Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
November 13 2013_Agenda_Packet
CO w AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2013 7:00 P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 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: E, G, H and R) Citizen Comments (Agenda Items Only, That Are Not Subject to Public Hearing.) Board of Supervisors Comments Minutes (See Attached) 1. Regular Meeting, October 9, 2013. County Officials 1. Introduction of New Handley Regional Library Director. 2. Introduction of New Shenandoah Area Agency on Aging Director. 'Bull 3. Committee Appointments. (See Attached) ------------------------------------- - - - - -- B AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2013 PAGE 2 4. Request from Commissioner of the Revenue for Refunds. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- C Committee Reports 1. Business Friendly Committee Report. (See Attached ) ---------------------- - - - - -- D 2. Parks and Recreation Commission. (See Attached) ------------------------ - - - - -- E 3. Human Resources Committee. (See Attached) ------------------------------ - - - - -- F 4. Public Works Committee. (See Attached) -------------------------------------- - - - - -- G 5. Joint Finance Committee. (See Attached) ------------------------------------- - - - - -- H 6. Finance Committee. (See Attached) --------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 7. Transportation Committee. (See Attached) ------------------------------------ - - - - -- J Planning Commission Business Public Hearing Ordinance Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165 Zoning, Article VI — Business and Industrial Zoning Districts Part 601 Dimensional and Intensity Requirements, §165- 601.02 Dimensional and Intensity Requirements, Part 608 EM Extractive Manufacturing District, §165- 608.06 Height Limitations. Article II Supplementary Use Regulations, Parking, Buffers, and Regulations for Specific Uses, Part 201 Supplementary Use Regulations, §165- 201.03 Height Limitations Exceptions, Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, §165- 204.28 Height Waivers in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), M1 (Light Industrial) and M2 (Industrial General) District. These are Revisions to Increase the Maximum Height in the EM, M1, and M2 Zoning Districts with a Board of Supervisors Waiver and Addition of Supplementary Use Regulations. (See Attached) ------ - - - - -- K 2. Ordinance Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165 Zoning, Article III Transfer Of Development Rights (TDR) Program, Part 302 Sending and Receiving Properties, §165- 302.01 Sending Properties, §165- 302.03. Calculation of Development Rights. Revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to Update the TDR Density Rights Table, Include a AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2013 PAGE 3 Provision for Contiguous Lots and Addition of a TDR Density Conversion Rate For Receiving Properties. (See Attached) ------------------------------ - - - - -- L Other Planning Items 1. Rezoning Application #05 -13 - Governor's Hill - Request to Revise Proffers Re: Transportation Enhancements and Environment Sections. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- M 2. EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District Height Waiver Request — Carmeuse. (See Attached) --------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- N 3. Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment (CPPA) Resolution to Study the McCann - Slaughter Property. (See Attached) ---------------------------- - - - - -- O 4. Master Development Plan #03 -13 for The Townes at Tasker. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- P 5. Request to Schedule Work Session. (See Attached) ----------------------- - - - - -- Q 6. Road Resolutions: (See Attached) --- - - - - -- a. Kendall Mills Subdivision, Phase 2 b. Rutherford Crossing - Milton Ray Drive c. Southern Hills Stickley Drive Extension Board Liaison Reports (If Any) Citizen Comments Board of Supervisors Comments -R Adjourn }^-�. FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' MINUTES REGULAR MEETING October 9, 2013 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on Wednesday, October 9, 2013 at 7:00 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 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 Wells delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice - Chairman DeHaven led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA - APPROVED County Administrator John R, Riley, Jr, advised he had no changes to the agenda. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, 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 following items for the Board's consideration under the consent agenda: - Parks and Recreation Commission Report — Tab D; - Human Resources Committee — Tab E; and - Road Resolution — Brookland Manor Subdivision — Tab L. Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Hess, 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 There were no citizen comments. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS There were no Board of Supervisors' comments. MINUTES - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the minutes from the September 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 PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION TO SHERANDO HIGH SCHOOL BASEBALL TEAM Chairman Shickle presented a framed copy of the RESOLUTION IN HONOR OF THE 2 2013 GROUP AA STATE CHAMPION SHERANDO HIGH SCHOOL WARRIORS BASEBALL TEAM to Coach Pepper Martin and members of the Sherando baseball team. The original resolution was approved on July 10, 2013, EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH AWARD — APPROVED JODI L. JONES Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved Jodi L. Jones as Employee of the Month for October 2013. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors recognizes that the County's employees are a most important resource; and WHEREAS, on September 9, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution which established the Employee of the Month award and candidates for the award may be nominated by any County employee; and WHEREAS, Jodi L. Jones who serves the Frederick County Fire and Rescue Department was nominated for Employee of the Month; and WHEREAS, Jodi L. Jones is being awarded for her loyalty and commitment to the Round Hill Volunteer Fire Company, which is the first due company to the new Lutheran Home at Orchard Ridge in Frederick County. Specialist Jones has worked with the staff at Round Hill VFC and Orchard Ridge to establish a pre - incident plan for the large residential complex. She has conducted countless walk- throughs of the facility, gathering information in order to develop a plan with a detailed layout of all of the floors and features of the building. The documents have been loaded onto Frederick County's Fire Management System and will allow fire and rescue workers access to a pre - incident plan while on the scene of an emergent situation. Specialist Jones was able to successfully complete this task along with her other daily duties and projects, Specialist Jones is to be commended for her initiative and dedication, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors this 9 th day of October, 2013 that Jodi L. Jones is hereby recognized as the Frederick County Employee of the Month for October 2013; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors extends its gratitude to the Jodi L. Jones for her outstanding performance and dedicated service and wishes her continued success in future endeavors; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Jodi L. Jones is hereby entitled to all of the rights and privileges associated with this award, Adopted October 9, 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 Chairman Shickle also noted that Jodi L. Jones was awarded Firefighter and EMS Provider of the year by the Frederick County Fire & Rescue Association at its annual picnic held in September. The Board extended their congratulations to Jodi for receiving this honor. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS REAPPOINTMENT OF JAY C. MEYERS AS GAINESBORO DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board reappointed Jay C. Meyers as Gainesboro District representative to the Industrial Development Authority. This is a four year appointment. Term expires November 18, 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 REAPPOINTMENT OF WILLIAM T. SWIMLEY TO THE SHAWNEELAND SANITARY DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board reappointed William T: Swimley to the Shawneeland Sanitary District Advisory Committee. This is a two year appointment. Term expires November 9, 2015. 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 NOMINATION OF ROSALIE CORNWELL, RONALD V. SHICKLE, AND LEON W. STROSNIDER TO THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board nominated Rosalie Cornwell, Ronald V. Shickle, and Leon W. Strosnider to the Board of Equalization. Appointments would be for a period of three years. Terms expire December 31, 2016. 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 COMMITTEE REPORTS PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The Parks and Recreation Commission met on September 10, 2013. Members present were; Marty Cybulski, Kevin Anderson, Christopher Collins, Gary Longerbeam, Ronald Madagan, and Charles Sandy, Jr. Members absent were: Patrick Anderson, Greg Brondos, Jr., and vacant appointment from Stonewall District. Items Requiring Board of Supervisors Action: 1. The Parks and Recreation Commission recommended purchasing two zero turn mowers and a sun shade for the Sherando Pool Complex with the funds the department is returning from the Fiscal 2013 budget, second by Mr. Kevin Anderson, motion carried unanimously (5 -0). This recommendation will be forwarded to the Finance Committee. Submitted for Board Information Only: 1. Cosponsor Policy— Mr. Sandy moved to adopt Cosponsor Policy as submitted, second by Mr. Madagan, motion carried unanimously (5 -0). Please find attached a copy of the approved Cosponsor Policy (500.02). 2. Finance Committee — The Finance Committee recommended adopting the Facility Rental Policy, Vendor Policy, and Fiscal 15 Fees and Charges with changes as submitted, second by Mr. Longerbeam, motion carried unanimously (5 -0). Please find attached a copy of the approved Vendor Policy (500.16) and Facility Rental Policy (500.19). You will also find enclosed a copy of the approved Fiscal 2015 Fees and Charges. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE -- APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The HR Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 N. Kent Street on Friday, September 6, 2013, at 8:00 a.m. Committee members present were: Supervisor Robert Hess, Supervisor Robert Wells, citizen members Dorrie Green and Beth Lewin. Committee members absent were citizen member Barbara Vance and Supervisor Chris Collins. Also present were: Assistant County Administrator Kris Tierney, County Attorney Rod Williams, NRADC Superintendent Jim Whitley, Finance Director Cheryl Shiffler, Planning Director Eric Lawrence, and DSS representative Delsie Butts. ** *Items Requiring Action * ** 1. None ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 1. Presentation by the Director of Planning and Zoning, Eric Lawrence. At the request of the Committee, Mr. Lawrence presented an overview of the objectives and responsibilities of the Planning and Zoning Department. The presentation also provided the Committee an understanding of his employee population, the skills required, and topics of importance within his department. Presentation attached. There being no further business, the meeting is adjourned. The next HR Committee meeting is scheduled for Friday, October 4, 2013. FINANCE COMMITTEE - APPROVED The Finance Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Monday, September 30, 2013 at 8:00 a.m. All members were present. Items 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 were approved under consent agenda. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman 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 The Fire & Rescue Chief requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of JL54,506, This amount represents funds required to eliminate the "Kelly Day" scheduling method. This item has been reviewed by both the Public Safety and Human Resources committees and forwarded - to the Finance Committee with support. See attached information, p. 5 -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 Aye Robert W. Wells Aye 2. The Fire & Rescue Chief requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $2,202.30. This amount represents a carry forward of proffer funds for the Stephens City Fire facility rehabilitation. This completes the project. See attached memo, p. 9. -- APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. 3. The Parks & Recreation Director requests the approval of the Recreation Reserve Fund Policy and the creation of the Parks Capital Projects Fund. Policy has been approved by the Parks & Recreation Commission, See attached information, p. 10 -12. The committee recommends approval. — APPROVED. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Collins, 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 Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $1,100 This amount represents DARE donations. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 13 -14. —APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation - in the amount of $1,100 This amount represents reimbursements for firing range use. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 15. — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. 6. The IT Director requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $16,666.66 This amount represents unspent grant funds. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 16 -23. — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. 7. The GIS Manager requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $ 20 , 0 . This amount represents reimbursements for GIS software maintenance. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 24. — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. 8. The Deputy Public Works Director requests a Lake Holiday Sanitary District Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $3,272.50. This amount represents a carry forward of funds needed to pay for the final engineering services invoices. See attached memo, p. 25 -26. — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. 9. The Finance Director requests an EMS Revenue RecoveKy Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $850,000 This is needed to move the EMS Recovery program budget to its own fund. The original General Fund supplemental appropriation was approved at the August Finance Committee meeting. 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 10, The Finance Department presents FY 2013 yearend financial information. See attached, p. 27 -34. 11. The School Finance Director provides FY 2013 yearend financial information and is available for discussion. See attached, p. 35 -61. INFORMATION ONLY 1. The Finance Director provides a Fund 10 Transfer Report for FY 2014. See attached, p. 62. 2, The Finance Director provides FY 2014 financial statements for the period ending August 31, 2013. See attached, p. 63 -73. 3. The Parks & Recreation Department returned $13,681 of unused appropriated proffer funds for the purchase of the 20 passenger bus. The original appropriation was $75,000, See attached memo, p. 74. 4. The County provides the FY 2013 year end open purchase order list. See attached, p. 75- 80. 5. The County Schools provide the FY 2013 year end open purchase order list. See attached, p. 81 -84. 6. The IT Committee report is provided for an update on the fire reporting software. See attached, p. 85 -91. 7. The Assistant County Administrator provides the yearly report from the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation regarding funding derived from Star Fort homeowner assessments. See attached information, p. 92 -95. 8. The Shenandoah Valley Discovery Museum and the Winchester - Frederick County Youth Football League send notes of thanks for the County's continued support. See attached e- mails, p. 96 -97. 9. An article from VML Virginia Town & City regarding the "Future of local [tax] levy, taxing authority at stake" is provided. See attached article, p. 98 -100. OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT REQUEST OF JOSHUA R. NELSON — NOT FADE AWAY FESTIVAL. PURSUANT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE 9 CHAPTER 86, FESTIVALS; SECTION 86 -3, PERMIT REQUIRED; APPLICATION; ISSUANCE OR DENIAL; FOR AN OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT. FESTIVAL TO BE HELD THURSDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2013 FROM 5:00 P.M. THROUGH SUNDAY, OCTOBER 27,2013,12:00 MIDNIGHT, ON THE GROUNDS OF THE COVE CAMPGROUND 9 80 COVE ROAD GORE VIRGINIA. PROPERTY OWNED BY ALEXANDER W. K. MCDOWELL AND MCDOWELL FAMILY, LLC. APPROVED Administrator Riley advised this was a request for an outdoor festival permit by Joshua R. Nelson for the "Not Fade Away Festival" to be held October 24, 2013 beginning at 5 :00 p.m. through October 27, 2013 at midnight. The festival will be held on the grounds of the Cove Campground, 980 Cove Road, Gore, VA. The property is owned by Alexander W. K. McDowell and McDowell Family, LLC. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the outdoor festival permit for Joshua R. Neslon -- Not Fade Away Festival 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 PROPOSED SCHOOL BOND FINANCING BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA. THE BOARD OF O SUPERVISORS THE "BOARD ARD ") OF THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK VIRGINIA (THE "COUNTY ") WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING_ IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 15.2 -2606 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA OF 1950 AS AMENDED ON THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BONDS (THE "BONDS ") OF THE COUNTY IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EX 0ANC CEED �5, 40 0 00 TO FIN ,,.,.a. ........................ .. E CERTAIN 10 CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL PURPOSES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDITIONS AT VARIOUS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RELACEMENT MIDDLE SCHOOL. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. — APPROVED. Administrator Riley advised this was a request from Frederick County Public Schools for the Board to authorize the issuance of $5A million in bonds through the Virginia Public School Authority in the fall 2013 sale. The proceeds will be used for the construction of the additions to four elementary schools and the architectural and engineering costs of the replacement Frederick County Middle School. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Vice- Chairman DeHaven, the Board approved the Resolution Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of not to Exceed $5,400,000 General Obligation School Bond of the County of Frederick, Virginia to be Sold to the Virginia Public School Authority and Providing for the Form and Details Thereof. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board ") of the County of Frederick, Virginia (the "County ") has determined that it is necessary and expedient to borrow an amount not to exceed $5,400,000 and to issue its general obligation school bond (as more specifically defined below, the "Local School Bond ") for the purpose of financing certain capital projects for public school purposes, including, but not limited to, additions at various elementary schools and the architectural and engineering associated with the construction of a replacement middle school (collectively, the "Project "); WHEREAS, the County held a public hearing, duly noticed, on October 9, 2013, on the issuance of the Local School Bond in accordance with the requirements of Section 15.2 -2606, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the "Virginia Code "); WHEREAS, the School Board of the County has, by resolution, requested the Board to authorize the issuance of the Local School Bond and consented to the issuance of the Local School Bond; 11 WHEREAS, Virginia Public School Authority ( "VPSA ") has offered to purchase the Local School Bond along with the local school bonds of certain other localities with a portion of proceeds of certain bonds to be issued by VPSA in the fall of 2013 (the "VPSA Bonds "); WHEREAS, the Bond Sale Agreement (as defined below) shall indicate that $5,400,000 is the amount of proceeds requested (the "Proceeds Requested ") from VPSA in connection with the sale of the Local School Bond; WHEREAS, VPSA's objective is to pay the County a purchase price for the Local School Bond which, in VPSA's judgment, reflects the Local School Bond's market value (the "VPSA Purchase Price Objective "), taking into consideration of such factors as the amortization schedules the County has requested for the Local School Bond relative to, the amortization schedules requested by other localities, the purchase price to be received by VPSA from the sale of the VPSA Bonds and other market conditions relating to the sale of VPSA's Bonds; and WHEREAS, such factors may result in the Local School Bond having a purchase price other than par and consequently (i) the County may have to issue the Local School Bond in a principal amount that is greater than or less than the Proceeds Requested in order to receive an amount of proceeds that is substantially equal to the Proceeds Requested, or'(ii) if the maximum authorized principal amount of the Local School Bond set forth in section 1 below does not exceed the Proceeds Requested by at least the amount of any discount, the purchase price to be paid to the County, given the VPSA Purchase Price Objective and market conditions, will be less than the Proceeds Requested, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA: 1. Authorization of Local School Bond and Use of Proceeds The Board hereby determines that it is advisable to contract a debt and to issue and sell its general obligation school bond in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,400,000 (the "Local School Bond ") for the purpose of financing the Project. The Board hereby authorizes the issuance and sale of the Local School Bond in the form and upon the terms established pursuant to this Resolution. 2. Sale of the Local School Bond The sale of the Local School Bond, within the parameters set forth in paragraph 4 of this Resolution, to VPSA is authorized, Given the VPSA Purchase Price Objective and market conditions, the County acknowledges that the limitation on the maximum principal amount on the Local School Bond set forth in paragraph 1 of this Resolution restricts VPSA's ability to generate the Proceeds Requested, however, the Local School Bond may be sold for a purchase price not lower than 95% of the Proceeds Requested. The Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator, or either of them (each a "Delegate ") and such other officer or officers of the County as either may designate are hereby authorized and 12 directed to enter into an agreement with VPSA providing for the sale of the Local School Bond to VPSA (the "Bond Sale Agreement'). The Bond Sale Agreement shall be in substantially the form submitted to the Board at this meeting, which form is hereby approved. 3. Details of the Local School Bond The Local School Bond shall be dated the date of its issuance and delivery; shall be designated "General Obligation School Bond, Series 2013 "; shall bear interest from the date of delivery thereof payable semi - annually on each January 15 and July 15 beginning July 15, 2014 (each an "Interest Payment Date "), at the rates established in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Resolution; and shall mature on July 15 in the years (each a "Principal Payment Date ") and in the amounts acceptable to a Delegate (the "Principal Installments "), subject to the provisions of paragraph 4 of this Resolution. 4. Interest Rates and Principal Installments Each Delegate is hereby authorized and directed to accept the interest rates on the Local School Bond established by VPSA, provided that each interest rate shall be five one - hundredths of one percent (0.05 %) over the interest rate to be paid by VPSA for the corresponding principal amount date of the VPSA Bonds, a portion of the proceeds of which will be used to purchase the Local School Bond, and provided further that the true interest cost of the Local School Bond does not exceed five and fifty one - hundredths percent (5.50 %) per annum. The Interest Payment Dates and the Principal Installments are subject to change at the request of VPSA. Each Delegate is hereby authorized and directed to accept changes in the Interest Payment Dates and the Principal Installments at the request of VPSA based on the final terra to maturity of the VPSA Bonds, requirements imposed on VPSA by the nationally- recognized rating agencies and the final principal amount of the Local School Bond; provided, however, that the principal amount of the Local School Bond shall not exceed the amount authorized by this Resolution. The execution and delivery of the Local School Bond as described in paragraph 8 hereof shall conclusively evidence the approval and acceptance of all of the details of the Local School Bond by the Delegate as authorized by this Resolution. 5. Form of the Local School Bond The Local School Bond shall be initially in the form of a single, temporary typewritten bond substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. 6. Payment: Paying Agent and Bond Registrar. The following provisions shall apply to the Local School Bond: (a) For as long as VPSA is the registered owner of the Local School Bond, all payments of principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Local School Bond shall be made in immediately available funds to VPSA at, or before 11:00 a.m. on the applicable Interest Payment Date, Principal Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption, of if such date is not a 13 business day for Virginia banks or for the Commonwealth of Virginia, then at or before 11 :00 a.m, on the business day next succeeding such interest Payment Date, Principal Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption. (b) All overdue payments of principal and, to the extent permitted by law, interest shall at the applicable interest rate or rates on the Local School Bond. (c) U.S. Bank National Association, Richmond, Virginia, is designated as Bond Registrar and Paying Agent for the Local School Bond. 7. Prepayment or Redemption The Principal Installments of the Local School Bond held by VPSA coming due on or before July 15, 2023, and the definitive bond for which the Local School Bond held by VPSA may be exchanged that mature on or before July 15, 2023, are not subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities. The Principal Installments of the Local School Bond held by VPSA coming due on or after July 15, 2024, and the definitive bond(s) for which the Local School Bond held by VPSA may be exchanged that mature on or after July 15, 2024, and the definitive bond(s) for which the Local School Bond held by VPSA may be exchanged that mature on or after July 15, 2024, are subject to prepayment or redemption at the option of the County prior to their stated maturities in whole or in part, on any date on or after July 15, 2024, are subject to prepayment or redemption prices (expressed as percentages of Principal Installments to be prepaid or the principal amount of the Local School Bond to be redeemed) set forth below plus accrued interest to the date set for prepayment or redemption: Dates Prices July 15, 2023 through July 14, 2024 101% July 15 2024 through July 14, 2025 100% July 15, 2025 and thereafter 100% Provided, however that the Local School Bond shall not be subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities as described above without first obtaining the written consent of VPSA or other registered owner of the Local School Bond. Notice of any such prepayment or redemption shall be given by the Bond Registrar to VPSA or other registered owner by registered mail not more than ninety (90) and not less than sixty (60) days before the date fixed for prepayment or redemption, 8. Execution of the Local School Bond The Chairman or Vice Chairman and the Clerk or any Deputy Clerk of the Board are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Local School Bond and to affix the seal of the County thereto. 14 9. Pledge of Full Faith and Credit For the prompt payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and the interest on the Local School Bond as the same shall become due, the full faith and credit of the County are hereby irrevocably pledged, and in each year while any portion of the Local School Bond shall be outstanding there shall be levied and collected in accordance with law an annual ad valorem tax upon all taxable property in the County subject to local taxation, sufficient in amount to provide for the payment of the principal of and premium, if any, and the interest on the Local School Bond as such principal, premium, if any, and interest shall become due, which tax shall be without limitation as to rate or amount and in addition to all other taxes authorized to be levied in the County to the extent other funds of the County are not lawfully available and appropriated for such purposes. 10. Use of Proceeds Certificate and Tax Compliance Agreement. The Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator and such other officer or officers of the County or the School Board as either may designate are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver on behalf of the County a Use of Proceeds Certificate and Tax Compliance Agreement (the "Tax Compliance Agreement ") setting forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the Local School Bond and containing sue covenants as may be necessary in order to show compliance with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code "), and applicable regulations relating to the exclusion from gross income of interest on the Local School Bond and on the VPSA Bonds. The Board covenants on behalf of the County that (i) the proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Local School Bond will be invested and expended as set forth in such Tax Compliance Agreement and that the County shall comply with the other covenants and representations contained therein and (ii) the County shall comply with the provisions of the Code so that interest on the Local School Bond and on the VPSA Bonds will remain excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. 11. State Non - Arbitrage Program: Proceeds Agreement The Board hereby determines that it is in the best interests of the County to authorize and direct the County Treasurer to participate in the State Non - Arbitrage Program in connection with Local School Bond. The Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator and such officer or officers of the County as either may designate are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver a Proceeds Agreement with respect to the deposit and investment of proceeds of the Local School Bond by and among the County, the other participants in the sale of the VPSA Bonds, VPSA, the investment manager and the depository, substantially in the form submitted to the Board at this meeting, which form is hereby approved, 12. Continuing Disclosure Agreement The Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator and such other officer or officers of the County as either may designate are hereby authorized and directed to execute a Continuing 15 Disclosure Agreement as set forth in Appendix F to the Bond Sale Agreement, setting forth the reports and notices to be filed by the County and containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to show compliance with the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15C2 -12, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended, and directed to make all filings required by Section 3 of the Bond Sale Agreement should the County be determined by VPSA to be a MOP (as defined in the Bond Sale Agreement), 13. Refunding. The Board hereby acknowledges that VPSA may issue refunding bonds to refund any bonds previously issued by VPSA, including the VPSA Bonds issued to purchase the Local School Bond, and that the purpose of such refunding bonds would be to enable VPSA to pass on annual debt service savings to the local issuers, including the County. Each of the Delegates is authorized to execute and deliver to VPSA such allonge to the Local School Bond, revised debt service schedule, IRS Form 8038 -G or such other documents reasonably deemed necessary by VPSA and VPSA's bond counsel to be necessary to reflect and facilitate the refunding of the Local School Bond and the allocation of the annual debt service savings to the County by VPSA. The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is authorized to affix the County's seal on any such documents and attest or countersign the same. 14. Filing of Resolution The appropriate officers or agents of the County are hereby authorized and directed to cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be filed with the Circuit Court of the County. 15. Election to Proceed under Public Finance Act In accordance with Section 15.2 -2601 of the Virginia Code, the Board elects to issue the Local School Bond pursuant to the provisions of the Public Finance Act of 1991, Chapter 26 of Title 15.2 of the Virginia Code, 16. Further Actions The members of the Board and all officers, employees and agents of the County are hereby authorized to take such action as they or any one of them may consider necessary or desirable in connection with the issuance and sale of the Local School Bond and otherwise in furtherance of this Resolution and any such actions previously taken is hereby ratified and confirmed. 17. Effective Date This Resolution shall take effect immediately, The undersigned Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, 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 October 9, 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. The front page of this Resolution accurately records (i) the members of Wo the Board of Supervisors present at the meeting, (ii) the members who were absent from the meeting, and (iii) the vote of each member, including any abstentions. WITNESS MY HAND and the seal of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, this 9 1h day of October, 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 PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS REZONING #04 -13 THE OVERLOOK, SUBMITTED BY GREENWAY ENGINEERING INC. TO REZONE 55.46 ACRES AS FOLLOWS: 14.283+1 - ACRES FROM RP RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE DISTRICT TO RA (RURAL AREAS) DISTRICT, 7.098 +/- ACRES FROM RP {RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE) DISTRICT TO B2 (GENERAL BUSINESS) DISTRICT; 10.040 +/- ACRES FROM RA RURAL AREAS DISTRICT TO RP RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE DISTRICT AND 24.15 +l- ACRES TO REMAIN RP (RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE) DISTRICT WITH PROFFERS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BERRYVILLE PIKE U.S. ROUTE NEAR AND ADJOINING THE VALLEY MILL ROAD INTERSECTION AND ARE IDENTIFIED BY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 55 -A -161 55- A -165A 55 -A -166 55- A -167A 55 -A -168 55- A -174A 55- A -17411 55- A -174D AND 55 -A -165 A PORTION IN THE RED BUD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. - APPROVED Deputy Director of Planning Michael Ruddy appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this was a request to rezone 55.46 acres from RP (Residential Performance) and RA (Rural Areas) to RA (Rural Areas) District, RP (Residential Performance) District and B2 (General Business) District, with proffers. The property is located in the Red Bud Magisterial District. Deputy Director Ruddy advised the current zoning was put in place in 2007 as part of the Carriage Park rezoning. He noted the generalized development plan shows the proffered development package, particularly Valley Mill Road's new intersection with Route 7, which will 17 be signalized. Deputy Director Ruddy went on to say the proposed RP and B2 zoning was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated the proposed impacts are addressed through the proffer statement. Deputy Director Ruddy noted there was a discrepancy in the Development Impact Model values in that the application reflects 2012 values versus 2013. He also advised the Deputy Director of Planning — Transportation was concerned about the number of proposed public street entrances. Deputy Director Ruddy concluded by saying the Planning Commission was satisfied with the proffers as presented and recommended unanimous approval, Supervisor Hess asked what type of precedent the Board had for using prior year numbers versus current year numbers. Deputy Director Ruddy responded that he did not believe we had ever done that. Supervisor Collins asked if the proposed Route 37 right -of -way would be moved. Deputy Director Ruddy responded that flexibility would be needed; however, the best outcome is the location proposed on this plan. He concluded by saying the alignment of Route 37 would occur at this location. Evan Wyatt, Greenway Engineering, appeared before the Board on behalf of the applicant. He reviewed the history of this project. He noted the Valley Mill Road realignment would occur at the first phase of development. He noted the median located to the east on Route 7 would be closed. With regard to the concerns about the number of entrances, Mr. Wyatt advised the entrances were spaced at 550 feet, 650 feet, 650 feet, and 750 feet, which is double the distance VDOT allows by right. With regard to the impact model values, Mr. Wyatt noted the accepted proffer pre -dates the 2013 update. He went on to say that the Willow Run project maintains a proffer that is not consistent with the current model. He concluded by saying this particular project has significant regional benefits. 18 Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Steve Chadwell appeared before the Board on behalf of the investors on Eddy's Lane. He stated he was seeking clarification on the proposed transportation program. He did not see how Eddy's Lane could make it to the new road alignment since Proffer B3 removes the existing section of Valley Mill Road. He concluded by asking how many days the Board allows for notice to neighboring landowners. There being no further comments, Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Deputy Director Ruddy responded that staff sends adjoiner notices seven to 10 days in advance of the hearing. Mr. Wyatt advised the Board that Eddy's Lane would be a right -turn in for vehicles travelling east. In order to travel west from Eddy's Lane, vehicles would have to travel east to the median crossing at the Opequon Facility and make a U turn. Supervisor Hess stated the staff report referenced concerns cited by staff regarding entrances. Deputy Director of Planning — Transportation John Bishop stated he was referring to the number of entrances to the residential portion of the project. He stated these entrances equated to additional conflict points and he did not see the true need for three entrances. He concluded by saying the applicant had proffered turn lanes. Supervisor Hess stated he was not concerned about where we ended up, but he was concerned about setting a precedent regarding the impact model values. He concluded by saying he liked the project and there were some good aspects. Upon a motion by Supervisor Collins, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved Rezoning #04-13. w WHEREAS, Rezoning #04 -13, The Overlook, submitted by Greenway Engineering, Inc., to rezone 55.46 acres as follows: 14.83 + /- acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to RA (Rural Areas) District; 7.098 +/- acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District; 10.040 +/- acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District and 24.145 +/- acres to remain RP (Residential Performance) District with proffers dated November 11, 2012, last revised on May 27, 2013, was considered. The property is located on the south side of Berryville Pike (U.S. Route 7) near and adjoining the Valley Mill Road intersection. The property is further identified by property Identification Numbers 55 -A -161, 55- A -165A, 55 -A -166, 55- A -167A, 55 -A -168, 55-A- 174A, 55- A -174B, 55 A -174D, and 55 -A -165 a portion, in the Red Bud Magisterial District. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on September 18 2013; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on October 9, 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 55.46 acres as follows: 14.83 + /- acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to RA (Rural Areas) District; 7.098 +/- acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District; 10.040 +/- acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to RP (Residential Performance) District and 24.145 +/- acres to remain RP (Residential Performance) District with proffers dated November 11, 2012, last revised on May 27, 2013. The conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner are attached. This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 9 th day of October, 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 OTHER PLANNING ITEMS 20 RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO SUBMIT REVENUE SHARING PROJECT APPLICATION FOR VALLEY MILL ROAD WORK RELATED TO REZONING #04 -13, THE OVERLOOK. - APPROVED Deputy Director of Planning- Transportation John Bishop appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised the Board was being asked to adopt a resolution stating its intent to apply for revenue sharing funds for this project. He noted the County applied for funding two years ago and received $1 million. He noted that staff expects the project to cost more than that. Other items dealt with in the resolution include: - The abandonment of the existing Valley Mill Road alignment; and - Channing Drive rezoning proffers of $100 per unit to be used as matching funds. He went on to say the verbiage "to the extent permissible " was added to item number 3 in the resolution. He concluded by saying the revenue sharing and matching funds would be applied to the new alignment and intersection. Upon a motion by Supervisor Collins, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved the resolution of intent to submit a Revenue Sharing Program application. WHEREAS, Timothy and Mary Stafford, and Valley Mill Farm, LC (collectively the "Owners ") currently own 55.46 acres, more or less, located in Frederick County, Virginia, and described as tax parcels 55 -A -161, 55 -A -165 (portion), 55- A -165A, 55 -A -166, 55 -A -167, 55 -A- 167A, 55 -A -168, 55- A -174A, 55- A -174B, 55- A -174D (the "Property "); WHEREAS, the Owners have submitted, contemporaneously herewith, a Proffer Statement and Rezoning Application for the Property; WHEREAS, the Proffer Statement and Rezoning Application request the Property be rezoned from Residential Performance (RP) and Rural Areas (RA), to Business General (B2) and Residential Performance (RP); WHEREAS, the Generalized Development Plan ( "GDP ") prepared by Greenway Engineering, dated May 27, 2013, and approved as a part of the Rezoning Application, provides for the relocation of Valley Mill Road through the Property; WHEREAS, the Owners, by way of the Proffer Statement, have proffered to dedicate a right -of -way area for the relocation of Valley Mill Road which is sufficient to provide for the 21 construction of two eastbound travel lanes, two westbound travel lanes, a center left turn lane, right turn lanes at all full access entrances, left, right, through stacking lanes for westbound traffic at the intersection of Berryville Pike, and two receiving lanes for eastbound traffic at the intersection of Berryville Pike (the "New Valley Mill Road Improvements "); and WHEREAS, the Owners have prepared information for Virginia Department of Transportation ( "VDOT ") review and comment concerning the abandonment of an approximately 0.9 acre portion of Valley Mill Road, as depicted on the GDP as the Valley Mill Road Abandonment Area, that will no longer be needed if said road is relocated as proffered NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby adopts this Resolution on the following terms and conditions, as follows: 1. Revenue Sharing Application The Board intends to submit a Revenue Sharing Application pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 33.1 - 23,05, and consistent with the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Revenue Sharing Program Guidelines, for one -half of the funds necessary to design the New Valley Mill Road Improvements, provided the Owners satisfy the conditions precedent set forth herein. 