madison Village on FCPS, including attendance zone information. Please feel free to contact me at leewkfrederick.k12.va.us or 540- 662 -3888 x88249 if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, 4 K. Wayne Lee, Jr., LEED GA Coordinator of Planning and Development enclosure cc: Dr. David Sovine, Superintendent of Schools Mr. Albert Orndorff, Assistant Superintendent for Administration Mr. John Grubbs, Transportation Director 1415 Amherst Street wwwftederick.k12.va.us 540 - 662 -3889 Ext. 88249 P.O. Box 3508 540 - 662 -4237 fax Winchester, Virginia 22604 -2546 0 U r � w bA O N U bA 73 o O o � N "C7 � 73 o o ti 0 o L7 h O x � U O � U 0 h 0 0 W� U o o o V1 O 00 bA ~ 6 N x N o o v o 0 V U M a, O 0 69 N N 69 Els o ^ o U � o cd � Q O Q Ok C,3 00 N w 03 " U a o M o C7 N U .c) q o DO a a Co E- 64 RS O x U O � U 0 h 0 0 W� U o o o V1 O 00 bA ~ 6 N x N o o v o 0 V U M a, O 0 69 N N 69 Els U a cd zQ +- E� U U .. ., ^ o U � o cd � Q O Q Ok C,3 00 N w 03 " U a o M o C7 N U .c) q o DO a a Co E- 64 RS O U U a cd zQ +- E� U U .. ., � o U � o cd � Q Q Ok C,3 w � o � o Q w 03 " U a o c d U o C7 U o DO a a Co E- 0 U c� 0 a� O O fV ti x � O• t�j � � -� N N 64 iTl C O � ,q W 6 00 0 w "W 4 O . a1 00 CC o � H � o tD M «° � w y U y 0 .s U E 4° W `d w � W 0 U o o � o tD M y U y 0 U W `d H � w 61 N C d � O U N O Q y c U O U O REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning xStafT �t _4 Fee Amount Paid _..onillg Amendment NUmbel Date Received PC Hearing; Date f: BOS Hearing Date' - - -- The following information shall be provided 1ty the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed hoot, and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Dent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: Madison II, LLC Address: _558 Bennys Beach Road Front Royal, VA 22630 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: Address: 540- 723 -9869 Telephone: 3. Contact person if other than above Name: John Lewis 540 - 662 -5792 _ _ Telephone: 4. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map ! X Agency Coni_inents X Plat X Tees X...� Deed to property _X.._ Impact Analysis Statement X Verification of takes paid X „ Proffer Statement X 10 5. The Cole of Virginia allows us to request frill disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: none 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Agricultural -RA Residential Performance -RP I3) Proposed Use of the Property: Business General District -B2 R. .Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance From nearest intersection using road names and route numbers): The property is located on the west side of Route 522, - approximately 1000 feet south of the intersection of Route 522 and Airport Road. ........... _ ....... 1.1. 9. The following information should be provided according to the type of 1 - ezoxlinr, proposed Number Units Prop Single Family homes: Townhome: 160 Multi-Family: 480 Non - Residential rots: Mobile IIome: Hotel Rooms: S quare Footage of Proposed Uses Office: Service Station: Retail: Manufaeturing Restaurant: Warehouse: Other: 1.0. signature: I (we), the undersigned, do liezeby respectfzdly make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning reap of Frederick_ County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site i.nspect.i.or:r. purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted. must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Con:t.li.issiori pubtic tiearing and the Board of Super.•visors` public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right -of- -way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its aecompanymg materials are true and accurate to the best of.m.v (our) .k rvledae. /, Applicant(s): Owner(s): 12 Date: 'A— kk n 3 Date Date: Date: Adjoining .Property Ow ners Rezoning Owners ofproperLy adjoining the land will be notified of the Plalining Commission and the Board of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application. adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public right -of- a private right -of -way, or a watereour'se from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on. each adjoining property iticluding the parcel idc.ntiiicatio.n number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. The Commis'syioner of'the Revenue is located on the 2nd floor o_f'the 1i reclerick Counzy AtIminisir alive Bidlcllng 1 Yorth Kent Str'L-'et. Dante and P r ope rty Identification Number � A ddress Name EFG Investments, LLC 340 W. Parkins Mill Road Winchester, VA 22602 L 64- A -123A, 63 -A -124 Property rt N i17e R 150 SPE, LLC 621 E. Pratt Street, Suite 600 Baltimore, MD 21202 l'Iroperty r 64 -A -12 Name DuBrueler Enterprises, LLC 1686 S. Pleasant Valley Road Winchester, VA 22601 Property r? 64 -A -21 jy : }111e Thomas Beatley V 1014 Front Royal Pike Winchester, VA 22602 --- -------- °-- --�- -- Prop = 64-A-1 8A Name Cleveland Michael Turner 201 Vine Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Propert � 64D -A -3 Name Jesse Willard Riley, Jr. __.. _..^ 980 Front Royal Pike Winchester, VA 22602 64 -A -17 Property { Name Michael D. Hockman � Front Royal Pike chester, VA 22602 64 - -16 #�961 Property L Nam, Janet A. Embrey Gillespie, Front Royal Pike Winchester, VA 22602 1 . roper R 64C -2 -4, 64C -2 -5 Nanre Dona Lee Dewitt, Trustee 949 Front Royal Pike Winchester, VA 22602 Prope ', 64C -2 -6 14 Name and Property Identification Number Address NameJUnxU':an . Zhou'.Guliam 1 937 Front Royal: Pike Winchester, VA 22602 Property 64 27 Name Robert: E,, &.Judy C. Wallace 929 Royal; Pike... Winchester, VA 22602 Property 64C�2-8 : Name Michael D. Hockman 910 Front Royal Pike Winchester, VA 22602 Property # 64 -A - Name Howard F. Sharp, Jr, 921 Front Royal Pike Winchester, VA 22602 Property # 64C -A -16 Name Montie Gibson, Jr. 2508 Wilson Boulevard Winchester, VA 22601 Property # 64C-A- 1 3A 16 REZONING APPLICATION Madison Property - TM #64 -A -18 7. Adjacent Property PARCEL ID NUMBER JUSE ZONING JOWNER . 63-A-1 23A Ivacant RA IEFG Investments, LLC 64 -A -12 Ivacant RA I R 150 SPE LLC 63 -A -124 vacant RA IEFG Investments, LLC 64 -A -21 vacant RA I Dubrueler Enterprises, LLC 64-A-1 8A residential RA IThomas Beatley 64D -A -3 residential RP lCleveland Michael Turner 64 -A -17 residential RA Jesse Willard Riley Jr 64 -A -16 residential RA Michael D. Hockman 64C -2 -4 vacant RP Janet A. Embrey Gillespie, Trustee 64C -2 -5 residential IRP Janet A. Embrey Gillespie, Trustee 64C -2 -6 residential IRP IlDons Lee Dewitt, Trustee 64C -2 -7 residential IRP 1junxuan Zhou Guiliani 64C -2 -8 residential IRP I Robert E. & Judy C. Wallace 64 -A -16 residential I RA IMichael D. Hockman 64C -A -16 residential IRP Howard F. Sharp, Jr 64C-A-1 3A vacant RP Montie Gibson, Jr 64 -A -15 vacant B2 Michael S. & Cheryl Shephard 64 -A -14 vacant B2 Michael S. & Cheryl Shephard i V71 Q CITY OF��`� 11� y 1 i O i ? WINCHESTER .;� 1 r - �� O c� :/ o -- �J A. \\�� — fit /� =ns'i r Y 4 1- - // , ` ^?L ? d ` - s s le^ °t u Al i �� Mrp «! SITES LLLLLL /i _: O . ell X 4y�4. 1 ( �1'�A !� � \ ZZY Al I � O , n y� H. u�nd. Homes P P ROJECT: P.L.C. PROJECT: COUNTY NA 116 North Braddock Street LOCATION MAP DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: Winchester, Virginia 22601 TM #64 -A -18 P -L 1201007 Telephone (540)662 -5792 SCALE: DATE: CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662 -5793 1" =2000' 10/23/12 ENGINEERS Email office @pointerlewis.com SHEET: 1 /1 Special Limited Power of Attorney Comity of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Web Site. v - ......................... _ ......... ..._...... Department of Planning & Development, Comity of frederick, Virginia, 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Facsimile 5=10 -665 -639-5 Phone 510- 665- 5651. I Know All Men By Those Present: That I (We) (Name) M adison II, LLC (Phone) 540 - 723 -9869 (Address) 558 Bennys Beach Road, Front Royal, VA 2263 _ .. . .... ...... the mvner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land (Property ") conveyed to ine (us), by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by Instrument No. 130 00774 6 on I a e 0140 and is described as � Parcel: Lot: 1 lock: Section: Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute a.nd appoint: (N ame) Painter- Lewis, P.L.C. (Phone) 540 - 662 -5792 _ (Address) 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA _..._.._._._ ':fo act as my true and lawifirl attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place and stead witli .full power and authority 1 (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, inclu.cling: X Rezoning (including proffers) _ Conditional Use Permit Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) _ Subdivision _ Site Plan Variance or Appeal Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to snake amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or unfit it is otherw rescinded or- modified, I,h IIIJ In. Witness thereof., I I.; ) h 7e ere in of larlcl and seal j Z this day of \� \ ��.•ONWCq�Tti. %� S ignature(s) Aq State of Virginia City /County 0. � �-� , To -wit: = RE3MM EXe3ES' I, - a Notary Public in and ffy tlze�a c�z��t� aforesaid, certify tllatthe persons) ivho signed to the foregoing rnstrunlent personally ap�,3�•c;QI��C �i\F��`�� and has acknowledged the same: before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this 12 tay of ` J r'vI� Commission Expires: .............. _ Notary ublic Revised 3/1'7/03 REZONING APPLICATION #06 -13 SILVER LAKE, LLC. Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: December 2, 2013 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 12/04/13 Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 12/11/13 Pending PROPOSAL: To request a minor revision to the proffer statement associated with rezoning RZ #O1- 09, Silver Lake. This revision relates to the relocation of the site provided for the development of a new fire and rescue facility and support facilities. LOCATION The properties are located on the north side of Northwestern Pike (Route 50 West), west of Retail Boulevard, and east of Poor House Road (Route 654). Primary access is provided via the newly developed National Lutheran Boulevard. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE 12/11/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: This request for a minor revision to the proffer statement associated with rezoning RZ #01 -09, Silver Lake relates to the relocation of the site provided for the development of a new fire and rescue facility and support facilities. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of Rezoning #06 -13, the Proffer Revision of Silver Lake, L.L.C. The new location for the fire and rescue site will front on Corporate Place Drive near the intersection of National Lutheran Boulevard. Previously, the fire and rescue site was located along Northwestern Pike and Silver Lake Road. The proposed general location of the fire and rescue site is further identified on the updated GDP (Generalized Development Plan). In addition, the revised Proffer Statement addresses several minor editorial changes that relate to the actual development of the site since the original rezoning. Executed proffers dated November 4, 2013 are provided as well as a redline version of the proffer update. The revised Proffer Statement is in an acceptable legal form. These modifications to the proffer statement are minor in nature and a public hearing is not required. Followinz the public meetinz, a decision re- ardinz this rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. Rezoning #06 -13 — Silver Lake LLC December 2, 2013 Page 2 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 12/04/13 Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 12/11/13 Pending PROPOSAL To request a minor revision to the proffer statement associated with rezoning RZ #01 -09, Silver Lake. This revision relates to the relocation of the site provided for the development of a new fire and rescue facility and support facilities. LOCATION The properties are located on the North side of Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50 West); West of Retail Boulevard; and East of Poor House Road (Route 654). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBERS 52 -A -C, 52- A -50A, 52 -A -52, and 52 -A -63 PROPERTY ZONING B2 (General Business) District and MS (Medical Support) District, with proffers. PRESENT USE Residential, National Lutheran Village at Orchard Ridge, Vacant, Agricultural, ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) B2 (Business General) East: B2 (Business General) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural Use: Residential/Vacant Commercial Use: Commercial Use: Residential /Agri cultural Rezoning #06 -13 — Silver Lake LLC December 2, 2013 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Frederick County Public Works: The Public Works Department supports the proposed revisions to the Silver Lake, LLC proffer statement date October 25, 2013. Frederick Count Fire Marshal: Plans approved. Fire and Rescue Company: After review of the proffer statement dated October 24, 2013 (revision date), I find the revision to be correct and accurate in regards to the Fire Station proffers. County Attorney: Please see attached e -mail from Rod Williams, County Attorney to Evan Wyatt dated October 29, 2013 and November 4, 2013. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The property was included in the 2006 update to the Round Hill Land Use Plan which expanded the Sewer and Water Service Area to include these and other properties and provided for an improved land use plan for the Round Hill Community. This was approved by the Board of Supervisors on November 2007. In 2009, this property was rezoned consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Rezoning RZ #01 -09 was approved to rezone 370.02 acres to the MS (Medical Support) District and the B2 (Business General) District with proffers for a Continuing Care Retirement Community and commercial land uses. The B2 (Business General) portion of this property (238.96 acres) is subject to this current application for a revision to the proffered conditions. The National Lutheran Village at Orchard Ridge project opened earlier this year and continues its development on the portion of the property that is zoned MS (Medical Support). 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County 2030 Comprehensive Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. Land Use This application to modify the proffered conditions associated with four of the five parcels that made up Rezoning Application RZ #01 -09 for a Continuing Care Retirement Community and commercial land uses remains generally consistent with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and the Round Hill Land Use Plan. Rezoning #06 -13 — Silver Lake LLC December 2, 2013 Page 4 3) Proffer Statement The applicant has provided a revised Proffer Statement, dated November 4, 2013, which most substantially provides for the relocation of the site provided for the development of a new fire and rescue facility and support facilities, Proffer E.1. The new location for the fire and rescue site will front on Corporate Place Drive near the intersection of National Lutheran Boulevard. Previously, the fire and rescue site was located along Northwestern Pike and Silver Lake Road. The proposed general location of the fire and rescue site is further identified on the updated GDP (Generalized Development Plan). In addition, the revised Proffer Statement addresses several minor changes that relate to the actual development of the site since the original rezoning; the renaming of streets to reflect the current road names, the restating of new Zoning Ordinance references, and further clarifications that reflect site development conditions such as in Proffer C. 6. One additional change is the restating of the Fire and Rescue enhancement proffer provision from "within five years from the date of final non - appealable rezoning approval" to "on or before April 21, 2014 ". It is important to recognize that this date in Proffer E.1., while consistent with the previous language, is coming up within six months.. Comments on this rezoning to revise the conditions proffered by the Applicant were offered by Planning, the County Attorney, Fire & Rescue, and Public Works. The revised Proffer Statement is in an acceptable legal form. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 12/04/13 PLANNING CONUMSSION MEETING: This request for a minor revision to the proffer statement associated with rezoning RZ #01 -09, Silver Lake relates to the relocation of the site provided for the development of a new fire and rescue facility and support facilities. The new location for the fire and rescue site will front on Corporate Place Drive near the intersection of National Lutheran Boulevard. Previously, the fire and rescue site was located along Northwestern Pike and Silver Lake Road. The proposed general location of the fire and rescue site is further identified on the updated GDP (Generalized Development Plan). In addition, the revised Proffer Statement addresses several minor editorial changes that relate to the actual development of the site since the original rezoning. Executed proffers dated November 4, 2013 are provided as well as a redline version of the proffer update. The revised Proffer Statement is in an acceptable legal form. These modifications to the proffer statement are minor in nature and a public hearing is not required. A recommendation rezardinz this rezoning application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. Rezoning #06 -13 — Silver Lake LLC December 2, 2013 Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF THE 12/04/13 MEETING Staff reported the site provided for by proffer for the development of the new fire and rescue facility and support services on Route 50 has been moved to a new site on Corporate Place Drive, near the intersection with the newly developed National Lutheran Home Boulevard. Staff noted the proffer statement submitted which modifies this proffer is dated November 4, 2013. The project's representative added that the original rezoning with the former fire and rescue site had proffered a preemption signalized intersection at Route 50, which would allow fire and rescue vehicles to turn lights red when approaching the intersection. He said the preemption signalized intersection has been changed to the existing signal on Lutheran Boulevard. A Commissioner asked for clarification concerning the date change within the proffer from five years to a specific date, April 21, 2014. Staff replied the original proffer provided a time period in which the project should move forward with triggers and was approximately four to five years from the original rezoning; the April 21, 2014 date is essentially the same time frame placed within the original proffer statement. A Commissioner inquired about the two future alternative routes to the west on the GDP in the location of the relocated fire and rescue site. The project's representative replied at the time of the original rezoning, the traffic study indicated a need, and the Board desired, a connection to Poorhouse Road, and the applicant had provided those two road options; those two road options were a part of the original proffer and do not have any part of the relocation of the fire and rescue site. There were no citizen comments. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning and the revised proffer statement. (Note: All members of the Commission were present.) Followinz the public meeting, a decision rezardinz this rezoninz application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. 4�' 4w 40 4w nm fmaustnai, t-ignt uistncq M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) R4 (Residential Planned Community District) RS (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District) 7 > t _J REZ #06 -13 Silver Lake LLC PINS: 52 - A - C, 52 - A - 52, 52 - A - 50A, 52 - A - 63 Rezoning Proffer Revision Note: Frederick County Dept of Planning & Development 107 N Kent St e Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 Map Created: November 13, 2013 Staff: mruddy 0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet Greenway Engineering N., .,amber 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 SILVER LAKE, LLC PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ #01 -09 Rural Areas District (RA) to Business General District (132) and MS Medical Support District (MS) PROPERTY: 238.96± acres; Tax Parcels #52- ((A)) -C, 52- ((A)) -50A, 52- ((A)) -52, and 52- ((A))- 63 (here -in after the "Property ") RECORD OWNER: Silver Lake, LLC, James R. Wilkins, III, Manager APPLICANT: Silver Lake, LLC (here -in after the "Applicant ") PROJECT NAME: Round Hill Commercial Center & The Village at Orchard Ridge — A National Lutheran Home Community ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: November 25, 2008 REVISION DATE: November 4, 2013 Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.2 -2296 Et. Seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned Applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve conditional zoning amendments to Rezoning Application #01 -09 which rezoned 370.02± -acres from the Rural Areas (RA) District to establish 238.96± acres of B -2, Business General District (Tax Map Parcels 52- ((A)) -C, 52- ((A)) -50A, 52- ((A)) -52, 52- ((A)) -63) and 131.06± -acres of MS, Medical Support District (Tax Map Parcel 52- ((A)) -50); development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the Applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with the said Code and Zoning Ordinance. The conditional zoning amendments within this document are intended to apply to the 238.96± acres of B -2, Business General District, while the 131.06± -acres of MS, Medical Support District will comply with the conditions approved as part of Rezoning Application #01 -09 on April 22, 2009, identified as Section B. MS, Medical Support District Area. In the event that the conditional zoning amendments are not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and have no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon this Applicant and their legal successors, heirs, or assigns. File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering No—mber 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 2 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 PROFFER STATEMENT A. Generalized Development Plan 1. The Applicant hereby proffers to submit a Generalized Development Plan (the "GDP ") for the Property. The purpose of the GDP is to identify the general location of the B -2, Business General District and MS, Medical Support District areas, the general location of the proposed future Fire and Rescue Station area, the general location of the proposed future passive open space area, the general location of the 50 -foot green strip enhancement area, the general location of the 10 -foot asphalt trail system, and the general location of the phased transportation improvements areas within and adjacent to the Property. 