Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 28 2014 Regular Meeting Minutes369 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on Wednesday, May 28, 2014 at 7:00 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT Chairman Richard C. Shickle; Charles S. DeHaven, Jr.; Christopher E. Collins; Gene E. Fisher; Robert A. Hess; and Gary A. Lofton. ABSENT Robert W. Wells. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Shickle called the meeting to order. INVOCATION Reverend Ross Halbersma, New Hope Alliance Church, delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice - Chairman DeHaven led the Pledge afAllegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA — APPROVED AS AMENDED County Administrator John R. Riley, Jr. advised he had no additions to the agenda. Supervisor Fisher stated he would like to add the Shawnee District representative appointment to the Historic Resources Advisory Board to the Committee Appointments portion of the agenda. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the agenda as amended. 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 Absent CONSENT AGENDA - APPROVED Administrator Riley offered the following items for the Board's consideration under the consent agenda: - Parks and Recreation Commission Report —Tab F; and - Human Resources Committee Report —Tab G. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 370 Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the consent agenda by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, rr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent CITIZEN CQMMENTS Dr. Carol Delaeruz, homeowner in the Shenandoah Community and Opequon District, appeared before the Board regarding private streets in the R -5 District and read the following statement: "Mr. Chairman, Supervisors, my name is Dr. Carol Delacruz, a homeowner of Shenandoah at Lake Frederick I'd like to take a moment to acknowledge the fellow residents I see here tonight. Shenandoah residents, please raise your hands. • All of us —those here tonight, and those not here, bought homes in a community planned for approximately 2,100 residences, with gated private streets. • The plan for gated, private streets was an important part of our personal buying decision. • Beginning in 2012, I was a member of the group of nine homeowners on a Redevelopment Study Group working with Lansdowne prior to their purchase of the Lake Frederick property. Although we differed on some details of the new development plan, we and Lansdowne were in agreement on two key points: 1. In order to fulfrll the promise of a 2,100 home community, the developer needed to address in parallel both the age - restricted and non -age restricted homebuyer markets: 2. Given the geography of the development and existing developed portion, it was imperative that we have gated, private streets throughout the entire development to provide the security existing homeowners expected, as well as a sense of cohesiveness and community among the age - restricted residents. We presently have two age restricted sections with private streets, one is gated, the other, not as yet. As new age - restricted homes are built, and as non age - restricted homes are added, it is our hope and desire that our community will be one of inclusion not exclusion to maintain that sense of community, particularly within the age - restricted section. Imagine the impact on this sense of community, and on community governance, in a situation where roughly half of the age - restricted community has gated access and private streets and the other half has not gated access and a mix of private and public streets. Such a condition would create disjunction within our community, not to mention the challenges it would present for HOA governance. The original developer was granted the requisite ordinance for private streets throughout our community of 21 DD homes. The only change in our community is that it will now be comprised of both age - restricted and non age - restricted residents. The roads will 6e the same. In my opinion, resident age should not influence or be a determining factor as to whether we are permitted to continue with private roads throughout our development. • Lansdowne is asking — on our behalf —that they be able to. develop the mixed community of 2,100 residences with the gated, private streets that we all expected. • That is important to us, the current residents, and it is very important to all residents, current and future. • `>�e ask the Board of Supervisors to bring this matter to conclusion by: o Scheduling public hearings on the private road request before the county; a Approving the requested ordinance change to allow for the application to install private streets in R5 communities; and o Approving Lansdowne's application to install private streets throughout the Lake Frederick community. Thank you. " Minnte Book Number 39 Board oTSuper�isors Regular Meeting of US/2811a �� Kevin Walek, Opequon District, appeared before the Board and read the following: "Comments for Kevin Walek: • Mr. Chairman; Supervisors; all: I would like to thank you for providing us with this opportunity to come before you and speak this evening regarding the issue of Private streets for the Lake Frederick Community. • My name is Kevin Walek. I am a retired attorney, having spent the last 28 years in the financial, regulatory world. Along with my wife, Margaret, a retired accounting manager, we are residents of Lake Frederick in the Opequon District. • My wife and I welcome and embrace the diversity that a minced age - restricted and non age - restricted community will bring. And, as has been underscored by many urban sociologists as early as Jane Jacobs, and Edward Ban�eld, in the long run, we believe it will enrich our lives and those of others in our community. • We also support the developer's desire to build out such a mixed community with gated access and private streets. • As Dr. Delacruz previously indicated, we believe an integrated private street development will provide benefits to all homeowners; will eliminate complexities and avoid challenges in the governance and day -to -day management of the HOA. • In a broader demographic and economic perspective, we read with interest John Martin's reported comments at the recent spring dinner of the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission, In brief, Mr. Martin's key points were: o Aging baby boomers will fuel the area's economy in the short term but younger "fife- style" seekers will become an increasing percentage of the area's population aver the next two or three decades; o Boomers are re- defining what it's like to grow old; looking at the promise of aging, NOT the problems of aging; o Younger life -style seekers are looking for place first, career and job second. They want a sense of place and community, carefree living and sustainability. • That, I submit, is exactly the two classes of homebuyers our mixed community has been designed to address. And given these broad demographic trends, I submit that the Lake Frederick development may well be, if not should be, the model for future planned communities in Frederick County and the Northern Shenandoah. • Finally, allowing rivate streets for such a community will align both costs and benefits with the residents of the community. In an age where less and less transportation funding will be taming from the State, such an alignment is surely a more viable option than relying on the County's general taxpayers to fund the maintenance and repairs of public streets. • We respectfully request the Board of Supervisors to bring this matter to a conclusion by: o Scheduling public hearings on the private road request before the county; o Approving the requested ordinance change to allow for the application to install private streets in RS communities; and o Approving Lansdowne's application to install private streets throughout the Lake Frederick community. Thank you." Dr. Richard Setton, Opequon District and resident of Lake Frederick, read the following: " • I'm Dr. Richard Setton and I'm a resident of fake Frederick in the Opequon District. • About 35 years ago, I was the clinical director of the Woodstock office of the Northwestern Community Services Board, which was, at the time, based in Winchester. I knew back then that this was the region in which I wanted to live, and I've been fortunate to be part of this area for the last 7 years, I'm also now serving on the Board of Directors of Habitat for Humanity, Winchester - Frederick County, and I'm chairman of their Family Services Committee. • We all have slightly different reasons for why we moved here, and like any diverse group, we don't all agree on very many community topics. However, on the issue of having private streets, there is a clear — better than 90% -- consensus. Minute Sook Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 45/28/14 372 Let me provide a somewhat broader historical and factual perspective on our request for private streets. • For starters, we know that the county approved the private streets and gated access for about 2100 homes at Lake Frederick as early as the MDP for the property in 2001. • The only change, and all that Lansdowne is requesting, is the ability to submit an — application to the county to provide private streets far both restricted and non- restricted homes at Lake Frederick. If effect, at the highest level, not much else has changed in the plan since the early MDP. • It will: a) still consist of some 2.100 homes, b) the total paved street areas will be about the same, c) amenities will be approximately the same, and in some ways, even better. • Importantly, the HOA and the residents are no strangers to the challenges and benef is of private streets. We currently have shout 4.8 miles of private streets, all buflt to VDOT base standards. For several years, our HDA, in the absence of a fiscally viable developer, funded and managed snow removal for those streets. We have a solid grasp on the reserve requirements necessary for these streets, both from cost and reserve studies performed in 2011 (and updated in 2013) and from the considerable prior life experience and knowledge that our residents bring with them. • Finally, let's not lose sight of the fact that almost 2 /3rds of the streets upon completion will be private anyway, considering both the age restricted sections and townhouse areas of the non - restricted portions. Our request, when approved, will simply enable the other 1 /3rd of the streets to be integrated into a consistent framework for HOA governance. • Therefore, representing the overwhelming majority of the residents at Lake Frederick, we urge the speedy approval of the developer's request. In that way, re- development can proceed expeditiously, and we, the residents as well as the county, can all benef t from this exceptional community and equally exceptional county in which we Live. " Larry Atkinson, Opequon District, appeared before the Board regarding the private roads information. He advised the issue tonight was not solely a Shenandoah issue, but a countywide issue. He went on to say tonight's focus should be about the county code change to pernpit private streets in all R -5 communities. He stated floe residents bought expecting an age - restricted community. He asked if the boaxd would vote tonight to allow the public hearing. He went on to ask if all developers have the opportunity to address these changes. He believed these proposed changes were adequate. He asked the Board to focus tonight on the code change and not the Lansdowne request. He concluded by urging the Board to hold the public hearing. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS There were no Board of Supervisors comments. MINUTES - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor b'isher, the Board approved the minutes from the May 14, 2014 meeting. Supervisor Collins abstained from voting an the minutes. The above motion was approved by the following retarded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Abstain Minute Book Dumber 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting or05128l14 ��� Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent COUNTY OFFICIALS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH AWARD — (RESOLUTION #054 -14} - TIMOTHY D. HILL- APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved Timothy D. Hill as Employee of the Month for May 2014. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors recognizes that the County's employees are a most important zesource; 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, Timothy D. Hill who serves the Northwestern Regional Adult Detention Center was nominated for Employee of the Month; and WHEREAS, Timothy D. Hill, an Officer that adheres to the operational imperative of Teamwork who is the "go to" person for the mare difficult and challenging questions that are presented to the Classification Unit of the Jail. Officer Hill works closely with all Security teams to zxiake certain that inmates are assigned to compatible housing assuring issues are not missed and is very good at making sure the census of each housing units remain low and. balanced in order to minimize the need far additional staff which in turn reduces overtime expense; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors this 28t" day of May, 2014, that Timothy D. Hill is hereby recognized as the Frederick County Employee of the Month for May 2014; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors extends gratitude to Timothy D. Hill for his outstanding performance and dedicated service and wishes him continued success in future endeavors; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Timothy D, Hill 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 Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS REAPPOINTMENT OF CUNT JONES AS SHAWNEE DISTRICT REPRESENTAIVE TO THE HISTORIC RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD - APPROVED Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 37� Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board reappointed Clint Jones as Shawnee District representative to the Historic Resources Advisory Board. This is a four year appointment. Term expires May 22, 201 S. 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 Absent REAPPOINTMENT OF MARTIN J. CYBULSKI AS RED BUD DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Collins, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board reappointed Martin Cybulski as Red Bud District representative to the Parks and Recreation Commission. This is a four year appointment. Term expires April 28, 2018. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent REAPPOINTMENT OF DENNY PERRY AS MEMBER -AT -LARGE TO THE HISTORIC RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board reappointed Denny Perry as member -at -large to the Historic Resources Advisory Board. This is a four year appointment. Term expires June 23, 2018. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent REAPPOINTMENT OF KAREN L. HIMBLE AS SHAWNEE DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD - APPROVED Upori a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board reappointed Karen L. Kimble as Shawnee District representative to the Social Services Board. Minute Book Number 3S Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28114 375 This is a four year appointanaent. Term expires June 30, 2108. 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 Absent APPOINTMENT OF THERESA GAINES ,TAMES E. RICHARD AND KAREN B. HELM TO THE WINCHESTER- FREDERICK COUNTY TOURISM BOARD - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board appointed Theresa Gaines, James E. Richard, and Karen B. Helm to the Winchester - Frederick County Tourism Board. This is a three year appointment. Term expires June 30, 2017. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr, Aye Christopher E. Collins � Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent REAPPOINTMENT OF RICH LARGENT AS FREDERICK COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE TO THE WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board reappointed Rich Largent as Frederick County representative to the Winchester Regional Airport Authority. This is a four year appointment. Term expires June 30, 201 S. 