2. Conditions Precedent to Board's Obligations Hereunder Prior to the Board submitting a Revenue Sharing Application, the Owners must have i) contributed one -half (112) of the costs of designing the New Valley Mill Road Improvements within twelve (12) months of approval of the final, un- appealed, approval of the Rezoning Application for the Property; and ii) agreed to dedicate for public use the right -of -way through the Property necessary to construct the New Valley Mill Road Improvements within three (3) months of the approval of the design of the New Valley Mill Road improvements by VDOT and the County, unless said dates are extended by the County. 3. Charming Drive Proffer The Board intends to contribute to the total sum, to the extent permissible, of the local match for the New Valley Mill Road Improvements funds proffered and collected for bridge construction as a part of the Charming Drive Rezoning, REZ415 -99. 4. Locally Administered Projects The Board intends that the Revenue Sharing Application shall opt for the Locally Managed Projects option under the Revenue Sharing Program. 5. Implementation of Revenue Sharing The Board understands VDOT expects all requests for Revenue Sharing funding to be for viable projects with work anticipated in the near future, and thus the Board intends that a Revenue Sharing Application would be submitted as soon as practical after the conditions precedent set forth above have been met, and prior to submitting such Application the Board would adopt the necessary resolution required for the Revenue Sharing Application. 6. Additional Funding Sources. The Board also resolves it intends to provide reasonable, non - monetary support to the Owners in applying for other Federal and State funding programs, if any, which could assist with funding the relocation and construction of Valley Mill Road, or other aspects of the project. 22 7. Right of Way Abandonment The Board resolves that it intends to support the abandonment of the approximately 0.9 acre portion of Valley Mill Road, as depicted on the GDP as the Valley Mill Road Abandonment Area, that will no longer be needed if said road is relocated as proffered, and the Board further resolves it intends to support transfer of the abandoned area to Valley Mill Farm, LC, all in accordance with Chapter I of Title 33.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950), or such other statutes as may be applicable. Any such abandonment proceedings as may be required by the Code would be instituted as soon as practical following VDQT acceptance of the relocated portion of Valley Mill Road into the State secondary system of highways. 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 DISCUSSION — PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS — HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS IN THE EM EXTRACTIVE MANUFACTURING MI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL), AND M2 (INDUSTRIAL GENERAL) DISTRICTS. — SENT FORWARD FOR PUBLIC HEARING. ry Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised on September 9, 2013 staff presented a request to increase the height allowance in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), M1 (Light Industrial), and M2 (Industrial General) Zoning Districts through the approval of a conditional use permit. She noted the Board expressed concern over this process due to the permanent nature of the improvements and referred the amendment back to committee for further review. The revised amendment would remove the conditional use permit requirement and replace it with a Board of Supervisors' waiver. The waiver would allow the Board to determine the appropriateness of the proposed height increase while providing the applicant with an irrevocable approval. The waiver would permit the maximum height in the EM District of 200 feet and 150 feet in the M1 and M2 Districts. Senior 23 Planner Perkins went onto say supplementary use regulations have been prepared that would need to be addressed by the applicant when applying for the waiver. She concluded by saying the Development Review and Regulations Committee was supportive of this amendment and staff was seeking Board direction regarding same. Vice - Chairman DeHaven asked about the source of the height figures. Senior Planner Perkins responded that the EM limit of 200 feet came from a specific applicant request, while the DRRC suggested the height limits in M1 and M2. She went on to say that in order to go higher than 200 feet in the EM the ordinance would need to be amended. She concluded by saying there was not much discussion about going higher than 200 feet. Supervisor Fisher questioned if there were currently any exempt structures that exceed 200 feet and whether some of those exempt structures should be included in this amendment for a waiver. Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board sent the proposed amendment forward for public hearing. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Department has received a request to revise the Zoning Ordinance to increase the maximum height in the EM, Ml, and M2 Zoning Districts; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors discussed proposed changes to the EM, M1, and M2 Districts at their regularly scheduled meeting on September 9, 2013 and sent the amendment back to the DRRC for further review; and WHEREAS, the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) discussed revisions at their meeting on September 26, 2013 and recommended this item be forwarded to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on October 9, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that in the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice directs the Frederick County Planning Commission hold a public hearing regarding an amendment to Chapter 165 to increase the 24 maximum height in the EM, M1, and M2 Zoning Districts with a Board of Supervisors Waiver and supplementary use regulations. Passed this 9"' day of October, 2013 by the following recorded vote: 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 ROAD RESOLUTION — BROOKLAND MANOR SUBDIVISION — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA. WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM -43, 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 Requirement 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. This item was approved under the consent agenda. BOARD LIAISON REPORTS There were no Board liaison reports. 25 CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no citizen comments. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS Vice - Chairman DeHaven advised the McCann family had approached him and expressed a desire to undertake a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, They asked him to sponsor this application. He stated he was inclined and would ask staff to prepare the resolution for the next board meeting. The Board consensus was to proceed with the process. Supervisor Hess advised that he attended the Shenandoah University football game and noted that as part of the festivities Supervisor Fisher was recognized for his 24 years of service to the University. Chairman Shickle extended his condolences to Vice- Chairman DeHaven and his family following the passing of his mother. A T% 7!7 Y 177 AT UPON A MOTION BY VICE - CHAIRMAN DEHAVEN, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR FISHER, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED. (5:01 P.M.) 26 COUNTY of FREDERICK TO: Board of Supervisors John R. Riley, Jr. County Administrator 5401665 -5666 Fax 540/667 -0370 E -mail: jriley @ co.frederick_va.0 s Frederick County-Grieyance Panel Mr. Marcus Adams, Jr. has resigned from the Frederick County Grievance :Panel. The following have agreed to serve on the Grievance Panel. The Board's consideration and a roval is requested: Pp 4 Milan R. Majarov, 104 Winnepeg Place, Winchester, VA 22603 Date T, Maza, 121 Highbanks Road, Stephenson, VA 22656 For your information, current members are Joyce Harriman, Helen Lake, Patricia Perry, Nancy "Tootie" Rinker and Donald H. Shirley. Communitv Policv and Management Team (CPM Greta Cherry - Parent Representative 112 Corral Drive Stephens City, VA 22655 Term Expires: 06/30/14 Two year term 107 North Kent Street ® Winchester, Virginia 22601 Memorandum - Board of Supervisors November 7, 2013 Page 2 IJCL.CIff16CK LV�3 Board of Zoning ADneals Memorandum - Board of Supervisors November 7, 2093 Page 3 Supervisors and submitted to the Judge of the Frederick County Circuit Court for final appointment.) Northern. Sherandoah Vailey Regional Commission {NSVRC,� Chuck DeHaveh - Board of Supervisors Representative Robert A. Hess` Board of Supervisors Representative Term Expires: 12/31/13 ,Elected Officials serve their elected term of office: while others serve a three year term. Current County representatives on the Corrimission are Supervisors DeHaven and Robe. Hess, County Administrator Sohn Riley; and Planning Director Eric Lawrence; Assistant County Administrator Kris Tierney serves as the alternate: ) JANUARY 201`4 Industrial Deveiogmefnt Authorit Memorandum — Board of Supervisors November 7, 2013 Page 4 10/15/2013 11:25 15405788828 DEHAVEN NURSERY INC PAGE 02/02 INFORMATIONAL DATA SHFET FOR FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Supe"Isor, would like to nominate you to serve an the ` ARk 7. .- _&u, As a brief personal introduction to the other hoard members, please fill out the information requested below for their review prior to filling the appointment. (Please Print Clearly. Thank You.) 1►�auae. � �" � � � Address: Home Phone. 6 -5 f-Cv7y office Phone: --5 - 72 - 2-- l ) 610 Employer: Ao C t.� Emai 0 (4 r M" Occupation: Civic/Community Activities: Will You Be able To ,Attend This Committee's Regularly Scheduled Meeting Ou. Yes: _X - No: - Do You Foresee Any Possible C Of Interest Which Might ,Arise fly Your S e rving On This Committee? Yes: _ No: _�,,..__Y._. Explain: ,Additional. Information Or Comments You Would Like To Provide (If you geed more space, pease use the reverse side or include additional sheets)•. ApplicanVs Signature: Nomioatin,g Supervisor's Comments: Date; � (o6109M6) COUNTY OF FREDERICK MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors CC: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator FROM: Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney DATE: November 4, 2013 RE: Commissioner of Revenue Refund Requests Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 5401722 -8383 Fax 5401667 -0370 E -mail: rwillia @co.frederick.va.us , 45 6 7 RECENED NOV 2013 Attached, for the Board's review, are requests to authorize the Treasurer to refund the following entities: 1. BMW Financial Services NA LLC — $4,484.10 2. GE Capital Auto Lease — $3,293.22 o erick B. Williams County Attorney Attachments 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 COUNTY OF FREDERICK TO: Ellen E. Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue Frederick County Board of Supervisors CC: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator FROM: Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney DATE: October 4, 2013 RE: Refund — BMW Financial Services NA LLC Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722 -8383 Fax 5401667 -0370 E -mail: rwillia @co.frederick.va.us I am in receipt of the Commissioner's request, dated September 6, 2013, to authorize the Treasurer to refund BMW Financial Services NA LLC the amount of $4,484.10, relating to vehicles sold or moved out of state for 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. Refund includes personal property taxes and registration fees due to proration. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 58.1 - 398l(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 act on the request, as indicated in the Commissioner's memorandum. oderick B. Williams County Attorney Attachment 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 RECEIVED X31 OCT Rv, 1VIELYIORANDUM TO: Ellen E. Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue Frederick County Board of Supervisors CC: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator FROM: Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney DATE: October 4, 2013 RE: Refund — BMW Financial Services NA LLC Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722 -8383 Fax 5401667 -0370 E -mail: rwillia @co.frederick.va.us I am in receipt of the Commissioner's request, dated September 6, 2013, to authorize the Treasurer to refund BMW Financial Services NA LLC the amount of $4,484.10, relating to vehicles sold or moved out of state for 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. Refund includes personal property taxes and registration fees due to proration. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 58.1 - 398l(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 act on the request, as indicated in the Commissioner's memorandum. oderick B. Williams County Attorney Attachment 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 September 6, 2013 Frederick County, Virginia Ellen E. Murphy Commissioner of the Revenue 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Phone 540.665 -5681 Fax 540 -667 -6487 email: emurphy @co.frederick.va.us TO: Mr. Roderick Williams, County Attorney Frederick County Board of Supervisors FROM: Ellen E. Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue RE: Exoneration BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES NA Please allow the Treasurer to refund $4,484.10 to BMW Financial Services NA LLC for vehicles sold or moved out of state for 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. Refund includes personal property taxes and registration fees due to proration. The request for refund appears in order and all backup information has been examined, approved, and retained by Commissioner of the Revenue staff. Detailed data is secure. Exoneration total is $4,484.10. Date: 9/05/13 Cash Register: COUNTY OF FREDERICK Time: 14:16 Customer Name: BMW FINANCIAL SERIVCES NA LLC Total Transactions: 41 Customer Transactions: 8 r Intions: 2 =Edit 4= Delete 5 =View upt Dept Trans PPS O --- - 1 Ticket No. Tax Amount U 5 2J - Penalty /Int Amount Paid - PP2011 2 00045870015 5- $827,17- 80. $.00 l .0 $827.17- - PP2011 3 00045870016 $827.17- $.00 $827.17- _ PP2012 4 00046020009 $742,37- $ 00 $742.37- _ PP2012 5 00046020010 $742.36- $.00 $742.36- _ PP2013 6 00046880001 $481.95- $.00 $481.95- - VL2012 7 00064970001 $25.00- $.00 $25.00- _ VL2013 8 00065440001 $25.00- $.00 $25.00 -- Total Paid : $4,484.10 F3 =Exit F14 =Show Map# F15 =Show Balance F18= Sort - Entered M=CmdLine COUNTY OF FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 5401722 -8383 Fax 5401667 -0370 E -mail: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us MEMORANDUM TO. Ellen E. Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue Frederick County Board of Supervisors CC: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator FROM: Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney DATE: November 4, 2013 RE: Refund — GE Capital Auto Lease I am in receipt of the Commissioner's request, dated November 1, 2013, to authorize the Treasurer to refund GE Capital Auto Lease the amount of $3,293.22, relating to vehicles sold or moved out of state for 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. Refund includes personal property taxes and registration fees due to proration. 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 act on the request, as indicate n the Commissioner's memorandum. Roderick . illiams County Attorney Attachment 107 North Kent Street e Winchester, Virginia 22601 November 1, 2013 Frederick County, Virginia Ellen E. Murphy Commissioner of the Revenue 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Phone 540 -665 -5681 Fax 540-667 -6487 email. emurphy &o.frederick va.us TO: Mr. Roderick Williams, County Attorney. Frederick County Board of Supervisors FROM: Ellen E. Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue RE. Exoneration G E CAPITAL AUTO LEASE Please allow the Treasurer to refund $3,293.22 to G E Capital Auto Lease for vehicles sold or moved out of state for 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. Refund includes personal property taxes and registration fees due to normal vehicle proration. The request for refund appears in order and all backup information has been examined, approved, and retained by Commissioner of the Revenue staff. Detailed data is secure. Exoneration total is $3,293.22. Date: 11/01/13 Cash Register: COUNTY OF FREDERICK Time: 08:36:41 Tot 294 Customer Name: G E CAPITAL AUTO LEASE Customer Transactions: 20 Ontion-9: 2=Edit 4=Delete 5=view upt Dent Trans ---- Ticket No. Tax Amount Penalty/Int Amount Paid — Plt�0 1 0017952013 $170.41- .Uu $170.4 - _ PP2010 2 00179520134 $340.81- $.00 - $340.81- _ PP2010 3 00179520135 $91.13- $.00 $91.13 - PP2010 4 00179520136 $182.25- $.00 $182.25- PP2011 5 00183060075 $297.07- $37.88- $334.95- PP2011 6 00183060076 $297.07- $.00 $297.07 - PP2011 7 00183060077 $165.85- $21.15- $187.00- PP2011 8 00183060078 $165,85- $,00 $165.85- PP2012 9 00183070051 $272.77- $.00 $272.77- _ PP2012 10 00183070052 $272.77- $.00 $272.77 - _ PP2012 11 00183070053 $160.38- $.00 $160.38- _ PP2012 12 00183070054 $160.38- $.00 $160.38 - Multiple Pages Total Paid : $3,293.22 F3=Exit F14=Show Map t F15=Show Balance FlB=Sort-Entered F21=CmdLin l�etcPS �>G..r,� Q(lP ✓n ua�� Date: 11/01/13 Cash Register: COUNTY OF FREDERICK Time: 08:36:41 C�t'ome'r"Name: �GE CAPITAL AUTO LEASE Total - Transactions: - 294 Customer Transactions: 20 �-tions: 2=Edit 4=Delete 5=View apt Dept Trans Ticket No. Tax Amount Penalty/Tnt Amount Paid PM 0018482003 $250.29- � - U - 0 ------- 72 PP2013 14 00184820034 $25.00- $.00 $25.00 - PP2013 15 00184820035 $136.08- $.00 $136.08- PP2013 16 00184820036 $136.08- $.00 $136.08- VL2011 17 00255040001 $25.00- $5.00- $30.00- VL2011 18 00255050001 $25.00- $5.00- $30.00- VL2012 19 00256440001 $25.00- $.00 $25.00- VL2012 20 00256450001 $25.00- $.00 $25.00- Multiple Pages Total Paid : $3,293.22 F3=Exit F14=Show Map # F15=Show Balance F18=Sort-Entered F21=CmdLine TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: John R. Riley, Jr., County � SUBJECT: Business Friendly Committee Report DATE:. November 4, 2013 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 14, 2013 meeting, the Board forwarded the phase I recommendations to the respective committees /departments 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. 107 North Dent Street ® Winchester, Virginia 22601 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 Code 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. Reduction in Proffer Requirements 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 reevaluate 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 Board hold a work session in the future to discuss and review the committees' proposed recommendations. Should you have any questions; please do not hesitate to contact me. JRR/j et Attachments 2 County of Frederick INNNNNHNNlNMMItlNilllxN WIW WlW NYNN# HIINNxRMINNN .NWgaiu9exNYIRNNNION,NIN�M.rQW W{Nx1YiN6Mi{WIIIIUinlMXYbwwxNN VNNbxnINIgINRMNNIIN NIxdMINMeINNINWn1lwMINNN INMx✓tYM Paula A. Nofsinger Director of Human Resources TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Paula Nofsinger, Director of Human Resources DATE: October 9, 2013 SUBJECT, Human Resources Committee Report (540) 665 -5668 Fax: (540) 665 -5669 pnofsinger @fcva.us xMfNMwIwW auMaHHHNI ulmunuuW WWN1tHUN1 W IINNIRq NNII W!1 W INx /tlwNalMtxnataRwxgflw[NIfIx1Hlp NMwMMNNtiYNVNgwx W { uixWallwxNH1111if1ugtxlNNgMxxltW wW INIINI {INIli1 NI4NNHMNItuualNalmbNfN The HR Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Friday, October 4, 2013, at 8:00a.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 Jim Whitley, and DSS representative Delsie Butts.. * ** Items Requiring Action` ** 1. Approval of new Human Resource Policies, 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. Work for Hire This newly created policy addresses ownership rights of copyrightable material. 2. Creation of the Public Information Officer position to facilitate funding consideration during the Fiscal Year 2014 -2015 budget cycle. The Committee recommends approval to create the position of Public Information Officer. Should the Board adopt to create it; the position can then be subject to funding consideration during the upcoming budget cycle. ** *Items Not Requiring Action* ** 1. None. 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA 22601 WINCHESTER q' u FREF)FRICK COUNT`( VIRGINIA EDr DATE: October 30, 2013 TO: John R. Riley Jr., County Administrator FROM: Patrick Barker, CEcD, Executive Director RE: Recommendation Establishment of an Economic Development Authority Thank you for the opportunity for the EDC to lead discussions about establishing an Economic Development Authority. This Business Friendly recommendation was reviewed and its subsequent recommendation was unanimously endorsed by the workgroup. The workgroup (full roster below) consisted of solely County residents and /or individuals that have a business in the County. Moreover, all members had board level experience in economic development on either the Economic Development Commission and /or County Industrial Development Authority. All members will actively engage. • Gary Lofton I Frederick County Board of Supervisors • Josh Phelps I Winchester Metals • Mitch Orndoff Special Made • Stan Crockett Virginia Inland Port • Doug Rinker I Winchester Equipment BACKGROUND From the Frederick County Business Friendly Committee's Final Report, the creation of an economic development authority or EDA was identified as an important catalyst to fostering a more competitive business environment for Frederick County. While the powers and authorities of an industrial development authority, which currently exists in Frederick County, and an economic development authority are the same, the change from an IDA to an EDA would provide the Board of Supervisors with an opportunity to re- establish the economic development vision for the county and would also provide the flexibility to pursue a variety of business attraction and retention options and strategies for implementing a diversified economic development strategy. The workgroup reviewed various elements of Economic Development Authorities. The positives and negatives of an economic development department and economic development authority were discussed at length. Staff acquired information directly on several other jurisdictions, including Warren County, City of Winchester, Henrico County and Chesterfield County. Several flow charts were developed to guide the discussion on organizational and funding issues Your Move, Our Commitment. 45 F. 1.t Bose 1wfE n Strcel i A 540- 6175-097_3 A F,ix 540 604 ® 'N•dVW.W[r�Vd.-Y!f Page 2 of 2 Recommendation I Establishment of an Economic Development Authority RECOMMENDATION • Convert IDA to EDA and mirror, at a minimum, the County's current funding to the EDC, including staff • EDA Board members should in reside the County and include 4 members of the current EDC Board and 3 members of the current IDA board, initially on a staggered term, and a BOS liaison. o All EDA members should have business experience at the executive level and /or significant Land development experience. • Annual meetings, at a minimum, of EDA Board and BOS to confirm strategy alignment and specific direction • Specific direction from County BOS on economic development (short- and long -term goals (activities to accomplish in year 1, etc), level of aggressiveness of EDA (land acquisitions, infrastructure development, bond issuance), and a continued existing business function as well. RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION • Option that most closely compares to current EDC structure, which has performed well, and would provide a mostly seamless transition • Most simple to customers (new businesses and business expansions have one point of contact) • County needs a vehicle to prime business development properties with fewer obstacles, increased speed , • Accountable model not just for today, but looking forward Thank you again for the opportunity to lead this discussion. Please inquire to any questions. If this impacts the current structure of the EDC, please note the EDC Chair position will be elected in January. The Chair position rotates based on residency with the City up next. Some direction prior to January would be appreciated. Your Move. Our Commitment. 4 `: i':is: Bo 1 „,,(I %rte St. f, c. � ;, a?t�f, 4�r.� r j �d 66 5- 0 97 -71 ' ;,,, 'e ']2 . ` ,� f�>".) � .} a F'� �1�� . � ._0w0 A `h�.�iVd,:•vint.i.�,.�i'lf COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665 -5651 Pax: 5401665 -6395 Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Director MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director SUBJECT: Development Impact Model — Oversight Committee Report from Meeting on October 8, 2013 DATE: October 30, 2013 The Development Impact Model — Oversight Committee (DIM -OC) met on Tuesday, October 8, 2013 at 9;00 AM. Members Present J.P. Carr Robert Hess Dr. John Lamanna Gary Lofton H. Paige Manual Stephen Pettler Kris Tierney Members Absent Brian Madigan Roger Thomas Patrick Barker, Eric Lawrence, Wayne Lee, and Al Orndorff were present. ** *Item Requiring Action * ** The DIM -OC conducted a re- evaluation of the Development Impact Model taking into account current economic conditions, per the Board's August 2013 Business Friendly initiative directive. It was recognized that the DIM's current proffer expectation solely reflects projected capital facility impacts resulting from new residential development. The DIM -OC recognized that the economy appears to be moving in a positive direction, which is reflected in a 31% increase in new residential building permits issued in the first 8 months of 2013, when compared to the same time period a year ago. 107 North Kent Street 9 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Page 2 DIM -OC Report October 31, 2013 It was noted that if cash proffer expectations are reduced, the projected capital impacts will remain. in essence, someone has to cover the costs of new residential construction and its impacts on capital facilities; either the developer /homebuilder /homeowner or countywide through contributions from all taxpayers. It was commented that current residents should not be expected to bear the cost of new growth through increased real estate taxes. The DIM -OC felt that offering credit for proffered transportation improvements, above what is typically expected to address transportation mitigation, would be appropriate. This practice has occurred on some of the larger, more heavily transportation- proffered projects. Additionally, the practice of crediting a project reflective of proffered transportation values is also occurring in other jurisdictions. It was noted that projects that offer extensive road rights -of -way such as for planned Route 37 should receive credits to mitigate their projected residential impacts. How one arrives at the value of the transportation credit will be through discussions with the applicant, VDOT, and the County Transportation Planner. By majority vote, the DIM-OC recommends approval of a policy modification to enable credit for transportation. * ** Informational Purposes Only * ** The DIM -OC intends to continue its re- evaluation of the Development Impact Model to assess if further modifications to the proffer expectation are appropriate which offer credit for: ® Tax contributions that may result from new residential development o This concept would enable the DIM to calculate real estate tax revenue resulting from residential development, and reflect that revenue as a credit against the projected impacts on capital facilities. o Tax contributions that may result from new commercial development associated with a residential development proposal o This concept would enable the DIM to calculate real estate tax revenue that would be generated from a proffered phased commercial component of the rezoning application, and reflect that revenue as a credit against the projected impacts on capital facilities. Page 3 DIM -OC Report October 31, 2013 Once the DIM -OC achieves a recommendation on these two potential credit scenarios, same will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for consideration. Please contact staff should you have questions. ERL /pd COUNTY of FREDERICK Parks and Recreation Department pure li. 540- 665 -5678 FAX: 540 - 665 -9697 www.fcprd.nct c- mail: fc rdC(�.co.frcdcrick.va.us U V. To: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator From: Jason L. Robertson, Director, Parks & Recreation Dept. Subject: Parks and Recreation Commission Action Date: October 10, 2013 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 Requiring 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 (4 -0). The Parks and Recreation FY 15 Capital Improvements Program recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Department for review by the Planning Commission. cc: Martin Cybulski, Chairman Christopher Collins, Board Liaison 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 County of Frederick Paula A. Nofsinger Director of Human Resources (540) 665 -5668 Fax: (540) 665 -5669 pnofsinger@a fcva. us TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Paula Nofsinger, Director of Human Resources DATE: October 9, 2013 SUBJECT: Human Resources Committee Report The HR Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Friday, October 4, 2013, at 8 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 Jim Whitley, and DSS representative Delsie Butts. * ** Items Requiring Action * ** 1. Approval of new Human Resource Policies. 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. Work for Hire This newly created policy addresses ownership rights of copyrightable material. 2. Creation of the Public Information Officer position to facilitate funding consideration during the Fiscal Year 2014 -2015 budget cycle. The Committee recommends approval to create the position of Public Information Officer. Should the Board adopt to create it; the position can then be subject to funding consideration during the upcoming budget cycle. ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 1. None. 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA 22601 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next HR Committee meeting is scheduled for Friday, November 1, 2013. Respectfully Submitted, Human Resources Committee Robert Hess, Chairman Chris Collins Robert Weils Dorrie Greene B:�( -� Y Paula A. Nofsinger Director of Human Resources 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA 22601 County of Frederick Paula. A. Nofsinger Director of Human Resources (540) 665 -5668 Fax: (540) 665 -5669 pnofsinger @fcva.us TO: Human Resources Committee and Board of Supervisors FROM: Paula Nofsinger, HR Director) �Y DATE: September 23, 2013 SUBJECT: Summary of Policy Changes Attached you will find two (2) policies that have been recently drafted and are new to the HR policy manual. Even though some policies are essential and may be more complicated to simplify and comprehend, the Committee's objective in reviewing the recommended policies is to determine the level of understanding of the policy from an employee's perspective. The ultimate goal is to recommend to the Board policies that are fundamental, compliant, and comprehendible to the extent possible. XXIV. 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. XXV. Work for Hire This newly created policy addresses ownership rights of copyrightable material. Thank you for your support and please contact me directly with any questions. 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA 22601 XXIV. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY USAGE 24.1 Pub The purpose of this policy is to establish the County's policy for the use of the County's information technology resources, including telephones, electronic mail, internet, and all other information technology resources provided by the County. The County provides telephones, electronic mail, internet, and other information technology resources so that employees can serve the citizens of Frederick County effectively and efficiently. 24.2 Definition "Information technology resources" means any and all hardware, software, devices, programs, telephones, electronic mail, internet, and/or other resources that the County owns and /or controls, regardless of where located or hosted, including mobile resources and cloud -based resources, for the purpose of maintaining, storing, creating, transmitting and/or otherwise using data, communications, and /or information. 24.3 Ownership of Information Technology Resources: The County provides information technology resources for the purpose of conducting County business. All data, communications, and/or information maintained, stored, created, transmitted, and /or used by means of any County information technology resources are the property of the County and, therefore, are not considered private. 24.4 Management The Department of Information Technology is responsible for maintaining the County's information technology resources and for providing general oversight of those resources. 24.5 Employee Responsibilities The County imposes certain responsibilities and obligations on employees when using County information technology resources, The following rules apply to employee use of those resources: A. Employees are expected to maintain the confidentiality of County information when using the County's information technology resources to communicate information. Employees must protect their individual user passwords from unauthorized use. B. Because the security of electronic messages and internet communications cannot be guaranteed, employees must be aware that marking a message or communication "confidential" or "private" must be done with the expectation that others may have access to all messages and communications, including those marked "confidential" or "private ". Thus, in certain cases, electronic messages and internet communications may not be the proper means of communication. C. Employees are expected to demonstrate courtesy and good judgment in communications they choose to transmit via electronic messages and the internet, the same as with other forms of communications. In general, electronic messages and internet communications are appropriate for short, informal messages. Hard copy letters or memoranda are recommended for longer, formal communications. D. Messages, communications, and /or data exchanged and/or stored on the County's information technology resources are subject to same records retention requirements as apply to hard copy documents. E. Employees who receive inappropriate messages or communications from inside or outside the County government have a responsibility to bring the matter to the attention of their supervisors. 24.6 Monitorina of Electronic Mail and Internet U Electronic mail messages transmitted or received (whether current or deleted) and/or information created and/or obtained using the County's information technology resources may be subject to review and /or investigation. The County may override any County - issued password or any password for any account owned and /or controlled by the County. Electronic mail messages may be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. 24.7 Disciplinary Action: Employees who use County information technology resources for inappropriate purposes are subject to discipline in accordance with the County's Human Resources Policies. "Inappropriate purposes" include, but are not necessarily limited to, any illegal purpose, any commercial purpose not approved by the County, any obscene or harassing purpose, and /or any purpose otherwise in violation of this policy, the County's Human Resources Policies generally, and /or any other County policy. XXV. WORK FOR HIRE This policy governs the respective ownership rights of the County and its employees in copyrightable material produced within the scope of employment. The "work- for - hire" rule in the Copyright Act gives the County ownership of the copyrights to works produced by its employees within the scope of their employment. The employee owns the rights to any work created at his or her own initiative and outside the scope, time and place of employment. April 9. 1 998 ACCEPTABLE USE GUIDELINES FOR INTERNET SERVICES INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA General Principles: Internet services are provided by the County of Frederick to support communications, the exchange of information, and the opportunity for collaborative government- related work. The County o'f' Frederick encourages the use of electronic communications by Its departments and employees. Access to Internet services is a revocable privilege, and conformance with acceptable to use, as expressed in this policy, is required. The Frederick County Local Government Personnel Policies and Procedures applies to Internet usage, as do other existing rules and guidelines on the ethical behavior of government employees and the use of government resources supplied by the County of Frederick. Specifically acceptable uses: 1. Communications and information exchange directly related to the operations and provision of services by Frederick County. 2. Corn III Lill Watlon and exchange for professional development. or to maintain currency of training or education. ±. Use for applying for or administering grants or contracts for the county. 4. Use for advisory, standards, research, analysis, and professional society activities related to work tasks and duties. 5. Announcement of new county regulations, ordinances, procedures, policies, rules, services, programs, information, or activities. 6. Any inter - departmental exchange not requiring a high level of security. Specifically unacceptable uses: 1. Use of the Internet for any purposes which violate federal, state, or local law. 2. Use for any purposes which violate the Personnel Policies and Procedures ofthc Irederick County Local Government. 3. Use for any for -profit activities unless specific to the County of Frederick. 4. Use for private business, including commercial advertising. 5. Use of the County of Frederick's Internet services so as to interfere with or disrupt network users, services, or equipment. 6. Intentionally seeking out information on, obtaining copies of. or modifying files and other data which are confidential under federal, state or local law, unless specifically authorized to do so once the legal conditions for release are satisfied. 7. No intentional copy is to be made of any software, electronic file. program. or data using INTERNET USE POLICY.doc Created on 10/22/2007 4.21 PM Page 1 of 2 Frederick County provided Internet services without prior, good -laith determination that copying is permissible. (Any efforts to obtain such permission must be documented in writing front the original source.) 8. Intentionally seeking information on, obtaining copies of, modifying files or data belonging to others. or electronically representing themselves as others without authorization of the file owner. Seeking passwords of others or the exchanging of passwords is prohibited. 9. Intentionally developing programs designed to harass other users or infiltrate a computer or computing system and /or damage or alter the software component of the same. 10. Use of fund raising or public relations activities not specifically related to the activities of Frederick County. Guidelines: Compuler viruses on downloaded sofrivare: Any software provided from outside the County of Frederick government must be virus checked prior to use. Software is not to be downloaded from the Internet without guidance from the Director of Information Technologies. Log(?ff (Exiling). Always make a reasonable attempt to complete the logoff or other termination procedure when finished using a remote, Internet - access system or resource. E -il fail security: I_inencryptcd electronic mail .sent or received outside any department and on the Internet cannot be expected to he secure. Largefile tran,skrr and Internet cal)acity. The Internet connection is a shared resource. While routine electronic mail and file transfer activities will not impact other users n1LIcll, large file transfers and multimedia activities will impact service levels of other users. Users contemplating large file transfers (over] 0 megabytes per transfer) or interactive video activities should. to be considerate of others. schedule these activities early or late In the day or after regular bLJSineSS I10111•S. Disclaimers: When using Internet services provided by Frederick County, users should remember that they are representing the county. Procedures: The department heads are responsible for staff compliance with this policy. and for investigating non - compliance. When an instance of non - compliance is discovered or suspected, the department head will proceed in accordance with the Disciplinary Policy of the Personnel Policies and Procedures of the Frederick County local Government. Suspension of service to users may occur when deemed necessary to maintain the operation and integrity of the County ot'Frederick internet- work. Discipline may be appropriate in some cases. Criminal or civil action against users may be appropriate where laws are - violated. INTERNET USE POLICY,doc Created on 10/22/2007 4:21 PM Page 2 of 2 July 30, 2004 SECURITY -- ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1.0 Overview The intentions for publishing an Acceptable Use Policy are not to impose restrictions that are contrary to Frederick County, Virginia's established culture of openness. trust and integrity. The County is committed to protecting its employees, and the County from illegal or damaging actions by individuals, either - knowingly or unknowingly. intetziet/lntranct/Fxtr related systems, including but not limited to computer equipment, soft operating systems, storage media, network accounts providing electronic mail, WWW browsing, and FTP, are the property of Frederick County, Virginia. These systems are to be used for business purposes in serving the interests of the County, and of our clients and customers in the course of normai operations, Effective security is a team effort involving the participation and support of every Frederick County. Virginity employee and affiliate who deals with information and /or information systems, It is the responsibility of every computer user to know these guidelines, and to conduct their activities accordingly. 