2. The Applicant hereby proffers to develop the Property in substantial conformity with the proffered GDP, prepared by Greenway Engineering dated October 24, 2013. The GDP is recognized to be a conceptual plan and may be adjusted by the Applicant to accommodate final design and engineering constraints without the need of new conditional rezoning approval by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, provided that the adjustments do not eliminate or substantially relocate the areas described in Section Al of this proffer statement. B. MS, Medical Support District Area 1. The Applicant hereby proffers to develop, or cause for the development of a Continuing Care Retirement Community (the "CCRC ") on the portion of the Property proposed to be zoned MS, Medical Support District, and to exclude all other MS, Medical Support District land uses not expressly permitted within Section 165- 504.02(B)(7) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. 2. The Applicant hereby proffers to limit the maximum residential density within the CCRC to eight units per acre. The maximum residential density total shall include all independent living units, assisted care living units, and skilled nursing care units. The location and totals for the residential units specified in this section shall be provided on the Master Development Plan for the Property. 3. Where buffer areas are required and mature woodlands are in place, the Applicant will request approval of the use of these woodland features to satisfy the buffer requirement during the consideration of the Master Development Plan. 4. The Applicant proffers to provide initial access to the CCRC via National Lutheran Boulevard as described in Section D(2)(f) of the proffer statement, and further proffers to provide a maximum of two commercial entrances on National Lutheran Boulevard to provide access to the CCRC. File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering NL„cmber 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 3 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 C. B2, Business General District Area 1. The Applicant hereby proffers to prohibit the following land uses currently allowed within the B2 District: ➢ Truck Stops ➢ Golf Driving Ranges ➢ Outdoor Batting Cages ➢ Model Home Sales ➢ Self - Service Storage Facilities ➢ Adult Retail Establishments 2. The Applicant hereby proffers to prohibit individual full service commercial entrances to all allowed B2 District land uses that intersect Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50 West) and Poorhouse Road (Route 654); however, right -in or right -out only access to B2 District land uses that intersect Northwestern Pike shall be permitted if approved by VDOT and /or Frederick County. 3. The Applicant hereby proffers to establish a green strip along the Property frontage adjacent to the Northwestern Pike corridor that is 50 feet in width. Parking lots and access drives shall be prohibited within the 50 -foot green strip, except for access drives permitted as described in Section C(2) above. The entire Property frontage of the 50 -foot green strip shall be enhanced with street trees that are a minimum of 2 -inch caliper at planting and spaced a maximum of 30 feet on center, ornamental shrubs that are a minimum three - gallon container at planting, as well as an asphalt bicycle and pedestrian facility that is 10 feet wide. The installation of the street trees, ornamental shrubs, and bicycle and pedestrian facility located within the 50 -foot green strip shall be required as specified in Section C(8) of the proffer statement. 4. The Applicant hereby proffers to establish street tree plantings along both sides of National Lutheran Boulevard and Trader Drive throughout the limits of the B2 District property. All street trees shall be a minimum of two -inch caliper at time of planting and spaced a maximum 40 feet on center. The street trees shall be located outside of the public right -of -way. 5. The Applicant hereby proffers to establish a linear passive open space area in the general location identified on the proffered GDP, which will be enhanced with a 10 -foot asphalt trail system between National Lutheran Boulevard and Northwestern Pike as specified in Section C(8) of the proffer statement. 6. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide for inter - parcel connectors between all adjoining commercial and office land uses unless prohibited by topographic conditions. File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering No ember 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 4 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30. 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 7. The Applicant hereby proffers to include an additional row of evergreen trees within all required buffer and screening areas adjacent to land primarily used for residential purposes in the RA District in which accessory uses are proposed within the active portion of the buffer area. 8. The Applicant hereby proffers to design and construct, or cause for the construction of an asphalt bicycle and pedestrian facility that is ten -feet wide. This location of this facility is identified on the proffered GDP and will be located outside of public right -of -way limits. This facility will be developed as follows: The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the south side of the Phase 1 segment of National Lutheran Boulevard shall be developed during the construction of this road segment as specified in Section D(2)(f) of the proffer statement. ➢ The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the south side of the Phase 2 segment of National Lutheran Boulevard shall be developed during the construction of this road segment as specified in Section D(3)(e) of the proffer statement. ➢ The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the passive open space area shall be developed on or before the completion of the commercial development permitted under the Phase 1Transportation Program as specified in Section D(2)(a) of the proffer statement. ➢ The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the southern boundary of the Property identified as Area 1 on the GDP shall be developed during the construction of the Phase 1 segment of National Lutheran Boulevard as specified in Section D(2)(f) of the proffer statement. ➢ The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the southern boundary of the Property identified as Area 2 on the GDP shall be developed prior to the issuance of the occupancy permit issued for the first commercial building permit located in the land bay between National Lutheran Boulevard and Trader Drive. The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the southern boundary of the Property identified as Area 3 on the GDP shall be developed prior to the issuance of the occupancy permit issued for the first commercial building permit located in the land bay between Trader Drive and the eastern boundary of the Property. 9. The Applicant hereby proffers to establish an Architectural Review Board (ARB) for the purpose of reviewing structural elevations, site landscaping and signage for all commercial sites to ensure compatibility with the restrictive covenant documents for the B2 District property. The restrictive covenant documents shall be provided to Frederick County prior to the subdivision of land within the B2 District, or prior to the approval of any site development plan within the B2 District. The restrictive covenant documents shall include, but not be limited to, the following design elements: File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering No�cmber 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 5 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 ➢ Building materials for all exterior walls and rooflines. ➢ Materials for all monument freestanding business signs. The materials for the base of all monument freestanding business signs shall be consistent throughout the B2 District. ➢ Screening of all loading areas from adjoining properties external to the B2 District. ➢ Screening of outdoor dumpster pad areas with building materials consistent with the primary structure. ➢ Common area maintenance agreements. D. Transportation Enhancements I. The Applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by Patton, Harris, Rust and Associates, dated November 25, 2008 for the 370.02± acre Property. The TIA identifies improvements to the regional transportation network to account for background undeveloped projects and the Applicant's proposal through four phases of development. The Applicant hereby proffers to design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to the regional transportation network as a phased development program that is described in this section of the proffer statement. Additionally, the phased development program is identified in illustrative form on the proffered GDP. It is recognized that the phased transportation improvements proffered herein will be constructed as described in this section; however, the exact location and limits of these improvements will be determined by VDOT and /or Frederick County during the approval of engineering design plans. It is further recognized that the location of the regional transportation network improvements identified in illustrative form on the proffered GDP are general in nature and may be relocated to accommodate VDOT engineering design plan approval without the need for conditional zoning amendment to the GDP or the proffer statement. 2. The Applicant hereby proffers the following Phase 1 Transportation Program: a. The Applicant shall be entitled to develop the CCRC and a maximum of 180,000 square feet of commercial land use within Phase 1. However, the Applicant can deviate from this land use mix assuming the total trip generation for site plans within this phase of the transportation program (based on the ITE 7` Edition Trip Generation Report) do not exceed the total trip generation specified in the November 25, 2008 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Phase 1. It is recognized that the Applicant shall complete all Phase 1 transportation improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 180,000 square feet of commercial land use or equivalent trip generation as noted above on the B2 portion of the Property. File #49285 /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 6 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 b. The Applicant shall dedicate all right -of -way necessary for the Phase 1 improvements that will occur on the Property to VDOT or Frederick County. The Applicant will attempt to design all off -site improvements within public right -of -way; however, if necessary it is recognized that VDOT and/or Frederick County will assist the Applicant with right -of- way necessary to implement proffered off -site transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to assume all costs associated with right -of -way acquisition if assistance from VDOT and/or Frederick County is required. c. The Applicant shall execute, or cause for the execution of a traffic signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund new traffic signalization at the intersection of Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50) and Poor House Road (Route 654). The traffic signalization agreement shall be executed within six months of final non - appealable rezoning approval, or prior to approval of the first Site Plan for the property, whichever occurs first. d. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the execution of a traffic signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund new traffic signalization with pedestrian actualization at the intersection of Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50) and the relocated National Lutheran Boulevard. The Applicant shall provide additional funding necessary to provide for pre - emption control for this traffic signal if the County requests the land for the new fire and rescue facility provided in Section E(1) of the proffer statement. In the event the County does not request the land for the new fire and rescue facility, the additional funding for traffic signal pre - emption control shall be made available for pre - emption control for the traffic signal at the intersection of Northwestern Pike and Poor House Road that is described in Section D(2)(c) of the proffer statement. The traffic signalization agreement shall be executed within one year of final non - appealable rezoning approval, or prior to approval of the first Site Plan for the property, whichever occurs first. The Applicant shall reserve the right to preempt this agreement by initiating a signal warrant study and signal design plans in accordance with VDOT standards for approval to install traffic signalization at this intersection. e. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to the median crossing including a westbound right turn lane and left turn lane and an eastbound left turn lane on Northwestern Pike at the intersection of the relocated National Lutheran Boulevard. These improvements shall be completed prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for the land use utilizing National Lutheran Boulevard for access to Northwestern Pike. f. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to National Lutheran Boulevard within the Property to File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 7 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 provide for a road section that is constructed to a 40 mph geometric design standard and provides right -of -way for a future roundabout at the intersection with Trader Drive, and left turn lanes and right turn lanes at all internal collector street intersections and at commercial entrances as required by VDOT. Additionally, the Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of separate right and left turn lanes on National Lutheran Boulevard at the intersection of Northwestern Pike. National Lutheran Boulevard shall be developed as a four -lane divided urban road section between Northwestern Pike and the future roundabout, and as a two -lane road section between the future roundabout and the limits of Phase 1 with dedicated right -of -way to Frederick County to allow for a four -lane urban road section. The construction of the two -lane road section shall include a raised median section necessary to transition from the roundabout into the urban road section design. These improvements shall be completed prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for the land use utilizing National Lutheran Boulevard for access to Northwestern Pike. Furthermore, the Applicant agrees to design and construct, or cause for the construction of the four -lane urban section between the future roundabout and the limits of Phase 1 if this improvement is warranted based on future traffic counts as described in Section D(6). g. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of modifications to, or the elimination of the median crossing on Northwestern Pike identified as Median Crossing A on the proffered GDP. VDOT shall determine the requirements for modification, or elimination and shall advise the Applicant in writing of the requirements associated with this improvement. The Applicant shall complete these improvements in conjunction with construction activities associated with National Lutheran Boulevard as described in Section D(2)(f) of the proffer statement. h. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to the southbound off ramp at the Route 37 interchange with Northwestern Pike to provide for a free flow right turn lane onto Northwestern Pike. The Applicant shall complete the Route 37 interchange improvements described in this section prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 180,000 square feet of commercial land use or equivalent trip generations as described in Section D(2)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. i. In the event that VDOT and Frederick County determine that a monetary contribution for regional transportation improvements to the Route 37 corridor between the Northwestern Pike interchange and the North Frederick Pike interchange is desired, the Applicant agrees to provide a File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 8 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 monetary contribution in lieu of the improvement described in Section 2(h). This monetary contribution shall be equivalent to the amount associated with the improvement described in that section based upon an engineering estimate agreed upon by VDOT, Frederick County and the Applicant that will be prepared on or before the build out of the Phase 1 transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to provide this monetary contribution to Frederick County within 30 days of written request by the County, and further agrees to allow for this monetary contribution to be utilized as matching funds by Frederick County for qualifying transportation improvements programs or grants. 3. The Applicant hereby proffers the following Phase 2 Transportation Program: a. The Applicant shall be entitled to develop the CCRC and a maximum of 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use within Phase 2 that is a cumulative total of Phase 1 — Phase 2. However, the Applicant can deviate from this land use mix assuming the total trip generation for site plans within this phase of the transportation program (based on the ITE 7 th Edition Trip Generation Report) do not exceed the total trip generation specified in the November 25, 2008 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Phase 2. It is recognized that the Applicant shall complete all Phase 2 transportation improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as noted above on the B2 portion of the Property. b. The Applicant shall dedicate all right -of -way necessary for the Phase 2 improvements that will occur on the Property to VDOT or Frederick County. The Applicant will attempt to design all off-site improvements within public right -of -way; however, if necessary it is recognized that VDOT and /or Frederick County will assist the Applicant with right -of- way necessary to implement proffered off -site transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to assume all costs associated with right -of -way acquisition if assistance from VDOT and /or Frederick County is required. c. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the execution of a traffic signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund new traffic signalization with pedestrian actualization at the intersection of Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50) and Trader Drive. The traffic signalization agreement shall be executed prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for the land use utilizing Trader Drive for access to Northwestern Pike. The Applicant shall reserve the right to preempt this agreement by initiating a signal warrant study and signal design plans in File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 9 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 accordance with VDOT standards for approval to install traffic signalization at this intersection. d. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to Trader Drive to include a two -lane urban road section with a raised median to the first available commercial entrance that is constructed to a 40 mph geometric design standard and provides for the construction of the roundabout at the intersection with National Lutheran Boulevard, and left turn lanes and right turn lanes at all commercial entrances as required by VDOT. Additionally, the Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of a median crossing including a westbound right turn lane and left turn lane and an eastbound left turn lane on Northwestern Pike at the intersection of Trader Drive. These improvements shall be completed prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(3)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property, with the exception of the median crossing and turn lane improvements on Northwestern Pike which shall be completed with the Trader Drive intersection improvements on Northwestern Pike. Additionally, the Applicant shall dedicate right -of -way to Frederick County to allow for a four -lane urban road section for Trader Drive, and further agrees to design and construct, or cause for the construction of the four -lane urban road section if this improvement is warranted based on future traffic counts as described in Section D(6). e. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to National Lutheran Boulevard to provide for a two -lane urban road section that is constructed to a 40 mph geometric design standard and provides for left turn lanes and right turn lanes at all internal collector street intersections and at commercial entrances as required by VDOT, which continues from the terminus of National Lutheran Boulevard constructed in Phase 1 to a connection at the intersection of Retail Boulevard. The Applicant shall complete these improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(3)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. Additionally, the Applicant shall dedicate right -of -way to Frederick County to allow for a four -lane urban road section for National Lutheran Boulevard and further agrees to design and construct, or cause for the construction of the four -lane urban section if this improvement is warranted based on future traffic counts as described in Section D(6). f. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of modifications to, or the elimination of the median crossings on File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 10 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 Northwestern Pike identified as Median Crossing B and Median Crossing C on the proffered GDP. VDOT shall determine the requirements for modification, or elimination and shall advise the Applicant in writing of the requirements associated with this improvement. The Applicant shall complete these improvements in conjunction with construction activities associated with Trader Drive as described in Section D(3)(d) of the proffer statement. g. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to the northbound off ramp at the Route 37 interchange with Northwestern Pike to provide for a second right turn. The Applicant shall complete the Route 37 interchange improvements described in this section prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(3)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. h. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements at the Route 37 interchange with Northwestern Pike to provide for a third westbound thru lane on Northwestern Pike under the Route 37 bridge structure continuing east to the transition for the Route 37 northbound on -ramp, to include the relocation of the existing Route 37 northbound on -ramp. The Applicant shall complete the Route 37 interchange improvements described in this section prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(3)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. In the event that VDOT and Frederick County determine that a monetary contribution for regional transportation improvements to the Route 37 corridor between the Northwestern Pike interchange and the North Frederick Pike interchange is desired, the Applicant agrees to provide a monetary contribution in lieu of the improvements described in Section 3(g) and 3(h). This monetary contribution shall be equivalent to the amount associated with the improvement described in those sections based upon an engineering estimate agreed upon by VDOT, Frederick County and the Applicant that will be prepared on or before the build out of the Phase 2 transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to provide this monetary contribution to Frederick County within 30 days of written request by the County, and further agrees to allow for this monetary contribution to be utilized as matching funds by Frederick County for qualifying transportation improvements programs or grants. In the event that regional transportation improvements to the Route 37 corridor between the Northwestern Pike interchange are constructed prior File #49285 /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 11 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 to the completion of the Phase 2 Transportation Program, the Applicant agrees to provide a monetary contribution equivalent to the amount associated with the improvement described in this section to be utilized unconditionally by Frederick County for other transportation improvements. This monetary contribution shall be provided to Frederick County within 60 days of written request by the County. 4. The Applicant hereby proffers the following Phase 3 Transportation Program: a. The Applicant shall be entitled to develop the CCRC and a maximum of 490,000 square feet of commercial land use and 350,000 square feet of office land use within Phase 3 that is a cumulative total of Phase 1 — Phase 3. However, the Applicant can deviate from this land use mix assuming the total trip generation for site plans within this phase of the transportation program (based on the ITE 7 th Edition Trip Generation Report) do not exceed the total trip generation specified in the November 25, 2008 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Phase 3. It is recognized that the Applicant shall complete all Phase 3 transportation improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 490,000 square feet of commercial land use and 350,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as noted above on the B2 portion of the Property. b. The Applicant shall dedicate all right -of -way necessary for the Phase 3 improvements that will occur on the Property to VDOT or Frederick County. The Applicant will attempt to design all off -site improvements within public right -of -way; however, if necessary it is recognized that VDOT and /or Frederick County will assist the Applicant with right-of- way necessary to implement proffered off -site transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to assume all costs associated with right -of -way acquisition if assistance from VDOT and /or Frederick County is required. c. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to National Lutheran Boulevard to provide for a second right turn lane on National Lutheran Boulevard at the intersection of Northwestern Pike. These improvements shall be completed prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 490,000 square feet of commercial land use and 350,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(4)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. d. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of a two -lane urban road that is constructed to a 40 mph geometric design standard and provides for roundabout design at the intersection with National Lutheran Boulevard, and left turn lanes and right turn lanes at all File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; t 2 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 commercial entrances as required by VDOT, which will provide for a connection between National Lutheran Boulevard and Poor House Road (Route 654). The Applicant will coordinate with the owner of tax parcel 52- ((A)) -47 to obtain right -of -way for this improvement as a first option for development of the two -lane urban road connection. In the event that the first option cannot be achieved, the Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of the two -lane urban road connection between National Lutheran Boulevard and Poor House Road on the Property. The general location of the two -lane road connection associated with both options will be provided on the proffered GDP; however, it is recognized that this location may shift without the need for conditional rezoning approval. The Applicant shall complete this improvement prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 490,000 square feet of commercial land use and 350,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(4)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. 5. The Applicant hereby proffers the following Phase 4 Transportation Program: a. The Applicant shall be entitled to develop the CCRC and a maximum of 583,050 square feet of commercial Iand use and 494,600 square feet of office land use within Phase 4 that is a cumulative total of Phase 1 — Phase 4. However, the Applicant can deviate from this land use mix assuming the total trip generation for site plans within this phase of the transportation program (based on the ITE 7 th Edition Trip Generation Report) do not exceed the total trip generation specified in the November 25, 2008 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Phase 4. It is recognized that the Applicant shall complete all Phase 4 transportation improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 530,000 square feet of commercial land use and 440,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as noted above on the B2 portion of the Property. In the event that the Applicant would desire to develop commercial or office land uses that exceed the maximum square feet or total trip generation specified in this phase of the transportation program, a new traffic impact analysis report shall be prepared with each site plan to determine any additional transportation improvements required to mitigate the impacts created solely by that project, which will be implemented as a condition of site plan approval. b. The Applicant shall dedicate all right -of -way necessary for the Phase 4 improvements that will occur on the Property to VDOT or Frederick County. The Applicant will attempt to design all off -site improvements within public right -of -way; however, if necessary it is recognized that VDOT and /or Frederick County will assist the Applicant with right -of- way necessary to implement proffered off -site transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to assume all costs associated with File #49285 /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 13 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 right -of -way acquisition if assistance from VDOT and /or Frederick County is required. c. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to Trader Drive to provide for a second left turn lane on Trader Drive at the intersection of Northwestern Pike. These improvements shall be completed prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 530,000 square feet of commercial land use and 440,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(5)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. d. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to provide for a third westbound thru lane on Northwestern Pike from the eastern boundary of the Property to National Lutheran Boulevard. Additionally, the Applicant shall be responsible for the relocation, construction, and right -of -way dedication (if necessary) of the existing right turn lanes on Northwestern Pike at the National Lutheran Boulevard and Trader Drive intersections. The Applicant shall complete these improvements prior to the approval of any Site PIan that exceeds 530,000 square feet of commercial land use and 440,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(5)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. 6. The Applicant hereby proffers to conduct annual traffic counts that will be provided to VDOT and Frederick County to determine if the 8,000 ADT volume is achieved to require the expansion of National Lutheran Boulevard and Trader Drive to four -lane urban road sections, as provided for in Sections 1)(2)(f), 1)(3)(d), and D(3)(e) of the proffer statement. The annual traffic counts shall begin in the first calendar year that the Phase 2 transportation improvements are completed and shall continue until the warrants are met for widening both street systems. VDOT and Frederick County may allow for annual traffic counts to be delayed in calendar years in which there is no development activity on the Property. When required, traffic counts will be conducted at the National Lutheran Boulevard and Trader Drive intersections with Northwestern Pike, on National Lutheran Boulevard at the eastern boundary of the Property, and on the two -lane road connector between National Lutheran Boulevard and Poor House Road at the western boundary of the Property. If warrants are met based on the annual traffic counts, the Applicant shall prepare and submit construction plans for approval by VDOT and Frederick County within six months of written notice that warrants are met. The Applicant shall commence construction of these improvements within six months of final plan approval. E. Fire and Rescue Enhancements 1. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide, or cause for the provision of land to Frederick County for the development of a new fire and rescue station and File #49285 /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008: Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 14 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 support facilities on or before April 21, 2014. The Applicant shall dedicate a site fronting on Corporate Place that is located near the intersection of National Lutheran Boulevard, which is a minimum of three acres and a maximum of four acres in size, with the final size of this site being determined upon approval of the Site Plan for the new fire and rescue station facility. The Applicant shall prepare and provide Frederick County with the dedication plat for this site and necessary right -of -way along Corporate Place on or before April 21, 2014 provided that a Site Plan has been approved for the new fire and rescue station. Additionally, if Frederick County does not commence construction of a new fire and rescue station within one year following the dedication of the site, this land shall be conveyed back to the Applicant to allow for further economic development. In the event Frederick County elects not to develop this site as a new fire and rescue station, the Applicant shall provide a monetary contribution to Frederick County in the amount of $100,000.00 for the development of a new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station at another location. 2. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide, or cause for the provision of a monetary contribution to Frederick County in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for the development of a new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station. This monetary proffer is intended to mitigate impacts to fire and rescue services associated with the development of the CCRC on the MS District portion of the Property. The $1,000,000.00 monetary contribution shall be provided to Frederick County on or before April 21, 2014 to assist with the development of the new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station. However, the date for the $1,000,000.00 monetary contribution payment may be extended if a Site Plan for a new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station has not been approved on or before April 21, 2014. If the latter occurs, the $1,000,000.00 monetary contribution shall be provided to Frederick County within 30 days of the date of final Site Plan approval for the new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station. 3. The Applicant hereby proffers to design and construct, or cause for the construction of all necessary road improvements to provide access to the new fire and rescue station, as well as all utilities necessary for the new fire and rescue station located on the Property. These infrastructure improvements shall be provided by the Applicant in advance of the Phase 1 or Phase 2 transportation program improvements to facilitate the construction of the new fire and rescue station should this occur in advance of the commercial development within these transportation phases. The Applicant shall work with Frederick County, upon notice by the County, to ensure that the design, bonding and construction of these infrastructure improvements is coordinated during the preparation of the Site Plan for the new fire and rescue station on the Property. File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 15 Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 2013 F. Signatures The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in the interest of the Applicants and owners. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants this rezoning and accepts the conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully Submitted: By: Date: 13 Commonwealth of Virginia, City ounty f t Ise Jey i � To Wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this of NO \je-vYl b r 20t:5 by a vA aq 1P I Notary Public My Commission Expires f f b 2--q L Re 1, 4 2-c3 L, I 4 � O? r ;U OF File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning _J l i H ' eP 111 I � O —. d 5a � J �P � O v> V N N m O ti ll , w J J 3I 00 Z 6 O a V W 0 , � I -. a w ;; W H! 01 -1 3Z. W W Z g LU 0194:21 20 sc A—S VA ',UNnOO X3lx21aaxd ^ `1 ' d wo,e- 9—aaze,,.,., 9296- 22e -oa9 XYd -Sus 101HISIQ 'IVI2IHISIOVW ONOHS3NIV0 J v z m i 59[4 -299 -045 aaogda[ay Z a v I I LL o ,ec /u,naw�°i 1N3WdOl3A3O 331V1 U3AlIS (r W? m 0 lu 0 () c ao N N N p 20922 a[a124A'ialsaga¢!d! a¢ I IM XPUTA 191 IV a m NVId 1N3WdOl3A3a a3ZIlV�13N3J JNIa33NIJN3 AYMN33VJ o � o m _ v LD _J l i H ' eP 111 I � O —. d 5a � J �P � O v> V N N m O ti ll , w J J 3I 00 Z 6 O a V W 0 , � I -. a w ;; W H! 01 -1 3Z. W W Z g LU 0194:21 20 1 W O ^ `1 ' d I F J v z Z a v I I LL 0 1' 1 _ (r W? m 0 lu 0 () c ao N N N p Z F Im 6 IV a m o \ H m 7 R y Nbb3N1\ i � � v OPT � % V IIc N! O N LO 2 w cc O to I V a w S 47 1 ^ `1 j I I F 0 ,1 I I Si i', 1' 1 u I \ i y n "s 1 ^ `1 j I I F ,1 1 , Si i', moo, aaa. aaa a.. 9296 - 224 -oa9 XVd 9BI4 — 299 -049 aaoydalay zoszz acu {8np lapeayomg -U-1 IM SPaFds I91 JNIa33NIJN3 AYMN33aJ al -S s'aaa`aa3 iec vawaer VA ', ,LNflOO MOM21GSHd IDIHISIQ 'IVIHHISIOVW ONOE 3NIV0 1N3WdOl3A3a 33IVl H3AlIS NVId 1N3WdOl3A3a a3ZIlV7J3N3J $ o o x w o m m o I w I Z UA Lu I a_ Z Iq W I ° Z a � I II �I W = J Iz Lu Y� N Im z I� J w mlz aI � c O Lu a la z J � W ICI a o IaI 49 z w 101 o `" a 1A � I I W I I3 1 z I os Lu w I ++11 w z a I x IL � ' z I a� Z cc Iz I W W ~ H H , I d a LL a w W I W 3; 3m 3avul Z W aw z = ■■ 0 14 >r o o ' (3 A - la I w J Z `O I z i h t I g3 1 / V 715 Q 0 ■■ htt 0 ► = O w q w L([7 W V C7 8 W I w I Z I z 1 I ag O I W ~ I I x� v V W F I I w z g Z I w z Z w If w N Z I I I a g J I O W I I L _. od I g z� I I I I o j I W a W a I I J I 0zx 'a a.,., al S S VA ',UNnoO MOM21GSHd 9296 - 224 -oa9 XVd a, —su3 101HLSIQ 'IVIHHISI0VW 0230EMNIV0 $ m 9BI4 - 299 -945 aaoydalay o zoszz acu {8np •lapeayomg iec 6 PDP °O1 1N3WdOl3A3a 331VI MAIM 1 IM XPUTA 191 JNIa33NIJN3 AYMN33HJ NV�d 1N3WdOl3A3a a3ZIlV7J3N3J m o � o / I I N Z W � -- II z1z `� a d 4 t m c ~ W � W A 0 rte/ /` z W LL Ic ~OS J On ) k v 0 X L \ - -' _; d � KA / / J u� \ 7l r I I I i I � I I t \ I 5 L ; r r � r I V r r '- I _ l i _ r r I__d7 RESOLUTION Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: December 4, 2013 - Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: December 11, 2013 ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #06 -13 PROFFER REVISION OF SILVER LAKE, LLC WHEREAS, Rezoning #06 -13 Proffer Revision of Silver Lake, LLC, submitted by Greenway Engineering, Inc_, to revise the proffers associated with Rezoning #01 -09 relating to the relocation of the site provided for the development of a new fire and rescue facility and support facilities, was considered. The proffer revision, proffers originally dated November 25, 2008, with final revision dated November 4, 2013, is replacing the previous fire and rescue site which was located along Northwestern Pike and Silver Lake Road with the new location which will front on Corporate Place Drive near the intersection of National Lutheran Boulevard. The properties are located on the north side of Northwestern Pike (US Route 50 West); west of Retail Boulevard, and east of Poor House Road (Route 654), and is identified by Property Identification Numbers 52 -A -C, 52-A-5 OA, 52 -A -52 and 52 -A -63 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public meeting on this rezoning on December 4, 2013 and forwarded a recommendation of approval; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public meeting on this rezoning on December 11, 2013, and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the proffers associated with Rezoning #01 -09 relating to the relocation of the site provided for the development of a new fire and rescue facility and support facilities. The proffer revision, originally dated November 25, 2008, with final revision dated November 4, 2013, is replacing the previous fire and rescue site which was located along Northwestern Pike and Silver Lake Road with the new location which will front on Corporate Place Drive near the intersection of National Lutheran Boulevard. PDRes. #38 -13 This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 11th day of December, 2013 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Gene E. Fisher Christopher E. Collins Robert W. Wells Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes. #38 -13 Proffer Statement Revisions with Redline Text Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008: Revised January 6, 20419, Revised January 27, 2009; Revised February 16, 2009: Revised February 19, 2009: Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13. 