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 A.ye Robert W. Wells Absent RESOLUTION ( #055 -14) RE: FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONCURRENCE WITH FREDERICK COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ELECTING TO PAY THE VRS BOARD CERTIFIED RATE. - APPROVED Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board approved the resolution of Local Governing Body Concurrence with School Division Electing to Pay the VRS Board- Certified Rate. Minute Book Number 39 Board of supervisors Tieguiar Meeting of 05/28/14 376 BE TT RESOLVED, that the County of Frederick does hereby acknowledge that the Frederick County School Board 55634 has made the election for its contribution rate to be based on the employer contribution rates certified by the Virginia Retirement System Board of Trustees pursuant to Virginia Code §51.1 - 145(1) resulting fram the June 30, 2013 actuarial value of assets and liabilities (the "Certified Rate "); and BE TT ALSO RESOLVED, that the County of Frederick does hereby certify to the Virginia Retirement System Board of Trustees that it concurs with the election of the Frederick County School Board 55634 to pay the Certified Rate, as required by Item 468 {H) of the 2014 Appropriation Act; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the off cers of the County of Frederick are hereby authorized and directed in the name of the Frederick County School Board 55634 to execute any required contract to carry out the provisions of this resolution. In execution of any such contract which may be required, the seal of the County of Frederick, as appropriate, shall be affixed and attested by the Clerk. 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 Absent REQUEST FROM COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE FOR REFUNDS - APPROVED Administrator Riley advised these were requests from the Commissioner of the Revenue to authorize the following refunds: 1. Navy Federal Credit Union in the amount of $6,559.40 for adjustment to business equipment filings fax 2014. Upon receiving the requested detail listing, staff discovered exempt software for new systems in their recent expansion. Since Navy Federal Credit Union had already paid their entire bill in full, a refund is due. - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the refund request and supplemental appropriation. 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 Absent 2. Partnership for Response &Recovery LLP in the amount of $13,664,57 for adjustment to business license filing for part of 2013. The prorated refund resulted fram Partnership for Response &Recovery LLF moving out of the County. - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the refund request and supplemental appropriation. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of Q5128114 377 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 Absent 3. Wheels LT in the amount of $3,472.3$ for adjustment to personal property taxes filing for 2013 for proration of vehicles. This proxation refund has been in the normal course of business and is generated from a division of the company separate _from where bills are paid. - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the refund request and supplemental appropriation. 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 Absent COMMITTEE REPORTS PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT -- APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The Parks and Recreation Commission met on May 13, 2014. Members present were: Randy Carter, Marty Cybulski, Gary Longerbeam, Ronald Madagan, and Charles Sandy, Jr. Members absent were: Greg Brandos, Jr., Kevin Anderson, Patrick Anderson, and Christopher Collins. Items Requiring Board of Supervisors Action: None Submitted for Board Information Only: 1. Policy Changes — Mr. Madagan moved to accept the policy changes as submitted, second by Mr. Cybulski, motion carried unanimously (5 -0 }. 2. Indoor Aquatic Facility — Mr. Cybulski moved to send a letter to the Frederick County Public Schools requesting acreage be set aside at the County's 4`�' High School site to collocate the aquatic facility at the site, second by Mr. Carter, motion carried unanimously (5 -0), 3. Executive Session — Relocation of the Clearbraak Ball Fields — Mr. Madagan moved to convene into executive session under Virginia Code 2.2- 3711A(3) — Discussion of the acquisition of real property for a public purpose and /or the disposition of publicly held real property, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body. Specifically, the acquisition and/or disposition would involve the relocation of the Clearbrook Park ball f elds, second by Mr. Cybulski, motion carried unanimously (� -0). Mr. Longerbeam moved the commission reconvene out of executive session and certify that, to the best of each member's knowledge, the Commission discussed only matters pursuant to VA Code 2.2- 3711A(3), the acquisition of real property for a public purpose Minute Book lumber 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 37� and /or the disposition of publicly held real property, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE REPORT — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA The HR Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Friday, May 9, 2014 at 8:00 a.m. Committee members present were: Supervisor Robert Hess, Supervisor Chris Collins; Supervisor Robert Wells, Citizen Member Don Butler, Citizen Member Dorrie Greene, and Citizen Member Beth Lewin. Also present were: Assistant County Administrator Kris Tierney, Parks & Recreation Director Jason Robertson, and DSS Representative Delsie Butts. * * *Items Requiring Action* 1. Approval of the Employee of the Month Award. The Committee recommends approval of Correctional Officer Timothy Hill as Employee of the Month for May 2014. ** *Items Not Requiring Action * ** 1. Presentation by the Drrectar of Parks &Recreation, �Tason Robertson. At the request of the Committee, Mr. Robertson presented an overview of the objectives and responsibilities of the Parks &Recreation 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. The next HR Committee meeting is scheduled for Friday, June 6, 2014. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORT - APPROVED The Public Works Committee met on Tuesday, May 20, 2014 at 8:00 a.m. All members were present except Bob Wells. The following items were discussed: ** *Item Requiring Action * ** 1. Construction of New Round Hili Fire and Rescue Station and Event Center The committee convened in a special meeting to review the bid results for the construction of the new Round Hill Fire and Rescue Station and Event Center. In addition, the comxxaittee reviewed the proposed project budget which included, not only, the law bid amount but also, costs related to engineering support services, water /sewer hookup fees, communication services and a five {5) percent contingency. The bids were received on May 15, 2014 in response to Frederick County's invitation for bid and subsequent pre - requisite pre -bid meeting held on April 29, 2014. The attached bid summary highlights the seven (7) bids received on this date with the low bid of $6,199,898 submitted by Caldwell and Santmyer, Inc. It should be noted that the architects' (Moseley Crroup, Inc.) estimate was $8,357,627. The actual bids were subdivided into the fire station, event center, and site work. The site work costs will be distributed between Frederick County, the Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company, and the developer, Silver Lake Properties. Agreements are currently being drafted to determine the actual distribution percentages. The fire station and event center will be the responsibility of Frederick County and the Round Hill Fire and Rescue Company, respectively. After discussing the bid results, the committee focused on the total project budget. During the discussion, it was decided to increase the communications costs and add a line item for furniture, fixtures, and equipment. These additions are reflected in the attached summary Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regutar Meeting of O5I28.�14 379 with a recommended budget of $6,904,000. At the conclusion of these discussions, the: committee unanimously recommended that a contract be awarded to the low bidder, Caldwell and Santmyer, Inc., subject to staff verifying the bid results and references. They also unanimously endorsed the proposed project budget with the inclusions of the minor changes discussed above. These endorsements will be forwarded directly to the board of supervisors for their review and to schedule a public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the budget public hearing subject to staff verifying final costs. 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 Absent FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT - APPROVED The Finance Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Wednesday, May 21, 2014 at 8:00 a.m. All members were present. Items 3,4,5,6,7,8,9, and 13 were approved on consent agenda. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the consent agenda by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jx. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent 1. The Parks &Recreation Director requests a General, Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $15,000. This amount represents the use of proffer funds for a site plan and development cost for the northwest corner of Sherando Park. This item has been approved by the Parks &Recreation Cornrnission. See attached �xaemo, p. 5. The committee recommends approval. -- Approved. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board approved the above request by the following retarded 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 Absent z. The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $62,962.1 S. This amount represents vacancy savings from the State Compensation Board to be used for phone services and part time staff. No local additional funds required. See attached memo, p. 6 -7. The committee recommends approval. — Approved. Minute Book Dumber 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 i:l Upon a motion by Vice- Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the Board approved the above request by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A, Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent 3. The Sheriff requests a General Fund su lemental a ro nation in the amount of $8,174.50. This amount represents reimbursements from prisoner extraditions and Sheriff's conference travel reimbursement. No local funds required. See attached memos, p. 8 -11. — Approved Under Consent Agenda. 4. The Sheriff requests a General Fund su lemental a ro nation in the amount of $24,600. This amount represents reimbursement from Electronic Grants Management System. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 12. — Approved Under Consent Agenda. 5, The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $2,398. This amount represents reimbursement from the Secret Service for supplies. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 13. — Approved Under Consent Agenda. 6. The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $35. This amount represents a donation received for the Honor Guard from the Top of Virginia Regional Chamber. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 14. — Approved Under Consent Agenda. 7. The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $15,995.75. This amount represents three (3) insurance reimbursements for auto claims. No local funds required. See attached memo, p.,15 -16. — Approved Under Consent Agenda. 8. The Fire &Rescue Chief requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $7,280. This amount represents programs with funds collected in excess of budgeted revenue. No local funds required. See attached memo, p. 17 -20. — Approved Under Cansent Agenda. 9. The Fire &Rescue Chief requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $11,92616. This amount represents State EMS Four- for -Life funds received in excess of the budgeted amount. See attached information, p. 21 -27. — Approved Under Consent Agenda. 1Q. The Fire &Rescue Deputy Chief presents information about the disbursement of the 50150 EMS Expense Recovery Program revenue. See attached information, p. 28. 11. The Fire &Rescue Deputy Chief requests discussion on the EMS Expense Recovery Program fee schedule. See attached memo, p. 29 -30. The committee recommends approval of the annual fee schedule evaluation, per the C.M.S. fee schedules, and to adjust the County's fee schedule accordingly on an automatic basis each year. — Approved. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Fisher, the Board approved the above request by the fallowing recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Minute Book Nuu�ber 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of D5/28114 38� Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent 12. The Finance Director requests approval of the VRS employer retirement contribution rate. See attached, p. 3133. The committee recommends approval of the certified rate and approval of the resolution to VRS. - Approved RESOLUTION #056 -14 BE IT RESOLVED, that the COUNTY OF FREDERICK 55134 does herby acknowledge that its contribution rates effective July 1, 2014 shall be based an the higher of a) the contribution rate in effect for FY 2014, or b) eighty percent of the results of the June 30, 2013 actuarial valuation of assets and liabilities as approved by the Virginia Retirement System Board of Trustees for the 2014 -16 biennium (the "Alternate Rate ") provided that, at its option, the contribution rate may be based on the employer contribution rates certified by the Virginia Retirement System Board of Trustees pursuant to Virginia code §51.1 -145 (I) resulting from the June 20, 2013 actuarial value of assets and liabilities (the "Certified Rate " }; and BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that the COUNTY OF FREDERICK 55134 does herby certify to the Virginia Retirement System Board of Trustees that it elects to pay the following contribution rate effective July 1, 2014: {Check only one box) D The Certified Rate of 12.15% ❑The Alternate Rate of %; and BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that the COUNTY OF FREDERICK 55134 does hereby certify to the Virginia Retirement System Board of Trustees that it has reviewed and understands the information provided by the Virginia Retirement System outlining the potential future fiscal implications of any election made under the provisions of this resolution; and NOW, THEREFORE, the officers of COUNTY OF FREDERICK 55134 are hereby authorized and directed in the name of the COUNTY OF FREDERICK to carry out the provisions of this resolution, and said off cer of the COUNTY OF FREDERICK are authorized and directed to pay over to the Treasurer of Virginia from time to time such sums as are due to be paid by the COUNTY OF FREDERICK for this purpose Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman. DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board approved the above resolution 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. Absent 13. The Department of Social Services requests a net General Fund reduction appropriation in the amount_, of $46,316, of which $40,316 are State /Federal dollars and $6,000 are local funds. See attached information, p. 34 -35. — Approved Under Consent Agenda. 14. Staff requests discussion on the information provided by the Department of Social Services at the April 29, 2014 work session. See attached information, p. 36 -43. Discussions will continue at a work session to be scheduled. 15. Discussion was held on a borrowing resolution which will allow the County to be prepared in the event that a State budget is not adapted and State funds are not received. The committee recommends forwarding a borrowing resolution to the Boa_ rd of Supervisors when available. ** *Information Only * ** Minute Boak Number 39 1&oard of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 3�� 1. The Finance Director provides a Fund 10 Transfer Report for FY 2014. See attached, p. 44 -45. 2. The Finance Director provides FY 2014 financial statements for the period ending Apri130, 2014. See attached, p. 45 -56. 3. The Finance Director provides the FY 2014 Fund Balance Report for the period ending May 16, 2014. See attached, p. 57. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS PUBLIC HEARING - OUTDOOR FESTNAL PERMIT REQUEST OF ALAYA WHITE KIM JOHNSTON AND DOUG STANFORD — SUNDOWN FEST. PURSUANT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 86 FESTIVALS; SECTION $6 -3, PERMIT REQUIRED; APPLICATION ISSUANCE OR DENIAL• FEE FOR AN OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT. FESTIVAL TO BE HELD ON SATURDAY JUNE 28 2014 FROM 1:00 P.M. TO 9:00 P.M.