Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay_14_2014_Agenda_PacketCO w AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2014 7:00 P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 6:00 P.M. — Service Learning Presentations — James Wood High School 7:00 P.M. — Regular Meeting - Call To Order Invocation Pledge of Allegiance Adoption of Agenda Pursuant to established procedures, the Board should adopt the Agenda for the meeting. Consent Agenda (Tentative Agenda Items for Consent are Tabs: C and F) Citizen Comments (Agenda Items Only, That Are Not Subject to Public Hearing.) Board of Supervisors Comments Minutes (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- A 1. Regular Meeting of April 23, 2014. 2. Work Session with Social Services, April 29, 2014. County Officials 1. Committee Appointments. (See Attached) ------------------------------------- - - - - -- B AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2014 PAGE 2 2. Resolution Recognizing H P Hood, Inc.'s Selection as 2013 Dairy Processor of the Year. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------ - - - - -- C 3. Status and any Further Action as to Item 11 of the Finance Committee Report for the May 22, 2013 Board of Supervisors Meeting Regarding an Amendment to the Term Sheet /Special Assessment Roll Approved by the Russell 150 Community Development Authority. (See Attached) - - -- D Committee Reports 1. Public Works Committee. (See Attached) -- -- E 2. Public Safety Communications Committee. (See Attached) -------------- - - - - -- F 3. Transportation Committee. (See Attached) -- Public Hearing G Outdoor Festival Permit Request of Sarah Fromme for TEENS, Inc. — "Boots and Bluegrass Festival ". Pursuant to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 86, Festivals; Section 86 -3, Permit Required; Application; Issuance or Denial; Fee, for an Outdoor Festival Permit. Festival to be Held Friday, June 20, 2014, from 6:00 P.M.to 9:30 P.M. on the Grounds of Always Green, 2122 North Frederick Pike, Winchester, Virginia. Property Owned by Gas City, 17768 James Marlboro Highway, Leesburg, Virginia. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- H 2. Proposed Ordinance - Salaries of the Board of Supervisors — Pursuant to Section 15.2- 1414.3 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, the Board of Supervisors will Hold a Public Hearing to Fix the Annual Salaries of the Board of Supervisors as Follows: Chairman, $10,800; Vice Chairman, $10,200; and Each Other Member of the Board of Supervisors at $9,000. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- Planning Commission Business Public Hearing 1. Draft Update of the 2014 -2015 Frederick County Primary and Interstate Road Improvement Plans - The Primary and Interstate Road Improvemeni Plans Establish Priorities for Improvements to the Primary and Interstate AGENDA REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2014 PAGE 3 Road Networks within Frederick County. Comments from the Transportation Committee will be Forwarded to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Ultimately, the Priorities Adopted by the Board of Supervisors will be Forwarded to the Commonwealth Transportation Board for Consideration. The Virginia Department of Transportation and the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia, in Accordance with Section 33.1 -70.01 of the Code of Virginia, will Conduct a Joint Public Hearing. The Purpose of this Public Hearing is to Receive Public Comment on the Proposed Secondary Road Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2015 Through 2020 in Frederick County and on the Secondary System Construction Budget for Fiscal Year 2015. Copies of the Proposed Plan and Budget May be Reviewed at the Edinburg Office of the Virginia Department of Transportation, Located At 14031 Old Valley Pike, Edinburg, Virginia or at the Frederick County Offices Located at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. All Projects in the Secondary Road Improvement Plan that are Eligible for Federal Funds will be Included in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which Documents How Virginia will Obligate Federal Transportation Funds. Persons Requiring Special Assistance to Attend and Participate in this Hearing Should Contact the Virginia Department of Transportation at 1- 800 - 367 -7623. (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- J Other Planning Items Conditional Use Permit #02 -14 for Jessica M. Neff for a Kennel. This Property is Located at 461 Laurel Grove Road, and is Identified with Property Identification Number 73 -9 -3 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. (Vote Postponed from April 23, 2014 Board Meeting.) (See Attached) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- K Board Liaison Reports (If Any) Citizen Comments Board of Supervisors Comments Adjourn to attend Frederick County public Schools' Government Service Learning Presentation of Student Projects The Corn tunity Forum at Frederick County Administration Building Board of Supervisors Meeting Room 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, VA Wednesday, May 14, 2014 6 :00- -7:00 p.m. James Wood High School Thursda May 22, 2014 6:00 -8:00 p.m. Millbrook and Sherando High School Frederick County rmao- so-so- r atxCelEeN eGY[39cm y1N:2kFf Never doubt that a small group of thoughtfid, Committer! Citizens Can change the word. Margaret Mean }^-�. FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' MINUTES REGULAR MEETING April 23, 2014 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on Wednesday, April 23, 2014 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 Lofton delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice- Chairman DeHaven led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA — APPROVED AS AMENDED County Administrator John R. Riley, Jr. advised he had one addition for the agenda. He added a Proclamation Honoring the Centennial of the Smith -Lever Act Establishing Cooperative Extension as item number four (4) under County Officials. Upon a motion by Supervisor Wells, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the amended 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 1 Administrator Riley offered the following items for the Board's consideration under the consent agenda: - Memorandum Re: Request to Set Schedule for Board Meetings During Summer Months and for November and December, 2014; - Parks and Recreation Commission Report; - Human Resources Committee Report; and - Proclamation Honoring the Centennial of the Smith -Level Act Establishing Cooperative Extension Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, 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 Lofton, seconded by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board approved the minutes from the April 9, 2014 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 2 EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board approved Debborah A. Hamilton as Employee of the Month for April 2014. 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, the Board of Supervisors selects one employee from those nominated based on the merits of outstanding performance and productivity, positive job attitude and other noteworthy contributions to their department and to the County; and WHEREAS, Debborah A. Hamilton who serves the Northwestern Regional Adult Detention Center was nominated for Employee of the Month; and WHEREAS, Debborah A. Hamilton, an Officer that can effectively work any post assignment in a productive and exceptional manner is being awarded Employee of the Month for April. Officer Hamilton displays great teamwork and loyalty to the facility when and wherever she is needed. Her selfless performance during challenging times not only aides in the team's ability to operate in a smooth, safe, and secure manner, but also attests to her professionalism and personal integrity; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors this 23 day of April, 2014, that Debborah A. Hamilton is hereby recognized as the Frederick County Employee of the Month for April 2014; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors extends gratitude to Debborah A. Hamilton for her outstanding performance and dedicated service and wishes her continued success in future endeavors; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Debborah A. Hamilton is hereby entitled to all of the rights and privileges associated with this award. 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 3 Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS APPOINTMENT OF GEORGE MICHAEL CUNDIFF TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY SANITATION AUTHORITY TO FILL THE UNEXPIRED TERM OF RICHARD A. RUCKMAN - APPROVED Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board appointed George Michael Cundiff to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority to Fill the unexpired term of Richard A. Ruckman. Term expires April 15, 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 APPOINTMENT OF CORDELL WATT TO THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board appointed Cordell Watt to the Frederick County Agricultural District Advisory Committee. 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 MEMORANDUM RE: REQUEST TO SET SCHEDULE FOR BOARD MEETINGS DURING SUMMER MONTHS AND FOR NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER 2014 — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The Board of Supervisors canceled the following meetings during the summer months and November and December: June 11, 2014; July 23, 2014; August 27, 2014; September 24, 2014; October 22, 2014; November 26, 2014; and December 24, 2014. The above item was approved under the consent agenda. PROCLAMATION HONORING THE CENTENNIAL OF THE SMITH -LEVER ACT ESTABLISHING COOPERATIVE EXTENSION — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA WHEREAS, The Smith -Lever Act of 1914 established the Cooperative Extension Service, a state - by -state national network of extension educators who extend the university -based research and knowledge to the people in the counties; and WHEREAS, the Cooperative Extension System is a nationwide educational network that is a collaboration of federal, state and local governments and Virginia Tech and Virginia State University , the state's land -grant universities; and WHEREAS, the mission of the Cooperative Extension System is to disseminate research -based information on topics as varied as nutrition and health, youth development, agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry, small business and personal finance. Every U.S. state and territory has a central state Extension office at its land-grant universities and county offices staffed by professionals; and WHEREAS, Cooperative Extension of Frederick County, serves its residents through faculty and staff providing educational programs and research to meet the needs of the county; and WHEREAS, for 100 years, the Smith -Lever Act has stimulated innovative research and vital educational programs for youth and adults through progressive information delivery systems that improved lives and shaped a nation; and WHEREAS, Cooperative Extension educational programs in the areas of Family and Consumer Sciences, Agriculture and Natural Resources, 4 -H Youth Development, and Community Viability have benefitted our agricultural producers, businesses, families and youth in Frederick County; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK as follows; That this Board, on behalf of the citizens of Frederick County recognizes the 100th Anniversary of the Smith -Lever Act that established Cooperative Extension. We honor and thank all the faculty and staff, past, present and future, of Virginia Cooperative Extension of Frederick County who serve residents of all ages and backgrounds and that all residents continue to grow in awareness and support, and reap the benefits of the programs and services provided by Virginia Cooperative Extension of Frederick County. 5 GIVEN under my hand this 23rd day of April, 2014. COMMITTEE REPORTS PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The Parks and Recreation Commission met on April S, 2014. Members present were: Greg Brondos, Jr., Randy Carter, Gary Longerbeam, Ronald Madagan, and Charles Sandy, Jr. Members absent were: Kevin Anderson, Patrick Anderson, Christopher Collins, and Marty Cybulski. Items Requiring Board of Supervisors Action: None Submitted for Board Information Only: 1. Building and Grounds Committee — Proffer Recommendation — The Buildings and Grounds Committee recommended the use of $15,000 from the Parks and Recreation proffer account for engineering services to develop access to the undeveloped area of Sherando Park along Warrior Drive, second by Mr. Carter, carried unanimously (5 -0). This recommendation will be forwarded to the Finance Committee prior to requiring Board of Supervisors action. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The HR Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Friday, April 4, 2014, at 5:00 a.m. Committee members present were: Supervisors Robert Hess, Supervisor Chris Collins, citizen member Dorrie Greene, and citizen member Beth Lewin. Supervisor Robert Wells was absent. Also present were: Assistant County Administrator Kris Tierney, IT Director Walter Banks, and DSS Representative Delsie Butts. ** *Items Requiring Action * ** 1. Approval of the Employee of the Month Award. The Committee recommends approval of Correctional Officer Deborah Hamilton as the Employee of the Month for April 2014. * * *Items Not Requiring Action*** 1. Presentation by the Director of Information Technology, Walter Banks. At the request of the Committee, Mr. Banks presented an overview of the objectives and responsibilities of the IT Department. The presentation also provided the Committee an understanding of his department's role, authority, projects, and topics of importance within his department. Presentation attached. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Due to the Apple Blossom Holiday, the next HR Committee meeting is scheduled for Friday, May 9, 2014. BUSYNESS FRIENDLY COMMITTEE — INFORMATION ONLY Staff is providing the Board of Supervisors with an update on the status of the recommendations derived from the Business Friendly Committee. Some of these recommendations remain a work in progress, while others are ready for Board action. REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCESS The Board referred the re- evaluation of the current Master Development Plan process to the Planning Commission and the Development Review and Regulations Committee. The DRRC reviewed the requirements and did not believe the MDP requirement should be eliminated. It was felt this was an important process for both the applicant and the public. The DRRC recommended that the MDP ordinance be modified to allow for a waiver of the MDP requirement if an applicant chooses to process a detailed site plan in lieu of the MDP. The Planning Commission considered this item at their April 2, 2014 meeting and concurred with the DRRC's recommendation. This will be an agenda item for the Board's April 23, 2014 meeting. Planning staff is seeking direction from the Board regarding whether to send this proposed amendment forward for public hearing. ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY At the January 8, 2014 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, the Board approved an ordinance changing the name of the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Frederick, Virginia to the Economic Development Authority of the County of Frederick, Virginia. In addition, the Board sought special legislation to all the Board to appoint a member of the Board of Supervisors as a voting member of the EDA. This legislation has been approved by the General Assembly and signed by the Governor. This new legislation will be effective July 1, 2014. The Board voted on the proposed make up of the newly named EDA board which would consist of three members each from the existing Economic Development Commission and Economic Development Authority and one member of the Board of Supervisors. Since that time, the EDA members have held discussions and unanimously agreed the Board of Supervisors needed the flexibility to consider all available and interested talent within Frederick County when appointing the new members to the Economic Development Authority and should not be restricted to three members from each of the current Economic Development Commission and Economic Development Authority. Based on the EDA members' position, the Board should give serious consideration to opening up the pool for EDA membership. As you might recall, the 7 Board reappointed Mrs. Beverley B. Shoemaker to the EDA until July 1, 2014. The Executive Director of the Economic Development Commission will attend the next EDA meeting to brief the Authority on the upcoming transition to include staffing, working group functionality, and funding after July 1, 2014. 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. The Development Impact Mode Oversight Committee recommended approval of a policy modification to enable credit for transportation. The Board affirmed the change to the Development Impact Model to allow transportation credits for rezonings. The Development Impact Model Oversight Committee continued to re- evaluate the model to see if further modifications would be appropriate. Those additional areas of study include: - Tax contributions that may result from new residential development. - Tax contributions that may result from new commercial development associated with a residential development proposal. In addition, the Committee reviewed the model to see if there were any components that prohibited growth. The Committee recommended no further changes to the Development Impact Model. SIMPLIFICATION OF THE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE The Board referred the reevaluation of the current Buffers and Landscaping Ordinance to the PIanning Commission and the Development Review and Regulations Committee. The DRRC reviewed the suggested changes from the Business Friendly Committee. The DRRC recognized that the buffer and landscaping sections were recently reviewed and felt the existing ordinance was appropriate. The DRRC recommended that the parking lot landscaping requirements be incorporated into the main landscaping session. The Planning Commission considered this item at their April 2, 2014 meeting. After some discussion and hearing comments from members of the public, the Commission referred this item back to the DRRC for further review and consideration. SIGNAGE ALONG MANOR ROUTES ENTERING FREDERICK COUNTY The Board referred this recommendation to the Transportation Committee and the Economic Development Commission for review of signage placement and messaging, respectively. The EDC shared their preliminary recommendations with the Economic Development Authority since the EDA will ultimately fund this initiative. The EDA discussed this item at their February 20, 2014 and March 20, 2014 meetings. A signage subcommittee was established to select a design and craft the messaging. The subcommittee continues to work with the EDC Executive Director and the Executive Director of the Winchester - Frederick County Convention and Visitors' Bureau regarding messaging and branding. At the EDA's March 20, 2014 meeting, the EDA referred this item to the Transportation Committee for input regarding placement and how best to work with VDOT on this initiative. Once the EDA has finalized their recommendation it will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for endorsement. PUBLIC HEARING OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT REQUEST OF MR. ALAYA WHITE AND MR. OMAR TEAGLE — P.M. DAY GLOW WILLOW GROVE FESTIVAL, PURSUANT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 86 -3 PERMIT RE UIRED• APPLICATION; ISSUANCE OR DENIAL FOR AN OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT. FESTIVAL TO BE HELD ON SATURDAY MAY 3 2014 FROM 7:00 P.M. TO 11:00 P.M.; ON THE GROUNDS OF WILLOW GROVE 750 MERRIMANS LANE WINCHESTER VIRGINIA. PROPERTY OWNED BY ALAYA WHITE. (WITHDRAWN OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT REQUEST OF MR DEMARCHI SPEARS — COLLEGE SPRING FORMAL DANCEICHRISTENDOM COLLEGE, PURSUANT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 86 FESTIVALS; SECTION 86 -3, PERMIT REQUIRED; APPLICATION; ISSUANCE OR DENIAL; FEE, FOR AN OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT. FESTIVAL TO BE HELD ON SATURDAY,-MAY 3, 2014 FROM 8:00 P.M. TO 1 :00 A.M.• ON THE GROUNDS OF TRUMPET VINE FARM 266 VAUCLUSE ROAD STEPHENS CITY VIRGINIA. PROPERTY OWNED BY DEMARCHI SPEARS. - APPROVED Administrator Riley advised this was a request for an outdoor festival permit by DeMarchi Spears for the College Spring Formal /Christendom College. The event will take place on Saturday, May 3, 2014 from 8:00 P.M. to 1 :00 A.M. on the grounds of Trumpet Vine Farm, 266 Vaucluse Road, Stephens City. 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 request of DeMarchi Spears. 0 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 PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 402 -14 FOR JrESSICA M. NEFF FOR A KENNEL. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 461 LAUREL GROVE ROAD AND IS IDENTIFIED WITH PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 73 -9 -3 IN THE BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. — POSTPONED UNTIL THE MAY 14, 2014 MEETING Zoning Administrator Mark Cheran appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this was a request for a conditional use permit for a kennel — dog boarding. The property is located at 761 Laurel Grove Rd in the Back Creek Magisterial District. The property is zoned RA (Rural Areas) District and kennels are permitted in the zoning district with an approved conditional use permit. The proposed kennel will be a covered structure measuring 20 feet by 30 feet with an exercise yard. Zoning Administrator Cheran advised the Planning Commission recommended approval of this conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs shall be permitted on the property at any given time. 3. This CUP is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. 4. No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed. 5. All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. 10 6. All dogs must be confined indoors by 9 :00 p.m, and not let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. 7. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. 8. Any expansion or modification of this use will require the approval of a new CUP. Zoning Administrator Cheran concluded by saying staff would be glad to answer any questions from the Board and the applicant was also present to answer any questions. Supervisor Hess asked if the number of dogs was suggested by the applicant or arrived at through discussions with the applicant and staff. Zoning Administrator Cheran responded the number was arrived at through discussions with the applicant. Supervisor Fisher asked if the Board had any way of evaluating the construction specifications. Zoning Administrator Cheran responded the Board could add that as a condition; however, the applicant would need to get an engineer to sign and seal the plans and it would have to go through the permitting process, Jessica Neff, applicant, addressed the Board regarding construction of the proposed building. She noted the wails would be constructed of 2'x6' studs and additional insulation. The floor would consist of two feet of concrete. The walls would be covered with 518 inch sheet rock. There would a wrap placed between the siding and the wall. Additional insulation would be blown into the attic area and doors would be used to damp the noise, She noted that not all of the dogs would be out at the same time during the day and they would not be outside unsupervised. She went on to say she had contracted with a waste disposal company to collect the dog waste. She concluded by saying pick up and drop off of dogs would be by appointment only. 11 Supervisor Hess asked the applicant how long they had owned the property. Ms. Neff responded 10 years. Supervisor Hess asked if the applicant had spoken to her neighbors about this proposal, Ms. Neff responded she had after she filed the application. Supervisor Hess asked how many dogs would be needed to make this business successful. Ms. Neff responded she would need at least 10 dogs. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Eds Coleman, attorney for Mr. & Mrs, Berman, adjacent property owners, appeared before the Board on behalf of his clients. He noted the proposed conditional use permit was not an appropriate use on that property. He stated the area was more residential than rural. He went onto say his clients would like to see additional conditions placed on this application, to include: - Requiring the applicant to secure a contract regarding waste handling; - Reduction in the number of allowed dogs; - Time limit on how long dogs can stay at the kennel; - One person must be present on site at all times; - Limit the number of dogs allowed outside to one at a time; and - The conditional use permit should not be transferrable, but limited to this applicant. Mr. Coleman distributed the following memorandum to the Board of Supervisors: "To: mcherangco. frederick va, us; rhe,Ysgfcva, us; rshickle(? cva. us; cdehaven a@fcva. us; g isher@fcva. us rwells feva. us glof on a@fcva. us°; ccollins cva. us Subject: BOS 4123114 Public Hearing on CUP 02 -14 -- Opposition of Scott and Bethanne Berman to Conditional Use Permit #02 -14 ( "CUP ") /Jessica M. Neff To: Members of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors (`BOS) and the Frederick County Planning Staff From: Scott and Bethanne Berman Our home is located at 247 Laurel Grove Road, TM # 7383 as shown on the attached 12 Planning Department Map created March 11, 2014. We have resided in our home for 15 years. Based on the scale of the attached Map, our home is approximately 1, 890 feet from the proposed site of Jessica Neff's Kennel. The proposed Kennel site and our home are both located on a ridge of essentially equivalent elevation, meaning that noise from the proposed Kennel will readily travel to our home. Consistent with comments presented at the April 2 Planning Commission Hearing, we oppose the approval of a CUPfor the Kennel based on the following concerns: 1. The Kennel, clearly a commercial use increasing vehicle traffic on Laurel Grove Road, will be a use inconsistent with the residential nature of the neighborhood. 2. The presence of the Kennel will reduce the value of'our property and of our neighbors' properties. 3. The Kennel, as presently planned consistent with the Planning Commission's "Conditions, " will constitute a nuisance to the neighborhood. We respectfully submit that no CUP, regardless of the "Conditions" imposed, should be granted for the establishment of the Kennel. If, however, a CUP is to be granted, then, as set forth on Page 3 of the Staff Report to the BOS, the Zoning Ordinance requires that this proposed Kennel be subject to "performance standards" to assure the mitigation of the negative impacts which will result to us and our neighbors. Further, Page 6 of the Staff Report suggests that the Commissioner of Revenue apparently has "no issues " concerning devaluation of properties located near kennels with approved CUPS. This establishes that protection against devaluation of our and our neighbors' properties is dependent upon this Board adopting specific, enforceable Conditions to mitigate the damaging effects of the proposed Kennel. We understand that the Planning Commission has recommended only the following eight (8) Conditions, which we respectfully suggest must be substantially strengthened and made more specific: All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. We believe the only significant agency comment to be the Health Department's statement that "Applicant may not dispose of canine waste via the septic tank drainfield on site. "Page 6 of the Staff Report states merely that "The Applicant has contacted a company for the disposal of dog waste. " We understand that while there may not be established regulations for average waste produced per dog per day, nevertheless we understand there to be a "low" estimate of S gallons per day per dog and a "high" 13 estimate of 10 gallons per day per dog, which would produce a range of 140 -280 gallons per day of wastewater assuming the Kennel operates at the Planning Commission's maximum of twenty -eight (28) dogs We request that the Board, as a Condition of any CUP, require the Applicant to provide a written plan confirminz: a. projected wastewater usaze for the Kennel under maximum capaci b. LZroLected s stem Lor containing and storing both wastewater and solid waste; and c. the frequency of waste pumping /waste removal, with confirmation of a contract with a waste hauler. 2. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs shall be permitted on the property at any given time. Given the waste containment and disposal issues of Condition I above and the control and noise issues of Condition 5 below, we submit that the maximum number o do s not be permitted to exceed 20 at anE given time. 3. This CUP is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. The Applicant's Application notes the desire to operate the Kennel `for those going on vacation and need a temporary home for their dogs while away." Therefore, we request that this Condition be expanded to provide that no dons shall be maintained in the Kennel for a time period exceedinz 28 consecutive days. 4. No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed. In order to assure the performance of Conditions 5 and b below, we request that there be a Requirement that at least one person residing on the propertV shall remain on site at all times that anV do ,-s are housed in the Kennel. 5. All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. As we understand it, Section 48 -23 "Unreasonable noise unlawful" of the Frederick County Code provides merely that it shall be unlawful, after written notice by the Sheriff to the custodian of a dog for such custodian to allow such dog to make unreasonably loud noises as are 14 plainly audible to adjoining residents far property owners so as to unreasonably annoy or disturb such residents or property owners. Since Section 48 -23 requires prior written notice from the Sheriff, and since this Section contains no specific criteria assisting its enforcement, the Board must set specific Conditions on the proposed Kennel. Pages 3 and 6 of the Staff Report note that the proposed 20 x 30 square foot free - standing garage that is to serve as the Kennel will be constructed with wider than normal walls to provide noise insulation. However, while the Planning Commission noted concerns for noise abatement, Condition 5 provides no standards. Obviously, noise mitigation of dog barking (both inside and outside of the kennel structure) must be achieved, in order to make Condition 5 meaningful and enforceable. To assure performance, we suggest. a. specific noise- abatement construction standards, with the use of s eci ac sound absorbing materials must be imposed u on the proposed kennel garage structure, since the facility apparently will not consist of concrete walls or a standard wood type roof construction. The - type of construction should provide at least a nominal 50 -55 STC peLformance which equates to a nominal 45 -50 dBA noise reduction at the typical dog bark frequency range. Further, the buildinu requirements should address the "composite performance" provided by walls, roof, doors, windows and any ventilation o enin s as gyRicall windows and doors re resent the "weakest 12ath "to abatin noise. Noise emanation from the facility should be addressed bV reducing openings represented by windows, doors andlor ventilation systems. b. a specific sixeldimension should be imposed on the "exercise yard and a fencing Requirement of a minimum of six (6) feet in heizht, with all Lencinm to be maintained throughout the life of the CUP. c. general experience establishes that individual dogs under control of a person generally do not bark. Generally, one dog or a few dogs under the control of individuals during outdoor activities may not bark, and if barking occurs, the dogs could be brought indoors. Therefore, we serest a Limitation as to the number of does 15 that will be permitted to be outside o the kennel structure at any one time should be established along with a Requirement that the dos be su ervisedlcontrolled while outside. We suggest that no more than 5 supervised dogs be permitted to be outside at any one time, and that no more than Z unsupervised dogs be permitted to be outside at any one time. 6 All dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00p. m. and not let outdoors prior to 8: 00 a.m. Without strengthening Condition 5 as suggested above, this Condition literally permits the Applicant to maintain 100% of the dogs outdoors, everyday, during the 13 hour period of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The Board must impose specific Requirements to avoid the creation of a nuisance. 7, Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. No comment, other than the Zoning Ordinance defines a "Cottage Occupation" as "an occupation or profession customarily carried on in a dwelling unit or an accessory building which `...is clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling unit for residential purposes. "' The presence of twenty -eight (28) dogs (each generating a fee on a daily basis), 24 hours per day and 7 days per week, "stretches" the logical definition of a "Cottage Occupation," and makes the residential use of Ms. Neff s property (and the residential use of our and our neighbors' properties) incidental and secondary to the Kennel itself. 8. Any expansion or modification of this use will require the approval of a new CUP. In addition, we suggest that any CUP be restricted solely to the Applicant (Jessica M. Neff), and that the operation of the Kennel ender the CUP not be transferable to any other person or entity without the p rior approval of the Board as an amendment to the CUP Conditions. Page 3 of the Staff Report references a 400 foot distance as being required for a "no screen Category C Buffer. "Page 5 of the Staff Report notes comments of Planning Commissioners that the Kennel location is buffered by cornfields and large stands of trees. Given, however, that there is no guarantee of the continued existence of the cornfields or the trees, and given the siting of the Kennel on the ridge, we suggest that supplemental screenin through throujZh Applicant's planting _g o f reen trees , along the southeastern boundary of Ever, Applicant's property be required. EU Thank you for your consideration of our concerns, which we look forward to discussing further during the April 23 Public Hearing. Respectfully submitted, Scott and Bethanne Berman " Sheila Pinner, 408 Laurel Grove Road, spoke in opposition to this proposed kennel. She stated that one voice in protest should ensure that due diligence is done by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. She stated this was an RA area and she had lived there for 42 years. She went on to say the tone of the Planning Commission meeting left her feeling dejected and that her concerns were not important. She asked the Board to consider her concerns. She was concerned about the loss of property value due to this kennel. She hoped the Board would look at Clarke County's recent action. She asked if the applicant was converting an existing garage or building a new building. She objected to having 28 dogs on the property. She urged the Board to review the conditions while considering what was right for the neighborhood. Rusty Clark, the applicant's father, appeared before the Board in support of this application. He stated he had lived next to a kennel for 25 years and it did not affect his property value. He went on to say he believed the applicant went above and beyond what was needed. Bethanne Berman, 247 Laurel Grove Road, stated she and her husband moved to the area to enjoy the peace and quiet. She noted a lot of problems could be solved with a phone call. She went on to say only one family stands to benefit from this business. She concluded by saying she was concerned her family's quality of life would be changed with approval of this permit. Chris McKenna, Back Creek District, expressed concerns about this proposal to include a decline in home values, increased traffic, and there were no other businesses on this road. He suggested approval of this business may change the character of the area. Laura Kulp, 442 Laurel Grove Road in the Back Creek District, stated the Virginia Tech 17 research center was already located along her road, which guarantees there is already traffic along the road. As for dogs barking, she noted there were already several other barking dogs in the area. She concluded by saying dog barking was no louder than farm equipment. Ray Hayslett, 245 Laurel Grove Road in the Back Creek District, stated he had not heard where any engineering science had been applied to the acoustics of this proposed building. He asked what expert had vouched for the acoustics. He went on to say he was a small business owner in the county and had lived here for five years. He noted there was some traffic tied to the Virginia Tech research center, but he begged to differ about the amount. He concluded by asking the Board to consider the concerns raised. Christy McLaughlin, Treasurer of Shirley's Angels Boxer Rescue, stated Ms. Neff had been a loyal foster for her rescue agency and she would be very dedicated to keeping the property up. Carroll Anderson, representing Charlene Anderson, stated he was trying to rent his mother's house, but his family had concern about noise from the proposed kennel and its effect on their ability to rent this house. Scott Berman, 247 Laurel Grove Road, advised he had spoken with neighbors of an existing kennel and those individuals were concerned about their property values. He noted that barking dogs were a concern as well. There being no further public comments, Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Supervisor Lofton noted he had received materials last evening and having heard the neighbors he had more questions. He went on to say he did not want to unnecessarily withhold a decision, but he had questions that he needed to have answered. Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Wells, the Board postponed this item until the May 14, 2014 i_ ;, meeting. Supervisor Collins stated he was concerned with what happens in the rural areas. He recalled an applicant, a few years ago, who sought a conditional use permit for a car wash. The applicant's request was denied, so he opened a pig farm. There being no further discussion, the motion to postpone 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 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 165 ZONING ARTICLE VII — OVERLAY DISTRICTS PART 702 FP FLOODPLAIN DISTRICTS. REVISIONS TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TO BRING PART 702 — FLOODPLAIN DISTRICTS INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION DCR VIRGINIA MODEL FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE. - APPROVED Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised these were revisions to Part 702 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Floodplain districts to ensure the ordinance meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program and the Commonwealth of Virginia. The primary revisions were: - New text regarding designation and duties of the Floodplain Administrator; - New sections for jurisdictional boundary changes and submitting technical data; Relocation and revisions to the "Description of Special Flood Hazard Districts" sections; - Revised "Factors to be considered in granting variances "; - Revised "Elevation and Construction Standards "; and - New and revised definitions. She noted the proposed revisions were discussed by the Development Review and Regulations 19 Committee, Planning Commission, and Board of Supervisors and were sent forward for public hearing. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed revisions and staff is seeking Board action. Supervisor Fisher asked if the Floodplain Administrator was a new position. Senior Planner Perkins responded no those responsibilities belong to the Zoning Administrator. Supervisor Collins stated it was his understanding the draft ordinance was given to the County by the State and we were told this is what we need to pass. Senior Planner Perkins responded correct, but noted the ordinance was modified to fit Frederick County. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing There were no public comments, Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Collins, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the ordinance amending the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165 Zoning, Part 702 FP Floodplain Districts, Article VII Overlay Districts, Article I General Provisions, Amendments, and Conditional Use Permits, Part 101 General Provisions, §165- 101.02 Definitions & Word Usage. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development was directed by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) to prepare changes to Chapter 165 Zoning pertaining to the FIoodplain Districts, to meet the minimum regulatory standards required in a fully compliant floodplain ordinance. WHEREAS, the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) recommended this item be forwarded to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this proposed amendment on April 2, 2014; and 20 WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this proposed amendment on April 23, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that 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, PART 702 FP FLOODPLAIN DISTRICTS, ARTICLE VII — OVERLAY DISTRICTS; ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS; PART 101 GENERAL PROVISIONS § 165- 101.02 DEFINITIONS & WORD USAGE be amended to meet the minimum regulatory standards required in a fully compliant floodplain ordinance. ARTICLE VII OVERLAY DISTRICTS Part 702 - FP Floodplain Districts §165-702.01. PUF m&&r- Statutory Authorization and Purpose. This ordinance is adopted pursuant to the authority ranted to localities by Va. Code 15.22280. The purpose of these provisions are to prevent the loss of life and property, the creation of health and safety hazards, the disruption of commerce and governmental services, the extraordinary and unnecessary expenditure of public funds for flood protection and relief, and the impairment of the tax base by: A. Regulating uses, activities, and development which, alone or in combination with other existing or future uses, activities, and development, will cause unacceptable increases in flood heights, velocities, and frequencies; Restricting or prohibiting certain uses, activities, and development from locating within districts subject to flooding; C. Requiring all those uses, activities, and developments that do occur in flood -prone districts to be protected and /or flood- proofed against flooding and flood damage; and, D. Protecting individuals from buying land and structures which are unsuited for intended purposes because of flood hazards. § 165- 702.02. Applicability. These provisions shall apply to all lands within the jWiSdiGtigR Of FFedffie� GeuRty and identified as Privately and publicly owned lands within the 'urlsdiction of Frederick County and identi ied as areas of special flood hazard according to the flood insurance rate map FIRM) that is provided to Frederick County by FFMA. 21 § 165- 702.03. Compliance and Liability. A. No land shall hereafter be developed and no structure shall be located, relocated, constructed, reconstructed, enlarged, or structurally altered except in full compliance with the terms and provisions of this chapter and any other applicable regulations which apply to uses within the jurisdiction of this chapter. B. The degree of flood protection sought by the provisions of this chapter is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on acceptable engineering methods of study. Larger floods may occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man -made or natural causes, such as ice jams and bridge openings restricted by debris. This chapter does not imply that districts outside the floodplain district, or that land uses permitted within such district, will be free from flooding or flood damages. C. Records of actions associated with administering this chapter shall be kept on file and maintained by the Frederick County Zoning Administrator. D. This chapter shall not create liability on the part of Frederick County or any officer or employee thereof for any flood damages that result from reliance on this chapter or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder. § 165- 702.04. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. This chapter supersedes any ordinance currently in effect in flood -prone districts. However, any underlying ordinance shall remain in full force and effect to the extent that its provisions are more restrictive than this chapter. § 165- 702.05. 5everability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this chapter shall be declared invalid for any reason whatever, such decision shall not affect the remaining portions of this chapter. The remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect; and for this purpose, the provisions of this chapter are hereby declared to be severable. § 165- 702.06. Administration. A. Desi nation of the Floodplain Administrator. The Zoning Administrator is hereby app ointed to administer and implement these regulations and is referred to herein as the Floodplain Administrator. The Floodplain Administrator may (1) Do the work themselves. In the absence of a designated Floodplain Administrator, the duties are conducted by the Frederick County Planning Director. (2) Delegate duties and responsibilities set forth in these regulations to qualified technical personnel, plan examiners, inspectors, and other employees. (3 ) Enter into a written agreement or written contract with another locality or private sector 22 entity tD administers ed is revisions o these reg ulations. Administrotion o an art o q of these -regulations by another entity shall relieve the County of its responsibilities n„ p ursuant to the partiCi pation requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program as set Earth in the Code of Federal Regulations at 44 CF. R. Section 53.22. B. Duties and Responsibilities pf the Flood lain Administrator. The duties and responsibilities o the Flood lain Administrator shall include but are not limited to: 1 Review applications for permits to determine whether ro osed activities will be located in the Spec, ial Flood Hazard Area 2 Interpret floodplain boundaries and provide available base flood elevation and flood hazard information. 