2.0 Purpose The purpose of this policy is to outline the acceptable use of computer equipment at Frederick County, Virginia. These dales are in place to protect the employee and Frederick County, Virginia. Inappropriate use exposes Frederick County. Virginia to risks including virus attacks, compromising of network systems and services, and legal issues. .3.0 Scope This policy applies to employees, contractors. consultants. temporaries, and other workers at Frederick County, Virginia, including all personnel affiliated with third parties. This policy applies to all equipment that is owned or leased by Frederick County. Virginia. 4.0 Policy 4.1 General Use and Ownership L While Frederick County, Virginia's network administration desires to provide a reasonable level of privacy, users should be aware that the data they create on the corporate systems remains the property of Frederick County, Virginia. Because of the need to protect Frederick County, Virginias network. management cannot guarantee the confidentiality of information stored on any network device belonging to Frederick County, Virginia. 2, Employees are responsible for exercising food judgment regarding the reasonableness of personal usc. Individual departments are responsible for creating guidelines concerning personal use of Internet /Intranet /Extranet systems. In the absence ofsuch policies. employees should be guided by County's Internet usage policy on personal use, and if there is any uncertainty, employees should consult their supervisor or manager. 3. It is recommended that any information that users consider sensitive or vulnerable be encrypted. 4. For wecurity and network maintenance purposes, authorized individuals Within Frederick County, Virginia may monitor equipment, systems and network traffic at any time. S. Frederick County, Virginia reserves the right to audit networks and systems on a periodic basis to ensure compliance with this policy. 6. Users of PC's must backup the critical information that they have stored on their computers hard drive. This is their personal responsibility. 4.2 Security I. Keep passwords secure and do not share accounts. Authorized users are responsible for the security of their passwords and accounts. System level passwords should he changed quarterly: user level passwords should be changed every six months. 2. All PCs, laptops and workstations should be secured with a password - protected screensaver with the automatic activation feature set at 10 minutes or less, or by logging -off (control -alt- delete for Win2K users) when the host will be unattended. 3. Because information contained on portable computers is especially vulnerable, special care should be exercised. 4. Postings by employees from a irederick County. Virginia email address to newsgroups should contain a disclaimer stating that the opinions expressed are strictly their own and not necessarily those of Frederick County. Virginia. unless posting is in the course of duties. 5. All hosts used by the employee that are connected to the Frederick County. Virginia Internet /Int•anet/Extranet, whether owned by the employee or Frederick County, Virginia, shall be continually executing approved virus - scanning software with a current virus database. Unless overridden by departmental or group policy. 6. Employees must Use extreme caution when opening e -mail attachments received from Unknown senders, which may contain viruses, e -mail borhbs, or Trojan horse code. 4.3, Unacceptable Use The following act.ivitics are prohibited. Employees may be exempted from these restrictions during the course of their legitimate job responsibilities (e_g., systems administration staff may have a need to disable the network access of a host if that host is disrupting production services). Under no circumstances is an employee of Frederick County, Virginia authorized to engage in any activity that is illegal tinder local. state, federal or international law while utilizing Frederick County, Virginia - owned resources. Fhe lists below are by no ricahs exhaustive, but attempt to provide a framework hir activities, which fall into the category of unacceptable use, S,ystent and Network Activities The following activities are strictly prohibited, with no exceptions: I , Violations of the rights of any person or company protected by copyright, trade secret, patent or other intellectual property, or similar laws or regulations, including, but not limited to, the installation or distribution of "pirated ".or other software products that are not appropriately licensed for use by Frederick County, Virginia. 2. Unauthorized copying of copyribltted material including, but not limited to, digitization and distribution of photographs from magazines, books or other copyrighted sources, copyrighted music, and the installation of any copyrighted software for which Frederick County, Virginia or the end user does not have an active license is strictly prohibited. 3. Exporting software. technical information, encryption software or technology, in violation of international or regional export control laws, is illegal. The appropriate management should be consulted prior to export of any material that is in question, d. Introduction of malicious programs into the network or server (e.g., viruses, worths. Troian horses, e-mail bombs, etc.). 5. Revealing your account password to others or allowing use of your account by others, This includes family and other household members when work is being done at tonne. G. Using a Frederick County, Virginia computing asset to actively engage in procuring or transmitting material that is in violation of sexual harassment or hostile workplace laws in the user's local jurisdiction. 7. Making fraudulent offers of products, items, or services originating from any Frederick County. Virginia account. 8. Effecting security breaches or disruptions of network communication. Security breaches include. but are not limited to, accessing data of which the employee is not an intended recipient or logging into a server or account that the employee is not expressly authorized to access. unless these duties are within the scope of regular duties. For purposes of this section. "disruption" includes, bUt is not limited to, network sniffing, pinged floods, packet spoofing, denial of service. and forged routing information for malicious purposes. 9. Pori scanning or security scanning is expressly prohibited unless prior notification to hirorniation Technology Department is made. 10. Executing any forni of network monitoring which willrntereept data not intended for the employee's host. unless this activity is a part of the employee's normal job /dirty. 11. Circurnvrnting user authentication or security of any host. network or account, 12. Interfering with or denying; service to any user other than the employee's host (for exannple. denial of service attack). 13. Using any prograrrr /script/cornmand, or sending messages of any kind, with the intent to interfere Nvith, or disable, a user's terrninal session. via any means, locally or via the i ntern et /Intranet /l rxtranet. 14. Installation of software, on County owned PC's, other than what is needed to perform the duties of the job. Email and Communications Activities I. Sending unsolicited email messages, including the sending of "junk mail " or other advertising, material to individuals who did not specifically request such material (email sparn). 2. Any form of harassment via email, telephone or paging, whether through Ian L, fiequenc y. or -size of messages. 3. Unauthorized use. or forging, of email header information. 4. Solicitation of email for any other email address, other than that of the poster's account, with the intent to harass or to collect replies. y. Creating or forwarding "chain letters ", "Ponzi" or other "pyramid" schenies of any type. 6. Use of unsolicited email originating from within Frederick County, Virginia's networks of other Internet /Intranct/Extranet service providers on behalf of or to advertise. any Service hosted by Frederick County, Virginia or connected via Frederick County, Virginia's network. 7. Posting the same or similar non - huffiness- related nessages to large n►nrnhers of Uscnct newsgroups (newsgroup spam). 5.0 Enforcement Any employee found to have violated this policy shall be suhicct to disciplinary action, up to tend including termination of employment. 6.0 Definitions Term Definition Sliani Unauthorized and /or unsolicited electronic mass niailings. COUNTY of FREDERICK Kris C. Tierney 1738 f MEMORANDUM Assistant County Administrator 5401665 -5666 Fax 540/667 -0370 Td: Human Resources Committee Members E -mail: ktierney @co.frederick.va.us FROM: Kris C. Tierney, Assistant County Administrate RE: Establishment of Public Information Officer Position DATE: September 27, 2013 Back in January the creation of a County Public Information Officer (PIO) position was brought before the HR Committee as a potential component of the FY 2013 budget. Although the benefits of, and need for, a PIO have long been recognized, in light of the challenging economic climate over the last number of years; staff had refrained from bringing the issue forward. However, when a committee created to evaluate the shortcomings in our internal and external communication following Hurricane Sandy identified the need for the creation of this position, staff felt compelled to bring the recommendation forward. This position was not funded. More recently, the creation of a County PIO was again identified as an action that should be considered in a report produced by an ad -hoc, Citizen's Business Climate Assessment Committee. As proposed, the PIO position would serve at the pleasure of the County Administrator and provide support to all County Departments. The position's primary responsibility would be to provide a reliable communication link between the county government and the residents of Frederick County, providing the citizens with timely, reliable information on County projects, programs and activities, as well as providing information to the media and other extemal groups. The position would also assist the County Administrator, Board of Supervisors, County departments and other county officials through press releases, public and media relations and the coordination of special events. The position would play a key role in enhancing the County's professional image as a first rate, livable, business friendly, community by communicating its attributes and successes. The position would also: • Oversee the cable channel, website and social media sites • Be the principle point of contact for Freedom of Information requests • Coordinate compliance with the State records retention laws • Be the primary point of contact for media 'information during weather or other emergencies Staff is requesting that the position be established at the R12 with a salary range of ($59,043.94 to $108,078.63) with the anticipation that the position would pay in the low to mid $60,000's. A full job description is attached for your review and information. Staff is seeking guidance from the Committee and a possible recommendation regarding the creation of the position. 107 North Kent Street , Winchester, Virginia 22601 County of r - Virginia Position Details Position Title; Public Information Officer Date Position Created: Department: County Administration Reports To: County /Assistant County Administrator E =xempt F1 Prepared By: Assistant County Non-Exempt Date Prepared: 7/4/2013 Administrator Range: R12 Grade; up to C Salary: $60,000 - $65,000 G/L Line Item: TBD Job Descriptio Job Purpose: Under the direction of the County Administrator, the POI manages, coordinates and provides leadership for the County's public information and engagement initiatives. Performs specialized work involving the preparation, publication and distribution of multi -media materials and press releases for the County. Responsibilities include assisting in establishing and maintaining cooperative relationships with community representatives, employees, public interest groups and the media. Provides expert advice, consultation, training and facilitation to all levels of county management in developing and implementing communication strategies and public participation programs. • Plans and manages dissemination of information regarding county programs, services and general information to citizens, including oversight of the County's website and supervision of web content staff. • Provides strategic and technical assistance to the County Administrator and elected officials relating to all aspects of relations with the public and the dissemination of information to the public. • Serves as primary county liaison to media, oversees and manages communications with the public, including local press, radio and television media. • Coordinates responses by County departments, offices, and agencies in accordance with the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and, as appropriate, prepares responses to such inquiries. • Oversees and manages the development, writing, design, production and editing of programming for the County's cable channel. • Assists county administration, constitutional officers and department heads in planning and arranging various promotional activities and special events including arranging press conferences for elected and appointed county officials. • Works with the county administrative staff in the preparation of reports, executive summaries, speeches and correspondence, formulates message and articulates the County's response to sensitive, controversial community issues. • Works closely with public safety and emergency services departments and serves as the media representative for the Emergency Operations Center when activated. • Develops and mans es de artment budget, rr Requirements: Education: Bachelor's degree in Public Administration, Public Relations, Communication, Journalism or En lush or substantial) similar field required. Experience: Minimum of five years of experience in designing and implementing community based information programs editing and writing publications preparing media releases. Knowledge /Skills: Extensive knowledge of modern principles and practices of public relations as applied to local government. Exceptional written and oral communication skills; proven ability to work effectively, productively, and diplomatically with and maintain effective working relationships with elected and appointed officials, employees, members of the media, community organizations, and citizens. Ability to perform under pressure and make effective presentations to civic /business organizations. Working knowledge of local government; including, criminal justice, emergency service systems, and FOIA. Substantial knowledge of word processing and web content management and computer graphics. Basic knowledge of television production and broadcast processes and techniques. Working Conditions: Physical Demands: Walking, talking, stooping, kneeling, bending, reaching, and gripping. Incumbent may be required on occasion to move and lift up to 30 Ibs. (boxes, files, etc.); work long periods at a desk; walk over rough terrain on occasion. Sup ervisory - r ♦ r Number of Employees Supervised: 0 Number of Subordinate Supervisors Reporting to Job: 0 A Department Director: Date: HR Director: Date: Finance Director: Date: County Administrator: Date: Board of Supervisors Approval: Date: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department. of Public Works 540/665 -5643 FAX. 5401478 -0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works # SUBJECT: Public Works Committee Report for Meeting of October 29, 2013 DATE: October 31, 2013 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 Hall 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 15, 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. Public Works Committee Report Page 2 October 31, 2013 4. Impacts of Affordable Health Care Act on the Status of Part -time Employees 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 more 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 a part-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 Recycling/Litter Programs The attached memorandum from Gloria Puffinburger, 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 6) c) Animal Shelter Dog Report (Attachment 7) d) Animal Shelter Cat Report (Attachment 8) Respectfully submitted, Public Works Committee Gene E. Fisher, Chairman David W. Ganse Gary Lofton Whit L. Wagner Robert W. Wells James Wilson By Harvey t snyder, Jr., P. R. Public Works Director HES /rls Attachments: as stated cc: file t:\Rhonda\PWCONLVHTTEE\CURYEARCONHtEPORTS\10-29-13pwcomrep.doe ATTACHMENT 1 Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Summary • • Methodology and Approach: OWPR issued a Departmental Space Planning Needs Assessment Survey to each Department Head. Each Department Head was asked to complete a series of questions requesting staffing levels (current and projected 10 years), how their department may work directly or indirectly with other departments, any specialized spaces that they currently have which need to be included or that they are currently lacking that need to be added and any other information that they could provide that would make their department space needs more functional and efficient. OWPR also requested that each Department Head list whether their staff requires private or open offices. OWPR then met with each Department Head and toured their department to make sure that we had a good understanding of how each department approach. As part of the Space Planning Needs Assessment OWPR also included standardized office sizes and conference rooms. The following method was used to calculate areas in the building: Sub -Total (Net) = Area of Programmed Space excluding walls, corridors, stairs, mechanical rooms, common areas, etc. Sub -Total (Gross) = Area of Programmed Space including walls, corridors, stairs, mechanical rooms, common areas, etc. A 1.35 efficiency factor /multiplier is used to convert Net to Gross. County Administration Current Space Allocation: 2,820 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to County Attorney. • Close to Finance and Human Resources if possible. Sub -Total (Net) 3,016 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,071 SF County Attorney Current Space Allocation: 1,100 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to County Administration. Sub -Total (Net) 1,416 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,912 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Summary • 1 111! 1 � I i i ii� . •- • Department of Social Services Current Space Allocation: 20,400 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Prefer to be on first floor due to the high level of client volume that they see. Sub -Total (Net) 14,480 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 19,548 SF Frederick- Winchester Service Authority Current Space Allocation: 948 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • None Sub -Total (Net) 970 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,310 SF Economic Development Commission Current Space Allocation: 2,145 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to Planning and Inspections Sub -Total (Net) 1,996 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 2,695 SF Information Tech nology /GIS /MIS Current Space Allocation: 4,150 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be on first floor with access to loading dock • If not on first floor, would need access to a freight elevator off the loading dock. • Would like to be close to Planning, Human Resources and Finance. Sub -Total (Net) 3,876 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 5,233 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Summary • 1 111! 1 � I i i ii� . •- • Department of Planning and Development Current Space Allocation: 7,600 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to Public Works. Sub -Total (Net) 3,620 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,887 SF Human Resources Current Space Allocation: 1,275 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to Finance. • Would like to be on the first floor. Sub -Total (Net) 1,456 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,966 SF Commonwealth Attorney Current Space Allocation: 6,820 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to remain close to Judicial Center. Sub -Total (Net) 5,756 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 7,770 SF Finance Current Space Allocation: 2,900 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to Human Resources and County Administration. Sub -Total (Net) 2,356 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 3,180 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Summary • 1 111! 1 � I i i ii� . •- • Building Inspections Current Space Allocation: 5,300 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to Planning and Development, Public Works and Environmental Health. Sub -Total (Net) 5,216 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 7,041 SF Public Works Current Space Allocation: 4,000 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location • Would like to be near Planning and Development and Building Inspections Sub -Total (Net) 3,076 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,152 SF Virginia Cooperative Extension Current Space Allocation: 2,268 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be on first floor with direct outside access Sub -Total (Net) 3,116 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,207 SF Voter Registration Current Space Allocation: 2,430 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be on first floor with access to a loading dock. Sub -Total (Net) 4,336 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 5,854 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Summary • 1 111! 1 � I i i ii� . •- • Frederick / Winchester Environmental Health Office Current Space Allocation: 4,320 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Due to rabies lab, would like to be on first floor with direct outside access (away from public). Sub -Total (Net) 4,716 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,367 SF Treasurer Current Space Allocation: 5,400 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to the Commissioner of Revenue. • Would like to be on first floor with access to a loading dock. Sub -Total (Net) 4,500 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,075 SF Commissioner of the Revenue Current Space Allocation: 5,900 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be adjacent to the Treasurer and Planning and Development. Sub -Total (Net) 4,600 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,210 SF Parks and Recreation Current Space Allocation: 4,644 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: • Would like to be on first floor with a direct outside access point. Sub -Total (Net) 3,556 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,800 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Summary 1111 Maintenance Department Current Space Allocation: 2,400 SF (Gross) Department Preferred Location: None Sub -Total (Net) 2,910 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 3,929 SF Cumulative Gross County Departments 101,207 SF FCPS Administration Sub -Total (Net) 3,020 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,077 SF FCPS Coordinator of Policy and Public Information Sub -Total (Net) 600 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 810 SF FCPS Finance Department Sub -Total (Net) 3,580 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,833 SF FCPS Human Resources Department Sub -Total (Net) 3,620 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,887 SF FCPS Planning and Development Department Sub -Total (Net) 780 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,053 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Summary • 1 111! 1 � I i i ii� ..- • FCPS Construction Services Sub -Total (Net) 780 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,053 SF FCPS Safety and Security Sub -Total (Net) 780 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,053 SF FCPS Student Support Services Department Sub -Total (Net) 4,500 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,075 SF FCPS Instruction Department Sub -Total (Net) 3,776 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 5,097 SF FCPS Testing and Assessment Department Sub -Total (Net) 1,440 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,944 SF FCPS Special Instructional Services Department Sub -Total (Net) 4,092 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 5,524 SF FCPS Information Technology Department Sub -Total (Net) 4,580 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,183 SF FCPS Records Retention Sub -Total (Net) 2,000 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 2,700 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Summary 1111 FCPS Future Growth Sub -Total (Net) 3,500 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,725 SF Cumulative Gross School Departments 50,014 SF • Current Gross School Allocation: 35,000 SF (Gross) County /School Shared Space Sub -Total (Net) 9,560 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 12,906 SF • Current County Space Allocation: 7,000 SF (Gross) Total Building Gross 164,127 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Office /Type Key Type A: Executive Staff Suite = 900 SF (This space includes executive office with conference area, administrative assistant office space, private reception /waiting area and secured records storage.) Type B: Directors Office = 180 SF Type C: Supervisors /Coordinators /Etc. = 120 SF Type D: Cubical = 120 SF Type E: Typical Receptionist /Waiting Area = 256 SF Type F: Individual Staff Restroom = 100 SF Type G: Conference Room = 320 SF Type H: Small Work Space /Service Window = 60 SF Type J: Small Conference Room = 120 SF Type K: Office Suite (Reception /Secretary /Waiting) = 600 SF Type L: Studio = 600 SF Note: Sub -Total (Net) = Area of Programmed Space excluding walls, corridors, stairs, mechanical rooms, common areas, etc. Sub -Total (Gross) = Area of Programmed Space including walls, corridors, stairs, mechanical rooms, common areas, etc. A 1.35 efficiency factor /multiplier is used to convert Net to Gross. DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program County Administration 1. County Administrator Suite (Type A) 900 SF 2. Asst. County Administrator (Type B) 180 SF 3. Deputy County Administrator (Type C) 120 SF 4. Administrative Assistant (Type D)(2) 240 SF 5. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 6. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 7. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 8. Kitchenette 80 SF 9. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 10. Legal Library/ File Room 240 SF 11. Future (Type C) (Public Information Officer) 120 SF 12. Future (Type D)(2) 240 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,016 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,071 SF County Attorney 1. County Attorney (Type B) 180 SF 2. Administrative Assistant (Type C) 120 SF 3. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 4. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 5. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 6. Kitchenette 80 SF 7. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 8. Legal Library/ File Room 120 SF 9. Future (Type C) 120 SF Sub -Total (Net) 1,416 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,912 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Department of Social Services 1. Director's Office Suite (Type B) 180 SF 2. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 3. Assistant Director's Office (Type B) 180 SF 4. Administrative Services Manager (Type C) 120 SF 5. Benefit Program Supervisor (Type C)(2) 240 SF 6. Family Services Supervisor (Type C) (2) 240 SF 7. IT /HR Specialist (Type C) 120 SF 8. Office Supervisor (Type C) 120 SF 9. Administrative Program Asst II (Type D) 120 SF 10. Benefit Program Specialist I (Type D) 120 SF 11. Benefit Program Specialist 11 (Type D) (13) 1,560 SF 12. Benefit Program Specialist III (Type D)(3) 360 SF 13. Benefit Program Specialist IV (Type D) 120 SF 14. Family Services Specialist 11 (Type D)(10) 1,200 SF 15. Family Services Specialist III (Type D)(5) 600 SF 16. Family Services Specialist IV (Type D)(3) 360 SF 17. Fraud Investigator 11 (Type D) 120 SF 18. Human Services Assistant I (Type D)(6) 720 SF 19. Human Services Assistant III (Type D)(2) 240 SF 20. Office Associate II (Type D)(2) 240 SF 21. Office Associate III (Type D) 120 SF 22. Self - Sufficiency VIEW Worker (Type D) 120 SF 23. Future Growth (Misc.)(Type D)(10) 1,200 SF 24. Kitchenette 120 SF 25. Employee Restrooms (4) 280 SF 26. Family Bathroom (2) 300 SF 27. Child and Family Visitation 800 SF 28. Observation Room 120 SF 29. Employee Training 1,200 SF 30. Donation Room 500 SF 31. Mail /Copy /Work Room 240 SF 32. Records Storage Room 800 SF 33. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 34. Comprehensive Services ACT 300 SF 35. Interview Room (Type C)(3) 360 SF 36. Waiting /Reception Area 800 SF Sub -Total (Net) 14,480 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 19,548 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Frederick- Winchester Service Authority 1. Directors Office (Type B) 180 SF 2. Administrative Assistant Office (Type C) 120 SF 3. Reception Area 120 SF 4. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 5. Kitchenette 80 SF 6. Toilet 70 SF 7. Work Room 100 SF 8. Storage /Plan Room 180 SF Sub -Total (Net) 970 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,310 SF Economic Development Commission 1. Executive Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Marketing Manager (Type C) 120 SF 3. Existing Business Coordinator (Type D) 120 SF 4. Business Development Associate (Type D) 120 SF 5. Secretary (Type D) 120 SF 6. Future (Type D)(3) 360 SF 7. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 8. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 9. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 10. Kitchenette 80 SF 11. Work Room 100 SF 12. Storage 120 SF Sub -Total (Net) 1,996 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 2,695 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Information Technology /GIS /MIS 1. Director of Tech Services (Type B) 180 SF 2. Administrative Assistant (Type C) 120 SF 3. Network Operations Supervisor (Type C) 120 SF 4. Network Technician (Type C) 120 SF 5. PC Technician (Type D)(2) 240 SF 6. Webmaster (Type C) 120 SF 7. Deputy GIS Manager (Type C) 120 SF 8. GIS Analyst Programmer (Type C) 120 SF 9. GIS Technician (Type C) 120 SF 10. MIS Director (Type B) 180 SF 11. MIS Deputy Director (Type B) 120 SF 12. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 13. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 14. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 15. Kitchenette 80 SF 16. Document and Reproduction Center 320 SF 17. Server Room 180 SF 18. Video Preparation Room 180 SF 19. Storage Room 180 SF 20. Future (Type D)(5) 600 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,876 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 5,233 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Department of Planning and Development 1. Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Deputy Director (Type C)(2) 240 SF 3. Zoning Administrator (Type C) 120 SF 4. Senior Planner (Type C) 120 SF 5. Zoning Inspector (Type D) 120 SF 6. GIS Analyst (Type C) 120 SF 7. Administrative Assistant (Type C) 120 SF 8. Office Assistant III (Type D) 120 SF 9. Secretary III (Type C) 120 SF 10. Secretary II (Type C) 120 SF 11. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 12. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 13. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 14. Small Conference Room 180 SF 15. Kitchenette 80 SF 16. Copy /Large Format /Work Room 320 SF 17. Storage and File Room 524 SF 18. Future (Type C)(3) 360 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,620 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,887 SF Human Resources 1. Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. HR- Generalist (Type C) 120 SF 3. Benefits Administrator (Type C) 120 SF 4. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 5. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 6. Small Conference Room (Type J) 180 SF 7. Kitchenette 80 SF 8. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 9. Storage and File Room 180 SF 10. Future (Type C) 120 SF Sub -Total (Net) 1,456 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,966 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Commonwealth Attorney 1. Commonwealth Attorney (Type B) 180 SF 2. Legal Secretary (Type C) 120 SF 3. Attorney (Type 13)(6) 720 SF 4. Secretary (Type D)(3) 360 SF 5. Investigator (Type C) 120 SF 6. Litigation Support Specialist (Type D)(2) 240 SF 7. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 8. Intervention 120 SF 9. Victim Witness Suite 600 SF 10. Criminal History 120 SF 11. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 12. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 13. Small Conference Room 180 SF 14. Kitchenette 80 SF 15. Copy /Work Room 180 SF 16. Storage and File Room 320 SF 17. Library 180 SF 18. Future (Type 13)(3) 540 SF 19. Future (Type C)(3) 360 SF Sub -Total (Net) 5,756 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 7,770 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Finance 1. Finance Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Asst. Finance Director (Type C) 120 SF 3. Budget Analyst /Risk Manager (Type C) 120 SF 4. Accounting Supervisor (Type C) 120 SF 5. Sr. Accounting Tech (Type C) 120 SF 11. Accounting Tech (Type C)(2) 240 SF 12. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 13. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 14. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 15. Kitchenette 80 SF 16. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 17. Scanning 100 SF 18. Storage and File Room 240 SF 19. Future (Type C)(2) 240 SF Sub -Total (Net) 2,356 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 3,180 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Public Works 1. Director of Public Works (Type B) 180 SF 2. Deputy Director of Public Works (Type C) 120 SF 3. Solid Waste Manager (Type C) 120 SF 4. Solid Waste Storage 120 SF 5. Administrative Assistant (Type C) 120 SF 6. E &S Program Administrator (Type D) 120 SF 7. Environmental Inspector (Type D) 120 SF 8. Plan Review /Storage Room 960 SF 9. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 10. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 11. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 12. Kitchenette 80 SF 13. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 14. Future (Type D)(2) 240 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,076 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,152 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. • Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Building Inspections 1. Building Code Official (Type B) 180 SF 2. Office Manager (Type C) 120 SF 3. Design Review Specialist (Type C)(2) 240 SF 4. Inspector /Plans Review (Type C)(2) 240 SF 5. Permit Technician (Type C)(2) 240 SF 6. Senior Inspector (Type C) 120 SF 20. Inspector III (Type D)(4) 480 SF 21. Waiting /Reception 256 SF 22. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 23. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 24. Kitchenette 80 SF 25. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 26. Scanning and Large Documents 220 SF 27. Plan Review Room 960 SF 28. Storage and File Room 720 SF 29. Future (Type C)(4) 480 SF 30. Future (Type D)(2) 240 SF Sub -Total (Net) 5,216 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 7,041 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Virginia Cooperative Extension 1. Extension Agent (Type B) 180 SF 2. Horticulture (Type C) 120 SF 3. 4H Extension Agent (Type C) 120 SF 4. Family and Consumer Sciences Agent (Type C) 120 SF 5. Unit Administrative Assistant (Type C) 120 SF 6. Travelling Agent (Type C) 120 SF 7. 4H Technician (Type D) 120 SF 8. Master Gardener Volunteer Help Desk (Type D) 120 SF 9. SNAP -Ed Technician (Type D) 120 SF 10. Classroom with Kitchen Lab 1,200 SF 11. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 12. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 13. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 14. Storage Room 200 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,116 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,207 SF Voter Registration 1. Registrar (Type B) 180 SF 2. Assistant Registrar (Type C) 120 SF 3. Electoral Board (Type C) 120 SF 4. Machine Technician (Type D) 120 SF 5. Machine Custodian (Type D) 120 SF 6. Fire Safe Room 100 SF 7. Voting and Files Area 1,200 SF 8. Machine Storage and Work Room 1,600 SF 9. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 10. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 11. Kitchenette 80 SF 12. Future (Type C) 120 SF 13. Future (Type D) 120 SF Sub -Total (Net) 4,336 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 5,854 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program • Frederick / Winchester Environmental Health Office 1. Health Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. EH Supervisor (Type C) 120 SF 3. EH Manager (Type C) 120 SF 4. Planner (Type C) 120 SF 5. LFHD Epidemiologist (Type C) 120 SF 6. Regional Epidemiologist (Type C) 120 SF 7. EHS Sr. (Type D)(7) 840 SF 8. OSS (Type D)(2) 240 SF 9. MCR (Type D) 120 SF 10. Interns (Type D)(3) 360 SF 11. Environmental Rabies Work Room 240 SF 12. Plan Review 180 SF 13. Server Room 120 SF 14. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 15. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 16. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 17. Kitchenette 80 SF 18. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 19. Storage 500 SF 20. Future (Type C)(2) 240 SF 21. Future (Type D) 120 SF Sub -Total (Net) 4,716 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,367 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Treasurer 1. Treasurer (Type B) 180 SF 2. Deputy Treasurer of Operations (Type C) 120 SF 3. Deputy Treasurer (Type C) 120 SF 4. Collections Supervisor (Type C) 120 SF 5. Collections Assistant (Type C) 120 SF 6. Cashier Supervisor (Type C) 120 SF 7. Cashier Windows (Type H)(6) 360 SF 8. Back Office Cubicles (Type D) 240 SF 9. Mail Prep Room 500 SF 10. Envelope Storage 400 SF 11. General Storage 300 SF 12. Customer Queuing Area 600 SF 13. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 14. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 15. Kitchenette 80 SF 16. Future (Type C)(2) 240 SF 17. Future (Type D)(2) 240 SF Sub -Total (Net) 4,500 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,075 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Commissioner of the Revenue 1. Commissioner of the Revenue (Type B) 180 SF 2. Administrative Assistant (Type D) 120 SF 3. Chief Deputy & Real Estate Division Head (Type C) 120 SF 4. Real Estate Secretary (Type D) 120 SF 5. Chief Assessor & Statistician (Type C) 120 SF 6. GIS Analyst /Mapping (Type C) 120 SF 7. Assessors (Type D)(3) 360 SF 8. Data Collectors (Type D)(2) 240 SF 9. Business Division Head (Type C) 120 SF 10. Business Clerks (Type D)(3) 360 SF 11. Personal Property Division Head (Type C) 120 SF 12. Personal Property Clerks (Type D)(4) 480 SF 13. Auditor II (Type C) 120 SF 14. Customer Queuing Area 600 SF 15. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 16. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 17. Kitchenette 80 SF 18. Central Work Area 500 SF 19. File Room 80 SF 20. Future (Type D)(6) 720 SF Sub -Total (Net) 4,600 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,210 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program Parks and Recreation 1. Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Assistant Director (Type C)(Future) 120 SF 3. Administrative Assistant (Type D)(2) 240 SF 4. Superintendent of Parks (Type C) 120 SF 5. Superintendent of Recreation (Type C) 120 SF 6. Public Information Officer (Type C) 120 SF 7. Parks and Stewardship Coordinator (Type C) 120 SF 8. Manager (Type C) 120 SF 9. Facilities Manager (Type C) 120 SF 10. Program Supervisor (Type D)(4) 480 SF 11. Registration Specialist (Type D)(2) 240 SF 12. Program Coordinator (Type D) 120 SF 13. Registration Specialist (Type D)(2) 240 SF 14. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 15. Off -site Employee Work Area 600 SF 16. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 17. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 18. Kitchenette 80 SF 19. Copy /Work Room 120 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,556 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,800 SF Maintenance Department 1. Maintenance Office (Type C) 120 SF 2. Tool Room 150 SF 3. Work Shop 600 SF 4. Cleaning Equipment Storage 200 SF 5. Loading Dock 180 SF 6. Locker Room 180 SF 7. Kitchenette 80 SF 8. Bulk Storage 1,000 SF 9. Exterior Storage Building (not included in net /gross) 400 SF Sub -Total (Net) 2,910 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 3,929 SF Cumulative Gross County Departments 101,207 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program FCPS Administration 1. Superintendent (Type A) 900 SF 2. Assistant Superintendent (Type A)(2) 1,800 SF 3. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,020 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,077 SF FCPS Coordinator of Policy and Public Information 1. Department Office (Type B) 180 SF 2. Secretary (Type C) 120 SF 3. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 4. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 5. Storage /Records 80 SF Sub -Total (Net) 600 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 810 SF FCPS Finance Department 1. Executive Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Assistant Director (Type C) 120 SF 3. Office Suite ( Reception /Secretary /Waiting)(Type K) 300 SF 4. Supervisors (Type C)(3) 360 SF 5. Clerks /Secretary /Specialists (Type D)(8) 960 SF 6. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 7. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 8. Kitchenette 80 SF 9. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 10. Scanning 100 SF 11. Storage and File Room 240 SF 12. Future (Type C)(3) 360 SF 13. Future (Type D)(2) 240 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,580 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,833 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program FCPS Human Resources Department 1. Executive Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Assistant Director (Type C) 120 SF 3. Office Suite ( Reception /Secretary /Waiting)(Type K) 600 SF 4. Benefit Specialist (Type 13)(2) 360 SF 5. Specialists (Type D) 720 SF 6. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 7. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 8. Kitchenette 80 SF 9. File /Storage 320 SF 10. Copy /Work Room 120 SF 11. Future (Type D) 120 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,140 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,239 SF FCPS Planning and Development Department 1. Coordinator of Planning and Development (Type B) 180 SF 2. Secretary /COE Student (Type D) 120 SF 3. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 4. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 5. Storage /Records 80 SF 6. Plan Room 180 SF Sub -Total (Net) 780 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,053 SF FCPS Construction Services 1. Administrator (Type B) 180 SF 2. Clerical (Type D) 120 SF 3. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 4. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 5. Storage /Records 80 SF 6. Plan Room 180 SF Sub -Total (Net) 780 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,053 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program FCPS Safety and Security 1. Administrator (Type B) 180 SF 2. Clerical (Type D) 120 SF 3. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 4. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 5. Storage /Records 80 SF 6. Plan Room 180 SF Sub -Total (Net) 780 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,053 SF FCPS Student Support Services Department 1. Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Assistant Director (Type C) 120 SF 3. Office Suite ( Reception /Secretary /Waiting)(Type K) 600 SF 4. Coordinator of School Counseling & ESL (Type C) 120 SF 5. Coordinator of School Health Services (Type C) 120 SF 6. Attendance Officers (Type D)(3) 360 SF 7. Family Support Specialists (Type D)(4) 480 SF 8. Secretarial Studio (Type L) 600 SF 9. Central Registrar (Type C) 120 SF 10. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 11. Conference Room (Type G) 320 SF 12. Kitchenette 80 SF 13. File /Storage 120 SF 14. Future (Type D)(4) 480 SF 15. Future (Type L) 600 SF Sub -Total (Net) 4,500 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,075 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program FCPS Instruction Department 1. Director (Type 13)(2) 360 SF 2. Supervisors (Type C)(14) 1,680 SF 3. Secretary to Director /Supervisors (Type C)(5) 600 SF 4. Waiting /Reception (Type E) 256 SF 5. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 6. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 7. Kitchenette 80 SF 8. Future (Type C)(4) 480 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,776 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 5,097 SF FCPS Testing and Assessment Department 1. Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Coordinator (Type C)(2) 240 SF 3. Secretarial Studio (Type L) 600 SF 4. Restroom (Type F) 100 SF 5. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 6. Storage 80 SF 7. Future (Type C) 120 SF Sub -Total (Net) 1,440 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 1,944 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. • Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program FCPS Special Instructional Services Department 1. Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Assistant Director (Type C) 120 SF 3. Secretary and Bookkeeper (Type E)(2) 512 SF 4. Special Services Secretaries (Type D)(3) 360 SF 5. Coordinators (Type C)(4) 480 SF 6. Specialists (Type C) 120 SF 7. School Psychologists (Type D)(8) 960 SF 8. Social Worker (Type D) 120 SF 9. Educational Diagnosticians (Type D)(3) 360 SF 10. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 11. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 12. Kitchenette 80 SF 13. Future (Type C)(2) 240 SF 14. Future (Type D)(2) 240 SF Sub -Total (Net) 4,092 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 5,524 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program FCPS Information Technology Department 1. Director (Type B) 180 SF 2. Assistant Director (Type 13)(2) 360 SF 3. Supervisors (Type C)(4) 480 SF 4. Network Engineers (Type C)(5) 600 SF 5. Network Specialists (Type C)(2) 240 SF 6. Programmers (Type D)(5) 600 SF 7. Software Support (Type D)(2) 240 SF 8. Tech Support (Type D) 120 SF 9. Computer Tech (Type D) 120 SF 10. Technology Training Specialist (Type C) 120 SF 11. Server Room 400 SF 12. Media Tech (Type D) 120 SF 13. Audio Visual Services (Type D)(3) 360 SF 14. Studio (Type L) 600 SF 15. ITRT (Type D)(2) 240 SF 16. Restroom (Type F)(2) 200 SF 17. Small Conference Room (Type J) 120 SF 18. Kitchenette 80 SF Sub -Total (Net) 4,580 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 6,183 SF FCPS Records Retention 1. Records Retention 2,000 SF Sub -Total (Net) 2,000 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 2,700 SF FCPS Future Growth 1. FCPS Future Growth 3,500 SF Sub -Total (Net) 3,500 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 4,725 SF Cumulative Gross FCPS Departments 50,014 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. Frederick County Space Planning Needs Assessment Program County /School Shared Space 1. Board Room 4,000 SF 2. Executive Conference Room 600 SF 3. A/V Recording /Filming Studio 240 SF 4. Kitchen 300 SF 5. Training Room (2 @ 30x50) 3,000 SF 6. Reception Desk 120 SF 7. Public Lobby 600 SF 8. Table and Chair Storage 300 SF 9. Shipping and Receiving Area 400 SF Sub -Total (Net) 9,560 SF Sub -Total (Gross) 12,906 SF Total Building Gross 164,127 SF DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW ONLY OWPR, Inc. ATTACHMENT 2 TI ,r Y /O/ JO 2 per,, F4 W O J o r t .1 W OFz d °3z F W W 2zW OIL z Ili za md ' Y� CL v ' I o p U U Q w p p i (Lz U N n v f' V I 1c� G I . n 7 s r I ti a 2 U tt I- to 0 m M) u a` a N m —c—S VA ',UNfIOO XOIHa(IaZI3 �oo���,.n��•Y,,, zz. - o.9 X•� �°° soIzlssla rmzlalsiDvw ozlaHSEINIVD „ R a 99l' gd �a4t1 1N3 Wd0'13A3a 3)IV'1 MA'lIS Z09ZZ xPU% —n MH 191 JNIH33NIJN3 AYMN33HO NV" Id IMMO'13AM a3Z1'1V13N3J TI ,r Y /O/ JO 2 per,, F4 W O J o r t .1 W OFz d °3z F W W 2zW OIL z Ili za md ' Y� CL v ' I o p U U Q w p p i (Lz U N n v f' V I 1c� G I . n 7 s r I ti a 2 U tt I- to 0 m M) u a` a N m A - ITKCA-MEWT 3 COUNTY of FREDERICK a Inspections Department John S. Trenary, Building Official 540/665 -5650 Fax 540/678 -0682 MEMORANDUM DATE: October 24, 2013 TO: Finance Department THROUGH: Harvey E. Strawsynder Jr.,PE, Director of P bl' rks FROM: John S. Trenary, Building Code Official SUBJECT: Funding Request of Part-Time Receptio "st Position The Building Inspection Department is requesting a supplemental appropriation of $15,000 to maintain the services of our current fart Time Receptionist through the end of the current FY 13/14 budget year. The part -time 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 FYI 3/14 compared to the same period FY12 /13. The increase inactivity 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 FYI 3/14 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. 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601 ATnccvtmeffr 4 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Public Works 5401665 -5643 FAX: 5401678 -0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Gloria M. Puffinburger Solid Waste Manager, RE: FY 12/13 Recycling/Litter Programs; Site Usage Survey Results DATE: October 25, 2013 RECYCLING PROGRAM: During 2012, the county's recycling program hit another record, collecting 12.6 million pounds of materials at the various convenience sites and the landfill citizens' center. As reported to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, the county's recycling rate is 44 percent which reflects diversion efforts by local residents and businesses and far exceeds the state mandate of 25 percent. Revenue from the sale of materials topped $85,000, also a record. REGIONAL ELECTRONICS RECYCLING PROGRAM.• Tonnages of e -waste recycled during FY 12/13 increased four percent for a total of 251 tons. A Berryville -based vendor, C2 Management, now holds the county's contract and is responsible for sorting and marketing materials. Labor is provided by the regional detention center's Community Inmate Workforce (CIWF) in order to curtail operational costs. LITTER PROGRAM: Frederick County Clean Sweep collected 19.5 tons of roadside litter during FY 12/13. Trustees from the regional jail (CIWF) are supervised by a part-time public works staff person. The combined efforts of the CIWF represented an in -kind contribution of $34,301 _ All operational costs associated with the county's litter program are more than off -set by state grant funding of about $13,000. The Virginia Department of Transportation, Stephens City Office, transports bagged litter to the regional h ndfill. CONVENIENCE SITE USAGE: The number of residents utilizing the county's convenience sites rose by an average of eight percent to 896,400 vehicle trips during FY 12/13. The more urban locations — Greenwood and Albin — showed the highest peak traffic days. For a usage summary, please see, attached. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 N W _H N LLI Z W Z W Z 0 Z W U W 9 D U) / W V a U) M r O N 00 [`1 bfl ca �, I N d Cd ir. I I � -v U � U 0. + M 0 N 00 � -a -o 0 0 U v y 0 � U I L C Ln M n " N N 00 ! T w V' O_ m O M N 0000 � N Q 0, ON 00 kn VOA M N 1 110 Rn kn N .� 00 O O 00 N b N Q^ +•+i f+1 N �O n M +--� N M C N R M ,.r O r•n ON if le ` CO) N o iD M ,� 00 O N e4 N N M V n N Q\ p b fn e4 M en 000 N kn n al O O O oo d q W) 00 00 M N N M O� O kn v M N 1 .0 kn n Q 00 V N C> 00 O iD �. orn N t# N O rn N m cn ?� N � 00 W) O Q n 00 N M kn M N O N © p p r v� N c e rf� n N oo a� n in in et M NO n a ao 00 [`1 bfl ca �, I N d Cd ir. I I � -v U � U 0. + M 0 N 00 � -a -o 0 0 U v y 0 � U I ATTACHMENT 5 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Public Works 540/665 -5643 FAX: 540/ MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works fif�m SUBJECT: Monthly Tonnage Report - Fiscal Year 13/14 DATE: October 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 05 -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: 13,067 TONS (UP 1,002 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 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 ATTACHMENT 6 V A H O 0- w O✓ (7 Z U w O✓ O O O O O O LO — O N V I— 1— 0 1— 0 LO I— N V 0 M V 00 O N ('O M M I— — ('O 0 0 N 0 N M— V 0 0 0 I— (n V ('O I— L(O L(O ('O — CO 00 G V ('O L(O O CO N (c V N — GO (D LO LO I— ('O LO C6 ('O N V O 00 0 - ('O O 0 N N LO Co JJJ 00 I— CO N— 0 V N 0 M O LO 'q V— LO ('O N O M I— N 0 M 0 I— 1— 0 LO LO LO V V V V V V ('O LO U � = J M N O O CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q O z J U d H> U z m } z Q 0 n Q cn O z D n 11 2 Q n 0 } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } L w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w co co co N 00 LO (j) ( r— V N O r H Q D O H 7 i V L r LO N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0— I— M I— V 0 ('O 0 N 0 LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO 0 0 V O V ('O ('O V 00 L I— O LO I— I— V I— V ('O M M N V I— M ('O I— — ('O V 0 0 1— 0 O M V 0 LO 0 V N I— ('O 0 O V I— ('O 00 0 O V V 0 N 00 N 0 0 J LO c) - - CO CO 0 O V O 0 M LO N — M M V M V V 0 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Q CO — N I� N CO � CO 00 V O 00 N L(O aO O a) ('O aO V V L(O I� LO O CO N 0 N V 0 N O 0 ('O M O M ('O 0 1— 0 V O O O LO LO V LO 1— 0 V ('O 0 ('O 0 M 0 0 N— V ('O O V M ('O co 0 (n Ln Ln Ln Ln V Ln ('O N N N N N N N N N N N I-� N ('O V ('O aO N 1- N N I— CD Lo N V Q LO M O 00 00 O N V O O CO V 0 00 I V 0 I - LO O O LO M M I— M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V d 00 00 V O ('O I— O 0 LO M I— N M ('O M V N M— V Q CO LO aO aO 0 - O - (D N O N 0 0 — M N LO I- 00 - - N O 00 1- N V LO (D - 00 a) V 00 a) U 00 V V 00 N co N V 0 I— LO O N co I— LO V V � V ('O V N ('O O LO N CO I— O O O O O O (D O O O V 0 I— 0 0 U 00 O 00 ('O L(O 00 CO M O N M 0 1— 0 Or— V 0 0 I� 0 0 0 0 r LO V I— M M O LC) W J co co 00 Ln N V [-�- Ln V 00 N - ('O CO N V N W V V CO L 00 CO co O 0 00 00 r— LO (D LO O LO O LO V V V V V ('O ('O N CO C CD CD W O N O N 0 N 00 O J CO CD 00 — CO I— N O CO ('O 00 V 0 ('O ('O X N N N LO W H C) 0 o C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O W N LLO O N V I- LO O r r N Lri C6 C6 C6 c0 O O O O O I— ('O 0 I— N 0 CO CO N LO = 1— 0 LO O N N U 00 00 CO ('O V I— 00 0 0 0 ('O N U a) = O N C6 O V= V L6 = a) O I� 00 I� N 0 0 O (D LO LLLO V 0 oO O N 0 0 0 0 V N ('O N LO 0 1— 0 0 0 0 LO V 0 0 V N N O N O M 0 0 0 0 ('O M LO O O 0 W co CO 00 O M M 0 ('O M I— = V = N I— LO M CD CD O CO d V V O M CO N V LO CO = V CO N CO == 0 CO X CO O Q O O CO CO 0 0 0 CO O LO V r— 00 N L 00 O LO 00 � CO 0 LO co N LO V V N I— 0 CO LO LO V co V I— CO V 00 CO LO I— N O CO LO LO (0 V CO CO V LO (0 LO N 00 CO 00 r— LO LO LO LO O J� (0 O LO N I-- V I— CO V V 00 N N= V Ln 00 V O I— N 0 CO W z I- aO 'q 00 00 V CO N L(O N LO = = LO aO CO aO 1- aO O W I- CO LO N M 00 CO LO O M 00 = CO LO V N N M CO V 00 H V N 0 0 0 0 LO V N N N co N N N N N N V V V O O O O O O LO — O N V I— 1— 0 1— 0 LO I— N V 0 M V 00 O N ('O M M I— — ('O 0 0 N 0 N M— V 0 0 0 I— (n V ('O I— L(O L(O ('O — CO 00 G V ('O L(O O CO N (c V N — GO (D LO LO I— ('O LO C6 ('O N V O 00 0 - ('O O 0 N N LO Co JJJ 00 I— CO N— 0 V N 0 M O LO 'q V— LO ('O N O M I— N 0 M 0 I— 1— 0 LO LO LO V V V V V V ('O LO U � = J M N O O CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q O z J U d H> U z m } z Q 0 n Q cn O z D n 11 2 Q n 0 } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } L w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w co co co N 00 LO (j) ( r— V N O r H Q D O H 7 i V L r O V LO 00 LO O 0 0 V O V ('O ('O V 00 L I— O LO I— I— V I— V ('O M M N V I— M ('O I— — ('O V 0 0 1— 0 O M V J Z a) - 00 00 a) — 00 I — L(O ('O - L(O V 'q O 'q 'q 00 ('O V QI Q CO ('0 N 0 LO CO N N CO LO � N � � 0 0 0 0 M CO CO 00 O O O O M O N 0 M O O V 0 0 0 0 O LO O LO � V V V N ('O N LO N N N N LO I— V— 0 O— O M (n V— CO N ('O V ('O aO N 1- N N I— CD Lo N V Q 1- 00 co M O 00 00 O N V O O CO V 0 00 I V 0 I - J co co co O � 0 I— I— N 00 0 0 0� V 00 0 r— 00 CO � CO d V ('O ('O ('O ('O N N — — — — — — — N O O O O O O LO — O N V I— 1— 0 1— 0 LO I— N V 0 M V 00 O N ('O M M I— — ('O 0 0 N 0 N M— V 0 0 0 I— (n V ('O I— L(O L(O ('O — CO 00 G V ('O L(O O CO N (c V N — GO (D LO LO I— ('O LO C6 ('O N V O 00 0 - ('O O 0 N N LO Co JJJ 00 I— CO N— 0 V N 0 M O LO 'q V— LO ('O N O M I— N 0 M 0 I— 1— 0 LO LO LO V V V V V V ('O LO U � = J M N O O CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q O z J U d H> U z m } z Q 0 n Q cn O z D n 11 2 Q n 0 } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } L w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w co co co N 00 LO (j) ( r— V N O r H Q D O H 7 i V L r C) N M r 0 N LL W J W 2 U) J Q Z Q 0 O m W U W Z D O U Y U W 0 W W' LL H O d W 0 O 0 a� _ W� 0 O Z 0 2 Lo Lo co w_ (o LO LO X �w Q Z U Z W w d Q 0 0 0 0 U � U U W Q w O z o 0 0 —w 0 Y 0 W U) O LO LO N d N U) 0 0 W Q M 0) 0) J CO CO CO U W 0 W 0 (O CO qt 0 Q Q w � z M o 0 Ow CO V W w �— U) m Q U co r- 0 cc N M 0 i. OQ LO � LO 0 m m 0 J W W � Z W W Lo co Co M w Y Q 2 H Z Q Z 0 O z C ) LO LO Q O I- (O LO Z ~ O U a�_ LL rn N 0 r = J O J D w U O w Z m Q w Q Z 2 -)<w0z0�L N c c a� Y 0 O � U co N c N O 0) 0) O O - 0 -0 co c Q .0 N d E N N .. Q O N U O L L � C N O co co N O) O c LO ATTACHMENT 7 ATTACHMENT 8 O = o z O1-- — N o � L-0 L-0 LO X Qw U z Z W w d Q 0 0 0 0 0 U � U U W � J Q W 0 z o rn o W Z LO N CO - W D Y 0 W O ° - co rn d N N LO U) 0 0 W Q � N J U W O D w w 0 CN co ~ D U Q Q W Z r- N �Zao�r co Ow CO V U W W �- (n — (o O I� m U Z_ �— O r- N M co Om m 0 J W w � Z U Y — N LO W � Q 2 H z Q Z O Q 0 - - - 2 Z O U LL = J O J D w U O w z w Q o- Q z 2)< w 0 z 0� LL 2 Q 2�� COUNTY of FREDERICK TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: John R. Riley, Jr., County Admi t DATE: October 31, 2013 RE: Joint Finance Committee Meeting John R. Riley, Jr. County Administrator 5401665 -5666 Fax 5401667 -0370 E -mail: jriley @ co.$ederick.va.us The Joint Finance Committee met on Thursday, August 7, 2013 at 5:00 A.M.; in the First Floor Conference Room, County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. Present were Chairman Richard Shickle and Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Frederick County representatives; and John Willingham, and Milt Mclnturff, City of Winchester representatives. Others present: John. R. Riley, Jr„ County Administrator; Jay 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; Josh Phelps, Chairman of the Winchester - Frederick County Economic Development Commission; John Huddy, Director of Handley Regional Library; and Vic Bradshaw, The Winchester Star. Mr. Shickle called the meeting to order. * "For Information Only* * * UPDATE /STATUS OF OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING 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. 107 North Dent Street ® Winchester, Virginia 22601 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 first 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. 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 betty gn p een 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. 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 MOU. 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. L` (V E E [A U a� �O [1 G 'o ti R Cl M U 0 p Q D C D m C R CL O O a Q w l4 N CL. ; (o U 0 c E cm C 0 C6 D Q a Q Q 4 e7• O O O ah O a0 O mo O u744 CD h C) CD 0 0 444 O Q O 44400 4 4 4 4 4 0 0 4 00 M m od h oD0 o N oO co o CO OO oo 0 00 0m p O 00 o in a0 N h u7 O d d O 6 d a o o M 4 4 4 4 M CA Q M o m m 4 N V O Q O QOM d M 0 u7 O V m M N N R LD h N u) O� m 0 f+ N O M N r to N r Q I M 4 o o CD O h' h' 4 4 d r 4 4 ' b O r ' m o o ' 0 0 a a o 0 0 O o O' m d d o d to o o v M o o b o h C1 o o 'O o Cp O u7 u7 4 6 4 4 0 4 O h o o o 0 0 0 o ep M d O m ll M r d d h h d M N h h o 0 0 o u7 Q d o0 p O m O M O O W p 0 m 0 r O rer W V M co O u) (D N ((7 m CD CD m NN 0 m Ohm N m m m O a-)t) o O 14 O N Lo Lo u7 Q' N o N m m m N rm o N U m Nr r u') N er QC) oh co Q oo o U7o omqroc 6C 0 Q OOO Q 0007 O b b oaoo OOb a M (A o o m o o CD N O un N (0 m d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 4 M fU M m O co +-- O h Cn O (M u7 o Iq O 0 C C C C 0 C 0 cu p h r M ff1 4 4 9] Cp 4 u7 C' 7 M f� 4 N V O O O O O CI o p N p M M M M N N N h N m u3 .0� 4 (- < M 0 0 0 �-^ O h 0 W O O O d (D O O O m V o 0 0 o 0 0 0 O a a b o o 0 0 0 0 m o 0 o O d o 0 0 y M O m o o m 4 4 p N c;) u7 N CD m p 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 I+ O m (ll M CL M ((7 m o o (+ r C r m Co C 'w7 o Q o 4 C Q G Q O (Q Iq C O d O h v M Y7 io 4) co m 0 In M M h 0 N 0 CO o a 0 LO 4 N u) O N m M r M O N� u7 N h N m CC) M M (D N O r h r N N w N Df m C° 0 0 0 u7 o h 0 oo 0 m 0 0 'C' u7 O to N CD h 0 4 0 o 4 0 4 d d d 4 4 4 0 0 o o o 4 4 4 4 4 d 4 N N O u7 N 0 O 0 M h O M r o O m o0 N u7 0 O N M V o r LO m O (O a O O d b C o C o O o O o C 4 C O 4 M Lo 44 r ,: "I O u10ON 00 OOOMO cq p M M W N N N h N u) 4 h M V ccj Q M (D a s O O h 0 � o o 0 0 v CD O u7 M (0 h o 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 4 4 D O O d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o w N 0 h 44 4 u) 4N Ou7 OO 000 00000 00 N N o o N C(') o 0 0 CD. bM'(t 4 0 4 4 4 4 0 0 C V n Ln0 h 03 Co io C)N �0u7 0 - a oto4 M O N ID M M t0 N CD u7 N t N N m co tin M m 1 CV O r h Y N N r M 't 0 0 m M O M O N d u7 a 0 m O d 0. h o o M 0 0 u7 o 'n o o o o 0 b m 4 o O u) O Q O LO o ca 97 k7 o +- Ct m 7 en Co (D N N (D O o (I7 (n M a? W m N (v_ O o a0 l~ a0 co u7 v_ O (n m r7 l+ ch a N o n u7 m h N er N co D a r ll'1 N M y N o N o (D r oo a LO u Co G O M r +O N N m r O N v7 M c0 m M M 3�Mr N m OO QpOMOCO 4000O CC) dQO 4, "m0"'00(nOOoo0oo0000[000 ooao bo m o M N [p o0 4 4 4 4 4 M M f� 4 N h p p O u) d d N d a' j M b m N N b b b N N o CD A u7 N u7 CD M 4 4 4 h O O O 4 cr r CD r ao �O Ln O V O M u) -d u7 O h o 'r7 00 u7 N O O u7 N CU (L' u7 c0 m V' N N F r C!7 M N C° � 'V' >` m M O r M V � M 4 m 0 p M 4 M Q N C7 u7 p O m O 0 O V c0 M O r 0 0 m O u7 0 C. 0 o 0 O M o 4 r 0 (n o o a (n o O 0 0 u7 m u [D m N N o o 0 u7 o co m u7 m N N 4 a h m m N o u7 Cn r op u, m N r 4 >n to h N N co N U p rO O r 4hV u7 c o V N N O O M m M CD .^ 0 300r m m o o cON N •^ m N O M c0 M M M r M r C N O O O co O m o N O (n Q O m 0 o d co m 0 'r O O M 0 u'7 0 0 0 0 0 o co Q Q r p u) 0 0 O (n 00 u7 _m 0 ui m N O u7 CO u7 N O h m 47 O Cf) - u7 N d u7 h N N m p Co ll;� CD N (fl O (R m m N O oa 't V: Lr r ao m r 4) M D m 0 4 CD h m m m b o W W CD N 0 Q' d o7 r u7 M N N b o M M M r NTS pmobm0MOi0000ornooC.'IT oomo(ri000000Mpo o(n0=10t000 N u7 u� 0 10 0 0 O u) M Co N Cl h f- O V' 00 u) N O u; h N N p o eY Cp N M b CD C CP N 4 o0 u, m u? C? � cn m r v) e0 V 00 N ( O �o O� (o c+ce (f7 r a'no� N N N 0 d com Mr MO am To (n co " Nr m tD N o M Q CD M co M h m '�"` m N jp a m O O m b m 0 to ED 47 m '0 m m O In M in N a h �+ O m li') N 4 l{y h N N d O (17 iF O N M O CO m - m N O c0 u'7 m Cf) m M N m r u� co vt v o0 N rO O h C9 CD Co 00 oo m (.6M�O Cf7M m CD N CDM N Q m r u) m N N N CD 4 m M m r M b cor O m m r N r r M _ 7 N > D to 7 C Cti U m p a) E (°q c m o L (D w E EE (a C E (2 �. - }o W c E 0 0 a Qd U U (u a) ZY SQ wQ N m _ D C O o15 B N N Q S N Z9 4) C .0. _ N CD U ° O CL w U cc � C y (4 _ G p p 7' C ❑ O N t D N C m w U O df O y S N N cmE C U�U--I o a�Up� S D 6) o 1 j l6 N (!J � j p ' R N U) V 0) S v C U p t4 N N l3 E , C N U LL 7 �_ CO w_ p W �) IC ❑ N (� C w� Q 2 �O o A x� n c o m 'y� v ° ti� ta) 0 O N O N O N C L N CC o d ° 40 :K G O N o 7�7 D) (� CC) io D �Li„ �iDl D f a7 11, . €L J U LfJJ JU)ZQIYU�QU 2 ��Q ��4^^7 U`r ❑fl Z U QU2J(q�Cq R Cl M U 0 p Q D C D m C R CL O O a Q w l4 N CL. ; (o U 0 c E cm C 0 C6 D Q a Q Q 4 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: October 16, 2013 SUBJECT: Finance Committee Report and Recommendations The Finance Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 at 8:00 a.m. All members were present. (21) Item 1 was approved under consent agenda. 1. (21) The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $33.865 This amount represents a DMV Highway Safety Grant. See attached memo, p. 4 — 5. 2. The Finance Director requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $1,526,665 and a School Capital Projects fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $800,882.79. These amounts represent one time funding for capital purchases from the FY 2013 year surplus. See attached information, p. 6 — 8. The committee recommends approval. 3. The School Finance Director requests a General Fund and a School Operating Fund supplemental appropriations in the amount of $97,011.71. This amount represents designated funds received in FY 2013. See attached memo, p. 8. The committee recommends approval. 4. The Commissioner of the Revenue requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $1,377.50. This amount represents proceeds from the Sheriff sale to be used for vehicle repair and maintenance. No local 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 1 Finance Committee Report and Recommendations October 16, 2013 Page 12 funds required. See attached memo, p. 9. The committee recommends approval. 5. The Assistant County Administrator requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation 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. INFORMATION ONLY 1. The Finance Director provides a Fund 10 Transfer Report for FY 2014. See attached, p. 12. 2. The Finance Director provides FY 2014 financial statements for the period ending September 30, 2013. See attached, p. 13 — 23. 3. The Finance Director provides the FY 2014 Fund Balance Report for 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. 5. The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) has awarded the County the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the FY 2014 Budget document. This is the 28 consecutive year that Frederick County has received this achievement. See attached, p. 26 — 27. 2 Finance Committee Report and Recommendations October 16, 2013 Page 13 Respectfully submitted, FINANCE COMMITTEE Charles DeHaven Judy McCann - Slaughter Ron Hottle Angela Rudolph Richard Shickle Gary Lofton By Cheryl B. Shiffler, Finance irector 3 0#q1r Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles Past Office Box 27412 Richmond, Virginia 23269 -0001 Purpose: Virginia's Highway Safety Program Subgrantees use this form to certify and assure that they will fully comply with all terms of the Highway Safety Grant Agreement. Instructions: Subgrantees must read the contract, complete all applicable information on the first page, initial the subsequent pages, and return all pages to the Department of Motor Vehicles. This Highway Safety Grant Agreement is entered into between the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (hereinafter "Department'), 2300 West Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia 23220, and the following: Subgrantee: Frederick Count Project Title: Selective Enforcement - Alcohol Project NumberlCFDA Number: 154AL- 2014 - 54247 -5495- 20.607 Grant Award Amount $33,865.00 Source of funds obligated to this award: U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Period of Performance for this project From October 1, 2013, or the date the Highway Safety Grant Agreement is (hereinafter "Grant Period "): signed by the Director, Virginia Highway Safety Office (whichever is later) through September 30, 2014. Allow 21 days for the Department to complete its review and signature, FINAL, VOUCHER IS DUE ON OR BEFORE NOVEMBER 5, 2014. In performing its responsibilities under this Highway Safety Grant Agreement, the Subgrantee certifies and assures that it will fully comply with the following: Applicable Department regulations and policies and state and federal laws, regulations, and policies Statement of Work and Special Conditions and an Approved Budget, included with this Highway Safety Grant Agreement General Terms and Conditions, also included with this Highway Safety Grant Agreement Subgrantee's signature below indicates that the Subgrantee has read, understands and agrees to fully comply with all terms and conditions of this Highway Safety Grant Agreement without alteration. This Highway Safety Grant Agreement (hereinafter "Grant Agreement "), consisting of this certification; the attached Statement of Work and Special Conditions; the attached General Terms and Conditions; the attached Project Budget; the Subgrantee's proposal; and the letter awarding the grant to the Subgrantee constitutes the entire agreement between the Department and the Subgrantee, supersedes any prior oral or written agreement between the parties and may not be modified except by written agreement as provided herein. Where any conflict arises between terms, the following is the order of governance of one term over another: (1) applicable Department regulations and policies, except where superseded by federal laws, regulations, or policies (2) applicable state laws, regulations, and policies, except where superseded by federal laws, regulations, or policies; (3) applicable federal laws, regulations, and policies; (4) Statement of Work and Special Conditions; (5) General Terms and Conditions; (6) Project Budget; (7) Subgrantee's proposal; and (8) grant award letter. SIGNATURES OF AUTHORIZED APPROVING OFFICIALS For Subgrantee For Virginia !Department of Motor Vehicles r� Name and Title of Project Director (print) Signature Date Saunders , Virgigia Highw9l"Safety Office (print) 101 ature tC — ) . — f- Name and Title of Authorized Approving O icial Subgrantee's DUNS Number 1) 1;) "L t Does your locality /legal entity expend $500,000 or more annually in total fe al nd (check one) Yes No 1z� 4 Signatu a Date I SEP 1 2013 Date - -- c U_ I) la" 1 1 lll��Y � � I o «. IL j ID � iLL. � I d � i3 P I� U C 1 CY Q [) 0 e O J N D a p Q.. e � E t 0 Aft I h 0 I I O , � I ,y I v I 999 � I i I d E31 0 0 0 0 L6 N 0 O 0 C) 0 U') N O C� 0 0 ° N T �I A 0 CL 0 0 O co U) 3 O LO N to w N 7 O N C e O N a O C C U) a C) O 0 0 ti T a ° o 0 Cl ° ° o m In rn 0 O 0 ° C ti T 0 0 c] 0 C_ T P rn a� D C C C E C (u O ui I6 L CJ O U U N N 0 O Q co ° en C7 O O LO 0 T aU Ls 0 U 93 W O N sv 7 N I— i C] T C N Q . cr w C3 I� a rn rn O d oi a) Q r cn a� O U O cr- O fU . E T O LLl C7 r _C3 C3 c C) C) I� °o lC I ° o © ° v C) LO i LO ° v co L6 �Ml I, I ii C) O q CD m r LO j d � u7 C7 C] d C7 C3 6 u } t4 rn co I'�! fl II (n C fU Z] J U) .O O U) J Q. T C C Q � d a cr w Iw .I i s { i I { f_ fC i i I � d m � I i C � IC Ik r-� I 47 � Q II w 5 COUNTY of FREDERICK Finance Department Cheryl B. Shiffler Director 540/665 -5610 Fax: 540/667 -0370 E -mail: cshiffle@fcva.us MEMORANDUM TO: Finance Committee FRONT: Cheryl Shiffler, Finance Director DATE: October 3, 2013 SUBJECT: Capital Funding During the development of the FY 2014 budget, it was agreed that fund balance funding of the general fund budget would remain at the present level of $4.3 million, and one- time funding for capital purchases would be reviewed for supplemental funding from fund balance if year -end balances were sufficient. At this time, it is requested that funding from unreserved general fund balance in the amount of $1,526,665 be considered. This amount includes capital funding for the county and the schools. Additional information attached. 107 North Kent Street ® V6ichester, Virginia 22601 General Fund Capital Requests Fire and Rescue Ford F -250 (LS) 33,000 Associate Equip. for F -250 7,000 Chevy Tahoe 29,500 Associate Equip. for Tahoe 7,000 Protective Uniform Equipment 72,918 Lucas Auto Pulse (CPR) Grant 31,000 Fire Companies Increase Capital Contribution 25,000 Sheriff's Department 3 Unmarked Cars Animal Control F150 13 Marked Cars Associated equipment for vehicles Parks (2) 72" Z -Turn mowers Sun -Shade Sherando Park 40 Computer Workstations with 2010 Microsoft 75,353 (25,451 each) 23,250 328,263 ( 25,251 each) 8,000 27,899 8,250 48,350 725,783 7 iFrederick County Public Schools ... Lo ensure all students c:a i excel! :nt education Executive Director of Finance fryel @frederick.k12.va.us DATE: September 5, 2013 TO: Cheryl Shiffler, Director of Finance - County of Frederick FROM: Lisa K. Frye, Executive Director of Finance - FCPS 4- ' ' SUBJECT: FY14 Budget Items for Consideration by the Board of Supervisors At their meeting, September 3, 2013, the School Board approved the following budget adjustments which are subject to consideration and approval by the Board of Supervisors. Please include the following requests for FY2014 budget adjustments on the agenda for the County Finance Committee meeting scheduled for September 18, 2013. Also, the financial reports for FY2013 are provided in this packet as an information item. I. Budget adjustment for the school operating fund A FY2014 budget adjustment to the school operating fund is requested for $97,011.71, which represents funds received at the end of the FY2013 and are to be used for their specified purposes including mentor teacher programs, algebra readiness program, and other miscellaneous purposes. II. Budget adjustment for school capital projects fund The school operating fund had a remaining, un- obligated surplus of $800,882.79 for the close of the 2013 fiscal year. The school board is requesting a FY2014 budget adjustment to the school capital projects fund for this amount. Approval of this request will provide appropriation for the purchase of replacement school buses, energy conservation projects, capital maintenance projects and technology replacements for the division. Attachment (1) - FY2013 Financial Report C: David T. Sovine, Superintendent John R. Riley, County Administrator ,f reberich Countp, Virginia OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE w 107 North Kent Street P.O. Sox 552 Winchester VA 22601 Winchester VA 22604 -0552 ennurphy@co,frederick.va.us www.`rederickcou ntvva. oovlcor ELLEN E. MURPHY Phone: 540- 665 -5681 COMMISSIONER Fax: 540 -567 -6487 MEMORANDUM TO: Finance Committee Cheryl B. Shiffler, Finance Director FROM: Ellen E. Murphy DATE: October 9, 2013 I RE; Request for Funds This is to request that the proceeds obtained from the sale of two older vehicles [1997 Ford and 2000 Ford] in the amount of $1377.50 be applied to our Vehicle Repair Maintenance budget (4 -010- 012090 -3004- 000 - 002) to use for tires, inspection, repair, and routine maintenance of the other vehicles used by the Commissioner of the Revenue office. FREDERICK COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE 457 CIVIL FEES PH. 547- 662 -6168, ! f't �a 68- 25115p6 1080 COVERSTONE DR t/S!r ,IY Ir:``� ✓; - WINCHESTER, VA 22602 Date Pay to the , Order of ]l .,,_ rJ a d aL� , ` 7 fIJ1,R. ` ldlru [ f rJ I� d r l7o {tars 5t U BANK �f C WKE COUNTY f k x 202NORTH LOU SsL WI VA22601 For YD Il S )i[orT" C[ - - r lf�f NwtLt 7 &P 9 107 North Kent Street . '41&chester, Virginia 22601 s now- ROBERT T. WILLIAMSON Sheriff 1080 Coverstone Drive Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540) 662 -6168 Fax(540)504 -6400 TO : Steve Richman FROM : Sheriff R. T. Williamson DATE : October 8, 2013 SUBJECT : Proceeds from Sale of Items MAJOR R. C. ECE MAN Chief Deputy On September 25, 2013 a public auction was held at the Frederick County Sheriff's Office - impound lot. The following items were sold for the Frederick County Maintenance department for the amount listed: 2002 Ford Pickup $3,600.00 Kohler Generator $15,000.00 Truck Cap $100.00 Enclosed please find a check in the amount of $17,765.00. This amount represents your department's proceeds minus 5% for the expenses incurred — auctioneer fees and advertising costs. RTW /asw Enclosure my Sheriffs - Wwa e 11 FY14 SEPTEMBER BUDGET TRANSFERS PAGE 1 DATE DEPARTMENT /GENERAL FUND REASON FOR TRANSFER FROM TO ACCT CODE AMOUNT 9/1/2013 FIRE & RESCUE RESTRUCTURING 3505 1001 000 087 1,841.79 FIRE & RESCUE 3505 1001 000 076 (1,841.79) FIRE & RESCUE 3505 1001 000 100 13,463.05 FIRE & RESCUE 3505 1001 000 026 (7,463.05) FIRE & RESCUE 3505 1001 000 090 (6,000.00) 9/17/2013 PARKS & RECREATION ADMINISTRATION ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ROSE HILL TRAIL 7101 3002 000 000 (240.00) PARKS MAINTENANCE 7103 30021 0001 000 240.00 9/20/2013 FINANCE BALNET ANNUAL MAINTENANCE 1214 3007 000 000 (1,215.00) FINANCE 1214 5413 000 000 1,215.00 9/26/2013 SHERIFF REIMB.MEALS/TOLLS /TRANSPORTATION 3102 5506 000 000 (500.00) SHERIFF 3102 5506 000 001 500.00 9/30/2013 REASSESSMENT /BOARD OFASSESSORS PART TIME DATA COLLECTOR 1210 1001 000 041 (31,402.00) REASSESSMENT /BOARD OFASSESSORS 12101003 000 000 31,402.00 10/1/2013 JINFORMATION TECHNOLOGY BALANCE BUDGET 1220 55061 0001 003 (190.00) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 1220 5506 000 000 190.00 10/3/2013 SHERIFF CORRECT PAYMENT P.O. 21508 3102 5401 000 000 (10,450.00) SHERIFF 3102 5506 000 000 10,450.00 10/3/2013 FIRE & RESCUE INCREASE IN INTERNET CHARGES 3505 5204 000 000 (1,500.00) FIRE & RESCUE 3505 5299 000 000 1,500.00 10/3/2013 FIRE & RESCUE TO COVER K9 EXPENSES 3505 5413 000 000 (1,000.00) E22L FIRE & RESCUE 1 1 3505152041 0001 0011 1,000.00 12 County of Frederick General Fund September 30, 2013 ASSETS FY 14 FY13 Increase Performance Bonds Payable 9/30/13 9/30/12 (Decrease) Cash and Cash Equivalents 44,008,666.59 38,132,364.70 5,876,301.89 *A Petty Cash 1,555.00 1,555.00 0.00 Receivables: 40,675,522.30 41,624,546.39 (949,024.09) Taxes, Commonwealth,Reimb.P /P 39,496,763.22 39,378,408.79 118,354.43 Streetlights 16,845.09 18,988.74 (2,143.65) Commonwealth, Federal, 45 day Taxes 73,190.77 69,156.71 4,034.06 Due from Fred. Co. San. Auth. 734,939.23 734,939.23 0.00 Prepaid Postage 1,788.02 3,926.74 (2,138.72) GL controls (est.rev / est. exp) (7,808,723.86) (6,805,770.08) (1,002,953.78) (1) Attached TOTAL ASSETS 76,525,024.06 71,533,569.83 4,991,454.23 LIABILITIES Accrued Liabilities 393,554.52 573,664.46 (180,109.94) *B Performance Bonds Payable 384,180.06 1,527,194.27 (1,143,014.21) *C Taxes Collected in Advance 323,722.68 67,002.18 256,720.50 Deferred Revenue 39,574,065.04 39,456,685.48 117,379.56 *D TOTAL LIABILITIES 40,675,522.30 41,624,546.39 (949,024.09) EQUITY Fund Balance Reserved: Encumbrance General Fund 536,768.05 95,179.07 441,588.98 (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 17,244.80 17,210.60 34.20 Transportation Reserve 377,396.00 438,300.00 (60,904.00) *E Animal Shelter 335,530.02 325,780.61 9,749.41 Proffers 2,843,610.60 2,305,873.65 537,736.95 (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 29,553,651.46 24,656,826.20 4,896,825.26 (4) Attached TOTAL EQUITY 35,849,501.76 29,909,023.44 5,940,478.32 TOTAL LIAB. & EQUITY 76,525,024.06 71,533,569.83 4,991,454.23 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. 13 BALANCE SHEET (1) GL Controls FY14 FY13 Inc /(Decrease) DEPARTMENT Amount Description Est.Revenue 129,130,021 123,074,342 6,055,680 Fire & Rescue Appropriations (56,724,081) (53,751,369) (2,972,712) 58,747.30 (2) 2014 Chevy Tahoe SUV Est.Tr.to Other fds (80,751,432) (76,223,922) (4,527,510) 931,292.04 Encumbrances 536,768 95,179 441,589 1,999.80 VO1P & Network Upgrade Parks (7,808,724) (6,805,770) (1,002,954) (2) General Fund Purchase Orders Outstanding Purchase Orders @9/30/13 Designated DEPARTMENT Amount Description Animal Shelter 16,127.00 (5)Double Stack Cat Condos w /Base Bowman Library 25,000.00 Roof Resurface Fire & Rescue 18,653.95 Lighting,Lightbars, Siren, Misc.Equip. PARKS 32,771.19 2014 Ford F -250 Projects 58,747.30 (2) 2014 Chevy Tahoe SUV Balancep9 /30/13 10,139.42 Lifepak 15 Additional Equipment & Inhouse Parts 224,730.17 19,239.15 Uniforms 931,292.04 7,230.00 Academy Textbooks Inspections 20,952.11 2013 Ford F -150 IT 1,999.80 VO1P & Network Upgrade Parks 7,128.75 Chemicals for Pools 931,292.04 264.51 Holiday Lighting 5,500.00 Plants for Clearbrook Park 19,760.00 Fall T-Shirts 7,446.30 Staff Uniforms Refuse Collection 139,625.67 Earthwork for Gainesboro Citizens Site 5,960.00 Concrete Wall /Slab for Gainesboro Citizens Site 57,950.00 Trash Compactor /Receiver Can Sheriff 3,658.07 Body Armor 49,400.00 Sungard CSS1 Software 349.47 HP Laserjet Pro 200 24,875.00 2014 Ford Explorer Treasurer 3,990.36 Envelopes Total 536,768.05 Designated Other Projects Detail Administration Designated Bridges (3)Proffer Information Historic Preservation 80,000.00 Other 38, 217.00 SCHOOLS PARKS FIRE & RESCUE Projects TOTAL Balancep9 /30/13 1 1,307,008.84 224,730.17 380,579.55 931,292.04 2,843,610.60 Designated Other Projects Detail 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 @9/30/13 (4) Fund Balance Adjusted Beginning Balance @9/13 31,655,032.02 Revenue 9/13 12,716,466.79 Expenditures 9/13 (14,167,435.58) Transfers 9/13 (650,411.77) 9/13 Adjusted Fund Balance 29,553,651.46 14 County of Frederick Comparative Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance September 30, 2013 NAUMIL *y 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 TOTALREVENUES EXPENDITURES: General Administration Judicial Administration Public Safety Public Works Health and Welfare Education Parks, Recreation, Culture Community Development 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 @9/30/13 FY14 FY13 YTD 9/30/13 9/30/12 Actual Appropriated Actual Actual Variance 87,168,379.00 3,675,049.11 3,183,367.34 491,681.77 (1) 28,429,460.00 3,237,064.38 3,011,150.97 225,913.41 (2) 956,610.00 365,502.27 271,558.92 93,943.35 (3) 131,120.00 56,293.47 60,550.57 (4,257.10) (4) 2,309,230.00 548,960.49 562,265.94 (13,305.45) 520,295.00 85,845.90 134,626.69 (48,780.79) 916,702.00 547,315.25 322,418.84 224,896.41 (5) 8,683,225.00 4,192,369.21 4,169,808.54 22,560.67 (6) 15,000.00 8,066.71 3,350.08 4,716.63 (7) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 129,130,021.00 12,716,466.79 11,719,097.89 997,368.90 9, 381, 314.77 1, 953, 227.34 1, 565, 685.71 387, 541.63 2,156,183.48 482,501.47 464,764.91 17,736.56 27,254,999.46 7,424,568.54 6,778,692.60 645,875.94 4,423,637.80 1,008,518.97 803,056.67 205,462.30 6,985,132.00 1,499,411.91 1,493,900.74 5,511.17 56,493.00 14,123.25 14,123.25 0.00 5,204,595.18 1,365,115.26 1,305,864.47 59,250.79 2,293,343.28 419,968.84 420,910.37 (941.53) 57,755,698.97 14,167,435.58 12,846,998.72 1,320,436.86 (8) 79,719,813.94 650,411.77 1,733,911.22 (1,083,499.45) (9) (8,345,491.91) (2,101,380.56) (2,861,812.05) (760,431.49) 31,655,032.02 27,518,638.25 4,136,393.77 29,553,651.46 24,656,826.20 4,896,825.26 15 (1)General Property Taxes FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease Real Estate Taxes 1,326,316 1,289,983 36,333 Personal Property 2,144,195 1,649,357 494,838 Penalties and Interest 119,551 139,747 (20,196) Credit Card Chgs. /Delinq.Advertising (16,556) (16,847) 291 Adm.Fees For Liens &Distress 101,544 121,127 (19,584) Recordation Taxes 3,675,049 3,183,367 491,682 (2) Other Local Taxes Local Sales and Use Tax 993,182.63 919,354.66 73,827.97 Communications Sales Tax 114,225.97 116,756.70 (2,530.73) Utility Taxes 350,032.16 401,304.91 (51,272.75) Business Licenses 582,537.39 433,812.00 148,725.39 Auto Rental Tax 19,940.08 31,432.69 (11,492.61) Motor Vehicle Licenses Fees 78,547.34 90,106.92 (11,559.58) Recordation Taxes 335,812.60 364,002.66 (28,190.06) Meals Tax 681,886.58 582,926.73 98,959.85 Lodging Tax 79,800.63 70,596.56 9,204.07 Street Lights 885.00 537.50 347.50 Star Fort Fees 214.00 319.64 (105.64) Total 3,237,064.38 3,011,150.97 225,913.41 (3) Perm its &Privileges Dog Licenses 12,948.00 13,207.00 (259.00) Transfer Fees 706.27 645.30 60.97 Development Review Fees 104,459.20 62,265.24 42,193.96 Building Permits 186,748.08 148,202.98 38,545.10 2% State Fees 4,399.22 3,466.26 932.96 Electrical Permits 22,152.00 13,832.00 8,320.00 Plumbing Permits 2,555.00 1,895.00 660.00 Mechanical Permits 11,269.50 10,985.14 284.36 Sign Permits 540.00 690.00 (150.00) Permits for Commercial Burning 75.00 125.00 (50.00) Explosive Storage Permits - 100.00 (100.00) Blasting Permits 120.00 75.00 45.00 Land Disturbance Permits 18,880.00 15,720.00 3,160.00 Residential Pump And Haul Fee - 300.00 (300.00) Transfer Development Rights 650.00 50.00 600.00 Total 365,502.27 271,558.92 93,943.35 (4) Revenue from use of Money 47,859.60 53,712.15 (5,852.55) Property 8,433.87 6,838.42 1,595.45 56,293.47 60,550.57 (4,257.10) 16 (5) Recovered Costs FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease Recovered Costs Treas. Office 41,340.00 1,237.25 40,102.75 Worker's Comp 300.00 350.00 (50.00) Reimbursement Circuit Court 3,283.02 3,510.90 (227.88) Clarke County Container Fees 16,073.58 14,748.98 1,324.60 City of Winchester Container Fees 10,356.13 2,467.54 7,888.59 Refuse Disposal Fees 21,777.27 13,825.11 7,952.16 Recycling Revenue 30,869.97 28,448.82 2,421.15 Fire &Rescue Merchandise (Resale) - 25.60 (25.60) Container Fees Bowman Library 417.23 135.61 281.62 Restitution Victim Witness 1,944.99 2,271.16 (326.17) Reimb.of Expenses Gen. District Court 7,091.12 10,141.17 (3,050.05) Reimb.Public Works Salaries - 41,682.00 (41,682.00) Winchester EDC - 18,000.00 (18,000.00) Reimb.Task Force 5,097.38 5,019.84 77.54 EDC /Recovered Costs - 480.00 (480.00) Sign Deposits Planning 150.00 (150.00) 300.00 Reimbursement Street Signs - 1,989.60 (1,989.60) Comcast PEG Grant 15,749.60 15,282.80 466.80 Proffer -Other 5,000.00 5,000.00 - Fire School Programs 16,921.00 13,060.00 3,861.00 Proffer Sovereign Village 10,976.19 14,634.92 (3,658.73) Proffer Lynnehaven - 13,513.24 (13,513.24) Proffer Redbud Run 45,178.00 45,178.00 - Clerks Reimbursement to County 3,530.89 3,111.62 419.27 Proffer Canter Estates 4,087.97 - 4,087.97 Proffer Village at Harvest Ridge 3,078.00 1,539.00 1,539.00 Proffer Snowden Bridge 143,484.44 45,654.14 97,830.30 Proffer Meadows Edge Racey Tract 130,936.00 - 130,936.00 Sheriff Reimbursement 24,791.47 21,261.54 3,529.93 Proffer Cedar Meadows Proffer 4,881.00 - 4,881.00 Total 547,315.25 322,418.84 224,896.41 17 (6) Commonwealth Revenue 9/30/2013 9/30/2012 FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease Motor Vehicle Carriers Tax 37,981.90 159.54 37,822.36 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 86,438.33 70,525.32 15,913.01 Shared Expenses Comm.Atty. 61,300.18 70,986.34 (9,686.16) Shared Expenses Sheriff 359,567.51 369,307.18 (9,739.67) Shared Expenses Comm.of Rev. 33,521.44 30,192.41 3,329.03 Shared Expenses Treasurer 25,434.39 20,614.92 4,819.47 Shared Expenses Clerk 65,043.06 57,115.96 7,927.10 Public Assistance Grants 741,758.00 779,343.64 (37,585.64) Litter Control Grant 15,502.00 - 15,502.00 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 16,421.51 (10,366.73) DOS & Sheriff State Grants - - JJC Grant Juvenile Justice 32,090.00 32,090.00 - Rent /Lease Payments 51,707.72 50,719.48 988.24 Spay /Neuter Assistance -State - 272.65 (272.65) VDEM Grant Sheriff 5,600.58 - 5,600.58 Wireless 911 Grant 11,674.25 677.00 10,997.25 State Forfeited Asset Funds 1,315.61 3,883.40 (2,567.79) Social Services VOCA Grant - 3,325.00 (3,325.00) Total 4,192,369.21 4,169,808.54 22,560.67 i County of Frederick General Fund September 30, 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 $1,320,436.86 in total. General Administration increased $387,541.63 and reflects the $271,899.92 telephone system upgrade to Cisco VOIP solutions. Public Safety increased $645,875.94 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 $382,322.31 year to date. Additionally, Fire and Rescue purchased a Lifepak 15 for $65,995.97 and the County local share for the Jail increased $66,876 for the first quarter of FY14 over the previous year. Public Works increased $205,462.30 due to the earthwork and concrete wall /slab costs of $186,853.33 for the Gainesboro citizens site. Transfers decreased $1,083,499.45. See chart below: (9) Transfers decreased $1,083,499.45 FY14 FY13 Increase /Decrease School Operating 218,891.94 1,352,373.34 (1,133,481.40) Shawneeland 0.00 597.36 (597.36) Debt Service County 144,378.37 125,181.16 19,197.21 Jail Fund 0.00 972.98 (972.98) Operational Transfers 287,141.46 254,786.38 32,355.08 Total 650,411.77 1,733,911.22 (1,083,499.45) *1 Decrease includes $1.1 million Reappropriation in FY13 *1 19 NOTES: *1 The increase in cash can be attributed to an increase in fund balance. *2 Total fund balance increased $1,485,575.92. 