2009; Revised March 30, 2009: R�vjsed NmL nnh4r 4, 20 i 1 SILVER LAKE, LLC PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ #01 -09 Rural Areas District (RA) to Business General District (B2) and MS Medical Support District (MS) PROPERTY: =370 .92 238.96± acres; Tax Parcels #52- ((A)) -C, 5 )) 50,, 52- ((A)) -50A, 52- ((A)) -52, and 52- ((A)) -63 (here -in after the "Property") RECORD OWNER:. Silver Lake, LLC, .lames R. Wilkins, III, Manager APPLICANT:. Silver Lake, LLC (here -in after the "Applicant ") PROJECT NAME: Round Hill Commercial Center & The Village at Orchard Ridge — A National Lutheran Home Community ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: November 25, 2008 REVISION DATE: M ai - eh 30, 2909 November 4. 2013 Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.2 -2296 Et. Seq. of the Cade of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned Applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve conditional zoning amendments to Rezoning Application #01 -09 which rezoned f f the - e°hn;ng e 370.02± -acres from the Rural Areas (RA) District to establish 23$.96± acres of B -2, Business General District (Tax Map Parcels 52- ((A)) -C, 52- ((A)) -50A, 52- ((A)) -52, 52- ((A)) -63) and I31.06± -acres of MS, Medical Support District (Tax Map Parcel 52- ((A))-50); development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the Applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with the said Code and Zoning Ordinance. The conditional zoning amendments within this document are intended to apply to the 238.96± acres of B -2, Business General District, while the 1 31.06+ -acres of MS, Medical Support District will comply with the conditions approved as part of Rezoning Application #01-09 on April 22, 2009, identified as Section B. MS, Medical Support District Area, In the event that the conditional zoning amendments are sueh ., „� r not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and have no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon this Applicant and their legal successors, heirs, or assigns. File #4928S,'Silver Lake t.t.0 Rezoning t,reenwa Lngincering Alnvemher 25. 2008; Revised January b, 2009: Revised January 27, 2009; Revised February 16, 2009: Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009. Revised March 17, 2009; Revised March 30, 20(19; W NovvToIIvr 4. 2i i i 1 ■ i . a OE ■ ■. ; If A� i ■ L r' PROFFER STATEMENT A. Generalized Development Plan The Applicant hereby proffers to submit a Generalized Development Plan (the "GDP ") for the Property. The purpose of the GDP is to identify the general location of the B -2, Business General District and MS, Medical Support District areas, the general location of the proposed future Fire and Rescue Station area, the general location of the proposed future passive open space area, the general location of the 50 -foot green strip enhancement area, the general location of the 10 -foot asphalt trail system, and the general location of the phased transportation improvements areas within and adjacent to the Property. 2. The Applicant hereby proffers to develop the Property in substantial conformity with the proffered GDP, prepared by Greenway Engineering dated Mafeh- October 24, 2013. The GDP is recognized to be a conceptual plan and may be adjusted by the Applicant to accommodate final design and engineering constraints without the need of new conditional rezoning approval by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, provided that the adjustments do not eliminate or substantially relocate the areas described in Section A 1 of this proffer statement. B. MS, Medical Support District area The Applicant hereby proffers to develop, or cause for the development of a Continuing Care Retirement Community (the "CCRC ") on the portion of the Property proposed to be zoned MS, Medical Support District, and to exclude all other MS, Medical. Support District land uses not expressly permitted within Section 165 ) 1 65- 04_02(B )i 7) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. 2. The Applicant hereby proffers to limit the maximum residential density within the CCRC to eight units per acre. The maximum residential density total shall include all independent living units, assisted care living units, and skilled nursing care units. The location and totals for the residential units specified in this section shall be provided on the Master Development Plan for the Property. File #492MSilver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering, November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2m9; Revised February 16, 2009; Revised February 19, 20(K); Revised March 2, Zf )9l Revised March 13, 2009; Revised March 30, 2069; R vises Ni vc :mhcr 4 2111 1 3. Where buffer areas are required and mature woodlands are in place, the Applicant will request approval of the use of these woodland features to satisfy the buffer requirement during the consideration of the Master Development Plan. 4. The Applicant ,proffers to provide initial access to the CCRC via Spinning Wherd National LLltheran Boulevard as described in Section D(2)(f) of the proffer statement, and further proffers to provide a maximum of two commercial entrances on SpinFining Mqieel Lane National Lutheran Boulevard to provide access to the CCRC. C. B2 Business General District Area 1. The Applicant hereby proffers to prohibit the following land uses currently allowed within the B2 District: > Truck Stops Golf" Driving Ranges 9 Outdoor Batting Cages Model Home Sales Self- Service Storage Facilities ➢ Adult Retail Establishments 2. The Applicant hereby proffers to prohibit individual full service commercial entrances to all allowed 132 District land uses that intersect Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50 West) and Poorhouse Road (Route 654), however, right -in or right -out only access to 132 District land uses that intersect Northwestern Pike shall be permitted if approved by VDDT and/or Frederick County. 3,. The Applicant hereby proffers to establish a green strip along the Property frontage adjacent to the Northwestern Pike corridor that is 50 feet in width_ Parking lots and access drives shall be prohibited within (lie 50 -foot green strip, except for access drives permitted as described in Section C(2) above. The entire Property frontage of the 50 -foot green strip shall be enhanced with street trees that are a minimum. of 2 -inch caliper at planting and spaced a maximum of 30 feet on center, ornamental shrubs that are a minimum three - gallon container at planting, as well as an asphalt bicycle and pedestrian facility that is 10 feet wide. The installation of the street trees, ornamental shrubs, and bicycle and pedestrian facility located within the 50 -foot green strip shall be required as specified in Section C(8) of the proffer statement.. 4. The Applicant hereby proffers to establish street tree plantings along both sides of Spinning Wheel Lan National Lrltheran Boulevard and Trade Drive throughout the limits of the B2 District property. All street trees shall be a. minimum of two -inch caliper at time of planting and spaced a maximum 40 feet on center. The street trees shall be located between the back of eur-b an Hle k4928,5/Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering. Novemher 25.2008; Revised January 6.2009; Revised January 27.2009; d Revised F chruary 16, 2409; Revised 1Thruaiy 19.2009; Revised March 2, 2009: Revisc l March 1 2449: Revised March 30, 20M Rcvlmld N, iecmher -. 2013 S id ewa lk s ,,,,& t h e asfl hi wa d raar�e 4.*ian faei!45 outside of t public Sidewalks 5_ The Applicant hereby proffers to establish a linear passive open space area in the general location identified on the proffered GDP. which will be enhanced with a 10 -foot asphalt trail system between Spinning Wheel L ane National Lutheran Boulevard and Northwestern Pike as specified in Section G(8) of the proffer statement. b. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide for inter - parcel connectors between all adjoining commercial and office land uses unless prohibited by topographic conditions. 7. The Applicant hereby proffers to include an additional row of evergreen trees within all required buffer and screening areas adjacent to land primarily used for residential purposes in the RA District in which accessory uses are proposed within the active portion of the buffer area. 8. The Applicant hereby proffers to design and construct, or cause for the construction of an asphalt bicycle and pedestrian facility that is ten -feet wide. This location of this facility is identified on the proffered GDP and will be located outside of public right -of -way limits. This facility will be developed as follows: The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the south side of the Phase I segment of S Wheel L ane National Lutheran Boulevard shall be developed during the construction of this road segment as specified in Section D(2)(f) of the proffer statement. > The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the south side of the Phase 2 segment of Spinnifig W heel L ane National Lutheran Boulevard shall be developed during the construction of this road segment as specified in Section D(3)(e) of the proffer statement. The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the passive open space area shall be developed on or before the completion of the commercial development permitted under the Phase ITransportation Program as specified in Section D(2)(a) of the proffer statement. The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the southern boundary of the Property identified as Area 1 on the GDP shall be developed during the construction of the Phase 1 segment of Spinning Wheel i a-i^ National Lutheran Boulevard as specified in Section D(2)(f) of the proffer statement. ? The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the southern boundary of the Property identified as Area 2 on the GDP shall be developed prior to the issuance of the occupancy permit issued for the first commercial building permit located in the land bay between Spifining Wheel i aRe National Lutheran Boulevard and Trader Drive. File #4929S/Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2468: Revised January 6, 2009, Revised January 27, 2009: 5 Revised February lei. 2009: Revised February 19. 20X19: Revised March 2, 2003: Revised March 13. 2403; Revised March 30, 2009: f4uNkrkl Mwupaher» '01 ,. The 10 -foot asphalt trail located along the southern boundary of the Property identified as Area 3 on the GDP shall be developed prior to the issuance of the occupancy permit issued for the first commercial building permit located in the land bay between Si'u °F rake Road Trader Drive and the eastern boundary of the Property_ 9. The Applicant hereby proffers to establish an Architectural Review Board (ARB) for the purpose of reviewing structural elevation's, site landscaping and signage for all commercial sites to ensure compatibility with the restrictive covenant documents for the B2 District property. The restrictive covenant documents shall be provided to Frederick County prior to the subdivision of land within the B2 District, or prior to the approval of any site development plan within the B2 District. The restrictive covenant documents shall include, but not be limited to, the following design elements: Building materials for all exterior walls and rooflines. Materials for all monument freestanding business signs. The materials for the base of all monument freestanding business signs shall be consistent throughout the B2 District, Screening of all loading areas from adjoining properties external to the B2 District. Screening of outdoor dumpster pad areas with building materials consistent with the primary structure. Common area maintenance agreements. D. Transportation Enhancements The Applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by Patton, Harris, Rust and Associates, dated November 25, 2008 for the 370.02± acre Property. The TIA identifies ifilpi'ovelnCnts to the regional transportation network to account for background undeveloped projects and the Applicant's proposal through four phases of development. The Applicant hereby proffers to design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to the regional transportation network as a phased development program that is described in this section of the proffer statement. Additionally, the phased development program . is identified in illustrative form on the proffered GDP. It is recognized that the phased transportation improvements proffered herein will be constructed as described in this section; however, the exact location and limits of these improvements will be determined by VDOT and/or Frederick County during the approval of engineering design plans, It is further recognized that the location of the regional transportation network improvements identified in illustrative form on the proffered GDP are general in nature and may be relocated to accommodate VDOT engineering design plan approval without the need for conditional zoning amendment to the GDP or the proffer statement. File #49285.rsilvcr Lake ld,C Rezoning Creenway Engineering November 25, 20{}8; Revised January b, 2049: Revised January 27, 2009: 6 Revised February ifs, 2009. Revised February 19, 2009, Revised March 2, 2009: Revised March 13. 2009; Revised March 30, 2009: Roisvd November 4. 2013 2. The Applicant hereby proffers the fallowing Phase 1 Transportation Program: a. The Applicant shall be entitled to develop the CCRC and a maximum of 180,000 square feet of commercial land use within Phase 1. However, the Applicant can deviate from this land use mix assuming the total trip generation for site plans within this phase of the transportation program (rased on the ITE 7`' Edition Trip Generation Report) do not exceed the total trip ,generation specified in the November 25, 2008 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Phase 1. It is recognized that the Applicant shall complete all Phase 1 transportation improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds I80,000 square feet of commercial land use or equivalent trip generation as noted above on the B2 portion of the Property. b. The Applicant shall dedicate all right -of -way necessary for the Phase 1 improvements that will occur on the Property to VDOT or Frederick County. The Applicant will attempt to design all off -site improvements within public right-of-way; however, if necessary it is recognized that VDOT and /or Frederick County will assist the Applicant with right -of- way necessary to implement proffered off -site transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to assume all costs associated with right -of- -way acquisition if assistance from VDOT and /or Frederick County is required. c. The Applicant shall execute, or cause for the execution of a traffic signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund new traffic signalization at the intersection of Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50) and Poor House Road (route 654). The traffic signalization agreement shall be executed within six months of final non- appealable rezoning approval, or prior to approval of the first Site Plan for the property, whichever occurs first. d. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the execution of a traffic signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund new traffic signalization with pedestrian actualization at the intersection of Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50) and the relocated SY..:,- iifl, W� °'' beffe National Lutheran Boulevard. The Applicant shall provide additional funding necessary to provide for pre-emption control for this traffic ;signal if the County requests the land for the new fire and rescue facility provided in Section E(1) of the proffer statement. In the event the County does not request the land for the new fire and rescue facility, the additional funding for traffic signal pre - emption control shall be made available for pre- emption control for the traffic signal at the intersection of Northwestern Pike and Poor House Road that is described in Section D(2) (c) of the proffer statement. The traffic signalization agreement shall be executed within one year of final non - appealable rezoning approval, or prior to approval of the first Site Plan for the property, whichever occurs File #4928S/Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenwq Lngineering November 25, 2((8; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009: 7 Revised February 16, 2009: Revised February 19.2009: Revised March 2, 2(1()9; Revised March 13.2({)9: Revised March 30, 2(1(9'_ Rcv s ,f Nowiniscra, 2013 first. The Applicant shall reserve the right to preempt this agreement by initiating a signal warrant study and signal design plans in accordance with VDDT standards for approval to install traffic signalization at this intersection. e. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to the median crossing including a westbound right turn lane and left turn lane and an eastbound left turn lane on Northwestern Pike at the intersection of the relocated S in ►arthi -ed T me National Lutheran Boule\ These improvements shall be completed ,prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for the land use utilizing Spinning Wheel Lane National Lutheran Boulevard for access to Northwestern Pike. f. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to S p in n in g 1,Wh,a1 16-m° National Lutheran Boulevard within the Property to provide for a road section that is constructed to a 40 mph geometric design standard and provides right -of -way for a future roundabout at the intersection with Sil f rake Read Trader Drive, and left turn lanes and right turn lanes at all internal collector street intersections and at commercial entrances as required by VDQT. Additionally, the Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of separate right and left turn lanes on Spinaing Wheel Lan National Lutheran Boulevard at the intersection of Northwestern Pike. Spinning Wheel T ane- National Lutheran Boulevard shall be developed as a four -lane divided urban road section between Northwestern Pike and the future roundabout, and as a two -lane road section between the future roundabout and the limits of Phase 1 with dedicated right -of -way to Frederick County to allow for a four -lane urban road section. The construction of the two- large road section shall include a raised median section necessary to transition from the roundabout into the urban road section design. These improvements shall be completed prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for the land use utilizing Spinning W t °fl° National Lutheran Boulevard for access to Northwestern Pike. Furthermore, the Applicant agrees to design and construct, or cause for the construction of the four -lane urban section between the future roundabout and the limits of Phase t if this improvement is warranted based on future traffic counts as described in Section D(b ). g. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of modifications to, or the elimination of the median crossing on Northwestern Pike identified as Median Crossing A on the proffered GDP. VDDT shall determine the requirements for modification, or elimination and shall advise the Applicant in writing of the requirements associated with this improvement. The Applicant shall complete these improvements File #4928S/Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineenng November 25, 21.`08; Revised January b, 2009; Revised January 27, 2409; 8 Revised February 16. 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13.2.009: Revised March 30. 2009; kk vistd Nnvcnthet 1, 201'; 1n conjunction with construction activities associated with Lane National Lutheran Boulevard as described in Section 1)(2)(f) of the proffer statement. h. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to the southbound off ramp at the Route 37 interchange with Northwestern Pike to provide for a free flow right turn lane onto Northwestern Pike. The Applicant shall complete the Route 37 interchange improvements described in this section prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 180.000 square feet of commercial land use or equivalent trip generations as described in Section D(2)(a) of the proffer statement can the B2 portion of the Property, i. In the event that VDOT and Frederick County determine that a monetary contribution for regional transportation improvements to the Route 37 corridor between the Northwestern Pike interchange and the North Frederick Pike interchange is desired, the Applicant agrees to provide a monetary contribution in lieu of the improvement described in Section 2(h), This monetary contribution shall be equivalent to the amount associated with the improvement described in that section based upon an engineering estimate agreed upon by VDQT, Frederick County and the Applicant that will be prepared on or before the build out of the Phase 1 transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to provide this monetary contribution to Frederick County within 30 days of written request by the County, and further agrees to allow for this monetary contribution to be utilized as matching funds by Frederick County for qualifying transportation improvements programs or grants. 