3 Review applications to determine whether prop activities will be reasonab! y sae from f looding and require new construction and substantial improvements to meet the requirements of these regulations. 4 Review applications to determine whether all necessary permits have been obtained from the Federal State or local ag encies from which prior or concurrent approval is required • in articular permits rom state ag encies for any construction reconstruction repair or alteration of a dam reservoir or waterway obstruction (including bridges culverts structuresh any alteration of a watercourse or any change of the course current or cross section of a stream or body of water including any thane to the 100-year frequenc loodplain of free flawing non-tidal waters of the State. 5 Verify that applicants an alteration of a watercourse have notif adjacent communities the Dep artment of Conservation and Recreation Division of Dam LaLety and Flood lain Management), and other a ro riate ag encies (VADEQ, US Army Corps o Engineers) and have submitted copies of such noti icatians to FEMA. S Advise applicants for new construction or substantial imp rovement of structures that are located within an area of the Coastal Barrier Resources Sy stem established by the Coastal Barrier Resources Act that Federal flood insurance is not available on such structures• areas subject to this limitation are shown on Flood Insurance Rate Maps as Coastal Barrier Resource System Areas CBRS or Otherwise Protected Areas (OPA). 7 App rove app lications and issue permits to develop in flood hazard areas 1 the rovisions o these regulations have been met or disapprove app lications if the provisions ot these regulations have not been met. 8 Inspect or cause to be inspected buildings, structures and other development for which p ermits have been issued to determine compliance with these regulations or to determine .non-complianc _.vioat � has occurred or have been committed. „ .,. L!Rl Review Elevation Certificates and require incomp or deficient certi icates to be corrected. 23 (10) Submit to FEMA, or require applicants to submit to FEMA, data and information necessary to maintain FIRMS, including hydrologic and hydraulic engineering analyses prepared by or for Frederick County, within six _months after such data and information becomes available if the analyses indicate changes in base flood elevations. (11) Maintain and permanently keep records that are necessary for the administration of these regulations, including: (a) Flood Insurance Studies, Flood Insurance Rate _Maps (including historic studies and maps and current effective studies and maps) and Letters of Map Change; and Lb) Documentation supporting issuance and denial of ermits Elevation Certificates documentation of the elevation (in relation to the datum on the FIRM) to which structures have been floodproofed, other required design certifications, variances, and records of en orcement actions taken to correct violations of these regulations. (12) Enforce the provisions of these regulations, investigate vialations, issue notices of violations or stop work orders and require permit holders to take corrective action. L131 Advise the Board of Zoniqq Appeals regarding the intent of these re ulations and for each application for a variance, prepare a staff report and recommendation. L141 Administer the requirements related to proposed work on existing buildings: (a) Make determinations as to whether buildings and structures that are located in special flood hazard areas and that are damaged by any cause have been substantially damaged. b Make reasonable efforts to noyyy owners of substantial! y damaged structures of the need to obtain a permit to repair, rehabilitate, or reconstruct, and prohibit the non- compliant repair of substantially damaged buildings exceptfor_temporary emergency p rotective measures necessary to secure a property or stabilize a building or structure to prevent additional damage. (15) Undertake, as determined appropriate by the Floodplain Administrator due to the circumstances, other actions which may include but are not limited to: issuing press releases, public service announcements, and other public information materials related to p ermit requests and re air of damn ed structures; coordinatin with other Federal State, and local agencies to assist with substantial damage determination, providing owners of damaged structures information related to the proper repair of damaged structures in special tlood hazard areas; and assisting property owners with documentation necessary to file claims for Increased Cost of Compliance coverage under NFIP flood insurance policies. (16) Notify the Federal Emergency Management Agency when the boundaries of Frederick County have been modified and: T a Provide a map that clear! y delineates the new car orate boundaries or the new area for which the authority to regulate pursuant to these regulations has either been assumed or relinquished through annexation; and b If the FIRM Lor any annexed area includes, ecial ood hazard areas that have flood zones that have regulatory requirements that are not set forth in these regulations, prepare amendments to these regulations to adopt the FIRM and appropriate 24 requirements, and submit the omendments to the governing body for odoption; such adoption sholl toke ploce at the same time as or prior to the dote of annexation and o copy of the amended regulations shall be provided to Department of Conservation and Recreation (Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management) and FEMA. (17) Upon the request of FEMA, complete and submit a report concerning participation in the NFIP which may request information regarding the number of building is in the SFHA number of permits issued for development in the SFHA, and number of variances issued for development in the SFHA. ^ (18) It is the duty of the Floodplain Administrator to take into account flood, mudslide and f lood-related erosion hazards to the extent that they ore known in all official actions relating to land management and use throughout the entire jurisdictional area of the County, whether or not those hazards have been specifically delineated geographically (e. g. via mapping or surveying). C. Use and Interpretation of FIRMS. The Floodplain Administrator shall make interpretations, where needed as to the exact location o s ecia! food hazard areas flood plain boundaries and floodway boundaries. The following shall apply to the use and interpretation of FIRMS and data: (1) Where field surveyed topography indicates that adjacent ground elevations: a Are below the base flood elevation even in areas not delineated as a special flood . hazard area on the FIRM, the area shall be considered as special flood hazard area and subject to the requirements of these regulations; b Are above the base f lood elevation the area shall be regulated asspecial fLood hazard area ,- ty so indicated on the FIRM unless the applicant obtains a Letter of Map Change that removes the area from the SFHA. 2 In FEMA- identr" reds ecia! Iood hazard areas where base fLood elevation and floodwa data have not been identified and in areas where FEMA has not identified SFHAs, any other flood hazard data available from a Federal, State, or other source shall be reviewed and reasonably used. (3) Base flood elevations and designated floodway boundaries on FIRMS and in Flood Insurance Studies shall take precedence over base flood elevations and floodway boundaries by any other sources il such sources show reduced floodway widths and or lower base flood elevations. U Other sources of data shall be reasonably used if such sources show increased base flood elevations and/or larger floodway areas than are shown on FIRMS and in Flood Insurance Studies. (5) If a Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map and /or a Preliminary Flood Insurance Study has been provided by FEMA: (a) Upon the issuance of o Letter of Final Determination by FEMA, the preliminary flood hazard data shall be used and shall replace the flood hazard data previously provided rom FEMA Lor the purposes of administering these regulations. 25 {bJ Prior to the issuance of a Letter of Final Determination by FEMA, the use of p reliminary flood hazard data shall be deemed the best available data pursuant to 165 - 702.06 and used where no base flood elevations and /or floodwa ry areas are provided on the effective FIRM. (3) Prior to issuance of a Letter of Final Determination by FEMA, the use ref „preliminary fl ood hazard data is permitted where the preliminary base flood elevations or , and /ordeslgnated floodway widths 0o way areas exceed the base loud elevations „ , „ in existing flood hazard data provided by FEMA. Such preliminary data may be subject to change and or o ea! to FEMA. 165 - 702.07. Jurisdictional BoundaryChanges. In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 44, Part 59, Subpart B, Section 59.22 (a) (9) v all NFIP p articip ating communities must notify the Federal Insurance Administration Emer enc , Coordinating Virginia Department of Management Agency and optionally the Stat Corinating O ..,.,,,o., Conservation and.._Recreatlan - Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management in writing whenever the boundaries o the Count have been modified b annexation or the e Count has „ t to op floodplain management otherwise assumed or no longer has author adt and enforce i „ , „ , . ,..,..,..,. reg ulations f or a partkular area. in order that all Flood Insurance Rate Maps accurately represent the County's boundaries, a copy of a map of the County suitable for reproduction, clear! y delineating the new corporate limits or new area or which the County has assumed or relinquished ood lain mans ement regulatory authority must be included with the notification. § 165- 702.08. Submitting Technical Data. p , ys T e Count . _ s asP oo elevations may Increase or decrease resulting from h es affecting _� ica! chang f looding conditions. As soon as p racticable , but not later than six months after the date such a!! ot fy he Federal Emergency Management Agency information becomes available, the County sh all ni t , .,, _ scientific data. Such a submission r of the changes by._submrtting technical ors, s necessary so that upon .... ,...,.,_ can irmation of those physical than es aff ecting oodin conditions risk premium rates and flood plain management requirements will be based upon current data. § 165 - 70218609. Description of Special Flood Hazard Districts. A. Basis of districts. The various flood hazard fin districts shall include aFeas subject -to inuRdat by waters of the one hundFed yeaF flood the Special Flood Hazard Areas. The basis for the delineation of these districts shall be the Flood insurance Study an d the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for Frederick County prepared by the federal Emergency Management Agency, 'nsuFance "dmin'StFati^^ dated September 2, 2009, as amended. The boundaries of the Special Flood Hazard Areas are established as shown on the FIRM which is declared to be a t on file at the Frederick Caunty Department of part o this article and which shall be kep D, lop Planning and . ey ment. .. ,.......e ...... . ....... -.� (1) The Floodway District is in an AE Zone delineated for purposes of this article using the criteria that certain areas within the floodplain must be capable of carrying the waters of the one percent annual chance flood ^ ^^ hu ndred f yeaF FE ^ ^d without 26 increasing the water surface elevation of that flood more than one (1) foot at any point. The areas included in this District are specifically defined in Table 2 of the above - referenced Flood Insurance Study and shown on the accompanying Fleedway Map OF Flood Insurance Rate Maps. (i)The following provisions shall apply within the Floodway District of an AF zone: a. Within any floodway area no encroachments including ill new construction, substantial improvements, or other development shall be permitted unless it has been demonstrated through_ hydrologic and hydraulic analysis Performed in accordance with standard engineering ractice that the proposed encroachment will not result in any increase in flood levels within the County during the occurrence of the base flood discharge. Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses shall be undertaken only by professional engineers or others of demonstrated qualifications, who shall certify that the technical methods used correctly reflect currently - accepted technical concepts. Studies, analyses, computations, etc. shall be submitted in sub icient detail to allow a thorough review by the Flood lain Administrator. Development activities which increase the water surface elevation of the base flood may be allowed,, provided that the applicant flirst applies - with Frederick County's endorsement -for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR). and receives the approval of the Federal Emeraencv Manaaement Agency. if 6165- 702.03 is satisfied, all new construction and substantial improvements shall comply with all a licable load hazard reduction Provisions of § 165 - 707.13 through 165- 707.17. b. The placement of manufactured homes [mobile homes] is prohibited. except in an existing manufactured home (mobile home) park or subdivision. A replacement manufactured home may be placed an a lot in an existing manufactured home nark or subdivision provided the anchorina. elevation. and encroachment standards are met. 7 The AF or AH Zones on the FIRM accompanying the FIS shall be those areas or which 27 one - percent annual chance flood elevations have been provided and the floodway has not been delineated. The following provisions shall apply within an AE or AH zone: Until a regulatory floodway is designated, no new construction,_ substantial improvements, or other development (including fill) shall be permitted within the areas of special flood hazard, designated as Zones AI -30 and AE or AH on the FIRM, unless it is demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the proposed development when combined with all other existing and anticipated development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than one foot at any point within Frederick County. Development activities in Zones AI -30 and AE or AH, on the Frederick County FIRM which increase the water surface elevation of the base flood by more than one foot may be allowed, provided that the applicant first applies -- with Frederick County's endorsement —for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision, and receives the approval of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 3 The A Zone on the FIRM accqMpanyiLng the FIS shall be those areas or which no detailed flood profiles or elevations are provided, but the one percent annual chance floodplain boundary has been approximated. For these areas, the following p rovisions shall gRely. The Approximated Floodplain District shall be that floodplain area for which no detailed flood profiles or elevations are provided, but where a one hundred (100) - year floodplain boundary has been approximated. Such areas are shown as Zone A on the maps accompanying the FIS. For these areas, the base flood elevations and floodway information from federal, state, and other acceptable sources shall be used, when available. Where the specific one percent annual chance flood elevation cannot be determined for this area using other sources of data, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Floodplain Information Reports, U. S. Geological Survey Flood -Prone uadran les etc. then the o pplicant for the proposed use development and or activity shall determine this base fLood elevation. For development pLegosed in the approximate floodplain the applicant must use technical methods that correctly reflect currently accepted non - detailed technical concepts, such as point on boundary, high water marks, or detailed methodologies hydro_loaic and hydraulic analyses. Studies, analyses, computations, etc., shall be submitted in sufficient detail to allow a thorough review by the Flood lain Administrator. The Floodplain Administrator reserves the right to require a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for any development. When such base fLood elevation data is utilized the lowest floor shall be elevated to or above the base flood level no lower than one (1) foot above the base flood elevation. During the permitting process, the Floodplain Administrator shall obtain: I) The elevation of the lowest floor including the basement of all new and substantially improved structures; and, mm 2) if the structure has been flood-proofed in accordance with the requirements of this article, the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) to which the structure has been flood fed. Base flood elevation data shall be obtained from other sources ordeveloped _ using detailed methodolog cam arable to those cantoined in a FIS f or subdivision proposals and other proposed development proposals {including manufactured home parks and subdivisions) that exceed flfty lots or five acres, whichever is the lesser.. (4) The AO Zone an the FIRM accompanying the FIS shall be those areas of shallow f looding identified as AO an the FIRM. For these areas the following Provisions shall apply a. All new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to or above the flood depth specified on the FIRM, above the highest adjacent grade at least as high as the depth number specified in feet on the FIRM. If no flood depth number is specified the lowest floor including basement shall be elevated no less than two feet above the highest adjacent grode. b. All new construction and substantial improvements of non- residential structures shall. 1) Have the lowest floor including basement elevated to or above the flood depth seeded on the FIRM, above the highest adjocent grade at least as high as the depth number specified in feet an the FIRM. if no flood depth number is specified the lowest loar, including basement shall be elevated at least two Leet above the hi hest ad "acent rode or 2) Together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities be completely flood- proofed to the specified flood level so that any space below that level is watertig with walls substantlaHV impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy. C. Adequate drainage paths around structures an slopes shall be provided to guide floodwaters around and away from _ proposed structures. B. Overlay concept. (1) The Floodplain Districts described above shall be overlays to the existing underlying districts as shown on the Official Zoning Ordinance Maps, and as such, the provisions for the floodplain districts shall serve as a supplement to the underlying district provisions. (2) Where there happens to be any conflict between the provisions or requirements of any of the Floodplain Districts and those of any underlying district, those pertaining to the floodplain districts shall apply. 29 (3) In the event that any provision concerning a floodplain district is declared inapplicable as a result of any legislative or administrative actions or judicial discretion, the basic underlying district provisions shall remain applicable. § 165 - 702.87 10. Flood Insurance Rate Map. The boundaries of the Special Flood Hazard Area and Floodplain Districts are established as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map, which are by reference made a part of this chapter and which shall be kept on file at the Frederick County offices. § 165 - 702.09-11. District boundary changes. The delineation of any of the floodplain districts may be revised by Frederick County where natural or man -made changes have occurred and /or more detailed studies conducted or undertaken by the United States Army Corps of Engineers or other qualified agency or individual documenting the necessity for such change. However, prior to any such change, approval must be obtained from the Federal '^°,,,�u aRGe nd.,,,,iniStFatieR Emergency Management Agency. § 165 - 702.09 -12. Interpretation of District Boundaries. Initial interpretations of the boundaries of the Floodplain Districts shall be made by the Zoning Administrator. Should a dispute arise concerning the boundaries of any of the Districts, the Board of Zoning Appeals shall make the necessary determination. The person questioning or contesting the location of the District boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to present his case to the Board and to submit his own technical evidence if he so desires. § 165 - 702.313. Permit and Application Requirements. A. Permit Requirement. All development and /or construction activities occurring within any floodplain district shall be undertaken only upon the issuance of a permit. Such development and /or construction activities shall be undertaken only in strict compliance with the provisions of this chapter and with all other applicable codes and regulations, as amended, such as the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code (VA USBC), the Frederick County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and the Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance. Prior to the issuance of any such permit, the Zoning Administrator shall require all applications to include compliance with all applicable state and federal laws. Under no circumstances shall any use, activity, development and /or construction activities adversely affect the capacity of the channels or floodways of any watercourse, drainage ditch, or any other drainage facility or system. 1. In circumstances where a permit is not required, all development and /or construction activities occurring within any floodplain district shall be undertaken only upon approval by the Zoning Administrator. 30 •. 30 ■ ■ ... a C. 8. Site Plans and Permit Applications. All applications for development within any floodplain district and all building permits issued for the floodplain shall incorporate the following information: 1. The elevation of the Base Flood at the site. z. The elevation of the lowest floor (including basement). 3. For structures to be flood - proofed (non- residential only), the elevation to which the structure will be flood - proofed. 4. The elevation of the one - hundred -year flood. 5. Topographic information showing existing and proposed ground elevations. § 165-7024-1-14. General Standards fGF all S W u„x-,,d Areas in all spec ( lead hazard afeas The following provisions shall apply to all permits: A. New construction and substantial improvements shall be according to the VA USBC, and anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of the structure. B. Manufactured homes shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement, Methods of anchoring may include, but are not limited to, use of over -the -top or frame ties to ground anchors. This standard shall be in addition to and consistent with applicable state requirements for resisting wind forces. C. New construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. D. New construction or substantial improvements shall be constructed by methods and practices that minimize flood damage. E. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air conditioning equipment and other service facilities, including duct work, shall be designed and /or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. F. New and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the system. G. New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters. K On -site waste disposal systems shall be located and constructed to avoid impairment to them or 31 contamination from them during flooding. In addition to provisions A - H above, in all special flood hazard areas, the additional provisions shall apply: 1 Any alteration, repair, reconstruction or improvements to a building that is not in compliance with the provisions of this chapter, shall be undertaken only if said non - conformity is not furthered, extended, or replaced subject to the substantial improvement provision in 165 - 702.19C. K. J. Prior to any proposed alteration or relocation of any channels or of any watercourse, stream, etc., within this jurisdiction, a permit shall be obtained from the U. S. Corps of Engineers, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission. Furthermore, notification of the proposal shall be given by the applicant to all affected adjacent jurisdictions, the Department of Conservation and Recreation (Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management) and the Federal IRsuFanee Administration Emergency Management Agency. L. The flood carrying capacity within an altered or relocated portion of any watercourse shall be maintained. § 165 - 702.42- 15.6pesi#ic Elevation and Construction Standards. In all special flood hazard areas where base flood elevations have been provided in the Flood Insurance Study or generated by a certified professional according to §165- 70243A 06 the following provisions shall apply: A. Residential Construction New construction or substantial improvement of any residential structure (including manufactured homes) shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated no lower than one (1) foot above the base flood elevation. B. Non - Residential Construction New construction or substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial, or non - residential building (or manufactured home) shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to no lower than one (1) foot above the base flood elevation. Buildings located in all A, and AE zones may be flood- proofed in lieu of being elevated provided that all areas of the building components below the elevation corresponding to the BFE plus one foot are water tight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water, and use structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and the effect of buoyancy. A registered professional engineer or architect shall certify that the standards of this subsection are satisfied. 32 this the "nevi ar, GE)nta the PF9ViS Of Ghaptef shall meet this rhapte FeqUiFeMeHtS of 1 Any alteration, repair, reconstruction or improvements to a building that is not in compliance with the provisions of this chapter, shall be undertaken only if said non - conformity is not furthered, extended, or replaced subject to the substantial improvement provision in 165 - 702.19C. K. J. Prior to any proposed alteration or relocation of any channels or of any watercourse, stream, etc., within this jurisdiction, a permit shall be obtained from the U. S. Corps of Engineers, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission. Furthermore, notification of the proposal shall be given by the applicant to all affected adjacent jurisdictions, the Department of Conservation and Recreation (Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management) and the Federal IRsuFanee Administration Emergency Management Agency. L. The flood carrying capacity within an altered or relocated portion of any watercourse shall be maintained. § 165 - 702.42- 15.6pesi#ic Elevation and Construction Standards. In all special flood hazard areas where base flood elevations have been provided in the Flood Insurance Study or generated by a certified professional according to §165- 70243A 06 the following provisions shall apply: A. Residential Construction New construction or substantial improvement of any residential structure (including manufactured homes) shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated no lower than one (1) foot above the base flood elevation. B. Non - Residential Construction New construction or substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial, or non - residential building (or manufactured home) shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to no lower than one (1) foot above the base flood elevation. Buildings located in all A, and AE zones may be flood- proofed in lieu of being elevated provided that all areas of the building components below the elevation corresponding to the BFE plus one foot are water tight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water, and use structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and the effect of buoyancy. A registered professional engineer or architect shall certify that the standards of this subsection are satisfied. 32 C E Bull n ^ Space Below the Lowest Floor Enclosed aFeas, of new G9R&%FuGti9R er substantia impFeyed structuFes, wh aFe below t In zones A, AE, AH, AO, and AI -A30, fully enclosed areas of new construction or substantial improved structures which are below the regulatory flood protection elevation shall: 1. Not be designed or used for human habitation, but shall only be used for parking of vehicles, building access, or limited storage of maintenance equipment used in connection with the premises. Access to the enclosed area shall be the minimum necessary to allow for parking of vehicles (garage door) or limited storage of maintenance equipment (standard exterior door), or entry to the living area (stairway or elevator). 2. Be constructed entirely of flood resistant materials below the regulatory flood protection elevation; 3. Include, in , measures to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters. To meet this requirement, the openings must either be certified by a professional engineer or architect or meet the following minimum design criteria: a. Provide a minimum of two openings on different sides of each enclosed area subject to flooding. b. The total net area of all openings must be at least one (1) square inch for each square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding. c. If a building has more than one enclosed area, each area must have openings to allow floodwaters to automatically enter and exit. d. The bottom of all required openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above the adjacent grade. e. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other opening coverings or devices, provided they permit the automatic flow of floodwaters in both directions. f. Foundation enclosures made of flexible skirting are not considered enclosures for regulatory purposes, and, therefore, do not require openings. Masonry or wood underpinning, regardless of structural status, is considered an enclosure and requires openings as outlined above. D. Standards for Manufactured Homes and Recreational Vehicles 1. All manufactured homes placed, or substantially improved, on individual lots or parcels, in expansions to existing manufactured home parks or subdivisions, in a new manufactured home park or subdivision or in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision on which a manufactured home has incurred substantial damage as the result of a flood, must meet 33 all the requirements for new construction, including the elevation and anchoring requirements in § 165- 702.14A through B, and § 165- 702.15A. 2. All manufactured homes placed or substantially improved in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision in which a manufactured home has not incurred substantial damage as the result of a flood shall elevated so that either a. The lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated no lower than one (1) foot above the base flood elevation; or b. The manufactured home chassis is supported by reinforced piers or other foundation elements of at least equivalent strength that are no less than 36 inches in height above grade c. And be securely anchored to the adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse and lateral movement. All recreational vehicles placed on sites must either: a. be on the site for fewer than 180 consecutive days; b. be fully licensed and ready for highway use (a recreational vehicle is ready for highway use if it is on its wheels or jacking system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices and has no permanently attached additions); or, c. Meet all the requirements for manufactured homes in § 165- 702.12D. development, A. ERGFOaehmeRts, iRG!wding fill, new substantial or other levels duFinn n rnnrn of the hare flood ■ 111W '74 i ■ Im ... ... 931 R � � G. The plac-ement of maRufarztured homes (mobile homes) j, except in an existing J � A the kedeFiek County Flood insuFanee Rate Map J ! 1 -- ---- the water SUFfaee elevatioR of the -h;;.-;P is May be allowed, PFOVided 1 unless it demenstFated that M l effect 0 1 when czerAbined with nerease the wateF surface elevation of thp ba a'! atheF flLqAd morp Development in Zones A AE, the kedeFiek County Flood insuFanee Rate Map J ! 1 -- ---- the water SUFfaee elevatioR of the -h;;.-;P is May be allowed, PFOVided 1 unless it demenstFated that the cufflulatiye effect 0 1 when czerAbined with nerease the wateF surface elevation of thp ba a'! atheF flLqAd morp e)45tift than one feet ?d developmeRt within wi Rot. FFederiel ' - _ "'1' at any point Development in Zones A AE, the kedeFiek County Flood insuFanee Rate Map activities and an whiGh -- ---- the water SUFfaee elevatioR of the -h;;.-;P f'AE)d by FnGFe than Ane feet May be allowed, PFOVided J I endorsement J / l M. ■ • / ■ l / • . MI Oil I MMEMI 35 eemputatweRs ., shall be submitted iR sufficient detail te allew a theFeugh review by the Fre de - Or C , Ceunty EngiReeF W ME 3) The elevation of the lowest floor (including the basement) of all new and substantially impFeved 7'C'IU4C+1'C7j ! 4) if the struGture has been flood preefed if4 aeeeFdanrze with the requiFements of this artiGle, the elevatlen to which the Wuctulre has been flood proofed. § 165- 702.16 . Standards for Subdivision Proposals. A. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; B. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage; C. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood hazards. D. In A Zones, Base flood elevation data shall be obtained from other sources or developed usin detailed methodolagies,_hydraulic and hydrologic analysis, comparable to those contained in a Flood Insurance Study or subdivision proposals and other p rapased develop p roposa ls ( including manufactured Name parks and subdivisions that exceed Lifty lots or f ive acres whichever is the lesser. § 165 - 702.17. Design criteria for utilities and facilities. A. New sanitary sewer facilities and private package sewage treatment plants (including all pumping stations and collector systems) are prohibited in the Special Flood Hazard Areas and Floodplain Districts. B. Replacement sanitary sewer facilities and private package sewer treatment plants (including all pumping stations and collector systems) shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems and discharges from the systems into the floodwaters. in addition, they should be located and constructed to minimize or eliminate flood damage and impairment. C. All new or replacement water facilities shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems and be located and constructed to minimize or eliminate flood damages. D. All storm drainage facilities shall be designed to convey the flow of surface waters without damage to persons or property. The systems shall ensure drainage away from building and on- site waste disposal sites. The Board of Supervisors may require a primarily underground system to accommodate frequent floods and a secondary surface system to accommodate larger, less 36 frequent floods. Drainage plans shall be consistent with local and regional drainage plans. The facilities shall be designed to prevent the discharge of excess runoff onto adjacent properties, E. All utilities, such as gaslines, electrical and telephone systems, being placed in flood -prone areas should be elevated (where possible) and constructed to minimize the change of impairment during a flooding occurrence. § 165 - 702.18. Factors to be considered in granting variances. A Variances shall be issued only upon M a showing of good and sufficient cause, (ii) after the Board of Zonina Appeals has determined that Lailure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant, and (iii) after the Board of Zoning Ap,aeals has determined that the grunting of such variance will not result in (a) unacceptable or prohibited increases in flood heig b additional threats to p ublic safety, c extraordinary public expense; and will not (d) create nuisances, (e) cause fraud or victimization of the public, or (fl conflict with local laws or ordinances. B. While the arantina of variances aeneraliv is limited to a lot size less than one -half acre deviations from that limitation mqX occur. However as the lot size increases beyond one-haI a„ variance „ increases. ° ,Variances may be acre, th tech nical !us ti ication recurred for issuing „ issued by the Board of Zoning Appeals for new construction and substantial improvements to be erected on a lot of one-half acre or less in size conti uous to and surrounded by lots with existing structures constructed b elow the base flood level rn„ conformance with the provisions ,,, , o f this section. C. Variances may be issued for new construction and substantial improvements and for other development necessary for the conduct of a functionally dependent use provided_ that the criteria of this section are met and the structure or other development is protected b du base that minimize f lood damages , during hoe and create no additional threats to public safety. D. In passing upon applications for variances, the Board of Zoning Appeals shall satisfy all relevant factors and procedures specified in other sections of this chapter and consider the following additional factors: (1) The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. No variance shall be granted for any proposed use, development or activity within any Floodway District that will cause any increase in the one- hundred- year flood elevation. (2) The danger that materials may be swept on to other lands or downstream to the injury of others. (3) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions. (4) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owners. (5) The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the County. (6) The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location. (7) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding forthe proposed use. (8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development 37 anticipated in the foreseeable future. (9) The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan and floodplain management program for the area. (10) The safety of access by ordinary and emergency vehicles to the property in time of flood. (11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and transport of the floodwaters expected at the site. (12) The repair or rehabilitation of historic structures upon a determination that the proposed repair or rehabilitation will not preclude the structure's continued designation as an historic structure and the variance is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of the structure. . (13) Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of this article. E. The Board of Zoning Appeals may refer any application and accompanying documentation pertaining to any request for a variance to the County Engineer for technical assistance in evaluating the proposed project in relation to flood heights and velocities, and the adequacy of the plans for flood protection and other related matters. F. Variances shall be issued only after the Board of Zoning Appeals has determined that the granting of such will not result in unacceptable or prohibited increases in flood heights, additional threats to public safety or extraordinary public expense; and will not create nuisances, cause fraud or victimization of the public or conflict with local laws or ordinances. G. Variances shall be issued only after the Board of Zoning Appeals has determined that the variance will be the minimum required to provide relief. H. The Board of Zoning Appeals shall notify the applicant for a variance, in writing, that the issuance of a variance to construct a structure below the one - hundred -year flood elevation increases the risks to life and property and will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance. A record shall be maintained of the above notification as well as all variance actions, including justification for the issuance of the variances. Any variances which are issued shall be noted in the annual or biennial report submitted to the Federal Insurance Administrator. § 165 - 702.19. Existing Structures in Floodplain Areas. A structure or use of a structure or premises which lawfully existed before the enactment of these provisions, but which is not in conformity with these provisions, may be continued subject to the following conditions: A. Existing structures in the Floodway Area shall not be expanded or enlarged unless it has been demonstrated through hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed in accordance with standard engineering practices that the proposed expansion would not result in any increase in the base flood elevation. B. Any modification, alteration, repair, reconstruction, or improvement of any kind to a structure and /or use located in any flood plain areas to an extent or amount of less than fifty (50) percent of its market value shall conform to the VA USBC. C. The modification, alteration, repair, reconstruction, or improvement of any kind to a structure and /or use, regardless of its location in a floodplain area to an extent or amount of fifty (50) percent or more of its market value shall be undertaken only in full compliance with this chapter and shall require the entire structure to conform to the VA USBC. § 165- 702.20. Penalties for Violations. A. Any person who fails to comply with any of the requirements or provisions of this article or directions of the Zoning Administrator or any authorized employee of Frederick County shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to the penalties outlined in §165- 101.08 of this Chapter. The VA USBC addresses building code violations and the associated p enalties in Section 104 and Section 115. B. In addition to the above penalties, all other actions are hereby reserved, including an action in equity for the proper enforcement of this article. The imposition of a fine or penalty for any violation of, or noncompliance with, this article shall not excuse the violation or noncompliance or permit it to continue; and all such persons shall be required to correct or remedy such violations or noncompliances within a reasonable time. Any structure constructed, reconstructed, enlarged, altered or relocated in noncompliance with this article may be declared by Frederick County to be a public nuisance and abated as such. Flood insurance may be withheld from structures constructed in violation of this article. ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Part 101— General Provisions §165- 101.02. Definitions and word usage. BASE FLOOD - The flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. BASE FLOOD ELEVATION (BFE) — The c.,,- ,,..,i c.,n. Fgeney Management AgeRey .designated „ „ h ed y ea ,uFface ...- t eF eleyatioA. The water surface elevations of the base flood, that is, the flood level that has a one p ercent or c greater chance of occurrence in any given year. The water su ace elevation of the base tLood in relation to the datum specified on the County's Fiood Insurance Rate Map. For the purposes of this ordinance, the base flood is the 1% annual chance flood. BASEMENT - Any area of the building having its floor sub -grade (below ground level) on all sides. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS - A Board whose members are appointed by the Circuit Court for the express purpose of considering and acting on variances and zoning appeals. DEVELOPMENT - Any man -made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials. W ELEVATED BUILDING - A non - basement building built to have the lowest floor elevated above the ground level by means of fill, solid foundation perimeter walls, pilings, or columns (posts and piers). ENCROACHMENT - With respect to a floodplain an encroachment shall be the advance or infringement of uses, plant growth, fill, excavation, buildings, permanent structures or development into a floodplain, which may impede or alter the flow capacity of a Floodplain. EXISTING CONSTRUCTION - structures for which the "start of construction" commenced before the effective date of the FIRM or before JanuarV 1 1975 for FIRMS effective before that date. "'ExIsting construction" ma also be referred to as "existing structures." EXISTING MANUFACTURED HOME PARK OR SUBDIVISION - A manufactured home park or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including, at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed before the effective date of the floodplain management regulations adopted by the County. EXPANSION TO AN EXISTING MANUFACTURED HOME PARK OR SUBDIVISION - The preparation of additional sites by the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufacturing homes are to be affixed (including the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads). FLOOD OR FLOODING 1. A general or temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from: a. the overflow of inland or tidal waters; or, b. the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source. c. mudflows which are proximately caused by flooding as defined in paragraph (1)(b) _ of this definition and are akin to a river of liquid and fLowing mud on the su aces of normafly dry land areas, as when earth is carried by a current of water and deposited along the path of the current. The collapse or subsistence of land along the shore of a lake or other body of water as a result of erosion or undermining caused by waves or currents of water exceeding anticipated cyclical levels or suddenly caused by an unusually high water level in a natural body of water, accompanied by a severe storm, or by an unanticipated force of nature such as flash flood or an abnormal tidal surge, or by some similarly unusual and unforeseeable event which results in flooding as defined in paragraph 1 (a) of this definition. and aFe akin te a F ef liqu and flow Fnud an the suFfaces ef neFmally dFy l and aFeas, as when FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM) —An official map of the County on which the Floodplain Administrator has delineated both the special hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the County. FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY (FIS) — An examination, evaluation and determination of flood hazards and, if sm appropriate, corresponding water surface elevations, or an examination, evaluation and determination of mudflow and /or flood- related erosion hazards. FLOODPLAIN OR FLOOD -PRONE AREA - Any land area susceptible to being inundated by water from any source. FLOODPROOFING — Any combination of structural and non - structural additions, changes, or adjustments to structures which reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or improved real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures and their contents. FLOODWAY - The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height. FREEBOARD - A factor of safety usually expressed in feet above a flood level for purposes of floodplain management. "Freeboard" tends to compensate for the many unknown factors that could contribute to flood heights greater than the height calculated for a selected size flood and floodway conditions, such as wave action, bridge openings, and the hydrological effect of urbanization in the watershed. HIGHEST ADJACENT GRADE — The highest natural elevation of the ground surface prior to construction next to the proposed walls of a structure. HISTORIC STRUCTURE - Any structure that is: 1. listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places (a listing maintained by the Department of Interior) or preliminarily determined by the Secretary of the Interior as meeting the requirements for individual listing on the National Register; 2. certified or preliminarily determined by the Secretary of the Interior as contributing to the historical significance of a registered historic district or a district preliminarily determined by the Secretary to qualify as a registered historic district; 3. individually listed on a state inventory of historic places in states with historic preservation programs which have been approved by the Secretary of the Interior; or, 4. individually listed on a local inventory of historic places in communities with historic preservation programs that have been certified either: a. by an approved state program as determined by the Secretary of the Interior; or, b. directly by the Secretary of the Interior in states without approved programs. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Engineering Analysis — Analyses performed by a licensed professional engineer, in accordance with standard engineering practices that are accepted by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation and FEMA, used to determine the base flood, other frequency floods, flood elevations, floodway information and boundaries, and flood profiles. . LETTERS OF MAP CHANGE (LOMC) - A Letter of Map Change is an official FEMA determination, by letter, that amends or revises an effective Flood Insurance Rate Map or Flood Insurance Study. letters of Map Change include: 41 • L ETTER OF MAP AMENDMENT (LOMA): An amendment based on technical data showing that _q property was incorrectly included in a designated special flood hazard area. A LOMA amends the current effective Flood Insurance Rate Map and establishes that a Land as defined b meets and bounds or structure is not located in a special flood hazard area. • L ETTER OF MAP REVISION (LOMB. A revision based on technical data that may show chances T to flood zones, flood elevations, „ delineations, , and planimetric floodplain , and floodwav features. A Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (LOMB -F), is a determination that a structure or Parcel of land has been elevated b ill above the base flood elevation and is therefore, no longer exposed to flooding associated with the base flood. In order to qualify for this determination the Ill must have been permitted and laced in accordance with the Count 's floodplain management regulations, • _C ONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION (CLOMR): A formal review and comment as to whether a proposed flood protection project or other project complies with the minimum NFIP requirements for such projects with respect to delineation of special flood hazard areas. A CLOMR does not revise the effective Flood Insurance Rate„ Map or Flood Insurance Study, LOWEST FLOOR - The lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An unfinished or flood - resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage in an area other than a basement area is not considered a building's lowest floor; provided, that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non - elevation design requirements of Federal Code 44CFR §60.3. MOBILE OR MANUFACTURED HOME —A structure, transportable in one or more sections, which in travel mode is eight body feet or more in width or 40 body feet or more in length, or when erected on site, is 320 or more square feet and which is built in a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities. MOBILE OR MANUFACTURED HOME PARK OR SUBDIVISION - A parcel (or contiguous parcels) of land or a subdivision divided into two or more manufactured home lots for rent or sale. NEW CONSTRUCTION - For the purposes of determining insurance rates, structures for which the "start of construction" commenced on or after the effective date of an initial Flood Insurance Rate Map on or after December 31, 1974, whichever is later, and includes any subsequent improvements to such structures. For floodplain management purposes, new construction means structures for which start of construction commenced on or after the effective date of a floodplain management regulation adopted by the Co. unty and includes any subsequent improvements to such structures. NEW MANUFACTURED HOME PARK OR SUBDIVISION - A manufactured home park or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed on or after the effective date of floodplain management regulations adopted by the County. I?lM RECREATIONAL VEHICLE - A vehicle which is: A. Built on a single chassis; B. Four hundred square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection; C. Designed to be self - propelled or permanently towable by a light -duty truck; and D. Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational camping, travel or seasonal use. Repetitive Loss Structure — A building covered by a contract for flood insurance that has incurred flood - related damages on two occasions during a 10 -year period ending on the date of the event for which a second claim is made, in which the cost of repairing the flood damage, on the average, equaled or exceeded 25 percent of the market value of the building at the time of each flood event. Shallow flooding area — A special flood hazard area with base flood depths from one to three feet where a clearly defined channel does not exist, where the path of flooding is unpredictable and indeterminate, and where velocity flow may be evident. Such flooding is characterized by ponding or sheet flow. SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA - The land in the floodplain subject to a one (1%) percent or greater chance of being flooded in any given year as determined in § 165 - 702.10. START OF CONSTRUCTION - The date the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, placement, substantial improvement or other improvement was within 180 days of the permit date. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. For a substantial improvement, the actual start of the construction means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of a building, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building. STRUCTURE -- For floodplain management purposes, a walled and roofed building, including a gas or liquid storage tank, that is principally above ground, as well as a manufactured home. Structure, for insurance rating purposes, means a walled and roofed building, other than a gas or liquid storage tank, that is principally above ground and affixed to a permanent site, as well as a manufactured home on a permanent foundation. For the latter purpose, the term includes a building while in the course of construction, alteration or repair, but does not include building materials or supplies intended for use in such construction, alteration or repair, unless such materials or supplies are within an enclosed building on the premises. SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE - Damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before - damaged condition would equal or exceed 50% of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT - Any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50% of the market value of the structure before the start of construction of the improvement. This term includes structures which have incurred substantial damage regardless of the actual repair work performed. The term does not, however, include either to eeFFeet ex vie of state ar l oca l health, S@RitaFy 9F safety code specif �Nh have hee-A 43 ........... 1. Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions, or 2. Any alteration of a historic structure, provided that the alteration will not preclude the structure's continued designation as a historic structure. 3. Historic structures undergoing repair or rehabilitation that would constitute a substantial improvement as defined above, must comply with all ordinance requirements that do not preclude the structure's continued desi nation as a historic structure. Documentation that a spec! is ordinance requirement will cause removal of the structure from the National Register of Historic Places or the State inventory of Historic places must be obtained from the Secretary of the Interior or the State Historic Preservation Officer. Any exem tion ram ordinance re uirements will be the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of the structure. VIOLATION - For floodplain management purposes, violation includes the failure of a structure or other development to be fully compliant with the County`s flood plain management regulations. A structure or other development without the elevation certificate, other certifications, or other evidence of compliance required in this ordinance is presumed to be in violation until such time as that documentation is provided. WATERCOURSE - A lake, river, creek, stream, wash, channel or other topographic feature on or over which waters flow at least periodically. Watercourse includes specifically designated areas in which substantial flood damage may occur. Passed this 23 day of April, 2014 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 DISCUSSION OF MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUIREMENTS — BUSINESS FRIENDLY RECOMMENDATIONS — SENT FORWARD FOR PUBLIC HEARING Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised the Master Development Plan requirements were a discussion topic of the Board's MA Business Friendly Committee initiative. The Business Friendly Committee recommended elimination of the master development plan requirement contained in the zoning ordinance. The Development Review and Regulations Committee reviewed this suggestion and the master development plan requirements and disagreed with their elimination. The Committee felt this was an important process for both the applicant and the public. The Committee ultimately recommended the master development plan ordinance be modified to allow for a waiver of the master development plan requirement if an applicant chooses to process a detailed site plan in lieu of a master development plan. The Planning Commission discussed this item at their April 2, 2014 meeting and agreed with the proposed ordinance amendment. She concluded by saying staff was seeking Board direction regarding this proposal. Vice - Chairman DeHaven stated the benefit of the master development plan was to further opportunities to let the public know what was going on and it helped to firm up when something would happen. He concluded by saying he did not have an issue with the proposed waiver. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board sent the proposed amendment forward for public hearing. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors formed the Frederick County Business Climate Assessment Committee to evaluate the current processes and procedures being utilized by the County. The Committee's final report was adopted by the Board of Supervisors in July 2013. One recommendation contained in the report was to eliminate the Master Development Plan (MDP) requirement contained in the Zoning Ordinance. WHEREAS, the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) reviewed the MDP requirements at their October 2013 and January 2014 meetings and disagreed that the MDP should be eliminated. The DRRC did recommend that the MDP ordinance be modified to allow for a MDP waiver if an applicant chooses to process a detailed site plan in lieu of a MDP and forwarded that recommendation to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on April 2, 2014 and agreed with the inclusion of the additional MDP waiver opportunity; and 45 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on April 23, 2014; 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 include a MDP waiver option that allows an applicant to process a detailed site plan in lieu of a MDP. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REQUESTED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the Frederick County Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing regarding an amendment to Chapter 165 to provide the applicant with the option to decide if they want to request a waiver of the MDP or not. Passed this 23` day of April, 2014 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 BOARD LIAISON REPORTS Supervisor Lofton thanked the Board for adding to the agenda and approving the resolution regarding the centennial of the Smith -Lever Act. He stated the Extension Service not only helps the farming community, but provides a number of services for others in the community. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no citizen comments. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS Supervisor Fisher advised there had been another change in March to state's stormwater program. He noted the ordinance was being revised to accommodate this change. He went on to say the Board should see this item at its May 28, 2014 meeting. He stated a number of localities were choosing not to enforce the program themselves, but rather pay the Department of Environmental Quality to do the enforcement. Supervisor Wells stated Frederick County was blessed to have the staff we have and we were way ahead of other counties in the area because of staffs' commitment to this program. He concluded by saying he would rather the county enforce the program versus the Department of Environmental Quality. Vice - Chairman DeHaven stated he did not think anyone was in a better position to serve the citizens than the locality. Chairman Shickle advised that he forgot to note a correction to the minutes during the Board's consideration of the April 9, 2014 meeting minutes. He advised that he had voted nay on the pump and haul permit request, but the minutes reflected an aye vote. Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board reconsidered the April 9, 2014 meeting minutes. 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 noted he had a correction to the minutes regarding the vote on the pump and haul permit. His vote should have been recorded as nay. Upon a motion by Vice- Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the minutes as corrected. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote; Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr, Aye 47 Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye ADJOURN UPON A MOTION BY VICE - CHAIRMAN DEHAVEN, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR FISHED, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED. (8:20 P.M.) FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' MINUTES WORK SESSION WITH DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES April 29, 2014 A work session of Frederick County Board of Supervisors and the Frederick County Social Services Board was held on Tuesday, April 29, 2014, at 12:00 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT Richard C. Shickle; Christopher E. Collins; Charles S. DeHaven, Jr.; Gene E. Fisher; Gary A. Lofton; Robert A. Hess; Robert W. Wells. OTHERS PRESENT John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator; Kris C. Tierney, Assistant County Administrator; Roderick Williams, County Attorney; Cheryl B. Shiffler, Director of Finance, Jennifer Place, Risk Manager /Budget Analyst of Finance; Paula A. Nofsinger, Director of Human Resources; Tamara L. Green, Director of the Department of Social Services; Linda Gibson; Assistant Director of Department of Social Services; Delsie Butts, Administrative Manager of Department of Social Services; Social Services Board members: Joanne Leonardis, Red Bud District, Vice Chairman; Linda Martenson, Board Member At- Large; Frank Heisey, Gainesboro District; Karen L. Kimble, Shawnee District; Kathleen H. Pitcock, Back Creek District; Susan W. Marsh, Stonewall District, CALL TO ORDER Chairman Shickle called the work session to order. He turned the work session over to County Administrator Riley. Administrator Riley asked Director Green to introduce the Department of Social Services board members and staff. Director Green began with introductions of the board members for the Department of Social Services and staff and stated Chairman James L. Stephens was not able to attend today. Vice - Chairman Leonardis stated serving the system and educating the families in the county is their number one priority. She went on to say she believes their second priority is administering federal and state mandated programs and funds in a timely manner without penalty or error to insure that their number one priority is met and today's presentation is a snapshot of what it takes to do that. Director Green thanked the Board for the opportunity and went on to review a brief presentation on the local Department of Social Services to include: • Structure of Department of Social Services • Financial impact of benefits programs in the community • Discuss Current benefits programs challenges • Explanation of how Social Services have maintained thus far • Justification for new staff request • Closing remarks and questions County Administrator Riley stated it might be helpful to see a total budget for the State and Federal funds. Administrator Manager Butts circulated a copy of the spreadsheet with those numbers. County Administrator Riley thanked Director Green on her presentation and stated this was the second time Director Green has presented this information. Supervisor Collins asked about staffs' ability to catch fraud due to the volume of cases. Director Green responded fraud cases were very low. She went on to say they have a part-time employee who is dedicated to fraud cases. Back Creek Supervisor Lofton commented that he was amazed at how well the department works to maintain State standards and commended the staff and the Department of Social Services board members given the county's population. Director Green stated there has been a 5% increase in families needing assistance, including a wide group of middle class families qualifying for short term eligibility. She went on to say the Hornsby Zeller assessment was completed in 2008 and it was determined additional staffing was needed but nothing resulted from it. She went on to say the Department of Social Services is in need of a total of 7 additional employees to handle all the calls, intake and eligibility, as well as handle the increase in long term care and aged, blind and disabled cases, and a worker to ease pressure off of the current team. Director Green stated they are meeting the 97% compliance rate on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP); however, they are only at a 92% compliance rate for Medicaid, which means they are not meeting deadlines. She went on to say if mandated processing deadlines are not met financial penalties could be assessed. Chairman Shickle commented that it is distressing to see the increase in case loads. He went on to say it was unclear of whose responsibility it was to address these concerns. Director Green stated the Department of Social Services employees are employees of the County whose job is to administer Federal Programs that are supervised by the State. However, the County is responsible for staffing. Chairman Shickle asked if there were any other questions or comments. He thanked the Department of Social Services for their presentation and was highly surprised. He went on to say the County supports them and will do their part. There being no further business the work session was adjourned at 1:03 P.M. COUNTY of FREDERICK John R. Riley, Jr. .¢x"01 County Administrator 1778 5401665 -5666 Fax 5401667 -0370 E -mail: jrilcy@co.frederick.va.us TO: Board of Supervisors. FROM: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administra DATE: May 7, 2014 RE: Committee Appointments Listed below are the vacancies /appointments due through July, 2014. As a reminder, in order for everyone to have ample time to review applications, and so they can be included in the agenda, please remember to submit applications prior to Friday agenda preparation. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. VACANCIES/OTHER Agricultural District Advisory Committee Mr. Walter.Baker, .Mr. James Douglas and Mr. Jack Jenkins have resigned per notice to Planning Department. (Two vacancies remain. The Agricultural District Advisory Committee meets as needed and members serve an indefinite term. FEBRUARY 2014 Historic Resources Advisory Board Claus Bader -- Red Bud District Representative 102 Whipp Drive Winchester, VA 22602 Home: (540)722 -6578 Term Expires: 02/22/14 Four year term APRIL 2014 Parks and Recreation Commission 107 North Kent Street ® Winchester, Virginia 22601 Memorandum Board of Supervisors May 7, 2014 Page 2 Martin J. Cybulski — Red Bud District Representative 134 Likens Way Winchester, VA 22602 Horne: (540)667 -6035 Term Expires: 04/28/14 Four year term MAY 2014 Historic Resources Advisory Board Clint Jones — Shawnee District Representative 3108 Middle Road Winchester, VA 22602 Home. (540)667 -6350 Term Expires 05/22/14 Four yearterm JUNE 2014 Extension Leadersho Council Memorandum- Board of Supervisors May 7, 2014 Page 4 (Staff is waiting on recommendation from Top of Virginia Building Association.) Community .Policy and Management Team (CPMT) Dana Bowman —.Private Provider Representative Chief Operating Officer Children's Services of Virginia, Inc. P. O. Box 2867 Winchester, VA 22604 Term Expires Two year term (See Attached. Correspondence from CPMT Chair and Social . Services Director Recommending Reappointment:) Economic Development Authority (EPA) Beverley 'B..Shoemaker- Opequon District Representative P. O. Box 480 Stephens City, VA 22655 Home: (540)869 -4828 Term Expires: 06/30/14 Four Year Term Lord Fairfax:Emeraenev Medical Services Council (EM'S May 6, 2014 Frederick County, Virginia Comprehensive Services Act 107 North Kent Street, 3 rd Floor Winchester, VA 22601 Office: (540) 665 -5688 FAX: (540) 535 -2146 Mr. John R. Riley, Jr_, Frederick County Administrator 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Mr. Riley, ` S56 7 ; RECEI ED `4:, Leda ic-k CoDr As Chairman of the Frederick County Community Planning and Management Team (CPMT), 1 am pleased to inform you that at our meeting of April 28, 2014 the CPMT re- nominated Ms. Dana Bowman, Children's Services of Virginia, Executive Director of Administration, by majority vote, to continue in the position of Private Provider Representative. The Private Provider Representative is a mandated position on the CPMT. The State Code provides for both the private provider representative and the parent representative to be appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Appointments are for a two year term with members being eligible for reappointment. Traditionally, the Board of Supervisors has considered input on new appointments to the CPMT from the seated members. Ms. Bowman has been a Private Provider Representative since approximately February 2011. Her participation on the CPMT has been valuable and influential. She comes to us with high regard from those individuals who have worked with her. The CPMT appreciates your consideration to reappoint Ms. Dana Bowman to continue as the Private Provider Representative on the Frederick County CPMT. Sincerely Tamara Green CPMT Chair Frederick County Department of Social Services Director RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING HP HOOD, INC.'S SELECTION AS 2013 DAIRY PROCESSOR OF THE YEAR WHEREAS, HP Hood, Inc. is one of the primary dairy producers in the United States, with nearly $2 billion in sales and 15 plants across the county; and WHEREAS, HP Hood, Inc.'s products are throughout the United States to chain and independent food retailers, convenience stores, and foodservice purveyors; and WHEREAS, HP Hood, Inc. located a facility in Frederick County in 1999; and WHEREAS, this facility has seen expansions in 2001, 2004, 2010, and 2013 and now employs over 400 people; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County facility is the flagship in HP Hood, Inc.'s production network; and WHEREAS, HP Hood, Inc. has been instrumental in developing and expanding its product lines, continues to invest in new equipment and technologies, and is working toward achieving zero -waste to- landfill in all plants; and WHEREAS, HP Hood, Inc. was selected by Dairy Foods as 2013 Processor of the Year NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, do hereby express its congratulations to HP Hood, Inc. on achieving this industry recognition; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors express their appreciation to HP Hood, Inc. for their continued investment and employment in Frederick County, Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution be spread across the minutes of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors for all citizens to reflect upon the accomplishment of this community partner. ADOPTED this 14"' day of May, 2014 Richard C. Shickle Chairman Robert A. Hess Gainesboro District Supervisor Robert W. Wells Opequon District Supervisor Gary A. Lofton Back Creek District Supervisor Gene E. Fisher Shawnee District Supervisor Christopher E. Collins Red Bud District Supervisor Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Stonewall District Supervisor John R. Riley, Jr. Clerk MUNICAP INC. PUBLIC FINA / NCE MEMORANDUM DATE: MARCH 13, 2013 To: JOHN MARKER, CHAIRMAN RUSSELL 150 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FROM: FAIZAN HABIB, MANAGER MUNICAP, INC. RE: AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Russell 150 Community Development Authority (the "Authority's was created pursuant to an ordinance adopted by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors (the `BOS'� on March 9, 2005. The BOS adopted an ordinance on May 25, 2006 authorizing the levy of special assessments within the boundaries of the CDA district. On May 1, 2007, the Authority issued $5,470,000 in Series 2007A Special Assessment Bonds and $15,685,000 in Series 2007B Special Assessments Bonds, collectively referred to herein as the Bonds, to finance public infrastructure improvements. II . HISTORICAL LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS (2009 -2012) Bond proceeds deposited in the Capitalized Interest Account were used to pay debt service in the 2008 Assessment Year and first -half of the 2009 Assessment Year. The Authority approved the levy of the special assessment, upon exhaustion of the Capitalized Interest Account, in the 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 Assessment Years. Table A shows the annual amount of special assessments approved by the Authority for each Assessment Year. Table A Approved Annual Special Assessments The approved special assessments were due in two installments in June and December of each Assessment Year. Russell 150 LC (the "Developer ") failed to pay the annual installment of special assessments. As a result of non - payment of the special assessments, payments on the Bonds were paid from bond proceeds deposited in the Debt Service Reserve Fund, deposits made in the Supplemental Debt Service Reserve Fund by MMA Realty Capital, LLC (the "Bondholder ") pursuant to the Debt Service Reserve Fund Deficiency Agreement (the "SDSRF Agreement', and deposits made by the Bondholder in the Revenue Fund. As of the date of this memorandum, the annual special assessments approved by the Authority remain delinquent. #466083 011322 -0046 Special Assessment Assessment Year Levy 2009 $1,390,000 2010 $1,732,936 2011 $1,732,123 2012 $524,223 Total $5,379,282 The approved special assessments were due in two installments in June and December of each Assessment Year. Russell 150 LC (the "Developer ") failed to pay the annual installment of special assessments. As a result of non - payment of the special assessments, payments on the Bonds were paid from bond proceeds deposited in the Debt Service Reserve Fund, deposits made in the Supplemental Debt Service Reserve Fund by MMA Realty Capital, LLC (the "Bondholder ") pursuant to the Debt Service Reserve Fund Deficiency Agreement (the "SDSRF Agreement', and deposits made by the Bondholder in the Revenue Fund. As of the date of this memorandum, the annual special assessments approved by the Authority remain delinquent. #466083 011322 -0046 On October 18, 2011, the Authority authorized redemption of the Bonds using remaining proceeds in the Project Fund at the request of the Bondholder. Accordingly, Regions Bank (the "Trustee' transferred $14,570,000 from the Project Fund to the Bond Fund Principal Account to reduce the total amount of Bonds outstanding. Table B shows the Series A and Series B Bonds prior to and after redemption. Table B Bonds Redeemed Note, the bonds outstanding prior to redemption reflect $630,000 of principal paid on the Bonds when due in 2010 and 2011 from the funds mentioned above, resulting in the Bonds outstanding in the amount of $20,525,000. Table C shows the principal payments, Bonds redeemed, and principal amount currently outstanding as of March 2, 2013. This table includes an additional $206,000 of principal paid on the Bonds when due in 2012 and 2013 from the funds mentioned above, resulting in Bonds outstanding in the amount of $5,749,000. Table C Principal Outstanding Bonds Outstanding Series A Bonds Series B Bonds Total Bonds outstanding prior to redemption $5,305,000 $15,220,000 $20,525,000 Bonds redeemed $3,766,000 $10,804,000 $14,570,000 Principal amount outstanding after redemption $1,539,000 $4,416,000 $5,955,000 Note, the bonds outstanding prior to redemption reflect $630,000 of principal paid on the Bonds when due in 2010 and 2011 from the funds mentioned above, resulting in the Bonds outstanding in the amount of $20,525,000. Table C shows the principal payments, Bonds redeemed, and principal amount currently outstanding as of March 2, 2013. This table includes an additional $206,000 of principal paid on the Bonds when due in 2012 and 2013 from the funds mentioned above, resulting in Bonds outstanding in the amount of $5,749,000. Table C Principal Outstanding Bonds Outstanding Series 2007 Bonds Total Bonds issued $21,155,000 Sinking fund payment 3/1/10 ($305,000) Sinking fund payment 3/1/11 ($325,000) Bonds redeemed ($14,570,000) Sinking fund payment 3/1/12 ($100,000) Sinking fund payment 3/1/13 ($106,000) Total Bonds outstanding $5,749,000 111. PROPOSED TERM SHEET AND AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL The proposed Series 2007 Bonds Revision to the Special Assessments Term Sheet (the "Term Sheet', attached hereto as Exhibit A, includes a request by the Bondholder to the Authority and Frederick County to approve and authorize the forgiveness of a portion of the past due annual special assessments and the rescheduling of the year the remaining portion of the past due annual special assessment are to be collected. The request to reschedule the past due annual special assessments is to reimburse the Bondholder for the deposits made by it to the Supplemental Debt Service Reserve Fund pursuant to SDSRF Agreement and the Revenue Fund as a result of non - payment of special assessments. The annual special assessment to be rescheduled are equal to $500,000 per year starting in the 2022 Assessment Year until $2,062,053 in advances previously made by the Bondholder have been collected. The Bondholder requests the Authority and Frederick County to forgive the remaining delinquent special assessments, along with related penalties and interest. The total past due annual special assessments are equal to $5,379,282. Of this amount, $2,062,053 is to be rescheduled and collected from 2022 through 2026, with the balance of $3,317,229 to be forgiven. Table D shows summary of the advances made by the Bondholder to pay debt service and outstanding administrative expenses related to the district. Table D Summary of Deposits made by the Bondholder Description of the Deposits made by the Bondholder Amount August 2009 deposit in the supplemental reserve fund to pay interest on Sept. 1, 2009 $285,404 February 2010 deposit in the supplemental reserve fund to pay interest on Mar. 1, 2010 $697,956 August 2010 deposit in the supplemental reserve fund to pay interest on Sept. 1, 2010 $413,690 February 2012 deposit in the Revenue Fund to pay interest on Mar. 1, 2012 $196,515 August 2012 deposit in the Revenue Fund to pay interest on Sept. 1, 2012 $192,173 Payment of outstanding administrative expenses in Nov. 2012 $83,100 February 2013 de osit in the Revenue Fund to a interest on Mar. 1, 2013 $193,215 Total reimbursement requested by the Bondholder $2,062,053 The total request of reimbursement by the Bondholder shown in Table D excludes the principal payments made on March 1, 2010, March 1, 2012, and March 1, 2013 from proceeds deposited by the Bondholder. Exhibit B, attached herein, includes the revised debt service repayment schedule, which includes the additional annual special assessment requested by the Bondholder. Mr. Marker, please do not hesitate to contact me with questions regarding this memorandum and the attached documents. Yours truly, Faizan Habib MuniCap, Inc. — CDA Administrator Exhibit A Term Sheet The following is intended to set forth the general terms under which the remaining outstanding principal balance of the Russell 150 Community Development Authority Special Assessment Bonds Series 2007A and Series 2008B (the "Bonds ") will be repaid. The parties will use reasonable efforts to accommodate the terms set forth below without the need to refund the Bonds, and if possible, within the confines of the existing bond documents without the need to have a reissuance for tax purposes. Outstanding Principal Balance: Guarantor Advances: Delinquent Assessments: Payment of Delinquent Assessments: Bondholder Advance Reimbursement: $5,749,000 $2,062,053 $5,379,282 Delinquent assessments will be repealed. Beginning in 2022, Russell 150 Community Development Authority (the "Authority ") will request and Frederick County (the "County ") will issue additional assessments of $500,000 per year for four years and $62,053 for one year to be applied by the Authority to the repayment in full of the Guarantor Advances. Interest Rate: Amortization: Accrued but Unpaid Interest: 6.60% (unchanged) The Authority shall request and the County will issue assessments sufficient to amortize the outstanding principal balance of the Bonds, as of the date of the restructuring, over the remaining term of the Bonds, in accordance with the amortization schedule attached as Exhibit B to the MuniCap, Inc. memorandum of March 13, 2013, all in accordance with the existing Bond documents to the maximum extent possible. Going forward, any accrued but unpaid interest on the bonds from and after the date of the restructuring shall bear interest as provided in the existing Bond documents. Such interest on interest shall be paid from interest on delinquent special assessments, to the extent available. Acceleration and Foreclosure: For as long as all of the property in the Russell 150 District has only one owner, the Authority shall have, in addition to the right to foreclose on the property to collect overdue assessments, the right to accelerate the entire unpaid principal amount of the Bonds, but only to the extent permitted under the Bond documents (including any Supplemental Indentures) and only at the direction of a majority in interest of the bondholders, and to apply the proceeds of foreclosure in satisfaction of all accrued but unpaid interest and, if accelerated, the entire outstanding principal amount of the Bonds. (Signatures appear on following page) R150 SPE LLC By: Name: Title: RUSSELL 150 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: Name: Title: FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA By: Name: Title: REGIONS BANK, AS BOND TRUSTEE By: Name: Title: (Signature Page to Russell 150 Bond Restructuring Term Sheet) Exhibit B Revised Special Assessment Roll Revised Reimbursement Estimated Estimated Bond Year Principal Revised to the Administrative Annual Ending Payment Interest Bondholder Expenses 1 Installment 1- Mar -14 $113,000 $379,434 $65,784 $558,218 1- Mar -15 $122,000 $371,976 $44,460 $538,436 1- Mar -16 $129,000 $363,924 $45,149 $538,073 1- Mar -17 $137,000 $355,410 $45,852 $538,262 1- Mar -18 $147,000 $346,368 $46,569 $539,937 1- Mar -19 $157,000 $336,666 $47,300 $540,966 1- Mar -20 $167,000 $326,304 $48,046 $541,350 1- Mar -21 $177,000 $315,282 $48,807 $541,089 1- Mar -22 $188,000 $303,600 $49,583 $541,183 1- Mar -23 $201,000 $291,192 $500,000 $50,375 $1,042,567 1- Mar -24 $215,000 $277,926 $500,000 $51,183 $1,044,109 1- Mar -25 $229,000 $263,736 $500,000 $52,006 $1,044,742 1- Mar -26 $243,000 $248,622 $500,000 $52,846 $1,044,468 1- Mar -27 $260,000 $232,584 $62,053 $53,703 $608,340 1- Mar -28 $277,000 $215,424 $54,577 $547,001 1- Mar -29 $296,000 $197,142 $55,469 $548,611 1- Mar -30 $315,000 $177,606 $56,378 $548,984 1- Mar -31 $337,000 $156,816 $57,306 $551,122 1- Mar -32 $358,000 $134,574 $58,252 $550,826 1- Mar -33 $382,000 $110,946 $59,217 $552,163 1- Mar -34 $406,000 $85,734 $60,201 $551,935 1- Mar -35 $434,000 $58,938 $61,205 $554,143 1- Mar -36 $459,000 $30,294 $62,229 $551,523 Total $5,749,000 $5,580,498 $2,062,053 $1,226,499 $14,618,050 i Administrative expense for bond year ending March 1, 2014 include estimated cost to do the audit ($25,000 for 2008 through 2012), arbitrage rebate report ($1,250), and estimated annual CDA expenses. The administrative expense budget for subsequent years is based on the original estimate of the annual administrative expenses of the CDA. A contingency of $10,000 is also included as part of the annual CDA expense fund budget in the event of delinquencies and unexpected expenses. 371 Supervisor Hess advised there were a lot of worthy organizations on this list, but we need to re- examine them in light of today's conditions. He concluded by saying it would behoove us to ensure we give them enough notice. Supervisor Lofton stated we are not taking anyone's lifeline away by removing funding. He went on to say not all agencies were being cut. Supervisor Fisher stated he would like to know how the funds are being used and what services would be cut if the funding was not there. Supervisor Collins stated he did not see any commentary regarding why the agencies were proposed to be cut. He went on to say the lack of information concerned him.. There being no further discussion, the amendment to the motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr, Aye Robert A, Hess Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye The amended motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye 10. The County Administrator provides the 2011 Frederick County Fire & Rescue Companies Audit Findings and Recommendations and requests discussion and recommendations. See attached information, p. 24. The committee recommends that each company submit a corrective action plan prior to the next scheduled donation disbursement in August 2013. 11.. The County Attorney presented information on the amendment to the special assessment roll approved by the Russell 150 Community Development Authority. See attached information, p. 25 -31. No action required, — Approved Upon a motion by Vice- Chairman Ewing, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board accepted the Term Sheet, identified as Exhibit "A" of the Municap, Inc, memorandum dated March 13, 2013 and authorized the County Administrator to sign same, on behalf of Frederick County. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Minute Book ]lumber 38 Board of supervisors Regular Meeting of (33122113 372 Christopher E. Collins Charles S, DeHaven, Jr Robert A. Hess Gene E. Fisher Gary A. Lofton Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye ** *Information Only * ** 1. The Finance Director provides a Fund 10 Transfer report for April 2013. See attached, p. 32. 2. The Finance Director provides 4130113 financial statements. See attached, p. 33 -43. 3. The Finance Director provides 5/19113 General Fund fund balance report. See attached, p. 44. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The Transportation Committee met on April 22, 2413 at 8:30 a.m. Members Present Chuck DeHaven (voting) Gene Fisher (voting) Christopher Collins (voting) James Tracey (voting) Bryon Grigsby (voting) Gary Oates (liaison PC) Lewis Boyer (liaison Stephens City) Members Absent Mark Davis (Iiaison Middletown) ** *Items Requiring Action * ** None ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 1. Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Plan Updates The Committee reviewed this item and has recommended approval to the Board of Supervisors. This will appear as an independent item on the Board agenda because it is a public hearing item. 2. Wakeland Manor Sign Request The County Administrator's off=ice has forwarded a request from the Wakeland Manor Home Owners' Association for Children at Play signs in their neighborhood. A total of ten, signs are requested. Under VDOT's new policy, these signs would be installed and maintained by Frederick County. Cost is expected to be $300 -$400 per sign. As the Committee considers this request, staff would note that Children at Play signs in residential areas are most appropriate around recreation areas, as opposed to more general coverage. The Committee reviewed this item and had concerns regarding placement and volume of signs. In addition, due to the fact that the County would be responsible for installation and maintenance, they have asked staff to come up with a review process and fee structure for dealing with these requests and their associated costs. 3. No Parking Request in Redbud Run Mr. Robert Pageant of the Red Bud Run Subdivision has contacted. VDOT and staff to Minute Book Number 36 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/22!13 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Public Works 540/665 -5643 FAX: 540/678 -0682 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Board of Supervisors Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works Public Works and Green Advisory Committees Report for Meeting of April 29, 2014 May 1, 2014 MI The Public Works and Green Advisory Committees met on Tuesday, April 29, 2014, at 8:00 a.m. All members were present. The following items were discussed: * * *Item Requiring Action * * * Final Draft Stormwater /Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance — Chapter 143 — Frederick County Code Mr. Joe Wilder, deputy director of public works, presented a final draft of the new stormwater /erosion and sediment control ordinance, Chapter 143, which included revisions dictated by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. After discussing the minor revisions, the committee unanimously endorsed the new ordinance and recommended that it be submitted to the board of supervisors for their review and approval. At the same time, the committee recommended that the current erosion and sediment control ordinance, Chapter 79, be repealed. (Attachment 1) ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 1. Building Inspections Issues a) Proposed Fee Increases: The Building Official, Mr. John Trenary, presented a brief overview of proposed changes to the current building inspection fee schedule. He indicated that a meeting has been scheduled with the Top of Virginia Building Association to discuss the proposed changes. After this meeting, staff will finalize the proposed changes and submit same to the public works committee at their next scheduled meeting. (Attachment 2) b) Property Maintenance Inspections in Stephens City: The town of Stephens City has requested that Frederick County assume the responsibility for property maintenance inspections. To this end, they have drafted a resolution to be approved by the town council prior to formal submittal to Frederick County. The county attorney has reviewed the request and determined that Frederick County is required to honor their request. (Attachment 3) 2. Update on New Round Hill Fire Station and Event Center Staff indicated that the project for the new Roundhill Fire Station and Event Center has been Public Works and Green Advisory Committees Report Page 2 May 1, 2014 advertised with a bid due date of May 15, 2014. A subsequent pre -bid meeting was held at 1:00 p.m. at the existing fire station. The attendance at the mandatory pre -bid meeting included 16 general contractors. Mr. Gene Fisher, committee chairman, expanded the discussion of the proposed Roundhill Fire Station to include a brief evaluation of a future prototype station. He indicated that a layout of a station previously referenced as a prototype was actually a plan that had been included in a PPEA submittal. This plan had not been reviewed by staff for compliance with current fire and rescue requirements or accepted gross space allocations. He further stated that he had evaluated these space requirements with the architectural members of the committee and determined that the previously referenced plan was deficient in required space allocations. He concluded that the proposed Roundhill Station was actually more in keeping with current design standards for fire and rescue stations. 3. Miscellaneous Reports a) Tonnage Report (Attachment 4) b) Recycling Report (Attachment 5) c) Animal Shelter Dog Report (Attachment 6) d) Animal Shelter Cat Report (Attachment 7) 4. Green Advisory Committee Energy Management Update (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 . St Snyder, Jr., P. Public Works irector HES /rls Attachments: as stated cc: file U:\Rhonda\PWCOMMITTEE\CURYEARCOMREPORTS\4-29-14pwcoirtwep.doe ATTACHMENT 1 1 Draft Stormwater /Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance 2 Frederick County, Virginia. — Proposed County Code Chapter 143 3 May 7, 2014 DRAFT 4 5 § 143 -100 Purpose 6 7 The Frederick County Board of Supervisors desires to protect the health, safety, 8 welfare, and property of Frederick County residents and businesses, and the quality of 9 waters within the County. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors recognizes that 10 development tends to degrade these waters through erosion and sedimentation, 11 increased flooding, stream channel erosion, and the transport and deposition of 12 waterborne pollutants. This degradation is due, in part, to increased stormwater runoff 13 as property is developed. Hence, as required by § 62.1- 44.15:27 Code of Virginia and in 14 compliance with the Virginia State Water Control Board requirements, the Frederick 15 County Board of Supervisors has determined that it is in the public interest to establish 16 requirements which regulate the discharge of stormwater runoff from developments by 17 integrating hydrologic and water quality functions into all aspects of a development's 18 design, landscape and infrastructure. 19 A. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish minimum stormwater management 20 and erosion and sediment control requirements which: 21 1. Reduce flood damage to property; minimize the impacts of increased 22 stormwater runoff from new land development; 23 2. Maintain the hydraulic adequacy of existing and proposed culverts, 24 bridges, dams, and other structures; 25 3. Prevent, to the greatest extent feasible, an increase in nonpoint source 26 pollution; 27 4. Maintain the integrity of stream channels for their biological functions and 28 drainage; 29 5. Maintain natural drainage patterns to the extent practicable in order to 30 promote existing hydrologic processes; 31 6. Promote infiltration of stormwater to recharge groundwater resources; 32 7. Minimize the impact of development upon stream erosion; 33 8. Preserve and protect water supply facilities from increased flood 34 discharges, stream erosion, and nonpoint source pollution; 35 9. Establish provisions for long -term responsibility for and maintenance of 36 stormwater management control devices and techniques to manage the 37 quality and quantity of stormwater runoff; and 38 10. Provide effective control of soil erosion and sediment deposition and to 39 prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream channels, 40 waters and other natural resources. 41 B. This chapter supplements and is to be applied in conjunction with Frederick 42 County building code, subdivision, and zoning ordinances as they apply to the 43 development or subdivision of land within the county. 44 45 46 47 § 143 -105 Authority 48 49 A. This chapter is authorized by the Code of Virginia, Title 62. 1, Chapter 3. 1, Article 50 2.4 (§ 62.1- 44.15.51 et seq.), known as the Virginia Erosion and Sediment 51 Control Law; and Title 62. 1, Chapter 3. 1, Article 2.3 ( §62.1- 44.15.24 et seq.), 52 known as the Virginia Stormwater Management Act. 53 B. Pursuant to the Code of Virginia § 62.1- 44.15:54, the Frederick County Public 54 Works Department is designated as a Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control 55 Program (VESCP) Authority to operate a Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control 56 Program. 57 C. Pursuant to the Code of Virginia § 62.1- 44.15:27, the Frederick County Public 58 Works Department is designated as a Virginia Stormwater Management Program 59 (VSMP) authority to operate a Virginia Stormwater Management Program in 60 compliance with all required elements hereto. 61 D. The Frederick County Public Works Department shall issue V.S.M.P. and 62 Erosion and Sediment Control land disturbance permits and operate stormwater 63 programs for the Towns of Middletown and Stephens City. 64 65 Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:27; 62.1- 44.15.54 66 67 § 143 -110 Definitions 68 69 In addition to the definitions set forth in 9VAC25- 870 -10 of the Virginia Stormwater 70 Management Program Permit (VSMP) Regulations, 9VAC25- 840 -10 of the Virginia 71 Erosion and Sediment Control (VESC) Regulations, and 9VAC25- 850 -10 of the Virginia 72 Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management Certification (VSMC) 73 Regulations, which are expressly adopted and incorporated herein by reference, the 74 following words and terms used in this chapter have the following meanings unless the 75 context clearly indicates otherwise. 76 77 "Administrator" or "VSMP Administrator" means the Virginia Stormwater Management 78 Program (VSMP) authority including the Frederick County Public Works Department 79 responsible for administering the VSMP on behalf of Frederick County, Virginia. 80 81 "Agreement in lieu of plan" means a contract between the plan- approving authority and 82 the owner that specifies conservation measures that must be implemented in the 83 construction of a single - family residence. This contract may be executed by the plan - 84 approving authority in lieu of a formal site plan for the residence 85 86 "Agreement in lieu of a stormwater management plan" means a contract between the 87 VSMP authority and the owner or permittee that specifies methods that shall be 88 implemented to comply with the requirements of a VSMP for the construction of a single 89 family residence; such contract may be executed by the VSMP authority in lieu of a 90 stormwater plan. 91 2 92 "Applicant" means any person submitting an application for a permit or requesting 93 issuance of a permit under this chapter. 94 95 "Best management practice" or "BMP" means schedules of activities, prohibitions of 96 practices, including both structural and nonstructural practices, maintenance 97 procedures, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of 98 surface waters and groundwater systems from the impacts of land- disturbing activities. 99 100 "Best management practice implementation plan" or "BMP Implementation Plan" is a 101 site specific design plan for the implementation of BMP facilities on an individual single 102 family lot or other parcel with less than one acre of land disturbance within a larger 103 common plan of development. The BMP Implementation Plan provides detailed 104 information on the implementation of the SWM pollutant load and volume reduction 105 BMP and other requirements for the individual lot or parcel as detailed in the SWPPP 106 and SWM plans of the VSMP Permit for the larger common plan of development. 107 108 "Board" means the Virginia State Water Control Board. 109 110 "Channel" means a natural or manmade waterway. 111 112 "Certificate of Competence" means a certificate of competence, issued to an individual 113 from the Board, or successful completion, within one year after enrollment, of the 114 Board's training program for 115 i) project inspection for ESC; 116 ii) project inspection for SWM; 117 iii) plan review for ESC, or is licensed as a professional engineer, architect, 118 certified landscape architect or land surveyor pursuant to Article 1 (§ 54.1 -400 et 119 seq.) of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia; 120 iv) plan review for SWM; 121 v) program administration for ESC; 122 vi) program administration for SWM; or 123 vii) responsible land disturber, or is licensed as a professional engineer, 124 architect, certified landscape architect or land surveyor pursuant to Article 1 (§ 125 54.1 -400 et seq.) of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia. 126 127 "Clean Water Act" means " or "CWX means the federal Clean Water Act (33 USC 128 §1251 et seq.), formerly referred to as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or 129 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Public Law 92 -500, as 130 amended by Public Law 95 -217, Public Law 95 -576, Public Law 96 -483, and Public Law 131 97 -117, or any subsequent revisions thereto. 132 133 "Commencement of land disturbance" means the initial disturbance of soils associated 134 with clearing, grading, or excavating activities or other construction activities (e.g. 135 stockpiling of soil fill material). 136 3 137 "Common plan of development" means the contiguous area of a proposed residential, 138 commercial, or industrial subdivision where the timing of the development of any one or 139 multiple lots or parcels may result in separate and distinct construction activities taking 140 place at different times on different schedules. 141 142 "Control measure" means any best management practice or stormwater facility other 143 method used to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to surface waters. 144 145 "Department" means the Department of Environmental Quality. 146 147 "Design Storm" for purposes of addressing quantity control provisions of § 143- 165(E) 148 means the one -year, two -year, 10 -year, 24 hour design storms as defined in § 143 -145. 149 The design storm for purposes of complying with the water quality provisions of § 143- 150 165(C) is the one -inch rainfall depth as applied with the "Virginia Runoff Reduction 151 Method" as identified by 9VAC25- 870 -65. 152 153 "Development" means land disturbance and the resulting landform associated with the 154 construction of residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, recreation, transportation 155 or utility facilities or structures or the clearing of land for non - agricultural or non - 156 silvicultural purposes. 157 158 "Director" means the Director of the Department of Environmental Quality or assigned 159 designee. 160 161 "Drainage area" means a land area, water area, or both from which runoff flows to a 162 common point. 163 164 "Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan" or "plan ", means a document containing 165 material for the conservation of soil and water resources of a unit or group of units of 166 land. It may include appropriate maps, an appropriate soil and water plan inventory and 167 management information with needed interpretations, and a record of decisions 168 contributing to conservation treatment. The plan shall contain all major conservation 169 decisions and all information deemed necessary by the plan- approving authority to 170 assure that the entire unit or units of land will be so treated to achieve the conservation 171 objectives. 172 173 "Erosion control handbook" means the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control handbook 174 and/ or a locally adopted erosion and sediment control handbook with such 175 amendments, modifications and supplements as may, from time to time, be properly 176 adopted. 177 178 "Erosion impact area" means an area of land not associated with current land- disturbing 179 activity but subject to persistent soil erosion resulting in the delivery of sediment onto 180 neighboring properties or into state waters. This definition shall not apply to any lot or 181 parcel of land of 10,000 square feet or less used for residential purposes or to 182 shorelines where the erosion results from wave action or other coastal processes. 12 183 184 "Excavating" means any digging, scooping or other methods of removing earth 185 materials. 186 187 "Filling" means any depositing or stockpiling of earth materials. 188 189 "Final stabilization" means that one of the following situations has occurred: 190 1. All soil disturbing activities at the site have been completed and a permanent 191 vegetative cover has been established on denuded areas not otherwise 192 permanently stabilized. Permanent vegetation shall not be considered 193 established until a ground cover is achieved that is uniform (e.g., evenly 194 distributed), mature enough to survive, and will inhibit erosion. 195 2. For individual lots in residential construction, final stabilization can occur by 196 either: 197 a. The homebuilder completing final stabilization as specified in subdivision 1 198 of this definition; or 199 b. The homebuilder establishing temporary stabilization, including perimeter 200 controls for an individual lot prior to occupation of the home by the 201 homeowner, and informing the homeowner of the need for, and benefits of, 202 final stabilization. 203 3. For construction projects on land used for agricultural purposes (e.g., pipelines 204 across crop or range land), final stabilization may be accomplished by returning 205 the disturbed land to its preconstruction agricultural use. Areas disturbed that 206 were not previously used for agricultural activities, such as buffer strips 207 immediately adjacent to surface waters, and areas that are not being returned to 208 their preconstruction agricultural use must meet the final stabilization criteria 209 specified in subdivision 1 or 2 of this definition. 210 211 212 "Flood fringe" means the portion of the floodplain outside the floodway that is usually 213 covered with water from the 100 -year flood or storm event. This includes, but is not 214 limited to, the flood or floodway fringe designated by the Federal Emergency 215 Management Agency. 216 217 "Flooding" means a volume of water that is too great to be confined within the banks or 218 walls of the stream, water body or conveyance system and that overflows onto adjacent 219 lands, thereby causing or threatening damage. 220 221 "Floodplain" means the area adjacent to a channel, river, stream, or other water body 222 that is susceptible to being inundated by water normally associated with the 100 -year 223 flood or storm event. This includes, but is not limited to, the floodplain designated by the 224 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 225 226 "Flood -prone area" means the component of a natural or restored stormwater 227 conveyance system that is outside the main channel. Flood -prone areas may include, 5 228 but are not limited to, the floodplain, the floodway, the flood fringe, wetlands, riparian 229 buffers, or other areas adjacent to the main channel. 230 231 " F000dway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land 232 areas, usually associated with flowing water, that must be reserved in order to 233 discharge the 100 -year flood or storm event without cumulatively increasing the water 234 surface elevation more than one foot. This includes, but is not limited to, the floodway 235 designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 236 237 General permit" means a state permit authorizing a category of discharges under the 238 CWA and the Act within a geographical area 239 240 "Hydrologic Unit Code" or "HUC" means a watershed unit established in the most recent 241 version of Virginia's 6th Order National Watershed Boundary Dataset. 242 243 "Immediately" means as soon as practicable, but no later than that end of the next work 244 day, following the day when the land- disturbing activities have temporarily or 245 permanently ceased. In the context of this permit, "immediately" is used to define the 246 deadline for initiating stabilization measures. 247 248 "Impaired waters" means surface waters identified as impaired on the 2010 § 249 305(b)/303(d) Water Quality Assessment Integrated Report. 250 251 "Impervious cover" means a surface composed of material that significantly impedes or 252 prevents natural infiltration of water into soil. 253 254 "Infeasible" means not technologically possible or not economically practicable and 255 achievable in light of best industry practices. 256 257 "Initiation of stabilization activities" means: 258 1. Prepping the soil for vegetative or non - vegetative stabilization; 259 2. Applying mulch or other non - vegetative product to the exposed area; 260 3. Seeding or planting the exposed area; 261 4. Starting any of the above activities on a portion of the area to be stabilized, but 262 not on the entire area; or 263 5. Finalizing arrangements to have the stabilization product fully installed in 264 compliance with the applicable deadline for completing stabilization. 265 266 "Inspection" means an on -site review of the project's compliance with the VSMP 267 Authority Land - Disturbing Permit or VSMP Authority permit, and any applicable design 268 criteria, or an on -site review to obtain information or conduct surveys or investigations 269 necessary in the implementation or enforcement of this ordinance. 270 9 271 "Karst area" means any land area predominantly underlain at the surface or shallow 272 subsurface by limestone, dolomite, or other soluble bedrock regardless of any obvious 273 surface karst features. 274 275 "Karst features" means sinkholes, sinking and losing streams, caves, large flow springs, 276 and other such landscape features found in karst areas. 277 278 "Land disturbance" or "Land- disturbing activity" means any man -made change to the 279 land surface that potentially changes its runoff characteristics, including, but not limited 280 to clearing, grading, or excavation, except that the term shall not include those 281 exemptions specified in § 62.1- 44.15:34 and § 62.1- 44.15:51, Code of Virginia and in 282 this ordinance. 283 284 "Layout" means a conceptual drawing sufficient to provide for the specified stormwater 285 management facilities required at the time of approval. 286 287 "Localized flooding" means smaller scale flooding that may occur outside of a 288 stormwater conveyance system. This may include high water, ponding, or standing 289 water from stormwater runoff, which is likely to cause property damage or unsafe 290 conditions. 291 292 "Main channel" means the portion of the stormwater conveyance system that contains 293 the base flow and small frequent storm events. 294 295 "Major modification" means, for the purposes of this chapter, the modification or 296 amendment of an existing state permit before its expiration that is not a minor 297 modification as defined in this regulation. 298 299 "Manmade" means constructed by man. 300 301 "Measurable storm event" means a storm event resulting in an actual discharge from 302 the construction site. 303 304 "Minor modification" means, for the purposes of this chapter, minor modification or 305 amendment of an existing state permit before its expiration for the reasons listed at 40 306 CFR 122.63 and as specified in 9VAC25- 870 -640. Minor modification for the purposes 307 of this chapter also means other modifications and amendments not requiring extensive 308 review and evaluation including, but not limited to, changes in EPA promulgated test 309 protocols, increasing monitoring frequency requirements, changes in sampling 310 locations, and changes to compliance dates within the overall compliance schedules. A 311 minor state permit modification or amendment does not substantially alter state permit 312 conditions, substantially increase or decrease the amount of surface water impacts, 313 increase the size of the operation, or reduce the capacity of the facility to protect human 314 health or the environment. 315 7 316 "Natural channel design concepts" means the utilization of engineering analysis based 317 on fluvial geomorphic processes to create, rehabilitate, restore, or stabilize an open 318 conveyance system for the purpose of creating or recreating a stream that conveys its 319 bank full storm event within its banks and allows larger flows to access its floodplain. 320 321 "Natural stream" means a tidal or non -tidal watercourse that is part of the natural 322 topography. It usually maintains a continuous or seasonal flow during the year and is 323 characterized as being irregular in cross - section with a meandering course. Constructed 324 channels such as drainage ditches or swales shall not be considered natural streams; 325 however, channels designed utilizing natural channel design concepts may be 326 considered natural streams. 327 328 "Operator" means the owner or operator of any facility or activity subject to regulation 329 under this Ordinance. 330 331 "Peak flow rate" means the maximum instantaneous flow from a prescribed design 332 storm at a particular location. 333 334 "Percent impervious" means the impervious area within the site divided by the area of 335 the site multiplied by 100. 336 337 "Permit" or "VSMP authority permit" means an approval to conduct a land- disturbing 338 activity issued by the Frederick County Public Works Department, the permit- issuing 339 VSMP authority, for the initiation of a land- disturbing activity after evidence of coverage 340 under the General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities 341 found in (9VAC25 -880 et seq.) of the Virginia Stormwater Management Program 342 Regulations has been provided. A person shall not conduct any land disturbing activity 343 until he has submitted a permit application to the VSMP authority that includes a state 344 VSMP permit registration statement, if such statement is required, a stormwater 345 management plan or an executed agreement in lieu of a stormwater plan, and has 346 obtained VSMP authority approval to begin land disturbance. 347 348 "Perm ittee" means the person to whom the Permit is issued. 349 350 "Person" means any individual, corporation, partnership, association, state, municipality, 351 commission, or political subdivision of a state, governmental body, including federal, 352 state, or local entity as applicable, any interstate body or any other legal entity. 353 354 "Point of discharge" means a location at which concentrated stormwater runoff is 355 released. 356 357 "Post development" refers to conditions that reasonably may be expected or anticipated 358 to exist after completion of the land development activity on a specific site. 359 360 "Predevelopment" refers to the conditions that exist at the time that plans for the land 361 development of a tract of land are submitted to the plan approval VSMP authority. 9 362 Where phased development or plan approval occurs (preliminary grading, demolition of 363 existing structures, roads and utilities, etc.), the existing conditions at the time prior to 364 the first item being submitted shall establish predevelopment conditions. 365 366 "Prior developed lands" means land that has been previously utilized for residential, 367 commercial, industrial, institutional, recreation, transportation or utility facilities or 368 structures, and that will have the impervious areas associated with those uses altered 369 during a land- disturbing activity. 370 371 "Qualified personnel" means a person knowledgeable in the principles and practices of 372 erosion and sediment and stormwater management controls who possesses the skills to 373 assess conditions at the construction site for the operator that could impact stormwater 374 quality and quantity and to assess the effectiveness of any sediment and erosion control 375 measures or stormwater management facilities selected to control the quality and 376 quantity of stormwater discharges from the construction activity. 377 378 "Regulations" means the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Permit 379 Regulations, 9VAC25- 870 -10, et seq, as amended, and /or the Virginia Erosion and 380 Sediment Control Regulations 9VAC25- 840 -10, et seq, as amended. 381 382 "Responsible land disturber" means an individual from the project or development team, 383 who will be in charge and responsible for carrying out a land- disturbing activity covered 384 by an agreement in lieu of a plan, when applicable, or an approved erosion and 385 sediment control plan , who (i) holds a certificate of competence as a responsible land 386 disturber, or (ii) holds a current certificate of competence from the Board in the area of 387 inspection, or (iii) holds a current contractor certificate of competence for erosion and 388 sediment control, or (iv) is licensed in Virginia as a professional engineer, architect, 389 certified landscape architect or land surveyor pursuant to Section 54.1 -400 et seq. of 390 Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia. 391 392 "Runoff" or "stormwater runoff' means that portion of precipitation that is discharged 393 across the land surface or through conveyances to one or more waterways. 394 395 "Runoff characteristics" include maximum velocity, peak flow rate, volume, and flow 396 duration. 397 398 "Runoff volume" means the volume of water that runs off the site from a prescribed 399 design storm. 400 401 "Single- family residence" means a non - commercial dwelling that is occupied exclusively 402 by one family. 403 404 "Site" means the land or water area where any facility or activity is physically located or 405 conducted, a parcel of land being developed, or a designated area of a parcel in which 406 the land development project is located. Also, means the land or water area where any 9 407 facility or land- disturbing activity is physically located or conducted, including adjacent 408 land used or preserved in connection with the facility or land- disturbing activity. 409 410 "Site hydrology" means the movement of water on, across, through and off the site as 411 determined by parameters including, but not limited to, soil types, soil permeability, 412 vegetative cover, seasonal water tables, slopes, land cover, and impervious cover. 413 414 "State" means the Commonwealth of Virginia. 415 416 State permit" means an approval to conduct a land- disturbing activity issued by the 417 board in the form of a state stormwater individual permit or coverage issued under a 418 state general permit or an approval issued by the board for stormwater discharges from 419 an MS4. Under these state permits, the Commonwealth imposes and enforces 420 requirements pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act and regulations, the Act and this 421 chapter. As the mechanism that imposes and enforces requirements pursuant to the 422 federal Clean Water Act and regulations, a state permit for stormwater discharges from 423 an MS4 and, after June 30, 2014, a state permit for conducting a land- disturbing activity 424 issued pursuant to the Act, are also types of Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination 425 System (VPDES) Permits. State permit does not include any state permit that has not 426 yet been the subject of final board action, such as a draft state permit. Approvals issued 427 pursuant to this chapter, 9VAC25 -880, and 9VAC25 -890 are not issuances of a permit 428 under § 62.1- 44.15.01 of the Code of Virginia. 429 430 "State waters" means all water, on the surface and under the ground, wholly or partially 431 within or bordering the Commonwealth or within its jurisdiction, including wetlands. 432 433 "Stormwater" means precipitation that is discharged across the land surface or through 434 conveyances to one or more waterways and that may include stormwater runoff, snow 435 melt runoff, and surface runoff and drainage. 436 437 "Stormwater conveyance system" means a combination of drainage components that 438 are used to convey stormwater discharge, either within or downstream of the land - 439 disturbing activity. This includes: 440 1. "Manmade stormwater conveyance system" means a pipe, ditch, vegetated 441 swale, or other stormwater conveyance system constructed by man except for 442 restored stormwater conveyance systems; 443 2. "Natural stormwater conveyance system" means the main channel of a natural 444 stream and the flood -prone area adjacent to the main channel; or 445 3. "Restored stormwater conveyance system" means a stormwater conveyance 446 system that has been designed and constructed using natural channel design 447 concepts. Restored stormwater conveyance systems include the main channel 448 and the flood -prone area adjacent to the main channel. 449 450 "Stormwater discharge associated with construction activity" means a discharge of 451 stormwater runoff from areas where land- disturbing activities (e.g., clearing, grading, or 452 excavation), construction materials or equipment storage or maintenance (e.g., fill piles, 10 453 borrow area, concrete truck washout, fueling), or other industrial stormwater directly 454 related to the construction process (e.g., concrete or asphalt batch plants) are located. 455 456 "Stormwater management facility" means a control measure that controls stormwater 457 runoff and changes the characteristics of that runoff including, but not limited to, the 458 quantity and quality, the period of release or the velocity of flow. 459 460 "Stormwater management plan" means a document(s) containing material for 461 describing methods for complying with the requirements of this ordinance and the 462 VSMP Permit regulations. 463 464 "Stormwater management concept plan" means a document(s) developed at the 465 preliminary plan, zoning, or other stage of the development process that establishes the 466 initial layout of the development along with sufficient information to ensure that the final 467 development stormwater management plan will comply with this ordinance. 468 469 "Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan" or "SWPPP" means a document that is 470 prepared in accordance with good engineering practices and that identifies potential 471 sources of pollutants that may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of 472 stormwater discharges from the construction site. In addition the document shall identify 473 and require the implementation of control measures, and shall include, but not be 474 limited to the inclusion of, and/ or the incorporation by reference of an approved erosion 475 and sediment control plan, an approved stormwater management plan, and a pollution 476 prevention plan. 477 478 "Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Template" or "SWPPP Template" means a 479 document intended to be used for single family residential construction land- disturbing 480 activity that disturbs less than one acre of land and is part of a larger common plan of 481 development to identify all applicable requirements of the SWPPP that was developed 482 for the larger common plan of development. 483 484 "Subdivision" means the same as defined in the Frederick County Subdivision 485 Ordinance (Chapter 144 of Frederick County, Virginia Code). 486 487 "Surface waters" means 488 1. All waters that are currently used, were used in the past, or may be 489 susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters that are 490 subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; 491 2. All interstate waters, including interstate wetlands; 492 3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent 493 streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, 494 playa lakes, or natural ponds the use, degradation, or destruction of which would 495 affect or could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: 496 a. That is used or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for 497 recreational or other purposes; 11 498 b. From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate 499 or foreign commerce; or 500 c. That is used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in 501 interstate commerce. 502 4. All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as surface waters under this 503 definition; 504 5. Tributaries of waters identified in subdivisions 1 through 4 of this definition; 505 6. The territorial sea; and 506 7. Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) 507 identified in subdivisions 1 through 6 of this definition. 508 509 "Total maximum daily load" or "TMDU means the sum of the individual wasteload 510 allocations for point sources, load allocations for nonpoint sources, natural background 511 loading and a margin of safety. TMDLs can be expressed in terms of either mass per 512 time, toxicity, or other appropriate measure. The TMDL process provides for point 513 versus nonpoint source trade -offs. 514 515 Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Program ( VESCP) land disturbance or VESCP 516 land- disturbing activity means any man -made change to the land surface that may result 517 in soil erosion from water or wind and the movement of sediments into state waters or 518 onto lands in the Commonwealth, including, but not limited to, clearing, grading, 519 excavating, transporting and filling of land, except that the term shall not include: 520 1. Minor land- disturbing activities such as home gardens and individual home 521 landscaping, repairs and maintenance work; 522 2. Individual service connections; 523 3. Installation, maintenance, or repair of any underground public utility lines when 524 such activity occurs on an existing hard surfaced road, street or sidewalk 525 provided the land- disturbing activity is confined to the area of the road, street or 526 sidewalk that is hard surfaced; 527 4. Septic tank lines or drainage fields unless included in an overall plan for land - 528 disturbing activity relating to construction of the building to be served by the 529 septic tank system; 530 5. Permitted surface or deep mining operations and projects, or oil and gas 531 operations and projects conducted pursuant to Title 45.1 of the Code of Virginia; 532 6. Tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural, horticultural, or forest crops, 533 livestock feedlot operations, or as additionally set forth by the Board in regulation, 534 including engineering operations as follows: construction of terraces, terrace 535 outlets, check dams, desilting basins, dikes, ponds, ditches, strip cropping, lister 536 furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land drainage and land 537 irrigation; however, this exception shall not apply to harvesting of forest crops 538 unless the area on which harvesting occurs is reforested artificially or naturally in 539 accordance with the provisions of Chapter 11 (§ 10.1 -1100 et seq.) of Title 10.1 540 of the Code of Virginia or is converted to bona fide agricultural or improved 541 pasture use as described in subsection B of § 10.1 -1163 of the Code of Virginia; 542 7. Repair or rebuilding of the tracks, right -of -way, bridges, communication 543 facilities and other related structures and facilities of a railroad company; 12 544 8. Agricultural engineering operations, including but not limited to the 545 construction of terraces, terrace outlets, check dams, desilting basins, dikes, 546 ponds not required to comply with the provisions of the Dam Safety Act, Article 2 547 (§ 10.1 -604 et seq.) of Chapter 6 of Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia, ditches, 548 strip cropping, lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land 549 drainage and land irrigation; 550 9. Disturbed land areas of less than 10,000 square feet in size; however, the 551 governing body of the program authority may reduce this exception to a smaller 552 area of disturbed land or qualify the conditions under which this exception shall 553 apply; 554 10. Installation of fence and sign posts or telephone and electric poles and other 555 kinds of posts or poles; 556 11. Shoreline erosion control projects on tidal waters when all of the land - 557 disturbing activities are within the regulatory authority of and approved by local 558 wetlands boards, the Marine Resources Commission or the United States Army 559 Corps of Engineers; however, any associated land that is disturbed outside of 560 this exempted area shall remain subject to this chapter and the regulations 561 adopted pursuant thereto; and 562 12. Emergency work to protect life, limb or property, and emergency repairs; 563 however, if the land- disturbing activity would have required an approved erosion 564 and sediment control plan, if the activity were not an emergency, then the land 565 area disturbed shall be shaped and stabilized in accordance with the 566 requirements of the VESCP authority. 567 568 "Virginia Stormwater Management Act" or "Act" means Article 2.3 ( §62.1- 44.15:24 et 569 seq.) of Chapter 3.1 of Title 62.1 of the Code of Virginia. 570 571 "Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse website" means a website that contains 572 detailed design standards and specifications for control measures that may be used in 573 Virginia to comply with the requirements of the Virginia Stormwater Management Act 574 and associated regulations. 575 576 "Virginia Stormwater Management Handbook" means a collection of pertinent 577 information that provides general guidance for compliance with the Act and associated 578 regulations and is developed by the Department with advice from a stakeholder 579 advisory committee. 580 581 "Virginia Stormwater Management Program" or "VSMP' means the program established 582 by Frederick County and approved by the Board to manage the quality and quantity of 583 runoff resulting from land- disturbing activities and includes Frederick County's local 584 ordinance and requirements for plan review, inspection, enforcement, permit 585 requirements, policies and guidelines, and technical materials. 586 587 "Virginia Stormwater Management Program authority" or "VSMP authority means a 588 program approved by the board after September 13, 2011, that has been established by 589 a VSMP authority to manage the quality and quantity of runoff resulting from land- 13 590 disturbing activities and shall include such items as local ordinances, rules, permit 591 requirements, annual standards and specifications, policies and guidelines, technical 592 materials, and requirements for plan review, inspection, enforcement, where authorized 593 in the Act and associated regulations, and evaluation consistent with the requirements 594 of the SWM Act and associated regulations. 595 596 "Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) land disturbance" or "VSMP land - 597 disturbing activity" means a manmade change to the land surface that potentially 598 changes its runoff characteristics including clearing, grading, or excavation, except that 599 the term shall not include: 600 1. Permitted surface or deep mining operations and projects, or oil and gas 601 operations and projects conducted under the provisions of Title 45.1 of the Code 602 of Virginia; 603 2. Clearing of lands specifically for agricultural purposes and the management, 604 tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural, horticultural, or forest crops, 605 livestock feedlot operations, or as additionally set forth by the Board in 606 regulations, including engineering operations as follows: construction of terraces, 607 terrace outlets, check dams, desilting basins, dikes, ponds, ditches, strip 608 cropping, lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land drainage, 609 and land irrigation; however, this exception shall not apply to harvesting of forest 610 crops unless the area on which harvesting occurs is reforested artificially or 611 naturally in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 11 (§ 10.1 -1100 et seq.) of 612 Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia or is converted to bona fide agricultural or 613 improved pasture use as described in subsection B of § 10.1 -1163 of the Code of 614 Virginia; 615 3. Single- family residences separately built and disturbing less than one acre and 616 not part of a larger common plan of development or sale, including additions or 617 modifications to existing single - family detached residential structures; 618 4. Land - disturbing activities that disturb less than one acre of land area except 619 for activities that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale that is 620 one acre or greater of disturbance; however, the governing body of any locality 621 that administers a VSMP may reduce this exception to a smaller area of 622 disturbed land or qualify the conditions under which this exception shall apply; 623 5. Discharges to a sanitary sewer or a combined sewer system; 624 6. Activities under a State of federal reclamation program to return an abandoned 625 property to an agricultural or open land use; 626 7. Routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and grade, 627 hydraulic capacity, or original construction of the project. The paving of an 628 existing road with a compacted or impervious surface and reestablishment of 629 existing associated ditches and shoulders shall be deemed routine maintenance 630 if performed in accordance with this subsection; 631 8. Conducting land- disturbing activities in response to a public emergency where 632 the related work requires immediate authorization to avoid imminent 633 endangerment to human health or the environment. In such situations, the VSMP 634 authority shall be advised of the disturbance within seven days of commencing 635 the land- disturbing activity and compliance with the administrative requirements 14 of subsection A, including a registration statement that substantiates the occurrence of an emergency, is required within 30 days of commencing the land - disturbing activity. "VSMP Construction General Permit" or "Construction General Permit" means the General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities found in 9VAC25 -880 of the Virginia Stormwater Management Program Regulations. "Wasteload allocation" or "wasteload" or "WLA" means the portion of a receiving surface water's loading or assimilative capacity allocated to one of its existing or future point sources of pollution. WLAs are a type of water quality -based effluent limitation. "Watershed" means a defined land area drained by a river or stream, karst system, or system of connecting rivers or streams such that all surface water within the area flows through a single outlet. In karst areas, the karst feature to which the water drains may be considered the single outlet for the watershed. "Wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. § 143 -125 Permits Required and Exemptions A. No person shall conduct a VESCP land- disturbing activity as defined in the § 143 -110 until a Frederick County land disturbing permit has been obtained from the Administrator. Reference: § 62.1- 44.15:55 B. No person shall conduct a VSMP land disturbing activity as defined in the § 143- 110 until a Frederick County land disturbing - permit as required in item A and a VSMP authority permit has been obtained from the Administrator. Reference: § 62.1- 44.15:34(A) § 143 -130 Permit Application A. Prior to issuance of a Frederick County land disturbing permit for a VESCP land disturbing activity, the following items must be submitted in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and approved: 1. Frederick County land disturbing permit application; 2. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to include all required elements applicable to a VESCP land disturbing activity; 15 681 3. An erosion and sediment control plan and narrative to comply with Virginia 682 erosion and sediment control requirements and Frederick County erosion and 683 sediment control requirements as outlined in this regulation. 684 4. The performance bond(s) in compliance with § 143 -240 and 685 5. The applicable permit fee. 686 687 B. Prior to issuance of a Frederick County VSMP permit for a VSMP land disturbing 688 activity the following items must be submitted in accordance with the provisions 689 of this chapter and approved: 690 1. The requirements of land disturbing permit application of subsection A, 691 2. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to include all required 692 elements applicable to a VSMP land disturbing activity, 693 3. A stormwater management plan or an executed agreement in lieu of a plan 694 that complies with Virginia stormwater requirements and Frederick County 695 stormwater requirements as outlined in this regulation. 696 4. A VSMP Authority permit application / registration statement, if such statement is 697 required. A person shall not conduct any land- disturbing activity until he has 698 submitted a permit application to the VSMP authority that includes a state VSMP 699 permit statement, if such statement is required. A registration statement is not 700 required for detached single - family home construction within or outside of 701 common plan of development or sale, but such projects must adhere to the 702 requirements of the general permit. §62.1- 44.15:28.8 703 5. All appropriate fees and 704 6. Evidence of coverage under the state general permit for discharges from 705 construction activities through the Virginia electronic database. 706 707 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -59; 9VAC25- 870 -108; 9VAC25- 870 -750; 62.1- 44.15:34 708 709 C. Prior to issuing coverage under an existing VSMP Authority permit for a land - 710 disturbing activity within a common plan of development, the following items must 711 be addressed: 712 1. The requirements of a Frederick County land disturbing permit application; 713 and 714 2. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to include all required 715 elements applicable to a VSMP land disturbing activity, or when the area of 716 disturbance is less than one acre, a SWPPP Template and a BMP 717 Implementation Plan consistent with the BMP performance goals of the 718 common plan of development. 719 3. A stormwater management plan that complies with Virginia stormwater 720 requirements and Frederick County stormwater requirements as outlined in 721 this regulation. 722 723 D. Whenever a land- disturbing activity is proposed to be conducted by a contractor 724 performing construction work pursuant to a construction contract, the preparation 725 and submission of plans, obtaining approval of the required plans, and obtaining 726 all required permits shall be the responsibility of the owner of the land. 16 Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:34; 9VAC25- 870 -54; 9VAC25- 870 -108; 9VAC25 - 870 -1170. § 143 -145 Applicable Design Standards, Specifications and Methods A. The standards contained within the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations (VESCR), the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook (VESCH) (latest edition), the Virginia Stormwater Management Handbook (VSMH) (latest edition), and any additional guidance provided by the VSMP Authority are to be used by the applicant in the preparation and submission of an erosion and sediment control plan, and by the VSMP Authority in considering the adequacy of a plan submittal. When the standards vary between the publications, the state regulations shall take precedence. B. The latest approved version of BMPs found on the Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse Website shall be utilized to effectively reduce the pollutant load and runoff volume as required in this chapter in accordance with the Virginia Runoff Reduction Method. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -65 C. The erosion and sediment control plan and stormwater management plan shall consider all sources of surface runoff and all sources of subsurface and groundwater flows converted to surface run -off. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -55 (A) D. Proposed residential, commercial, or industrial subdivisions shall apply these stormwater management criteria to the development project as a whole. Individual lots or parcels shall not be considered separate development projects, but rather the entire subdivision shall be considered a single development project. Hydrologic parameters shall reflect the ultimate development and shall be used in all engineering calculations. Implementation of the plan may be phased or carried out by individual or separate applicants as referenced in § 143- 130(C). E. Unless otherwise specified, the following shall apply to the hydrologic computations of this section: 1. The prescribed design storms are the one -year, two -year, and 10 -year 24- hour storms using the site - specific rainfall precipitation frequency data recommended by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14 and provided in the VA SWM Handbook. 