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 $680,539.59. Current Unrecorded Accounts Receivable- FY2014 Prisoner Billing: Compensation Board Reimbursement 9/13 Total 31,630.53 442,023.00 473,653.53 20 County of Frederick FUND 11 NORTHWESTERN REGIONAL ADULT DETENTION CENTER September 30, 2013 ASSETS FY2014 FY2013 Increase 9/30/13 8/31/13 (Decrease) Cash 4,770,096.19 3,848,471.51 921,624.68 *1 Accounts Receivable Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 GL controls(est.rev /est.exp) (359,876.37) (852,900.43) 493,024.06 TOTAL ASSETS 4,410,219.82 2,995,571.08 1,414,648.74 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 17,863.36 162,277.64 (144,414.28) Undesignated Fund Balance 2,314,828.39 829,252.47 1,485,575.92 *2 TOTAL EQUITY 2,332,691.75 991,530.11 1,341,161.64 TOTAL LIABILITY & EQUITY 4,410,219.82 2,995,571.08 1,414,648.74 NOTES: *1 The increase in cash can be attributed to an increase in fund balance. *2 Total fund balance increased $1,485,575.92. 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 $680,539.59. Current Unrecorded Accounts Receivable- FY2014 Prisoner Billing: Compensation Board Reimbursement 9/13 Total 31,630.53 442,023.00 473,653.53 20 County of Frederick Comparative Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance 9/30/2013 FUND 11 NORTHWESTERN REGIONAL ADULT DETENTION CENTER FY2014 REVENUES: 9/30/13 Appropriated Actual Interest FY2013 9/30/12 YTD Actual Actual Variance Supervision Fees 45,000.00 9,777.30 9,846.00 (68.70) Drug Testing Fees 5,500.00 915.00 1,330.00 (415.00) Work Release Fees 384,616.00 64,289.19 64,586.85 (297.66) Federal Bureau Of Prisons 0.00 1,045.00 0.00 1,045.00 Local Contributions 5,888,444.00 2,629,662.75 1,318,441.75 1,311,221.00 Miscellaneous 15,000.00 2,365.88 3,479.27 (1,113.39) Phone Commissions 120,000.00 0.00 11,173.70 (11,173.70) Food & Staff Reimbursement 100,000.00 9,579.83 15,450.93 (5,871.10) Elec.Monitoring Part.Fees 83,767.00 1,755.50 0.00 1,755.50 Employee Meal Supplements 200.00 42.50 0.00 42.50 Share of Jail Cost Commonwealth 997,975.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Medical & Health Reimb. 57,600.00 12,557.53 11,184.31 1,373.22 Shared Expenses CFW Jail 4,947,976.00 805,255.14 850,614.59 (45,359.45) State Grants 249,551.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Local Offender Probation 242,437.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DOC Contract Beds 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bond Proceeds 0.00 221,000.00 0.00 221,000.00 Transfer From General Fund 4,755,887.00 1,116,750.50 1,050,847.48 65,903.02 TOTAL REVENUES 17,893,953.00 4,874,996.12 3,336,954.88 1,538,041.24 EXPENDITURES: 18,271,692.73 4,194,456.53 4,185,960.04 8,496.49 Excess(Deficiency)of revenues over expenditures 680,539.59 (849,005.16) 1,529,544.75 FUND BALANCE PER GENERAL LEDGER 1,634,288.80 1,678,257.63 (43,968.83) Fund Balance Adjusted To Reflect 2,314,828.39 829,252.47 1,485,575.92 Income Statement @9/30/13 21 County of Frederick Fund 12 Landfill September 30, 2013 ASSETS Cash Receivables: Accounts Receivable Fees Accounts Receivable Other Allow.Uncollectible Fees Fixed Assets Accumulated Depreciation GL controls(est.rev /est.exp) TOTALASSETS FY2014 FY2013 Increase 9/30/13 9/30/12 (Decrease) 29,690,077.20 28,465,034.02 1,225,043.18 *1 566,571.02 579,194.03 (12,623.01) *2 68.00 691.68 (623.68) (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) (4.316,682.45) 1,803,449.45 47,635,501.98 45,616,905.54 2.018.596.44 LIABILITIES Accounts Payable Accrued VAC.Pay and Comp TimePay Accrued Remediation Costs Retainage Payable Deferred Revenue Misc.Charges �r.�r��rr_r�urri EQUITY Fund Balance Reserved: Encumbrances Land Acquisition New Development Costs Environmental Project Costs Equipment Undesignated Fund Balance 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) 68.00 691.68 62( 3.68) 11,951.533.32 11,835,772.11 115,761.21 0.00 285,029.72 (285,029.72) *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 25,825,526.66 23,637,661.71 2,187.864.95 *5 TOTAL EQUITY TOTAL LIABILITY AND EQUITY 35,683,968.66 47,635,501.98 33,781.133.43 45,616,905.54 1.902.835.23 2.018.596.44 NOTES: *1 The increase in cash can be attributed to the increase in fund balance. *2 Receivables decreased $12,623.01 at 9 /30 /13.Landfill charges at 9/13 were $416,962.36 compared to $383,733.59 at 9/12 for an increase of $33,228.77. The delinquent fees at 9/13 were $145,897.71 compared to $194,127.53 at 9/12 for a decrease of $48,229.82. *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 9/13/13. *5 Total fund balance increased $2,187,864.95. 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 $819,918.71. 22 County of Frederick Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance September 30, 2013 FUND 12 LANDFILL REVENUES Interest Charge Interest on Bank Deposits Salvage and Surplus Sanitary Landfill Fees Charges to County Charges to Winchester Tire Recycling Reg.Recycling Electronics Miscellaneous Wheel Recycling Charges for RTOP Renewable Energy Credits Landfill Gas To Electricity Waste Oil Recycling State Reimbursement Tire Operation TOTAL REVENUES Operating Expenditures Capital Expenditures TOTAL Expenditures Excess(defiency)of revenue over expenditures Fund Balance Per General Ledger FUND BALANCE ADJUSTED 25,005,607.95 23,350,358.55 1,655,249.40 25,825,526.66 23,637,661.71 2,187,864.95 23 FY14 FY13 YTD 9/30/13 9/30/12 Actual Appropriated Actual Actual Variance 0.00 759.63 1,496.35 (736.72) 40,000.00 2,422.91 2,388.00 34.91 0.00 31,260.70 39,810.70 (8,550.00) 4,632,600.00 1,167,993.70 1,110,841.07 57,152.63 0.00 89,608.98 89,149.36 459.62 0.00 23,537.32 26,184.76 (2,647.44) 70,000.00 37,340.42 35,786.96 1,553.46 40,000.00 11,875.60 13,965.00 (2,089.40) 0.00 0.00 301.00 (301.00) 120,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 787.89 0.00 787.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 403,660.00 88,581.68 131,888.21 (43,306.53) 3,298.30 4,642.19 (1,343.89) 0.00 0.00 6,120.00 (6,120.00) 5,306,260.00 1,457,467.13 1,462,573.60 (5,106.47) 4,728,993.00 637,548.42 671,038.30 (33,489.88) 1,912,500.00 0.00 504,232.14 (504,232.14) 6,641,493.00 637,548.42 1,175,270.44 (537,722.02) 819,918.71 287,303.16 532,615.55 25,005,607.95 23,350,358.55 1,655,249.40 25,825,526.66 23,637,661.71 2,187,864.95 23 County of Frederick, VA Report on Unreserved Fund Balance September 30, 2013 Unreserved Fund Balance, Beginning of Year, July 1, 2013 33,888,096 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 Fund Balance, September 30, 2013 (379,606) (1,853,458) 31,655,032 24 m Development Cen ter, Inc. �C�J����retiv✓ �e 6zlr`� CIL 25 Government Finance Officers Association 203 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2700 Chicago, Illinois 60601 -1210 312.977.9700 fax: 312.977.4806 September 9, 2013 Mr. John R. Riley, Jr. County Administrator Frederick County 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Mr. Riley: \ , c� F i ,"O tisa a I am pleased to notify you that Frederick County, Virginia has received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the current budget from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). This award is the highest form of recognition in governmental budgeting and represents a significant achievement by your organization. When a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award is granted to an entity, a Certificate of Recognition for Budget Presentation is also presented to the individual or department designated as being primarily responsible for its having achieved the award. This has been presented to: Finance Department We hope you will arrange for a formal public presentation of the award, and that appropriate publicity will be given to this notable achievement. A press release is enclosed for your use. We appreciate your participation in GFOA's Budget Awards Program. Through your example, we hope that other entities will be encouraged to achieve excellence in budgeting. Sincerely, Stephen J. Gauthier, Director Technical Services Center Enclosure Washington, DC Office 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 309 • Washington, DC 20004 , 202.393.8020 • fax: 202.393.0780 www. gf,2&g Government Finance Officers Association 203 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2700 Chicago, Illinois 60601 -1210 312.977.9700 fax: 312 , 977.4806 September 9, 2013 PRESS RELEASE For Further Information Contact Stephen J. Gauthier (312) 977 -9700 Chicago - -The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) is pleased to announce that Frederick County, Virginia has received the GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for its budget. The award represents a significant achievement by the entity. It reflects the commitment of the governing body and staff to meeting the highest principles of governmental budgeting. In order to receive the budget award, the entity had to satisfy nationally recognized guidelines for effective budget presentation. These guidelines are designed to assess how well an entity's budget serves as: • a policy document • a financial plan • an operations guide • a communications device Budget documents must be rated "proficient" in all four categories, and the fourteen mandatory criteria within those categories, to receive the award. When a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award is granted to an entity, a Certificate of Recognition for Budget Presentation is also presented to the individual or department designated as being primarily responsible for its having achieved the award. This has been presented to Finance Department. For budgets including fiscal period 2012, over 1,340 entities are expected to received the Award. Award recipients have pioneered efforts to improve the quality of budgeting and provide an excellent example for other governments throughout North America. The Government Finance Officers Association is a nonprofit professional association serving over 17,800 government finance professionals throughout North America. The GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Awards Program is the only national awards program in governmental budgeting. Washington, DC Office 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 309 • Washington DC 20004 • 202.393.8020 • fax: 202,393.0780 w ww. g4jrg COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEMORANDUM 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director - Transportations RE: Transportation Committee Report for Meeting of October, 28 2013 DATE: November 4, 2013 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 NOTE: Board resolution included. 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. Motion by Mr. Racey and seconded by Mr. DeHaven to recommend support. Motion passed unanimously. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Click in this box to return to the page you were previously viewing VDOT REVENUE SHARING APPLICATION INFORMATION SNOWDEN BRIDGE BOULEVARD Frederick County, VA PROJECT INFORMATION Locality's Priority # 1 Route # and local road name Snowden Bridge Boulevard - Ph 1 State Project Number UPC # Type of Project Construction Project will be accelerated. Project in Frederick Co Comprehensive Plan. Current Ad Date 1/1/15 Advanced Ad date 7/1/14 Scope of Work: Construction of 4 lane roadway and multi -use trail on new alignment with bridge over CSX to provide access to Graystone Industrial Park. Description of Work Scope: Grading, paving, storm drainage, water main, utility relocation, and bridge construction From: 0.37 mi east of Route 11 To: 0.890 mi. east of Rte 11 Length: 0.852 miles Is this project in another locality? NO PROJECT ESTIMATE PHASE Total Estimated Project Cost Estimated Eligible Project Costs Estimated Eligible VDOT Project Expenses Estimated Reimbursements to Locality PE $0 $0 $0 $0 RW $0 $0 $0 $0 CN $8,136,700 $8,136,700 $35,000 $4,033,350 TOTAL $8,136,700 $8,136,700 $35,000 $4,033,350 LOCALLY ADMINISTERED PROJECT PE Phase: No - Reimbursement will not be requested RW Phase: No - Reimbursement will not be requested CN Phase: Yes - Reimbursement will be requested PROJECT FINANCIAL INFORMATION VDOT Revenue Sharing match funds up to $1M requested for CONSTRUCTION project FY 2014: $0 VDOT Revenue Sharing match funds over to $1M requested for CONSTRUCTION project FY 2014: $4,033,350 VDOT Revenue Sharing match funds up to $1M requested for MAINTENANCE project FY 2014: $0 VDOT Revenue Sharing match funds up to $1M requested for MAINTENANCE project FY 2014: $0 VDOT Revenue Sharing matching TOTAL request: Locality Revenue Sharing matching TOTAL: Project has previously received Revenue Sharing state funds: NO Total of other State / Federal / Local funds: List types of other funds: developer funding Total of other State / Federal / Local funds: Total funding to be programmed on Project $4,033,350 $4,033,350 $1,300,000 $4,103,350 $8,136,700 E � o � U � �n O N + 7 +, s O Q Z tq- O 0 MEN v O mol dol v O L a 0 Q W J O m W D DG 00 Z W 0 3 O Z 0 Q r m V v L L6 Q RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS "REVENUE SHARING PROGRAM" FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 Action: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: November 13, 2013 IJ APPROVED IJ DENIED 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 1; 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 13th day of November 2013. This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Robert A. Hess Gene E. Fisher Gary A. Lofton Robert W. Wells Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Christopher E. Collins A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes #33 -13 * **Items Not Requiring Action * ** 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 Priorties 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 Staff s recommendation. 4. Other JB /pd Click in this box to return to the page you were previously viewing Transportation Committee Project Prior List PRIORITY 1 Planning, Engineering, Right of Way and Construction Work for Route 37 Description: This project would be to continue work on the Eastern Route 37 extension. More specifically, to update the Environmental Impact Statement to the point of a new Record of Decision and to update the 1992 design plans to address the current alignment, engineering guidelines, and possible interchange improvements. In addition, this allows for advanced engineering, right of way purchase and construction. Capital Cost: $300,000,000 + Justification: This project moves the County closer to completion of a transportation improvement that would benefit the entire county and surrounding localities. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 2 Interstate 81, Exit 310 Improvements Description: Construct improvements to Exit 310 interchange. Capital Cost: $30,000,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in many areas of the County and address coming development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 3 Interstate 81, Exit 307 Relocation Description: Construct a relocated Exit 307 interchange. Capital Cost: $60,000,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in many areas of the County and address coming development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 4 East Tevis Street Extension Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Route 522 and going west approximately 0.2 miles to connect to the road network being constructed by the Russell 150 development. Capital Cost: $2,600,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in many areas of the County and address development to the surrounding area. The location is as identified by joint planning efforts between the county, VDOT, and the developer. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 5 Route 277 Widening and Safety Improvements Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at 1 -81 and continuing to Sherando Park. Project would include realignment of Aylor Road to align with Stickley Drive. Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: 2013 -2017 PRIORITY 6 Warrior Drive Extension Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Route 277 where Warrior Drive intersects from the north and continuing that roadway south and west to intersect with 1 -81 at the location of the relocated Exit 307 interchange. Capital Cost: $23,200,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction "Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 7 Channing Drive Extension Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Senseny Road where Charming Drive intersects from the north and continuing that roadway south to intersect with Route 50 East at Independence Drive. Capital Cost: $20,600,000 Justification: This project has been identified in the Eastern Road Plan, and will address congestion in Eastern Frederick County and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY S Widening of Route It North to the West Virginia State Dine Description: Improve Route I1 to a divided 4 and 6 -lane facility as detailed in the Eastern Road Plan. 2 Capital Cost: $47,800,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion over a large area of the County and address development to the surrounding area. This project improves the safety for the traveling public by reducing congestion and improving the flow of traffic. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 9 Brucetown Road/Hopewell Road Alignment and Intersection Improvements Description: Realign Brucetown Road to meet Hopewell Road at Route 11. Improvements to this intersection will address comprehensive planned development's traffic generation in the area. Capital Cost: $3,000,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on the Route 11 corridor. The location is identified by joint planning efforts between the county and VDOT. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 10 Senseny Road Widening Description: Widen Senseny Road to a 4 -lane divided roadway. This project is not dependent upon, but is being coordinated with the implementation of Route 37, Charming Drive, and development in the area. Capital Cost: $22,800,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on Eastern Frederick County. This project is identified in the adopted Eastern Road Plan. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY xI Inverlee Way Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Senseny Road and going south to Route 50 East. This project is being planned in conjunction with improvements to Senseny Road and surrounding development. Capital Cost: $10,200,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion and provide an additional needed link. between Senseny Road and Route 50 East. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 12 Fox Drive Description: Add additional turning lane(s) to Fox Drive where it intersects with Route 522 North. Capital Cost: $250,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will address congestion at this intersection. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 13 Renaissance Drive Description: Construct a connector road between Route 11 and Shady Elan Drive. Capital Cost: $2,000,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will address congestion at key points along Route 11 and Apple Valley Dr. This project is identified in Secondary Road Improvements Plan. Construction Schedule: Phase I is under construction. PRIORITY 14 Senseny Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Description: This project will construct bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Senseny Road from Greenwood Road to the 1 -51 crossover. Capital Cost: $2,000,000 Justification: This project will improve pedestrian safety along a corridor surrounded by residential development and centered upon the Senseny Road Elementary School. Construction Schedule: NIA PRIORITY 15 Frederick County Eastern Road Plan Description: This project is intended to address all of the planned transportation improvements in the County Comprehensive Plan, Eastern Road Plan that are not noted individually above. Capital Cost: TBD Justification: This project prepares the county for future development by addressing the projects needed to support that development in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Construction Schedule: N/A 4 Transportation Committee Proiect Priority List (DRAFT UPDATE) Funded Priorities Priority 1 Interstate 81, Exit 310 Improvements Description: Construct improvements to Exit 310 interchange. Capital Cost: $48,000,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in many areas of the County and address coming development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD Priority 2 Route 277 Widening and Safety Improvements Phase I Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at I -81 and continuing to Warrior Drive. Project would include realignment of Aylor Road to align with Stickley Drive. Capital Cost: $40,000,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: 2013 -2017 PRIORITY 3 East Tevis Street Extension and Brid ,-e over I -81 Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Route 522 and going west approximately 0.2 miles to connect to the road network being constructed by the Russell 150 development, then continuing toward 1 -81 and constructing a bridge into the City of Winchester. Capital Cost: $2,600,000 $6,000,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in many areas of the County and address development to the surrounding area. The location is as identified by joint planning efforts between the county, VDOT, and the developer. Construction Schedule: TBD Unfunded Priorities PRIORITY 1 Planning, Engineering, Right of Way and Construction Work for Route 37 Description: This project would be to continue work on the Eastern Route 37 extension. More specifically, to update the Environmental Impact Statement to the p oint of a new Record of Decision and to update the 1992 design plans to address the current alignment, engineering guidelines, and possible interchange improvements. In addition, this allows for advanced engineering, right of way purchase and construction. Capital Cost: $300,000,000 + Justification: This project moves the County closer to completion of a transportation improvement that would benefit the entire county and surrounding localities. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 2 Interstate 81, Exit 307 Relocation Description: Construct a relocated Exit 307 interchange. Capital Cost: $60,000,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in many areas of the County and address coming development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRInUlTV 3 Route 277 Widening and Safety Improvements Phase II Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Warrior Drive and continuing to White Oak Road. Capital Cost: $15,000,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 4 Redbud Road Realignment Description: Construct a 2 -lane realignment of Redbud Road beginning east of the CSX rail line and terminating at an intersection with future Snowden Bridge Blvd. Capital Cost: $2,500,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion and safety at the interchange of Route 11 north and Interstate 81. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 5 Warrior Drive Extension Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Route 277 where Warrior Drive intersects from the north and continuing that roadway south and west to intersect with I -81 at the location of the relocated Exit 307 interchange. Capital Cost: $23,200,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 6 Charming Drive Extension Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Senseny Road where Charming Drive intersects from the north and continuing that roadway south to intersect with Route 50 East at Independence Drive. Capital Cost: $20,600,000 Justification: This project has been identified in the Eastern Road Plan, and will address congestion in Eastern Frederick County and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 7 (chap ,-e in order) Brucetown Road /Hopewell Road Alignment and Intersection Improvements Description: Realign Brucetown Road to meet Hopewell Road at Route 11. Improvements to this intersection will address comprehensive planned development's traffic generation in the area. Capital Cost: $3,000,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on the Route 11 corridor. The location is identified by joint planning efforts between the county and VDOT. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 8 (change in order) Widening of Route 11 North to the West Virginia State Line Description: Improve Route 11 to a divided 4 and 6 -lane facility as detailed in the Eastern Road Plan. Capital Cost: $47,800,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion over a large area of the County and address development to the surrounding area. This project improves the safety for the traveling public by reducing congestion and improving the flow of traffic. Construction Schedule: TBD PRInUITV 9 Senseny Road Widening Description: Widen Senseny Road to a 4 -lane divided roadway. This project is not dependent upon, but is being coordinated with the implementation of Route 37, Channing Drive, and development in the area. Capital Cost: $22,800,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on Eastern Frederick County. This project is identified in the adopted Eastern Road Plan. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 10 Inverlee Way Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Senseny Road and going south to Route 50 East. This project is being planned in conjunction with improvements to Senseny Road and surrounding development. Capital Cost: $10,200,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion and provide an additional needed link between Senseny Road and Route 50 East. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 11 Fox Drive Description: Add additional turning lane(s) to Fox Drive where it intersects with Route 522 North. Capital Cost: $250,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will address congestion at this intersection. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 12 Renaissance Drive Description: Construct a connector road between Route 11 and Shady Elm Drive. Capital Cost: $2,000,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will address congestion at key points along Route 11 and Apple Valley Dr. This project is identified in Secondary Road Improvements Plan. Construction Schedule: Phase I is under construction. PRIORITY 13 Frederick County Eastern Road Plan Description: This project is intended to address all of the planned transportation improvements in the County Comprehensive Plan, Eastern Road Plan that are not noted individually above. Capital Cost: $2,000,000 TBD Justification: This project prepares the county for future development by addressing the projects needed to support that development in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Construction Schedule: N/A Y . PRIORITY 13 Frederick County Eastern Road Plan Description: This project is intended to address all of the planned transportation improvements in the County Comprehensive Plan, Eastern Road Plan that are not noted individually above. Capital Cost: $2,000,000 TBD Justification: This project prepares the county for future development by addressing the projects needed to support that development in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Construction Schedule: N/A COUIJTY of FREDERICK 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 Subject: Public Hearing Height Requirements in the EM, Ml, and M2 Districts Date: November 7, 2013 Staff has received a request to revise the Zoning Ordinance to increase the maximum height in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), MI (Light Industrial), and M2 (Industrial General) Zoning Districts. Currently the maximum height in the EM District is 45' and the maximum height in the M1 and M2 Districts is 60'. Staff has prepared an amendment that allows the Board of Supervisors to waive the maximum heights in the EM, M1, and M2 Districts. The waiver would allow the Board of Supervisors to waive the height in the EM District up to 200' and the Ml /M2 Districts height up to 150'. The waiver would allow the Board of Supervisors to determine the appropriateness of a requested height increase in a requested location while providing an applicant with an irrevocable approval. Supplementary use regulations have also been drafted that would need to be addressed when an applicant applies for the waiver. The supplementary use regulations address architectural renderings, the ability for the Board to require additional screening /distance as well as other conditions as necessary. A revision to the supplementary use regulations for height exemptions has also been added to expand the automated facility 100' allowance to also include automated manufacturing facilities. The Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) discussed this item at their meeting on September 26, 2013. The DRRC was supportive of the waiver option as well as the supplementary use regulations. The Board of Supervisors discussed this item on October 9, 2013, meeting and ultimately sent the amendment forward for public hearing. The Planning Commission discussed the revised ordinance on October 16, 2013. , The Planning Commission then held a public hearing for this item on November 6, 2013; there were no citizen comments and the Commission recommended approval of the amendment. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Discussion EM/MI/M2 Heights November 7, 2013 Page 2 The attached documents show the existing ordinance with the proposed changes (with strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added). This proposed amendment is being presented to the Board of Supervisors as a public hearing item. A decision by the Board of Supervisors on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. Proposed Height Revisions (deletions shown in strikethrough and additions shown in bold underlined italics). 2. EDC Support Letter 3. Resolution CEP/pd Click in this box to return to Page 2 of the DOS 11/07/13 Memorandum DRAFT Ordinance Amendment Attachment 1 EM /M1 /M2 Districts ARTICLE VI BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Part 608 — EM Extractive Manufacturing District § 165 - 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. ",�;TStPEt re Sh@ Eee P-1 4 - feet I A h e+g ht. -The maximum structure height shall be 45 feet. The Board of Supervisors may waive the 45 foot height limitation provided that it will not negatively impact adjacent uses. In order to consider the waiver, the applicant must submit all information and adhere to requirements specified by § 165- 204.28. In no case shall any structure exceed 200 feet in height. 1 DRAFT Ordinance Amendment Attachment 1 EM /M1 /M2 Districts ARTICLE VI BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Part 601— Dimensional and Intensity Requirements § 165 - 601.02 Dimensional and intensity requirements The following table describes the dimensional and intensity requirements for the business and industrial districts: District Requirement 131 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 M1 and M2 Districts the Board of Supervisors may waive the 60 foot height limitation provided that it will not negatively impact adjacent uses. In order to consider the waiver, the applicant must submit all information and adhere to requirements specified by § 165 - 204.28 In no case shall any structure exceed 150 feet in height. DRAFT Ordinance Amendment Attachment 1 EM /M1 /M2 Districts Article II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES § 165 - 204.28. Height Waivers in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), M1 (Light Industrial) and M2 (Industrial General) District: Waiver requests for height increases in the EM, M1 and M2 Zoning Districts, shall adhere to the following requirements: 1. Architectural renderings of the proposed structure shall be submitted for review by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors; 2. The Board of Supervisors may require buffer and screening elements and /or additional distance when deemed necessary to protect existing adjacent uses; 3. The Board of Supervisors may require additional conditions as deemed necessary; 4. This waiver shall not be permitted to increase the height of any signage regulated by § 165- 201.07. Article II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, 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, M1 and M2 Zoning Districts and automated manufacturing facilities in the M1 and M2 Zoning Districts shall be exempt from the maximum height requirement. p,etest+eR @eee,FdiRste the 1spee Tr--@*iA-n- ef applieable ed 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. WINCHESTER FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA EDC DATE: September 25, 2013 TO: Eric Lawrence, Planning Director Click in this box to return to Page 2 of the DOS 11/07/13 Memorandum FROM: Patrick Barker, CEcD, Executive Director RE: Height Requirements in the EM, M1 and M2 districts For the past several months Frederick County has worked steadfastly to enhance height limits in industrial zoning districts. The chief catalyst for this effort is rooted in an EDC supported project, a $45 million expansion by Carmeuse last year. This expansion will bring new modern kilns to meet growing demand. Carmeuse officials worked with Frederick County to discover a path to operate this new investment under County Code. One such path involved a Conditional Use Permit but proved to be problematic. This discussion required significant time. Now time is critical as Carmeuse aims to install this new investment by the end of this year. As such, County and Carmeuse officials have pursued a new Board of Supervisors waiver track. County processes require public hearings on such an amendment to the County code. In order to comply with Carmeuse's operational timeframe, staff engaged in a fast track process. This process bypasses receiving formal feedback on the waiver amendment from the Planning Commission prior to the Board of Supervisors' authorization of a public hearing, should they grant it. I appreciate your hopeful understanding. Please contact me with any questions. Your Move. Our Commitment. 45 East Boscawen Street A Winchester. VA 22601 A 540 -665 -0973 A Fax 540- 722 -0604 A wwwwinva.com Click in this box to return to Page 2 of the BOS 11/07/13 Memorandum RESOLUTION Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: November 6, 2013 Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: November 13, 2013 IJ APPROVED IJ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 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 §165- 201.03 — HEIGHT LIMITATIONS EXCEPTIONS PART 204 — ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES §165- 204.28 — HEIGHT WAIVERS IN THE EM (EXTRACTIVE MANUFACTURING), MI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) AND M2 (INDUSTRIAL GENERAL) DISTRICT 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 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 PDRes. 435 -13 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, §165- 201.03 — Height Limitations Exceptions, Part 204 — Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, §165- 204.28 — Height Waivers in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), MI (Light Industrial) AND 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. This amendment shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Passed this 13th day of November, 2013 by the following recorded vote: This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Gene E. Fisher Robert W. Wells Christopher E. Collins Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes. 435 -13 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 Subject: Public Hearing TDR Ordinance Revisions Date: November 7, 2013 Staff has drafted three proposed changes to the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Ordinance that was originally adopted in 2010. The proposed revisions are as follows: Revision #1 — Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Density Table (See sheet 6 of the TDR Ordinance) In January 2013, the Board of Supervisors approved a number of revisions to the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District. One of the revisions was a change to the maximum RP density. The currently adopted Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) density table was based on the previous RP Density table rand, therefore, needs to be updated. In addition to the ordinance being updated to be consistent with the RP changes, another reason for these changes is to ensure that the use of TDR's remain a beneficial option for future development in lieu of rezoning. The TDR table has been revised to follow the same format as the adopted RP Density table. Changes include: • Incorporating the RP density requirements (based on housing types and parcel size). • Increasing the RP allowable density when using TDR's for a development. • Increasing the RA (Rural Areas)' permitted maximum density using TDR's to be consistent with the maximum RP density using TDR's T The adopted RP Density table has been included for reference. Revision #2 — Contiguous Sending Properties (See sheet 3 of the TDR Ordinance) Draft revision to the TDR ordinance to include a minor addition that allows the use of contiguous parcels for TDR transfers (one property may have state road frontage but another contiguous property under the same ownership may not). 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Frederick County Board of Supervisors TDR Ordinance Revisions November 7, 2013 Page 2 Revision #3 — Density Right Conversion Rate (See sheet 7 of the TDR Ordinance) Draft revision to the TDR ordinance to include a density right conversion that would apply to density rights being applied to receiving properties. The conversion would be based on the type of housing unit being developed on the receiving property - single- family detached, single- family attached or multifamily. In reviewing the TDR Ordinance and discussions with parties interested in utilizing TDR rights for their developments, it has come to Staff's attention that the projected value of a TDR would only be economically feasible to utilize when developing a single - family detached development and would not be attractive when developing single - family attached (townhouse) or multifamily units. With a rezoning, the capital impact a dwelling unit has on the County is based on the development impact model which is broken down by housing type. As outlined in the impact model output, a single - family dwelling unit has a higher impact on capital facilities than a multifamily unit. The development impact model currently calculates the capital facility impacts as follows: • Single- Family Dwelling Unit = $ 19,600 • Town Home Dwelling Unit = $ 13,062 • Apartment Dwelling Unit = $ 11,339 A single- family dwelling unit constructed in both the rural areas and the urban areas has an impact of $19,600 on capital facilities (based on the 2013 Development Impact Model). This impact doesn't include the impact on the local transportation network. Dwellings constructed in the urban areas typically have access to a road network that is better capable of accommodating the traffic generated by new dwellings, while dwellings constructed in the rural areas access the existing rural road network which typically is not constructed in a way to accommodate additional units. Additionally, state transportation funding programs favor transportation in urban and suburban areas. While the use of TDR's prohibit the County from collecting proffers and capital facility impacts, the County does not lose out by the use of TDR's. The County absorbs the fiscal and transportation impacts of rural development either way, and the use of TDR's allows those units to be transferred to the urban areas which are better equipped to handle that development. To help bridge this value gap, staff has prepared a revision to the TDR ordinance that allows for the following: • When utilizing TDR's to develop single - family detached dwellings on a receiving property, one TDR density right can be used to develop one single - family detached dwelling unit. • When utilizing TDR's to develop single - family attached dwellings (townhouses) on a receiving property, one TDR density right can be used to develop 1.5 single - family attached dwelling units. • When utilizing TDR's to develop multifamily dwellings on a receiving property, one TDR density right can be used to develop 1.75 multifamily dwelling units. By including a conversion rate, it allows the TDR value to remain fair and stable while allowing a developer to construct various housing types. 25, -. Frederick County Board of Supervisors TDR Ordinance Revisions November 7, 2013 Page 3 25, Review Ifistory Revision 91 was discussed by the DRRC on April 2013 and by the Planning Commission on May 15, 2013. The Planning Commission recommended that the density updates be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for review. Following the Planning Commission review of the density table updates, staff drafted additional changes to the TDR ordinance and the previously discussed updates were put on hold so all the TDR updates could be processed concurrently. Revisions #2 and 43 were discussed by the DRRC on July 2013. The DRRC was supportive of the proposed amendments being forwarded to the Planning Commission for discussion. The Planning Commission discussed all three revisions at their meeting on August 21, 2013; the Planning Commission forwarded the amendments to the Board of Supervisors for discussion. The Board of Supervisors discussed the proposed revisions at their meeting on September 9, 2013. The Board of Supervisors requested additional information regarding the ability to apply TDR density rights to receiving properties zoned RA (Rural Areas) and whether that was the original intent of the TDR Program. Ultimately the Board did send the amendments forward for public hearing. Following the Board of Supervisors discussion, staff prepared a Friday mailing for the Board of Supervisors dated September 19 that discussed purpose of the TDR program and the initial approval process. The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this item on November 6, 2013. A representative from the Frederick County Farm Bureau spoke in support of the TDR Ordinance and requested that it be approved. The Planning Commission was in favor of the proposed TDR tgeS ordinance changes and recommended approval of the amendments. The attached documents show the existing ordinance with the proposed chant (with strikethroughs for text eliminated and bold italic for text added). This proposed amendment is being presented to the Board of Supervisors as a public hearing item. A decision by the Board of Supervisors on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics and deletions shown with strikethrough. 2. Adopted RP Density table. 3. Development Impact Model. 