• ON THE GROUNDS OF 740 750 AND 760 MERRIMANS LANE WINCHESTER VIRGINIA. PROPERTY OWNED BY 740 LLC 750 LLC AND WILLOW GROVE VLLC. - APPROVED Administrator Riley advised this was a request for an outdoor festival permit for Sundown Fest. The event will take place on Saturday, June 28, 2014 from 1:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. on the grounds of 740, 750, and 760 Merrimans Lane. seen. Supervisor Hess noted this application had less specificity than any application he had Alaya Whi #e appeared before the Board on behalf of the application. He advised that he had addressed a number of issues in the county attorney's letter. He Hated: - The applicants did have permission from all property owners. - They have applied for a business license. - He had a copy of the ticket. - They are still acquiring food vendors. - He had a revised venue plan/map. - Round Hill Fire &Rescue had been contacted. - They had contacted the Sheriff's Department regarding traffic - They provided a plan for traffic and parking on site. - They are still looking for anon -proft to partner with for alcohol sales. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor Lofton, the 13aard approved the outdoor festival permit application subject to the county attorney receiving written verification of the respanses noted from the applicant by Friday, May 30, 2014. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Nay Charles S. DeHaven, Tr. Aye 1V[inute Book Nam6er 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 • Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Absent PUBLIC HEARING - AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT CHAPTER 143 OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, STORMWATER/EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL, AND TO REPEAL CHAPTER 79 OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BOTH EFFECTIVE JULY 1 2014. - APPROVED Deputy Director of Public Works Joe Wilder appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised there have been no changes since the May 20, 2Q 14 draft sent to the board. He stated this is a proposed new Chapter 143 of the Frederick County Code for the new stormwater ordinance. He noted this ordinance had gone through a lot of changes since staff began working on this ordinance. He went on to say the state required localities to have this type of program. He stated the department would use existing staff to administer these new regulations. He noted there was a need to educate the development community regarding these proposed changes. The ordinance has been approved by the Department of Environmental Quality. Once the Board approves the ordinance then the Department of Environmental Quality would authorize Frederick County to operate the program. Chairrnan Shickle stated that he saw the fees were included in the ordinance, but he thought past practice was to remove them from the actual ordinance so the code would not have to be changed if fees changed. Deputy Director Wilder noted the proposed fees were set for a.period of five years. Vice - Chairman DeHaven asked if the ordinance could make reference to the state fee schedule instead of having the fees included in the ordinance. County Attorney Williams responded that change could be made. Deputy Director Wilder agreed with the suggested change. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor DeHaven, the Board approved the ordinance adopting Chapter 143 and repealing Chapter 79 with the fees to be incorporated by reference. § 143 -100 Purpose Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of US128/14 3�� The Frederick County Board of Supervisors desires to protect the health, safety, welfare, and property of Frederick County residents anal businesses, and the quality of waters within the County. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors recognizes that development tends to degrade these waters through erosion and sedimentation, increased flooding, stream channel erosion, and the transport and deposition of waterborne pollutants. This degradation is due, in part, to increased stormwater runoff as property is developed. Hence,, as required by § 62.1- 44.15:27 Code of Virginia and in compliance with the Virginia State Water Control Board requirements, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors has determined that it is in the public interest to establish requirements which regulate the discharge of stormwater runoff from developments by integrating hydrologic and water quality functions into all aspects of a development's design, landscape and infrastructure. A. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish minimum stormwater management and erosion and sediment control requirements which: 1. Reduce flood damage to property; minimize the impacts of increased stormwater runoff from new land development; 2. Maintain the hydraulic adequacy of existing and proposed culverts, bridges, dams, and other structures; 3. Pxevent, to the greatest extent feasible, an increase in nonpoint source pollution; 4. Maintain the integrity of stream channels for their biological functions and drainage; S. Maintain natural drainage patterns to the extent practicable in order to promote existing hydrologic processes; 6. Promote infiltration of stormwater to recharge groundwater resources; 7. Minimize the impact of development upon stream erosion; 8. Preserve and protect water supply facilities from increased flood discharges, stream erosion., and nonpoint source pollution; 9. Establish provisions for long -term responsibility for and maintenance of stormwater management control devices anal techniques to manage the quality and quantity of stormwater runoff; and 10. Provide effective control of soil erosion and sediment deposition and to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and other natural resources. B. This chapter supplements and is to be applied in conjunction with Frederick County building code, subdivision, and zoning ordinances as they apply to the development or subdivision of land within the county. § 143 -105 Authority A. This chapter is authorized by the Code of Virginia, Title 62.1, Chapter 3.1, Article 2.4 (§ 62.1- 44.15.51 et seq. }, known as the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law; and Title 62.1, Chapter 3.1, Article 2.3 ( §62.1- 44.15.24 et seq.), known as the Virginia Stormvvater Management Act. B. Pursuant to the Code of Virginia § 62.1 - 44.15:54, the Frederick County Public Works Department is designated as a Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Program (VESCP) Authority to operate a Virginia Erasion and Sediment Control Program. C. Pursuant to the Cade of Virginia § 62.1- 44.15:27, the Frederick County Public Works Department is designated as a Virginia stormwater Management Program (VSMP) authority to operate a Virginia stormwater Management Program in compliance with all required elements hereto. D. The Frederick County Public�Warks Department shall issue V.S.M.P. and Erosion and Sediment Control land disturbance permits and operate stormwater programs for the Towns of Middletown and Stephens City. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1 - 44.15:27; 62.1 - 44.15.54 § 143 -11.0 Definitions In addition to the definitions set forth in 9VAC25- 870 -10 of the Virginia stormwater Management Program Permit (VSMP} Regulations, 9VAC25- 844 -10 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control (VESC} Regulations, and 9VAC25= 850 -10 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control and stormwater Management Certifcation (VSMC) Regulations, which are Minute Book Number 39 Board of supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 38� expressly adopted and incorporated herein by reference, the following words and terms used in this chapter have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.. "Administrator" or "VSMP Administrator" means the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) authority including the Frederick County Public Works Department responsible for administering the VSMP on behalf of Frederick County, Virginia. "Agreement in lieu of plan" means a contract between the plan- approving authority and the owner that specifies conservation measures that must be implemented in the construction of a single- family residence. This contract may be executed by the plan- approving authority in lieu of a formal site plan for the residence "Agreement in lieu of a stormwater management plan" means a contract between the VSMP authority and the owner or permittee that specifies methods that shall be implemented to comply with the requirements of a VSMP for the construction of a single family residence; such contract may be executed by the VSMP authority in lieu of a stormwater plan. "Applicant" means any person submitting an application for a permit or requesting issuance of a permit under this chapter. "Best management practice" or "BMP" means schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, including both structural and nonstructural practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of surface waters and groundwater systems from the impacts of land - disturbing activities. "Best management practice implementation plan" or "BMP Implementation Plan" is a site specific design plan for the implementation of BMP facilities on an individual single family lot or other parcel with less than one acre of land disturbance within a larger common plan of development. The BMP Implementation Plan provides detailed information an the implementation of the SWM pollutant load and volume reduction BMP and other requirements for the individual lot or parcel as detailed in the SWPPP and SWM plans of the VSMP Permit for the larger common plan of development. "Board" means the Virginia State Water Control Board. "Channel" means a natural or manmade waterway. "Certificate of Competence" means a certificate of competence, issued to an individual from the Board, or successful completion, within one year after enrollment, of the Boaxd's training program for i} project inspection for ESC; ii) project inspection for SWM; iii) plan review for ESC," or is licensed as a professional engineer, architect, certified landscape architect or land_ surveyox pursuant to Article 1 {§ 54.1 -400 et seq.} of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia; iv) plan review for SWM; v) program administration for ESC; vi} program administration for SWM; or vii) responsible land disturber, or is licensed as a professional engineer, architect, certified landscape architect or land surveyor pursuant to Article 1 (§ 54.1 -400 et seq.) of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia. "Clean Water Act" means " or "CWA" means the federal Clean Water Act (33 USC §1251 et seq.), formerly referred to as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Public Law 92 -500, as amended by Public Law 95 -217, Public Law 95 -576, Public Law 96 -483, and Public Law 97 -117, or any subsequent revisions thereto. "Commencement of land disturbance" means the initial disturbance of soils associated with clearing, grading, or excavating activities or other construction activities (e.g. stockpiling of soil fill material). Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 0512$114 � �1 "Common plan of development" means the contiguous area of a proposed residential, commercial, or industrial subdivision where the timing of the development of any one or multiple lots or parcels may result in separate and distinct construction activities taking place at different times an different schedules. "Control measure" means any best management practice or stormwater facility ocher method used to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to surface waters. "Department" means the Department of Environmental Quality. "Design Storm" for purposes of addressing quantity control provisions of § 143- 165(C) means the one -year, two -year, 10 -year, 24 hour design storms as defined in § 143 -145, The design storm for purposes of complying with the water quality provisions of § 143- 165(C) is the one -inch rainfall depth as applied with the "Virginia Runoff Reduction Method" as identified by 9VAC25- 870 -65. "Development" means land disturbance and the resulting landform associated with the construction of residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, recreation, transportation or utility facilities or structures ar the clearing of land for non - agricultural or non- silvicultural purposes. "Director" means the Director of the Department of Environmental Quality or assigned designee. "Drainage area" means a land area, water area, or both from which runoff flows to a common point. "Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan" or "plan ", means a document containing material for the conservation of soil and water resources of a unit or group of units of land. It may include appropriate maps, an appropriate soil and water plan inventory and management information with needed interpretations, and a retard of decisions contributing to conservation treatment. The plan shall contain all major conservation decisions and all information deemed necessary by the plan- approving authority to assure that the entire unit or units of land will be so treated to achieve the conservation objectives.. "Erosion control handbook" means the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control handbook and/ or a locally adopted erosion and sediment control handbook with such amendments, modifications and supplements as may, from time to time, be properly adopted. "Erosion impact area" means an area of land not associated with current land - disturbing activity but subject to persistent soil erosion resulting in the delivery of sediment onto neighboring properties or into state waters. This definition shall not apply to any lot or parcel of land of 10.,000 square feet ar less used for residential purposes ar to shorelines where the erosion results from wave action or other coastal processes. "Excavating" means any digging, scooping or other methods of removing earth materials. "filling" means any depositing or stockpiling of earth materials. "Final stabilization" means that one of the following situations has occurred: 1. All soil disturbing activities at the site have been completed and a permanent vegetative cover has been established an denuded areas not otherwise permanently stabilized. Permanent vegetation shall not be considered established until a ground cover is achieved that is uniform {e.g., evenly distributed), mature enough to survive, and will inhibit erosion. 