17 771 2. All hydrologic analyses shall be based on the existing watershed 772 characteristics and how the ultimate development condition of the subject 773 project will be addressed. 774 3. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation 775 Service (NRCS) synthetic 24 -hour rainfall distribution and models, including, 776 but not limited to TR -55 and TR -20, hydrologic and hydraulic methods 777 developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or other NRCS standard 778 hydrologic and hydraulic methods, shall be used to conduct the analyses 779 described in this part. 780 4. For purposes of computing predevelopment runoff, all pervious lands on the 781 site shall be assumed to be in good hydrologic condition in accordance with 782 the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service 783 (NRCS) standards, regardless of conditions existing at the time of 784 computation. 785 5. Predevelopment and post development runoff characteristics and site 786 hydrology shall be verified by site inspections, topographic surveys, available 787 soil mapping or studies, and calculations consistent with good engineering 788 practices. Guidance provided in the Virginia Stormwater Management 789 Handbook and by the Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse shall be 790 considered appropriate practices. 791 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -72 792 6. All proposed sediment control or stormwater impounding structures shall be 793 designed in accordance with State standards. 794 795 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -85 796 797 § 143 -148 Grandfathering provisions 798 799 A. Any land- disturbing activity shall be considered grandfathered by the VSMP authority 800 and shall be subject to the Part II C (9VAC25- 870 -93 et seq.) technical criteria of this 801 chapter provided: 802 803 1. A proffered or conditional zoning plan, zoning with a plan of development, preliminary 804 or final subdivision plat, preliminary or final site plan, or any document determined by 805 the locality to be equivalent thereto (i) was approved by the locality prior to July 1, 2012, 806 (ii) provided a layout as defined in 9VAC25- 870 -10, (iii) will comply with the Part II C 807 technical criteria of this chapter, and (iv) has not been subsequently modified or 808 amended in a manner resulting in an increase in the amount of phosphorus leaving 809 each point of discharge, and such that there is no increase in the volume or rate of 810 runoff; 811 812 2. A state permit has not been issued prior to July 1, 2014; and 813 814 3. Land disturbance did not commence prior to July 1, 2014. 815 im B. Locality, state, and federal projects shall be considered grandfathered by the VSMP authority and shall be subject to the Part II C technical criteria of this chapter provided: 1. There has been an obligation of locality, state, or federal funding, in whole or in part, prior to July 1, 2012, or the department has approved a stormwater management plan prior to July 1, 2012; 2. A state permit has not been issued prior to July 1, 2014; and 3. Land disturbance did not commence prior to July 1, 2014 C. Land disturbing activities grandfathered under subsections A and B of this section shall remain subject to the Part II C technical criteria of this chapter for one additional state permit cycle. After such time, portions of the project not under construction shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted by the board. D. In cases where governmental bonding or public debt financing has been issued for a project prior to July 1, 2012, such project shall be subject to the technical criteria of Part II C. E. Nothing in this section shall preclude an operator from constructing to a more stringent standard at his discretion. References: 9VAC25- 870 -48, § 62.1- 44.15:25,62.1- 44.15:28 § 143 -150 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Components and Applicability For each of the following activities as may be relevant, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) shall contain the indicated components: A. VESCP Land - Disturbing Activities: 1. General SWPPP requirements as described in § 143 -155; and 2. An erosion and sediment control (ESC) plan or if single family residential construction an agreement in lieu of an ESC plan as described in § 143 -160; B. VSMP Land - Disturbing Activities: 1. General SWPPP requirements as described in § 143 -155; 2. An ESC plan or if single family residential construction an agreement in lieu of an ESC plan as described in § 143 -160; 3. A SWM plan as described in § 143 -165; and 4. A SWPPP plan as described in § 143 -175. C. VSMP Land - Disturbing Activities part of a larger Common Plan of Development shall include: 1. General SWPPP requirements as described in § 143 -155; 2. An ESC plan or if single family residential construction an agreement in lieu of an ESC plan as described in § 143 -160; and 3. A SWM Plan as described in § 143 -165, or if less than 1 acre, a BMP Implementation Plan or a completed SWPPP Template demonstrating 19 compliance with all applicable elements of the approved SWPPP developed for the larger common plan of development D. The requirements for a SWPPP as outlined in §9VAC25- 870 -54 shall be included with each plan submitted for review. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:34; 9VAC25- 870 -53; 9VAC25- 870 -54; 9VAC25 -870- 30.; 9VAC- 880 -70 Section II. § 143 -155 General Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Requirements A. In addition to the applicable components as provided in § 143 -150, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall include the following general requirements: 1. Contact information. 2. The SWPPP Certification. 3. The Operator Certification 4. Certification of Compliance with all other applicable permits necessary for activities in state waters and wetlands or appropriate waivers of jurisdiction have been obtained. B. Prior to engaging in the land- disturbing activities shown on the approved plan, the person responsible for carrying out the plan shall provide the name of a Qualified Personnel to the Administrator. Failure to provide the name of an individual holding a certificate of competence prior to engaging in land- disturbing activities may result in revocation of the approval of the plan and the person responsible for carrying out the plan shall be subject to the penalties provided in § 143 -225. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15.55 (B) C. The SWPPP must be maintained at a central location onsite. If an onsite location is unavailable, notice of the SWPPP's location must be posted near the main entrance at the construction site. The operator shall make SWPPP's and all updates available upon request to County personnel. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -54 (G) § 143 -160. Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan Requirements A. As required in § 143 -150, an erosion and sediment control plan shall be developed and referenced into the SWPPP. B. The erosion and sediment control plan shall be designed to control stormwater volume and velocity within the site to minimize soil erosion and to minimize sediment discharges from the site by incorporating the following performance goals to the maximum extent practicable: 1. The area of land disturbance at any one time shall be the minimum necessary to install and /or construct the proposed site improvements. 2. The installation and /or construction of the proposed site improvements shall be phased to limit the duration of exposed soils to the minimum time needed 20 907 to construct and /or install the improvements in the immediate vicinity of the 908 disturbance. 909 3. The disturbance and /or compaction of the existing native soils shall be 910 minimized by directing construction traffic, material stockpiling, and other 911 activities to only those areas of the site that are designated for proposed 912 infrastructure (buildings, roads, parking areas, etc.). 913 4. Disturbance of slopes 15% or steeper shall be avoided to the maximum 914 extent practicable given the proposed site improvements. When disturbance 915 of steep slopes is unavoidable, or the resulting grade of exposed soil is 15% 916 or greater, the area shall be stabilized immediately with an approved soil 917 stabilization matting. 918 5. Existing topsoil shall be preserved to the maximum extent practical. 919 6. The selection and design of erosion and sediment controls shall be based on 920 the expected frequency, intensity, and duration of precipitation, and the 921 corresponding expected volume of runoff and sediment erosion, 922 sedimentation, and transport during the land- disturbing activity. 923 a. The volume and peak flow rate of runoff from the construction site should 924 be estimated for the 2 -year and /or 10 -year design storms as required for 925 the particular controls being considered using accepted NRCS hydrologic 926 methods as described in the VESCH and the VSWMH, latest editions; and 927 b. The expected volume of sediment erosion, sedimentation, and transport 928 during land- disturbing activities should be estimated considering the 929 surface area, length, and slope of exposed soil, the soil horizons exposed 930 by grading activities, and the range of soil particle sizes expected to be 931 present. 932 7. Provide 50 -foot natural vegetated buffers around surface waters, and direct 933 stormwater to vegetated areas where feasible. Where infeasible, alternate 934 practices that remove or filter sediment and maximize stormwater infiltration 935 may be approved by Frederick County in accordance with state standards; 936 8. Sediment basins, when used in accordance with the requirements of the 937 VESCH shall incorporate an outlet structure that discharges from the surface. 938 939 Reference: 9VAC25 -870 Section I IA.2. b (4); 9VAC25- 870 -54. F 940 941 C. When the land- disturbing activity is part of a larger common plan of development, 942 the ESC plan shall demonstrate compliance with the approved SWPPP for the 943 larger common plan of development , and shall contain the following: 944 Information and /or statements demonstrating compliance with the minimum 945 standards of the erosion and sediment control regulations of the Board (9VAC25 - 946 840). 947 1. Compliance with the water quantity requirements of §§ 62.1 -44.2 et seq. of 948 the Code of Virginia shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of 9VAC25 - 949 840 - 40(19) (Minimum Standard 19 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment 950 Control Regulations). 951 2. A statement by the permittee that all erosion and sediment control measures 952 shall be maintained and that the permittee will inspect the erosion and 21 953 sediment control measures at least once in every two -week period and within 954 48 hours following rainstorm events of 0.25 inches or greater during 955 construction to ensure continued compliance with the approved plan. Records 956 of self- inspection shall be maintained on the site and available for review by 957 county inspectors. 958 3. The location, dimensions, and other information as required ensuring the 959 proper construction and maintenance of all temporary erosion and sediment 960 controls necessary to comply with the provisions of this chapter. 961 4. Calculations for sediment traps, basins, outlet protection, etc. as applicable. 962 5. A sequence of construction and clear delineation of the initial areas of land 963 disturbance necessary for installation of the initial erosion and sediment 964 control measures such as earthen dams, dikes, and diversions. The areas of 965 initial land disturbance shall be the minimum necessary for installation of the 966 initial erosion and sediment control measures and the delineation should 967 include all areas necessary for such installation, including stockpiles, borrow 968 areas, and staging areas. The sequence should also include the stabilization 969 of these areas immediately upon reaching final grade. 970 6. Clear delineation of the proposed areas of land disturbance and those areas 971 to be protected from construction activity and traffic, including the following: 972 a. Minimize the disturbance of slopes 15% or greater; and 973 b. Minimize soil compaction and, unless infeasible, preserve topsoil. 974 7. Requirement that final stabilization of disturbed areas shall be initiated 975 immediately upon reaching final grade on any portion of the site, and that 976 temporary stabilization shall be initiated immediately upon areas that may not 977 be at final grade but will remain dormant for longer than 14 days. Stabilization 978 shall be applied within 7 days of initiating stabilization activities. 979 8. A comprehensive drainage plan including: 980 a. The existing and proposed drainage patterns on the site; 981 b. All contributing drainage areas to permanent stormwater practices and 982 temporary sediment controls; 983 c. Existing streams, ponds, culverts, ditches, wetlands, other water bodies, 984 and floodplains ; 985 d. Land cover such as forest meadow, and other vegetative areas; 986 e. Current land use including existing structures, roads, and locations of 987 known utilities and easements; 988 f. Sufficient information on adjoining parcels to assess the impacts of 989 stormwater from the site on these parcels; 990 g. Proposed buildings, roads, parking areas, utilities, and stormwater 991 management facilities; and 992 h. Proposed land use with tabulation of the percentage of surface area to be 993 adapted to various uses, including but not limited to forest or reforestation, 994 buffers, impervious cover, managed turf (lawns), and easements. 995 10. The location of any stormwater management practices and sequence of 996 construction. 997 11. Temporary natural vegetated buffers in accordance with the requirements of 998 the VSMP Construction General Permit. These buffers shall be delineated on 22 999 the ESC Plan and protected with accepted signage, safety fence, or other 1000 barrier. 1001 D. In lieu of the plan described in subsections A and B of this section, single family 1002 residential construction that is not part of a larger common plan of development, 1003 including additions or modifications to an existing single - family detached 1004 residential structures, may execute an ESC Agreement in Lieu of an Erosion and 1005 Sediment Control Plan with the Administrator. 1006 E. In lieu of the plan described in subsections A and B of this section, single family 1007 residential construction that disturbs less than 1 acre and is part of a larger 1008 common plan of development, may execute a SWPPP Template with the 1009 Administrator that demonstrates compliance with the practices and strategies 1010 identified for the lot or parcel in the larger common plan of development SWPPP. 1011 F. In regard to the erosion and sediment control minimum standards, the following 1012 changes are effective within Frederick County (references are to 9VAC25 -840- 1013 40): 1014 1. Subsection 6.b. Surface run -off from disturbed areas that are comprised of 1015 flow from drainage areas greater than or equal to three acres shall be 1016 controlled by a sediment basin. The minimum storage capacity of a sediment 1017 basin shall be 134 cubic yards per acre of drainage area. The outfall system 1018 shall, at a minimum, maintain the structural integrity of the basin during a 100- 1019 year -storm of twenty -four hour duration. Runoff coefficients used in runoff 1020 calculations shall correspond to a bare earth condition or those expected to 1021 exist while the sediment basin is utilized. 1022 2. Subsection 14 - Regulation of Watercourse Crossing - All applicable federal, 1023 state and local regulations pertaining to working in or crossing live 1024 watercourses shall be met. Prior to obtaining a land disturbance permit, 1025 copies of all applicable environmental permits, including but not limited to 1026 wetland disturbance, stream crossing, stormwater discharge permits, shall be 1027 submitted with the application. 1028 3. Subsection 17 - Vehicular Sediment Tracking - Where construction vehicle 1029 access routes intersect paved or public roads, provisions shall be made to 1030 minimize the transport of sediment by vehicular tracking onto paved or public 1031 road surface; the road surface shall be cleaned thoroughly at the end of each 1032 day. Sediment shall be removed from roads by shoveling or sweeping and 1033 transported to a sediment disposal area. Street washing shall be allowed only 1034 after sediment is removed in this manner. This provision shall apply to 1035 individual development lots as well as to larger land- disturbing activities. 1036 4. In subdivisions, the owner /developer of the subdivision shall be responsible 1037 for compliance with the standard set forth in section 3 until the streets are 1038 taken into the Virginia Department of Transportation's Secondary Road 1039 System for maintenance, and the plan submitted for approval shall include a 1040 detailed plan or narrative to ensure transport of sediment onto subdivision 1041 streets does not occur during any phase of construction, including but not 1042 limited to construction of all infrastructure, utilities, and building construction. 1043 In addition, if individual lots or sections in a subdivision are being developed 1044 by a different owner, such owner shall be jointly and severally responsible 23 1045 with the owner /developer of the subdivision for achieving compliance with this 1046 minimum standard, and the erosion and sediment control plan, or "agreement 1047 in lieu of a plan," submitted for approval shall include a detailed plan or 1048 narrative to ensure transport of sediment onto the applicable roads does not 1049 occur during any phase of construction, including but not limited to 1050 construction of all infrastructure, utilities, and building construction. 1051 5. The provision found in Subsection 19b (1) is deleted. 1052 6. In order to assure proper stormwater drainage and site stabilization, the 1053 following policies are hereby adopted concerning all development. Prior to 1054 release of building permits, the following infrastructure shall be completed and 1055 stabilized within the subdivision, subsection or phase as shown on the 1056 approved plan: 1057 a. Stormwater conveyance systems, including but not limited to culverts, 1058 road surface, curb and gutter, stormwater structures, drainage swales and 1059 ditches, channel linings and all cleared areas shall be stabilized, etc. 1060 b. Submittal of a certified as -built plan of the subdivision, subsection or 1061 phase, which includes but is not limited to stormwater conveyance 1062 systems, curb and gutter, drainage swales and ditches, 1063 stormwater /sediment ponds, graded areas, etc. A letter from the engineer - 1064 of- record shall be included with the as -built plan which states that the 1065 subdivision has been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. 1066 c. A proposed overall lot grading plan is required by Frederick County prior 1067 to the release of building permit(s) for subdivisions. This plan shall meet 1068 the intent of the original site plan submitted by the developer. It is required 1069 that the developer provide the builder /owner a copy of the original 1070 engineered site grading plan for the particular subdivision. 1071 d. It will be necessary to submit a certified as -built plan for all lots on which 1072 proposed lot grading plans were required. This certified as -built plan shall 1073 indicate the following: properly annotated boundary lines; setback lines; 1074 proposed house footprint; offsets to house; existing grading; spot shots as 1075 necessary to show positive drainage; proposed driveway; proposed floor 1076 elevation to include basement, first floor and garage; and erosion and 1077 sediment controls, if required. The as -built plan shall be accompanied by a 1078 document prepared by a professional engineer or a certified land surveyor 1079 certifying that the as -built conditions meet the intent of the approved site 1080 grading plan. The proposed lot grading plan and the as -built survey shall 1081 be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to release of the final 1082 certificate of occupancy. 1083 7. Before adopting or revising regulations, the County shall give due notice and 1084 conduct a public hearing on the proposed or revised regulations, except that a 1085 public hearing shall not be required when the County is amending its program 1086 to conform to revisions in the state program. However, a public hearing shall 1087 be held if the County proposes or revises regulations that are more stringent 1088 than the state program. 1089 8. Pursuant to § 62.1- 44.15:53 of the Code of Virginia, an erosion control plan 1090 shall not be approved until it is reviewed by a certified plan reviewer. 24 1091 Inspections of land- disturbing activities shall be conducted by a certified 1092 inspector. The erosion control program of the County shall contain a certified 1093 program administrator, a certified plan reviewer, and a certified inspector, who 1094 may be the same person. 1095 9. The County hereby designates the Department of Public Works as the plan - 1096 approving authority. 1097 10. The program and regulations provided for in this chapter shall be made 1098 available for public inspection at the office of the Department of Public Works. 1099 1100 § 143 -165 Stormwater Management (SWM) Plan Requirements 1101 1102 A. As required in § 143 -150, a stormwater management plan shall be developed 1103 and referenced into the SWPPP. 1104 B. In addition to the plan requirements outlined in § 143 -155 and § 143 -160, the 1105 stormwater management plan shall include the following: 1106 1. A general description of the proposed stormwater management facilities, 1107 including: 1108 a. Contact information including name, address, telephone number and 1109 parcel number of the property or properties affected; 1110 b. Narrative that includes a description of current site conditions and final site 1111 conditions or if allowed by the VSMP authority, the information provided 1112 and documented during the review process that addresses the current and 1113 final site conditions; 1114 c. General description of the proposed stormwater management facilities 1115 and mechanism through which the facilities will be operated/ maintained 1116 after construction is complete; Information on type of stormwater facilities; 1117 d. The location of stormwater facilities, including geographic coordinates; 1118 e. The named surface waters to which the facility eventually drains; 1119 f. Information on proposed stormwater management facilities, including (i) 1120 type of facilities; (ii) location, including geographic coordinates; (iii) acres 1121 treated; and (iv) surface waters or karst features into which facility will 1122 discharge; 1123 g. Hydrologic /hydraulic computations, including runoff characteristics; 1124 h. Documentation /calculations verifying compliance with water quality and 1125 quantity requirements of the regulations; 1126 i. Map or maps of site that depicts topography of the site and includes: 1127 1. Contributing drainage areas; 1128 2. Existing streams, ponds, culverts, ditches, wetlands, other water 1129 bodies, floodplains; 1130 j. Soil types, geologic formations if karst features are present in the area, 1131 forest cover, other vegetative areas; 1132 k. Current land use including existing structures, roads, locations of known 1133 utilities and easements; 1134 I. Sufficient information on adjoining parcels to assess impacts of 1135 stormwater from the site on these parcels; 1136 m. Limits of clearing and grading, proposed drainage patterns on the site; 25 1137 n. Proposed buildings, roads, parking areas, utilities, stormwater 1138 management facilities; 1139 o. Proposed land use with tabulation of percentage of surface area to be 1140 adapted to various uses, including but not limited to planned locations of 1141 utilities, roads and easements. 1142 p. A stormwater management plan for a land disturbing activity shall apply 1143 the stormwater management technical criteria set for the in the part to the 1144 entire land disturbing activity. Individual lots in new residential, 1145 commercial, or industrial developments shall not be considered separate 1146 land- disturbing activities. 1147 q. A stormwater management plan shall consider all sources of surface 1148 runoff and all sources of subsurface and groundwater flows converted to 1149 surface runoff. 1150 r. Information on type/ location of stormwater discharges, information on 1151 features to which stormwater is discharged, including surface waters or 1152 karst features if present, and predevelopment/ post development drainage 1153 areas. 1154 2. All necessary documentation and calculations supporting the design and 1155 construction of the proposed stormwater management structures, including 1156 sufficient details such as cross sections, profiles, dimensions, grades, and 1157 other information as needed to ensure that the BMP facilities are built in 1158 accordance with the approved plans and BMP Design Standards and 1159 Specifications; 1160 3. Runoff Reduction Method Compliance Spreadsheet Summary Sheet. 1161 4. A landscaping plan prepared by an individual familiar with the selection of 1162 appropriate vegetation for the particular BMP (emergent and upland 1163 vegetation for wetlands, woody and /or herbaceous vegetative stabilization 1164 and management techniques to be used within and adjacent to the 1165 stormwater management facilities, etc.). The landscaping plan must also 1166 describe the maintenance of vegetation at the site and what practices should 1167 be employed to ensure that adequate vegetative cover is preserved. 1168 5. Identification of all easements provided for inspection and maintenance of 1169 stormwater management facilities in accordance with specifications in the 1170 Stormwater Management Design Manuals and Frederick County 1171 requirements. 1172 6. When Applicable, a copy of the Frederick County SWM BMP Operation and 1173 Maintenance Agreement to be recorded in the local land records prior to plan 1174 approval. This may be submitted prior to plan approval. 1175 7. When stormwater facilities are proposed on individual residential lots, a copy 1176 of the proposed Residential Lot BMP Inspection and Maintenance Agreement 1177 to be signed by the property owner upon settlement. This must be submitted 1178 prior to plan approval. 1179 8. If an applicant intends to meet the water quality requirements of subsection C 1180 of this section through the use of off -site compliance options, the a letter of 1181 availability from the off -site provider must be included, and the use of the off- 26 1182 site options shall be in accordance with the VSMP Regulations Offsite 1183 Compliance Options (9VAC25- 870 -69). 1184 C. Stormwater management (SWM) plans shall demonstrate compliance with the 1185 following: 1186 1. Stormwater runoff quality and runoff volume reduction criteria for new 1187 development. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -63. 1188 2. Stormwater runoff quality criteria for development on prior developed lands. 1189 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -63. 1190 3. Channel protection criteria. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -66. 1191 4. Flood protection criteria. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -66. 1192 5. Requirements for identifying, evaluating, and addressing increased volumes 1193 of sheet flow resulting from pervious or disconnected impervious areas or 1194 from physical spreading of concentrated flow through level spreaders. 1195 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -66. 1196 D. Prior to release of the stormwater plan surety bond, two (2) sets of the 1197 construction record drawing or as -built of permanent stormwater management 1198 facilities, also referred to as "as -built plans," in accordance with county 1199 requirements shall be submitted to the Administrator. The construction as -built 1200 shall be appropriately sealed and signed by a professional registered in the 1201 Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to Article 1 (§ 54.1 -400 et seq.) of Chapter 4 1202 of Title 54.1. of the Code of Virginia, certifying that the stormwater management 1203 facilities have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. 1204 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -108, 9VAC25- 870 -55 (D). 1205 E. Single family residential construction that is less than one acre of disturbance 1206 and part of a larger common plan of development may execute and implement a 1207 BMP Implementation Plan as part of the SWPPP Template in order to 1208 demonstrate compliance with the practices and strategies identified in the larger 1209 common plan of development SWPPP. 1210 F. Stormwater Management Facility Maintenance Agreements: Maintenance of all 1211 stormwater management facilities shall be ensured through the creation of a 1212 formal maintenance agreement that must be approved by the Administrator and 1213 recorded in the land records prior to issuance of a land- disturbing permit and 1214 contain the following provisions: 1215 1. A copy of the County Frederick County BMP Operation and Maintenance 1216 Agreement proposed for recordation in the local land records prior to plan 1217 approval to be signed by the property owner upon settlement shall be 1218 submitted with the plans. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -112. 1219 2. Responsibility for the operation and maintenance of stormwater management 1220 facilities shall remain with the property owner or an owner's association and 1221 shall pass to any successor or owner. If portions of the land are to be sold, 1222 legally binding arrangements shall be made to pass the responsibility to 1223 successors in title. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -112. 1224 3. Maintenance agreements shall be in accordance with the Frederick County 1225 requirements (BMP Inspection & Maintenance Program) and provide for all 1226 necessary access for inspections. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:39; 1227 9VAC25- 870 -112. 27 1228 4. Except as provided in item 5 below, maintenance agreements shall be 1229 enforceable (by the Administrator). Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -112. 1230 5. Individual on -lot stormwater facilities that are designed to primarily manage 1231 the runoff from the individual residential lot on which they are located require 1232 a County Residential Lot BMP Inspection & Maintenance Agreement 1233 acknowledging the presence, purpose, location, and basic maintenance 1234 requirements for the particular BMP facilities in accordance with County 1235 requirements. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -112. 1236 6. Elements of the stormwater management plans that include activities 1237 regulated under Chapter 4 (§ 54.1 -400 et seq.) of Title 54.1 of the Code of 1238 Virginia shall be appropriately sealed and signed by a professional registered 1239 in the Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to Article 1 (§ 54.1 -400 et seq.) of 1240 Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia. 1241 7. Stormwater management plans for residential, commercial or industrial 1242 subdivisions are approved and which govern the development of individual 1243 parcels within that plan, throughout the development life even if ownership 1244 changes. §62.1- 44.15:28.7 1245 1246 § 143 - 175 Pollution Prevention (PP) Plan 1247 1248 A. A Pollution Prevention (PP) plan is required for all VSMP Land - Disturbing 1249 Activities as required in § 143 -125, and shall be developed for incorporation into 1250 the SWPPP. 1251 B. The pollution prevention plan shall be developed in accordance with the 1252 Frederick County VSMP Manual to minimize the discharge of pollutants and the 1253 exposure of materials to stormwater, and prohibit illicit discharges from 1254 construction activities. 1255 C. The PP plan shall be implemented and updated as outlined in § 143 -205 (C) and 1256 the Frederick County VSMP Manual (if adopted) as necessary throughout all 1257 phases of the land- disturbing activity to implement appropriate pollution 1258 prevention measures applicable to construction activities. 1259 Reference: 9VAC25 870 -56. Pollution prevention plans. 1260 1261 § 143 - 185 Review and Approval of Plans 1262 1263 A. Upon receipt of a plan for a land- disturbing permit and accompanying plans as 1264 required by § 143 -150, the Administrator shall determine the completeness of the 1265 application and notify the applicant within 15 calendar days if the submittal is 1266 considered incomplete. 1267 B. Once the applicant has been notified of a complete submittal, the Administrator 1268 shall have an additional 60 calendar days from the date of the communication for 1269 the review of the plans to determine compliance with the requirements of this 1270 ordinance, and to communicate to the applicant the approval or disapproval of 1271 the plans. 1272 C. If a determination of completeness is not made and communicated to the 1273 applicant within the 15 calendar days, the plans shall be deemed complete as of ��3- 1274 the date of submission and a total of 60 calendar days from the date of 1275 submission shall be allowed for the review of the plans. 1276 D. If the plans are not approved, the reasons for not approving the plans shall be 1277 provided in writing to the applicant. 1278 E. The Administrator shall review within 45 calendar days of the date of 1279 resubmission any plans that have been previously disapproved. 1280 F. Unless otherwise indicated in the application, electronic communication shall be 1281 considered communication in writing. 1282 Reference: Va. Code §62.1- 44.15:55(8); §62.1- 44.15:34(A); 9VAC25- 870 -55 (B); 1283 9VAC25- 870 -108. 1284 1285 § 143 -190 Pre - Construction Meeting Required 1286 1287 No land- disturbing activities shall commence until a Pre - Construction Meeting between 1288 the Administrator and the applicant, and the individual responsible for carrying out the 1289 plan, has been conducted. The applicant shall notify the Administrator in advance to 1290 schedule the meeting on -site. 1291 1292 § 143 -195 Issuance, Time Limit, Modification, Maintenance, Transfer and /or 1293 Termination of the Frederick County Land - Disturbing Permit and the VSMP 1294 Authority Permit 1295 1296 A. Permit Issuance: Once the requirements for obtaining a Frederick County Land - 1297 Disturbing Permit and coverage under the state general permit for discharges 1298 from construction activity (if applicable) have been met, including the receipt or 1299 verification of payment of all required permit fees in accordance with the fee 1300 schedule of § 143 -235, the Administrator will issue a Frederick County Land - 1301 Disturbing Permit and a VSMP Authority permit. 1302 B. No transfer, assignment, or sale of the rights granted by virtue of a Frederick 1303 County Land - Disturbing Permit shall be made unless a written notice of transfer 1304 and corresponding permit modification fee is filed with the Administrator and the 1305 transferee certifies agreement to comply with all obligations and conditions of the 1306 permit. The Administrator may require modification or revocation and reissuance 1307 of the VSMP Authority Permit to change the name of the permittee and 1308 incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary for the transfer. 1309 C. If land- disturbing activity has not commenced within 180 days of land- disturbing 1310 or VSMP Authority permit issuance or cease for more than 180 days, the 1311 Administrator may evaluate the existing approved ESC plan to determine 1312 whether the plan still satisfies local and state erosion and sediment control 1313 criteria and to verify that all design factors are still valid. If the previously filed 1314 ESC plan is determined to be inadequate a modified plan shall be submitted and 1315 approved prior to the resumption of land- disturbing activity. 1316 Reference: 9VAC25- 840- 80(B). 1317 D. VSMP Authority Permits are effective for a fixed permit cycle of 5 years. Activities 1318 requiring a VSMP permit may obtain coverage at any time during the 5 -year 1319 permit cycle and must be renewed if the permit has not been terminated prior to 29 1320 the end of the cycle. The annual permit maintenance fees in § 143 -235 apply 1321 until the permit coverage is terminated or renewed. 1322 E. Land - disturbing activities for which VSMP Permit coverage was issued between 1323 July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2014 for that permit cycle may remain subject to the 1324 technical criteria of Part II C of the Virginia Stormwater Regulations for two 1325 additional permit cycles provided coverage under the original VSMP Permit is 1326 maintained. After two permit cycles have passed, or should the original VSMP 1327 Permit coverage not be maintained, portions of the project not under construction 1328 shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted by the VSMP 1329 Authority after the original VSMP Permit coverage was issued. 1330 F. Land - disturbing activities for which VSMP Permit coverage was issued between 1331 July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2014 for that permit cycle may elect to modify the 1332 permit by paying the appropriate permit modification fee and request approval for 1333 compliance with the technical criteria of Part II B for any remaining portions of the 1334 project. 1335 Reference: Va. Code §62.1- 44.15:24; 9VAC25- 870 -47. 1336 1337 § 143 -200 Variances /Exceptions 1338 1339 A. Frederick County may grant exceptions or modify the ESC requirements of land - 1340 disturbing activities if the requirements are deemed inappropriate or too 1341 restrictive for site conditions by granting a variance. A variance may be granted 1342 under the following conditions: 1343 1. At the time of plan submission, an applicant may request a variance from the 1344 requirements of an erosion and sediment control plan. The applicant shall 1345 explain the reasons for requesting variances in writing. Specific variances 1346 which are allowed shall be documented in the plan. 1347 2. During construction, the person responsible for implementing the approved 1348 plan may request a variance in writing from the Administrator. The 1349 Administrator shall respond in writing either approving or disapproving such a 1350 request. If the Administrator does not approve a variance within 10 days of 1351 receipt of the request, the request shall be considered to be disapproved. 1352 Following disapproval, the applicant may resubmit a variance request with 1353 additional documentation. 1354 3. The Administrator shall consider variance requests judiciously, keeping in 1355 mind both the need of the applicant to maximize cost effectiveness and the 1356 need to protect off -site properties and resources from damage. 1357 B. The Administrator may grant exceptions to the Technical Criteria of § 143 -165: 1358 SWM Plan Requirements. An exception may be granted provided that: 1359 1. the exception is the minimum necessary to afford relief, 1360 2. reasonable and appropriate conditions shall be imposed as necessary upon 1361 any exception granted so that the intent of this chapter is preserved, 1362 3. granting the exception will not confer any special privileges that are denied in 1363 other similar circumstances, 1364 4. exception requests are not based upon conditions or circumstances that are 1365 self- imposed or self- created, and 30 1366 5. economic hardship alone is not sufficient reason to grant an exception from 1367 these requirements. 1368 C. Under no circumstance shall an exception to the requirement that the land - 1369 disturbing activity obtain required VSMP permits be granted, nor shall the use of 1370 a BMP not found on the Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse Website be 1371 approved. 1372 D. Exceptions to requirements for phosphorus reductions shall not be allowed 1373 unless offsite options available as described in § 143 -165 (113)(9) have been 1374 considered and found not available. 1375 Reference: 9VAC25 -840; 9VAC25- 870 -122 1376 1377 § 143 -205 Amendments to Approved Plans 1378 1379 A. Amendments to an approved ESC plan may be made once the proposed change 1380 has been agreed to by the Administrator and the person responsible for carrying 1381 out the plan in the following cases: 1382 1. Where inspection has revealed that the plan is inadequate to satisfy 1383 applicable regulations; or 1384 2. Where the person responsible for carrying out the approved plan 1385 demonstrates that because of changed circumstances or for other reasons 1386 the approved plan cannot effectively be carried out, and proposed 1387 amendments to the plan are consistent with the requirements of this article. 1388 Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:55 (C). 1389 B. Amendments to an approved SWM Plan may be made only after review and 1390 written approval by the Administrator. An approved plan may be modified in 1391 accordance with the following: 1392 1. The person responsible for carrying out the approved plan demonstrates in 1393 writing to the Administrator that because of changed circumstances or for 1394 other reasons the approved plan cannot effectively be carried out, and has 1395 proposed amendments to the plan with all necessary calculations and 1396 documents consistent with the requirements of this chapter (refer to § 143- 1397 165). 1398 2. The Administrator shall have 60 calendar days to respond in writing either 1399 approving or disapproving such requests. 1400 3. Based on an inspection, the Administrator may require amendments to the 1401 approved stormwater management plan to address any deficiencies within a 1402 time frame set by the Administrator. 1403 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -108 1404 C. Amendments to an approved SWPPP Plan may be required in order to reflect 1405 changes in the implementation of an approved ESC or SWM Plan. In addition to 1406 the requirements of subsection A and B of this section, the site operator shall 1407 document the implementation of the provisions of the SWPPP as follows: 1408 1. The operator shall amend the SWPPP whenever there is a change in design, 1409 construction, operation, or maintenance that may have a significant effect on 1410 the discharge of pollutants from the construction activity and that has not 1411 been previously addressed in the SWPPP. 31 1412 2. The SWPPP must be amended if during inspections or investigations by the 1413 operator's qualified personnel, or by the Administrator, state or federal 1414 officials, it is determined that the existing control measures are ineffective in 1415 minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the construction site. 1416 3. Where revisions to the SWPPP include additional or modified control 1417 measures designed to correct problems identified, and where such revisions 1418 to the SWPPP require the Administrator's approval, the additional control 1419 measures shall be completed within seven calendar days of approval or prior 1420 to the next anticipated storm event. If implementation before the next 1421 anticipated storm event is impracticable, the situation shall be documented in 1422 the SWPPP and alternative control measures shall be implemented as soon 1423 as practicable. 1424 4. Revisions to the SWPPP must be dated and signed in accordance with 1425 Section III of the VSMP permit. Changes to any component of an approved 1426 SWPPP with VSMP Permit coverage that result in changes to stormwater 1427 management plans or that require additional review by the Administrator shall 1428 be subject to permit modification fees set out in § 143 -235. 1429 1430 § 143 -210 Monitoring and Inspections during Land - Disturbing Activities 1431 1432 All erosion and sediment control measures must be periodically inspected by the 1433 individual responsible for carrying out the plan and /or the operator and properly 1434 maintained in effective operating condition in accordance with the approved plans and 1435 the VESCH. If site inspections identify control measures that are not operating 1436 effectively, maintenance shall be performed as soon as practicable to maintain the 1437 continued effectiveness of stormwater controls. 1438 Reference: Va. Code §62.1- 44.15:58(A); 9VAC25- 840 -60. 1439 A. The VSMP Authority will inspect all regulated land- disturbing activities to ensure 1440 compliance with the approved ESC Plan in accordance with the County and state 1441 requirements. The owner, permittee or person responsible for carrying out the 1442 plan or agreement may be given notice of the inspection. 1443 Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:58. 1444 B. The County requires that stormwater management facilities are inspected and 1445 the construction of such facilities are certified in accordance with sub - section D of 1446 § 143 -210. The VSMP Authority may also inspect the construction of permanent 1447 stormwater management facilities at critical stages of construction and in 1448 accordance with the Virginia BMP Design Specifications to ensure compliance 1449 with the approved plans. 1450 Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:37. 1451 C. The right -of -entry for the VSMP Authority to conduct such inspections shall be 1452 expressly reserved in the permit. The permit holder, or his duly designated 1453 representative, shall be afforded the opportunity to accompany the inspectors. 1454 Reference: § 62.1- 44.15:39 Right of entry. 1455 D. The County will accept the submittal of inspection reports certifying that the 1456 stormwater management facilities are being constructed in accordance with the 1457 approved plan conducted by: 32 1458 1. a person who is licensed as a professional engineer, architect, landscape 1459 architect, or land surveyor pursuant to Article 1 ( §54.1 -400 et seq.) of Chapter 1460 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia; 1461 2. a person who works under the direction and oversight of the licensed 1462 professional engineer, architect, landscape architect, or land surveyor; or 1463 3. a person who holds a certificate of competence in Stormwater Inspection from 1464 the Board. 1465 Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:37. 1466 E. The VSMP Authority will inspect all regulated land- disturbing activities covered 1467 by a VSMP Authority Permit to ensure the operator is conducting and 1468 documenting the operator inspections as required by the County and is 1469 appropriately updating the PP plan as required by the County. The owner, 1470 permittee or person responsible for carrying out the plan or agreement may be 1471 given notice of the inspection. 