4. September 19 Board of Supervisors Friday Mailing Package regarding TDR Receiving Properties 5. Resolution CEP/pd Click in this box to return to Page 3 of the 11/07/13 BOS Memorandum CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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 B. Implementing the Comprehensive Policy Plan by directing residential land uses to the Urban 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 1 -3 1 -;; ^d 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 Frederick 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 1 CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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 single - family 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 single - family 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- 301.03A are 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. 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. For the purposes of this chapter, a sending property must be an entire tax parcel or lot qualified under §165 - 302.0113 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. 2 CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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 Code including, but not limited to, meeting all state road and access requirements. For TDR purposes, if the sending property consists of more than one parcel of land, at least one lot must meet all the subdivision requirements of Chapter 144, this lot shall be deemed the primary lot. Additional parcels that do not meet the subdivision requirements but are contiguous to the primary lot maybe added to the sending property, if they are all under common ownership. For purposes of this section, lots divided by a street are considered contiguous if the lots would share a common lot line if 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. Click in this box to return to Page 1 §165- 302.02. Receiving Properties. of the 11/07/13 Bos Memorandum 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; 3 CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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 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 receiving property in the transfer of development rights program. E. A receiving property may accept development rights from one or more sending properties, up to a maximum density specified in Tables 1 -3 ' ;; Table 2 in §165- 302.03. §165- 302.03. 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. 4 CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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 licensed 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. G. The determination of the number of residential development rights a sending property has available for transfer to a receiving property and /or 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: 5 Click in this box to return to Page 1 of the 11/07/13 DOS Memorandum CHAPTER 165 - ZONING Table 1 Maximum Density Allowed in Zoning Districts through Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program Zoning District Pr And Land Use Size Density in Dwelling Units per Acre with DR In Acres Dwelling Units per Transfers Acre Without T RA RA NA i,„I H,„ - DeRs t y a ll e ,. e d it +� (Rural Areas) Receiving 1 Unit Per 5 f 16g RP D; #Pirt ,. jt+ iR tl.e I D,6 PeF Property Acres 40 0 ; Density for qualified RA Receiving Properties in the UDA shall be consistent with the allowable RP Density Utilizing TDR's (see below) RA RA 1 Unit Per 5 1 Unit Per Acre in Designated Rural (Rural Areas) Receiving Acres Community Centers served by *For Designated Rural Community Centers Property Community Septic Systems RP 419 49 4-5 (Residential Performance) 19-199 *Density by parcel size for all other housing >1Q9 0 -10 10.1 -25 4 10 6 6 15 10 types and developments with mixed housing tvags l *See § 165 - 402.05 for maximum percentage 25.1-50 50.1+ 6 6 10 10 of multifamily housing RP (Residential Performance) Multifamily Residential Buildings & Age N/A 20 24 Restricted Multifamily Garden Apartments 10 15 Townhouse (single family attached) 10 15 R4 (Residential Planned Community) >100 4 4- 10 11 Click in this box to return to Page 2 of the 11/07/13 DOS Memorandum CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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 density rights are applied to a receiving property, the density right to housing type conversion rate shall be outlined in the table below. Such density conversions shall be demonstrated on the Master Development Plan for the receiving property. Table 3 TDR Denisty Right Conversation Rate §165- 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 7 CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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- 302.03A, 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- 302.05. 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 (60) 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- 302.01, 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. B. 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. 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: 1) A certificate of title for the sending property prepared by an attorney admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia; L-11 CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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 LETTER 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; 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 p7 CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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; 6) 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 may be 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 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 person(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; 10 CHAPTER 165 - ZONING 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 - 303.0113 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- 303.02. 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 zoning classification of the property, the number of development rights used, and a notation of the recordation of the conveyance required by §165- 302.06. 11 Click in this box to return to Page 3 of the 11/07/13 DOS Memorandum ARTICLE IV AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Part 402 — RP Residential Performance District § 165 - 402.05 Gross density. Adopted RP Density Table A gross density shall be established for each proposed development, including all land contained within a single master development plan, according to the characteristics of the land, the capacity of public facilities and roads and the nature of surrounding uses. Because of these characteristics, some developments may not be allowed to employ the maximum density allowed by these regulations. The following density requirements shall apply to all parcels as they exist at the time of the adoption of this section: A. Subsequent divisions of land shall not increase the allowed density on parcels of land. B. In no case shall the gross density and maximum percentage of multifamily housing of any development within an approved master development plan exceed the densities and percentages set forth in the following table: Density by Land Use Density (Units /Acre) Maximum Percentage of Multifamily Housing Multifamily Residential Buildings and Age Restricted Multifamily (excluding garden apartments) 20 Units /Acre 100% Garden Apartments 10 Units /Acre 100% Townhouse (single family attached) 10 Units /Acre N/A Density by Parcel Size (for all other housing types and development with mixed housing types) Density (Units /Acre) Maximum Percentage of Multifamily Housing 0 -10 acres 10 Units /Acre 100% 10.1 -25 acres 6 Units /Acre 100% 25.1 -50 acres 6 Units /Acre 60%75% 50.1 + acres 6 Units /Acre 50% C. Within developments utilizing Transferable Development Rights, the maximum gross residential density for the development shall be determined in §165- 302.03H. Click in this box to return to Page 3 of the 11/07/13 DOS Memorandum Development Impact Model On October 12, 2005, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors directed staff to use the Development Impact Model (DIM) to project the capital fiscal impacts that would be associated with any rezoning petitions containing residential development, replacing the existing Capital Facilities Fiscal Impact Model. The DIM was created by an economic consultant who evaluated and analyzed development within the County in an effort to assist the County in planning for future capital facility requirements. Critical inputs to the DIM are to be reviewed and updated annually to assure that the fiscal projections accurately reflect County capital expenditures. The Board of Supervisors authorized use of the annual model update on June 12, 2013. The DIM projects that, on average, residential development has a negative fiscal impact on the County's capital expenditures. As such, all rezoning petitions with a residential component submitted after July 1, 2013 will be expected to demonstrate how the proposal will mitigate the following projected capital facility impacts: Single Family Dwelling Unit = $ 19,600 Town Home Dwelling Unit = $ 13,062 Apartment Dwelling Unit = $ 11,339 The following is a breakdown of the projected impacts per dwelling unit for each capital facility. Capital facility Single Family Town home Apartment Fire And Rescue General Government $564 $43 $419 $33 $425 $33 Public Safety $0 $0 $0 Library ....... .. ....... .......... $496 .... ............ ... ........ ... ...... ... ..... $379 $379 Parks and Recreation $1766 $1,350 $1,350 School Construction $16,731 $10,881 $9,152 ....... .. ....... ........ Total ........ ............ ... ........ ... ...... ... ..... $19,600 $13,062 $11,339 The projected capital expenditures depicted above do not include a credit for future real estate taxes. A "read- only" copy of the Development Impact Model is available on the public workstation within the Planning and Development's office. A user manual is also available. 06/12/2013 Click in this box to return to Page 3 of the 11/07/13 BOS Memorandum COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665-6395 To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director Subject: Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Ordinance — Receiving Properties Date: September 19, 2013 At the Board of Supervisors September 9, 2013 meeting, concern was expressed over the implementation of the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program. Specifically, the ability to apply transferred density rights to a receiving property zoned RA (Rural Areas) without benefit of a rezoning was questioned and whether it was the original intent to allow such a transfer. This memorandum offers an overview of the thoughts and efforts that lead to the creation and adoption of the TDR ordinance, and the benefits of TDRs in managing and reducing impacts on the county. The directive to adopt a TDR program came out of the Rural Areas Study, which ultimately produced the "Rural Areas Report and Recommendations" which the Board of Supervisors approved as a policy component of the Comprehensive Plan on April 22, 2009. The recommendation for the TDR program from the report was to adopt a TDR Program that allowed receiving properties to be "within the UDA on residentially planned areas that are zoned RA" (see attachment 1); thus being the basis for the creation of the ordinance as drafted. The intent of the County's TDR Program is to direct growth away from farmland. So by design, the development rights purchased from farmland would be transferred to land within the County's Urban Development Area (UDA), where public services are more readily available. When by -right development occurs in the Rural Areas, the county must absorb the impact from the new residential dwellings. The TDR program allows the transfer of residential dwelling units from the Rural Areas to the Urban Areas, thus shifting the impact to an area more capable of handling the growth. The residential density provided in the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District is sufficient for development without the need for transferred density rights from sending properties. Therefore, the most desirable receiving properties for TDR transfers are RA zoned property within the UDA. Receiving properties must be designated on the adopted Receiving Areas Map, must be served by public water and sewer, located in the Urban Development Area (UDA), and identified in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan for residential land uses. Receiving areas also consist of defined Rural Community Centers. TDR's allow a developer to bypass the cost and time associated with a rezoning and move straight to the Master Development Plan stage. The owner is permitted to develop their property with transferred rights and the County shifts residential dwelling units and their associated impacts from the rural areas to the urban areas, thus preserving farm land. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Re: TDR Ordinance Page 2 September 19, 2013 Receiving properties zoned RA (Rural Areas) when developed utilizing TDR's must adhere to all development regulations that property zoned RP (Residential Performance) would be subject to. The development would also be required to submit a Master Development Plan (MDP) which is reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors as well as a subdivision design plan that would be reviewed and approved by staff. Staff recognizes that when utilizing TDR's on RA zoned land in the UDA the County is unable to mitigate impacts via proffers. The TDR enabling legislation contained in the Code of Virginia prohibits requiring a rezoning when utilizing TDR's; therefore the transfer process is administrative and regulated by the adopted ordinance. It should be recognized that the County would not be able to recover the impact from that same dwelling unit were to be constructed on the potential sending property (farm land). The Frederick County TDR program enables density rights to be applied to receiving areas under three different scenarios: 1. To increase the residential density on land zoned RA located in the UDA and planned for residential uses. 2. To increase the residential density on previously rezoned and proffered land zoned RP. 3. Rural Community Centers Conclusions The TDR Program was developed to transfer the impacts of rural development to the urban areas of the county that were more suitable to handle the impacts brought about by the new residential dwelling units. It was envisioned through the creation of the program that the RA zoned properties located within the receiving areas would be the most desirable to receive transferred density rights, without benefit of a rezoning. Staff has attached the relevant sections from the 2009 Rural Areas Report and Recommendations policy document, the 2011 TDR Factsheet, and sections of the Zoning Ordinance that regulate receiving properties. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. Excerpts from the 2009 Rural Areas Report and Recommendations 2. 2011 TDR Factsheet 3. Zoning Ordinance — TDR sections ER /CEP/pd ATTACHMENT 1 Click in this box to return to Page 2 of the 09/19/13 DOS Memorandum RURAL AREAS REPORT & RECOMMENDATION A Report from the Rural Areas Subcommittee Recommended by the Subcommittee on February 19, 2009 Recommended by the Planning Commission on April 1, 2009 Adopted by the Board of Supervisors on April 22, 2009 February 2009, Final Version Following six months of research, presentations, discussions, and evaluations, the Rural Areas Subcommittee offered their Preliminary Thoughts regarding the County's rural areas. The subcommittee's Preliminary Thoughts were presented to the community during a public meeting held on February 5, 2009. After taking into consideration the comments received during this public session, the Subcommittee finalized their research, and on February 19, 2009, forwarded a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. This recommendation is included in the Rural Areas Report & Recommendation. Development pressures in the rural areas, which intensified over the past decade, are significantly impacting our community's rural character. The residential development that is resulting from this pressure impacts the County in various ways. It increases demands for County services. It significantly impacts the vitality of the agricultural economy as farmland is converted from active agriculture to residential use. Additionally, the development pressures and resulting residential development impacts the rural character of the community, detracting from viewsheds and the rural landscape. FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' RURAL AREAS SUBCOMNIITTEE February 2009, Final Version Rural Areas Report & Recommendation • Prohibit the use of Discharge Health Systems, and require Board of Supervisors' approval for Pump -and -Haul permits. • Support Operation and Maintenance Requirements for alternative health systems. • Enable the use of Community Health Systems within defined Rural Community Centers. • Implement enhancements to the existing Rural Preservation Lot subdivision requirements. • Maintain a minimum lot size of two acres. • Increase the preservation lot (cluster set -aside lot) from 40 percent of the parent tract to a minimum 60 percent of the parent tract. • Establish a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. o Consider identifying `sending' areas based on rich agricultural soils and ridgeline viewsheds ■ In identifying `sending' areas, recognize that a property's location, soil, and terrain heavily influence its capacity to be developed and thus its development value. • TDR `sending' areas should be designated in an effort to discourage development. o Consider using `receiving' areas where residential development is desired. • Within the UDA on residentially planned areas that are zoned RA. • Within Urban Centers and Neighborhood Villages. • In Rural Community Centers with adopted boundaries. • Structure the TDR program so that it is economically advantageous for the development community to purchase development rights from key agricultural areas of the County. • Structure the TDR program so that it is economically advantageous for landowners to sell their development rights as opposed to selling their land for development. • Pursue state enabling legislation that would allow the County to implement Impact Fees for new construction. o Seek, support, and participate in collective lobbying efforts to secure impact fee - enabling legislation to adequately address the impacts new construction places on the county. • Strengthen opportunities that support and promote agriculture. o Promote forum and network opportunities that would further produce marketing and agriculture economy support. On February 19, 2009, the Subcommittee forwarded these recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration. The Board of Supervisors adopted this report as a component of the Comprehensive Policy Plan on April 22, 2009. Frederick County Board of Supervisors' Rural Areas Subcommittee Page 4 of 30 ATTACHMENT 2 ^ N W Ln 4-1 U rr FBI W N bl LL 0 5 'O 0 O O O pq 0 r -� rn rn � o - x U +� H W O O iI Q ►7 N O O U ~ • W ^ WW I� w O �I V1 v 0 N . s = "O � w u c c Ln w m u O w Q O � LO c _ fb 0 +, • L •� w L g t w c E w bu L �, o g N w Q cb a> - 0 'Q Q ' L , o w 'Q ns O a ° c a' L L �•• fb O X i L Q t v O a �n b.0 LL 3 O Ln L {n fb ++ O �' O U L O L L Q C > a•• _ C . 5; C L fO to M •C fb L c • C w a' a' 0 L> bu M w 3 c as }, L {n w v +1 t O c *„ t w p w 'c 41 v ° a E c o °c °1" v Ln c + N U N 3 O O �n w c a m O + L co ns c n v m t N c t fb O Vf �n CL ++ U w L p L ++ f6 N H >j c M ++ .� E cb — c c M w + 41 w a ns Ln O U U w c c C L L +�' E = i L w 7 0 c w ^. L M w L CL c fb �n •fb c CL • 7 E c L - O w O +' w ++ Ln o o w E w w O o cLb wa °' oa _ a 3 ns E ° c c c L, L - a fb C 0 O + OC 0 ++ - 0 ++ _a � ~ C t t L fb c L c O E U w w cb L L w Ln ++ O w p w > bb L c w cb O L Q j, Q L m p O c 3m+ O O w w O 0 3 c 0 M O O + h0 t — c bA lr by E {n tb L 1 N 3� O {n w O_ • C `- {n 3� 3� L _ c 6. o o o 3 v 3 .L 0 o o a ' v U o 3 E E >, L �n O ++ w '++ U �n L w V bA L 0 w v w c D m .S 3 w E° a E f6 =a o w w> w > 0 m w �n +, w p t cb Q U O 3 w L i E 7 7 c +� C i1 Vl > E E— +' w O O L t ' L Q- 7 H c bA "a w O M O t t - a L w ++ 2 by O -0 Q) O O w Q ++ Q ++ ++ a bu W Q > L L O c U t c c bA cb v c '� c c ° o w +„ o a s o c *' c> V Ln 'Ln - 0 o u .o o w `L c o v oc w a0 O o •3 ~ c E •E ° ns w N w c w +' n N c n w w w ` ++ 3w+ f6 U � bA - C � w � c cb _ L cb � � E 'Z v a �' a ° E �i v 3 3 o a v �' N 3 a o a o 0 v vi E i bb 0 a 0 H N O U m m w a r4 Ln c +; w c c L w w 3 M Y U o ++ `--' m U U E w fb c to . 0 fb 0 +�• w w U 3�+ L +) w Q > L L g L } w -a p Q ns t U O '� to Vf w U Li L O O o t L a Q a Q E �n w t c p ++ +' O ++ L - 0 m c O N w O `-- c ° E C w tH O {n ?) L w w L M (b U 3-� > > , c fb w >, W N L1 U Q }J — c — +� E tb i w tb Q) N C p O w Q M O Q c - :3 0 CL CL tb E L tb > 3 L o N +� w L + U p w w w p ++ w O_ " C O U c "a c Y O c �n E ` w w o w L f w O_ t ,� p O_ w E O > E > w >, L a 41 a > + c M CL n Q) � v t +' E L1 c c c L > c O t m w c w N tb O > '++ bb w L fb 3 c bb O L O E p w M w L c w i t a 3 — > + m i 7 7 p - 3�+ 0 7 O Y U y) w bA c 3�•+ O t bA L w L �• L �b O L 3 D O .� • E 3 E> m cb c � w p c o E E O E c w +� fb E 3w+ a a O t a p o u 'L a U • L ° t 3�•+ o y � 3�+ w C w v> t w 0> w bA L ° O w t + -p E + .E o L w L LL 3 U bw N M LE L E CL v +' o o E +' w O o c w c w v ai 'i U M > ,� L O E O O c ns w w � - 0 o E ° Q L p :3 t fb Q' 7 >, O O ++ Q p Q +� > 3 > U w E CL 'a M Q w t ,n •O m E u Ln }1 U 3w+ c to > ++ H D � t o w 0> w ++ p E E — $ m O f6 c cb ns c U t i w > tb 0 O c C 3 w c w w L Q U w a w c v o 0 v v t E • bA p L Ln 4-1 U rr � T F•�•I 7-/ C'� Q . i r-I r C/1 N O O • W W W rr � I-•�I �I v -1 O N a) - a O u L u = O a) v v o a) L � � � L L ++ ++ f0 p •++ � U a1 U h 0 CL c L O f0 f0 @ U N C > n 3k p W L h0 O > n a) L +' m ++ U c co c m a1 v L v ns a E v a) H L Ln a Q L co O Ln + > C r I t O - C -0 Ln v o V c -0 E ,0 cI C O ^ N i ^ E W OL +� _O m � m •Y L � 0 i P In. DA axle �a�� �a�o 1 1 i Q � w C Q C C w a C w E3 � Y asp a1 a1 L a1 — L C • �n a1 +' h0 `- O f0 W W L L W W w — "a c "a f6 ++ ++ b. Cl E O aa1.1 t } t (� ++ a1 c +� c +, co O ++ f0 C w t a1 W ++ C N t Q � � � f0 bz 'L � in Q � "a 0 C � � � � ++ �••� c E ° .� Q 0 v v c •� v O +� ns > .� E v vi a1 L 7 f0 ns v •� L L c {n L c if a1 {n L O_ — Q {n Q) U a1 t (O O O ++ a1 O v O a1 v r I LL V) a1 7 t a1 c *' L p +' +' 3 +�+ (O to - c H > ns v �, N a Ln +� CL L L a1 h0 � C f0 f0 C L f0 "p {n {n W Q C ns C ns ns CL ++ Q a..� EL a1 a1 Q Q m n a1 a1 a ++ i 7 L O I N n a1 Q `� a1 O a1 U Ln 7 C C U N O (O O U U N 7 �n f0 a1 " L a1 V) b.0 0 L w ns C O i > j 4- c co a1 > c a1 U +, " f0 O 4-- U Q d a1 O Q g m N L "a > m L Q "a C > i $ a1 c m .� - a t ++ O Q W +' Q O "a a c L a1 a) C co a) .� CL C O ++ � a1 L . L c0 m L a1 a) a a1 � =a t > m m ++ 7 • N L O U -° a L° n m 7 ' Q v O a p a1 Q +' O M> m Y w +>, L m n O I O L H 7 �, o a a1 U c a C v v v CL O p x (O L CL {n C N V) w w 7 C m t O �n L �n -a t m a1 O Q +�+ •� ++ a1 7 {n L ++ c0 E h 0 7 c a1 > i a1 O ++ L V) ++ N t U a1 f0 f0 'p L `n ~ °; O m CL a� M c Vi a� coo : a� t t m in ° v U u o �' D c v Q v �' Q_ ao .o v v o v Q c .- ° E c E h0 - ++ L w i i "a -a +! > h0 c0 E >, C C a1 a1 ++ a1 U "a {n O 7 O L w - w a1 a1 a1 7 N C Q L ns ++ 0 O �, O - p Q' > > Q �? "O 7 Q Q Q - a Ln m "a U {n t V) w U {n L C UO O L p L L a1 6 O O O a1 a1 a1 O U L a1 U C > ++ C> "a > a1 a a1 L Q 7 Q pp N N L Q L d L Q L L L — O w L Q N > w 0 c0 U a1 "a a1 - p C C V) m V) m !n V) L LL m LL f0 m L V) V) m w ri ko N N Ln 4-1 � U v � V O ,y O U ~ N Q rr O V1 v 0 N > m c > a, -0 >; a, w m v w c c E O 7 v c H O o O C > > L E 3° o m Ln L CL a f6 -_ a- o t CL v a m 3° c v � O � H a1 OL O N O +� E O O v • � CL o p o ° C ° +� co ns O CL c o . c H • o L L > (6 O m a Q .- O f0 U Q - 0 Q } Q Q M "a H 92. 7 U 6 } c - co > ns > a' c o v> a w 0 w E L +' O O L 0 o CL f v o a1 C > L i > a) a1 a1 O a-0 2 d `.� "O U "O U 14 o p � A v O ~ u L O L D QL G II (D H E d a 0 � W A W +± M o v O ~ u L O L D QL G II O a 0 O b.0 � +± +- a1 � L � E O > 41 � Q E i 0 .� .� L W � Q C 0 4- O p a1 C � a1 0 m O ++ _ a1 t +� +�+ C � a) L +' .�i d � 7 O A 3 °- , ++ M v a� O O 3 bA C 'C O N L >� �n +� v O ~ u L O O a 0 O b.0 � +± +- a1 L � E O > 41 � Q E i 0 .� .� L W � Q C 0 4- O p a1 C � a1 m O ++ _ a1 t +� +�+ C � a) L +' Q O a) ++ w E= a .Q U O ��,, co Q a a1 CO + a1 a OL L1 a a1 a) a O m CL ° +� `� +m+ to � O O a 41 - —_ O 3 Q t ~ > N f0 0 O- Q" !n v y E > bu L a a) > a1 N C a1 a1 a1 — a1 �' ._ L f6 O a1 U N a1 ++ {� O bD C 'L to C O C C Q- w t v E L a a ... c$ {n a1 ++ O v > a1 v c0 * ' v°' v ° CL v E c v ° E v 0 E a O>„ v v v E E C E - a E o i w O L }1 a� C f0 E U C L N a) Q' C a1 O ++ - Q C — O O E -0 L O "a x L O Q - Q C U " '+ v C "a }' N > > c0 to > _ W E O O U L -a E N t v "O > o W — f0 N b A `1 w •E v O U v +� > v O 0 v L L O L D E ++ C w U > i a) C m — ns L i a1 a W L :a M +' a by ++ C O O +' U Q O f0 O r- N W -0 =) = L ++ +�+ O i — a) Q ++ C O 7 ++ •� Ln N "a 3 Q Q C C O "a 7 c0 al to .� a1 Q L al Q > a) +� v L Q v cLo w v c0 U =� >• C L M Q r L a) C C �..i N ° �..i a - 0 > i Q ,bA bB "a "a C a1 ++ L > v t +, t O L O a1 ++ >• C w O > U U C >• +' t U 0 a1 } � 1 . • U a) O N - a1 L Q_ C f L 6 L a1 C1A a) a) ++ N Q C f6 f0 a w f0 N a1 Q 7 t C C Q. Q O Q- E O = a1 U �n L c OC a1 4- Q O L L O .++ O Q w Q O N N �n f0 O "a ° O (O 'ZS bb 7 C U Q- N ++ C '� f0 r- U + + in C ++ bA C i O L1 y 'a a1 7 ±' '� N +� a1 '+' j a1 z > a) a J C N 'C N ` N N O O a1 Q c c U O a1 o a E 3 E a o �' u_ a a a, C 00 of � v a� O O 3 bA C 'C O N L N N Ln a-1 u L=. iI C'� Q •� u O ,x O U ~ N N N w '1 '1 0 N O O QJ U txo N L � r s QJ Q O a) D O i H QJ CL E m X W L QJ Q O i a 0o ar N e•-I e•-I M1• tA OC D H QJ J +' c O X a) U 4' M C a✓ O N CL ( Q N y X o0 W 4 - o L U o +, O \ rn L n +� L > o o N cI L M � -- I- Ln N c�-I Q M r4 r t rj c�-I 0 M W N c En O c tA a do — m a c L Z U c � � CL N Ln 1 41 c 4.1 O LL N r- O 3 s vi c s E s N r a) a) Ln CA w � 0 0 Y > u�i +� CL E b0 o N m y to O o O O > E CL CL C i QJ a) L O O>> ° c a v i O X CL N W D OC CL LL � H J +' c O X a) U 4' M C a✓ O N CL ( as-� a) X o0 W 4 - o > o +, L c a +� L > L a c O r t `-' 3 0 v L Q_ c s 3 O c c a do — m a c L S U c � � CL N 1 41 c 4.1 O a) b0 U a�i a s vi c s E s Qj +� a) a) C O a✓ E O E b0 o N m O O > E CL CL a) > Q a) L ° c E 7 L o N c a) o L c O O U N s a +� c a N E E o 3 p L i , a O a O a) 0 O 76 4, 3 CL o= CL c o CL Fa w X ao >• > s i L CL s + a) s 4- o O c E 'a to CL 4� E c o to E a 41 s o '� 3 > 'a� > O > qA ' L L CL O O = O U a� L = * w 'O *' .E PF � u & � Ln 4-1 U � � : c c u R 2 V � � C � u .& ƒ � � � c � � � � � O N § CL E ui � CL a E : � � q \� & ( 3 *`\ \ \ t \ / 3 [ ` z \ { / } \ \ \ \ t j / , \ \ 3 c)3 t � ;& / \/` , 2 3 t3 .313 / [ / } / L '\ E E 4 3 'k $ § } bio | C: M } 4 CL : / ® 5 c E cL c j i o .1 \ / , e s o c (D e ƒ E \ ; § t / \ 0 ; ƒ } / >, a) 4 C: \ / / § � - ( ; = u a f L E E , ! a) E 2 � \ § § � o CL - / � \ / / / � o � | � � � E > j t / � k � 2 2 2 m « § � 3 2.LLJ 2 \ \ � z / / / ( 2 / f 2 / � \ / k K ° 7 / 2 _ ƒ e 2 • / -r- k $ } § / - J � \ $ ( / K S k £ $ § ' f / } G / ® t \ t ( g G \ s / \ \ s / / ) E o s / f / » 7 e § § CL E ui � CL a E : � � q \� & ( 3 *`\ \ \ t \ / 3 [ ` z \ { / } \ \ \ \ t j / , \ \ 3 c)3 t � ;& / \/` , 2 3 t3 .313 / [ / } / L '\ E E 4 3 'k $ § } bio | C: M } 4 CL : / ® 5 c E cL c j i o .1 \ / , e s o c (D e ƒ E \ ; § t / \ 0 ; ƒ } / >, a) 4 C: \ / / § � - ( ; = u a f L E E , ! a) E 2 � \ § § � o CL - / � \ / / / � o � | � � � E > j t / � k � 2 2 2 m « § � 3 2.LLJ 2 \ \ � z ATTACHMENT 3 Click in this box to return to Page 2 of the 09/19/13 BOS Memorandum Chapter 165 — Zoning ARTICLE III Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) 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. A. If a receiving 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 receiving property in the transfer of development rights program. E. A receiving property may accept development rights from one or more sending properties, up to a maximum density specified in Table 1 and Table 2 in §165- 302.03. §165- 303.02. 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. 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 zoning classification of the property, the number of development rights used, and a notation of the recordation of the conveyance required by §165-302.06. Click in this box to return to Page 3 of the 11/07/13 BOS Memorandum RESOLUTION Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: November 6, 2013 Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: November 13, 2013 IJ APPROVED IJ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 165 ZONING ARTICLE III — TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENTS 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. WHEREAS, an ordinance to amend Chapter 165 Zoning with regard to the Transfer Development Rights (TDR) Ordinance as follows: (1) updates to the Transfer 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 PDRes. #34 -13 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 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 This amendment shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Passed this 13th day of November, 2013 by the following recorded vote: This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Gene E. Fisher Robert W. Wells Christopher E. Collins Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes. #34 -13 REZONING APPLICATION #05 -13 GOVERNORS HILL Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: November 4, 2013 Staff Contact: John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director - Transportation Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 10/16/13 Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 11/13/13 Pending PROPOSAL To revise proffers associated with Rezoning #10 -08. This revision relates to the "Transportation Enhancements" and "Environment" sections of the proffers. LOCATION The properties are located approximately one mile east of Interstate 81 on the south side of the Millwood Pike (Route 50 East), across from Sulphur Springs Road (Route 655) and The Ravens subdivision. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 11/13/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The applicant is seeking approval of a minor proffer revision. The proposed proffer revision 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. However, development triggers for road improvements remain in place, so if economic conditions improved and the development were able to move forward soon, the road improvements would also move forward. Executed proffers are provided along with a redline version to make clear where changes have been made. The portion of the proffers related to the recordation of the avigation easement have been removed in addition to the transportation items noted above. The deadline for installation of a left turn lane and median crossover to access Raven Pointe remains in place unchanged. Followinz the public meetinz, a decision re- ardinz this rezoninz application to the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. Rezoning #05 -13 — Governors Hill November 4, 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: 10/16/13 Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 11/13/13 Pending PROPOSAL To revise proffers associated with Rezoning #10 -08. This revision relates to the "Transportation Enhancements" and "Environment" sections of the proffers. LOCATION The properties are located approximately one mile east of Interstate 81 on the south side of Millwood Pike (Route 50 East), across from Sulphur Springs Road (Route 655), and The Ravens subdivision. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS 64 -A -83, 64- A -83A, 64 -A -86, 64 -A -84, 64 -A -85, 64 -A -86, 64 -A -87, PROPERTY ZONING R4 (Residential Planned Community) District PRESENT USE UndevelopedNacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Single Family Residential South: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Regional Airport East: M1 (Light Industrial) Use: Industrial and Residential MH1 (Mobile Home Community) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Regional Airport and Office B2 (Business General) Rezoning #05 -13 — Governors Hill November 4, 2013 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: Please see attached e -mail from Lloyd Ingram, VDOT to Ron Mislowsky dated August 22, 2013. County Attorney: Please see attached e -mail from Rod Williams, County Attorney to Ron Mislowsky dated August 15, 2013. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcels as being zoned R -1 (Residential Limited). The parcels were re- mapped from R -1 to A -2 (Agricultural General) pursuant to the County's comprehensive downzoning initiative (Zoning Amendment Petition 9011 -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 subj ect properties and all other A -1 and A -2 zoned land to the RA District. On October 12, 2005 the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning 911 -05 which rezoned parcels 64 -A -82, 64 -A -83, 64- A -83A, 64 -A -86, 64 -A -87, 64 -A- 87A to the R4 District with proffers. On January 28, 2009, rezoning number 410 -08 to R4 with proffers approved by the Board of Supervisors. The January 28, 2009 updated transportation and land use layouts. Most significant of the transportation changes was the severing of a planned connection to Route 50 at the location of Sulphur Springs Road and the focusing of traffic flow to Route 50 at Inverlee Drive. 2) 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. Land Use A portion of the site is located within the Urban Development Area (UDA); specifically the residential portion of the development is within the UDA. The comprehensive plan envisions the area comprised by the subj ect parcels as developing with business /office land use. The existing and proposed R4 zoning is generally consistent with this plan as it relates to this area. The subject parcels are also located within the boundaries of the Airport Support Area that surrounds the Winchester Regional Airport. Business and industrial uses should be the primary uses in the airport support area. Rezoning #05 -13 — Governors Hill November 4, 2013 Page 4 3) Proffer Statement The proposed proffer revision 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. However, development triggers for road improvements remain in place, so if economic conditions improved and the development were able to move forward soon, the road improvements would also move forward. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 10/16/13 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The applicant is seeking approval of a minor proffer revision. The proposed proffer revision 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. However, development triggers for road improvements remain in place, so if economic conditions improved and the development were able to move forward soon, the road improvements would also move forward. Executed proffers are provided as well as a redline version of the proffer update. The portion of the proffers related to the recordation of the avigation easement have been removed in addition to the transportation items noted above. The deadline for installation of a left turn lane and median crossover to access Raven Pointe remains in place unchanged. A recommendation rezardin,- this rezoning 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 AND ACTION OF 10/16/13 MEETING The applicant's representatives, Mr. Ronald Mislowsky with Pennon Associates, Inc. and Mr. John Conrad with Miller and Smith, were available for questions. Commission members believed this was a positive approach for this development proposal. No issues of concern were raised. There were no citizen comments. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning with the proffer revision requested. (Note: Commissioner Madagan was absent from the meeting.) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 11/13/13 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: The applicant is seeking approval of a minor proffer revision. The proposed proffer revision 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. However, development triggers for road improvements remain in place, so if economic conditions improved and the development were Rezoning #05 -13 — Governors Hill November 4, 2013 Page 5 able to move forward soon, the road improvements would also move forward. Executed proffers are provided along with a redline version to make clear where changes have been made. The portion of the proffers related to the recordation of the avigation easement have been removed in addition to the transportation items noted above. The deadline for installation of a left turn lane and median crossover to access Raven Pointe remains in place unchanged. Following the required public meeting a decision regarding 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. '` '� Subdivision u IV RAVEN WINGS r �`� 'Sbdivision` RAVEN POINTE G al yQ m Ito ri 0 �� Subdivision \ i _ B coir 7 110AP PRINCE FREDERICK j OF,F'CEv PART Q Subision C` , r o p REZ0513 REZ0513 PEGASUS BUSINESS CENTER!/ SI ivision,j,cj a h Q6 6� h WINCHESTER SS PARK REGIONALAIRPORT lion AIRPORT `i Subdivision BUSINESS CENTERS l sas 'Subdivision rh o O Applications Q Parcels a� Building Footprints 131 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) 4 EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) HE (Higher Education District) 'o M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) 4W 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) MILLER ""Slq a� ��? HEIGHTS =��C)N`FY' r RE ubdivision PID_ cn 4 T 7 i -7 � PROSPECT Z "' HILLS,, Subdivisi 50 sa�eN�R�655 )_ ] SPR \NG ERN ORS HILL REZ0513 �JICLTD.j\ Subdivision. i \ 0 X Note: REZ # 05 - 13 Frederick County Dept of Governor's Hill 1 07 & Development 07 N Kent St e PINS: Suite 202 64 - A - 82, 64 - A - 83, 64 - A - 83A, Winchester, VA 22601 64 - A - 86, 64 - A - 87, 64 - A - 87A 540- 665 -5651 Rezoning Proffer Revision Map Created: August 27, 2013 Staff: jbishop 0 550 1,100 2,200 Feet Click in this box to return to the page you were previously viewing Ronald Mislowsky From: Funkhouser, Rhonda (VDOT) < Rhonda .Funkhouser @VDOT.Virginia.gov> on behalf of Ingram, Lloyd (VDOT) < Lloyd.Ingram @VDOT.virginia.gov> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 12:07 PM To: Ronald Mislowsky Cc: Bishop, John. (VDOT); Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT); Ingram, Lloyd (VDOT) Subject: Governor's Hill - Proposed Proffer Modification Attachments: Scanned from EDNXerox.pdf The proposed proffer modification dated July 23, 2013 has been found to be acceptable. Lloyd A. Ingram v Dena cf7e E Virginia Department of Transportation QU ax `: Lloyd. Ing ram Cdvdot.virginia gov Karen Flynn From: Ronald Mislowsky Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 4:39 PM To: Karen Flynn Subject: FW: governors hill proffer amendment Take care of this added signature sheet, please Ron From: Rod Williams [ mailto:rwillia(&fcva.us ] click in this box to return to the Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 4:08 PM page you were previously viewing To: Ronald Mislowsky Cc: John Bishop Subject: RE: governors hill proffer amendment Ron, The substance of the proffers, as now revised, looks acceptable. There is still one small remaining issue with the signature pages. I think you added a signature page for Governors Hill Investors, L.L.C., to be signed on its behalf by MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C. That page should remain, but because MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C. is listed as a separate co -owner with Governors Hill Investors, L.L.C. for parcels 64 -A -84 and 64 -A -85, MS Carpers Valley investors, L.L.C. needs a separate signature page. Without such additional page, MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C. would not actually be bound by the proffer statement, other than to the extent of its interest in Governors Hill Investors, L.L.C., for parcels 64 -A -84 and 64 -A -85. You need not send a further revision to me for review, but it would be acceptable as long as the additional page is included in the materials submitted for placement on the PC agenda. M 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 domain name: fcva.us From: Ronald Mislowsky [ mailto: RMislowsky0) Pennon i.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:50 PM To: Rod Williams; Ingram, Lloyd (VDOT); John Bishop Cc: iconradC&millerandsmith.com Subject: governors hill proffer amendment I have attached here the recent version of the proffer amendment for Governors Hill. The Changes are Proffer 3 - We clarified that a portion of Pendleton drive has already been constructed. Proffer 14 - Since the avigation easements have been dedicated and the first building permit has been issued (Public Safety Bldg) we have removed that requirements form the proffer. If you accept the changes, the last sentence requiring the noise attenuation will move up to the end of 14.2, deleting 14.3. Proffer 15.3 - We clarified in 15.2 that the construction of Coverstone requires all of the improvements required in 15.2. We deleted 15.3. See Below on RavenPointe. Proffer 15.4 —We revised the extension point of Tazewell. I have also attached a copy of the Raven Pointe (formerly Ravenwood) Master Development Plan which was approved in 2002. Coincident with the filing of the Governors Hill proffer amendment application we will submit a Master Plan Revision application. The change is to address the required improvements at Rte 50. The Raven Pointe developer has agreed to install the median break and eastbound left turn lane as soon as plans can be developed and approved by VDOT. The new note requires these improvements to be complete by November 1 2015. Please let me know if anyone has comments on this approach. If these item are satisfactory, we will process the applications immediately. Please let me know if there are any questions. Ronald Mislowsky Associate Vice President Office Director Pennoni Associates, Inc. 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, VA 22601 -5002 Office 540 - 667 -2139 Direct 540 - 771 -2085 Mobile 540 - 664 -2110 http: / /www.pennoni.com / RMislowsky(cDpennoni.com Consulting Engineers providing... Environmental — Geotechnical — Inspections & Testing — Land Development — MEP Landscape Architecture — Structural — Survey— Transportation — Water/Wastewater John Bishop From: Ingram, Lloyd (VDOT) [ Lloyd.Ingram @VDOT.virginia.gov] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 12:14 PM To: Ronald Mislowsky; John Bishop; Rod Williams Subject: RE: Governors Hill Proffer Amendment The proposed language change to the proffer is acceptable. Lloyd A. Ingram, Transportation Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Edinburg Residency M Land Development 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, Virginia 22824 Phone #(540) 984 -5611 Fax #(540) 984 -5607 From: Ronald Mislowsky [ mails :RMislow k Pennoni com Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 5:36 PM To: John Bishop ( jbishop feya,w5 Ingram, Lloyd (VDOT); Rod Williams ( rwiII1@ _f va us ) Subject: Governors Hill Proffer Amendment John, As discussed today we need to revise the Governors Hill Proffer once more to keep the responsibility of the Rte 50 median break and eastbound left turn lane with the Governors Hill proffer, since that document is a binding agreement. I have attached Section 15 of the proffer here with the new language highlighted. If this looks acceptable I will process a new proffer for owner signatures and get that to you asap. I have copied Lloyd and Rod on this as well, so they can also let me know if they have questions or comments. It is still Raven Pointe's intention to get their master plan revision finalized and install the same median break and left turn lane as soon as possible. I know that I am not getting emails from Joe Wilder again, so if you respond to me by email, I may not get it. Ronald Mislowsky Associate Vice President Office Director Pennoni Associates, Inc. 