2. For individual lots in residential construction, final stabilization can occur by either: a. The homebuilder completing final stabilization as specified in subdivision 1 of this definition; or b. The homebuilder establishing temporary stabilization, including perimeter controls for an individual lot prior to occupation of the home by the homeowner, and informing the homeowner of the need for, and benefits of, final stabilization. Minute Boak Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05128!x4 387 3. For construction projects on land used for agricultural purposes (e.g., pipelines across crop or range land), final stabilization may be accomplished by returning the disturbed land to its preconstruction agricultural use. Areas disturbed that were not previously used for agricultural activities, such as buffer strips immediately adjacent to surface waters, and areas that are not being returned to their preconstruction agricultural use must meet the final stabilization criteria specified in subdivision 1 or 2 of this definition. "Flood fringe" means the portion of the floodplain outside the floodway chat is usually � covered with water from the 100 -year flood or storm event. This includes, but is not limited to, the flood or floodway fringe designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. "Flooding" means a volume of water that is too great to be confined within the banks or walls of the stream, water body or conveyance system and that overflows onto adjacent lands, thereby causing or threatening damage. " Floodplain" means the area adjacent to a channel, river, stream, or other water body that is susceptible to being inundated by water normally associated with the 100 -year flood or storm event. This includes, but is not limited to, the floodplain designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. "Flood -prone area" means the component of a natural or restored stormwater conveyance system that is outside the main channel. Flood -prone -areas may include, but are not limited to, the floodplain, the floodway, the flood fringe, wetlands, riparian buffers, or other areas adjacent to the main channel. "Floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas, usually associated with flowing water, that must be reserved in order to discharge the 100 -year flood or storm event without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot, This includes, but is not limited to, the floodway designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. General permit" means a state permit authorizing a category of discharges under the CWA and within a geographical area "Hydrologic Unit Code" or "HUG" means a watershed unit established in the most recent version of Virginia's 6th Order National Watershed Boundary Dataset. "Immediately" means as soon as practicable, but no Iater than chat end of the next work day, following the day when the land- disturbing activities have temporarily or permanently ceased. Tn the context of This permit, "immediately" is used to define the deadline for initiating stabilization measures, "Impaired waters" means surface waters identified as impaired on the 2010 § 305(b)/303 {d) Water Quality Assessment Integrated Report. "Impervious cover" means a surface composed of material that significantly impedes or prevents natural infiltration of water into soil. "Infeasible" means not technologically possible or not economically practicable and achievable in light of best industry practices, "Initiation of stabilization activities" means: 1. Prepping the soil far vegetative arnon- vegetative stabilization; 2. Applying mulch or other non - vegetative product to the exposed area; 3. Seeding or planting the exposed area; 4. Starting any of the above activities on a portion of the area to be stabilized, but not on the entire area; or 5. Finalizing arrangements to have the stabilization product fully installed in compliance with the applicable deadline for completing stabilization. Minute Book lYumber 39 Bo$rd of Supervisors Regular Meeting of pS1281i4 .. •� "Inspection" means an on -site review of the project's compliance with the VSMP Authority Land - Disturbing Permit or VSMP Authority permit, and any applicable design criteria, or an on -site review to attain information or conduct surveys or investigations necessary in the implementation or enforcement of this ordinance. "Karst area" means any land area predominantly underlain at the surface or shallow subsurface by limestone, dolomite, or other soluble bedrock regardless of any obvious surface karst features. "Karst featwes" means sinkholes, sinking and losing streams, caves, large flow springs, and other such landscape features found in karst areas. "Land disturbance" or "Land- disturbing activity" means any man -made change to the land surface that potentially changes its runoff characteristics, including, but not limited to clearing, grading, ar excavation, except that the term shall not include those exemptions specified in § 62.1- 44.15:34 and § 62.1 -44.15 ; 51, Code of Virginia and in this ordinance. "Layout" means a conceptual drawing sufficient to provide for the specified stormwater management facilities required at the time of approval. "Localized flooding" means smaller scale flooding that may occur outside of a stormwater conveyance system. This may include high water, ponding, or standing water from stormwater runoff, which is likely to cause property damage or unsafe conditions. "Main channel" means the portion of the stormwater conveyance system that contains the base flow and small frequent storm events. "Major modification" means, for the purposes of this chapter, the modification or amendment of an existing state permit before its expiration chat is not a minor modification as defined in this regulation. "Manmade" means constructed by man. "Measurable storm event" means a storm event resulting in an actual discharge from the construction site. "Minor modification" means, for the purposes of this chapter, minor modification or amendment of an existing state permit before its expiration far the reasons listed at 40 CFR 122.63 and as specified in 9VAC25 -$70 -640. Minor modification for the purposes of this chapter also means other modifcations and amendments not requiring extensive review and evaluation including, but not limited to, changes in EPA promulgated test protocols, increasing monitoring frequency requirements, changes in sampling locations, and changes to compliance dates within the overall compliance schedules. A minor state permit modification or amendment does not substantially alter state permit conditions, substantially increase or decrease the amount of surface water impacts, increase the size of the operation, or reduce the capacity of the facility to protect human health or the environment. "Natural channel design concepts" means the utilization of engineering analysis based an fluvial geomorphic processes to create, rehabilitate, restore, or stabilize an open conveyance system for the purpose of creating ar recreating a stream that conveys its bank full storm event within its banks and allows larger flows to access its floodplain. "Natural stream" means a tidal or non -tidal watercourse that is part of the natural topography. It usually maintains a continuous or seasonal flow during the year and is characterized as being irregular in cross - section with a meandering course. Constructed channels such as drainage ditches or swales shall not he considered natural streams; however, channels designed utilizing natural channel design concepts may be considered natural streams. "Operator" means the owner or operator of any facility or activity subject to regulation under this Ordinance. "Peak flow rate" means the maximu�u instantaneous flow from a prescribed design storm at a particular location. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 65/28114 .� "Percent impervious" rrieans the impervious area within the site divided by the area of the site multiplied by 100. "Permit" or "VSMP authority permit" means an approval to conduct gland- disturbing activity issued by the Frederick County Public Works Department, the permit- issuing VSMP authority, for the initiation of gland- disturbing activity after evidence of coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of stormwater from Construction Activities found in {9VAC25 -880 et seq.} of the Virginia Storxnwater Management Program Regulations has been provided. A person shall not conduct any land disturbing activity until he has submitted a permit application to the VSMP authority that includes a state VSMP permit registration statement; if such statement is required, a stormwater management plan or an executed agreement in lieu of a stormwater plan, and has obtained V SMP authority approval to begin land disturbance. "Permittee" means the person to whom the Permit is issued. "Person" means any individual, corporation, partnership, association, state, municipality, commission, or political subdivision of a state, governmental body, including federal, state, or local entity as applicable, any interstate body or any other legal entity. "Point of discharge" means a location at which concentrated stormwater runoff is released. "Post development" refers to conditions that reasonably may he expected or anticipated to exist after completion of the land development activity on a specific site. ''Predevelopment" refers to the conditions that exist at the time that plans for the land development of a tract of land are submitted to the plan approval VSMP authority. Where phased development or plan approval occurs (preliminary grading, demolition of existing structures, roads and utilities, etc.), the existing conditions at the time prior to the first item being submitted shall establish predevelopment conditions. . "Prior developed lands" means land that has been previously utilized for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, recreation, transportation or utility facilities ox structures, and that will have the impervious areas associated with those uses altered during gland- disturbing activity. "Qualif ed personnel" means a person knowledgeable in the principles and practices of erosion and sediment and stormwater management controls who possesses the skills to assess conditions at the construction site for the operator that could impact starmwatex quality and quantity and to assess the effectiveness of any sediment and erosion control measures or stormwater management facilities selected to control the quality and quantity of stormwater discharges from the construction activity. "Regulations" means the Virginia stormwater Management Program {VSMP) Permit Regulations, 9VAC25- 870 -10, et seq, as amended, and/or the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Rcgulations 9VAC25- 840 -10, et seq, as amended. "Responsible Land disturber" means an individual from the project or development team, who will be in charge and responsible for carrying out gland- disturbing activity covered by an agreement in lieu of a plan, when applicable, or an approved erosion and sediment control plan , who (i) holds a certificate of competence as a responsible land disturber, or (ii) holds a current certificate of competence from the Board in the area of inspection, or (iii) holds a current contractor certif cate of competence far erosion and sediment control, or {iv) is licensed in Virginia as a professional engineer, architect, certified landscape architect or land surveyor pursuant to Section 54.1 -400 et seq. of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia. "Runoff' or "stormwater runoff' means that portion of precipitation that is discharged across the land surface or through conveyances to one or more waterways. "Runoff characteristics" include maximum velocity, peak flow rate, volume, and flaw duration. "Runoff volume" means the volume of water that runs off the site from a prescribed design storm. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 3901 SSSingle- family residence" means anon- commercial dwelling that is occupied exclusively by one fammily. "Site" means the land or water area where any facility or activity is physically located or conducted, a parcel of land being developed, or a designated area of a parcel in which the land development project is located. Also, means the land or water area where any facility or land - disturbing activity is physically located or conducted, including adjacent land used ox preserved in connection with the facility or land - disturbing activity. "Site hydrology" means the movement of water. on, across, through and off the site as determined by parameters including, but not limited to, soil types, soil permeability, vegetative cover, seasonal water tables, slopes, land cover, and impervious cover. "State" means the Commonwealth of Virginia. State permit" means an approval to conduct gland- disturbing activity issued by the board in the form of a state stormwater individual permit or coverage issued under a state general permit or an approval issued by the board for stormwater discharges from an MS4. Under these state permits, the Commonwealth imposes and enforces requirements pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act and regulations, the Act and this chapter. As the mechanism that imposes and enforces requirements pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act and regulations, a state permit fox stormwater discharges from an MS4 and, aftex June 30, 2014, a state permit far conducting a land- disturbing activity issued pursuant to the Act, are also types of Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System {VPDES} Permits. State permit does not include any state permit that has not yet been the subject of final board action, such as a draft state permit. Approvals issued pursuant to this chapter, 9VAC25 -880, and 9VAC25 -890 are not issuances of a permit under § 62.1- 44.15.01 of the Code of Virginia. "State waters" means all water, on the surface and under the ground, wholly or partially within or bordering the Commonwealth or within its jurisdiction, including wetlands. "stormwater" means precipitation that is discharged across the land surface or through conveyances to one or more waterways and that may iixclude stormwater runoff, snow melt runoff, and surface runoff and drainage. "stormwater conveyance system" means a combination of drainage components that are used to convey stormwater discharge, either within or downstream of the land- disturbing activity. This includes: i . "Manmade stormwater conveyance system" means a pipe, ditch, vegetated swale, or other stormwater conveyance system constructed by man except far restored stormwater conveyance systems; 2, "Natural stormwater conveyance system" means the main channel of a natural stream and the flood -prone area adjacent to the main channel; ar 3. "Restored stormwater conveyance system" means a stormwater conveyance system that has been designed and constructed using natural channel design concepts. Restored stormwater conveyance systems include the main channel and the flood -prone area adjacent to the main channel. "stormwater discharge associated with. construction activity" means a discharge of stormwater runoff from areas where land- disturbing activities (e.g., clearing, grading, ar excavation), construction materials or equipment storage or maintenance {e.g., fill piles, borrow area, concrete truck washout, fueling), ar other industrial stormwater directly related to the construction process (e.g., concrete or asphalt batch plants) are located. "stormwater management facility" means a control measure that controls stormwater runoff and changes the characteristics of that runoff including, but not limited to, the quantity and quality, the period of release or the velocity of flow. "stormwater management plan" means a documents) enntaining material far describing methods for complying wish the requirements of this ordinance and the VSMP Permit regulations. Minute Book Number 39 Board oiSupervisors Regular Meeting ©f 05/28/14 �9� "Stormwater management concept plan" means a documents) developed at the preliminary plan, zoning, or other stage of the development process that establishes the initial layout of the development along with sufficient information to ensure that the final development stormwater management plan will comply with this ordinance. "Starmwater Pollution Prevention Plan" or "SWPPP" means a document that is prepared in accordance with good engineering practices and that identifies potential sources of pollutants that may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of stormwater discharges from the construction site. In addition the document shall identify and require the implementation of control measures, and shall include, but not be limited to the inclusion of,. and/ or the incarparation by reference of an approved erosion and sediment control plan, an approved stormwater management plan, and a pollution prevention plan. "Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Template" or "SWPPP Template" means a document intended to be used for single family residential construction land - disturbing activity that disturbs less than one acre of land and is part of a larger common plan of development to identify all applicable requirements of the SWPPP that was developed for the larger common plan of development. "Subdivision" means the same as defined in the Frederick County Subdivision Qrdinance (Chapter 14� of Frederick County, Virginia Cade). "Surface waters" means: 1. All waters that are currently used, were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; 2. All interstate waters, including interstate wetlands; 3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds the use, degradation, or destruction of which would affect or could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: a. That is used or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; b. From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or c. That is used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. 4. All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as surface waters under this definition; 5. Tributaries of waters identified in subdivisions 1 through 4 of this defmition; 6. The territorial sea; and 7. Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified in subdivisions 1 through 6 of This definition. "Total maximum daily load" or "TMDL" means the sum of the individual wasteIoad allocations for paint sources, load allocations fox nonpoint sources, natural background loading and a margin of safety. TMDLs can be expressed in terms of either mass per time, toxicity, ar other appropriate measure. The TMDL process provides for point versus nonpoint source trade -offs. Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Program (VESCP) land disturbance or VESCP land - disturbing activity means any man -made change to the land surface that may result in soil erosion from water or wind and the movement of sediments into state waters ar onto lands in the Commonwealth, including, but not limited to, clearing, grading, excavating, transporting and filling of land, except that the term shall not include: 1. Minor land- disturbing activities such as hoarse gardens and individual home landscaping, repairs and maintenance work; 2. Individual service connections; 3. Installation, maintenance, or repair of any underground public utility lines when such activity occurs on an existing hard surfaced road, street or sidewalk provided the land- disturbing activity is confined to.the area of the road, street or sidewalk that is hard surfaced; 4. Septic tank lines or drainage fields unless included in an overall plan for Minute Book Number 39 Board of supervisors Regular Meeting of 05128/1q 392 land- disturbing activity relating to construction of the building to he served by the septic tank system; S. Permitted surface or deep mining operations and projects, or oil and gas operations and projects conducted pursuant to Title 45.1 of the Code of Virginia; 6. Tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural, horticultural, or forest craps, livestock feedlot operations, or as additionally set forth by the Board in regulation, including engineering operations as follows: construction of terraces, terrace outlets, check dams, desilting basins, dikes, ponds, ditches, strip cropping, lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land drainage and land irrigation; however, this exception shall not apply to harvesting of forest crops unless the area on which harvesting occurs is reforested artificially or naturally in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 11 {§ 10.1 -1100 et seq.} of Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia or is converted to bona fide agricultural or, improved pasture use as described in subsection B of § 10.1 -1163 of the Code of Virginia; 7. Repair or rebuilding of the tracks, right -of- -way, bridges, communication facilities and other related structures and facilities of a railroad company; 8. Agricultural engineering operations, including but not limited to the construction of terraces, terrace outlets, check dams, desilting basins, dikes, ponds not required to comply with the provisions of the Dam Safety Act, Article 2 {§ 10.1 -604 et seq.} of Chapter 6 of Title 10.1 of the Cade of Virginia, ditches, strip cropping, lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land drainage and land irrigation; 9. Disturbed land areas of less than 10,000 square feet in size; however, the governing body of the program authority may reduce this exception to a smaller area of disturbed land or qualify the conditions under which this exception shall apply; 10. Installation of fence and sign posts or telephone and electric poles and other kinds of posts or poles; 11. Shoreline erosion control projects on tidal waters when all of -the land - disturbing activities are within the regulatory authority of and approved by local wetlands boards, the Marine Resources Commission or the United States Army Corps of Engineers; however, any associated land that is disturbed outside of this exempted area shall remain subject to this chapter and the regulations adopted pursuant thereto; and 12. Emergency work to protect life, limb or property, and emergency repairs; however, if the land- disturbing activity would have required an approved erosion and sediment control plan, if the activity were not an emergency, then the land area disturbed shall be shaped and stabilized in accordance with the requirements :of the VESCP authority. "Virginia Stormwater Management Act" or "Act" means Article 2.3 { §62.1- 44.15;24 et seq.) of Chapter 3.1 of Title 62.1 of the Code of Virginia. "Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse website" means a website that contains detailed design standards and specifications for control measures that may be used in Virginia to comply with the requirements of the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and associated regulations. "Virginia Stormwater Management Handbook" means a collection of pertinent information that provides general guidance for compliance with the Act and associated regulations and is developed by the Department with advice from a stakeholder advisory committee. "Virginia Storrnwater Management Program" or "VSMP" means the program established by Frederick County and approved by the Board to manage the quality and quantity of runoff resulting from land- disturbing activities and includes Frederick County's local ordinance and requirements for plan review, inspection, enforcement, permit requirements, policies and guidelines, and technical materials. "Virginia Stormwater Management Program authority" or "VSMP authority means a program approved by the board after September 13, 2411, that has been established by a VSMP authority to manage the quality and quantity of runoff resulting from Land- disturbing activities and shall include such items as _local ordinances, rules, permit requirements, annual standards and specifications, policies and guidelines, technical materials, and requirements for plan review, inspection, enforcement, where authorized in the Act and associated regulations, and evaluation consistent with the requirements of the SWM Act and associated regulations. "Virginia Storrnwater Management Program (VSMP) land disturbance" or "VSMP Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 0512811A 39� land- disturbing activity" means a manmade change to the land surface that potentially changes its runoff characteristics including clearing, grading, or excavation, except that the term shall not include: _ 1. Permitted surface or deep mining operations and projects, or oil and gas operations and projects conducted under the provisions of Title 45.1 of the Code of Virginia; 2. Clearing of lands specifically for agricultural purposes and the management, tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural, horticultural, or forest crops, livestock feedlot operations, or as additionally set forth by the Board in regulations, including engineering operations as follows: construction of terraces, terrace outlets, check dams, desalting basins, dikes,. ponds, ditches, strip cropping, lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land drainage, and land irrigation; however, this exception shall not apply to harvesting of forest crops unless the area on which harvesting occurs is reforested artificially or naturally in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 11 (§ 10.1 -1100 et seq.} of Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia or is converted to bona fide agricultural or improved pasture use as described in subsection B of § 10.1 -1163 of the Code of Virginia; 3. Single- family residences separately built and disturbing Iess than one acre and not part of a larger common plan of development or sale, including additions or modifications to existing single - family detached residential structures; 4. Land - disturbing activities that disturb less than one acre of land area except for activities that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale that is one acre or greater of disturbance; however, the governing body of any locality that administers a VSMP may reduce this exception to a smaller area of disturbed land or qualify the conditions under which this exception shall apply; 5. Discharges to a sanitary sewer or a combined sewer system; 6. Activities under a State of federal reclamation program to return an abandoned property to an agricultural or open land use; 7. Routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, or original construction of the project. The paving of an existing road with a corxrpacted or impervious surface and reestablishment of existing associated ditches and shoulders shall be deemed routine maintenance if performed in accordance with this subsection; S. Conducting land- disturbing activities in response to a public emergency where the related work requires immediate authorization to avoid imminent endangerment to human health or the environment. In such situations, the VSMP authority shall be advised of the disturbance within seven days of commencing the land- disturbing activity and compliance with the administrative requirements of subsection A, including a registration statement that substantiates the occurrence of an emergency, is required within 34 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 nr 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 duxatian sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances da 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 Minute Boole iYurnber 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 394 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. Na 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 V SMP 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 far 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; 3. An erasion and sediment control plan and narrative to comply with Virginia erosion and sediment control requirements and Frederick County erosion and sediment control requirements as outlined in this regulation. 4. The performance bonds} in compliance with § 143 -240 and 5. The applicable permit fee. B. Prior to issuance of a Frederick County VSMP permit for a VSMP land disturbing activity the following items must be submitted in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and approved: 1. The requirements of land disturbing permit application of subsection A, 2. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to include all required elements applicable to a V SMP land disturbing activity, 3. A stormwater management plan or an executed agreement in lieu of a plan that complies with Virginia stormwater requirements and Frederick County stormwater requirements as outlined in this regulation. 4. A VSMP Authority permit application /registration statement, if such statement is required. A person shall not conduct any land- disturbing activity until he has submitted a permit application to the VSMP authority that includes a state VSMP permit statement, if such statement is required. A registration statement is not required for detached single - family home construction within ar outside of common plan of development or sale, but such projects must adhere to the requirements of the general permit. §62.1- 44.15:28.8 5. All appropriate fees and 6. Evidence of coverage under the state general permit for discharges from construction activities through the Virginia electronic database. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -59; 9VAC25- 870 -108; 9VAC25 - 870 -750, 62.1 - 44.15:34 C. Prior to issuing coverage under an existing VSMP Authority permit far aland- disturbing activity within a common plan of development, the following items must be addressed; 1. The requirements of a Frederick County land disturbing permit application; and 2. A Storinwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to include all required elements applicable to a VSMP land disturbing activity, or when the area of disturbance is less than one acre, a SWPPP Template and a BMP lmplenaentation Plan consistent with the BMP performance goals of the common plan of development. 3. A stormwater management plan that complies with Virginia stormwater requirements and Frederick County stormwater requirements as outlined in this regulation. D. Whenever aland- disturbing activity is proposed to be conducted by a contractor performing construction work pursuant to a construction contract, the preparation and submission of plans, obtaining approval of the required plans, and obtaining all required permits shall be the responsibility of the owner of the land. Reference: Va. Code § b2.1- 44.5:34; 9VAC25 - 870 -54; 9VAC25 - 870 -108; 9VAC25 -870 -1170. § 143 -145 Applicable Design Standards, Speciiicatiaa�s and Methods Minute Book Number 39 $oard of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/25114 39� 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 Starmwater Management Handbook (VSMH} (latest edition }, and any additional guidance provided by the V SMP 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} r 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- specifc rainfall precipitation frequency data recommended by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14 and provided in the VA SWM Handbook. 2. All hydrologic analyses shall be based on the existing watershed characteristics and how the ultimate development condition of the subject project will be addressed. 3. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) synthetic 24 -hour rainfall distribution and�models, including, but not limited to TR -55 and TR -20, hydrologic and hydraulic methods developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or other NRCS standard hydrologic and hydraulic methods, shall be used to conduct the analyses described in this part. 4. For purposes of computing pxedevelopment runoff, all pervious lands on the site shall be assumed to be in good hydrologic condition in accordance with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service {NRCS) standards, regardless of conditions existing at the time of computation. 5. Predevelopment and post development runoff characteristics and site hydrology shall be verif ed by site inspections, topographic surveys, available soil mapping ar studies, and calculations consistent with good engineering practices. Guidance provided in the Virginia Stormwater Management Handbook and by the Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse shall be considered appropriate practices. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -72 6. All proposed sediment control or stormwater impounding structures shall be designed in accordance with State standards. Reference: 9VAC25 - 870 -85 § 143 -148 Grandfathering provisions A. Any land - disturbing activity shall he considered grandfathered by the V SMP authority and shall be subject to the Part II C (9VAC25 - 870 -93 et seq.) technical criteria of this chapter provided: 1. A proffered or conditional zoning plan, zoning with a plan of development, preliminary or Minute Baok Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting.of 05/28/14 • final subdivision plat, preliminary or final site plan, or any document determined by the locality to be equivalent thereto (i) was approved by the locality prior to July 1, 2012, {ii) provided a layout as defined in 9VAC2S- 870 -10, (iii} will comply with the Fart II C technical criteria of this chapter, and (iv} has not been subsequently modified or amended in a manner resulting in an increase in the amount of phosphorus leaving each point of discharge, and such that there is no increase in the volume or rate of runoff; 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. 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, ox 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 eases where governmental bonding or public debt financing has been issued fox 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 -154 Stormvvater 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 -1SS; 2. An ESC plan or if single family residential construction an agreement in lieu of an ESC plan as described in §1.43 -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 compliance with all applicable elements of the approved SWPPP developed for the larger common plan of development. D. The requixements for a SWPPP as outlined in �9VAC2S- 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. Minute Book �fumber 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of o5 /2$!14 3g� § 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 S WPPP 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 cazxying out the plan shall provide the Warne 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 acid 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 andlor construction of the proposed site improvements shall be phased to limit the duration of exposed sails to the minimum time needed to construct andlor install the improvements in the immediate vicinity of the disturbance. 