1472 Reference: A, B, & C above; 9VAC25- 870- 114(A) 1473 F. All land- disturbing activities covered by a VSMP Permit shall be inspected by the 1474 operator in accordance with the requirements of the County. The operator shall 1475 maintain records of inspections and maintenance in order to determine whether 1476 the measures required in the ESC plan are effective in controlling erosion and 1477 sedimentation and to ensure compliance with the approved plan. Records shall 1478 be made available to the Administrator or the VSMP Authority inspector upon 1479 request. 1480 G. Prior to the release of any performance bonds or termination of the VSMP 1481 Authority Permit, the applicant shall submit the required as -built drawings for the 1482 stormwater management facilities as described in § 143 -165; 1483 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -108. 1484 H. A. On a fiscal year basis (July 1 to June 30), a VSMP authority shall report to the 1485 department by October 1 of each year in a format provided by the department. 1486 The information to be provided shall include the following: 1487 1. Information on each permanent stormwater management facility completed 1488 during the fiscal year to include type of stormwater management facility, 1489 geographic coordinates, acres treated, and the surface waters or karst features 1490 into which the stormwater management facility will discharge; 1491 2. Number and type of enforcement actions during the fiscal year; and 1492 3. Number of exceptions granted during the fiscal year. 1493 4. A VSMP authority shall keep records in accordance with the following: 1494 5. Project records, including approved stormwater management plans, shall be 1495 kept for three years after state permit termination or project completion. 1496 6. Stormwater management facility inspection records shall be documented and 1497 retained for at least five years from the date of inspection. 1498 7. Construction record drawings shall be maintained in perpetuity or until a 1499 stormwater management facility is removed. 1500 8. All registration statements submitted in accordance with 9VAC25- 870 -59 shall 1501 be documented and retained for at least three years from the date of project 1502 completion or state permit termination. 1503 33 1504 § 143 -215 Monitoring and Inspections of Permanent Stormwater Management 1505 Facilities 1506 1507 A. Owners of stormwater management facilities shall be responsible for conducting 1508 inspections and performing maintenance in accordance with the recorded 1509 Stormwater BMP Maintenance Agreement as described in § 143 -165 and in 1510 accordance with county requirements. In regards to individual residential lots, 1511 such recorded instruments need not be required for stormwater management 1512 facilities designed to treat stormwater runoff primarily from an individual 1513 residential lot on which they are located, provided it is demonstrated to the 1514 satisfaction of the Administrator that future maintenance of such facilities will be 1515 addressed through an enforceable mechanism at the discretion of the 1516 Administrator. Provisions for this are addresses in Frederick County's SWP BMP 1517 Inspection and Maintenance Program manual. 1518 B. If a recorded instrument is not required pursuant to section 143- 215.A, the 1519 Administrator shall develop a strategy for addressing maintenance of stormwater 1520 management facilities designed to treat stormwater runoff primarily from an 1521 individual residential lot on which they are located. Such a strategy may include 1522 periodic inspections, homeowner outreach and education, or other method 1523 targeted at promoting the long -term maintenance of such facilities. Such facilities 1524 shall not be subject to the requirement for an inspection to be conducted by the 1525 Administrator. 1526 1527 Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -112. 1528 C. The Administrator will ensure that all stormwater management facilities are being 1529 inspected and maintained according to the following: 1530 1. The Administrator shall track the 5 -year frequency comprehensive inspection 1531 report submittals as required by the recorded maintenance agreement and in 1532 accordance with County requirements. The Administrator shall conduct 1533 maintenance inspections at a minimum of once every 5 years for certain 1534 BMPs as defined by County requirements. 1535 2. The right -of -entry for the Administrator to conduct such inspections shall be 1536 expressly reserved in the Maintenance Agreements. The owner, or his duly 1537 designated representative, shall be afforded the opportunity to accompany 1538 the inspectors. 1539 D. The Administrator shall notify the property owner or owner's association in writing 1540 in accordance with § 143- 225(A)(1) to the address as identified in the SWM BMP 1541 Inspection and Maintenance Agreement when a determination has been made 1542 that the stormwater management facility is in disrepair or is not functioning as 1543 intended. The notice shall specify the measures needed to comply with the 1544 approved maintenance plan and shall specify the time within which such 1545 measures shall be completed. If the responsible party fails to perform such 1546 maintenance and repair, the county shall have the authority to initiate 1547 enforcement action in accordance with § 143 -225 (D), and perform the work and 1548 recover the costs from the responsible party. 1549 34 1550 § 143 -225 Enforcement 1551 1552 A. If, during inspections at any stage of the land- disturbing activity, the Administrator 1553 determines that the operator has failed to comply with the approved plan, 1554 including but not limited to failure to install or properly install stormwater BMP 1555 facilities or erosion and sediment controls, the Administrator shall serve notice 1556 upon the permittee or person responsible for carrying out the permit conditions 1557 as follows: 1558 1. A Notice to Comply shall be sent as follows: 1559 a. Certified mail, return receipt requested, sent to the address specified by 1560 the owner or permittee in his application or plan certification; or 1561 b. Delivery at the site of the land- disturbing activities to the agent or 1562 employee supervising such activities. 1563 2. The notice shall specify the measures necessary to comply with the plan or 1564 agreement in lieu of a plan and shall specify the time within which such 1565 measures shall be completed. 1566 3. Stop Work Order: 1567 a. If a permittee fails to comply with a notice to comply issued in accordance 1568 with paragraph 1 within the time specified, the Administrator may issue an 1569 order requiring the owner, permittee, or person responsible for carrying 1570 out the approved plan, to cease all land- disturbing activities until the 1571 violation of the permit has ceased or the specified corrective actions have 1572 been taken. Such orders shall become effective upon service on the 1573 person by certified mail, return receipt requested, sent to his address 1574 specified in the registration statement, or by personal delivery by an agent 1575 of the VSMP authority or Department. 1576 b. In addition to the cessation of all land- disturbing activities as described in 1577 item a above, the permittee may also be subject having the VSMP 1578 Authority permit revoked; and furthermore, he shall be deemed to be in 1579 violation of this ordinance and, upon conviction or adjudication of violation, 1580 shall be subject to the penalties as provided in the Code of Virginia or by 1581 this ordinance. 1582 Reference: Va. Code §62.1- 44.15:63; §62.1- 44.15:48. 1583 c. Where the alleged noncompliance is causing or is in imminent danger of 1584 causing harmful erosion of lands or sediment deposition in surface waters 1585 within the watersheds of the state, or where the land- disturbing activities 1586 have commenced without an approved plan, agreement in lieu of a plan or 1587 any required permits, such an order may be issued without regard to 1588 whether or not the owner or permittee has been issued a notice to comply. 1589 B. If, at any stage of the land- disturbing activity, the VSMP Authority determines that 1590 the physical conditions on the site are not as stated or shown on the approved 1591 erosion and sediment control plan or stormwater management plan, or the 1592 county determines that the storm drainage system or stormwater management 1593 facility is inadequate or not constructed as shown on the approved stormwater 1594 management final plan, the VSMP Authority may refuse to approve further work 35 1595 and the county may revoke existing permits or approvals until a revised 1596 stormwater management final plan has been submitted and approved. 1597 C. Commencing Land - Disturbing Activities without an Approved Plan or a Permit 1598 1. If land- disturbing activities have commenced without an approved plan, 1599 agreement in lieu of a plan, or a VSMP Authority Permit where required, a 1600 stop work order may be issued requiring that all land- disturbing activities be 1601 stopped until an approved plan, an agreement in lieu of a plan or any required 1602 permits are obtained. 1603 2. The stop work order shall remain in effect for a period of seven calendar days 1604 from the date of service pending application by the Administrator or alleged 1605 violator for appropriate relief to the circuit court of the jurisdiction wherein the 1606 violation is alleged to have occurred. If the alleged violator has not obtained 1607 an approved plan, agreement in lieu of a plan or any required permits within 1608 seven days from the date of service of the order, the director may issue an 1609 order to the owner requiring that all construction and other work on the site, 1610 other than corrective measures, be stopped until an approved plan, 1611 agreement in lieu of a plan or any required permits have been obtained. The 1612 order shall be served upon the owner by registered or certified mail to the 1613 address specified in the permit application or the land records of the county. 1614 3. The owner may appeal the issuance of an order to the circuit court. 1615 D. Maintenance of permanent stormwater facilities 1616 1. If during periodic inspections to ensure that stormwater management facilities 1617 are being adequately maintained as designed, the VSMP Authority identifies 1618 operational deficiencies and /or determines that the owner of the stormwater 1619 management facility has failed to perform maintenance or conduct 1620 maintenance inspections in accordance with the recorded SWM BMP 1621 Maintenance and Inspection agreement, the VSMP Authority shall notify the 1622 person or organization responsible for carrying out the requirements of the 1623 agreement. The notice shall specify the deficiencies, the corrective actions 1624 required to restore the facility, and the time frame within which the corrective 1625 actions shall be completed. 1626 2. If the individual or organization fails to comply with the notice within the time 1627 specified, the VSMP Authority may initiate informal and /or formal 1628 administrative enforcement procedures including but not limited to directives 1629 issued by the Board in accordance with Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:25, or civil or 1630 criminal penalties in accordance with this ordinance and Va. Code §§ 62.1- 1631 44.15:48 and 62.1- 44.15:63. 1632 E. Any person violating or failing, neglecting, or refusing to obey any rule, 1633 regulation, ordinance, order, approved standard or specification, or any permit 1634 condition issued by the VSMP Authority or any provisions of this chapter may be 1635 compelled in a proceeding instituted in any appropriate court by the VSMP 1636 Authority to obey same and to comply therewith by injunction, mandamus or 1637 other appropriate remedy. Nothing in this section shall prevent the VSMP 1638 Authority from taking additional enforcement action permitted by state law. 1639 F. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter or of any regulations or 1640 ordinances, or standards and specifications adopted or approved hereunder, 36 1641 including those adopted pursuant to the a VSMP permit, or who fails, neglects or 1642 refuses to comply with any order of the VSMP Authority, the Department, the 1643 Board, or court, other than any violation that relates solely to the erosion and 1644 sediment control requirements of any of the foregoing, shall be subject to a civil 1645 penalty not to exceed $32,500 for each violation within the discretion of the court. 1646 Each day of violation of each requirement shall constitute a separate offense. 1647 Reference: § 62.1- 44.15:48 of the Code of Virginia. 1648 1. Violations for which a penalty may be imposed under this subsection shall 1649 include but not be limited to the following: 1650 a. no permit registration, 1651 b. no SWPPP, 1652 c. incomplete SWPPP; 1653 d. SWPPP not available for review; 1654 e. failure to install stormwater BMP or Erosion and Sediment Controls; 1655 f. stormwater BMP facilities improperly installed or maintained; 1656 g. operational deficiencies; 1657 h. failure to conduct required inspections; 1658 i. incomplete, improper, or missed inspections; and 1659 j. discharges not in compliance with the requirements of the VSMP 1660 Construction General Permit. 1661 k. no approved Erosion and Sediment Control Plan 1662 2. The Administrator may issue a summons for collection of the civil penalty and 1663 the action may be prosecuted in the appropriate court. 1664 3. In imposing a civil penalty pursuant to this subsection, the court may consider 1665 the degree of harm caused by the violation and also the economic benefit to 1666 the violator from noncompliance. 1667 4. Any civil penalties assessed by a court as a result of a summons issued by 1668 Frederick County shall be paid into the treasury of the Frederick County to be 1669 used for the purpose of minimizing, preventing, managing, or mitigating 1670 pollution of the waters of Frederick County and abating environmental 1671 pollution therein in such manner as the court may, by order, direct. 1672 G. Notwithstanding any other civil or equitable remedy provided by this section, any 1673 person who willfully or negligently violates any provision of this chapter, any 1674 order of Frederick County or the Department, any condition of a permit, or any 1675 order of a court, other than any violation that relates solely to the erosion and 1676 sediment control requirements of any of the foregoing, shall be guilty of a 1677 misdemeanor punishable by confinement in jail for not more than 12 months and 1678 a fine of not less than $2,500 nor more than $32,500, either or both. 1679 H. Notwithstanding any other civil or equitable remedy provided by this section, any 1680 person who violates any provision of this chapter, any order of Frederick County 1681 or the Department, any condition of a permit, or any order of a court relating to 1682 the erosion and sediment control requirements of any of the foregoing shall be 1683 guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by confinement in jail for not more than 12 1684 months and a fine of not more than $2,500, either or both. 1685 Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:63. § 62.1- 44.15;48. 1686 37 1687 1688 § 143 -230 Hearings 1689 1690 Any permit applicant, permittee, or person subject to the Frederick County Land - 1691 Disturbing Permit, VSMP Authority Permit, or state permit requirements under this 1692 article aggrieved by any action of the Department of Public Works taken without a 1693 formal hearing, or by inaction of the Department of Public Works may demand in writing 1694 a formal hearing by the County Board of Supervisors, provided a petition requesting 1695 such hearing is filed with the Board of Supervisors within 30 days after notice of such 1696 action. Any hearings conducted by the Board of Supervisors shall be in accordance with 1697 § 62.1- 44.15:45 of the Code of Virginia .Hearings must be conducted by the Board of 1698 Supervisors at a regular or special meeting. In reviewing the agent's actions, the 1699 County Board of Supervisors shall consider evidence and opinions, and the County 1700 Board of Supervisors may affirm, reverse or modify the action. Verbatim record of 1701 proceedings must be taken and filed with the County Board of Supervisors. The County 1702 Board of Supervisors decision shall be final, subject only to review by the Circuit Court 1703 of the County. 1704 Reference: § 62.1- 44.15:44, Right to hearing § 62.1- 44.15:45. Hearings 1705 1706 § 143 -232 Appeals 1707 1708 Any permittee or party aggrieved by a state permit or enforcement decision of the 1709 Frederick County Public Works under this article, or any person who has participated, in 1710 person or by submittal of written comments, in the public comment process related to a 1711 final decision of the Department of Public Works or Board of Supervisors under this 1712 article, whether such decision is affirmative or negative, is entitled to judicial review 1713 thereof in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Process Act (§ 2.2 -4000 1714 et seq.) if such person meets the standard for obtaining judicial review of a case or 1715 controversy pursuant to Article III of the Constitution of the United States. Final 1716 decisions shall be subject to review and appeal to the Circuit Court of the County, 1717 provided an appeal is filed within 30 days from the date of any written decision 1718 adversely affecting the rights, duties, or privileges of the person engaging in or 1719 proposing to engage in the land disturbance activity occurs or is proposed to occur. 1720 Unless otherwise provided by law, the circuit court shall conduct such review in 1721 accordance with the standards established in § 2.2 -4027, and the decisions of the 1722 circuit court shall be subject to review by the Court of Appeals. A person shall be 1723 deemed to meet such standard if (i) such person has suffered an actual or imminent 1724 injury that is an invasion of a legally protected interest and that is concrete and 1725 particularized; (ii) such injury is fairly traceable to the decision of the Department or the 1726 Board and not the result of the independent action of some third party not before the 1727 court; and (iii) such injury will likely be redressed by a favorable decision by the court. 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 0 1733 § 143 -235 Fees 1734 1735 A. The fee for the Frederick County Land - Disturbing Permit and fees for coverage 1736 under the VSMP Authority Permit shall be imposed in accordance with Table 1. 1737 When a site or sites have been purchased for development within a previously 1738 permitted common plan of development or sale, the applicant shall be subject to 1739 fees in accordance with the disturbed acreage of their site or sites according to 1740 Table 1. 1741 Reference: Part XIII of the VSMP Regulations 1742 1743 39 1744 Table 1: Fees for coverage under the VSMP Construction General Permit 1745 1746 1747 B. Fees for the modification or transfer of coverage under the VSMP Construction 1748 General Permit issued by the Administrator shall be imposed in accordance with 1749 Table 2. If the permit modifications result in changes to stormwater management 1750 plans that require additional review by the Administrator, such reviews shall be 1751 subject to the fees set out in Table 2 based on the total disturbed acreage of the 1752 site. Modifications resulting in an increase in total disturbed acreage shall pay the 1753 difference in the initial state permit fee paid and the state permit fee that would 1754 have applied for the total disturbed acreage in Table 1. 1755 1756 .x Total Fee Portion to Type of Permit Paid by be Paid Applicant to DEQ VESCP permit fee if VSMP permit not required or VSMP $209 $0 General/ Stormwater Management — Small construction Activity /Land Clearing (Areas within common plans of development or sale with land disturbance less than 1 acre.) VSMP General / Stormwater Management - (Single Family Home that disturbs less than 5 acres ) $209 $0 VSMP General / Stormwater Management - Small Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of $2,700 $756 development or sale with land disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 1 acre and less than 5 acres VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of $3,400 $952 development or sale with land disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 5 acres and less than 10 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of $4,500 $1,260 development or sale with land disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 10 acres and less than 50 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of $6,100 $1,708 development or sale with land disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 50 acres and less than 100 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of $9,600 $2,688 development or sale with land disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 100 acres) 1746 1747 B. Fees for the modification or transfer of coverage under the VSMP Construction 1748 General Permit issued by the Administrator shall be imposed in accordance with 1749 Table 2. If the permit modifications result in changes to stormwater management 1750 plans that require additional review by the Administrator, such reviews shall be 1751 subject to the fees set out in Table 2 based on the total disturbed acreage of the 1752 site. Modifications resulting in an increase in total disturbed acreage shall pay the 1753 difference in the initial state permit fee paid and the state permit fee that would 1754 have applied for the total disturbed acreage in Table 1. 1755 1756 .x 1757 Table 2: Fees for the modification or transfer of registration statements for the VSMP 1758 Authority Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities 1759 1760 1761 C. Permit maintenance fees. (9VAC25- 870 -830): 1762 1. The following annual permit maintenance shall be imposed in accordance 1763 with Table 3, including fees imposed on expired permits that have been 1764 administratively continued. With respect to the VSMP Authority Permit, these 1765 fees shall apply until the permit coverage is terminated. 1766 2. VSMP Authority Permit coverage maintenance fees shall be paid annually to 1767 the VSMP Authority, by the anniversary date of VSMP Authority General 1768 Permit coverage, in accordance with Table 3. No VSMP Authority permit will 1769 be reissued or automatically continued without payment of the required fee. 1770 VSMP Authority permit coverage maintenance fees shall be applied until a 1771 Notice of Termination is effective. 1772 1773 41 Fee Type of Permit Amount VSMP General / Stormwater Management - Small Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Areas within common plans of development or sale with land $20 disturbance acreage less than 1 acre, not to include single family homes.) VSMP General / Stormwater Management - Small Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $200 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 1 acre and less than 5 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $250 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 5 acres and less than 10 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $300 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 10 acres and less than 50 acres VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $450 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 50 acres and less than 100 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $700 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 100 acres) 1760 1761 C. Permit maintenance fees. (9VAC25- 870 -830): 1762 1. The following annual permit maintenance shall be imposed in accordance 1763 with Table 3, including fees imposed on expired permits that have been 1764 administratively continued. With respect to the VSMP Authority Permit, these 1765 fees shall apply until the permit coverage is terminated. 1766 2. VSMP Authority Permit coverage maintenance fees shall be paid annually to 1767 the VSMP Authority, by the anniversary date of VSMP Authority General 1768 Permit coverage, in accordance with Table 3. No VSMP Authority permit will 1769 be reissued or automatically continued without payment of the required fee. 1770 VSMP Authority permit coverage maintenance fees shall be applied until a 1771 Notice of Termination is effective. 1772 1773 41 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 Table 3: VSMP Authority Permit Maintenance Fees D. The fees set forth in subsections A -C, above, shall apply to: 1. All persons seeking coverage under the VSMP Authority Permit. 2. All permittees who request modifications to or transfers of their existing registration statement for coverage under a VSMP Authority Permit. 3. Persons whose coverage under the VSMP Authority Permit has been revoked shall reapply for an Individual Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities. 4. Permit and permit coverage maintenance fees outlined under Section may apply to each VSMP Authority Permit holder. E. No VSMP Authority Permit application fees will be assessed to Permittees whose permits are modified or amended at the initiative of the VSMP Authority, excluding errors in the registration statement identified by the Director or errors related to the acreage of the site. F. All incomplete VSMP permit fee payments will be deemed as nonpayment's, and the applicant shall be notified of any incomplete permit fee payments. Interest may be charged for late permit fee payments at the underpayment rate set forth in §58.1 -15 of the Code of Virginia and is calculated on a monthly basis at the applicable periodic rate. A 10% late payment fee shall be charged to any delinquent (over 90 days past due) account. The Administrator shall be entitled to all remedies available under the Code of Virginia in collecting any past due amount. :A Fee Type of Permit Amount VSMP General / Stormwater Management - Small Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Areas within common plans of development or sale with land $50 disturbance acreage less than 1 acre, not to include single family homes. VSMP General / Stormwater Management - Small Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $400 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 1 acre and less than 5 acres VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $500 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 5 acres and less than 10 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $650 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 10 acres and less than 50 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $900 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 50 acres and less than 100 acres) VSMP General / Stormwater Management — Large Construction Activity /Land Clearing (Sites or areas within common plans of development or sale with land $1,400 disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 100 acres D. The fees set forth in subsections A -C, above, shall apply to: 1. All persons seeking coverage under the VSMP Authority Permit. 2. All permittees who request modifications to or transfers of their existing registration statement for coverage under a VSMP Authority Permit. 3. Persons whose coverage under the VSMP Authority Permit has been revoked shall reapply for an Individual Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities. 4. Permit and permit coverage maintenance fees outlined under Section may apply to each VSMP Authority Permit holder. E. No VSMP Authority Permit application fees will be assessed to Permittees whose permits are modified or amended at the initiative of the VSMP Authority, excluding errors in the registration statement identified by the Director or errors related to the acreage of the site. F. All incomplete VSMP permit fee payments will be deemed as nonpayment's, and the applicant shall be notified of any incomplete permit fee payments. Interest may be charged for late permit fee payments at the underpayment rate set forth in §58.1 -15 of the Code of Virginia and is calculated on a monthly basis at the applicable periodic rate. A 10% late payment fee shall be charged to any delinquent (over 90 days past due) account. The Administrator shall be entitled to all remedies available under the Code of Virginia in collecting any past due amount. :A 1801 § 143 -240 Performance Bonds 1802 1803 A. Prior to the issuance of any land- disturbing permit, the owner or permittee shall 1804 execute and file with the Administrator a Frederick County Erosion and Sediment 1805 Control and Stormwater Management Performance Agreement and cash escrow 1806 or irrevocable letter of credit (or other form of a performance bond as approved 1807 by the Frederick County Attorney) in an amount determined in accordance with 1808 the Frederick County Bond Estimate Worksheet which shall be equal to the 1809 approximate total cost of providing erosion and sediment control and stormwater 1810 quality and quantity improvements as required by this ordinance and shown on 1811 the approved plans in addition to a 25% contingency of the total bond amount. 1812 B. The Frederick County Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater 1813 Management Performance Agreement and performance bond is to ensure that 1814 measures could be taken by Frederick County at the applicant's expense should 1815 he fail, after proper notice as outlined in § 143 -225, within the time specified to 1816 initiate or maintain appropriate actions which may be required of him by the 1817 permit conditions as a result of his land- disturbing activity. If Frederick County 1818 takes such action upon such failure by the applicant, Frederick County may 1819 collect from the applicant for the difference should the amount of the reasonable 1820 cost of such action exceed the amount of the security held. 1821 C. Upon successful completion of the land- disturbing activity, to include submittal of 1822 the construction as -built drawings of permanent stormwater management 1823 facilities described in § 143 -165 and prior to termination of the VSMP Permit, the 1824 owner or permittee must provide written notification to Frederick County. Upon 1825 verification of adequate stabilization of land disturbing activity in the project or 1826 any section thereof, the director shall reduce, return, or terminate the required 1827 bond, cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit to the owner, as the case may 1828 be, within 60 days. 1829 D. If the applicant /owner fails to comply with the approved SWPPP as documented 1830 through the site inspections described in § 143 -210, and after proper notification, 1831 the Administrator may determine that the performance bond or escrow may be 1832 used to execute the plan. 1833 Reference: §62.1- 44.15:34; 9VAC25- 870 -104 (D). 43 ATTACHMENT 2 Public Work Committee, April, 28,2014 COUNTY of FREDERICK Inspections Department John S. Trenary, Building Official 5401665 -565© Fax 540167$ -0682 Discussion of Building Inspection Department's Fee Schedule Change 2014 Previous change to fee schedule was in March of 2006 1 May 8 ", 2014 meeting with Top of VA committee for comment on changes Evaluation included several localities permit fees, the activities and expenses not related to building permits and the revenue and expenditure comparison to Building Departments to maintain services. Expenditures for Property Maintenance and complaint inspections estimated to be $65,000 over the previous year. Major changes : (Square footage fees generate 41% of revenue collected. ) Residential- $38 to $.40 sq. ft. ( average from evaluation comparison of other localities) Res. Accessory Buildings from $.05 to $.10 Sq. Ft. over 600 Sq. Ft. Industrialized Buildings and Manufactured Housing form $.25 to $30 Sq. Ft. (changing N/TH to as equal charge as Industrialized from previous set fee) Restructure of Commercial fees with increase to cover Plans/Design Review (separate IBC use classifications for permit fees charged) Storage and utility increase from $.15 Sq. Ft. to $.18 Sq. Ft. w /reduction to $.15Sq.Ft. Over 250,000 Sq_ Ft. from the previous $.10 Sq. Ft. Churches and Schools increase from $.08 Sq. Ft. to $.15 Sq. Ft. Other IBC uses classification from $35 to $.22 Sq. Ft. Renovation / Alterations from $.15 to $.18 Sq. Ft. (except for E and A3 uses) Sprinkler systems from $.75 per head with reduction to $.50 to $1.00 per device Fee for Inspection of Work started prior to permit issuance. Currently $50.00 to ? Estimate 590,000 plus annually with increase changes 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 ATTACHMENT 3 COUN'T'Y of FREDERICK N April 28, 2014 Frederick County Public Works Committee Property Maintenance Town of Stephen City Inspections Department John S. Trenary, Building Official 5401665 -5650 Fax 5401678 -0682 The Town of Stephen City has a purposed ordinance to the Town Code to implement Property Maintenance. The ordinance purposed is set to go to Public Hearing on May 6` and Mike Kehoe the Town Manager is seeking comments prior to the hearing. The wording of the ordinance, that amends Chapter 9 Code of the Town of Stephen City, mirrors the language within Chapter 54: Building Maintenance of the Frederick County Code. Enforcement of Virginia Maintenance Code is an option, however under the Virginia Construction Code when a tenant complains about an unsafe condition in a dwelling the Building Inspections Department has to respond and the Building Official has to enforce the provisions of the VMC on any unsafe condition. Frederick County currently enforces the Virginia Construction Code and the Virginia Rehabilitation Code within Stephen City. Enforcement - The VUSBC and State Code under section 36 -105 requires enforcement by the County for Towns under the population of 3,500. ( Rod Williams has reviewed and confirmed requirement for the County to enforce the VMC) Stephen City enforcement is identified to be conducted by FC Building Inspections Department and appoints The Building Official as the VMC Code Official. (Stephen City 2012 census indicated 1,874 people) Frederick County currently has four certified Property Maintenance Inspectors on staff. Effect - FC Inspections conducted 368 PM and Complaint inspections from Feb.2013 to Feb.2014 at an estimated cost of approximately $50,000 to $60,000 annually. Records indicate that we received approximately 2 -3 complaints per year within Stephen City town limits. Without the VMC ordinance being adopted and the appointment of the Code Official, enforcement cannot occur on structures built before the adoption of the VUSBC and on structures if they are two years beyond the date of occupancy. With the approval of this purposed ordinance greater uniformity of the VMC enforcement throughout the County will occur. 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601 ATTACHMENT 4 COUNTY of FREDERICK I MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works � I SUBJECT: Monthly Tonnage Report - Fiscal Year 13/14 � DATE: April 23, 2014 Department of Public Works 5401 -5643 FAX: 540/678-0682 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: FY 04 -05: FY 05 -06: FY 06 -07: FY 07 -08: FY 08 -09: FY 09 -10: FY 10 -11: FY 11 -12: FY 12 -13: FY 13 -14: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: AVERAGE PER MONTH: 16,348 TONS (UP 1,164 TONS) 17,029 TONS (UP 681 TONS) 17,785 TONS (UP 756 TONS) 16,705 TONS (DOWN 1,080 TONS) 13,904 TONS (DOWN 2,801 TONS) 13,316 TONS (DOWN 588 TONS) 12,219 TONS (DOWN 1,097 TONS) 12,184 TONS (DOWN 35 TONS) 12,013 TONS (DOWN 171 TONS) 12,065 TONS (UP 52 TONS) 11,988 TONS (DOWN 77 TONS) MONTH JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE FY 2012 -2013 FY 2013 -2014 12,596 13,514 13,934 13,343 11,621 12,345 12,863 13,266 12,598 10,857 10,728 11,614 11,054 11,411 9,776 10,021 10,636 11,518 13,074 13,396 12,508 HES /gmp ATTACHMENT 5 LO N O (O (O (O O M N 0 0 0 M (O r Il- M I- M M M N O LO O M 0 (O O O LO O 0 M M O (O LO M I- M O O S I%- M 00 (O O O N w N (O 0) JI LO O LO 0 LO W LO N � N (O r (O O � O 0) 00 Ln N r 00 00 � 00 � � O 0) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. QI M rI-* M (O 00 t M r M N (O Il- (O 00 I-t O w N LO D O O M 0) �-It LO I- LO O O (O N I- (O O 0 LO 0qqt 0 M N I- (O M O M M M (O (O N r'It M Oqqt M M M F Ln Ln Ln Ln lq Ln M N N N N N N N N N N N Lf L0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln M M I- 00 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (L 00 CO -t "t 00 N -t"t O N M 1` 0 0 0 M I- N M M M'--t N M r � M Ln O Ln N Ln N N 00 Ln 0) (O r M r 00 O N O N (O r (O r 00 N LO I- M M (O (O r r-t LO r N O M Il- N O'.-t 0 (O r M 0) t M O M'It Nt 'It O I` (O (O N LO N M N O I- 0 O N M I%- LO �� r U r r r r r r O M N M O r Ln N M r I� y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 'It M I- O O r r (� M Ln 00 Ln O (O (O r N (O (O 0) (O I- r Ln V I` 00 00 O Ln W CO M M (O CO r LO O O N N E I%- LO ,* M N r M (O N-t N J I 0 N11-t 0 N r O M (O M O O M M I- LO (O LO O W 0 M M N r (O M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O W O O O N w N N O Nt I- 00 N 00 O J M O 00 Ln O Ln M r 0 I- (O I- N O F- M M - - - M ( X N N N LM W H N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O W (O co 00 O N 00 00 (O N r r Ln (O (0 r 0) I LO N O N (O 00 N O N'It r I- (O LO 0 r r r r N r r Ln 00 00 r 00 (O 2 r r r N N I� N O O O O O r 0 0 0 r 0 I'- M O I'- N r 0) r M M (O N N N N (O N o r I- (O 0 O N N U 00 00 (O (O 00 O M 00 00 V V r- 00 (O 0) (O M N U O r O M O M I- r (O (O M CD 'It r'It U) r 0) I- 00 I- (O (O 00 (O O 0 0 w 0 O (O LO qt 00 M O N O (O (O O M N r M (O (O qqt N M r N r r 0 (O r I O O O O LO 0) 00 N I- M M LO LO N N O N O M r (O r (O M O M M 0 0 0 (O r 00 M O Ln 00 O Ln I- O r O 00 00 (O M 00 I� r r V r N P- Ln 0) O O O (O W � qt CO M O M� - O M N� U) M - � M N M - - M (O B O O M O a O O 0) (O 0) LO I- N LO (O O 0) O M O I- 00 N LO 00 O Ln 00 r M 0) LO M Q r r r r r 0) LO It N I` 0) (O Ln 0 co Nt I` (O 00 (O LO I- a r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r (fl N O (D LO LO LO r Ln O Ln N Ln (O (O (O Nt LO (O LO N 00 M 00 I , - LO LO LO LO O J 0 O LO CO (O I- LO r I 00 I` � I` (O 'It � 00 N N r qt Ln 00 � O 1` N 0) (O y W I- I` 0) Ln � 00 I- O N M 00 00 V (O N Ln N Ln Ln r r Ln 0) 00 0) I- (O 0) O W 1- O LO O w O I- O 1` LO N O M (O 0 0 0 0 I- - M U) ,* N N O O 00 H r r r I- O O 0) O 0 N N N M N N N N N N U) U r I� C) I'* Ln 0 Ln O LO O LO m Oqqt O M M 00 LO I- O LO Il- I- I'* I- r M (n 00 0 O M r 00 O CO 00 q-* 00 00 N 1` 00 CO I'- r M 'It (O (O I- (O O 00 � r O r 00 Ln 0) V O (O I- M O 00 r 00 V I` 00 � V V 00 Ln M r Ln M Ln r QI M co N co N co co co N 0) LO M N N CO LO r N r r 0) O O O 0) M CO 00 r V N qt q-t qt q-t N r r r r r r r r r N N ((M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O M O N (O M O O r'It (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O N �- "-t "t "-t (O CD "t N CO O N CO N 0 00 N N N r N Ln I- q-* r (O O r o 00 r U) ql*� r (O I- N (O Ln O r Ln M M V M O N I` (O N N I` O Ln N V r rql*� 00 Q I'- M CO (O - I'- - 0) 0) O 00 00 O N qqt O O CO qqt O - 00 � * (O � I` LO J co co M co M co M N M O r 0) I- 1` N 00 O 0) 0) 1` 'It 00 0) 00 M r (p r IZ MI'* M CO M CO N N r r r r r r r r r N r O M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O LO r O N'It I- I- (O I- O 0 I- Nqqt (O M r Nt 00 O 00 00 I'* N 00 00 O co 00 00 I r M (O (O N O N M r-* M O O Il- � d V) '14� M I` r N 00 O'14� N (O Ln M r (O 00 0) V M Ln 00 (O N (O V r N r C), z co 0 0 Lo I N M � 0 O I'- M Ln M M N � O M M � M O (O N N LO M � � 0 00 Il- (O w I- 00 I- Il- (O I- r 0 'It N 0 M O Ln 'It r Ln M N O M I- r � J JJJJ (O M M M r I- 1` (O Ln 0 LO 'It M Ln N -a (' r O - a r co M N O M w h w w qt M N O m w 1-. w 00000000toCnCnCn W F- J >Uzmww >- W-eMN ° 0 z » wUpwQwQaQ�H0� 0 000W n < wozo " 0 o H O W W 0 O 0 a�_ W� > O Z D 2 LO LO ao CF) N w (o LO LO LO (m Q' X Q' w Q W U Z Z W w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q U � U U W � J Q W O z o 0 0 0 0 w D Y 0 W U) OLO LO Nr— (o d N U) 0 0 W 2 Q M 0) 0) LO r- J CO CO CO CO N U W 0 w N 0') 0') O (O M M D Q Q W Z Z M 0 0 0 0 Ow C O V W w �- W - - 19t - N m U ii = O LO 19t LO qqt M 0 m m 0 J W W > Z W W Lo co Co M Lo co U Y W � Q Q Z 0 O Z O LO LO co CF) Q O I- (O LO LO LO Z ~ O U a�_ LL rn rn N 0 cc LO M r M N M RA LO N N r N N r- C) M = J Q Z J>UZm�Z� 2 -)<0zo�L L N N L U co N E � • c N Q Y O . 7 O o U CO co �U N O 0)— O N O) O co - 0 N L N 0 � U E N > O O "- Z 4- O L L � C N O co co N O) O C ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 7 O = o z W 0 I-- — N o r- I- - --t L-0 L-0 M co co r r r r (o U w Z 0 Z W w Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w� J Q W Zorn — Lo(o Z LO N CO CO co — W D Y D W O O - (O - N M d N N — N — 0') U 0 0 W Q N M J � U W O D w w 0 (o(o00 N o 0 N — CO ~ D U Q Q W �Zao born O w C O V W w �- U — (o 0 0 co m U i. �- O M LO CN 0 � � Om Q' m D W w > Z W w N N O co W � Q 2 H ~ Q Z O I-- I I-- Q - N o LL �q-* LO LO M N Z O U a�_ LL = J Q ZJC�W� >UZ�ZH 2 )< 0z0�LWL2Q2�0 ATTACHMENT 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Green Advisory Committee ,,, FROM: Jonathan M. Turkel, Park & Stewardship Planner) " SUBJECT: Meeting of April 29, 2014 DATE: April 23, 2014 There will be a meeting of the Green Advisory Committee on Tuesday, April 29, 2014, at 8 a.m. in the conference room located on the on the second floor of the north end of the County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Suite 200. The agenda thus far is as follows. Items for discussion: 1. Energy Management Update a. Planet Footprint data collection & monitoring Using the Planet Footprint service staff is monitoring electricity and natural gas consumption across all accounts. Heating and cooling degree day data is being monitored to determine if temperature is driving changes in consumption. Using Planet Footprint database of Frederick County accounts, staff is able to monitor current and historical consumption for trend evaluation. Improvements to the Planet Footprint service are now Iive. Better graphical representation of use and trends are now a feature, and the ability to `push' reports to responsibility center heads should lead to greater awareness of consumption trends. See (Attachment 1) for new data presentation format. Fre derick County Home Dashboard Thts da_ ht-oa, ds sh ms data from )ul - RAar 201a ,up.o and I 'Lludirg Quarter 3) compared the same per,oai ast mar Learn about dashboards Heating & Cooling Degree Days % change over previous fiscal quarter 14 Q3 2% 14 Q2 _ 14 Q1 -13° 13 Q4 -6% 13 Q3 28% 13 Q2 15 13 Q1 -18% 12 Q4 -24% - 12 Q3 _ 12 Q2 -13 ° 12 Q1 -18% 11 Q4 -23° 11 Q3 -5 -35% -25% -15% -5% 5% 15% 25% 35% CDD ■ HDD TOTA_ a nL tELE, CS -3� 2% Heating & Cooling Degree Days % change over previous fiscal quarter 14 Q3 2% 14 Q2 _ 14 Q1 -13° 13 Q4 -6% 13 Q3 28% 13 Q2 15 13 Q1 -18% 12 Q4 -24% - 12 Q3 _ 12 Q2 -13 ° 12 Q1 -18% 11 Q4 -23° 11 Q3 -5 -35% -25% -15% -5% 5% 15% 25% 35% CDD ■ HDD Ana fyse Assets * Home > Analyse Assets Name Main Jail Administration Building Search: Year to date Compared to Same Jul - Mar 2014 Period Last Year Trend (last 5 years) )7K + $3k (1.790 R $101 K + $6k (6.4%) Public Safety Building E $93K T $7k ($.2%) Q Administration Building e • iff ArGlyse Q t4rhsl ,lVf ttan DACIUf Dashboard Details Ferformante AtCUL s)>s JumpteEltwiary_ Gas 9 Electricity ssP.m smP.w srr. 14P.NO BmP,mQP €iW+ 53P.PPm - 9¢Zl,@CU kbh £ i 4 S sla.mom i rwa POP kwa 3P m kWh Qt q7 {1,i qs t11 Q; G3 9M Q) b_' t'S Qa Qi w Q3 Qa 41 h'.P14 iY 7931 FY 20,2 n7P1) rV2014 Gas S,,P s.Pmm nr t3.PPP 3APm Sti � e U 61 .mcP. I,Ppn tc* p fP — O) Qa G1 02 'I3 124 Qi Q:' Q3 Q4 QI 47 Q'+ ka Q1 q, Q, Q. Q. Q ¢3 n7P Ni$" F'+3Pt1 rt2m22 w 13 FV'VIA Director (540) 665 -6356 Fax (540) 723 -8848 2. Star Tannery request for staffing update (Attachment B)• At the Committee's December 17, 2013 meeting, the Committee's consensus was for Mr. Riley to set up a meeting with Shenandoah County officials to discuss the staffing needs at Star Tannery in an effort to reach an agreement regarding funding assistance for needed full -time positions. Since that time, Chief Linaburg and Mr. Riley did meet with their counterparts in Shenandoah County with an offer to split the cost of staffing. At that time, Shenandoah County declined to assist with such costs as it was not financially feasible. Frederick County had requested $150,000. Mr. Lofton noted that it appeared they were looking to Frederick County to fund the entire staffing cost even though both localities split the calls. He went on to say this was not financially feasible for Frederick County. It was noted that Star Tannery is currently running at 40% failure rate due to the lack of staffing. It was further rioted if Frederick County provided 100% funding in order to take care of this issue, with no expectations of assistance from Shenandoah County then there would be no long term benefit since the calls are equally divided between the two counties. Mr. Fisher agreed that the lack of cooperation from Shenandoah County in this matter was disheartening. Mr. Riley offered to go back to Shenandoah County to again request funding assistance for Star Tannery. Mr. Fisher suggested that other board members attend the meeting in an effort to try resolve this matter. The Committee's consensus was for Mr. Riley, and any other committee members who wish to accompany him, to again meet with Shenandoah County's representatives in an effort to reach an agreement to fund these positions. I Fee Schedule for Fire Marshals Chief Linaburg discussed the need to update the Fire Marshal's fee schedule which is over 20 years old. It needs to be reflective of the current and surrounding jurisdictions and state rates. Chief Linaburg would like to address this issue at the next Public Safety Meeting. 