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, VA 22601 -5002 Office 540 - 667 -2139 Direct 540-771-2085 Mobile 540 - 664 -2110 http: / /www_pennoni.com / 13MislA "ky pennoni.coM Consulting Engineers providing... Environmental — Geotechnical — Inspections & Testing — Land Development — MEP Landscape Architecture — Structural — Survey — Transportation — Water/Wastewater PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ. 410 -08: R4 and RA to R4 PROPERTY: 278.0 Acres + / -: Tax Map & Parcels 64 -A -83, 83A, 84, 85, 86, and 87 (the "Property ") RECORD OWNER: Carpers Valley Development, LLC and Governors Hill LLC APPLICANT: Carpers Valley Development, LLC and Governors Hill LLC PROJECT NAME: Governors Hill ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: March 24, 2008 REVISION DATE: September 2, 2008; October 31, 2008; December 8, 2008; January 9, 2009; May 1, 2013; June 17, 2013, July 23, 2013; August 15, 2013; September 6, 2013; September 26, 2013 The undersigned owners hereby proffer that the use and development of the subject property ( "Property "), as described above, shall be in conformance with the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced rezoning is not granted as applied for by the Applicant ( "Applicant "), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property with "Final Rezoning" defined as that rezoning that is in effect on the day upon which the Frederick County Board of County Supervisors (the "Board ") grants the rezoning. The headings of the proffers set forth below have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the Property adjacent to or including the improvement or other proffered requirement, unless otherwise specified herein. The term "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners, assigns, and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Master Development Plan" shall refer to the plan entitled "Master Development Plan, Governors Hill" prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, (the "MDP ") dated March 2008 revised January 9, 2009. 1. LAND USE 1.1 The project shall be designed to establish interconnected mixed -use residential and commercial /employment Land Bays in general conformance with the MDP, and as is specifically set forth in these Page 1 of 15 proffers subject to minor modifications as necessary upon final engineering including but not limited to intersection alignments. 1.2 All development, including street landscaping, shall be accomplished in general conformance with the "Governors Hill, Design and Development Standards ", prepared by PHR &A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Design and Development Standards "). 1.3 Residential uses shall be prohibited in the area identified as Land Bay 2 on the MDP. Furthermore, Land Bay 2 shall be restricted to those uses permitted in the General Business (B -2) zoning district as specified in the Frederick County Code Article X, §165- 82B(1). 1.4 Except as modified herein, areas of residential development on the Property shall be limited to Land Bay 1 and shall be developed in conformance with the regulations of the Residential Planned Community ( "R4 ") zoning district, including permissible housing types set forth in the Frederick County Code Article VII, §165-67 through §165-72, as cross - referenced to Article VI, §165-58, through §165-66. Unit types and lot layouts within residential Land Bays may comprise any of the permitted unit types as set forth in the Design and Development Standards, and authorized for the R4 district, and these Proffers. 1.5 Residential development on the Property shall not exceed 550 dwelling units, with a mix of housing types permitted in the R4 district. Multi- family units, as defined by the Design and Development Standards, shall not exceed 50% of the total number of dwelling units developed in the project. No residential structures shall be closer than 2000 feet from the centerline of the existing Winchester Airport runway. 1.6 Prior to the Property exceeding 1,285,000 square feet of commercial building floor area, the Applicant shall submit to the County a revised Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Property. The total permitted commercial building floor area may increase provided that the Applicant completes a revised traffic impact analysis which identifies the impacts of trips for commercial development in excess of 45,815 Average Daily Trips (ADT) and mitigation, if necessary for said impacts is provided by the Applicant in a form that is acceptable to the County and VDOT. 2. CONSTRUCTION OF A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT 2.1 The Property shall be developed as one single and unified development in accordance with applicable ordinances and regulations for the R4 zoning district, the MDP as approved by the Board, and this Proffer Statement. Page 2 of 15 3. ACCESS TO ARMORY PARCEL 3.1 The Applicant has designed and constructed a two lane public roadway, identified on the MDP as Pendleton Drive, from Arbor Court to the entrance of the Armory Site (TM 64- A -82). At such time that Tazewell Road is constructed as depicted on the MDP, the Applicant shall extend Pendleton Drive to connect with Tazewell Road. 4. PHASING OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 4.1 Building permits for Land Bay 1 of the Property shall be issued on the following phasing schedule: Year 1 (Months 1 -12): Year 2 (Months 13 -24): Year 3 (Months 25 -36): Year 4 (Months 37 -48): 140 building permits 140 building permits 140 building permits 130 building permits The above identified phasing schedule is taken from the Date of Final Rezoning (DFR). Any building permits not issued within any given year may be carried over to the following year, however the Applicant shall not make application for more than 200 residential building permits in any given year. 4.2 Commercial and employment uses may be constructed at any time. 4.3 Improvements including a 3,000 square foot community center, 3,500 square feet of neighborhood swimming pools, and a dog park shall be constructed in conjunction with residential development in Land Bay 1 and the land therefor shall be dedicated upon completion of the improvements to the Property Owners Association. The location thereof shall be depicted on final subdivision plans for such residential development. These recreational amenities shall serve to meet the requirement of 1 recreation unit per 30 dwellings. These improvements shall be completed prior to the issuance of the 281st residential building permit. 5. ARCHITECTURE, SIGNAGE, AND LANDSCAPING: 5.1 All buildings on the Property shall be constructed using compatible architectural styles. The Applicant shall establish one or more Architectural Review Boards through the required Property Owner Association to be created to enforce and administer a unified development plan in general conformity with the Design and Development Standards. Page 3 of 15 5.2 All signage within the Property shall be in substantial conformity with a comprehensive sign plan that meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for signage, which shall be submitted in conjunction with the first final site or subdivision plan for the Property. 6. PEDESTRIAN TRAIL SYSTEM AND RECREATION AREAS 6.1 The Applicant shall design and build a public pedestrian- bicycle trail system to Virginia Department of Transportation standards that links residential and commercial areas within the development. Said trails shall be in the locations generally depicted on the MDP. To the extent that such trails are not depicted on the MDP at the time of Final Rezoning, such trails shall be connected with or linked to the internal street and sidewalk network. Sidewalks shall be constructed on public streets to VDOT standards, and a minimum of four -foot sidewalks shall be constructed on private streets. All combined pedestrian /bicycling trails shall be 10 feet wide, and shall have an asphalt surface. 7. FIRE & RESCUE: 7.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $422 per dwelling unit for fire and rescue purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. 7.2 Following Final Rezoning, the Master POA to be created in accordance herewith shall contribute annually, on or before July 1 St of each year, the sum of $100 per constructed residential unit, and $100 per 1000 square feet of constructed commercial (not including any land in public use), to the fire and rescue company providing first response service to the Property. Such contribution shall be monitored and enforced by the master POA, and the Board may require an accounting of such payments at such times and upon such conditions as it may determine necessary. Said monetary contribution shall cease at such time that the fire and rescue company providing first response service is no longer a volunteer operation or should the County adopt a fee for service plan to provide fire and rescue services. 8. SCHOOLS: 8.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $1,714 per dwelling unit for educational purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. Page 4 of 15 9. PARKS & OPEN SPACE: 9.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $343 per dwelling unit for recreational purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. 10. LIBRARIES: 10.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $79 per dwelling unit for library purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. 11. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING: 11.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $79 per dwelling unit upon issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit to be used for construction of a general governmental administration building. 12. CREATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION: 12.1 The Master Property Owners' Association to be created in accordance herewith shall be created contemporaneously with the first final site or subdivision plan submitted for the Property. 12.2 The Applicant shall establish a Master Property Owners' Association (hereinafter "Master POA ") for Governors Hill, in its entirety, that shall, among other things, have responsibility for assuring compliance with design guidelines and standards, signage requirements, landscape maintenance, and similar matters. Any homeowners' or property owners' associations created for commercial or residential uses individually shall act as a subset of the Master POA. 12.3 The residential portion of the development shall be made subject to one or more Property Owners' Association(s) (hereinafter "Residential POA ") that shall be responsible for the ownership, maintenance and repair of the community center, walking trails in Land Bay 1, swimming pools, all common areas, including any conservation areas that may be established in accordance herewith not dedicated to the County or others, and stormwater management facilities not dedicated to public use in Land Bay 1, for each area subject to their jurisdiction, and shall be provided such other responsibilities, duties, and powers as are customary for such associations or as may be required for such Residential POA herein. 12.4 In addition to such other duties and responsibilities as may be assigned, a Residential POA shall have title to and responsibility for the following in Land Bay 1: (i) all common open space areas not otherwise dedicated to public use, (ii) common buffer areas located outside of residential lots; (iii) private streets serving the residents who are members of such Page 5 of 15 association; (iv) common solid waste disposal and recycling programs, including curbside pick -up of refuse by a private refuse collection company, and (v) responsibility for the perpetual maintenance of any street, perimeter, or road buffer areas, all of which buffer areas shall be located within easements to be granted to the Residential POA if platted within residential or other lots, or otherwise granted to the Residential POA by appropriate instrument. 12.5 The Residential POA shall be so established that it possesses all necessary powers to set and revise fees and dues in sufficient sums to perform the responsibilities assigned to it hereunder and under the Declaration to be recorded creating such Association. In addition, upon any conveyance of a residential unit from the builder thereof to a home purchaser, there shall be a fee paid by the home purchaser to the Residential POA in an amount equal to three times the then - current monthly residential dues applicable to the unit so conveyed. 12.6 Any commercial portion of the development (with the exception of any property owned or leased by the United States, or Frederick County) shall be made subject to one or more Property Owners' Association(s) (hereinafter "Commercial PDX'). Such Commercial POA(s) shall be responsible for the ownership, maintenance and repair of all common areas in Land Bay 2, including any conservation areas that may be established in accordance herewith not dedicated to the County or others, and stormwater management facilities (under common (open space) ownership) not dedicated to public use for each area subject to their jurisdiction, and shall be provided such other responsibilities, duties, and powers as are customary for such associations or as may be required for such Commercial POA herein. 12.7 In addition to such other duties and responsibilities as may be assigned, a Commercial POA, in Land Bay 2, shall have title to and responsibility for (i) all common open space areas not otherwise dedicated to public use, (ii) common buffer areas located outside of commercial lots; (iii) responsibility for the perpetual maintenance of any street, perimeter, or road buffer areas, all of which buffer areas shall be located within easements to be granted to the Commercial POA if platted within commercial or other lots, or parcels, or otherwise granted to the Commercial POA by appropriate instrument. 13. WATER & SEWER: 13.1 The Applicant shall be responsible for connecting the Property to public water and sewer. It shall further be responsible for constructing all facilities required for such connection at the Property boundary. All water and sewer infrastructure shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. Page 6 of 15 14. ENVIRONMENT: 14.1 Stormwater management and Best Management Practices (BMP) for the Property shall be provided in accordance with the Virginia Stormwater Management Regulations, First Ed. 1999, Chapter 2, Table 2 -3. 14.2 The Applicant shall provide notice in all sales literature, in covenants, conditions and restrictions for any Property Owners' Associations, of the adjacency of the Winchester Regional Airport. The Applicant shall provide noise attenuation treatment for all residential units. 15. TRANSPORTATION: 15.1 The major roadways to be constructed on the Property shall be constructed in the locations depicted on the MDP, with reasonable adjustments permitted for final engineering. 15.2 Excluding 200,000 square feet of office uses which may be developed at any time utilizing access to the existing completed portion of Coverstone Drive, the Applicant shall design and construct Coverstone Drive as a full section with raised medians on a minimum 90' right -of -way, utilizing the following phasing schedule: PHASE 1: Phase 1 shall consist of the full four lane section including a ten -foot trail from Millwood Pike to the first intersection on Coverstone Drive as depicted on the MDP from Point A to Point B. Said roadway shall be constructed to base asphalt prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any commercial building for the Property and /or prior to issuance of a building permit for any residential units, excluding model homes, located in Land Bay 1. Phase 1 improvements shall consist of all necessary improvements, including signalization when warranted by VDOT, to create a four way intersection at the existing intersection of Inverlee Way and Millwood Pike as shown on the MDP. Page 7 of 15 PHASE 2: Phase 2 shall consist of construction of a two lane section of Coverstone Drive from Point B to Point C as depicted on the MDP. Said roadway improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any use that would cause the Property to exceed 400,000 square feet of commercial building area. PHASE 3: Phase 3 shall consist of construction of the remaining two lane section of Coverstone Drive from Point B to Point C as depicted on the MDP. Said roadway improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any use that would cause the Property to exceed 800,000 square feet of commercial building area. PHASE 4: The Applicant shall design Coverstone Drive Extended as a four -lane section from Prince Frederick to Relocated Route 522 as depicted from Point D to Point E or for a maximum distance of 800 feet when the alignment of Relocated 522 has been determined by VDOT, and the right of way for this segment of Coverstone Drive has been acquired by VDOT or Frederick County. In the event that the alignment for relocated Route 522 has not been determined or if the right of way for Coverstone Drive Extended is not secured by June 30, 2018 then the Applicant shall pay to the County $20,000 for transportation improvements within the vicinity of the Property in lieu of designing said portion of Coverstone Drive. The Applicant shall further pay to the County $1,000 for each permitted residential unit as a contribution towards the future construction of Coverstone Drive Extended, but if the conditions above have not been met by June 30, 2018 then these funds may be used for other projects in the vicinity of the Property that have a rational nexus to the Property. Such funds shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance for each of the permitted residential units. 15.3 Notwithstanding any other provisions of these proffers, the Applicant shall construct Coverstone Drive as a full four -lane section as required in Proffer 15.2 from Millwood Pike to Prince Frederick Drive prior to November 1, 2025. A median break and eastbound left turn lane shall be constructed at the existing Millwood Pike and Inverlee intersection prior to November 1, 2015. Page 8 of 15 15.4 The Applicant shall design and construct Tazewell Road as shown on the MDP as a minimum two lane roadway within a variable width right of way with a maximum right of way width of 60' to provide access to residential uses within Land Bay 1 and other commercial areas of Land Bay 2. Said 60' right of way width shall be required for Tazewell Road between Coverstone Drive and Pendleton Drive. The right of way and road width shall decrease for the remaining portions of Tazewell Road. Said roadway shall be constructed in phases as needed for future subdivision plans. Furthermore, no certificate of occupancy for any residential dwelling that is served by Tazewell Road, excluding model homes, shall be issued until such time that access to Land Bay 1 from Millwood Pike is provided via Coverstone Drive and Tazewell Road. 15.5 The Applicants shall pay to the County the amount of $75,000 for signalization or other road improvements at the intersection of Millwood Pike (US Route 50) and Victory Road (Route 728). Such funds shall be paid within sixty (60) days of the issuance of the first residential building permit in Land Bay 1. 15.6 The Applicants shall pay to the County the amount of $175,000 for signalization or other road improvements at the intersection of Costello Drive and Prince Frederick Drive. Such funds shall be paid within sixty (60) days of receiving written request from the County and VDOT after acceptance of Phase 2 Coverstone Drive Improvements per Proffer 15.2 into the State highway system. 15.7 Access to Millwood Pike shall be limited to Coverstone Drive as shown on the MDP with the exception of the private driveway currently serving TM 64- A -83B. The Applicant shall close said driveway once access is provided to TM 64 -A -83B via the internal residential street network as depicted on the MDP. Additionally, the Applicant shall close the existing crossover previously used for access to the golf course concurrent with Phase 1 improvements as provided by Proffer 15.2. 15.8 All public right -of -ways shall be dedicated to Frederick County as part of the subdivision approval process, consistent with applicable Virginia law. 15.9 All public streets and roads shall be designed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation specifications, subject to review and approval by Frederick County and VDOT. 15.10 All private streets and roads shall be constructed in accordance with the current Virginia Department of Transportation structural standards, and as may be modified by the County, and shall be owned and maintained by the Property Owners Association served by such streets or roads. Page 9 of 15 15.11 The design of off -site road improvements shall be in general conformance with the plan entitled "Governors Hill Road Improvements" Sheets 1 -2, as prepared by Patton Harris Rust and Associates, dated October 30, 2008. Excluding 200,000 square feet of office uses which may be developed at any time utilizing access to the existing completed portion of Coverstone Drive, off -site improvements shall be constructed in three phases as depicted on the aforementioned plans as follows: Phase A: Phase A improvements shall consist of improvements at the intersection of Millwood Pike /Inverlee Way /Coverstone Drive and shall be completed coincident with Phase 1 Coverstone Drive construction per Proffer 15.2. Phase B: Phase B improvements shall consist of improvements at the intersections of Millwood Pike /Prince Frederick Drive and Prince Frederick Drive /Costello Drive. Phase B improvements shall be completed coincident with Phase 2 Coverstone Drive construction per Proffer 15.2. Phase C: Phase C improvements shall consist of improvements at the intersection of Millwood Pike /Sulphur Spring Road. Phase C improvements shall be completed coincident with Phase 3 Coverstone Drive construction per Proffer 15.2. 15.12 The Applicant shall make good faith efforts to obtain any off -site right of way needed to complete any proffered off -site transportation improvements. In the event that the Applicant is not able to obtain the right of way and, further, the County and /or State of Virginia do not obtain the necessary right of way, in lieu of constructing the road improvement, the Applicant shall provide a monetary contribution to Frederick County that is equivalent to the estimated construction cost of those road improvements that could not be implemented. The construction cost estimate shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT. The monetary contribution shall coincide with the commercial area threshold that triggers the off -site road improvement as identified in Proffer 15.11. 15.13 Any future transportation analyses which may be required for the Property, shall utilize Code 820 "Retail" per the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual 7 Edition for any commercial use other than office use. Page 10 of 15 15.14 In the event any proffered off -site road improvements are constructed by others, the Applicant shall provide a monetary contribution to Frederick County that is equivalent to the estimated construction costs of those proffered road improvements not installed by the Applicant. The construction cost estimate shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT. The monetary contribution shall coincide with the commercial area threshold that triggers the off -site road improvements as identified in Proffer 15.11. 16. CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION AND PRESERVATION The Applicant shall conduct or cause to be conducted a Phase I Archaeological Investigation of the Property, prior to the approval of the first final site or subdivision plan for the Property, and shall complete Phase lI and III investigations thereof as may be demonstrated to be necessary by the Phase I study. 17. ESCALATOR CLAUSE 17.1 In the event any monetary contributions set forth in the Proffer Statement are paid to the Frederick County Board County Supervisors ( "Board ") within 30 months of October 12, 2005, as applied for by the Applicant, said contributions shall be in the amounts as stated herein. Any monetary contributions set forth in the Proffer Statement which are paid to the Board after 30 months following October 12, 2005 shall be adjusted in accordance with the Urban Consumer Price Index ( "CPI -U ") published by the United States Department of Labor, such that at the time contributions are paid, they shall be adjusted by the percentage change in the CPI -U from that date 30 months after October 12, 2005 to the most recently available CPI -U to the date the contributions are paid, subject to a cap of 5% per year, non - compounded. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 11 of 15 Governors Hill, L.L.C. By: MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C., Managing Member By: Miller and Smith In ., Manager Charles F. Stuart, Jr., kanager STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FAIRFAX COUNTY, To -wit. The for. oin in meat as ackn ledged before me this sjV day of i El 8 2013, by My commission expires Notary Public N N c° o OF a NOTARY PUBLIC Commonwealth y r of v49(nl Red. #7163184 SePternber 38, 201,5 Page 12 of 15 Carpets Valley Development, L.L.G. By: MS Carpets Valley Investors, L.L.C., Managing Member By: Miller and Smith Inc., Manager 1'i I " to Charles F. Stuart, Jr., .Manager STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE FARIFAX COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 4T day o 44;�' 2013, by Ch My commission expires Notary Public I. CO u rF �ar Page 13 of 15 John T. Conrad NOTARY PUBLIC Commonwealth of Virginia Reg. #7163184 My Commission Expires September 30, 2016 Governors Hill Investors, L.L.C. By: MS Careers Valley Investors, L.L.C., Managing Member djj � // S Charles F- Stuart, Jr., g anager STATE CJf` VIRGINIA, AT LARGE 'ARIFAX COUNTY, To-wit: The foregoing instrument w aeknowl — ?D red before me chis clay of 2013, by My commission expires Notary Public � I. Cg,� N Q c •f L r ��Rr y�ya Page 14 of 15 John T. Conrad NOTARY PUBLIC Commonwealth of Virginia Reg, #7163184 My Commission Expires September 30, 20 16 MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C. B MS Carpers Valley I vestors, L.L.C., M anaging Member Charles F. Stuart, Jr., Manager STATE OF VIRGINIA., AT LARGE FARIFAX COUNTY,'Io -wit: The foregoin ins ent was acknowled d before me this 3—L—day of , 2013, by a p9�°n c John T Conrad NOTARY PUBLIC U (p _ Commonweafth of Virginia Reg -47163184 My Commission Expires Septembe 30, 2016 Page 15 of 15 RESOLUTION Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: October 16, 2013 - Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: November 13, 2013 ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #05 -13 PROFFER REVISION OF GOVERNORS HILL WHEREAS, Rezoning #05 -13 Proffer Revision of Governors 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 if 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 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 910 -08 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 changes the date of performance provision for road improvements from 2015 to PDRes. #31 -13 -2- 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 13th day of November, 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. #31 -13 PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: PROPERTY RECORD OWNER: APPLICANT PROJECT NAME: ORIGINAL DATE RZ. n : # 10 -08: R4 and RA to R4 Formatted: Line spacing: E actly 13 pt 278.0 Acres + / -: Tax Map & Parcels 64 -A -83, 83A, 84, 85, 86, and 87 (the "Property") Carpers Valley Development, LLC and Governors Hill LLC Carpers Valley Development, LLC and Governors Hill LLC Governors Hill OF PROFFERS: March 24, 2008 REVISION DATE: September 2, 2008; October 31, 2008; December 8, 2008; January 9, 2009 May 1, 2013, June 17, 2013, July 23, 2013; August 15, 2013; September 6, 2013; September 26, 2013 The undersigned owners hereby proffer that the use and development of the subject property (`Property"), as described above, shall be in conformance with the following conditions, which shall supersede all other proffers that may have been made prior hereto. In the event that the above referenced rezoning is not granted as applied for by the Applicant (` Applicanf'), these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void. Further, these proffers are contingent upon final rezoning of the Property with "Final Rezoning" defined as that rezoning that is in effect on the day upon which the Frederick County Board of County Supervisors (the `Board ") grants the rezoning. The headings of the proffers set forth below have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the mcaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the proffers. The improvements proffered herein shall be provided at the time of development of that portion of the Property adjacent to or including the improvement or other proffered requirement, unless otherwise specified herein. The term "Applicant" as referenced herein shall include within its meaning all future owners, assigns, and successors in interest. When used in these proffers, the "Master Development Plan" shall refer to the plan entitled "Master Development Plan, Governors Hill" prepared by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, (the "MDP ") dated March 2008 revised January 9, 2009. 1. LAND USE 1.1 The project shall be designed to establish interconnected mixed -use residential and commercial /employment Land Bays in general conformance with the MDP, and as is specifically set forth in these Page 1 of 16 proffers subject to minor modifications as necessary upon final engineering including but not limited to intersection alignments. 1.2 All development, including street landscaping, shall be accomplished in general conformance with the "Governors Hill, Design and Development Standards ", prepared by PHR &A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Design and Development Standards "). 1.3 Residential uses shall be prohibited in the area identified as Land Bay 2 on the MDP. Furthermore, Land Bay 2 shall be restricted to those uses permitted in the General Business (B -2) zoning district as specified in the Frederick County Code Article X, §165- 82B(1). 1.4 Except as modified herein areas of residential development on the Property shall be limited to Land Bay 1 and shall be developed in conformance with the regulations of the Residential Planned Community ( "R4 ") zoning district, including permissible housing types set forth in the Frederick County Code Article VII, §165 -67 through §165 -72, as cross- referenced to Article VI, §165 -58, through §165 -66. Unit types and lot layouts within residential Land Bays may comprise any of the permitted unit types as set forth in the Design and Development Standards, and authorized for the R4 district, and these Proffers. 1.5 Residential development on the Property shall not exceed 550 dwelling units, with a mix of housing types permitted in the R4 district. Multi- family units, as defined by the Design and Development Standards, shall not exceed 50% of the total number of dwelling units developed in the project. No residential structures shall be closer than 2000 feet from the centerline of the existing Winchester Airport runway. 1.6 Prior to the Property exceeding 1,285,000 square feet of commercial building floor area, the Applicant shall submit to the County a revised Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Property. The total permitted commercial building floor area may increase provided that the Applicant completes a revised traffic impact analysis which identifies the impacts of trips for commercial development in excess of 45,815 Average Daily Trips (ADT) and mitigation, if necessary for said impacts is provided by the Applicant in a form that is acceptable to the County and VDOT. 2. CONSTRUCTION OF A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT 2.1 The Property shall be developed as one single and unified development in accordance with applicable ordinances and regulations for the R4 zoning district, the MDP as approved by the Board, and this Proffer Statement. Page 2 of 16 3. ACCESS TO ARMORY PARCEL 3.1 The Applicant '�^'�rhas designed and Gomstfae constructed a two lane public roadway, identified on the MDP as Pendleton Drive, from Arbor Court to the entrance of the Armory Site (TM 64- A -82}4e ). At such time that Tazewell Road is constructed adjao°^* to PepAletoi Pfi- e as depicted on the MDP, the Applicant shall extend Pendleton Drive to connect with Tazewell Road. 4. PHASING OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 4.1 Building permits for Land Bay 1 of the Property shall be issued on the following phasing schedule: Year 1 (Months 1 -12): 140 building permits Year 2 (Months 13 -24): 140 building permits Year 3 (Months 25 -36): 140 building permits Year 4 (Months 37 -48): 130 building permits The above identified phasing schedule is taken from the Date of Final Rezoning (DFR). Any building permits not issued within any given year may be carried over to the following year, however the Applicant shall not make application for more than 200 residential building permits in any given year. 4.2 Commercial and employment uses may be constructed at any time 4.3 Improvements including a 3,000 square foot community center, 3,500 square feet of neighborhood swimming pools, and a dog park shall be constructed in conjunction with residential development in Land Bay 1 and the land therefor shall be dedicated upon completion of the improvements to the Property Owners Association. The location thereof shall be depicted on final subdivision plans for such residential development. These recreational amenities shall serve to meet the requirement of 1 recreation unit per 30 dwellings. These improvements shall be completed prior to the issuance of the 281st residential building permit. 5. ARCHITECTURE, SIGNAGE, AND LANDSCAPING: 5.1 All buildings on the Property shall be constructed using compatible architectural styles. The Applicant shall establish one or more Architectural Review Boards through the required Property Owner Association to be created to enforce and administer a unified development plan in general conformity with the Design and Development Standards. Page 3 of 16 5.2 All signage within the Property shall be in substantial conformity with a comprehensive sign plan that meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for signage, which shall be submitted in conjunction with the first final site or subdivision plan for the Property. 6. PEDESTRIAN TRAIL SYSTEM AND RECREATION AREAS 6.1 The Applicant shall design and build a public pedestrian bicycle trail system to Virginia Department of Transportation standards that links residential and commercial areas within the development. Said trails shall be in the locations generally depicted on the MDP. To the extent that such trails are not depicted on the MDP at the time of Final Rezoning, such trails shall be connected with or linked to the internal street and sidewalk network. Sidewalks shall be constructed on public streets to VDOT standards, and a minimum of four -foot sidewalks shall be constructed on private streets. All combined pedestrian/bicycling trails shall be 10 feet wide, and shall have an asphalt surface. 7. FIRE & RESCUE: 7.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $422 per dwelling unit for fire and rescue purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. 7.2 Following Final Rezoning, the Master POA to be created in accordance herewith shall contribute annually, on or before July 1 St of each year, the sum of $100 per constructed residential unit, and $100 per 1000 square feet of constructed commercial (not including any land in public use), to the fire and rescue company providing first response service to the Property. Such contribution shall be monitored and enforced by the master POA, and the Board may require an accounting of such payments at such times and upon such conditions as it may determine necessary. Said monetary contribution shall cease at such time that the fire and rescue company providing first response service is no longer a volunteer operation or should the County adopt a fee for service plan to provide fire and rescue services. 8. SCHOOLS: 8.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $1,714 per dwelling unit for educational purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. Page 4 of 16 9. PARKS & OPEN SPACE: 9.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $343 per dwelling unit for recreational purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. 10. LIBRARIES: 10.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $79 per dwelling unit for library purposes, payable upon the issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. 11. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING: 11.1 The Applicant shall contribute to the Board the sum of $79 per dwelling unit upon issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit to be used for construction of a general governmental administration building. 12. CREATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION: 12.1 The Master Property Owners' Association to be created in accordance herewith shall be created contemporaneously with the first final site or subdivision plan submitted for the Property. 12.2 The Applicant shall establish a Master Property Owners' Association (hereinafter "Master POA ") for Governors Hill, in its entirety, that shall, among other things, have responsibility for assuring compliance with design guidelines and standards, signage requirements, landscape maintenance, and similar matters. Any homeowners' or property owners' associations created for commercial or residential uses individually shall act as a subset of the Master POA. 12.3 The residential portion of the development shall be made subject to one or more Property Owners' Association(s) (hereinafter "Residential PDX') that shall be responsible for the ownership, maintenance and repair of the community center, walking trails in Land Bay 1, swimming pools, all common areas, including any conservation areas that may be established in accordance herewith not dedicated to the County or others, and stormwater management facilities not dedicated to public use in Land Bay 1, for each area subject to their jurisdiction, and shall be provided such other responsibilities, duties, and powers as are customary for such associations or as may be required for such Residential POA herein. 12.4 In addition to such other duties and responsibilities as may be assigned, a Residential POA shall have title to and responsibility for the following in Land Bay 1: (i) all common open space areas not otherwise dedicated to Page 5 of 16 public use, (ii) common buffer areas located outside of residential lots; (iii) private streets serving the residents who are members of such association; (iv) common solid waste disposal and recycling programs, including curbside pick -up of refuse by a private refuse collection company, and (v) responsibility for the perpetual maintenance of any street, perimeter, or road buffer areas, all of which buffer areas shall be located within easements to be granted to the Residential POA if platted within residential or other lots, or otherwise granted to the Residential POA by appropriate instrument. 12.5 The Residential POA shall be so established that it possesses all necessary powers to set and revise fees and dues in sufficient sums to perform the responsibilities assigned to it hereunder and under the Declaration to be recorded creating such Association. In addition, upon any conveyance of a residential unit from the builder thereof to a home purchaser, there shall be a fee paid by the home purchaser to the Residential POA in an amount equal to three times the then- current monthly residential dues applicable to the unit so conveyed. 12.6 Any commercial portion of the development (with the exception of any property owned or leased by the United States, or Frederick County) shall be made subject to one or more Property Owners' Association(s) (hereinafter "Commercial PDX'). Such Commercial POA(s) shall be responsible for the ownership, maintenance and repair of all common areas in Land Bay 2, including any conservation areas that may be established in accordance herewith not dedicated to the County or others, and stormwater management facilities (under common (open space) ownership) not dedicated to public use for each area subject to their jurisdiction, and shall be provided such other responsibilities, duties, and powers as are customary for such associations or as may be required for such Commercial POA herein. 12.7 In addition to such other duties and responsibilities as may be assigned, a Commercial POA, in Land Bay 2, shall have title to and responsibility for (i) all common open space areas not otherwise dedicated to public use, (ii) common buffer areas located outside of commercial lots; (iii) responsibility for the perpetual maintenance of any street, perimeter, or road buffer areas, all of which buffer areas shall be located within easements to be granted to the Commercial POA if platted within commercial or other lots, or parcels, or otherwise granted to the Commercial POA by appropriate instrument. 13. WATER & SEWER: 13.1 The Applicant shall be responsible for connecting the Property to public water and sewer. It shall further be responsible for constructing all facilities required for such connection at the Property boundary. All water Page 6 of 16 and sewer infrastructure shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority. 14. ENVIRONMENT: 14.1 Stormwater management and Best Management Practices (BMP) for the Property shall be provided in accordance with the Virginia Stormwater Management Regulations, First Ed. 1999, Chapter 2, Table 2 -3. 444—The Applicant shall provide notice in all sales literature, in covenants,- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5 ", Hanging: 0.5" conditions and restrictions for any Property Owners' Associations, of the adjacency of the Winchester Regional Airport . Formatted: Font: caramond 44-4 pr-ovide ftH44er- pr-otee „ f ir- i 4 , , ash ' dedioate Sffe aviga4iofi easemepA shall be dediea+ed prior- to isstiaRee of the-, 1" buil ding pefw& f o r - +',° P - opeft,. The Applicant shall provide noise attenuation treatment for all residential units. 15. TRANSPORTATION: 15.1 The major roadways to be constructed on the Property shall be constructed in the locations depicted on the MDP, with reasonable adjustments permitted for final engineering. 15.2 Excluding 200,000 square feet of office uses which may be developed at any time utilizing access to the existing completed portion of Coverstone Drive, the Applicant shall design and construct Coverstone Drive as a full section with raised medians on a minimum 90' right -of -way, utilizing the following phasing schedule: PHASE 1: Phase 1 shall consist of the full four lane section including a ten -foot trail from Millwood Pike to the first intersection on Coverstone Drive as depicted on the MDP from Point A to Point B. Said roadway shall be constructed to base asphalt prior to issuance of a certificate of eeou occupancy for any commercial building for the Property and/or prior to issuance of a building permit for any residential units, excluding model homes, located in Land Bay 1. Phase 1 improvements shall consist of all necessary improvements, including signalization when warranted by VDOT, to create a four way intersection at the existing intersection of Inverlee Way and Millwood Pike as shown on the MDP. Page 7 of 16 PHASE 2: Phase 2 shall consist of construction of a two lane section of Coverstone Drive from Point B to Point C as depicted on the MDP. Said roadway improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any use that would cause the Property to exceed 400,000 square feet of commercial building area. PHASE 3: Phase 3 shall consist of construction of the remaining two lane section of Coverstone Drive from Point B to Point C as depicted on the MDP. Said roadway improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any use that would cause the Property to exceed 800,000 square feet of commercial building area. PHASE 4: The Applicant shall design Coverstone Drive Extended as a four -lane section from Prince Frederick to Relocated Route 522 as depicted from Point D to Point E or for a maximum distance of 800 feet when the alignment of Relocated 522 has been determined by VDOT, and the right of way for this segment of Coverstone Drive has been acquired by VDOT or Frederick County. In the event that the alignment for relocated Route 522 has not been determined or if the right of way for Coverstone Drive Extended is not secured by June 30, 2018 then the Applicant shall pay to the County $20,000 for transportation improvements within the vicinity of the Property in lieu of designing said portion of Coverstone Drive. The Applicant shall further pay to the County $1,000 for each permitted residential unit as a contribution towards the future construction of Coverstone Drive Extended, but if the conditions above have not been met by June 30, 2018 then these funds may be used for other projects in the vicinity of the Property that have a rational nexus to the Property. Such funds shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance for each of the permitted residential units. 