3. The disturbance and/or compaction of the existing native soils shall be minimized by directing construction traffic, material stockpiling; and other activities to only those areas of the site that are designated for proposed infrastructure (buildings, roads, parking areas, etc. }. 4. Disturbance of slopes 1 S% or steeper shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable given the proposed site improvements. When disturbance of steep slopes is unavoidable, or the resulting grade of exposed soil is 1S% or greater, the area shall be stabilized immediately with an approved sail stabilization matting. 5. Existing topsoil shall be preserved to the maximum extent practical. 6. The .selection and design of erosion and sediment controls shall be based on the expected frequency, intensity, and' duration of precipitation, and the corresponding expected volume of runoff and sediment erosion, sedimentation, and transport during the land- disturbing activity. a. The volume and peak flow rate of runoff from the construction site should be estimated for the 2 -year and/or 1 d -year design storms as required for the particular controls being considered using accepted NRCS hydrologic methods as described in the VESCH and the VSWMH, latest editions; and b. The expected volume of sediment erosion, sedimentation, and transport during land- disturbing activities should be estimated considering the surface area, length, and slope of exposed soil, the soil horizons exposed by grading activities, and the range of soil particle sizes expected to be present. 7. Provide 50 -foot natural vegetated buffers around surface waters, and direct Stormwater to vegetated areas where feasible. Where infeasible, alternate practices that remove ar filter sediment and maximize Stormwater infiltration may be approved by Frederick County in accordance with state standards; Minute Book Number 39 Board of supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 • 8. Sediment basins, when used in accordance with the requirements of the VESCH shall incorporate an outlet structure that discharges from the surface. Reference: 9VAC25�870 Section IIA.2. b {4); 9VAC25- 870�54.F C. When the land- disturbing activity is part of a larger common plan of development, the ESC plan shall demonstrate compliance with the appraved SWPPP for the larger common plan of development ,and shall contain the following: Information andlor statements demonstrating compliance with the minimum standards of the erosion and sediment control regulations of the Board {9VAC25 -$40). 1. Compliance with the water quantity requirements of §§ 62.1 -44.2 et seq. of the Code of Virginia shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of 9VAC25 -840- 40(19) (Minimum Standard 19 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations). 2. A statement by the permittee that all erosion and sediment control measures shall be maintained and that the permittee will inspect the erosion and sediment control measures at least once in every two -week period and within 48 hours following rainstorm events of 0.25 inches or greater during construction to ensure continued compliance with the appraved plan. Records of self inspection shall be maintained on the site and available for review by county inspectors. 3. The location, dimensions, and other information as required ensuring the proper construction and maintenance of all temporary erosion and sediment ,controls necessary to comply with the provisions of this chapter. 4. Calculations for sediment traps, basins, outlet protection, etc. as applicable. 5. A sequence of construction and clear delineation of the initial areas of land disturbance necessary for installation of the. initial erosion and sediment control measures such as earthen dams, dikes, and diversions. The areas of initial land disturbance shall be the minimum necessary for installation of the initial erosion and sediment control measures and the delineation should include all areas necessary for such installation, including stockpiles, borrow areas, and staging areas. The sequence should also include the stabilization of these areas immediately upon reaching final grade. 6. Clear delineation of the proposed areas of land disturbance and those areas to be protected frozxz construction activity and traffic, including the following: a. Minimize the disturbance of slopes 15% ar greater; and b. Minimize soil compaction and, unless infeasible, preserve topsoil. 7. Requitement that final stabilization of dzstutbed areas shall be initiated immediately upon reaching final grade on any portion of the site, and that temporary stabilization shall be initiated immediately upon areas that may not be at final grade but will remain dormant for longer than 14 days. Stabilization shall be applied within 7 days of initiating stabilization. activities. 8. A comprehensive drainage plan including: a. The existing and proposed drainage patterns on the site; b. All contributing drainage areas to permanent stormwater practices and tezxzporary sediment controls; c. Existing streams, ponds, culverts, ditches, wetlands, other water bodies, and floodplains ; d. Land cover such as forest meadow, and other vegetative areas; e. Current land use including existing structures, roads, and locations of known utilities and easements; f. Sufficient information on adjoining parcels to assess the impacts of storrrlwater froze the site on these parcels; g. Proposed buildings, roads, parking areas, utilities, and stormwater management facilities; and h. Proposed land use with tabulation of the percentage of surface area to be adapted to various uses, including but not limited to forest or reforestation, buffers, impervious cover, managed turf (lawns), and easements. 10. The location of any stormwater management practices and sequence of construction. 11. Temporary natural vegetated buffers in accordance with the requirements of the VSMP Construction General Permit. These buffers shall be delineated on the ESC Plan and protected with accepted signage, safety fence, or other barrier. D. In lieu of the plan described in subsections A and B of this section, single family residential construction that is not part of a larger common plan of development, including additions at modifications to an existing single- family detached residential Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting oi'05/28l14 399 structures, may execute an ESC Agreement in Lieu of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan with the Administrator. E. In lieu of the plan described in subsections A and B of this section, single family residential construction that disturbs less than 1 acre and is part of a larger common plan of development, may execute a SWPPP Template with the Administrator that demonstrates compliance with the practices and strategies identif ed for the lot or parcel in the larger common plan of development SWPPP. F. In regard to the erosion and sediment control minimum standards, the following changes are effective within Frederick County (references are to 9VAC25- $40 -40): 1. Subsection 6.b. Surface run -off from disturbed areas that are comprised of flow from drainage areas greater than or equal to three acres shall be controlled by a sediment basin. The minimum storage capacity of a sediment basin shall be 134 cubic yards per acre of drainage area. The outfall system shall, at a minimum, maintain the structural integrity of the basin during a 100 - year -storm of twenty -four hour duration. Runoff caeff dents used in runoff calculations shall correspond to a bare earth condition ar those expected to exist while the sediment basin is utilized. 2. Subsection 14 - Regulation of Watercourse Crossing -Ali applicable federal, state and local regulations pertaining to working in or crossing live watercourses shall be me #. Prior to obtaining a land disturbance permit, copies of all applicable environmental permits, including but not limited to wetland disturbance, stream crossing, stormwater discharge permits, shall be submitted with the application. 3. Subsection 17 - Vehicular Sediment Tracking -Where construction vehicle access routes intersect paved or public roads, provisions shall be made to minimize the transport of sediment by vehicular tracking onto paved or public road surface; the road surface shall be cleaned thoroughly at the end of each day. Sediment shall be removed from roads by shoveling or sweeping and transported to a sediment disposal area. Street washing shall be allowed only after sediment is removed in this manner. This provision shall apply to individual development lots as well as to larger land - disturbing activities. 4. In subdivisions, the owner /developer of the subdivision shall be responsible for compliance with the standard set forth in section 3 until the streets are taken into the Virginia Department of Transportation's Secondary Road System for maintenance, and the plan submitted for approval shall include a detailed plan or narrative to ensure transport of sediment onto subdivision streets does not occur during any phase of construction, including but not limited to construction of all infrastructure, utilities, and building construction. In addition, if individual lots or sections in a subdivision are being developed by a different owner, such owner shall be jointly and severally responsible with the owner /developer of the subdivision fox achieving compliance with this minimum standard, and the erosion and sediment control plan; or "agreement in lieu of a plan," submitted for approval shall include a detailed plan or narrative to ensure transport of sediment onto the applicable roads does not occur during any phase of construction, including but not limited to construction of all infrastructure, utilities, and building construction. 5. The provision found in Subsection 19b (1) is deleted. 6. In order to assure proper stormwater drainage and site stabilization, the following policies are hereby adopted concerning all development. Prior to release of building permits, the following infrastructure shall be completed and stabilized within the subdivision, subsection or phase as shown on the approved plan: a. Stormwater conveyance systems, including but not limited to culverts, road surface, curb and gutter, stormwater structures, drainage swales and ditches, channel linings and all cleared areas shall be stabilized, etc. b. Submittal of a certified as -built plan of the subdivision, subsection or phase, which includes but is not limited to stormwater conveyance systems, curb and gutter, drainage swales and ditches, stormwater /sediment ponds, graded areas, etc. A letter from the engineer -af- record shall be included with the as -built plan which states that the subdivision has been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. c. A proposed overall lot grading plan is required by Frederick County prioi to the release of building permits) for subdivisions. -This plan shall meet the intent of the original site plan submitted by the developer. It is required that the developer provide the builder /owner a copy of the original engineered site grading plan for the particular subdivision. Miuute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 goo d. It will be necessary to submit a certified as -built plan for all lots on which proposed lot grading plans were required. This certif ed as -built plan shall indicate the following: properly annotated boundary lines; setback lines; proposed house footprint; offsets to house; existing grading; spot shots as necessary to show positive drainage; proposed driveway; proposed floor elevation to include basement, first floor and garage; and erosion and sediment controls, if required. The as -built plan shall be accompanied by a document prepared by a professional engineer ar a certified land surveyor certifying that the as -built conditions meet the intent of the approved site grading plan. The proposed lot grading plan and the as -built survey shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to release of the final certificate of occupancy. 7. Before adopting or revising regulations, the County shall give due notice and conduct a public hearing on the proposed or revised regulations, except that a public hearing shall not be required when the County is amending its program to conform to revisions in the state program. However, a public hearing shall be held if the County proposes or revises regulations that are more stringent than the state program. 8. Pursuant to § 62.1 - 44.15:53 of the Code of Virginia, an erosion control plan shall not be approved until it is reviewed by a certified plan reviewer. Inspections of land- disturbing activities shall be conducted by a certified inspector. The erosion control program. of the County shall contain a certified program administrator, a certified plan reviewer, and a certified inspector, who may be the same person. 9. The County hereby designates the Department of Public Works as the plan- approving authority. 10. The program and regulations provided for in this chapter shall be made available for public inspection at the office of the Department of Public Works. § 143 -165 Stormwater Management (SWM) Plan Requirements A. As required in § 143 -150, a Stormwater management plan shall be developed and referenced into the SWPPP. B. In addition to the plan requirements outlined in � 143 -155 and § 143 -160, the Stormwater management plan shall include the following: 1. A general description of the proposed stormwater management facilities, including: a. Contact information including name, address, telephone number and parcel number of the property or properties affected; b. Narrative that includes a description of current site conditions and final site conditions or if allowed by the V SMP authority, the information provided and documented during the review process that addresses the current and final site conditions; c. General description of the proposed Stormwater management facilities and mechanism through which the facilities will. be operated/ maintained after construction is complete; Information on type of Stormwater facilities; d. The location of Stormwater facilities, including geographic coordinates; e. The named surface waters to which the facility eventually drains; f. Information an proposed stormwater management facilities, including {i) type of facilities; {ii) location, including geographic coordinates; (iii) acres treated; and {iv) surface waters or karst features into which facility will discharge; g. Hydrologic/hydraulic computations, including runoff characteristics; h. Documentation/ calculations verifying compliance with water quality and quantity requirements of the regulations; i. Map or maps of site that depicts topography of the site and includes: 1. Contributing drainage areas; 2. Existing streams, ponds, culverts, ditches, wetlands, other water bodies, floodplains; j. Soil types, geologic formations if karst features are present in the area, forest cover, other vegetative areas; k. Current land use including existing structures, roads, locations of known utilities and easements; 1. Sufficient information on adjoining parcels to assess impacts of Stormwater from the site on these parcels; m. Limits of clearing and grading, proposed drainage patterns on the site; Minute .Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of OSI28114 ��� n. Proposed buildings, roads, parking areas, utilities, stormwatex management facilities; o. Proposed land use with tabulation of percentage of surface area to be adapted to various uses, including but not limited to planned locations of utilities, roads and easements. p. A stormwater management plan for a land disturbing activity shall apply the stormwater management technical criteria set for the in the part to the entire land disturbing actirvity. Individual lots in new residential, commercial, or industrial developments shall not be considered separate land- disturbing activities. q. A stormwater management plan shall consider all sources of surface runoff and all sources of subsurface and groundwater flows converted to surface runoff. r. Information on type/ location of stormwater discharges, information on features to which stormwater is discharged, including surface waters or karst features if present, and predevelopmeni/ post development drainage areas. 