4. New Fire & Rescue President Dan Cunningham introduced himself as the new president of the Fire & Rescue Association, succeeding Mr. Price. He is looking forward to working with the Committee on the issues topics that arise within the community. Next Meeting: TBA Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Public Safety Committee Gary Lofton Gene Fisher John Riley Brenda Vance Sheriff Robert Williamson Ann B. Lloyd Denny Linaburg Rod Williams Chris Collins Michael Lindsay LeeA a Pyles, Direct Public Safety Communications LP /sds Chuck Torpy Ronald Wilkins Glen Williamson Dan Cunningham COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT 1080 Coverstone Drive Winchester, VA 22602 Larry A. Oliver Deputy Chief Training Division DATE: April 30, 2014 TO: Public Safety Committee FROM: Larry A, Oliver, Deputy Chief— Training Division Fire and Rescue Department SUBJECT: Automatic Fee Increase For E.M.S. Expense Recovery Program At the June 2013 Public Safety Committee and Board of Supervisors meetings, the Fee Schedule for the E.M.S. Expense Recovery Program, was adopted unanimously. During this meeting, it was discussed that the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (C.M.S.) updates the payment limits for ambulance transportation annually, that localities can adopt for their local fee schedules. These rate increases are designed for increasing healthcare costs as well as economy inflation to continue to allow adequate reimbursement to the localities. No action was taken on these annual rate increases during either of these two (2) meetings. Premier Accounts Receivable Management has advised the Fire and Rescue Department that this increase tools place January 1, 2014, we would like to implement the increase accordingly. After speaking with the County Attorney concerning this rate increase, he .stated that it would need to be addressed during the Public Safety Committee and then ultimately the Board of Supervisors since no action was taken during either of the two (2) meetings in June 2013. We recommend that the Frederick County Fire and Rescue Department fee schedule be evaluated annually and established at a rate twenty -five percent (25 %) greater than the current C.M.S. Ambulance Fee Schedule allowable amounts, rounded up to the nearest whole dollar for the following service levels Basic Life Support (B.L.S.) Emergency Rate (A0420) Basic Life Support (B.L.S.) Non - Emergency Rate (A0428) Advanced Life Support (A.L.S.) Level I Emergency Rate (A0427) Advanced Life Support (A.L.S.) Non Emergency Rate (A0426) Advanced Life Support (A.L.S,) Level 2 Emergency Rate (AG433) We recommend that the adopted fee schedule be the minimum fee schedule in the event that C.M.S. reduces their Ambulance Fee Schedule. We also recommend this to be an automatic process as long as it is positive for the E.M.S. Expense Recovery Program. Premier Accounts Receivable Management will present new recommended rate amounts (25 % greater than current Medicare allowed fees) to Frederick County Fire and Rescue Department within thirty (30) days of C.M.S.'s published Iist, for approval. Training (540) 665 -6388 0 loliver@co.frederick.va.us ® Fax (540) 678 --4739 From June 3, 2014 Pubic Safety Committee Minutes. "Deputy Chief Oliver addressed the current fee schedule which. was developed last year by the Public Safety Committee. One of the outstanding issues is the automatic fee increase that Medicare/Medicad/Tricare have in place and how this automatic fee increase could be incorporated into the current fee schedule. Deputy Chief Oliver also noted that ALS 1 and BLS I non emergency fees are not current on the proposed schedule. The current fees should be $532.00 for ALS 1 non emergency and $431.00 for BLS 1. non emergency calls. The Public Safety Committee unanimously recommended the Board of Supervisors adopt the rates for the Fee for Service fee schedule. " LAO cc: File Copy COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINU Dennis D. Limburg Fire Chief' FIRM AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT 1080 coverstone Drive Winchester, VA 22602 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Safety Committee FROM; Dennis D. Linaburg, Chief Fire & Rescue SUBJECT: Career Staffing Request -- Star Tannery DATE. Apri[28 2014 A meeting with Shenandoah: County Fire and Rescue 'as well as the Shenandoah. County Board of Supervisors was held to discuss assistance with financing career staff at Star Tannery Fire and Rescue. Unfortunately, Shenandoah County's budget does not allow them to assist us at this time. The only funding option they were able to offer was re-allocating their annual company contribution of $30,000 to the County. This option however would take away from Star Tannery's annual operating budget and would thus negatively affect the company. After a review of several county companies including Star Tannery, it was realized that Star Tannery is failing to respond to :approximately 30 -40% of their first due calls. The company is still in dire need of career staffing in order to adequately respond to emergencies in their district. At this time; we again are requesting the Commiitee's'support in moving forward with staffing Star Tannery Fire and Rescue with career personnel to better serve the residents living in this community. Office (540) 665 -5618 9 dlinabur @fcva.us a Fax (540) 678 -4739 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: John A. Bishop, A1CP, Deputy Director - Transportation RE: Transportation Committee Report for Meeting of April 28, 2014 DATE: May 7, 2014 The Transportation Committee met on April 28, 2014 at 8:30 a.m. Members Present Members Absent Chuck DeHaven (voting) Mark Davis (liaison Middletown) James Racey (voting) Christopher Collins (voting) Gene Fisher (voting) Lewis Boyer (liaison Stephens City) Gary Oates (liaison PC) ***Items Requiring Action*** 1. Welcoming Signage One of the recommendations of the recent business friendly committee work was to recommend that welcoming signage be placed at key entrances to Frederick County. For signage along primary routes such as Route 522, Route 50, or Route 11, the process is fairly simple. The County would need to design the signage and place it in accordance with VDOT standards and practices and with a VDOT permit. Attached please find the VDOT guidelines as well as a memorandum of support from Mr. Riley which includes example signage. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 For signage along 1-81, the process is somewhat more complicated. VDOT does not allow location of such signage within the limited access right-of-way so alternative methods must be evaluated. To utilize an existing billboard, the cost would be approximately $600 per month in addition to what the cost would be to create and install the signage itself. Staff would recommend that the agency doing the signage cooperate with property owners neighboring the 1-81 right-of-way to purchase or occupy enough land to place and maintain a sign. This can be accomplished with a conditional use permit and would allow for greater variability and likely a more attractive signage design. Actual cost of this option would be highly variable depending upon agreements reached with property owners and final signage design. In addition to this material staff and VDOT noted that signage cannot be placed in the median. Motion was made by Mr. Racey and Seconded by Mr. Fisher to recommend that the Board direct the EDA to proceed with signage on the primary routes and to further investigate the options (rented billboard vs. county owned sign) and to include consideration of the water tower. Motion passed unanimously. ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 2. Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Plan (appearing as separate agenda item) The Interstate and Primary Plans are unchanged while the Secondary Plan has been updated to reflect projects that have been or are in the process of being completed on the scheduled hardsurfacing list as well as add new projects to the unscheduled list for hardsurfacing. Additional funding is not available that would allow any projects to be promoted from the unscheduled to the scheduled list. Motion to recommend approval was made by Mr. Racey and seconded by Mr. Fisher. 3. Intersection of Tasker Road and Crosskeys Blvd. serves as Staff has received a request from Mrs. Jorie Martin who the property manager for the Musket Ridge subdivision. The residents of Musket Ridge have requested that a left turn lane be installed from Tasker Road onto Crosskeys Boulevard. Staff has attached graphics of the intersection for reference. Staff contacted Captain Heflin of the Sheriff's office and he indicated that there are regular issues caused in this location by the lack of a turn lane and that the installation would be a positive improvement. Accident data has also been requested from VDOT. Staff would recommend that the Committee request an evaluation from VDOT's traffic engineering division that analyze the issue, develop a cost estimate for the improvement, and Vvaluate the competitiveness of the project for a safety grant. The committee directed staff to continue on the course that they had recommended. 4. Private Streets in the R5 Zoning District (appearing under separate agenda item) Staff provided the minutes of the DRRC as well as a letter from Mr. Lawson and noted that no other new materials had been received. Staff further noted that the concerns raised by DRRC were very similar to those raised at Transportation. Supervisor Wells, several residents of the Shenandoah Development, and the applicant were present and requested that even if the Transportation Committee did not have a recommendation that they forward this item to the Board of Supervisors without one. Motion by Mr. Racey and seconded by Mr. Fisher to forward the request to the Board without a transportation committee recommendation. 5. 6 Year Improvement Program Public Hearing Staff noted to the Committee that on April 29, 2014 the Commonwealth Transportation Board would be holding a public hearing on the Draft 6 Year Improvement Program. Staff outlined concerns with the draft which had been previously covered with Mr. Shickle and Mr. Riley. The committee concurred with the concerns and the resulting continents that were made are below. S Frederick County would like to note our appreciation of the expansion of the revenue sharing program and note our success in that area. I would paRicularly like to emphasize how Frederick County's use of the public private partnership within the scope of the revenue sharing program has been very successful. Noted the positive progress on exit i 10 and Route 277. Regarding project funding we would like to note that we waited a long time for significant funding of those projects and that pattern of funding reminds us in Frederick County how important it is that the next significant spending item is carefully chosen. In the draft plan there is 9M on the exit 3 Li interchange. $3 -3.5M is for the interchange study. Remainder seems to be seed money for the next project. If that seed money is for the redecking then we are fully supportive of that project which is much needed for the safety of the traveling public. Frederick County does not believe that this is the best project to be the next major project in our However, if something more is envisioned by VDOT I would caution them and the CTB that region. I would note that extending Route 37 from exit 310 to Route 522 would be a much more regionally significant proje This facility will offer much needed relief to exit 307, exit 3 -13, and offer significantly improve access to vehicles accessing the Virginia Inland Port. Port expansion has been a key planning item in Virginia for some time now and cannot afford to be overlooked here. 23 As I noted earlier, major projects do not often come to our part of the state. HB 13 certainly helps that and gives us cause to be optimistic. However it remains critical that when major projects are up for funding that they are very carefully chosen and that local planning and priorities are considered and local officials are involved. 6. Other •e b. No signs shall be erected that would restrict sigVt distance, or are close to highway warning and directional signs; c. Signs regarding forest fires should be placed by fire wardens; and d. Signs shall be maintained by the Department of Forestry. In all cases, the forest warden is to coordinate the desired location of these signs with the district administrator's designee prior to placement. 2. Garden week. These signs are erected and removed by employees of VDOT The appropriate committee of the Garden Club of Virginia will designate the gardens and places that are to be officially opened during Garden Week and notify the district administrator's designee accordingly, who will ensure the appropriate placement of these signs. 3. Roadside acknowledgement. These signs acknowledge the name and logo of businesses, organizations, communities, or individuals participating in the landscape of a segment of the right-of-way in accordance with the Comprehensive Roadside Management Program (see 24VAC30-151-760). As the landscaping is accomplished under a land use permit, the signs are considered to be covered by that permit. 4. Rescue squad. These signs are fabricated, erected, and maintained by VDOT. The signs may be used on the approaches to the rescue squad headquarters as shown in the Virginia Supplement to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (see 24VAC30-151-760). 5, Fire station. These signs are fabricated, erected, and maintained by VDOT. The signs may be used on the approaches to fire station headquarters as shown in the Virginia Supplement to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (see 24VAC30-151-760). 6. Bird sanctuary. Upon receipt of a request from a town or city, VDOT will fabricate and erect these signs, at the expense of the municipality, at the corporate limits of the town or city under the municipality name sign as shown in the Virginia Supplement to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (see 24VAC30-151-760). In order for a municipality to be designated as a bird sanctuary, the municipality must pass a resolution to that effect. The municipality shall be responsible for maintenance of bird sanctuary signs. 7. Historical highway markers. Information regarding the historical highway marker program may be obtained from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. Applications for historical highway markers shall be obtained from and submitted to the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. B. The district administrator's designee may authorize the placement of the following miscellaneous signs within right-of-way under the auspices of a single use permit: 1. Locality identification or 'Welcome to" signs. Requests for locality identification or "welcome to" signs to be located within nonlimited access right-of-way. These signs shall not be placed on limited access right-of-way. Locality identification or "welcome to" signs that interfere with roadway safety, traffic capacity, or maintenance shall not be permitted. A permit application requesting placement of a locality identification or 'Welcome to" sign within the right-of-way must be accompanied by a formal resolution from the local governing body or a letter from the chief executive officer of the local government. Such signs shall meet all VDOT breakaway requirements (see Road Design Manual, 24VAC30-151-760) or be erected outside of the clear zone. No advertising shall be placed on these KE signs. The local governing body shall be responsible for maintenance of the locality s identification or "welcome to" signs in perpetuity. 2. VDOT may authorize any individual, group, local government, and other entities to place storm drain pollution prevention markers or stenciling on VDOT storm drain inlet structures accessible by pe%destrian facilities. A local government, through coordination with the district administrator's designee, may apply for a countywide permit to enable this type of activity of behalf of clubs, citizens groups, and other entities. The permit application must include, at a minimum, a graphic sample or samples of the proposed markers, structure locations and a comprehensive list of streets, if ,a wide distribution of marker placement is anticipated. Stencil measurements sh,8111 not exceed 15" L x 20" W. 3. VDOT may authorize a local government to install "no loitering" signs within the right-of-way. The district administrator's designee shall determine the appropriate location for these signs. 24 Ornamental posts, vvafts, residential % " a' cornmerchil development i-ft fz!gnvs, or other nontransportation-related elements. Ornamental posts, walls, residential and commercial development identification signs, or other nontransportation elements such as pedestrian oriented trash cans, or any combination of these, that do not interfere with road%etay safety, traffic capacity or maintenance may be authorized under the auspices of a single use permit. These nontransportation related elements shall not be placed on limited access rights-of-way. Requests for the placement of ornamental posts, walls, residential and commercial development identification signs, or other nontransportation related elements, or any combination of these, may be permitted as authorized by the district administrator's designee. Permit applications requesting placement of ornamental posts, walls, residential and commercial development identification signs, other nontransportation related elements, or any combination of these, within the right-of-way must be accompanied by documentation indicating the issuance of all required approvals and permissions from the local jurisdictional authority. Such ornamental posts, walls, residential and commercial development identification signs, and other nontransportation related elements shall meet all VDOT breakaway requirements (see Road Design Manual, 24VAC30-151-760) or be erected outside of the clear zone. No advertising shall be placed on these nontransportation related elements permitted within the right-of-way. The permiffee shall be responsible for maintenance of these nontransportation related elements in perpetuity. 24%SAC30-1 61 -690. Outdoor advertising adjacent, to the right-of-way. Permits for outdoor advertising located off the right-of-way are obtained through the roadside management section at any VDOT district office or the Maintenance Division in accordance with Chapter 7 (§ 33.1-351 et seq.) of Title 33.1 of the Code of Virginia. Selective pruning permits for outdoor advertising shall be issued in accordance with 33.1-371.1 of the Code of Virginia. 24 VAC 30-15i-600. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The installation of sidewalks, steps, curb ramps, shared use paths, pedestrian underpasses and overpasses within right-of-way may be authorized under the auspices of a single use permit. VDOT shall maintain those facilities that meet the requirements of the Commonwealth Transportation Board's Policy for Integrating Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations (see 24VAC30-151-760). The maintenance of sidewalks, steps, curt, ramps, shared use paths, pedestrian underpasses and overpasses not meeting these 31 COUNTY of FREDERICK John R. Riley, Jr. County Administrator 540/665 -5666 Fax 540/667 -0370 E -mail: jriley@co.frederick.va.us MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation Committee FROM: John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator SUBJECT: Signage Placement Along Major Routes Entering Frederick County DATE: April 8, 2014 The Frederick County Economic Development Authority would like to install signage along the major routes entering Frederick County (i.e. Routes 7, 11, 50, and 522) as away of establishing Frederick County's identity and promoting the county as a business destination. This initiative was one of the phase I recommendations taken from the County's business friendly initiative. The Authority would like to see this signage placed within the median of the divided highways rather than on the shoulder, as this placement would draw attention to the signage. At the Authority's March 20, 2014 meeting, the members voted to forward this item to the Transportation Committee for guidance on the structure of the signs, placement, and how VDOT might work with the County to accomplish this objective. The Authority continues to work on the design and messaging for these signs, but would like to have the Transportation Committee begin looking at this proposal. Following the Transportation Committee's consideration of this item, the Authority would like to receive a recommendation so it can be incorporated into the final report that will be considered by the Board of Supervisors. You will find attached some sample signage showing metal signs, medium density overlay panel, and high density urethane foam. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. JRR/jet Attachment 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 �-11 kTA I a I| 1. Metal � � 2. Medium density overlay panel (MDU) 3. Hhdh Density Urethane foam (HDU) be f. 7E IO 3 F OL - la m i2 LIr I IL I �~ i F"r qw b � A x U N 4-a O a.s 3 DRRC Meeting 03/27/2014 Members present: Greg Unger, Tim Stowe, Gary Oates, June Wilmot, Jay Banks Absent: Larry Ambrogi, Kevin Kenney, Eric Lowman, Dwight Shenk, Whit Wagner, Roger Thomas Staff: Candice Perkins Applicants: Rick Lanham, Josh Hummer Attorney Item 1: Private Streets in the R5 Zoning District. Discussion on revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to remove the requirement that R -5 communities must be "age restricted communities" to qualify for private streets. e The Applicant's Attorney summarized the Transportation Committee meeting. The TC wanted the roads built to state standards and cbr's to be provided to the county. They also wanted to have the PE requirement to monitor the instillation and certify the construction. Mr. Unger asked about the construction and the PE certification. The applicant stated that the same standards would apply to them; paving design would be provided to the county and bonded. They would be inspected and then fixed at the end and off bond. The committee was concerned because private streets don't have the same requirements as the public streets. Private streets go bad eventually; the committee questioned how this could be avoided. The applicant stated that the ordinance includes a provision for a reserve fund and a reserve balance analysis to make sure there are adequate funds for repairs. He further stated that Shenandoah is a large community and the residents are asking for private streets. Every two years a capital reserve study is completed that ensures there are adequate funds for repairs. Mr. Unger expressed concern about busses not being able to go into the community. Ms. Wilmot wanted to know if this community would draw more residents with or without kids. The applicant stated that he believes that it will draw fewer children, but can't be sure. The DRRC also had questions about liability for accidents on the private streets. The committee questioned how the reserve is started? The Applicant stated that it is created at day one and as more improvements get underway more gets added to the fund. The committee expressed concern about the guarantee that the HOA would never fold and then the residents come back to the county for help. The applicant stated that there is no way to provide a complete guarantee but they are trying to put ordinances in place to help that from happening. The applicant further stated that Shenandoah is proposed to be a nice development and the residents are going to want to keep it up but how do you make sure the maintenance is kept up. If the HOA doesn't do the reserve study then the county would have to enforce the ordinance and make them do it. Item 2: (Other) Setbacks for Midrise apartments. The committee expressed concern with the proposal to reduce the front setback from 35 feet to 15 feet. They felt that it seemed to close to a public street. TND or high density developments should have commercial elements that include eating establishments which would be between the street and the building and 15 feet seems close. The committee expressed comfort with reducing the setback from ]5 feet to 20 feet because it would provide more distance to the public road. The committee also stated the possibility of going off the speed limit. Roads with a25 mph should be2O feet and anything overt that should be 35 feet. 2 � __ iA m d} N M 4Pr {f} iPr N M <Pr sPr V1- -1 O lO L O ( 0 % l0 LL w O ld�l i& M O ^ O 41)- O 4Pr O i& O iA- O 0 O O O iPr O b4 O i+ V' C) 0% 0 } L6 LL 7 .N.i M ri lu+ nj i�r io+ O i 4A- -t+ {i} .r- f" 0 O C V' O GO O V" Ln O in 01 N M L.0 O V O m LD M - 4 N O O Ln 0) M O V' n O to N L,0 M n .--i O N .� i{r, N N 16- V' N Ln .-i 0) '�' to 0? ii} I, +fl' lO Lr N ifs N iPr M iPr 3 CL M iPr iPr iPr iPr b4 {fl <Pr t6 N N O O V 0^i OO N 0 M t N L O CD 0 (0o ON ra M O lzt r" iPr (D 00 N O if} Ln l0 N N (7i ti iPr 0i iPr 'V' +6� 1- if} V� iPr M<f! <Pr iFT iPr iPr �} W O v C C o C C C c C C C C c C C c C c p 0 U U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U H Y Y U U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U L 1. U U a a �L a U a a s U a U a U a U a a a U a U a U a U a L L L L L L L L L L L L L L LL LL LL LL LL LL ll LL LL ll LL LL lL LL LL LL E 2 L B . j 2 L ?7 � 2 � I L � L L It H (C (6 i i (6 i N i O C to E m m E m E m m E fo E m C m - C m - C m ' C . .E 0 0 0 0 S S S S (n (n Ln N . 0 •"' V C C O O c O c O C O C O c O C O C O c O C O C O C O C O C O C O +~+ N C C 7 7 C O C 7 C 7 C 7 C 7 C C C 7 C O C 7 C C C 7 C C C 7 C 7 Q Y N (n V) (n (n (A (n N 0 (n VI (n 0 0 Ln 0 Ln 00 00 1-1 00 00 M M N N N L n N O M .--i M n t0 t0 C O C H M W M M M I w C) h- W Lu O (n w w Q J W Z Q p 00 w c ,-i T r AL H ��w Nam'? Z Op Z O LL Z S Q �ce Y M 0 U w w °O >O ° ..Y LU a a Ln z LU Iz-w(°= LU UNO 4 z a p z O Y > a m (n V) p F . X w a V) H (n �w } < �O a a w N0 > w O > O Q U N p } Q LU o U co L t= m z m Y u w w O O Q W� Q LU Lu ^ N O ce U w Q LL L a Ln w I mo - O Q LD O LU cr) o- a =~ O w w - `� LU U >y Q w D = W W �� W M o Qm g a a. U F > �- Q w Ln w a w w F Q < w p U Z a p � LU F- o 00 O o 00 w Q a p w O Go 00 a o L w m O o o L O O M _ N w d N W w_ w o D w ¢ w z p w o a m D. a, 00 Ln O N N Lo M N GO ' O N N N (o M 00 O .I 1 .0 Ln N N LD co M1 n V LO Q L O ko 0 V• .ti O V L LLn co 00 00 V O O to N 00 00 0 0 0) 0 00 O " M n O m O G0 1b ' APPLICATION FOR OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT' COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA 0 to L ' AAPL►CANT dNf�OiFt;M/iT11?iN � �Lr�L�rs t3'r` 9 *� s Name of Applicant: TEENS, Inc.CZ��� Telephone Number(s): 540.324.$965 In home X office a cell 540.550.6449 ❑ home o office X cell Address: 2122 N. Frederick Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 FESTIVAL EV hIT OROANf�AT10NAI'd11�F10iVlA71�JIV ' Festival,: Event Name of Festival: Boots & Bluegrass (it's a fundraising dinner) Cost of Admission to Festival: $30pp /$50couple Business License Obtained; ❑ Yes x No ` $talrf idaxrnium No End w 4 Y Estimated No D s t TWO- of Tickets O#F�e$red . ttf ARM - fees Frida June 20th 6:00pm 9:30pm 150 150 Location Address: 2122 N. Frederick Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 OW neir N ame(s): Gas City owns the property. Always Green has a longterm lease on the property. of Property Always Green is sponsoring the event and provides space for TEENS, Inc. on the property in their " greenhouse. Address: Gas City's Address: 17768 James Marlboro Hwy, Leesburg, VA 20176. Always Green's address is the 2122 N. Frederick Pike address where the event will be held. ( *NOTE: Applicant may be required to provide a statement or other documentation indicating consent bythe owner(s) for use of the property and related parking for the festival.) Promoter Narne(s): This is a non -profit Address: ( *NOTE: For festivals other than not - for - profit, promoter may need to check with the Frederick County Commissioner of Revenue to determine compliance with County business license requirements, In addition, promoters who have repeat or ongoing business in Virginia may be required to register with the VA Mate Corporation Commission for legal authority to conduct business in Virginia,) Financial Name (s): TEENS, Inc. Bader Address: 2122 N, Frederick Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 Perforrner rNamePerson(s) or Group(s): Jake and the Burtones (a bluegrass band from Loudoun County) ( *NOTE: Applicant may need to update information as performers are booked forfestival event,) F�SrIVAC +�U'nrrCV.Grsrl�cs rnrFOPM�rr#3nranr0 D®GUMiEAIfTIT1QN i l , 1. Attach a copy of the printed ticket or badge of admission to the festival, containing the dates) and time(s) of such festival (may be marked as "sample "). ❑ copy attached OR x copy to be provided as soon as available 2. Provide a plan for adequate sanitation facilities as well as garbage, trash, and sewage disposal for persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the VA Department of Health (Lord Fairfax Health District), 3 waste receptacles, 2 Johnny Blues, trash will be removed to the landfill station about 1 mile from site behind Virginia Farm Market, the food is being cooked by the caterer at their restaurant but may be re- heated on a grill at the dinner site. A permit has been submitted with the health department regarding all of these items as well. A property temporary event sanitation set up will also be provided as required by VDH. 3. Provide a plan for providing food, water, and lodging for the persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and focal statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the VA Department of Health (Lord Fairfax Health District). Food is being provided by a VDH approved caterer Neighborhood Italian Kitchen. Bottled water and soda will be provided. Wine and beer provided by Sante Wine and Beer. We have submitted the permit to ABC for a "banquet special event license" which allows the wine and beer sales. There will be no lodging. This is only a 3 hour dinner. 4. Provide a plan for adequate medical facilities for persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the County Fire Chief or Fire Marshal and the local fire and rescue company. I spoke with Mark McDonald, the president of the Gainesboro Fire Department which serves the district for the fundraiser location. There are no medical facilities requirements for this event. 5. Provide a plan for adequate fire protection. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the County fire Chief or Fire Marshal and the local fire and rescue company.. Mark McDonald, president of Gainesboro F.D. does not require any fire prevention measures because this is an outdoor /open event. His only requirement is that we contact the F.D. 2 weeks prior to the event as a reminder that we will be holding this dinner, 6. Provide a plan for adequate parking facilities and traffic control in and around the festival area. (A diagram may be submitted.) The current facility has 16 parking spaces, All cars above the first 16 will park two businesses down in the Winchester Church of God parking lot. The Church as agreed to allow overflow parking in their lot for this dinner. Guests will be shuttled from the Church to the dinner. 7. State whether any outdoor lights or lighting will be utilized: x YES ❑ NO If yes, provide a plan or submit a diagram showing the location of such lights and the proximity relative to the property boundaries and neighboring properties. In addition, show the location of shielding devices or other equipment to be used to prevent unreasonable glow beyond the property on which the festival is located. We will.only be using a few low voltage lighting. This property is zoned B2 and next door to a gas station with a lot of bright lights. There are no other neighboring properties that would be disturbed by the event 8. State whether alcoholic beverages will be served. x YES ❑ NO if yes, provide details on how it will be controlled, A qualified bartender will be distributing any wine or beer. Alcohol provided by Sante Wine & Beer of Winchester and sold by the glass. Our ABC permit for "banquet special event license" will be posted at the permit. Evidence of any applicable VA ABC permit must also be provided and po sted at th f estival as required. Applicant may need to confirm with the VA ABC that a license is not required from that agency in order for festival attendees to bring their own alcoholic beverages to any event that is open to the general public upon payment of the applicable admission fee,) FESTIVAL EVENT LOGISTICS _INFORMATION AND`01' M . NTATION . 9. State whether any temporary structures, as defined within the Virginia Construction Code, will be placed on the property during the event (e.g. tents or air supported structures that exceed 900 squarefeet, stages, grandstand seating, or amusement rides): o YES x NO If yes, please list the type of temporary structure and its dimensions. Also indicate the location of the structure on the submitted site plan. FESTIVAL PROVI.SONS Applicant makes the following statements: A. Music shall not be rendered nor entertainment provided for more than eight (8) hours in any twenty - four (24) hour period, such twenty -four (24) hour period to be measured from the beginning of the first performance at the festival. B. Music shall not be played, either by mechanical device or live performance, in such a manner that the sound emanating therefrom exceeds 73 decibels at the property on which the festival is located. C. No person under the age of eighteen (18) years of age shall be admitted to any festival unless accompanied by a parent or guardian, the parent or guardian to remain with such person at all times. (NOTE: It may be necessary to post signs to this effect.) D. The Board, its lawful agents, and /or duly constituted law enforcement officers shall have permission to go upon the property where the festival is being held at any time for the purpose of determining compliance with the provisions of the County ordinance. CFRTIFI`CATION I, the undersigned Applicant, hereby certify that all information, statements, and documents provided in connection with this Application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. In addition, Applicant agrees that the festival event and its attendees shall comply with the provisions of the Frederick County ordinance pertaining to festivals as well s the festival provisions contained herein. Signature of Applicant Date: April 7 2014 THE BOARD SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVOKE ANY PERMIT ISSUED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE UPON NON- COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS. 4 1Dpn ic 2122 N. Frederick Pike S Winchester, VA 22603 g 540.324.8965 info@teensincva.org m www.teensincva.org Dear Frederick County Permit Office and Administrator, Please find the attached sample invitation (the final invitation has not yet been printed). We will be mailing out the enclosed invitations to potential guests and adding the link to eventbrite.com for ticket sales. Tickets will be purchased on -line through eventbrite.com and a master list provided to the TEENS fundraising committee for guest check -in. Guests will not be issued a paper ticket for the event. I've also provided a copy of the receipt for the ABC License as requested. This receipt only shows that we have applied for the permit and not that it has been approved. As soon as it has been approved and the license issued, a copy will be provided to you. i would anticipate that the license will be issued prior to the public hearing for the board of supervisors on May 14 Everyone on the invitation list is over the age of 21. However there is always a possibility that someone may bring a family member or friend under the age of 21. To ensure that there is no chance of having an underage person being served alcohol, a wrist band will be issued. If there is anything further that you need from us, please let us know. Regards, Sarah Fromme TEENS, Inc. (540) 324 -8965 info (&,teensincva. org www.teensineva.org www.facebook.com/TEENSINCVA twitter. con/teens inc linkedin.com/company/teens-inc-?trk--top_,nav—home S - efit for TEENS, Inc. A Ben Featur a a nd the Bprtone J Signature Sponsor: .: Name & Logo Here Like us on Faeebook: teensinevn Fallow us ®n Twitter: teens ine Fallow us can Finkedin. Teens, Inc. v . WP � O U' "r I n ' r v d r. Teaching Employment t i Enhancement t AF Necessary f ©r Survival Friday, June 20, 2014, 6 9 PM 2122 N. Frederick Pike, Winchester, VA 22603 Tickets: $30 per person / $50 per couple Seating is Limited - Please RSVP by .tune 5th to reserve your seats. For tickets contact: 540.324.8965 or e-mail info @teensincva.org Tickets include Live Music, Dinner, Silent Auction, & Tours of the Greenhouse Pull on those boots and join us in supporting TEENS! 4130/2m ------ � Your application has been successfully submitted to ABC and we have received your payment \ Transaction Complete. A copy of this receipt is being sent to your email address on file. Payment Details 438315 Banquet Special Event (Per Transaction Date: 04/3012014 Amount Charged: us $55.00 Last four digits of card used. 8473 Approval Code: 552009 Email: sfromme@teensincva.org License # EventTVpe Regional Office Date(s) EventTax 438315 Banquet Special Event (Per Staunton - Region 3 (640) 332-7800 06/20/2014 $40.00 Event Total $40.00 Application Fee $15N Total Amount Charged $55.00 Your application will be reviewed by a VA ABC Special Agent or an Administrative Technician. If additional information |o needed during the investigation, you will ba contacted bv phone ore-nlaii If you have any further questions or comments, please,contact the VA ABC Regional Office listed above. https:�AwAN.abc.)Arginia.gcrVebanquetAicensee/Wzardreceipt.do 1/1 Nlrr / � 1 BO ARD I f SU r w , ��tyrr ORDINANCE SALARIES OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FISCAL YEAR 2014 -2015 BE IT ORDAINED, the annual salary for each member of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014, shall be as follows: Chairman, $10,800; Vice Chairman, $10,200; and each other member of the Board of Supervisors at $9,000. Upon motion made by and seconded by the above was by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, at a regular meeting and public hearing held on May 14, 2014, by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Robert A. Hess Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Robert W. Wells Gene E. Fisher Christopher E. Collins Gary A. Lofton A COPY TESTE: John R. Riley, Jr. Clerk, Board of Supervisors cc: Cheryl B. Shiffler, Finance Director C. William Orndoff, Jr., Treasurer Paula A. Nofsinger, Human Resources Director U:1 TJP1ordncesl BoardSalaryFY2014 .2015(BdMtg051414). docx COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 5401665-6395 j � e l all 0 1 Bill ivi El TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors FROM: John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director - Transportation RE: Update of the Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Plans DATE: May 8, 2014 This is a public hearing item to consider the update of the 2014 — 2015 Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Improvement Plans. The Interstate and Primary plans remain unchanged from the 2013-2014 adoption. In the Secondary Road Improvement plan, new projects have been added to the unscheduled list, but the projects ranking have not been updated due to a lack of funding for promoting projects. On the scheduled list, Laurel Grove Road has been broken into two project segments. The Transportation Committee reviewed this item on April 28, 2014 and the Planning Commission reviewed this item on May 14, 2014. Both have recommended approval. Staff is seeking approval from the Board of Supervisors on the plan. Attachments 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 2014 -2015 INTERSTATE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN for FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Frederick County Transportation Committee: 0412812014 Frederick County Planning Commission: 0510712014 Frederick County Board of Supervisors: 0511412014 I -81 Improvements Provide additional travel lanes on the main line, collector- distributor lanes adjacent to the main line, modifications to existing interchange areas, and develop new interchange areas and bridge crossings of the main line as recommended by the WinFred MPO Long Range Plan. In addition, as the State continues to work toward an ultimate plan for the I -81 widening, the County of Frederick continues to support the study of Eastern Route 37 as a potential corridor on new location an alternative for that effort. Moreover, the County of Frederick supports exploration of the potential for rail transportation as a component of the Interstate 81 Corridor improvements. S 1 , A) Progress to Phase of the FHWA approved interchange modification to Exit 3 0 (as illustrated on map as priority A) B) Relocate Exit 307 further south to alleviate existing and future congestion on Route 277. There is an urgent need to begin increased study of this project. (as illustrated on map as priority B) C) Widen I -81 from Fairfax Pike to Route 37 North. This should include the relocation of the 277 Interchange. From: Route 277, Exit 307 310 To: Route 37 North, Exit (as illustrated on map as priority C) D) Widen Remainder of I -81 in Frederick County From: West Virginia line To: Warren County line (as illustrated on map as priority D) E) Spot Improvements on I -81 in Frederick County Provide spot improvements at various interchanges to increase capacity and/or enhance safety for the motoring public. i l p � 4 S r C iX � f � l �' E r r i � r i : ' � • `.,. • i � t e 1 � A i ( � t xe � � r 50 nc he 37 _ � y �H Interstate i L-- �� Improvement Stephens ✓'r✓>✓ � = . IF citV 1 r Y 4(l ( Make SalW Qg Iefchi Improvernunis a] ExH 31 Privity B 4 3 + rici I• a {. - R1277 N to R137 N Priority iD RESOLUTION 2014 -2015 INTERSTATE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, Sections 33.1 -23 and 33.1 -23.4 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, provides the opportunity for each county to work with the Virginia Department of Transportation in developing a Six -Year Road Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Transportation Committee recommended approval of this plan on April 28, 2014; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval of this plan at their meeting on May 7, 2014; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors had previously agreed to assist in the preparation of this plan in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation's policies and procedures and participated in a public hearing on the proposed Plan, after being duly advertised so that all citizens of the County had the opportunity to participate in said hearing and to make comments and recommendations concerning the proposed Plan and Priority List; and, WHEREAS, a representative of the Virginia Department of Transportation appeared before the Board during the public hearing and recommended approval of the 2014 — 2015 Interstate Road Improvement Plan and the Construction Priority List; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors support the priorities of the interstate road improvement projects for programming by the Commonwealth Transportation Board and the Virginia Department of Transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as follows: The 2014 -2015 Interstate Road Improvement Plan appears to be in the best interest of the citizens of Frederick County and the Interstate Road System in Frederick County; and therefore, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the 2014 -2015 Interstate Road Improvement Plan and Construction Priority List for Frederick County, Virginia as presented at the public hearing held on May 14, 2014. PDRes #09 -14 This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Robert W. Wells Gene E. Fisher Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Christopher E. Collins A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes #09 -14 2014 -2015 PRIMARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN for FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Frederick County Transportation Committee: 0412812014 Frederick County Planning Commission: 0510712014 Frederick County Board of Supervisors: 0511412014 1) Route 37 Bypass A. Route 37 - Phase 1 Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right -of -way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the southern segment of the Route 37 Eastern Bypass from Interstate 1 -81 to Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South). (As illustrated on map as priority IA) B. Route 37 - Phase 2 Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right -of -way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the preferred alternative between existing Route 37 around Stonewall Industrial Park and Route 7. (As illustrated on map as priority IB) 522. C. Route 37 - Phase 3 Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right -of -way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the preferred alternative between Route 7 and Route (As illustrated on map as priority I C) 2) Route 277 (East of Stephens City) 522 From: I -81 /Route 277 /Route 647 Intersection (East of Stephens City) To: Route 340/Route South Intersection (East of Double Toll Gate) Improve to a four lane divided roadway with County staff to work with site developers to acquire dedicated right -of -way and achieve grading, drainage, and construction Le improvements in conjunction with development projects which occur along thf corridor until such time that funding is available for construction. Establish construction schedule for the phased improvement of Fairfax Pike (Route 277). Program funding fcg the completion of right -of -way acquisition and construction of each phase as described above. 