15.3 Notwithstanding any other provisions of these proffers, the Applicant shall Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5 ", Hanging: construct Coverstone Drive as a full four -lane section as required in 0.5 °, space After: 0 Pt Proffer 15.2 from Millwood Pike to Prince Frederick Drive prior to November 1, 2025. A median break and eastbound left turn lane shall be constructed at the existing Millwood Pike and Inverlee intersection prior to November 1, 2015. Page 8 of 16 15.4 The Applicant shall design and construct Tazewell Road as shown on the MDP as a minimum two lane roadway within a variable width right of way with a maximum right of way width of 60' to provide access to residential uses within Land Bay 1 and other commercial areas of Land Bay 2. Said 60' right of way width shall be required for Tazewell Road between Coverstone Drive and the A&fftefy epAfaftee—Pendleton Drive. The right of way and road width shall decrease for the remaining portions of Tazewell Road. Said roadway shall be constructed in phases as needed for future subdivision plans. Furthermore, no certificate of occupancy for any residential dwelling that is served by Tazewell Road, excluding model homes, shall be issued until such time that access to Land Bay 1 from Millwood Pike is provided via Coverstone Drive and Tazewell Road. 15.5 The Applicants shall pay to the County the amount of $75,000 for signalization or other road improvements at the intersection of Millwood Pike (US Route 50) and Victory Road (Route 728). Such funds shall be paid within sixty (60) days of the issuance of the first residential building permit in Land Bay 1. 15.6 The Applicants shall pay to the County the amount of $175,000 for signalization or other road improvements at the intersection of Costello Drive and Prince Frederick Drive. Such funds shall be paid within sixty (60) days of receiving written request from the County and VDOT after acceptance of Phase 2 Coverstone Drive Improvements per Proffer 15.2 into the State highway system. 15.7 Access to Millwood Pike shall be limited to Coverstone Drive as shown on the MDP with the exception of the private driveway currently serving TM 64- A -83B. The Applicant shall close said driveway once access is provided to TM 64 -A -83B via the internal residential street network as depicted on the MDP. Additionally, the Applicant shall close the existing crossover previously used for access to the golf course concurrent with Phase 1 improvements as provided by Proffer 15.2. 15.8 All public right -of -ways shall be dedicated to Frederick County as part of the subdivision approval process, consistent with applicable Virginia law. 15.9 All public streets and roads shall be designed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation specifications, subject to review and approval by Frederick County and VDOT. 15.10 All private streets and roads shall be constructed in accordance with the current Virginia Department of Transportation structural standards, and as may be modified by the County, and shall be owned and maintained by the Property Owners Association served by such streets or roads. Page 9 of 16 15.11 The design of off -site road improvements shall be in general conformance with the plan entitled "Governors Hill Road Improvements" Sheets 1 -2, as prepared by Patton Harris Rust and Associates, dated October 30, 2008. Excluding 200,000 square feet of office uses which may be developed at any time utilizing access to the existing completed portion of Coverstone Drive, off-site improvements shall be constructed in three phases as depicted on the aforementioned plans as follows: Phase A: Phase A improvements shall consist of improvements at the intersection of Millwood Pike/Inverlee Way /Coverstone Drive and shall be completed coincident with Phase 1 Coverstone Drive construction per Proffer 15.2. Phase B: Phase B improvements shall consist of improvements at the intersections of Millwood Pike/Prince Frederick Drive and Prince Frederick Drive /Costello Drive. Phase B improvements shall be completed coincident with Phase 2 Coverstone Drive construction per Proffer 15.2. Phase C: Phase C improvements shall consist of improvements at the intersection of Millwood Pike /Sulphur Spring Road. Phase C improvements shall be completed coincident with Phase 3 Coverstone Drive construction per Proffer 15.2. 15.12 The Applicant shall make good faith efforts to obtain any off-site right of way needed to complete any proffered off -site transportation improvements. In the event that the Applicant is not able to obtain the right of way and, further, the County and/or State of Virginia do not obtain the necessary right of way, in lieu of constructing the road improvement, the Applicant shall provide a monetary contribution to Frederick County that is equivalent to the estimated construction cost of those road improvements that could not be implemented. The construction cost estimate shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT. The monetary contribution shall coincide with the commercial area threshold that triggers the off -site road improvement as identified in Proffer 15.11. 15.13 Any future transportation analyses which may be required for the Property, shall utilize Code 820 "Retail' per the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual 7 th Edition for any commercial use other than office use. Page 10 of 16 15.14 In the event any proffered off -site road improvements are constructed by others, the Applicant shall provide a monetary contribution to Frederick County that is equivalent to the estimated construction costs of those proffered road improvements not installed by the Applicant. The construction cost estimate shall be subject to review and approval by VDOT. The monetary contribution shall coincide with the commercial area threshold that triggers the off-site road improvements as identified in Proffer 15.11. 16. CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION AND PRESERVATION The Applicant shall conduct or cause to be conducted a Phase I Archaeological Investigation of the Property, prior to the approval of the first final site or subdivision plan for the Property, and shall complete Phase II and III investigations thereof as may be demonstrated to be necessary by the Phase I study. 17. ESCALATOR CLAUSE 17.1 In the event any monetary contributions set forth in the Proffer Statement are paid to the Frederick County Board County Supervisors (`Board ") within 30 months of October 12, 2005, as applied for by the Applicant, said contributions shall be in the amounts as stated herein. Any monetary contributions set forth in the Proffer Statement which are paid to the Board after 30 months following October 12, 2005 shall be adjusted in accordance with the Urban Consumer Price Index ( "CPI -U ") published by the United States Department of Labor, such that at the time contributions are paid, they shall be adjusted by the percentage change in the CPI -U from that date 30 months after October 12, 2005 to the most recently available CPI -U to the date the contributions are paid, subject to a cap of 5% per year, non - compounded. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES Page 11 of 16 Governors Hill, L.L.C. By: MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C., Managing Member By: Miller and Smith Inc., Manager Charles F. Stuart, Jr Pr-es len+ Manager Page 12 of 16 x-- � xcrz¢r, Senior viee n .,.,,id ffi STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE AIRFAX COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2991 113. by My commission expires Notary Public Carpers Valley Development, L.L.C. By: MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C., Managing Member By: Miller and Smith Inc., Manager Page 13 of 16 Charles F. Stuart, Jr SeftipfA4Ce ., Manager Serriaf viee President STATE OF VIRGINIA, AT LARGE ARIFAX COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2993 2013, by My commission expires Notary Public Page 14 of 16 Governors Hill Investors, L.L.C. MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C., Managing Member Charles F. Stuart, Jr., Manager STATE OF VIRGINIA. AT LARGE FARIFAX COUNTY, To -wit: . Formatted: Font: Garamond The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this dad of Formatted: Normal, Space After: 0 pt, Line 2013, by spacing: Exactly 13 pt, No bullets or numbering, Tab stops: Not at 1" My commission expires Notary Public Page 15 of 16 MS Carers Vallev Investors, L.L.C. MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C., Managing Member Charles F. Stuart, Jr., Manager STATE OF VIRGINIA. AT LARGE FARIFAX COUNTY, To -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2013, by Page 16 of 16 John Bishop From: Ronald Mislowsky [RMislowsky @Pennoni.com] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 2:42 PM To: John Bishop Subject: FW: Governors Hill Proffer Amendment Attachments: 2013 09 16 - Request to modify proffer.pdf; Gov Hill Proffer 2009 version.pdf; Gov Hill Proffer Amend 9 -6 -13 - signed 9- 12- 13.pdf John, please see the airport comment below. Ron From: Renny Manuel [ mailto:okvmanuel r, comcast netl Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 2:19 PM To: Ronald Mislowsky Subject: RE: Governors Hill Proffer Amendment Good afternoon Ron! I apologize for the delay in getting an answer however Mark Flynn had a family medical emergency and wasn't able to respond right away. On behalf of the Airport Authority is okay with the proposed amendment you submitted with your email of 9/16/2013 regarding the proffer statement for the Governors Hill project. I have copies Mark's response as follows: Renny, The last sentence of the 2009 version in § 14.3 on providing noise attenuation is now in proposed § 14,2 so that's fine. In addition, the noise attenuation provision is set out in paragraph 4 of the recorded 14 January 2009 avigation easement, 1 do thin the recorded easement satisfies the first part of the 2009 proffer agreement, so the elimination of the proffer condition is acceptable. Let me know if you have any other questions on this, Mark K, Flynn $04 400 -1321 mobile markkflynn@ mail.g9 Please let me know if you need anything further from my office or if this email suffices. Thank you, Renny Serena (Renny) Manuel Executive Director Winchester Regional Airport Authority 491 Airport Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540) 662 -5786 okvmanuelagoincast.net From: Ronald Mislowsky [ ilto;RMislowsk_v@a Pennoni coral Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:32 PM To: Serina Manuel ( gkymanuel,@comca-ast.net Subject: Governors Hill Proffer Amend Serina, have you heard anything back from Mark Flynn? Thanks, Ronald Mislowsky Associate Vice President Office Director Pennoni Associates, Inc. 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, VA 22601 -5002 Office 540 - 667 -2139 Direct 540 - 771 -2085 Mobile 540 - 664 -2110 http:l/www.r)ennoni.com I PMislowskv Pennoni core Consulting Engineers providing... Environmental - Geotechnical - Inspections & Testing - Land Development - MEP Landscape Architecture - Structural - Survey - Transportation - WaterlWastewater CD N Q!9(UQ0565 0 THIS DEED IS EXEMPT from the state recordation taxes imposed by Virginia Code §58.1 -801, pursuant to Virginia Code §58.1- 811(A)(3). THIS DEED OF EASEMENT AND RESTRICTIONS is made this 14th day of January, 2009, by and between CARPERS VALLEY DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, and GOVERNOR'S HILL, L.L.C., A Virginia limited liability company (collectively, the "Grantor ") and THE WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia ( "Grantee "), WHEREAS, the Grantee is the owner of the Winchester Regional Airport ( "Airport "), located within Frederick County, Virginia; WHEREAS the Grantor is the owner of certain real property, described to Exhibit A; WHEREAS the zoning ordinance of the County of Frederick requires an avigation easement for any properties that are subdivided that lie within the airport support area as shown in the zoning maps of the County; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to set out the rights and responsibilities of each related to the Airport. WITNESSETH: Definitions As used herein: The term "navigable airspace" means airspace above the minimum altitudes of flight prescribed by regulations under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations ("C.F.R. ") Part 77, including airspace needed to ensure safety in the takeoff and landing of aircraft. The term "Property" shall mean the real property located in Frederick County, Virginia, and more particularly described in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The term "structure" shall mean any object, including a mobile object, constructed or erected by man, including but not limited to: buildings, towers, communications towers, radio and television antennae, cranes, smokestacks, earth formations, overhead transmission lines, and flag poles. THAT for and in consideration of the mutual benefits to the parties hereto, the Grantor hereby grants to the Grantee a permanent avigation easement across the Property, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein below, and in accordance with the regulations established pursuant to Title 14, C.F.R. Part 77, to wit: 0 N U7 1. THAT the Grantor, for itself, its heirs, successors and assigns, grants unto Grantee for the benefit of the public in the use and operation of the Airport, a right of the public and specifically, without limitation, owners, operators and occupants of aircraft to use the navigable airspace over the Property and for all said persons and entities to cause in the navigable airspace above the Property such light, sound, noise, smoke and vibration as may be inherent in or related to the operation of aircraft using said navigable airspace for landing at, taking off from, or otherwise operating at or about the Airport. 2. THAT Grantor, for itself, its successors and assigns, and for the benefit of the public in the use and operation of the Airport and the airspace above the Airport, covenants and agrees that it will not use the Property, or permit any use of the Property, in a manner that would constitute an obstruction to the passage of aircraft using the navigable airspace above the Property for landing at, taking off from, or otherwise operating at or about the Airport, and that they will not use the Property, or permit any use of the Property, in a manner, including casting of light into the airspace above the Property, which would present a hazard to any aircraft using the navigable airspace above the Property for landing at, taking off from, or otherwise operating at or about the Airport. 3. THAT Grantor for itself, its successors and assigns, covenants and agrees with the Grantee that for the benefit of the public in the use and operation of the Airport, they will not hereafter establish, construct, erect or grow, or permit the establishment, construction, erection or growth of, any structure or vegetation, whether natural or man-made, which would penetrate into or through the airspace of the Airport. Further, Grantor acknowledges that no permit shall be obtained that would allow the establishment of or creation of an airport hazard or a hazard to air navigation. The issuance of a construction permit shall be deemed to confirm that any improvements shown or reflected on the plans associated with the permit do not constitute a hazard to either the airport or to air navigation. 4. THAT Grantor covenants and agrees with the Grantee that Grantor shall provide noise attenuation treatment for all residential structures its constructs within the Property. 5. Except as specifically provided herein, Grantor, for itself, its successors and assigns, hereby releases Grantee from any and all claims, liability or causes of action that they have or will have against Grantee on account of noise emanating upon the Airport now or hereafter incident to the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking ofd' from, the Airport. THE GRANTEE TO HAVE AND TO HOLD such easement and all rights appertaining thereto under the Grantee, its successors and assigns, with the understanding and agreement that the covenants, restrictions and agreements set forth herein shall be binding upon the successors in interest and assigns of the Grantee and Grantor, and that these covenants and agreements shall run with the land, unless and until the Airport is abandoned. In the event the Airport is abandoned this easement shall automatically terminate, and title to the Property, unencumbered by this easement and the restrictions set forth herein, shall automatically revert to the Grantor or its successors in interest, as applicable, without the need of any further action by the parties or their successors. CD N Cn N WITNESS the following signatures and seals: [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES] 0 N C. n CA) CARPERS VALLEY DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. By: MS Carpers Investors, L.L.C., Member Manager By: Miller and Smith, Inc., Manager By:�'�J Name: Charles F. St , Jr. Title: Senior Vice President STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FAWAX The foregoing instrument was duly acknowledged before me this / day of January, 2009, by ptr F S/va�,T� as ✓P of Miller and Smith, Inc., Manager of MS Carpers Investors, L.L.C., Member Manager of Carpers Valley Development, L.L.C, on behalf of the company. NoVaary Public My Commission Expires: �W/20I0 My Notary Registration Number is: oi� 4 CD N CJt GOVERNOR'S HILL, L.L.C. By: MS Carpers Valley Investors, L.L.C., Member Manager By: Miller and ith, In . Manager By. Name: Charles F. Stl , Jr. Title: Senior Vice President STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FAIRFAX The foreggoing instrument was duly acknowledged before me this "I day of January, 2009, by G"t�s F•St'it2�jJv. as Sey+ryi VP of Miller and Smith, Inc., Manager of MS Carpers Investors, L.L.C., the Manager of Governor's Hill, L.L.C., on behalf of the company. Nckary Publi c My Commission Expires: VW;3 0/0 My Notary Registration Number is: 70#, Z CZ) N c-n EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION "' To the Deed of Easement and Restrictions between Carpers Valley Development L.L.C., and Governor's Hill L.L.C. (Grantor) and The Winchester Regional Airport Authority (Grantee). Property belonging to the Grantor: Tax Map Parcel 64 -A -83 consisting of 116.2509 acres established by instrument #060007880 Tax Map Parcel 64 -A -83A consisting of 14.242 acres established by instrument 4050027203 Tax Map Parcel 64 -A -84 consisting of 24.4739 acres acquired on February 13, 2008 from the Mary K. Hockman Trust. Tax Map Parcel 64 -A -85 consisting of .9183 acres acquired on February 13, 2008 from the Mary K. Hockman Trust. Tax Map Parcel 64 -A -86 consisting of 107.4389 acres established by instrument #060003761 Tax Map Parcel 64 -A -87 consisting of 17.9745 acres established by instrument # 070009451 Vii C;ir�i;1 FIZLL`1:R'"CCUNTY.SC "C. This instrument of writing was produced to me on and with certificate acknowledgement thereto annexed was admitted to record. Tax imposed by Sec, 58.1 -802of $ , and 58.1 -801 have been al P �d, if assessable, f� k � �� � j ' S � yI I C , AUG 2�' it Number - 31 V6.1 ?' FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA To be completed by Planning Staff: Fee Amount Paid $ D D D O ° Zoning Amendment Date Received — 21 Z 3 1 13 PC Hearing Date _ BOS Hearing Date 1 1'? 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: •e Name: Pennoni Associates Inc. Telephone: 540 - 667 -2139 c/o Ron is ows y, Address: 117 E. Piccadilly S treet, Winchester, VA 22601 Telephone: 540- 722 -9566 Winchester, VA 22 2. Property Owner (if different than above): Name: Governors Hill, LLC & uarpers valley ueveiopment LL(; Address: 480 West Jubal Early Drive, Suite 330 Winchester, VA 22601 f — eFeDfuone. 3. Contact person if other than above: Name: 4. Property Information: fned: a. Property Identification Number(s): t�' Total acreage to be rezot 64 -A -82, 83, 83A, 86, 87, 87A Total acreage o f the aR rcel(c) to hr rezoned (if the entirctV of the parcel(S) is nut heing rezoned):_ n: R4 d. Current zoning designation(s) and acreage(s) in each designation e. Proposed zoning designation(s) and acreage(s) in each designation: R4 f. Magisterial District(s): Shawnee 12 Q 5. Checklist: Check the following items t hat 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 (pdt's) of all submitted documents, maps and exhibit 6. The Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ovonership in rEM6#46 rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to he 7. Adjoining Property: SEE ATTAC ZONING PARCEL ID NUMBER 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): The properties are located approximately one mile east of Interstate 81 on the south side of Millwood Pike (Route 50 East) across from Sulphur Springs Road (Rt. 655) and The Ravens Subdivisicon. 13 9. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed: Single Family homes: Non - Residential Lots: Office: Retail: Restaurant: Commercial: 10. Signature: Number of Units Proposed Townhome: Mobile Home: Square Footage of Proposed Uses Multi- Family: Hotel Rooms: Service Station: Manufacturing: Warehouse: Other: 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 wav 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): Owner(s): Date: Date: Date: C Date: 4 1 -< e e 14 Special Limited Power of Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia Frederick Planning Website: w-.vw.co.frederick.va.us Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street Winchester,- Virginia 2-2601 Phone (540) 665-5651 Facsimile (540) 665-6395 Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We) Govemor's Hill LLC (Name) Carpers Valley Development LLC (Phone) 540-722-9566 (Address) 480 W. Jubal Early Drive, Suite 330, Winchester, VA 22601 die owners) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Properly') conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by 64 64 64 64 64 do hereby make, constitute and appoint: (Niame) Pennoni Associates Inc. (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: X Rezoning (including proffers) Conditional Use Permit Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) Subdivision Site Plan Variance or Appeal N4y 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 (we) have ereto set my (our) hand and seal this 10 day of M41 20 Signature(s State of Virginia, City/County of F 9 r, To-wit- 1, jaikitf mmr ,( a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) whofigned .o the foregoing instrument ersonally appeared before me and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this day of Meli4 20_0 T Notary Public NOTARY PUBLIC REGISTRATION # 701 1682 1 nXv COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AUGUST 31, 'y014 Z 9996 ZZL 0t JENNIFER M. AA(., NOTAF, UBLIC :�:" ,: 7011682 �n A M n M W '- � �41 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUGUST 31, 2014 QWS- dC 6:qo C l, 00 AV COUNTY of 1 Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 ME NUARmIN DUM ,. To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors e (J e `vl From: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner — Subject: EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District Height Wavier Request Carmeuse Property Identification Number (PIN #): 33 -A -144 Date: November 7, 2013 Staff has received a request from Lawson and Silek, P.L.C., on behalf of Carmeuse Lime, 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). igs of The Applicant has provided architectural renderin, 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 County is currently processing an ordinance amendment that would allow structures in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) to exceed the 45 foot district height maximum, up to 200 feet, with a Board of Supervisors waiver. The Planning Commission considered this waiver request at their meeting on November 6, 2013: the Commission recommended approval of the requested waiver for a kiln up to 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 my questions. Attachment: 1. Request Letter. 2. Architectural Renderings of the Structure. 3. Photographs of the structure. 4. Overall site layout. 5. Resolution. am 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Click in this box to return to the 11/07/13 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 v E u � o c L m x o o E 9 W E C O L W C ri X r U N 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 �� � o +� � � �, � � x � U o � � � � U � c i 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} Click in this box to return to the 11/07/13 BOS Memorandum RESOLUTION Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: November 6, 2013 - Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: November 13, 2013 - ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED HEIGHT WAIVER REQUEST CARMEUSE LIME — CLEARBROOK QUARRY WHEREAS, On November 13, 2013 the Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance amendment that allowed the Board of Supervisors to waive the maximum height in the EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District up to 200 feet; and WHEREAS, Carmeuse Lime has requested a waiver of the 45' EM District height maximum in accordance with § 165- 608.06 Height limitations, to allow for the construction of a kiln up to 200 feet in height at their Clearbrook Quarry (indentified by Property Identification Number 33 -A -144); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered this waiver request during a public meeting on November 6, 2013 and recommended approval of the waiver with the skin; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors considered this waiver request during a public meeting on November 13, 2013 ; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that the approval of this waiver request be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in good zoning practice; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Carmeuse Lime is hereby granted a waiver of the maximum height in the EM Zoning District per § 165- 608.06 Height limitations, for the construction of a kiln up to 200 feet in height with the "skin" at their Clearbrook Quarry (indentified by Property Identification Number 33 -A -144). PDRes. 436 -13 -2- Passed this 13th day of November, 2013. This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Gene E. Fisher Robert W. Wells Christopher E. Collins Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes. 436 -13 RESOLUTION Action: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: November 13, 2013 []APPROVED ❑ DENIED 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 traverses parcel 44 -A -25B and the properties are located with the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA); 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 uses 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, Chairman Robert A. Hess Gene E. Fisher Christopher E. Collins Gary A. Lofton Robert W. Wells Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. PDRes. #032 -13 Frederick County Administrator McCann - Slaughter Properties CPPA Resolution F® MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #03 -13 The Townes at Tasker Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: November 7, 2013 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner Planning Commission: Board of Supervisors: Reviewed 11/06/13 11/13/13 PROPOSAL: To develop 10.25 acres of land zoned RA (Rural Areas) District with a total of 49 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 49 transferred development rights from four parcels (72 -A -30, 72 -A -34, 72 -A -29C and 21 -A -7A) that are located in the County's sending area. The applicant currently has the TDR rights to develop half of the site; the remainder of the site could be developed through the transfer of additional TDR rights (revised MDP would also be required) or through a rezoning. 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 11/13/13 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 November 7, 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 49 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 49 transferred development rights from four parcels (72 -A -30, 72 -A -34, 72 -A -29C and 21 -A -7A) that are located in the County's sending area. The applicant currently has the TDR rights to develop half of the site; the remainder of the site could be developed through the transfer of additional TDR rights (revised MDP would also be required) or through a rezoning. This is the first property to develop under the adopted TDR ordinance. MDP #03 -13, The Townes at Tasker November 7, 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 November 7, 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 4.3 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 November 7, 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 November 7, 2013 Page 6 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 11/13/13 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. 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 O N , M 0 �1 z E1 � 0 O � w wg U w� � V N N N N F O J J z Z Lu w J ¢ a a O ME w m I Z Q ` O , m Z U o U� � R I UU UU Q l w � "' o L _ � w Ml �� o � NO �; w o d Z U o 0 W Q uJ w Z X Q U U) C-) Cn i2 UJ :: oe W ¢ p � N w 0 U w z CO z o 5� goo •O o }4 g1N� Q � w O Ne d �o II �00 I w h - a s � w a w � � p 0 z - 0 Z n� a z a a w O N , M 0 �1 z E1 � 0 O � w wg U w� � V N N N N F O J J z Z Lu w J ¢ a a O ME w m I Z Q ` O , m Z U o U� � R I UU UU Q l w � "' o L _ � w Ml �� o � NO �; w o d Z U o 0 W Q uJ w Z X Q U U) C-) Cn i2 UJ :: oe W ¢ p � N w 0 U w z CO z o 5� �o� goo •O o }4 g1N� Q � w O Ne d �o� goo G d a _aril- - I - , n ddb -- P _'.. -:1 I., i -dl LI:. ..L L,I N •—L , �_�, ,I A �,d n�ogm- s � os op dm=� °vosaa� o NAflf M OL6 'ONI '00 NOIlOMISNOO JVIJITOH 3hVO a A31NJI15 S l3tlHJIW o �g °�� = „NN` o � NI 1NIWOUAM 831SVA =oo saxa � A�A A oL L� ] SW]NrvO.'I UNHO,t A]SWtl - - d - E ao3= wl.rv� uHHOL ald A1LwA �Aliaoad 3 a3�SV1 1V S3NM01 3Hl L1�JNtlp1AJL� � b03 NVId 1N3WdOl3�3d d315VW S sssaoo= � s N” swl..� d3d �( A A AA o� O�s.3w�a as C a.t aO�C aS n0 S.(annp S.TO,6AJn s.(aaC0'U Wo . ses -o PV x� gs ' � l p:� 6 P 7 �d S 7 oszz ai��� sa �LII �� IOOSSv ILIOLZLZad nIi OOZ a�rreg ��aa.r� .(JJeaard eeg \ 0 If u o / y W 14 m r — —— — o d r o�It \¢` x — _ go _ z \ I I I — _� p==mm °o o a° 3 of \ -- = IT= � w = a z a u A. \�N \ \\ s � • ^I INf �5g � on I m a f IT m� o � w o _ F J I - No Sh I Os 2 w \ I 71 e R a € a = s N - aO m Ka �Wd III z Uw i �� ° w N �S _ zz rc °a _r t u 0 w � Y � C a� rc m awl °-vl m- O� ° N I (, Id I i ,'L I_r 11 11 i - -...I 1 'I 'l -:1 I.J 1 -dl :,I. ��, zdNOr�s os mNoa� a3�3 NAM`�=a�8a =s 10 IN.11111, ON 'I N0110nd1SN00 3AV0 e e= VS3d /sTvil0 4 b3NSV1 1V ]HI a IIIIAI exgsp N s b03 NVId 1N3WdOl3A30 ?J31SVW =a_.° an III 1-- .11 ��d a���� � t� �� so ao�daw = M slaalryazy adeaspne7. s a end. s o antes. s aanr9gy ey;as' °s � OLIj soj eTiossIv �LIOCIL�a�j H j 2 ` N 2 \ i r A 5 = I — 3 O F W N O 6 U� z K W a 2 i -X I —,x, y� l HE IF - ---------- -- - � ) Vim— `� • III =11I I�I1 = I _ 3 o � o L _I I 0 F U 2 O a6 0 Y I, I 1 -il I, `..� -� L A �,d n�ogm- s � os op dm=� °vosaa� o NAflf M OL6 'ONI '00 NOIlOMISNOO JVaIIIOH 3hVH o NVId 30NVNIN3 so o= o� ONV S1N3N13AOddYVI 39VINO213 =oo e e sxa - aid] IN,A,,, d3�SV11V s& �g 46_ . A �Nry SN �SN,rv�a N I �N�a,dArA NOd NVId 1NIWdOl3A3O d31SVW io��aa=ea s ryw S—HO 1 LA A ova o z, as r a t adeas ne . s an p . s o�an n . s as rr�n, wo x s Z �.� 6 P 7 /d S 7 oszz a, r� uM �LII Sale 0,-Sv ILIOLILIad OOZ airreS iaa.riS Ileaard sea <II �m q s K a e � � ° n is J �2 �z � U � U � Q 7 K 0 556' 9 4°E. 1 m S o 1 I I oz s � Ne w , o§ 2� m� g zop W � U n 2 m o§ E g � M, 0c� V 4�1ddn 28 €:� J � � �a J z oo Q OM / w� I I I *3 a w \� h � 2 8 - - a gy f6[[ W5a - - -- � - A6R76"Ri3 1S"95'9i'iV -", 1 Z 1,13 4) p4 Sfl -AN] M s[[ o alai ° o \ O \�G 29 Z6 � SB,961 eca a AV7 a21O p � 3 i I.I _ -1 I- I_J I - 1 11 1 p 'i .'I- -. -:1 I.., i -dl I LI.'..L _L .I Li .—L / I_s, ,I MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLA r APPLICATION FORM Department of Planning & DeveIopment Use Only — Application # 0 3_. L� Date Application Received: w 1 i PC Meeting Date BOS Meeting Date Fee Amount Paid $A � I s„ ' ° Initials: Receipt # �5 55 - 1 1. Project Title: The T ownes at Tasker 2. Applicant: Name: Pennoni Associates Inc. Telephone: 540 - 667 -2139 Attn: Scott Stickley, PE Address: 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 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 -21 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 G Is 10 Ty 7. Property Location: Last side of Rt. 642, Tasker Road and nU1 Ln 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: 11.35 acres C) Current Zoning: RA with RP Standards VIA T DR;s d) Present Use: Vacant e) Proposed Uses: Residential 10. If residential uses are proposed, provide the following: a) Density: 4.3 Units Per Acre b) Number of Units: 49 c) Housing Types: Single Family Attached 11. Adjoining Property use and zoning: USE ZONING North Commercial B2 East Residential RA South Vacant RP West Interstate 81 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): Date: Date: Owner(s): 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 C -L C�c! ,�1 �� 0 VA (ck i 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 -6345 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 ]and ( "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 -21 (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: �[Z Rezoning (including proffers) _[]_ Conditional Use Permit �✓ Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final) _ Subdivision �✓ 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 (Ve) have hereto se 4r -(our) hand and sea] this ?4�y��f jjj �j � , 20 f :3 , Signature(s) State of Vi 11ia, City /County of }.� c1' r t ,=To zWiEG# 157474 - % MY COMMISSION ; < r ' EXPIRES Z I, (l f� h L� 3� ►n !: YZ a Notary Pgbiic .ire �i21ltficl�'rl, jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that the person(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument p y 0 -a }} " ',fired before me and has acknowledged the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid this /'`` `dv t1', 20 13 . r �G tt'C }- ,. My Commission Expires: N Lary Public COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665 -5651 Fax: 540/ 665 -6395 Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Director MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director �/� SUBJECT: Request for Scheduling a Work Session DATE: November 1, 2013 Staff requests the scheduling of a work session with the Board of Supervisors to discuss drafts of the Urban Center Concept plan and the Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) ordinance. The Planning Commission will be invited to participate in the work session. Staff would suggest the following dates for this work session: Thursday, November 21, 2013 at 12:00 PM (lunch provided) Friday, November 22, 2013 at 12:00 PM (lunch provided) Tuesday, December 3, 2013 at 12:00 PM (lunch provided) Thursday, December 5, 2013 at 12:00 PM (lunch provided) Friday, December 6, 2013 at 12:00 PM (lunch provided) Monday, December 16, 2013 at 12:00 PM (lunch provided) Tuesday, December 17, 2013 at 12:00 PM (lunch provided) Wednesday, December 11, 2013 at 5:00 PM (prior to Board meeting, dinner provided) Please let staff know which date would best work with your schedule. Thank you. ERL /pd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 Memorandum To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator's 'y— Date: November 1, 2013 RE: Kendall Mills Subdivision — Phase 2 The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested: Riley Mill Lane, State Route Number 1665 0.14 miles Riley Mill Lane, State Route Number 1665 0.37 miles Hazel Mill Lane, State Route Number 1447 0.18 miles Riley Mill Lane, State Route Number 1665 0.15 miles Larrick Lane, State Route Number 1666 0.10 miles Staff is available to answer any questions. MRC /dlw 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 In the County of Frederick ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- By resolution of the governing body adopted November 13, 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 Kendall Mills, Phase 2 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 ♦ Riley Mill Lane, State Route Number 1665 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Quincey Mill Court To: 0.14 mile west of Quincey Mill Court, a distance of: 0.14 miles. Recordation Reference: N/A Right of Way width (feet) = 50' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Riley Mill Lane, State Route Number 1665 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Pershing Mill Lane To: 0.37 mile west of Pershing Mill Lane, a distance of: 0.37 miles. Recordation Reference: N/A Right of Way width (feet) = 50' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Hazel Mill Lane, State Route Number 1447 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1446, Wayside Mill Lane To: 0.18 mile north of Route 1446, Wayside Mill Lane, a distance of: 0.18 miles. Recordation Reference: N/A Right of Way width (feet) = 50' VDOT Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: November 13, 2013 Page 1 of 2 Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Riley Mill Lane, State Route Number 1665 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1447, Hazel Mill Lane To: 0.15 mile west of Route 1447, Hazel Mill Lane, a distance of: 0.15 miles. Recordation Reference: N/A Right of Way width (feet) = 50' Street Name and/or Route Number ♦ Larrick Lane, State Route Number 1666 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1665, Riley Mill Lane To: Route 842, North Bucktown Road, a distance of: 0.10 miles. Recordation Reference: N/A Right of Way width (feet) = 50' VDOT Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on the 13th day of November, 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. 428 -13 John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 Memorandum To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator ,11f/ Date: November 1, 2013 RE: Rutherford Crossing — Milton Ray- Drive The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested.: Milton Ray Drive, State Route Number 1622 0.16 miles Staff is available to answer any questions. MRC /dlw 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 In the County of Frederick ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- By resolution of the governing body adopted November 13, 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 Rutherford Crossing - Milton Ray 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 ♦ Milton Ray Drive, State Route Number 1622 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Route 1621, Market Street To: 0.16 mile north of Route 1621, Market Street, a distance of: 0.16 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. 080005730, Page 0293 Right of Way width (feet) = 60' VDOT Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: November 13, 2013 Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on the 13th day of November, 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. 429 -13 John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 Memorandum To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator �1I- -- Date: November 13, 2013 RE: Southern Hills Stickley Drive Extension The following facilities of the Secondary System of State Highways are hereby ordered abandoned, pursuant to the statutory authority cited: Town Run Lane, State Route Number 1012 0.03 miles The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested: Town Run Lane, State Route Number 1012 0.02 miles Town Run Lane, State Route Number 1012 0.03 miles Stickley Drive, State Route Number 1085 0.18 miles Staff is available to answer any questions. MRCi'dlw 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 ---------------- - - - - -- - In the County of Frederick By resolution of the governing body adopted June 12, 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 of state highways. A Copy Testee Signed (County Official): Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision Southern Hills Stickley Drive Extension Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Abandonment The following facilities of the Secondary System of State Highways are hereby ordered abandoned, pursuant to the statutory authority cited: Reason for Change: Non - Project - Section 33.1 -151 Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.1 -151 Street Name and /or Route Number Town Run Lane, State Route Number 1012 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: 0.25 mile south of Route 277 To: 0.28 mile south of Route 277, a distance of: 0.03 miles. VDOT Fond AM -43 (4 %202007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: June 12, 2013 Page 1 of Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project /Subdivision Southern Hills Stickley Drive Extension 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 ♦ Town Run Lane, State Route Number 1012 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: New Intersection with Route 1085, Stickley Drive To: Southern portion of Route 1012, Town Run Lane, a distance of: 0.02 miles. Recordation Reference: DB 746,593,010017348,030022762 Right of Way width (feet) = 60' Street Name and /or Route Number ♦ Town Run Lane, State Route Number 1012 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: 0.25 mile south of Route 277 To: New Intersection with Route 1085, Stickley Drive, a distance of: 0.03 miles. Recordation Reference: DB 746,593,010017348,030022762 Right of Way width (feet) = 60' Street Name and /or Route Number Stickley Drive, State Route Number 1085 Old Route Number: 0 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - • From: Southern End of Existing Route 1085, Stickley Drive To: Intersection of Route 1012, Town Run Lane, a distance of: 0.18 miles. Recordation Reference: DB 746,593,010017348,030022762 Right of Way width (feet) = 60' VDOT Form AM -4.:> (420 /2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Project Adjustments Involving Additions, Discontinuances and /or Abandonments The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on the 13th day of November, 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 06/12/13 depicting the additions, discontinuances and abandonments required in the Secondary System of State Highways as a result of Project Southern Hills Stickley Drive 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 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. #30 -13 Frederick County Administrator