3. The Applicant hereby proffers the following Phase 2 Transportation Program: a. The Applicant shall be entitled to develop the CCRC and a maximum of 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use within Phase 2 that is a cumulative total of Phase 1 — Phase 2. However, the Applicant can deviate from this land use mix assuming the total trip generation for site plans within this phase of the transportation program (based on the fTE 7` Edition Trip Generation Report) do not exceed the total trip generation specified in the November 25, 2008 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Phase 2. It is recognized that the Applicant shall complete all Phase 2 transportation improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as noted above on the B2 portion of the Property. File #4928VSilver Lake LLC Rezoning Crreenway Engineering November 25, 2008. Revised January 6, 2009, Revised January 27.2009'. 9 Devised February lb, 2009: Revised February 19, 2009. Revised March 2, 20WY Devised March 13. 2009: Revised March 30. 2(H)9: Kovi4t November 4, 'iif b. The Applicant shall dedicate all right-of-way necessary for the Phase 2 improvements that will occur on the Property to VDOT or Frederick County. The Applicant will attempt to design all off -site improvements within public right -of -way; however, if necessary it is recognized that VDOT and /or Frederick County will assist the Applicant with right-of- way necessary to implement proffered off site transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to assume aff costs associated with right -of -way acquisition if assistance from VDOT and/or Frederick County is required. c. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the execution of a traffic signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund new traffic signalization with pedestrian actualization at the intersection of Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50) and Silver- r ake Read Trader Drive.. The traffic signalization agreement shall be executed prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for the land use utilizing Sil r ike Dear/ Tender Drive for access to Northwestern Pike. Applic shal for this tfaffie b r faeility pr Seetien B(I) of the pr-effer- statement, in 64e event the Geun�y does fiet request 04e lmd f\9f the new fife afid Fesetw faeility be made available t4- pfe emptieH eent" for the tFaffie signal at the The Applicant shall reserve the right to preempt this agreement by initiating a signal warrant study and signal design plans in accordance with VDOT standards for approval to install traffic signalization at this intersection. d. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to Silye.. r (e Re Trader Drive to include a two -lane urban road section with a raised median to the first available commercial entrance that is constructed to a 40 mph geometric design standard and provides for the construction of the roundabout at the intersection with National Lutheran Boulevard, and left turn lanes and right turn lanes at all commercial entrances as required by VDOT. Additionally, the Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of a median crossing including a westbound right turn lane and left turn lane and an eastbound left turn lane on Northwestern Pike at the intersection of SilyeF Lake Read Trader Drive, These improvements shall be completed prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,400 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(3)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property, with the exception of the median crossing and turn lane improvements on Northwestern Pike which shall be completed with the Silver Lake Real File #4928S /Silver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2008: devised January 6.2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 10 Revised February 16, 2(7)9; ,Revised February 19, 2(X)9; Revised March 2, 2009: Reviser) March 13. 2009; devisee! March 30, 20()9, 1v'v isrd Novernher .t 20 1 e Trader Drive intersection improvements on Northwestern Pike. Additionally, the Applicant shall dedicate right -of -way to Frederick County to allow for a four -lane urban road section for I—AkEe Read Trader give, and further agrees to design and construct, or cause for the construction of the four -lane urban road section if this improvement is warranted based on future traffic counts as described in Section D(6). e, The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to Spifwing Wheel bafi National Lutheran Boulevard to provide for a two -lane urban road section that is constructed to a 40 mph geometric design standard and provides for left turn lanes and right turn lanes at all internal collector street intersections and at commercial entrances as requu•ed by VDOT, which continues from the tcrminus of Spinning W heel L National Lutheran Boulevard constructed in Phase l to a connection at the intersection of Retail Boulevard. The Applicant shall complete these improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D (3)(a) of the proffer statement on the B7 portion of the Property. Additionally, the Applicant shall dedicate right -of -way to Frederick County to allow for a four -lane urban road section for Spinning Vkeel Lane National Lutheran Boulev wd and further agrees to design and construct, or cause for the construction of the four -lane urban section if this improvement is warranted based on future traffic counts as described in Section D(6). f. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of modifications to, or the elimination of the median crossings on Northwestern Pike identified as Median Crossing B and Median Crossing C on the proffered GDP. VDOT shall determine the requirements for modification, or elimination and shall advise the Applicant in writing of the requirements associated with this improvement. The Applicant shall complete these improvements in conjunction with construction activities associated with Silvef: Lake Read Trader Drive as described in Section D(3)(d) of the proffer statement. g. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to the northbound off ramp at the Route 37 interchange with Northwestern Pike to provide for a second right turn. The Applicant shall complete the Route 37 interchange improvements described in this section prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,404 square feet of commercial land use and 105,004 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(3)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. File #4928S/Silver lake LLC Rezoning Grecnwoy Lngincenng November 25, 2008; Revised January 6,2(X)9 revised January 27, 2OW; 1 l Revised February 16, 2 004: Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009. . Revised March 13.2009; Revised March 30. 2009. RL!vr_: dl 1vu%Lulhc-r a 201 t h. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements at the Route 37 interchange with Northwestern Pike to provide for a third westbound thru lane on Northwestern Pike under the Route 37 bridge structure continuing east to the transition for the Route 37 northbound on- ramp, to include the relocation of the existing Route 37 northbound on -ramp. The Applicant shall complete the Route 37 interchange improvements described in this section prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 350,000 square feet of commercial land use and 105,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(3)(a) of the proffer statement on the 132 portion of the Property. In the event that VDOT and Frederick County determine that a monetary contribution for regional transportation improvements to the Route 37 corridor between the Northwestern Pike interchange and the North Frederick Pike interchange is desired, the Applicant agrees to provide a. monetary contribution in lieu of the improvements described in Section 3(g) and 3(h), This monetary contribution shall be equivalent to the amount associated with the improvement described in those sections based upon an engineering estimate agreed upon by VDQT, Frederick County and the Applicant that will be prepared on or before the build out of the Phase 2 transportation improvements_ The Applicant agrees to provide this monetary contribution to Frederick County within 30 days of written request by the County, and further agrees to allow for this monetary contribution to be utilized as matching funds by Frederick County for qualifying transportation improvements programs or grants. fn the event that regional transportation improvements to the Route 37 corridor between the Northwestern Pike interchange are constructed prior to the completion of the Phase 2 Transportation Program, the Applicant agrees to provide a monetary contribution equivalent to the amount associated with the improvement described in this section to be utilized unconditionally by Frederick County for other transportation improvements. This monetary contribution shall be provided to Frederick County within 60 days of written request by the County. 4. The Applicant hereby proffers the fallowing Phase 3 Transportation Program: a. The Applicant shall be entitled to develop the CCRC and a maximum of 490,000 square feet of commercial land use and 350,000 square feet of office land use within Phase 3 that is a cumulative total of Phase 1 — Phase I However, the Applicant can deviate from this land use mix assuming the total trip generation for site plans within this phase of the transportation program (based on the ITE 7` Edition Trip Generation Report) do not exceed the total trip generation specified in the November fik #4928S/Silver Lake I_LC Rezoning Greenway L•ugineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 12 Revised February 16. 2009; Revised February 19, 2009 - . Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 2.3.2009: Revised March 30.2009: Re , , i ed NiJVCTnnera 21111 25, 2005 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Phase 3. It is recognized that the Applicant shall complete all Phase 3 transportation improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 490,000 square feet of commercial land use and 350,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as noted above on the B2 portion of the Property. b. The Applicant shall dedicate all right-of-way necessary for the Phase 3 improvements that will occur on the Property to VDOT or Frederick County. The Applicant will attempt to design all off-site improvements within public right -of -way; however, if necessary it is recognized that VDOT and/or Frederick County will assist the Applicant with right-of- way necessary to implement proffered off -site transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to assume all costs associated with right -of -way acquisition if assistance from VDOT and/or Frederick County is required. c. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to c,,iffning W heal L ane Na tional Lutheran Boulevard to provide for a second right turn lane on g fin Whee i %ge !National Lutheran BoulewLrd at the intersection of Northwestern Pike. These improvements shall be completed prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 490,000 square feet of commercial land use and 350,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(4)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. d. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of a two -lane urban road that is constructed to a 40 mph geometric design standard and provides for roundabout design at the intersection with Spinning lxrbeel L ane /National Luthcran Boulevard, and left turn lanes and right turn lanes at all commercial entrances as required by VDOT, which will provide for a connection between Spinning Wheel Laime \g at ional Lutherans Boulevard and Poor House Road (Route 654). The Applicant will coordinate with the owner of tax parcel 52- ((A)) -47 to obtain right- of-way for this improvement as a first option for development of the two -lane urban road connection. In the event that the first option cannot be achieved, the Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of the two -lane urban road connection between gpiiifliiig EI!l,a /National Lutheran Boulevard and Poor House Road on the Property. The general location of the two -lane road connection associated with both Captions will be provided on the proffered GDP; however, it is recognized that this location may shift without the need for conditional rezoning approval. The Applicant shall complete this improvement prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 490,000 square feet of commercial land use and 370,400 square feet of office land use or File #49285 ?silver Cake L LC Rezoning Greenway Engineering November 25, 2(308; Revised .January 6, 2009; Reviled January 27. 2009 13 Revised February 16. 211(14: Revised February 19, 2009: Revised March 2, 2009; Revi.st -d March 13, 21109: Revised March 30, 2009: R- :t intd Novcmher RI, - 1 0]1 equivalent trip generation as described in Section 1)(4)(a) of the proffer statement on the B2 portion of the Property. 5. The Applicant hereby proffers the following Phase 4 Transportation Program. a. The Applicant shall be entitled to develop the CCRC and a maximum of 583,050 square feet of commercial land use and 494,600 square feet of office land use. within Phase 4 that is a cumulative total of Phase I — Phase 4. However, the Applicant can deviate from this land use mix assuming the total trip generation for site plans within this phase of the transportation program (based on the ITE 7' Edition Trip Generation Report) do not exceed the total trip generation specified in the November 25, 2008 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Phase 4. It is recognized that the Applicant shall complete all Phase 4 transportation improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 530,000 square feet of commercial land use and 440,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as noted above on the B2 portion of the Property. In the event that the Applicant would desire to develop commercial or office land uses that exceed the maximum square feet or total trip generation specified in this phase of the transportation program, a new traffic impact analysis report shall be prepared with each site plan to determine any additional transportation improvements required to mitigate the impacts created solely by that project, which will be implemented as a condition of site plan approval, b. The Applicant shall dedicate all right -of -way necessary for the Phase 4 improvements that will occur on the Property to VDQT or Frederick County, The Applicant will attempt to design all off -site improvements within public right -of -way, however, if necessary it is recognized that VDOT and/or Frederick County will assist the Applicant with right -of- way necessary to implement proffered off-site transportation improvements. The Applicant agrees to assume all costs associated with right - of-way acquisition if assistance from VDDT and/or Frederick County is required. c. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to Silver- Lake Read Trader Drive to provide for a second left turn lane on Silve r ••l,,e Read Trader Drive at the intersection of Northwestern Pike, These improvements shall be completed prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 530,000 square feet of commercial land use and 440,040 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section 1)(5)(a) of the proffer statement on the 132 portion of the Property. File #49288fsilver Lake LLC Rezoning Cireenway Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27, 2009; 14 Revised February 16.. 2009; Revised February 19, 2009; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13, 2009: Revised March 30, 2009; Revised November 4, 20 3 d. The Applicant shall design and construct, or cause for the construction of improvements to provide for a third westbound thru lane on Northwestern Pike from the eastern boundary of the Property to Spinfiing Wheel L ane National Lutheran Boulevard. Additionally, the Applicant shall be responsible for the relocation, construction, and right-of-way dedication (if necessary) of the existing right turn lanes on Northwestern Pike at the Spinning Wheel Lane National Lutheran Boulevard and Silye.. b ake Rea ] Trader Drive intersections. The Applicant shall complete these improvements prior to the approval of any Site Plan that exceeds 530,000 square feet of commercial land use and 440,000 square feet of office land use or equivalent trip generation as described in Section D(5 of the proffer statement on the 132 portion of the Property. 6. The Applicant hereby proffers to conduct annual traffic counts that will be provided to VDOT and Frederick County to determine if the 8,000 ADT volume is achieved to require the expansion of National Lutheran Boulevard and Silver r ake Trader Drive to four -lane urban road sections, as provided for in Sections 1)(2)(f), 1)(3)(d), and D(3)(e) of the proffer statement. The annual traffic counts shall begin in the first calendar year that the Phase 2 transportation improvements are completed and shall continue until the warrants are met for widening both street systems. VDOT and Frederick County may allow for annual traffic counts to be delayed in calendar years in which there is no development activity on the Property, When required, traffic counts will be conducted at the SpinniHg Wheel i me National Lutheran Boulevard and Silve� hake Read Trader Drive intersections with Northwestern Pike, on min Wheel ae National Lutheran Boulevard at the eastern boundary of the Property, and on the two -lane road connector between Spipming Wheel Lane National Lutheran Boulevard and Poor House Road at the western boundary of the Property. If warrants are met based on the annual traffic counts, the Applicant shall prepare and submit construction plans for approval by VDOT and 'Frederick County within six months of written notice that warrants are met. The Applicant shall commence construction of these improvements within six months of final plan approval.. E. Fire and Rescue Enhancements The Applicant hereby proffers to provide, or cause for the provision of land to Frederick County for the development of a new fire and rescue station and support facilities within five yeafs ffem ��e date ef fina! non appealable on or before April 21, 2014, The Applicant shall dedicate a site fronting on Silvef mad Corporate Place that is located near the intersection of Pike National Lutheran Bouie� ard, which is a minimum of three acres and a maximum of four acres in size, with the final size of this site being determined upon approval of the Site Plan for the new fire and rescue station facility. The Applicant shall prepare and provide Frederick County with the File #4928SJSiIver Lake LLC Revoning Greenway Engineering November 25.2008: Revised January 6, 2009; Revised January 27.2009: I5 Revisdd February 16, 2009: Revised February 19, 2[109; Revised March 2, 2009; Revised March 13. 2009. Revised March 30.. 2049, Rey iswai November 4. ?11 dedication plat for this site and necessary right -of -way along Corporate Place nea appealable rezening approval on or he ["ore April 21, 2014 provided that a Site Plan has been approved for the new fire and rescue station. Additionally, if Frederick County does not commence construction of a new fire and rescue station within one year following the dedication of the site, this land shall be conveyed back to the Applicant to allow for further economic development. In the event Frederick County elects not to develop this site as a new fire and rescue station, the Applicant shall provide a monetary contribution to Frederick County in the amount of $100,040.00 for the development of a new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station at another location.. 2. The Applicant hereby proffers to provide, or cause for the provision of a monctary contribution to Frederick County in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for the development of a new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station. This monetary proffer .is intended to mitigate impacts to fire and rescue services associated with [lie development of the CCRC on the MS District portion of the Property. The $1,000,000.00 monetary contribution shall be provided to Frederick County within f;ye rs ffem the date of final nafl moval appealable . - " on or before April 21, 2014 to assist with the development of the new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station. However, the date for the $1,000,000.00 monetary contribution payment may be extended if a Site Plan for a new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station has not been approved ;.A. ithi-��e ye;�em the dame able a� on or before April 21, 2014. If the Iatter occurs, the $1,000,400.00 monetary contribution shall be provided to Frederick County within 30 days of the date of final Site Plan approval for the new fire and rescue station or for the expansion of an existing fire and rescue station. 3. The Applicant hereby proffers to design and construct, or cause for the construction of all necessary road improvements at the Nei4hwestefn Pike } ffs +sue w ith Siye Re d Sil La i- ix c cr a c� G�01T�F' P l r k 71T1 71TP L- TKV'4Tq 'R:FIC[ 'O'I�O7Tl�Gr °c rev�a to provide access to the new fire and rescue station, as well as all utilities necessary for the new fire and rescue station located on the Property. These infrastructure improvements shall be provided by the Applicant in advance of the Phase 1 or Phase 2 transportation program improvements to facilitate the construction of the new fire . and rescue station should this occur in advance of the commercial development within these transportation phases. The Applicant shall work with Frederick County, upon notice by the County, to ensure that the design, bonding and construction of these infrastructure improvements is coordinated during the preparation of the Site Plan for the new fire and rescue station on the Property. File #492WSilver Lake LLC Rezoning Greenwag Engineering November 25, 2008; Revised January b, 2009: € wised Januay 27.2004; 16 Revised February 16. 