3 3) Route 11 (North and South of Winchester) A) Establish an Urban Divided Four Lane System From: Southern limits of the City of Winchester To: 0.4 miles south of intersection of Route 37 South, Exit 10 (As illustrated on map as priority 3A) B) Establish an Urban Divided Six Lane System From: Northern limits of the City of Winchester To: Intersection of Merchant Street (As illustrated on map as priority 3B) C) Establish an Urban Divided Four Lane System From: Intersection of Merchant Street 1 ti To: West Virginia line 522 (As illustrated on map as priority 3C) 4) South Frederick County Parkway From: Relocated Exit 307 To: Intersection with Route 277 approximately Mile west of he intersection of Route 277 and Route This is a planned new roadway with limited access points serving a mixture of predominantly commercial and industrial development. There is need to study this project in conjunction with the Exit 307 relocation and planning for Route 277 improvements noted in item 3. Phasing of this project is not yet clearly defined, however general phasing would be from West to East with the clear first phase being from relocated Exit 307 to Warrior Dr. (4s illustrated on map as priority 4) 5) Commuter Park and Ride Lots Establish a new park and ride facility along the Berryville Pike (Route 7) corridor_ Work with the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission to determine appropriate Iocations for park and ride facilities at other strategic locations within the County's Urban Development Area. For Park and Ride locations in Frederick County the primary goal should be that they are situated in such a manner that they reduce traffic in Frederick County in addition to adjacent localities. (As illustrated on map as priority S) J r s F r' } Or I � r i� r' �� f� - ` J �• - > . � . " t`' r .i �r � „- � � I. , r � _ �•� r �9 .. r � � r l J ,c i a J y 50 Stephens; 4t V&u Tai 'rte �( t. RESOLUTION 2014 -2015 PRIMARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, Sections 33.1 -23 and 33.1 -23.4 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, provides the opportunity for each county to work with the Virginia Department of Transportation in developing a Six -Year Road Plan, and; WHEREAS, the Frederick County Transportation Committee recommended approval of this plan on April 28, 2014; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval of this plan at their meeting on May 7, 2014; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors had previously agreed to assist in the preparation of this plan in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation's policies and procedures and participated in a public hearing on the proposed Plan, after being duly advertised so that all citizens of the County had the opportunity to participate in said hearing and to make comments and recommendations concerning the proposed Plan and Priority List; and, WHEREAS, a representative of the Virginia Department of Transportation appeared before the Board during the public hearing and recommended approval of the 2014 — 2015 Primary Road Improvement Plan and the Construction Priority List; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors support the priorities of the primary road improvement projects for programming by the Commonwealth Transportation Board and the Virginia Department of Transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as follows: The 2014 -2015 Primary Road Improvement Plan appears to be in the best interest of the citizens of Frederick County and the Primary Road System in Frederick County; and therefore, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the 2014 -2015 Primary Road Improvement Plan and Construction Priority List for Frederick County, Virginia as presented at the public hearing held on May 14, 2014. PDRes #10 -14 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 Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Christopher E. Collins A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes #10 -14 2014115-2019120 M FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Frederick County Transportation Committee: 0412812014 Frederick County Planning Commission: 0510512014 Frederick County Board of Supervisors: 0511412014 FREDERICK COUNTY MAJOR ROAD IMlPROVEM1ENT PROJECTS 2014/2015 through 2019/2020 Major road improvement projects command the reconstruction of hardsurfaced roads to enhance public safety. Improvements required for road width, road alignment, road strength, and road gradient are considered major road improvements projects. N V W V z W t 4 .J Q 1 - V W N z Y Z 11-- Q g ��z N wV ° wW LU p ° Q W �0 to U)� H Q �a ° 2 2 w Q LL > N i r aQ �° N o v W Q 1) 655 Sulphur Springs Route 50 .30 Mi East 6000 1.1 miles SH $7,505,445 2013 $5,798:052 Road Rt 656 Allocated .47 Mi Int. Snowden Partial 2) 661 Red Bud Road South Bridge 1300 0.5 miles ST $2,000,000 UN /SH Funded Route 11 Blvd. Relocation $1,500.000 Partial 3) 672 Brucetown Road Route 11 .35 Mi East 3200 0 35 miles ST Significantly UN /SH Funded $100,000 Variable Thru Plan $10,414,000 Appited for 4) 788 East Tevis Street Route 522 Winchester N/A 0.44 miles SH Revenue UN /SH R/S Funds City Limit Sharing $1,400,000 5) 788 East Tevis Street Route 522 1 -81 N/A 0 40 miles SH Revenue UN /SH Cover Overall Sharing Project Needs LF Turn Lns Under 81 $3,346,924 SBound @ 6) 11 Martinsburg Pike Overpass 16000 0.20 miles ST Revenue UN /SH 1 -81 Overpass Exit 317 Sharing $1.9 Mil Short on Fundin Federal 723 Carpers Valley Road At Clarke 1100 N/A SH $1,262,327 Beyond Bridge 7) County line 2014 Replacement Fundin .24 Mi Int. 8) 788 Renaissance West Shady Elm N/A .18 miles BC $1,635,658 2015 R/S Funds Route 11 Road N 50 Winchester i Rd 1. Sul her Springs p 522 !, �2. Redbud Rd # Brucetown Rd 11 �� 0% East Tevis Street 5. East Tevis Street 0 Martinsburg Pike Stephens City j� �7. Carpers Valley Rd # Renaisance Dr e Frederick County Major Road A Improvement Projects 11 2014/2015 thru 2019/2020 n a E j , FREDERICK COUNTY HARD SURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 2014/2015 through 2019/2020 Hardsurface road improvement projects provide impervious resurfacing and reconstruction of non-hardsurfaced secondary roads. Hardsurface improvement projects are prioritized by an objective rating system, which considers average daily traffic volumes; occupied structures; physical road conditions including geometries, drainage, and accident reports, school bus routing; and the time that project requests have been on the Secondary Road Improvement Plan. Z W W U U- 4 ell UJ UJ rA � Z LU Z Z Z UJ (a LU UJ 0 �- Z LU D a D W 0 go 2 W > 0 IL $20,000 Allocated 671 Woodside Road Route 11 0.4 East of 50 0.4 miles ST $144,000 UN1SH Potential Rural Route 11 Rustic/Funding I ' by Others IF — T671 ] I Woodside Road I Wright Road Route 669 WV Line 270 I 0.30 miles ST $91,500 0412812017 I CTB Unpaved Roads Funding 661 Route 669 WV Line 240 1.84 miles ST $561,200 04130/2018 CTB Unpaved Roads Funding 62 Carter Lane J Route 631 Route 625 220 1 8 miles BC $549,000 04/30/2019 CTB Unpaved Pack Horse Road Roads ds Funding 692 1.2 Mi NE of Rt. 600 Route 671 210 1.4 miles GA $427,000 0413012020 CTB Unpaved Roads Funding Laurel Grove Road Route 622 of 1 200 1,25 miles BC 376,000 04/30/2021 CTB Unpaved i Rt, 622 Roads Funding — FT62 9 Laurel Grove Road 1.25 Mi W of 2 .5 Mi W of 200 1.25 miles =BC 376,000 04130/2021 CTB Unpaved Rt. 622 Rt. 622 Roads Funding <. Frederick County Hardsurface Road 1. Woodside Rd t ; Improvement Projects 2. Woodside Rd ,'j '� 2014/2015 thru 2019/2020 ti #'%o 3. Wright Rd N 4. Carter L E 22 •�`• 5. Pack Horse Rd 6. Laurel Grove Rd 7. Laurel Grove Rd 27 r f Winchester 0 2 4 8 Miles FREDERICK COUNTY UNSCHEDULED HARDSURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS RATINGS NOT UPDATED 2014/2015 through 2019/2020 Note: Project ratings are updated only when funding is available to promote projects to the scheduled list. No new funding was available this year so ratings are not updated and new projects have been placed at the end of the list. In the future when ratings are updated they will likely move up on the list. 4 v w � wU w Q � co t— Y a w a z z W V z w a F- o F- ~o nF- F o W w y a 0 W a u_ >�v coo o o a� o 1) 707 Hollow Road WV Line Route 610 190 1.6 GA 74 Miles 2) 734 North Sleepy 1.27 Mi S W of 2.27 Mi S W of 150 1.0 GA 73 Creek Road Route 522 Route 522 Mile 3) 730 Babbs Mountain Route 654 Route 677 130 0.9 GA 72 Road Miles 4) 677 Old Baltimore Route 676 Route 672 170 1.2 GA 70 Road Miles 5) 607 Heishman Road Route 600 End of State 150 0.78 BC 68 Maintenance Miles 6) 695 Middle Fork 2.3 Mi N of WV Line 30 0.9 GA 68 Road Route 522 Miles 7) 733 Fletcher Road Route 50 Route 707 150 1.3 GA 67 Miles 8) 636 Canterburg Road Route 640 Route 641 170 1.5 OP 66 Miles 9) 634 Cougill Road Route 635 Route 11 200 0.25 BC 64 Miles 10) 612 Fishel Road Route 600 Route 600 40 1.6 BC 64 Miles 11) 638 Clark Road Route 625 Route 759 90 0.8 BC 63 Miles 12) 644 East Parkins Mill Route 50 End of State 140 0.81 SH 61 Road Maintenance Miles 13) 811 Timberlakes Route 671 End of State 290 0.25 ST 61 Lane Maintenance Miles 14) 682 Glaize Orchard Route 608 Route 671 240 1.54 GA 57 Road Miles 15) 636 Huttle Road Route 709 Route 735 140 1.1 OP 53 Miles 16) 616 McDonald Road Route 608 Mid- 0.44 Mile N 150 0.45 BC 53 Int. Route 608 Miles 17) 696 South Timber Route 522 Route 694 120 1.3 GA 53 Rid a Road Miles 18) 685 Light Road Route 600 Route 681 130 1.3 GA 47 Miles 19) 731 Cattail Road Route 608 Route 654 130 1.7 GA 46 Miles 20) 608 Hunting Ridge Route 682 2.41 Miles West 100 2.41 GA 46 Road Of 682 Miles 21) 667 Sir John's Road Route 672 Last residence 180 2.37 ST Not Ranked Miles 22) 615 Mount Olive Route 50 Route 600 110 .77 GA Not Ranked Road Miles 23) 671 Shockeysville Rd 690 .90 Miles West of 140 .90 BC Not Ranked 690 Miles Note: Project ratings are updated only when funding is available to promote projects to the scheduled list. No new funding was available this year so ratings are not updated and new projects have been placed at the end of the list. In the future when ratings are updated they will likely move up on the list. 4 Frederick County Unscheduled Hardsurface Road 0%01. Hollow Rd 0%02. North Sleepy Creek Rd 0%03. Babbs Mountain Rd 0%04. Old Baltimore Rd 0%05. Heishman Rd 0%06. Middle Fork Rd ^07. Fletcher Rd 0%08. Canterburg Rd ^409. Cougill Rd 10. Fishel Rd 4NO11. Clark Rd 4%012. East Parkins Mill Rd ^4013. Timberlakes Ln 0%014. Glaize Orchard Rd 0%015. Huttle Rd 0%016. McDonald Rd 17. South Timber Ridge Rd 18. Light Rd 0%019. Cattail Rd 0%020. Hunting Ridge Rd ^4W Sir John's Rd 0%022. Mount Olive Rd #W4%023. Shockeysville Rd Improvement Projects Ratings Updated April 2014 2014/2015 thru 2019/2020 J C SHAWNEE N y �� y W X E A!1 0 2 4 8 Miles RESOLUTION 2014 -2015 SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, Sections 33.1 -23 and 33.1 -23.4 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, provides the opportunity for each county to work with the Virginia Department of Transportation in developing a Six -Year Road Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Transportation Committee recommended approval of this plan on April 28, 2014; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval of this plan at their meeting on May 7, 2014; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors had previously agreed to assist in the preparation of this plan in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation's policies and procedures and participated in a public hearing on the proposed Plan, after being duly advertised so that all citizens of the County had the opportunity to participate in said hearing and to make comments and recommendations concerning the proposed Plan and Priority List; and, WHEREAS, a representative of the Virginia Department of Transportation appeared before the Board during the public hearing and recommended approval of the 2014 — 2015 Secondary Road Improvement Plan and the Construction Priority List; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors support the priorities of the secondary road improvement projects for programming by the Commonwealth Transportation Board and the Virginia Department of Transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as follows: The 2014 -2015 Secondary Road Improvement Plan appears to be in the best interest of the citizens of Frederick County and the Secondary Road System in Frederick County; and therefore, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the 2014 -2015 Secondary Road Improvement Plan and Construction Priority List for Frederick County, Virginia as presented at the public hearing held on May 14, 2014. PDRes #11 -14 This resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert A. Hess Robert W. Wells Gene E. Fisher Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Christopher E. Collins A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator PDRes #11 -14 CMG CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #02 -14 w4 ti� JESSICA M. NEFF a ar Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors w A � Prepared: May 1, 2014 ;J3B Staff Contact: Mark Cheran, Zoning Administrator 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 request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 04/02/14 Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 04/23/14 Public Hearing Held- Action Postponed until 5/14/14 Board of Supervisors: 05/14/14 Pending EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for a Residential Kennel - Dog Boarding. The Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on April 23, 2014, for this proposed Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The Board of Supervisors postponed the action until May 14, 2014. The applicant has met with staff to modify the conditions of this CUP, to address the adjoining property owners concerns. The modified conditions are below in bold print: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs shall be permitted on the property at any given time. 3. This conditional use permit (CUP) is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. 4. No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed. 5. All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. 6. The Applicant will construct a 20 x 30 enclosed kennel in the rear of the property, with a 6 foot fenced outdoor play area. 7. The enclosed kennel house shall be built with noise - abatement construction material to reduce any dog barking so as to not exceed 50 dba. A professional engineer licensed in the state of Virginia shall seal the plans of the kennel house indicating it has met the 50 dba threshold. 8. The plans of the kennel house shall be reviewed by the County prior to any Page 2 CUP 902 -14 Jessica M. Neff May 1, 2014 construction activity or operation of kennel. 9. The kennel shall have an appointment only drop -off and pick up of dogs. 10. The Applicant shall maintain a contract with a waste removal company. 11. All dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00 p.m. and not let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. No more than three (3) dogs may be outdoors at any given time. 12. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. 13. Any expansion or modification of this use will require the approval of a new CUP. It would be appropriate for Board action concerning this application. LOCATION The property is located at 461 Laurel Grove Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBER 73 -9 -3 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential Land Use: Vacant Land Use: Vacant Land Use: VPI Agricultural Research and Extension Center PROPOSED USE Residential Kennel - Dog Boarding. REVIEW EVALUATIONS Virginia Department of Transportation: The application for a Conditional Use Permit for this Page 3 CUP 902 -14 Jessica M. Neff May 1, 2014 property appears to have little measurable impact on Route 629, the VDOT facility which would provide access to the property. Present entrance is adequate for proposed improvements. Should business ever expand in the future, entrance may need to be upgraded. Frederick County Fire and Rescue: Plans approved. Frederick County Fire Marshall: Plans approved as long as there is at least one working smoke detector and 1 -51b 2A/IOBC fire extinguisher within 75 feet of the areas being occupied by the dogs. Frederick County Inspections: The building shall comply with The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, The International Existing Building Code 2009 and section 304 - B, Business Use Group of the International Building Code /2009. Other Code that applies is ICC /ANSI A117.1 -03 Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities and 2009 International Energy Code. If new kennel construction exceeds 200 square feet, a building permit would be required. Frederick - Winchester Health Department: The Health Department has no objection to the request as stated. This does not grant approval for additional employees. Applicant may not dispose of canine waste via the septic tank drainfield on site. Winchester Regional Airport: We have reviewed the referenced conditional use permit request proposal. While the site does lie within the airspace operations of the Winchester Regional Airport, it is outside of the close in part 77 surfaces and should not impact airport operations. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: No comments. Citv of Winchester: No comments. Planning and Zoning: Kennels are a permitted use in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District with an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) [Code of Frederick County §165 - 401.03.x]_ This proposed use will take place on a 7 +/- acre parcel; surrounded by properties that are zoned RA. The 2030 Comprehensive Policy Plan of Frederick County (Comprehensive Plan) identifies this area of the County to remain rural in nature and is not part of any land use study. The Zoning Ordinance defines a Kennel: "As a place prepared to house, board, breed, handle or otherwise keep or care for dogs for sale or in return for compensation." The Zoning Ordinance requires that kennels be subject to additional performance standards in order to mitigate negative impacts to adjoining residential properties to include, all dogs to be confined within a secure structure and a Category C Buffer. There will be no employees with this proposed kennel per the Frederick County Health Department. The properties immediately Page 4 CUP 902 -14 Jessica M. Neff May 1, 2014 adjacent to this proposed CUP are currently zoned RA Zoning District, with the nearest residential dwelling being approximately 600 feet from this proposed dog kennel. Therefore, the intent of the Category C Buffer can be met, as 400 feet is required for a no screen Category C Buffer. The applicant will be constructing a 20 x 30 square foot enclosed kennel with a fenced area for the dogs, at the rear of the property. The applicant has indicated that no more than twenty —eight (28) dogs will be on the property at any given time. All dogs must be confined indoors with the exception of when they are walked or exercised, and will not to be let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. Dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00 p.m. In reviewing this application, the following conditions are considered appropriate reflective of the applicant's request, review agency comments, and /or in an effort to mitigate any potential impacts as noted. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs on the property at any given time. (The applicant has requested the number of dogs with this kennel) This CUP is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. (The applicant does not want to breed dogs) No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed. (This condition is per the Frederick County Health Department) All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. All dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00 p.m. and not be let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. (This condition is to help mitigate any impacts to adjoining properties) Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. Any expansion or modification of this use will require an approval of a new CUP. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 04/02/14 PLANNING CONIMISSION MEETING The request complies with applicable policies and ordinances. The Planning staff recommends approval of the CUP, with the following eight (8) conditions: Page 5 CUP 902 -14 Jessica M. Neff May 1, 2014 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs shall be permitted on the property at any given time. 3. This CUP is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. 4. No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed. 5. All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. 6. All dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00 p.m. and are not to be let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. 7. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. S. Any expansion or modification of this use will require the approval of a new CUP. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF THE 4/02/14 MEETING The applicant said there will be no dog breeding, solely boarding; the dogs will be inside at all times, except when walked or exercised; and the kennel building will be a free - standing garage constructed with wider than normal walls to provide noise insulation and the walls and attic will be insulated for better heating and air conditioning. Two neighboring residents spoke in opposition to the proposed kennel. Both residents were concerned about the devaluation of their property; they were concerned about noise from barking dogs disrupting the quiet of their neighborhood; they were concerned about odors and how dog waste would be disposed; and they were concerned about water runoff. They did not believe their residential neighborhood was a practical location for the operation of this business. Commission members were concerned about noise from dog barking. They advised the applicant there were a number of different construction techniques for sound abatement in a building. Those construction techniques involved a benefit/cost ratio standpoint that needed to be considered by the applicant. They also pointed out that when dogs are outside, they will bark and there was no way to muzzle them. They encouraged the applicant to be mindful about the conditions of the permit and the possibility the permit could be revoked, if the operation becomes a public nuisance. Other Commissioners pointed out this location is a somewhat remote Page 6 CUP 902 -14 Jessica M. Neff May 1, 2014 agricultural area buffered by cornfields and large stands of trees. They mentioned the adjoining State agricultural research center where there is spraying taking place, noise from tractors, and the various types of farm animals being raised in this area. The applicant stated that the kennel building will be constructed with wider walls to provide for better noise insulation. By a unanimous vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit with the conditions as recommended by the staff, as follows: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs shall be permitted on the property at any given time. 3. This conditional use permit (CUP) is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. 4. No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed. 5. All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. 6. All dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00 p.m. and not let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. 7. Any proposed business sign shall conform to cottage occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square -feet in size and five (5) feet in height. 8. Any expansion or modification of this use will require approval of a new conditional use permit. (Note: Commissioner Crockett was absent from the meeting.) Two citizens spoke in opposition to this use at the April 2, 2014, Planning Commission Meeting. One of the concerns was the devaluation of properties located near kennels. Staff contacted the Commissioner of Revenue Office with the concern of devaluation of properties located near kennels. The Commissioners Office had no issues of devaluation of properties near kennels or with approved Conditional Use Permits in general. The noise and control of the dogs is addressed by Condition #5 of the Conditional Use Permit. Furthermore, the kennel building will be a free- standing garage constructed with wider than normal walls to provide noise insulation and the walls and attic will be insulated for better heating and air conditioning. The applicant has contacted a company for the disposal of dog waste. Page 7 CUP 902 -14 Jessica M. Neff May 1, 2014 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SUMMARY & ACTION OF THE 04/23/14 MEETING: The Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this proposed Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a kennel. Several adjoining property owners spoke in opposition to this kennel, and two (2) letters of opposition were received. The Board of Supervisors voted to postpone any action on this CUP until their May 14, 2014, meeting. This action was to allow the applicant to address some of the concerns voiced by the adjoining property owners. ACTIONS SINCE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 4/23/14 MEETING: The applicant has met with staff to modify the conditions of this CUP, to address the adjoining property owners concerns. The modified conditions are located below in bold print: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs shall be permitted on the property at any given time. 3. This conditional use permit (CUP) is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. 4. No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed. 5. All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. 6. The Applicant will construct a 20 x 30 enclosed kennel in the rear of the property with a 6 foot fenced outdoor play area. 7. The enclosed kennel house shall be built with a noise - abatement construction material to reduce any dog barking so as to not exceed 50 dba. A professional engineer licensed in the state of Virginia shall seal the plans of the kennel house indicating it has met the 50 dba threshold. 8. The plans of the kennel house shall be reviewed by the County prior to any construction activity or operation of the kennel. 9. The kennel shall have an appointment only drop -off and pick -up of dogs. Page 8 CUP 902 -14 Jessica M. Neff May 1, 2014 10. The Applicant shall maintain a contract with a waste removal company. 11. All dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00 p.m. and not let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. No more than three (3) dogs outdoors at any given time. 12. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. 13. Any expansion or modification of this use will require a new CUP. Mao 'a yr- 7 r [ t� 73A3 I mint ; w1i' Y . • r a , 3 CUPO214 4 MOa fA0f3 i+ M ao t MW i ME 1 V ryR1 <N Note: Frederick County Dept of CUP # 02 - 14 Planning & Development Jessica Nei e 202 N Kent St S e Suite PINS: Winchester, VA 22601 73 -9 -3 540- 665 -5651 Map Created: March 11, 2014 Staff: macheran 0 105 210 420 Feet O Applications Q Parcels Building Footprints 131 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) f EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) HE (Higher Education District) M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) - R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District) i ME 1 V ryR1 <N Note: Frederick County Dept of CUP # 02 - 14 Planning & Development Jessica Nei e 202 N Kent St S e Suite PINS: Winchester, VA 22601 73 -9 -3 540- 665 -5651 Map Created: March 11, 2014 Staff: macheran 0 105 210 420 Feet v ma on@ � r cntb 629 LQ CUP0214 t 30a ` MOB r MOB RU flfl r MOO 73 A 13' 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) 40 MS (Medical Support District) 4W OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District) ou LE COUN ESTATES ubdivisio rrmwn:. ' mG1 t1i13 fA ©f3 POPLAR RIDGE Sub'divis'ion m ®a V A 10 i Note: Frederick County Dept of CUP # 02 - 14 Planning & Development Suite 202 N Kent St Jessica Neff e Suit PINS: Winchester, VA 22601 73 -9 -3 540- 665 -5651 Map Created: March 11, 2014 Staff: macheran 0 315 630 1,260 Feet LE a W LE u L MAg 72014 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING AND nF»m r cm.,L- ,. Submittal Deadline - 1 1 P/C Meeting 1 BOS Meeting L{ ,� j` APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1. Applicant check one): Property Owner Other NAME: _ J6S► CO K Ne ADDRESS: laid Elf -o e �(J J& iAchcst er 00 J) TELEPHONE: ��D (Q(� c J. � 2. Please list all owners, occupants, or parties in interest of the property: (Jl ca 3. The property is located at: (please give exact directions and include the route number of your road or street) If M The property has a road frontage of i�i W feet and a depth of -�)C'i feet and consists of l.`_" acres. (Please be exact) The property is owned by cc, j as evidenced by deed from W 1k -t RY;Qaef M I I /- (previous owner) recorded in deed book no. -°►�_ on page`: , as recorded in the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, County of Frederick. Property Identification Number (P.I.N.) - c) Magisterial District ELOL C:rtd- V \I CON Skric �,i Current Zoning 0G, +G 5 7. E:3 Adjoining Property: USE ZONING North East VA6AnT South 4"1f ,4 i West a " V The type of use proposed is (consult with the Planning Dept. before completing): 9. It is proposed that the following buildings will be constructed: 10. The following are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to both sides and rear and in front of (across street from) the property. where the requested use will be conducted. (Continue on back if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of tbi- ann]icatinn: 444 Laurel Grove Road Mailing Address Name and Property Identification Number Winchester, VA 22602 678 Laurel Grove Road Dogwood Knoll LC Winchester, VA 22602 73 -A -9 Name ' 11 .S(Mn &IC-UNI, 5qs Wvel 0(y R& Property # �3 -,A --3 ' lC�')PSfE3" � JCS Q KSS LC 73 -A -12 Name Bo Property # Name Pr operty # Name Property # Name Property # 448 Laurel Grove Road Winchester, VA 22602 eeta & Rae L�OYYe r 5 'R 4y Q to j.su,,,re, l fov Mailing Address P.O. Box 2368 Winchester, VA 22604 6 �� Q_ 12. Additional comments, if any: yyal (I ite t M Ows & lyt � I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the governing body of Frederick County, Virginia to allow the use described in this application. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the first public hearing and maintained so as to be visible until after the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Your application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizes any member of the Frederick County Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors or Planning and Development Department to inspect your property where the proposed use will be conducted. Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner ( � /�&� , Owners' Mailing Address " u oI,, d NO& Kd � a nm -��"t'l 03 Owners' Telephone No. TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: USE CODE: RENEWAL DATE: 0 s A + _�. L h 'Ln -' M 1 `_:• � s + _�. April 2, 2014 Thank you for the opportunity to address the Planning Commission- My name is Sheila Pinner and I am here tonight with my husband Jack Pinner. We are residents of Laurel Grove Rd. We are very close (across the street and within sight) of the proposed indoor boarding kennel. We are also here tonight to express our concerns and opposition to the proposed kennel. Since receiving Ms. Neffs letter of March 10, 2014 regarding her proposed indoor boarding kennel, I have been researching the effects the proposed kennel would have on us as property owners. I have been focused on a debate going on in neighboring Clarke County involving the proposed approval of a dog kennel. In an article written in the Winchester Star, former supervisor and realtor A. R. Dunning "Pete" Dunning read a letter from the county Commissioner of Revenue, Donna M. Peake, who said homeowners there would lose 15 to 20 percent of the value of their homes if the kennel is built next to their properties. I do understand that this involves a different property. I immediately began contacting local realtors and county offices for information. I would note in addition there are thousands of sites on the internet from every state which address devaluing of property by having a kennel near your property. I was speechless when I read over and over again that a kennel could have a negative effect of anywhere from 15 to 50 percent on property values. The realtors I surveyed did support the point of view that my property would be devalued. No one can guarantee that my property value will not be affected. Two questions which I would like to have an answer to: Will the property owner's conditional permit transfer if the property is sold? I have been told VA (Frederick County) would require a new permit. Is this correct? Could a new property owner expand the business on a renewal of the same permit? I understand from realtors I asked that VA (Frederick and surrounding counties) does not have a nuisance disclosure requirement if you sell your property. Is this correct? My understanding is that VA has a disclosure form which states on it that you do not have to disclose a neighboring nuisance if you sell your home. But, word of mouth would travel. Realtors know what is located in a community. Most buyers would speak to neighbors to find out about the area. One realtor made the comment "who could sell a home next door to a kennel? Common sense tells me most folks would look elsewhere ". My other concerns are obvious: Noise (you can easily hear more than one dog as far as '/ mile — what about 28 dogs? Traffic — Rt. 629 has been close to completely paved in the last few years — this has added more traffic traveling all hours of the day and night (neighbors have had mail and paper boxes constantly destroyed due to traffic increase). This will only increase with an operating business on the road. What hours would the kennel have for drop off and pick up? It is proposed as a 24 hour operation. 28 dogs and 28 owners in 28 vehicles that could travel on our residentially zoned road in one morning and a new group of 28 owners in 28 vehicles with 28 dogs dropped off that afternoon would be 56 additional vehicles on the road in a day, extreme but possible. What arrangements have been made for parking? Would this face the front of the property? What about the odor of taking care of this number of animals? Are there proposals for adequate disposal of waste? Will there be a septic system? Will there be runoff? What are the county requirements if any? Will the entire facility be fenced or just the walking and exercise areas? What is required? Has there been a noise impact study? I have read much on the proper authorities coming out to investigate a barking dog and measuring the noise levels? What recourse is open to property owners once the permit is issued? Is this just the first phase of a proposed kennel? What are the restrictions as far as expansion? Are their required site visits from county or state? Who regulates the conditions of the permit? What kind of precedent would this set for other proposed money making businesses in a rural, residential area? Fourteen (14) kennels for 28 dogs. Is this just the start? My husband and I feel that this is not a local need. There are other kennels in the area offering the same service. No amount of convenience is worth the detrimental effect to surrounding homes. Ms. Neff states in her letter that this is a dream of hers to work with and help animals. My husband and I have had a dream since we built on family property over 42 years ago. Most of our neighbors have been on Laurel Grove as long as we have or longer. We dreamed of having a wonderful retirement and being able to enjoy the serenity and the beauty of nature surrounding our home. I do not believe looking out from any front facing window in my home to a dog boarding kennel would add to this serene environment. Sheila Pinner 408 Laurel Grove Rd. Winchester, VA 22602 (540) 869 -4476 To: mcheran@co.frederick.va.us rhess@fcva.us rshickle@fcva.us cdehavengfeva.us fisher@fcva.us rwellsAfcva.us lofton ,fcva.us ccollinsAfcva.us Subject: BOS 4/23/14 Public Hearing on CUP 02 -14 -- Opposition of Scott and Bethanne Berman to Conditional Use Permit #02 -14 ( "CUP ") /Jessica M. Neff To: Members of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors (`BOS ") and the Frederick County Planning Staff From: Scott and Bethanne Berman Our home is located at 247 Laurel Grove Road, TM # 7383 as shown on the attached Planning Department Map created March 11, 2014. We have resided in our home for 15 years. Based on the scale of the attached Map, our home is approximately 1,890 feet from the proposed site of Jessica Neff s Kennel. The proposed Kennel site and our home are both located on a ridge of essentially equivalent elevation, meaning that noise from the proposed Kennel will readily travel to our home. Consistent with comments presented at the April 2 Planning Commission Hearing, we oppose the approval of a CUP for the Kennel based on the following concerns: 1. The Kennel, clearly a commercial use increasing vehicle traffic on Laurel Grove Road, will be a use inconsistent with the residential nature of the neighborhood. 2. The presence of the Kennel will reduce the value of our property and of our neighbors' properties. The Kennel, as presently planned consistent with the Planning Commission's "Conditions," will constitute a nuisance to the neighborhood. We respectfully submit that no CUP, regardless of the "Conditions" imposed, should be granted for the establishment of the Kennel. If, however, a CUP is to be granted, then, as set forth on Page 3 of the Staff Report to the BOS, the Zoning Ordinance requires that this proposed Kennel be subject to "performance standards" to assure the mitigation of the negative impacts which will result to us and our neighbors. Further, Page 6 of the Staff Report suggests that the Commissioner of Revenue apparently has "no issues" concerning devaluation of properties located near kennels with approved CUPS. This establishes that protection against devaluation of our and our neighbors' properties is dependent upon this Board adopting specific, enforceable Conditions to mitigate the damaging effects of the proposed Kennel. We understand that the Planning Commission has recommended only the following eight (8) Conditions, which we respectfully suggest must be substantially strengthened and made more specific: All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. We believe the only significant agency comment to be the Health Department's statement that "Applicant may not dispose of canine waste via the septic tank drainfield on site." Page 6 of the Staff Report states merely that "The Applicant has contacted a company for the disposal of dog waste." We understand that while there may not be established regulations for average waste produced per dog per day, nevertheless we understand there to be a "low" estimate of 5 gallons per day per dog and a "high" estimate of 10 gallons per day per dog, which would produce a range of 140 -280 gallons per day of wastewater assuming the Kennel operates at the Planning Commission's maximum of twenty -eight (28) dogs. We request that the Board, as a Condition of any CUP, require the Applicant to provide a written plan confirming: a. proiected wastewater usage for the Kennel under maximum capaci b. proiected system for containing and storing both wastewater and solid waste: and the frequency of waste pumping/waste removal, with confirmation of a contract with a waste hauler. 2. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs shall be permitted on the property at any given time. Given the waste containment and disposal issues of Condition 1 above and the control and noise issues of Condition 5 below, we submit that the maximum number of does not be permitted to exceed at any given time. This CUP is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. The Applicant's Application notes the desire to operate the Kennel "for those going on vacation and need a temporary home for their dogs while away." Therefore, we request that this Condition be expanded to provide that no does shall be maintained in th Kennel for a time period exceeding 28 consecutive days. p/6"77- 4. No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed In order to assure the performance of Conditions 5 and 6 below, we request that there be a Requirement that at least one person residing on the property shall remain on site at all times that any dogs are housed in the Kennel. All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. As we understand it, Section 48 -23 "Unreasonable noise unlawful" of the Frederick County Code provides merely that it shall be unlawful, after written notice by the Sheriff to the custodian of a dog for such custodian to allow such dog to make unreasonably loud noises as are plainly audible to adjoining residents for property owners so as to unreasonably annoy or disturb such residents or property owners. Since Section 48 -23 requires prior written notice from the Sheriff, and since this Section contains no specific criteria assisting its enforcement, the Board must set specific Conditions on the proposed Kennel. 2 Pages 3 and 6 of the Staff Report note that the proposed 20 x 30 square foot free - standing garage that is to serve as the Kennel will be constructed with wider than normal walls to provide noise insulation. However, while the Planning Commission noted concerns for noise abatement, Condition 5 provides no standards. Obviously, noise mitigation of dog barking (both inside and outside of the kennel structure) must be achieved, in order to make Condition 5 meaningful and enforceable. To assure performance, we suggest: a. specific noise - abatement construc standards, with the use of specific sound absorbing materials must be imposed upon the proposed kennel garage structure, since the facility apparently will not consist of concrete walls or a standard wood type roof construction. The type of construction should provide at least a nominal 50 -55 STC performance which equates to a nominal 45-50 dBA noise reduction at the typical doe bark frequency range Further, the building requirements should address the "composite performance" provided by walls roof, doors, windows and any ventilation openings, as typically windows and doors represent the "weakest path" to abating noise Noise emanation from the facility should be addressed by reducing openings represented by windows, doors and /or ventilation systems. b. a specific size /dimension should be imposed on the "exercise yard," and a fencing Requirement of a minimum of six (6) feet in height, with all fencing to be maintained throughout the life of the CUP. C. general experience establishes that individual dogs under control of a person generally do not bark. Generally, one dog or a few dogs under the control of individuals during outdoor activities may not bark, and if barking occurs, the dogs could be brought indoors. Therefore, we suggest a Limitation as to the number of dogs that will be permitted to be outside of the kennel structure at any one time should be established, along with a Requirement that the dogs be supervised /controlled while outside. We suggest that no more than 5 supervised dogs be permitted to be outside at any one time, and that no more than 2 unsupervised dogs be permitted to be outside at any one time. All dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00 p.m. and not let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. Without strengthening Condition 5 as suggested above, this Condition literally permits the Applicant to maintain 100% of the dogs outdoors, everyday, during the 13 hour period of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The Board must impose specific Requirements to avoid the creation of a nuisance. 7. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. No comment, other than the Zoning Ordinance defines a "Cottage Occupation" as "an occupation or profession customarily carried on in a dwelling unit or an accessory building which `...is clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling unit for residential purposes. "' The presence of twenty -eight (28) dogs (each generating a fee on a daily basis), 24 hours per day and 7 days per week, "stretches" the logical definition of a "Cottage Occupation," and makes the residential use of Ms. Neff 's property (and the residential use of our and our neighbors' properties) incidental and secondary to the Kennel itself. 8. Any expansion or modification of this use will require the approval of a new CUP. In addition, we suggest that any CUP be restricted solely to the Applicant (Jessica M. Neff), and that the operation of the Kennel under the CUP not be transferable to any other person or entity without the prior approval of the Board as an amendment to the CUP Conditions. Page 3 of the Staff Report references a 400 foot distance as being required for a "no screen Category C Buffer." Page 5 of the Staff Report notes comments of Planning Commissioners that the Kennel location is buffered by corn fields and large stands of trees. Given, however, that there is no guarantee of the continued existence of the corn fields or the trees, and given the siting of the Kennel on the ridge, we suggest that supplemental screening through Applicant's planting of Evergreen trees along the southeastern boundary of Applicant's property be required Thank you for your consideration of our concerns, which we look forward to discussing further during the April 23 Public Hearing. Respectfully submitted, Scott and Bethanne Berman M:1Berman, Scott & BethanneTerman Opposition 4- 21- 14.docx RESOLUTION Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: April 2, 2014 - BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: April 23, 2014 - May 14, 2014 Recommended Approval Public Hearing Held ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED RESOLUTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #02 -14 JESSICA M. NEFF WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit #02 -14 of Jessica M. Neff, submitted by Jessica M. Neff, for a Residential Kennel — Dog Boarding was considered. The property is located at 461 Laurel Grove Road. The property is further identified with Property Identification Number 73 -9 -3 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. The conditional use is permissible as a kennel; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Commission held a public hearing on the conditional use permit on April 2, 2014, and recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this Conditional Use Permit during their regular meeting on April 23, 2014; and, WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this conditional use permit 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 map to reflect that Conditional Use Permit Application 902 -14 — Jessica M. Neff for a Residential Kennel — Dog Boarding is permitted on the parcel identified by Property Identification Number (PIN) 73 -9 -3 with the following conditions: PDRes #08 -14 1 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. No more than twenty -eight (28) dogs shall be permitted on the property at any given time. 3. This Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is solely to enable the boarding of dogs on this property. 4. No employees other than those residing on the property shall be allowed. 5. All dogs shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to any adjoining properties by roaming free or barking. 6. The Applicant will construct a 20 x 30 enclosed kennel in the rear of the property, with a 6 foot board on board fenced outdoor play area. 7. The enclosed kennel house shall be built with noise - abatement construction material to reduce any dog barking so as to not exceed 50 dba. A professional engineering licensed in the state of Virginia shall seal the plans of the kennel house indicating it has met the 50 dba threshold. 8. The plans of the kennel house shall be reviewed by the County prior to any construction activity or operation of kennel. 9. The kennel shall have an appointment only drop -off and pick up of dogs. 10. The Applicant shall maintain a contract with a waste removal company. 11. All dogs must be confined indoors by 9:00 p.m. and no let outdoors prior to 8:00 a.m. No more than three (3) dogs may be outdoors at any given time. 12. Any proposed business sign shall conform to Cottage Occupation sign requirements and shall not exceed four (4) square feet in size and five (5) feet in height. 13. Any expansion or modification of this use will require the approval of a new Conditional Use Permit. PDRes #08 -14 2 Passed this 14th day of May, 2014 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert Hess Gene E. Fisher Robert W. Wells Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Christopher E. Collins A COPY ATTEST John R. Riley Frederick County Administrator PDRes #08 -14