2. .All necessary documentation and calculations supporting the design and construction of the proposed stoxznwater management structures, including sufficient details such as cross sections, profiles, dimensions, grades, and other information as needed to ensure that the BMP facilities are built in accordance with the approved plans and BMP Design Standards and Specifications; 3. Runoff Reduction Method Corrapliance Spreadsheet Summary Sheet. 4. A landscaping plan prepared by an individual familiar with the selection of appropriate vegetation for the particular BMP (emergent and upland vegetation for wetlands, woody and/or herbaceous vegetative stabilization and management techniques to be used within and adjacent to the stormwater management facilities, . etc.). The landscaping plan must also describe the maintenance of vegetation at the site and what practices should be employed to ensure that adequate vegetative cover is preserved. S. Identification of all easements provided for inspection and maintenance of stnrmwater management facilities in accordance with specifications in the Stormwater Management Design Manuals and Frederick County requirements. 6. When Applicable, a copy of the Frederick County SWM BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement io be recorded in the local land records prior to plan approval. This may be submitted prior to plan approval. 7. When stormwater facilities axe proposed on individual residential Iots, a copy of the proposed Residential Lot BMP Inspection and Maintenance Agreement to be signed by the property owner upon settlement. This must be submitted prior to plan approval. 8. If an applicant intends to meet the water quality requirements of subsection C of this section through the use of ofd site compliance options, the a letter of availability from the ofd site provider must be included, and the use of the off -site options shall be in accordance with the VSMP Regulations Offsite Compliance Options (9VAC25- 870 -69). C. Stormwater znanageznent (SWM) plans shall demonstrate compliance with the following: 1. Stormwater runoff quality and runoff volume reduction criteria for new development. Reference: 9VAC25 - 870 -63. 2. Stormwater runafF quality criteria for development on prior developed lands. Reference: 9VAC2S�870 -63 . 3. Channel protection criteria. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -66. 4, Flood protection criteria. Reference: 9VAC25 - 870 -66. 5. Requirements for identifying, evaluating, and addressing increased volumes of sheet flow resulting from pervious or disconnected impervious areas or from physical spreading of concentrated flow through level spreaders. Reference: 9VAC25- $70 -66. D. Prior to release of the stormwater plan surety bond, two (2) sets of the construction record drawing or as -built of permanent stormwater management facilities, also referred to as "as -built plans," in accordance with county requirements shall be submitted to the Administrator. The construction as -built shall be appropriately sealed and signed by a professional registered in the Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to Article 1 (§ 54.1 -400 et seq.) of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1. of the Code of Virginia, certifying that the stormwater management facilities have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. Reference: 9VAC25 - 870 -108, 9VAC25- 870 -55 (D). Minute Sank Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of OSIZ8 /14 X02 E. Single family residential construction that is less than one acre of disturbance and part of a larger common plan of development may execute and implement a BMP Implementation Plan as part of the S WPPP Template in order to demonstrate compliance with the practices and strategies identified in the larger common plan of development SWPPP. F. Stormwater Management Facility Maintenance Agreements: Maintenance of all stormwater management facilities shall be ensured through the creation of a formal maintenance agreement that must be approved by the Administrator and recorded in the land records prior to issuance of aland- disturbing permit and captain the following provisions: 1. A copy of the County Frederick County BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement proposed for recordation in the local land records prior to plan approval to be signed by the property owner upon settlement shall be submitted with the plans. Reference: 9VAC25 -870 -112. 2. Responsibility for the operation and maintenance of stormwater management facilities shall remain with the property owner or an owner's association and shall pass to any successor or owner. If portions of the land are io be sold, legally binding arrangements shall be made to pass the responsibility to successors in title. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -112. 3. Maintenance agreements shall be in accordance with the Frederick County requirements {BMP Inspection & Maintenance Program) and provide for all necessary access for inspections. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1 - 44.15:39; 9VAC25 -870 -112. 4. Except as provided in item 5 below, maintenance agreements shall be enforceable (by the Administrator). Reference: 9VAC25 - 870 -112, 5. Individual on -lot stormwater facilities that are designed to primarily manage the runoff from the individual residential lot on which they are located require a County Residential Lot BMP Inspection &Maintenance Agreement acknowledging the presence, purpose, location, and basic maintenance requirements for the particular BMP facilities in accordance with County requirements. Reference: 9VAC25 -870 -112. 6. Elements of the stormwater management plans that include activities regulated under Chapter 4 (§ 54.1 -400 et seq.) of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia shall be appropriately sealed and signed by a professional registered in the Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to Article 1 (§ 54.1 -400 et seq.) of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia. 7. Stormwater management plans for residential, commercial ar industrial subdivisions are approved and which govern. the development of individual parcels within that plan, throughout the development life even if ownership changes. §62.1- 44.15:28.7 § 143 -175 Pollution Prevention (PP) Plan A. A Pollution Prevention {PP) plan is required for all VSMP Land - Disturbing Activities as required in § 143 -125, and shall be developed far incorporation into the SWPFP. B. The pollution prevention plan shall be developed in accordance with the Frederick County VSMP Manual to minimize the discharge of pollutants and the exposure of materials to stormwater, and prohibit illicit discharges from construction activities. C. The PP plan shall be implemented and updated as outlined in § 143 -205 (C) and the Frederick County VSMP Manual (if adopted) as necessary throughout all phases of the land- disturbing activity to implement appropriate pollution prevention measures applicable to construction activities. Reference: 9VAC25 870 -56. Pollution prevention plans. § 143 -185 Review and Approval of Plans A. Upon receipt of a plan for aland- disturbing permit and accompanying plans as required by § 143 -150, the Administrator shall determine the completeness of the application and notify the applicant within 15 calendar days if the submittal is considered incomplete. B. Once the applicant has been notified of a complete submittal, the Administrator shall have an additiona160 calendar days from the date of the communication for the review of the plans to determine compliance with the requirements of this ordinance, and to communicate to the applicant the approval or disapproval of the plans. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meetzng of ©5128114 �U� C. If a determination of completeness is not made and communicated to the applicant within the 15 calendar days, the plans shall be deemed complete as of the date of submission and a total of 60 calendar days from the date of submission shall be allowed for the review of the plans. D. If the plans are not approved, the reasons for not approving the plans shall be provided in writing to the applicant. E. The Administrator shall review within 45 calendar days of the date of resubmission any plans chat have been previously disapproved. F. Unless otherwise indicated in the application, electronic communication shall be considered communication in writing. Reference: Va. Code §62.1- 44.15:55(B }; §62.1- 44.15:34(A }; 9VAC25- 870 -55 (B); 9VAC25- 870 -108. § 143 -190 Pre - Construction Meeting Required No land - disturbing activities shall commence until aPre- Construction Meeting between the Administrator and the applicant, and the individual responsible for carrying out the plan, has been conducted. The applicant shall notify the Administrator in advance to schedule the meeting on -site. § 143 -195 Issuance, Tirne Lemit, Modification, Maintenance, Transfer andlor Termination of the Frederick County Land - Disturbing Permit and the VSMP Autharity Permit A. Permit Issuance: Once the requirements for obtaining a Frederick County Land - Disturbing Permit and coverage under -the state general permit for discharges from construction activity {if applicable} have been met, including the receipt or verification of payment of all required permit fees in accordance with the fee schedule of § 143 -235, the Administrator will issue a Frederick County Land - Disturbing Permit and a VSMP Authority permit. B. No transfer, assignment, or sale of the rights granted by virtue of a Frederick County Land - Disturbing Permit shall be made unless a written notice of transfer and corresponding perzrzit lxxodlfication fee is filed with the Administrator and the transferee certif es agreement to comply with all obligations and conditions of the permit. The Administrator may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the VSMP Authority Permit to change the name of the perrnittee and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary for the transfer. C. If land- disturbing activity has not commenced within 180 days of land- disturbing or VSMP Authority permit issuance or cease for more than 180 days, the Administrator may evaluate the existing approved ESC plan to determine whether the plan still satisfies local and state erosion and sediment control criteria and to verify that all design factors are still valid. If the previously filed ESC plan is determined to be inadequate a modified plan shall be submitted and approved prior to the resumption ofland- disturbing activity. Reference: 9VAC25 - 840- 80(B }. D. VSMP Authority Permits are effective for a fixed permit cycle of 5 years. Activities requiring a VSMP permit may obtain coverage at any time during the 5 -year permit cycle and must be renewed if the permit has not been terminated prior to the end of the cycle. The annual permit maintenance fees in § 143 -235 apply until the permit coverage is terminated or renewed. E. Land - disturbing activities for which VSMP Permit coverage was issued between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2014 for that permit cycle may remain subject to the technical criteria of Part II C of the Virginia Stormwater Regulations for two additional permit cycles provided coverage under the original VSMP Permit is maintained. After two permit cycles have passed, or should the original VSMP Permit coverage not be maintained, portions of the project not under canstruction shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted by the VSMP Authority after the original VSMP Permit coverage was issued. F. Land - disturbing activities far which VSMP Permit coverage was issued between July I, 2009 and June 30, 2014 for that permit cycle may elect to modify the permit by paying the appropriate permit modification fee and request approval for compliance with the technical criteria of Part II B for any remaining portions of the project. Reference: Va. Code §62.1 - 44.15:24; 9VAC25- 870 -47. Minufe Book dumber 39 Board of Supervisors Regutar Meeting of 4512.8114 40� § 143 -2QU VarianceslExceptions A. Frederick County may grant exceptions ox modify the ESC requirements of land - disturbing activities if the requirements are deemed inappropriate ar too restrictive for site conditions by granting a variance. A variance may be granted under the following conditions: 1. At the time of plan submission, an applicant may request a variance from the requirements of an erosion and sediment control plan. The applicant shall explain the reasons for requesting variances in writing. Specific variances which are allowed shall be documented in the plan. 2. During construction, the person responsible for implementing the approved plan may request a variance in writing from the Administrator. The Administrator shall respond in writing either approving or disapproving such a request. If the Administrator does not approve a variance within 10 days of receipt of the request, the request shall be considered to be disapproved. Fallowing disapproval, the applicant may resubmit a variance request with additional documentation. 3. The Administrator shall consider variance requests judiciously, keeping in mind both the need of the applicant to maximize cost effectiveness and the need to protect off -site properties and resources from damage. B. The Administrator may grant exceptions to the Technical Criteria of § 143 -165: SWM Plan Requirements. An exception maybe granted provided that: 1. the exception is the minimum necessary to afford relief, 2. reasonable and appropriate conditions shall be imposed as necessary upon any exception granted sa that the intent of this chapter is preserved, 3. granting the exception will not confer any special privileges that are denied in other similar circumstances, 4. exception requests are not based upon conditions or circumstances that are self - impased or self - created, and 5. economic hardship alone is not cuff dent reason to grant an exception from these requirements. C. Under no circumstance shall an exception to the requirement that the land- disturbing activity obtain required VSMP permits be granted, nor shall the use of a BMP not found on the Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse Website be approved. D. Exceptions to requirements for phosphorus reductions shall not be allowed unless offsite options available as described in § 143 -165 (B }(8) have been considered and found not available. Reference: 9VAC25 -840; 9VAC25- 870 -122 § 143 -205 Amendments to Approved Plans A. Amendments to an approved ESC plan may be made once the proposed change has been agreed to by the Administrator and the person responsible for carrying out the plan in the following cases: 1. Where irispection has revealed that the plan is inadequate to satisfy applicable regulations; or 2. Where the person responsible for carrying out the approved plan demonstrates that because of changed circumstances or for other reasons the approved plan cannot effectively be carried out, and proposed amendments to the plan are consistent with the requirements of this article. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:55 (C). B. Amendments to an approved SWM Plan may be made only after review and written approval by the Administrator. An approved plan may be modified in accordance with the following: 1, The person responsible for carrying out the approved plan demonstrates in writing to the Administrator that because of changed circumstances or for oilier reasons the approved plan cannot effectively be carried out, and has proposed amendments to the plan with all necessary calculations and documents consistent with the requirements of this chapter (refer to § 143 -165). 2. The Administrator shall have 64 calendar days to respond in writing either approving or disapproving such requests. Minute Book Number 39 Board of ,Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28!14 405 3. Based on an inspection, the Administrator may require amendments to the appxoved stormwater managemient plan to address any deficiencies within a time frame set by the Administrator. Reference: 9VAC25 -870 -108 C. Amendments to an approved SWPPP Plan may be required in order to reflect changes in the implementation of an approved ESC or SWM Plan. In addition to the requirements of subsection A and B of this section, the site operator shall document the implementation of the provisions of the SWPPP as follows: 1. The operator shall amend the SWPPP whenever there is a change in design, construction, operation, or maintenance that may have a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants from the construction activity and that has not been previously addressed in the SWPPP. 