2009. Revised February 19.24i1+3: Revised March 2, 2009. Revised March 13, 20i19; Revised March 30,2009-, Re%ivtid Novt!(nt1ty d, 2111 ; F. SigLiatures The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, execrators, administrators, assigns and successors in the interest of the Applicants and owners. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants this rezoning and accepts the conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully Submitted: M. Commonwealth of 'Virginia, City /County of To Wit: Date. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20 by Notary Public My Commission Expires File #4928SNIva Cake LLC Rezoning Page 1 of 2 Evan Wyatt From: Rod Williams [rwillia @fcva.us] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 3:27 PM To: Evan Wyatt Cc: Eric Lawrence; Mike Ruddy Subject: RE: Silver Lake Proffer Amendment Evan, I have reviewed your update and it looks good. U.. From: Evan Wyatt [mailto:ewyatt @greenwayeng.com] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 2:32 PM To: Rod Williams Cc: Eric Lawrence; Mike Ruddy; Richie Wilkins Subject: RE: Silver Lake Proffer Amendment Hi Rod, I received comments from Planning and Public Works at the end of last week which were positive; therefore, I wanted to update the proffers to address your comments so I can get the proffer statement ready for Richie Wilkins' signature. Please review the attached document, which uses blue line revisions to address the comments below and advise me if this is acceptable. To date, we haven't received comments from the Fire Marshal or the Round Hill Fire Chief; however, I'm not anticipating that they will have any comments that will require further revisions to the proffer statement. Please contact me if you would like to discuss this information further. Thank you, Evan Click in this box to return to the page you were previously viewing From: Rod Williams [ mailto:rwillia(a)fcva.us ] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:57 AM To: Evan Wyatt Cc: Eric Lawrence; Mike Ruddy Subject: Silver Lake Proffer Amendment Dear Evan, I am in receipt of the draft revised proffer statement dated October 24, 2013 (the "Revised Proffer Statement "), for the Silver Lake development, consisting of tax parcel numbers 52 -A -C, 52 -A -50, 52- A -50A, 52 -A -52, and 52 -A -63 (the "Property "). Subject to the following comments, the Revised Proffer Statement would be in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement: • The 2009 rezoning of the Property included tax parcel number 52 -A -50, as does the Revised Proffer Statement, which parcel is now owned by The Village at Orchard Ridge, Inc. The Revised Proffer Statement does not appear, however, to include a signature on behalf of The Village at Orchard Ridge, Inc. The Revised Proffer Statement would either need to include a signature on behalf of The Village at Orchard Ridge, Inc. or exclude tax parcel number 52 -A -50 from its scope. The latter option might conceivably be possible, as the proposed revisions do not appear to affect the obligations of tax parcel number 52 -A -50, but the former option would be preferable, to prevent any possible ambiguities. • One technical item that does involve tax parcel number 52 -A -50 concerns Proffer B1. Proffer B1 cites to Section 165- 97(B)(7) of the Frederick County 11/7/2013 Page 2 of 2 Code. The County recodified Chapter 165 of the Code on August 12, 2009, with the result being that Section 165- 97(B)(7) is now Section 165- 504.02(B)(7). The substantive provisions of that code section are unchanged. It would be appropriate to update the reference in Proffer B1. • Proffers E1 and E2, regarding provision of land and a monetary contribution for fire and rescue enhancements, refer to those proffer obligations as being in force for "five years from the date of final non - appealable rezoning approval'. The introductory language of the Revised Proffer Statement, however, defines the Revised Proffer Statement as encompassing "conditional zoning amendments to Rezoning Application #01 -09 ". While my understanding is that the County intends to move promptly on a Round Hill Fire relocation project, the language of the Revised Proffer Statement, as written, might give the County only limited time to invoke these provisions of the Revised Proffer Statement. I wonder perhaps if it might be best to change the timing references in Proffers to E1 and E2 to a date certain. I have not reviewed the substance of the revisions as to whether the revised proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as it is my understanding that review will be done by staff and the Planning Commission. Sincerely yours, Roderick B. Williams County Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (540) 722 -8383 Facsimile: (540) 667 -0370 E -mail: rwillia@fcva.us Please note new e -mail address: rwillia@fcva.us 11/7/2013 Page 1 of 1 Evan Wyatt From: Mike Ruddy [mruddy @fcva.us] Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 2:14 PM To: Evan Wyatt Cc: Eric Lawrence; Rod Williams Subject: Silver Lake, LLC Conditional Zoning Amendment Good Afternoon Evan. Planning Staff has reviewed the Silver Lake, LLC Conditional Zoning Amendment you submitted on October 25, 2013. It appears as though the proposed changes to the application are consistent with the discussions held prior to submission of this draft application. The revised proffer statement, dated October 24, 2013, achieves the intended goal of relocating the proffered fire and rescue station and support facilities. Subject to those comments provided by the County Attorney regarding the proffer statement, including the timing of the fire and rescue enhancements, and those of the other reviewing agencies, this application would be ready to submit for Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors review. We look forward to receiving the application. Thanks. Mike. Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665 -5651 (540) 665 -6395 fax. mruddy @co.frederick.va.us 11/4/2013 REZONING APPLICATION FORM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA., To be completed by Planning Staff.- Fee Amount Paid $ Zoning Amendment Number 1,3 Date Received PC Hearing Date i) i) BOS Hearing Date The following information shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: Greenway Engineering, Inc. Telephone: (540) 662 -4185 Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, VA 22602 2. Property Owner (if different than above): Name: Silver Lake, LLC Telephone: (540) 662 -7215 Address: 13 South Loudoun Street Winchester, VA 22601 3. Contact person if other than above: Name: Evan Wyatt Telephone: ( 540 ) 662-4 4. Property Information: a. Property Identification Number(s): 52 -A -C, 52 -A -50, 52- A -50A, 52 -A -52, and 52 -A -63 b. Total acreage to be rezoned: N/A - Conditional Zoning Amendment c. Total acreage of the parcel(s) to be rezoned (if the entirety of the parcel(s) is not being rezoned): N/A - Conditional Zoning Amendm d. Current zoning designation(s) and acreage(s) in each designation: B -2 District 238.96 +/- acres; MS District 131,06 +/- acres e. Proposed zoning designation(s) and acreage(s) in each designation: B -2 District 238.96 +/- acres; MS District 131.06 +/- acres f. Magisterial District(s): Gainesb District 12 5. Checklist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map _ _ Agency Comments Plat _ _ Fees _ Deed to property _ _ Impact Analysis Statement Verification of taxes paid _ �/ _ Proffer Statement Plat depicting exact meets and bounds for the proposed zoning district Digital copies (pdf's) of all submitted documents, maps and exhibits 6. The Code of VirLinia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: N/A - C Zoning Amend 7. Adjoining Property: PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING See Att Informat 8. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road names and route numbers): North side of Northwestern Pike (U.S. Route 50 West); West of Retail Boulevard; and east of Poor House Road (Route 654). 13 9. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Number of Units Proposed Single Family homes: Townhome: Multi - Family: Non - Residential Lots: Mobile Home: Hotel Rooms: Square Footage of Proposed Uses Office: Service Station: Retail: Manufacturing: Restaurant: Warehouse: Commercial: Other: 10. Signature: I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right -of -way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s). . r Owner(s): Date: t z4 l3 Date: Date: Date: 14 No,e,oge� le4uawuonnu3 ia,ema4sery� 8 , alert ssnuaios eluawuo,inu3 . xauueid . sorta�ng . saauibu3 . dVW S3IlL13dM:ld ONINIOf ad ww fiva,(eenu aa,8mxvn y �� azss- usarsx•a saiPZasorsa�Qudalal rew�be zoszze,wa a�e�mHea�Mn�s� 07 'DAVE bJDA�IS JNIa33NIJN3 AVMN33VO �r Fl O O LID Q load OOL = 4 -ul l 3IVOS AS 03NOIS30 S8Z64 :OI10]rOad £lOZ 31H0 VI NI OH A ' .1Nno0 A01a303ad 101b1SI0IVIb31SIOVN Ob08S3NIVO dVW Slit OdObd JNINIOf OV 311'3AVI H3AIIS 7V3WVlol Li F J . a Q O O M Q f0 N Q O LID N O u7 C l N O O v O r O O In Cl) O G O a o d 3 J o :s u .E d a� 3 El U Q LID bA C v v 0 a =o a N O v O u O Ll V J U Y v d N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N � N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N rl N �--I N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N l0 N a aaaaaaa a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a> a a a a a a a a a a a a w r w r w r w r w r w r w r w r z w r w r w r w r w r w r w r w r w r w r w r w r w r a >> a w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w o w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w z w w w w w w w w w w w w c S S S S S S S S Z f0 U U z U z U z U z U z U z U z S U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z z z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z w U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z U z ,.z a Y Z Y Z Y Z Y Z Y Z Y Z Y Z Y Z a Y Z r " r ° � ° (D ° °° r U w° r °° 0 0 0 0 ° in J J ° �n � � in in in in in in in in in in in w p 0 m > Q m m m m m m m °' _— O S r S r S r S r S r S r S r S Z S r S S z .� m N m O S M °� O S O S S r O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S w a Q N N N N N N N N z 0 z 0 0 a m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m m p w a w a m a •--I ti m O N O O S O O x O O x 0 0 0 0 0 a w __ Q a x O m x O m x ° m x ° m x ° m x ° m x O m x °m G G a o m m a a o� x ° m x ° m o x °m o o Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Q o .-I 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 O O O O O O N C �(1 �(1 l0 .-I l0 I� c O O r O n n O I� O N n M m O O c-I N T r r = K r w U a ° J J w � Z Z Y Q z a w S u S u r � z a U U S U S U z = w a U v v° a K 0 z m a Z Z a a Z a z a r r Z Z m a a u CO v o G J r Q ? z d 0 d 0 z 0 Q ° w m m m w Q - H Z w Q w in 0 w S N o r m : U U z U z U" z U z (7 m S m ° w Z w a z m w ° n Q " m a w m O U Z z o > ° a a 3 0 0 O r a O a o w z a w J a w m a a a m J a J J O U 3 > r J z v J= °} o Q S U S U S U S U S U S U w 0 0 U z w ?? a z S w J w } }° a w a w U d a U d U a z J a a O a a w U a w O O O O O O w w w o o S a o o z U w w = o == o g U a z =^ U o g S °" a= w w r Q } 0 " w = u r w w m w Y Z ° o z J o r r a °?? K a a a a w z a g z N U m a Z - S r S r S r S r S r S r d O d O J° V1 m r r w z V1 z V z Z m w w w = t�/l t�/1 o> a S v S K a ° z � 0 � m " `� ° o" o a 'a 'a z a" z a z a�° a o' a o a w o o o u LL LL LL LL LL LL 3 o o m F r r v Y r r U m m S> S S r r U z m U° m v Z Q I� C OJ w Ol m 0 - Ol m O a m .a-I m . rl m .a-I Q N a N M a N N T Ol Ol U l0 l0 l0 n M M O O x N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N v J Z �� c-I N N N N N N N N N N O N N M :T +H- bA C v v 0 a =o a N O v O u O Ll V J U Y v Iaad 000' l = 4aul l 3lVOS /�o4e4oge� Ie4uawuwi,nu3 �a4eonalse� g �a4eM . s61JU loSIMUaWUalnu3 • slauuew • e AS ns • s aulbug • dVA NOUVOM 3MO A9 O3NOISDO S8Z64 :OI iODMO Id EIOZ bZ OI :DiVO wp 1N3WaNIAVONINOZ�VNOWGNOO VINl9MA:11Nnoo)iOR1303213 Rnu_ _ao q e � 1ON-LSIO 1VR131SIOVIN O2JOMNIVO EDMS aue1111H 07 `D>Wb b3n�IS dVW NOUVOOl JN1833NIJN3 AVMN33a9 1N31NON31NVONINOZIVNOIAGNOO 011 `3NVl 213n1IS �f L k , e , ' M — s � -0 0 � 4 . 78 �,b �i 4 1� - iI �h I�IlIIil�� wl'�f ` =Wr 0 W L L d z O ��. o O MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #03 -13 The Townes at Tasker Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: December 5, 2013 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner Reviewed Planning Commission: 11/06/13 Board of Supervisors: 11/13/13 Planning Commission (revised MDP): 12/04/13 Board of Supervisors (revised MDP): 12/11/13 PROPOSAL: To develop 10.25 acres of land zoned RA (Rural Areas) District with a total of 81 single family attached (townhouse) units. This receiving property will be utilizing transferred development rights as permitted by the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) ordinance to develop with RP (Residential Performance) District standards. The subject receiving parcel will be utilizing 54 transferred development rights from six parcels (72 -A -30, 72 -A -34, 72- A -29C, 21 -A -7A, 31 -A -34 and 34- A -34B) that are located in the County's sending area. Utilizing the TDR conversation rate for single family attached dwelling units the development has 81 units (54 x 1.5 = 81). This is the first property to develop under the adopted TDR ordinance. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Shawnee LOCATION: The subject property is located on the east side of Route 642, (Tasker Road) and north of Route 846, (Rutherford Lane) approximately 0.7 miles south of the I -81 Interchange 310. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 12/11/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The Master Development Plan for The Townes at Tasker depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the requirements of Article III, Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program and Article VIII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning Ordinance. Following the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors review of the MDP, staff will proceed with the severing and application process for the TDR rights from the sending property to the receiving property and proceed with approval of the MDP. All of the issues brought forth by the Board of Supervisors should be appropriately addressed by the applicant. It appears that the application meets all requirements. Following presentation of the application to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and the incorporation of your comments, staff is prepared to move forward with the TDR transfer and approve the MDP. MDP #03 -13, The Townes at Tasker December 5, 2013 Page 2 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist in the review of this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. LOCATION: The subject property is located on the east side of Route 642, (Tasker Road) and north of Route 846, (Rutherford Lane) approximately 0.7 miles south of the I -81 Interchange 310. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER 75 -A -86 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) using RP (Residential Performance) District development standards through the use of the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Ordinance. Use: Vacant ZONING & PRESENT USE OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES: North: B2 (Business General) Use: Self Storage Facility South: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential & Vacant East: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential & Church West: Interstate I -81 Use: Interstate PROPOSAL: To develop 10.25 acres of land zoned RA (Rural Areas) District with a total of 81 single family attached (townhouse) units. This receiving property will be utilizing transferred development rights as permitted by the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) ordinance to develop with RP (Residential Performance) District standards. The subject receiving parcel will be utilizing 54 transferred development rights from six parcels (72 -A -30, 72 -A -34, 72- A -29C, 21 -A -7A, 31 -A -34 and 34- A -34B) that are located in the County's sending area. Utilizing the TDR conversation rate for single family attached dwelling units the development has 81 units (54 x 1.5 = 81). This is the first property to develop under the adopted TDR ordinance. MDP #03 -13, The Townes at Tasker December 5, 2013 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation The Master Development Plan for this property appears to have a significant measurable impact on Route 642, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. Before making any final comments, this office will require a complete set of site plans, drainage calculations and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right -of -way needs, including right -of -way dedications, traffic signalization, roadway improvements and drainage. Prior to construction on the State's right -of -way the developer will need to apply to this office for issuance of appropriate permits to cover said work. Frederick County Fire & Rescue: Plan approval recommended. Frederick County Fire Marshal Plan approved Frederick County Public Works All of our previous comments have been addressed. Frederick County Inspections Department: No comments at this time. Comments will be made at site plan and subdivision plan submittal. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: Approved Frederick County Parks and Recreation: Plan appears to meet the recreation unit and open space ordinance. It may be helpful to make sure the three recreation units will fit the site. Recreation units are now $32,500.00 each. Virginia Department of Health Comment: Health Department has no objections so long as public sewer and water are utilized. Frederick County Public Schools: The applicant has worked with Frederick County Public Schools to provide adequate turning area for a bus as well as a shelter for students. Planning & Zoning: A) Master Development Plan Requirement A master development plan is required prior to development of this property. Before a master development plan can be approved, it must be reviewed by the Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors and all relevant review agencies. Approval may only be granted if the master development plan conforms to all requirements of the Frederick County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The purpose of the master development plan is to promote orderly and planned development of property within Frederick County that suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious with adjoining property and is in the best interest of the general public. Also, pursuant to Article III, Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program (§165-303.02. Development Approval Procedures.), a request to utilize transferred development rights on an MDP #03 -13, The Townes at Tasker December 5, 2013 Page 4 eligible receiving property must be in the form of a Master Development Plan and a Subdivision Design Plan submitted to the Department of Planning and Development in accordance with the Zoning and Subdivision regulations contained in Chapters 165 and 144 of the County Code. B) Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Stephens City, VA Quadrangle) identifies the subject property as being zoned R -I (Residential Limited). The parcel was re- mapped from R -1 to A -2 (Agricultural General) pursuant to the County's comprehensive downzoning initiative (Zoning Amendment Petition #011 -80), which was adopted on October 8, 1980. The County's agricultural zoning districts were subsequently combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re- mapping of the subject property and all other A -I and A -2 zoned land to the RA District. C) Site Suitability & Project Scope Comprehensive Policy Plan: The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1 -1] Land Use Compatibility: The parcel comprising this MDP application is located within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. The Townes at Tasker Development is proposed to develop with a density of 7.9 units per acre, which is consistent with the maximum RP density permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan shows this property with a residential land use designation. The residential designation was approved by the Board of Supervisors on January 25, 2013, (CPPA request #01 -11, institutional designation to residential). Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program: The TDR program allows properties designated as receiving properties to be developed to RP standards. Therefore, the program allows RA -Zoned receiving properties that are proposing townhouses to develop with a maximum density of 10 units per acre. The MDP depicts the road network, entrances, buffers, sidewalks and recreational amenities. Site Access and Transportation: The Townes at Tasker is proposed to be accessed via one full entrance on Tasker Road. It should be noted that in 2011 -2012 during the Comprehensive Plan change for this parcel, it was discussed that the entrance for this development should be via Rutherford Lane. The applicant, however, opted for a full intersection on Tasker Road instead. The MDP also depicts the MDP #03 -13, The Townes at Tasker December 5, 2013 Page 5 required sidewalk along Tasker Road. Recreational Amenities: The MDP proposes a tot lot and picnic shelter as the recreational amenities for the 49 townhouse units. PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION SUMMARY OF THE 11/06/13 MEETING Commission members had a number of safety concerns with the only entrance to the development being on Tasker Road. Their concerns were based on a number of issues, including the vertical curve coming down the hill towards the entrance and whether adequate site distances could be achieved; vehicles coming down the hill typically exceed the posted 45mph; considering the amount of trips leaving the development, service degradation was expected to occur and a vehicular back -up from the Route 37 signal was expected to extend down to the proposed entrance. Staff agreed with the points made and noted the applicant was encouraged to relocate the entrance to Rutherford Lane. Staff noted this development does not meet the threshold for staff to require a TIA (transportation impact analysis) in order to specifically comment on back -up queuing information. Staff noted their greater concerns are with exiting traffic at this location, more so than traffic entering the development, and staff predicted a future service degradation problem. However, it was noted the applicant is constructing a left -turn lane and there has been considerable exchange between the applicant and VDOT as they work to come up with an approvable entrance under VDOT standards. The applicant's representative felt confident the proposed entrance onto Tasker Road will meet VDOT's road design requirements for site distance, turn lanes, length of turn lanes, etc. He said an entrance onto Rutherford Lane was initially attempted; however, not only were the same improvements needed on Rutherford Lane as on Tasker Road, but some additional obstacles were encountered on Rutherford as well. He said a large power pole is situated on the northeast corner of the Rutherford Lane - Tasker Road intersection; the applicant would be required by VDOT to straighten out this intersection, which would require the relocation of the power pole. Additionally, the widening would need to be extended across the box culvert which carries Opequon Creek under Tasker Road; this would require lengthening of the culvert as well. Lastly, the entrance on Rutherford Lane would result in the site being roughly 30 feet lower than where it is presently. The applicant's representative believed these conditions added a far more complex condition to the entrance design than what would be required on Tasker Road. The applicant's representative noted they were utilizing the older TDR ordinance for this development, but expects to come back with a revised MDP as the TDR condition changes. It was noted the developer is working on acquiring additional TDRs in order to fully build out the site. It was further noted that all of the studies were done using a total of 80 townhouses, as well as the trip calculations for the proposed entrance. No other issues were raised. No action was needed by the Commission at this time. (Note: Commissioners Dunlap, Kenney, and Manuel were absent from the meeting.) MDP #03 -13, The Townes at Tasker December 5, 2013 Page 6 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DISCUSSION SUMMARY OF THE 11/13/13 MEETING: Staff presented the Master Development Plan and noted that a revised MDP would be brought before the Board at their December 11, 2013 meeting to reflect the adopted TDR Ordinance changes. The Board requested clarification that VDOT would need to approve the subdivision design plan before the entrance could be constructed. Staff noted that the design plan would need to be approved and if VDOT could not approve the Tasker Road entrance location then a revised MDP would be necessary. No other issues were raised. No action was needed by the Board of Supervisors. PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION SUMMARY OF THE 12/04/13 MEETING: Staff presented the Master Development Plan and noted that it consisted of the same layout reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 6, 2013. The only revision pertains to the number of residential units, based on the approval of the TDR Ordinance amendments. The Board of Supervisors approved the TDR conversion rate which is based on the type of housing unit being developed on the receiving property — single - family detached, single - family attached or multifamily. Based on the single - family attached TDR conversion rate, the property owner now has the ability to build 81 single - family attached units on this property. Staff reported the property is using 54 transferred rights from six parcels within the sending area; the 54 development units multiplied by the conversion rate of 1.5 equals the 81 units they now have rights to develop. A Commissioner commented that VDOT seemed to have questions and safety concerns about the amount of trips on Tasker Road (Route 642) and he inquired about the applicant's discussions with VDOT. The applicant's representative stated the major concerns that will need to be overcome involve the widening of Tasker Road north of the site and the construction of a retaining wall. He explained that working out how the retaining wall is constructed, as well as how VDOT will provide future maintenance of it, are the major issues at this time. He said VDOT has asked them to try and acquire an easement from an adjoining property owner and they are in the process of working on this. The applicant's representative stated they will need to get VDOT's approval of the site plan before Frederick County will sign their site plan, which would allow the applicant to subdivide the property. A Commissioner commented this was the first time a TDR application has come through and he asked the applicant about the experience and if it was easy to accomplish. The applicant stated it was an easy process and they were guided and assisted by the Planning Staff and the process has worked out well. No action was needed by the Planning Commission. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 12/11/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The Master Development Plan for The Townes at Tasker depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the requirements of Article III, Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program and Article VIII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning Ordinance. Following the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors review of the MDP, staff will proceed with the severing and application process for the TDR rights from the sending property to the receiving property and proceed with MDP #03 -13, The Townes at Tasker December 5, 2013 Page 7 approval of the MDP. All of the issues brought forth by the Board of Supervisors should be appropriately addressed by the applicant. It appears that the application meets all requirements. Following presentation of the application to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and the incorporation of your comments, staff is prepared to move forward with the TDR transfer and approve the MDP. M r �O 1? L� O Applications Q Parcels Building Footprints 131 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) HE (Higher Education District) M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) 4W MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) 4W MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R6 (Residential Recreational Community District) 0 RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District) 0 i 1 f i I Note: Frederick County Dept of MDP # 03 -13 Planning & Development 07 N Kent St e The Townes at Tasker suite 202 PINS: Winchester, VA 22601 75 -A -86 540- 665 -5651 Map Created: October 17, 2013 Staff: cperkins 0 130 260 520 Feet 1 o rp , F� O a l 1 E♦� CUD C) z O W� -j ` w w� v w� 11 Q V N N LU -1 1 w J i ¢ a�¢ R O L J O w' W W O'~ W Lu a Q LU L z z o U w U o U w C/) Q O w Ml E♦� o 161 [Ii o o N � O W � o K z U N N o � w w w z X a - w � J n J R M W Q p N W z0 U w �o z C7 z U S z Z d U W w d w z O W sf W W F o x - N o z =1 =1 P?� N w Q u iam�i°��mm W d w - c�s� a a - 1 o rp , F� O a l 1 E♦� CUD C) z O W� -j ` w w� v w� 11 Q V N N LU -1 1 w J i ¢ a�¢ R O L J O w' W W O'~ W Lu a Q LU L z z o U w U o U w C/) Q O w Ml E♦� o 161 [Ii o o N � O W � o K z U N N o � w w w z X a - w � J n J R M W Q p N W z0 U w �o z C7 z U S z Z d U W w d w z O W sf W W ■ x - o o z =1 =1 P?� 'ONI '00 N011OAdISNOO kVaITCH 3nVa DoE § �£ 3_ - C e A31NJI1S 5 �3tlNJIlY o �§ ` NVId 1N3WdOl3A30 bHSVW - - a ky Ntl3 ary ain 'u noa wm3o3a �`4ov5pg=o$a dDSV1 J S3NMO1 3Hl sw3ryw° `ds�; a3d a3s 3a No d3 °oe ry a3 dCJ NVId 1N3Wd011AA b31SVW ,„ I E< << an N.ill. o isn EB60 - 999 - 064 :xed BEIL L99�69 �Yd sjoa�rgajy adeospue7. szauue[d. szoAfanjnS . sjaagrAud 0922 a. Qs, 1a,saY u:M Jul Sal erJOSSV TUODU --d m 002 a a-1 i f !d ? ITT os ° o oa °° a a� x w _ o oo _ _ �e'�� - u m 28065 — ^2 -- 1 5 n W T O ° I w r . o °o z mm N j°aa �22`�p r LL W K � o V1 2 N, Q � Wo p rc C ° G f � o� °s 0 0 ImE a R �i o \ LF \ W \\ 0 v I j W Her \ 6 w w w � �;�' o �I � Ifil I• I o S- 2 r. 0 r Y'�' x +.ruse• I - 4\ � m - z ° 8 I 6 1 8 I O ti K r W D C I I� gip II w I y to a e - I I 4 m _ ppN 6 an ° � � E I I � 4 8 0 7,N , L �v V 1A � it mn� ine 0 _ A� /} N3 a, os I - 4\ � m - z ° 8 I 6 1 8 I O ti K r W D C I I� gip II w I y to a e - I I 4 m _ ppN 6 an ° � � E I I � 4 8 0 a' LL ° m x� z� m Wo LLf -_ LL gyp - en 0 z 8 I - � w m U� I y6 ° O N ^I I VIII` 7,N , L 0 _ sw _ r ,_ a' LL ° m x� z� m Wo LLf -_ LL gyp - en 0 z 8 I - � w m U� I y6 ° O N ^I I VIII` �_, ivNOr s loxza vimioaia a�ASM ow> ' }vas as n�w3 ivanr 'ONI '00 NOIlOAd1SHOO AVOITCH 3vVG 91 V[0 'ox 'orl � s ervo£' O � A3lHJIIS 'S l3tlHJIX o sa��$ND „` VSO3 /SlIV13au= s s b3NSV1 1V S3NM01 3H1 oM 3x III xa33 oad Sao ,a A3 Ntld3a sa a 1111 -Ala b03 NVId AlAdOl3\3a d31SVW a = � ° ° - Sae = iSfIW S e00 N SH9 xP.d 6EIZ <H9�OSyd s ;oa ryarr adeospue7. s auue�d s . o as ns . sraaur�uj 1N0 oszz xl�s� s =s =y� Ia JT�j SaJUIDOSSV TUOuLrOd ooZ ao ', = =sIE Ira , see II - - - - - -- -- -- IF — �m3 III — VI II II — o III � E ZT: � N I e N III IIII I II ~ > o —1 y IIII � I I 0 1 \ 0 x = o Fq � >o rc= t � , �d'a d `aiso d A V d g E P Al i oN 3 oazz m3 ==s 'ONI 'oO NOIlOA&SNOO IVaIIIOH 3AVa O sA3, u s,3e N NVId 3ONVaN3 -,N-I �g�a C aNV S1NN3AMM 39VAOa3 sys s�os's"s_ °��s,e �\ N003a a =4 N °tl3oe °'" a3 dINSV1 1V S3NM01 3H1 b03 NVId AlAdOl3A3a d31SVW = og€ M- ®` w3o�w �d aI msti� m o opal o un EB60 - 999 - 064 :xed BEIL L99�69 �Yd sjaa ryory adeaspNe7. s aNUe[d. s o an ng . sraagr�Ny Io— a= X' ?Ili Jul Sal erJOSSV TUODU --d ITT 002 a aa.r .f /,e��d s 3 a w 55� 2924 "E 22 II K _ o 0 0 0o e& ° s w 2 I 2 b Y 6 3 K r N o� viz _- �.\ � z. .gip m'a sP �a �3� �a € €,e $ �_ °, r' a � - u 0 00000;• �I a I u � � o � ti { 3Nd193118 a3'Und ry 4 � o a .. U rscrr -mn - am- asscrn3�e won w' eZ ° - m 3 'N o §tea ms_ � e N g Z� 8 O - U_ n W F a2d8aN O a 2_ r' a � - u 0 00000;• �I a I u � � o � ti { 3Nd193118 a3'Und ry 4 � o a .. U rscrr -mn - am- asscrn3�e won w' eZ ° - m 3 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLA i APPLICATION FORM Department of Planning & Development Use Only — Application # 0 � 18 Date Application Received: 1 ; 1 8 PC Meeting Date l _? BOS Meeting Date _ Fee Amount Paid $'3 -- Initials: Receipt# F) — ]3{c 1. Project Title: The Townes at Tasker 2. Applicant: Name: Pennoni Associates Inc. Attn: Scott Stickley, PE Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Telephone: 540 - 667 -2139 Winchester, VA 22601 3. Property Owner (if different than above): Name: Shawnee Village LC Telephone: 540 - 667 -2120 Address: 420 W. Jubal Early Drive, Suite 103 Winchester, VA 22601 4. Design Company: Name: Pennoni Associates Inc. Telephone: 540 - 667 -2139 Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 5. Please list names of all owners, principals, and /or majority stockholders: Shawnee Village LC 6. Magisterial District: Shawnee i' 10 r Y 7. Property Location: -ast side of Rt. 642, Ta sker Road a nun En of Rt . 846, Rutherford Lane, approximately 0.7 miles south of the 1 -81 Interchange 310. (Give State Route # and name, distance and direction from intersection) 8. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan? Original Amended Previous MDP� 9. Property Information: a) Property Identification Number (PIN): 75 -A -86 b) Total Acreage: 14 acr es r C) Current Zoning: RA with RP St andards VIA_TDR;s d) Present Use: Vacant e) Proposed Uses: Residential 10. If residential uses are proposed, provide the following: a) Density: ?,q Units Per Acre b) Number of Units: 'E� / c) Housing Types: Single Family Attached 11. Adjoining Property use and zoning: USE North Commercia East South West Residential Vacant Interstate 81 ZONING EU Mr I have read the material included in this package and understand what is required by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. I also understand that the master development plan shall include all contiguous land under single or common ownership. All required material will be complete prior to the submission of my master development plan application. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. Applicant(s): Owner(s): Date: b It I Date: Date: Date: Adjoining Property Owners MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN Owners of property adjoining the land will be notified of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors meetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly across a public right -of -way, a private right -of -way, or a watercourse from the requested property. The applicant is required to obtain the following information on each adjoining property including the parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the Commissioner of Revenue. The Commissioner of the Revenue is located on the 1st floor of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street. Name and Property Identification Number Address Name Hack Winifred W Etals c/o Hackwoods L C 974 Tasker Road Stephens City, VA 22655 Property# 75 -A -78 Name Boyd John L 521 Tasker Road Stephens City, VA 22655 Property # 75 -A -78C Name Rutherford Gary D. & Carolyn 163 Rutherford Lane Stephens City, VA 22655 Property # 75 -A -86A Name The Hall Partnership 11 LLC 373 Tasker Road Stephens City, VA 22655 Property # 75 -A -86C Name Agape Christian Fellowship 199 Agape Way Stephens City, VA 22655 Property # 75 -A -87C Name Property # Name Property # Name Property # Name Property # 12 �L A ` (ck) f Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Website: www.co.frederick.va.us Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 Phone (540) 665 -5651 Facsimile (540) 665 -6395 Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We) (Name) Shawnee Village LC (Phone) 540 - 667 -2120 (Address) 420 West Jubal Early Drive, Suite 103, Winchester, VA 22601 the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ( "Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by Instrument No. 010017570 on Page and is described as Parcel: 86 Lot: Block: A Section: 75 Subdivision: do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Name) Pennoni Associates Inc. (Phone) 540 - 667 -2139 (Address) 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200, Winchester VA 22601 To act as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place and stead with full power and authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described Property, including: _ Rezoning (including proffers) _ Conditional Use Permit F71 _ Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) F Subdivision _ - 7 Site Plan _ Variance or Appeal My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously approved proffered conditions except as follows: This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise rescinded or modified. In witness thereof, I (fie) have hereto sey our) hand and seal this � j y,gt; � ,t ,= , 20 e 3 , Signature(s) State of Vi;g1fiia, City /County of A. `• PUBLIC ` 1' O - ivi� ' G#1579 MY COMMISSION FXPIRES I, VIA z e - h Y-V A . t kt m 1: tz a Notary . ju Ptlbj:ie i?D16o °� i aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument' o Taal '`� Red before me and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this �dq`�y +Il 20 . l LA My My Commission Expires: rib, �1, � 0/ r G 2GL G"cs "' a- �� . N G tary Public COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665 -6395 04 TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors FROM: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner 3, 3 SUBJECT: Request for Pump & Haul Permit 186 Star Tannery Road, Star Tannery (PIN #:70- A -16I) DATE: December 201 Staff has received a request seeking approval of a Pump & Haul Permit for an existing accessory residence located at 186 Star Tannery Road. Frederick County Code, §161- 201.05A, states that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, after receiving a written statement from the Health Department, may approve a permanent pump and haul system permit if specific criteria is satisfied. This request appears to comply with the code requirements and, therefore, Board consideration of the request is appropriate. Site Information 1 . The subject property is located at 186 Star Tannery Road in Star Tannery, and is further identified by Property Identification Number (PIN) 70- A -16I. The 5.9 acre property contains two structures, a primary dwelling and a one- bedroom accessory structure. The accessory structure was constructed first in 1989 with its own sewage disposal system and the larger (now primary) structure was built in 1996. The property owners are currently selling the property and the Health Department conducted a walk over for the sewage disposal systems and discovered that the system for the accessory structure was installed incorrectly and is unable to be repaired. Applicable Code Requirements and AnAysis Frederick County Code Chapter 161 addresses Sewage Disposal Systems and, more specifically, permanent pump and haul systems are addressed in § 161- 201.05. In 2009, the County revised its health system ordinance to enable the issuance of permanent pump and haul system permits only upon the approval of the Board of Supervisors. Additionally, criteria was established in § 161- 201.05 to offer guidance in the evaluation Sf the merits of a request for a permanent pump and haul system. In correspondence dated October 9, 2013, from the Health Department to tha property owner, the Health Department states that repair peraiit could 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Page 2 Request for Pump and Haul: 186 Star Tannery Road December 3, 2013 not be issued for the existing sewage disposal system due to "insufficient depth to restriction, depth to rock and depth to seasonal water table." Also, the Health Department on November 14, 2013 issued a recommendation for approval of the pump and haul permit. The property owner unsuccessfully requested off site easements from the adjoining property owners (see attached letters). The property owner has also established a relationship with Martin Septic Service LLC to service the requested pump and haul system. This correspondence works towards addressing the established criteria. Conclusion The property owner appears to have addressed the requirements of the County Code to utilize a pump and haul system for the property at 186 Star Tannery Road. It should be noted that the maintenance costs associated with a pump and haul system can be expensive; however it appears that this system is the only available option to bring the septic system into compliance for this property. Board of Supervisors action on the request to permit a pump and haul system is appropriate. CEP /pd Attachments 112 STAR fANNERI ...rrX 9 11 --- Via - Mann maw 4 4 _ m mp and Haul \1 ; Permit ! r i STAR gum TANNER•Y,RD IL 7r' Applications Q Parcels Building Footprints 131 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) t EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) HE (Higher Education District) M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R6 (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District) q \ T ,,66 m, ac- 27 T STAR TANNERY RD p / Note: Pump and Haul Frederick County Dept of Planning & Development Permit Request 107 N Kent St e 186 Star Tannery Road Winche ter, VA 22601 PINS: 540 - 665 - 5651 70 -A - 161 Map Created: December 3, 2013 Staff: cperkins 0 105 210 420 Feet f . \ • 1 J YM1 f \� Est APPLICATION - PERMANENT PUMP AND HAUL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM Address: Applicant/Agent: Pkn Phone Number: 5 Zi is - Y77- 1 l-15 Property Owner's Name (if different from applicant): J)tNama DCJL!qe- I J Address: Phone Number: Contact Person (if different from applicant Phone Number: Please list names of all owners, principals, and/or majority stockholders: 9 W ., W 01 ta lkya 112mol N 0 Property Location (please give State Route # and name, distance and direction from intersection): 10 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA M Name of the Subdivision (if applicable): Magisterial District: &C If e-JL- Total Property Acreage: 1 3, Property Identification Number (P.I.N.): 12m M -. 70 I 7 0 -PUMP AND HAUL INFORMATION- 1. The applicant hereby applies for a permit to remove and transport sewage from: siar - rtzilt-i (property address) I (sewage trtatment facility) 2. Justification for the pump and haul application: Tti%c 14&J-Vk 3. Brief description of holding facilities (type, capacity, etc.): 2, 1 SIORD 4. Plans and specifications of holding facility (if required) prepared by: (Engineer) (address) 5. Name of Septic Hauler: MA.Or;� LiC_ I wikhusk Hauler Address: 3'31�, q &eA NK� Phone: Lord Fairfax District Hauler # DPOR#: CW" Frederick County Hauler Permit #: &P,00- , 3 , %XS Ate-44' 6. Quantity of sewage to be hauled per day: gallons. Cost per load: A_C00�'_ 7. Route(s) of transport:5T — m - ..0 ic ed - ,11- a A I a+.'i 8. Time of day for transport: 9. Emergency response capability: 04je- 10. Disposition of Sewage: (attach a copy of agreement with owner of receiving treatment facility) I have read the material included in this package and understand what is required by the Frederick County and the Virginia Department of Health. I also understand that all required material will be complete prior to this application being scheduled for review by the Board of Supervisors. -,eignature: 0 — Date: /o/rA Signature: Date: t�DH October 09, 2013 Andrew Page 186 Star Tannery Rd. Star Tannery, VA 22654 RE: Tar: Map /GPIN: 70 -A -16I HDID: 06913(7244 Dear Andrew Page: This letter is to inform you that he Frederick County Health Department has evaluated your application for a sewage disposal systemlwar supply permit or certification letter filed on September 24, 2013. Unfortunately, we are not able to issue a Repair Permit. The reason for denial is: Insufficient depth to restriction Insufficient depth to rock Insufficient depth to seasonal water table This decision is based on the information filed with your application. Site and soil evaluations were made in accordance with the Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations, the Private Well Regulations, the Alternative Onsite Sewage System Regulations , as well as current agency policy. In accordance with 12 VAC 5 -610 -230 of the July I, 2000 Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations you have the right to appeal this decision. Your written request for appeal must be received in this office at 107 N. Kent St. Suite 201 Winchester, VA, 22601 within thirty (30) days from the date you receive this letter. Please include any facts or other data that would support your appeal. If you have any questions or if this office may be of' r her service, please let us know. Sincerely, t Joshua Anderson Reviewed by: Environmental Health Specialist, Sr. Mudding Official Frederick County Health Department VIRGINIA 107 N. Kent St. Suite 201 DEPARTMENT Winchester, VA OF HEALTH 22601 r (540) 722 -3480 Protecting You and Your Environment (540) 722 -3479 Fax Andrew Page 186 Star Tannery Rd. Star Tannery, VA 22654 RE: Tar: Map /GPIN: 70 -A -16I HDID: 06913(7244 Dear Andrew Page: This letter is to inform you that he Frederick County Health Department has evaluated your application for a sewage disposal systemlwar supply permit or certification letter filed on September 24, 2013. Unfortunately, we are not able to issue a Repair Permit. The reason for denial is: Insufficient depth to restriction Insufficient depth to rock Insufficient depth to seasonal water table This decision is based on the information filed with your application. Site and soil evaluations were made in accordance with the Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations, the Private Well Regulations, the Alternative Onsite Sewage System Regulations , as well as current agency policy. In accordance with 12 VAC 5 -610 -230 of the July I, 2000 Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations you have the right to appeal this decision. Your written request for appeal must be received in this office at 107 N. Kent St. Suite 201 Winchester, VA, 22601 within thirty (30) days from the date you receive this letter. Please include any facts or other data that would support your appeal. If you have any questions or if this office may be of' r her service, please let us know. Sincerely, t Joshua Anderson Reviewed by: Environmental Health Specialist, Sr. Mudding Official REQUEST FOR PUMP AND HAUL COMMENTS Virginia Department of Health Mail to Virginia Department of Health Attn: Environmental Health Supervisor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 722-3480 Hand f1pl;X701- fn* Virginia Department of Health Attn: Environmental Health Supervisor 107 North Kent Street, Suite 201 Winchester, Virginia Applicant: It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach one copy of the completed application form and all other pertinent information. Applicant's Name: P t A paaz Telephone: 0 1 Mailing Address: RD ln j j f�nn_-!S�4 Location of the property where the permanent pump and haul system is being requested: VDH Comments: &C&IMMt- "04 S pt,4 (/41 1 nt*,-o1,4&x -VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH USE ONLY- Date Received 11 l� 143 Date Reviewed f/// 4 3 Revision Required �Z A? Review NumberC) 2 3 4 5 (circle one) Date Approved Signature & Date: f� Please Return Form to Am)licant** 7 - VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH USE ONLY- 1. Contract with Hauler having a valid sewage handling permit: !yes no 2. Receiving facility satisfactory? ' y es no Comments: 3. Bonding and/or assurances approved by Bureau and Attorney General? /es _ no Comments: 4. Plans and Specifications for storage facility satisfactory? -Zyes _no _not required 5. Construction Permit issued for storage facility? Zycs _no _not required 6. Storage facility inspected? ' yes no 7. Recommended Pump and Haul Permit be issued? Z es no 8. Authorize Pump and Environmental Health Supervisor Signature ate Additional Comments: - FREDERICK. COUNTY USE ONLY- Board of Supervisors Review: Additional Information Requested: Approved: _y es no Frederick County Requests the VDH to issue a construction permit for a permanent Pump and Haul System: yes no 9 572 ' C O ti O .' It o► ' �. d o h sGv V3 wE 572 � 'o► j • .?vsrrff ', � ai��rA tlf F,= '--' j e. $.9�35/Ac. t/ S Y t! iyli 1•a 0-i i i'Y t _,� t � . cT..09:11 atirt R . r! toe 110/• o. Q f!y/P`?o r 1 j L ti a i I 1 PLAT Of A 9URv9v MADE Pon Rvs'SCL , F. iJtNNER#. or A PARoER or RAND I V1N• AT MOUNTAIN FA LLS #N THE BACK. CEE9R 'AjA4 18194#44. D ISTRICT Of F REDERIOK CovNTY, VoRsoN#A. t 1M1t1 IS A PORTION Or T Ht? *AMC RAND THAT WAS OONVCYto TO R USatRR F. JCNNCRR AND MARTHA M"-,+ J CNNtRRr HIS WIFEp FROM P AUI6 We RICHARD OY 0990'DATED .SEPTEMOER 16, 1970 RteoRDto #N Ott SoOK 36% ; P♦ 100, IN THE 4 Of THE C LINK Of THE C#Rcv COURT or F REDER#oK C:OUNTY# VIROIN i SURVCV19D tlr ;lA L- /A z l - AL iL2c.L.iS# lttvCvCD NovEMOtR 26, 197 T w instrument of writing was produced to as On the ��yY Of . 19 _2� t at u:d with asrtiticat of ackn figment thereto atsnexed V .rltnitted to ram . Tax imposed by Sec. 5394. f of and 5.:•54 have been paid, if aaeaWe, clesk • �{ ' D57 1 ._ - -�_ %1�3�Zoo3 ve v �� Y7� ei '�'� � T 1 1 �J r7 6 - if Z-A CT' 2- 2 te �� ' - H 1 On 4g m Alt- er (s)] —7 FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA SEWAGE HANDLING AGREEMENT FOR PUMP AND HAUL SYSTEM MAer - ; - AI SC4-'rrc ScRu;4c, d,CC and ai1d e,.r NIC [Septic Hauler] [Property Owne enter into this Contract with the County of Frederick, Virginia (the '`County"), on this day of 64 —, 20 J:, WHEREAS, in consideration of the County's approval of a pump and haul pen for the property located at 1%Lp 5ta r TQtlnevv ? , PIN# 7t) - ,4 _ 1 to = , and to provide for sewage collection and disposal services for a pump and haul system and guarantee compliance with all applicable regulations concerning sewage collection and disposal services. THE PARTIES AGREE as follows: The Property Owner will maintain a contract with the specified Septic Hauler and will ensure that the system is being property pumped and that 24 -hour call service is maintained for emergency service. The Property Owner will submit annual invoices to the Virginia Department of Health verifying that the system is being property pumped. The Property Owner will procure an inspection from the Virginia Department of Health every three years (from the date of permit issuance) to ensure that the system is in proper working order. The Property Owner grants permission for ainployees of the County and the Virginia Department of Health to conduct routine field inspections of the system to ensure proper maintenance. The Property Owner understands that violation of the conditions of the pump and haul permit or violation of any applicable regulations concerning sewage collection and disposal services may lead to the revocation of the pump and haul permit. The Septic Hauler agrees to provide sewage pump and hauling services to the Property Owner at a cost of per load and the Property Owner agrees to pay for such services according to such normal and commercially reasonable terms as the Septic Hauler may provide. a {''By: VDH Sewage Handling Permit [ ptic Hauler] Frederick County Septic Permit # 9 c.P0ol k [owner /officei /authorized apent must sign fo Sepik Haulerj --Date- /,� ). Bv: Date [Property Owner] By. Date [County of Frederick, Virginia] [County Administrator or authorized agent must sign for County] Board of Supervisors Approval Date 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665 -5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 Memorandum fo: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator -- Date: December 3, 2013 RE: Wakeland Manor Subdivision — Phases 7, 12. 13 & 14 The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested: Talamore Drive, State Route Number 1036 0.05 miles Talamore Drive, State Route Number 1036 0.11 miles Talamore Drive, State Route Number 1.0'36 0.08 miles Brigatine Drive, State Route Number 1573 0.06 miles Turnberry Court, State Route Number 1576 0.09 miles Penderbrook Court, State Route Number 1577 0.13 miles Auburn Hill Court, State Route Number 1572 0.20 miles "l Drive, State Route Number 1036 0.12 miles endefbrook Crurt, State Route Number 1577 0.05 miles Collington Court, State Route Number 1574 0.05 miles Collington Court, State Route Number 1574 0.11 miles Ivy Hill Court, State Route Number 1575 0.08 mile, Somerton Court, State Route Number 1578 0.10 miles Ivy Hill Court, State Route Number 1575 0.14 miles Staff is available to answer any questions. MRC1dlw 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 In the County of Frederick ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- By resolution of the governing body adopted December 11, 2013 The following VDOT Form AM -4.3 is hereby attached and incorporated as part of the governing body's resolution for changes in the secondary system ofstate highways. A Copy Testee Signed (County Official): Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision Wakeland Manor Phases 7, 12, 13. 14 & Talamore Drive Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Reason for Change: New subdivision street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.1 -229 Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Talamore Drive, State Route Number 1036 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1063, Warrior Drive To: 0.05 mile east to Route 1572, Auburn Hill Court, a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #100009692 Right of Way width (feet) = 54' Street Name and/or Route Number . Talamore Drive, State Route Number 1036 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1572, Auburn Hill Court To: 0.11 mile east to Route 1573, Brigatine Drive, a distance of: 0.11 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #100009692 Right of Way width (feet) = 54' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Talamore Drive, State Route Number 1036 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1573, Brigatine Drive To: 0.08 mile east to Route 1575, Ivy Hill Court, a distance of: 0.08 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #100009692 Right of Way width (feet) = 54' VDOT Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: December 11, 2013 Page 1 of 3 Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Brigatine Drive, State Route Number 1573 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1036, Talamore Drive To: 0.06 mile south of Route 1036, Talamore Drive, a distance of: 0.06 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #050028911 Right of Way width (feet) = 48' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Turnberry Court, State Route Number 1576 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1575, Ivy Hill Court To: 0.09 mile south of Route 1575, Ivy Hill Court, a distance of: 0.09 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #070010038 Right of Way width (feet) = 48' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Penderbrook Court, State Route Number 1577 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1578. Somerton Court To: 0.13 mile mile north of Route 1578, Somerton Court, a distance of: 0.13 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #070008759 Right of Way width (feet) = 48' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Auburn Hill Court, State Route Number 1572 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1036, Talamore Drive To: 0.20 mile north of Route 1036, Talamore Drive, a distance of: 0.20 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #110001638 Right of Way width (feet) = 48' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Talamore Drive, State Route Number 1036 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1575, Ivy Hill Court To: 0.12 mile east to Route 1502, Corral Drive, a distance of: 0.12 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #100009692 Right of Way width (feet) = 54' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Penderbrook Court, State Route Number 1577 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1575, Ivy Hill Court To: 0.05 mile north of Route 1575, Ivy Hill Court, a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #070008759 Right of Way width (feet) = 48' VDOT Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 2 of 3 Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Collington Court, State Route Number 1574 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1573, Brigatine Drive To: 0.05 mile west of Route 1573, Brigatine Drive, a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #050028911 Right of Way width (feet) = 48' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Collington Court, State Route Number 1574 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1573, Brigatine Drive To: 0.11 mile east of 1573, Brigatine Drive, a distance of: 0.11 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #050028911 Right of Way width (feet) = 48' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Ivy Hill Court, State Route Number 1575 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1036, Talamore Drive To: 0.08 mile north east of Route 1036, Talamore Drive, a distance of: 0.08 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #070010038 Right of Way width (feet) = 54' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Somerton Court, State Route Number 1578 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1577, Penderbrook Court To: 0.10 mile west of Route 1577, Penderbrook Court, a distance of: 0.10 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #070008759 Right of Way width (feet) = 48' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Ivy Hill Court, State Route Number 1575 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1576, Turnberry Court To: 0.14 mile north east of Route 1576, Turnberry Court, a distance of: 0.14 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #070010038 Right of Way width (feet) = 54' VDOT Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on the 11th day of December, 2013, adopted the following: WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM -4.3, fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Form AM -4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 33.1 -229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right -of- way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Christopher E. Collins Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Robert W. Wells Gene E. Fisher A COPY ATTEST PDRes. #39 -13 John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator Date: December 4, 2013 RE: Fieldstone Subdivision — Channing Drive The following additions and discontinuance to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions, cited, are hereby requested: Discontinuance Valley Mill Road, State Route Number 659 0.12 miles Addition Valley Mill Road, State Route Number 659 0.08 miles Valley Mill Road, State Route Number 659 0.05 miles Channing Drive, State Route Number 1554 0.24 miles Staff is available to answer any questions. MUNI 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 In the County of Frederick ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- By resolution of the governing body adopted December 11, 2013 The following VDOT Form AM -4.3 is hereby attached and incorporated as part of the governing body's resolution for changes in the secondary system ofstate highways. A Copy Testee Signed (County Official): Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision Fieldstone Subd. - Channing Drive Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Discontinuance The Virginia Department of Transportation is requested to discontinue the following portions of the Secondary System of State Highways: Reason for Change: Developer project Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.1 -150 Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Valley Mill Road, State Route Number 659 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: 0.34 mile south of Route 1288, Camden Drive To: 0.46 mile south of Route 1288, Camden Drive, a distance of: 0.12 miles. VDOT Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: December 11, 2013 Page 1 of 2 Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision Fieldstone Subd. - Channing Drive Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Reason for Change: Developer relocated VDOT roadway Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.1 -229 Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Valley Mill Road, State Route Number 659 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: 0.34 mile south of Route 1288, Camden Drive To: 0.42 mile south of Route 1288, Camden Drive, a distance of: 0.08 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #040006449 Page 0433 Right of Way width (feet) = 65' -80' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Valley Mill Road, State Route Number 1288 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: 0.17 mile west of Route 1270, Mill Race Drive To: 0.22 mile west of Route 1270. Mill Race Drive. a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #040006449 Page 0433 Right of Way width (feet) = 40' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Channing Drive, State Route Number 1554 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1491, Nassau Drive To: 0.24 mile north of Route 1491, Nassau Drive, a distance of: 0.24 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #040006449 Page 0433 Right of Way width (feet) = 80' VDOT Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 2 of 2 ova ,L�Ialslc 'idnialsMW One clau sew- zss -ovs a i NOIMI(]9nS ANOl2Q19Id Days e� 'TuH'aP�a—M'�s ,< 8/ u , L �AIH(I !DNINNVHO ° JNIl��NIJN� JIdMN�3l�J H°� - ��'dz'�� ,L[H[HX3 'iVl�[0[SN3N'[Q i kQJ �<'ayL) \\i 9yN.9yy�9t1/ � I N oy �ssy R ze o Z S ,- U �. V 1 N O C ce W ce W Q I oz ozo V Fpm cC Z Z C Z C `-*- F 0 0 CO C O q � I III # n I W I F F F F F F F F I 0 ul Zaf i \ N l 6 I � I I J J O RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Project Adjustments Involving Additions and Discontinuance The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on the 11th day of December, 2013, adopted the following: WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has provided this Board with a sketch and a VDOT AM -4.3 form dated 11/27/13 depicting the additions and discontinuance required in the Secondary System of State Highways as a result of Project Fieldstone Subdivision - Channing Drive which sketch is hereby incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the portions of old road identified to be discontinued are deemed to no longer serve public convenience warranting maintenance at public expense; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Commissioner to discontinue from the Secondary System of State Highways the portion of old road identified by the sketch to be discontinued, pursuant to Section 33.1 -155, Code of Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add to the Secondary System of State Highways, those portions of road identified by the sketch to be added, pursuant to Section 33.1 -229, Code of Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board concurs with the discontinuance as part of the Secondary System of State Highways, those portions of road identified by the sketch to be discontinued, pursuant to Section 33.1 -150, Code of Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board does hereby guarantee clear and unrestricted rights -of -way and any necessary easements for cuts, fills, and drainage for this street; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the local representative of the Virginia Department of Transportation. Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Robert W. Wells Christopher E. Collins Gene E. Fisher Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. PDRes. 440 -13 Frederick County Administrator