2. The SWPPP must be amended if during inspections or investigations by the operator's qualified personnel, or by the Administrator, state or federal officials, it is determined that the existing control measures are ineffective in minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the construction site. 3. Where revisions to the SWPPP include additional or modified control measures designed to correct problems identified, and where such revisions to the SWPPP require the Administrator's approval, the additional control measures shall be completed within seven calendar days of approval or prior to the next anticipated " storm event. If implementation. before the next anticipated storm event is impracticable, the situation shall be documented in the SWPPP and alternative control measures shall be implemented as soon as practicable. 4. Revisions to -the SWPPP must be dated and signed in accordance with Section III of the VSMP permit. Changes to any component of an approved SWPPP with VSMP ,Permit coverage that result in changes to stormwater management plans or that require additional review by the Administrator shall be subject to permit modification fees set out in § 143 -235. § 143 -210 Monitoring and Inspections during Land - Disturbing Activities All erosion and sediment control measures must be periodically inspected by the individual responsible for carrying out the plan and/or the operator and properly maintained in effective operating condition in accordance with the approved plans and the VESCH. If site inspections identify control measures that are not operating effectively, maintenance shall be performed as soon as practicable to maintain the continued effectiveness of stormwater controls. Reference: Va. Code §62.1- 44.15:58(A }; 9VAC25- 840 -60. A. The VSMP Authority will inspect all regulated land - disturbing activities to ensure compliance with the approved ESC Plan in accordance with the County and state requirements. The owner, permittee or person responsible for carrying out the plan or agreement maybe given notice of the inspection. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1 - 44.15:58.. B. The County requires that stormwater management facilities axe inspected and the construction of such facilities are certified in accordance with sub - section D of § 143- 210. The VSMP Authority may also inspect the construction of permanent stormwater management facilities at critical stages of construction and in accordance with the Virginia BMP Design Specifcations to ensure compliance with the approved plans. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:37. C. The right -af- -entry for the VSMP Authority to conduct such inspections shall be expressly reserved in the permit. The permit holder, or his duly designated representative, shall be afforded the opportunity to accompany the inspectors. Reference: § 62.1 - 44.15:39 Right of entry. D. The County will accept the submittal of inspection reports certifying that the stormwater management facilities are being constructed in accordance with the approved plan conducted by: 1. a person who is licensed as a professional engineer, architect, landscape architect, or land surveyor pursuant to Article 1 ( §54.1 -440 et seq.) of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia; 2. a person who works under the direction and oversight of the licensed professional engineer, architect, landscape architect, or land surveyor; or 3. a person who holds a certificate of competence in Stormwater Inspection from the Board. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 Reference: Va. Code § 62.1 - 44.15:37. E. The VSMP Authority will inspect all regulated land - disturbing activities covered by a VSMP Authority Permit to ensure the operator is conducting and documenting the operator inspections as required by the County and is appropriately updating the PP plan as required by the County. The owner, perrnittee ox person responsible for carrying out the plan or agreement may be given notice of the inspection. Reference: A, B, & C above; 9VAC25 - 870- 114(A) F. All land- disturbing activities covered by� a VSMP Permit shall be inspected by the operator in accordance with the requirements of the County. The operator shall maintain records of inspections and maintenance in order to determine whether the measures required in the ESC plan are effective in controlling erosion and sedimentation and to ensure compliance with the approved plan. Records shall be made available to the Administrator or the VSMP Authority inspector upon request. G. Prior to the release of any performance bonds or termination of the VSMP Authority Permit, the applicant shall submit the required as -built drawings for the Stormwater management facilities as described in § 143 -165; Reference: 9VAC25 -870 -108. H. A. On a fiscal year basis (July 1 to June 30), a VSMP authority shall report to the department by October 1 of each year in a format provided by the department. The information to be provided shall include the following: 1, Information on each permanent Stormwater management facility completed during the fiscal year to include type of Stormwater management facility, geographic coordinates, acres treated, and the surface waters or karst features into which the Stormwater management facility will discharge; 2. Number and type of enforcement actions during the fiscal year; and 3. Number of exceptions granted during the fiscal year. 4. A VSMP authority shall keep records in accordance with the following: 5. Project retards, including approved Stormwater management plans, shall be kept for three years after state permit termination or project completion. 6. Stormwater management facility inspection records shall be documented and retained fox at least five years from the date of inspection. 7. Construction record drawings shall be maintained in perpetuity or until a Stormwater management facility is removed. 8. A11 registration statements submitted in accordance with 9VAC25 - 870 -59 shall be documented and retained for at least three years from the date of project cornpletinn or state permit termination. § 143 -215 Monitoring and Inspections of Permanent Stormwater Management Facilities A. Owners of Stormwater management facilities shall be responsible for conducting inspections and performing maintenance in accordance with the recorded Stormwater BMP Maintenance Agreement as described in § 143 -165 and in accordance with county requirements. In regards to individual residential lots, such recorded instruments need not be required for Stormwater management facilities designed to treat Stormwater runoff primarily from an individual residential lot on which they are located, provided it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Administrator that future maintenance of such facilities will be addressed through an enforceable mechanism at the discretion of the Administrator. Provisions for this are addresses in Frederick County's SWP BMP Inspection and Maintenance Program manual. B. If a recorded instrument is not required pursuant to section 143- 215.A, the Administrator shall develop a strategy for addressing maintenance of Stormwater management facilities designed to treat Stormwater runoff primarily from an individual residential lot on which they are located. Such a strategy may include periodic inspections, homeowner outreach and education, or other method targeted at promoting the long -term maintenance of such facilities. Such facilities shall not be subject to the requirement for an inspection to be conducted by the Administrator. Reference: 9VAC25- 870 -112. C. The Administrator will ensure that all stor�mwater management facilities are being inspected and maintained according to the following: Minute Book IYurnber 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of o5128114 �.o� 1. The Administrator shall track the 5 -year frequency comprehensive inspection report submittals as required by the recorded maintenance agreement and in accordance with County requirements. The Administrator shall conduct maintenance inspections at a minimum of once every 5 years for certain BMPs as defined by County requirements. 2. The right -of- -entry for the Administrator to conduct such inspections shall be expressly reserved in the Maintenance Agreements. The owner, or his duly designated representative, shall be afforded the opportunity to accompany the inspectors. D. The Administrator shall notify the property owner or owner's association in writing in accordance with § 143- 225(A)(1) to the address as identif ed in the SWM BMP Inspection and Maintenance Agreement when a determination has been made that the stormwater management facility is in disrepair or is not functioning as intended. The notice shall specify the measures needed to comply with the approved maintenance plan and shall specify the time within which such measures shall be completed. If the responsible party fails to perform such maintenance and repair, the county shall have the authority to initiate enforcement action in accordance with § 143 -225 (D }, and perform the work and recover the costs from the responsible party. § 143 -225 Enforcement A. If, during inspections at any stage of the land- disturbing activity, the Administrator determines that the operator has failed to comply with the approved plan, including- but not limited to failure to install or properly install storrnwater BMP facilities or erosion and sediment controls, the Administrator shall serve riotice upon the permittee or person responsible for carrying out the permit conditions as follows: 1. A Notice to Comply shall be sent as (allows: a. Certified mail, return receipt requested, sent to the address specified by the owner or permittee in his application or plan certification; or b. Delivery at the site of the land- disturbing activities to the agent or employee supervising such activities. 2. The notice shall specify the measures necessary to comply with the plan or agreement in lieu of a plan and shall specify the � time within which such measures shall be completed. 3. Stop Work Order: a. If a permittee fails to comply with a notice to comply issued in accordance with paragraph 1 within the time specified, the Administrator may issue an order requiring the owner, permittee, or person responsible far carrying out the approved plan, to cease all land- disturbing activities until the violation of the permit has ceased or the specified corrective actions have been taken. Such orders shall become effective upon service on the person by certified mail, return receipt requested, sent to his address specified in the registration statement, or by personal delivery by an agent of the VSMP authority or Department. b. In addition to the cessation of all land- disturbing activities as described in item a above, the pexmittee may also be subject having the VSMP Authority permit revoked; and furthermore, he shall be deemed to be in violation of this ordinance and, upon conviction or adjudication of violation, shall be subject to the penalties as provided in the Code of Virginia or by this ordinance. Reference: Va. Cade §62.1- 44.15:63; §62.1 - 44.15:48. c. Where the alleged noncompliance is causing or is in imminent danger of causing harmful erosion of lands or sediment deposition in surface waters within the watersheds of the state, or where the land- disturbing activities have commenced without an approved plan, agreement in lieu of a plan or any required permits, such an order may be issued without regard to whether or not the owner or permittee has been issued a notice to comply. B. If, at any stage of the Iand- disturbing activity, the VSMP Authority determines that the physical conditions on the site are not as stated or shown on the approved erosion and sediment control plan or stormwater management plan, or the county determines that the storm drainage system or stormwater management facility is inadequate or not constructed as shown on the approved stormwater management final plan, the VSMP Authority may refuse to approve fiuther work and the county may revoke existing permits or approvals until a revised stormwater management final plan has been submitted and approved. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of Q5/28/14 4Q� C. Commencing Land - Disturbing Activities without an Approved Plan or a Permit 1. If land- disturbing activities have commenced without an approved plan, agreement in lieu of a plan, or a VSMP Authority Permit where required, a stop work order may be issued requiring that all land- disturbing activities be stopped until an approved plan, an agreement in lieu of a plan or any required permits are obtained. 2. The stop work order shall remain iul effect for a period of seven calendar days from the date of service pending application by the Administrator or alleged violator fox appropriate relief to the circuit court of the jurisdiction wherein the violation is alleged to have occurred. If the alleged violator has not obtained an approved plan, agreement in lieu of a plan or any required permits within seven days from the date of service of the order, the director may issue an order to the owner requiring that all construction and other work on the site, other than corrective measures, be stopped until an approved plan, agreement in lieu of a plan or any required permits have been obtained. The order shall be served upon the owner by registered or certified mail to the address specified in the permit application or the land records of the county. 3. The owner may appeal the issuance of an order to the circuit court. D. Maintenance of permanent stormwater facilities 1. If during periodic inspections to ensure that stormwater management facilities are being adequately maintained as designed, the VSMP Authority identifies operational def ciencies and/or determines that the owner of the stormwater management facility has failed to perform maintenance or conduct maintenance inspections in accordance with the recorded SWM BMP Maintenance and Inspection agreement, the VSMP Authority shall notify the person or organization responsible for carrying out the requirements of the agreement. The notice shall specify the deficiencies, the corrective actions required to restore the facility, and the time frame within which the corrective actions shall be completed. 2. If the individual or organization fails to comply with the notice within the time specified, the VSMP Authority may initiate informal and/or formal administrative enfarcenaent procedures including but' not limited to directives issued by the Board in accordance with Va. Code § 62.1 - 44.15:25, ar civil or criminal penalties in accordance with this ordinance and Va. Code §� 62.1 - 44.15:4$ and 62.1- 44.15:63. E. Any person violating or failing, neglecting, or refusing to obey any rule, regulation, ordinance, order, approved standard or specification, or any permit condition issued by the VSMP Authority or any provisions of this chapter may be compelled in a proceeding instituted in any appropriate court by the VSMP Authority to obey same and to comply therewith by injunction, mandamus or other appropriate remedy. Nothing in this section shall prevent the VSMP Authority from taking additional enforcement action permitted by state law. F. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter or of any regulations or ordinances, or standards and specifications adopted or approved hereunder, including those adapted pursuant to the a VSMP permit, ar who fails, neglects or refuses to comply with any order of the VSMP Authority, the Department, the Board, or court, other than any violation that relates solely to the erosion and sediment control requirements of any of the foregoing, shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $32,500 for each violation within the discretion of the court. Each day of violation of each requirement shall constitute a separate offense. Reference: § 62.1 - 44.15:48 of the Code of Virginia. 1. Violations for which a penalty may be imposed under this subsection shall include but not be limited to the fallowing: a. no permit registration, b. no SWPPP, c. incomplete SWPPP; d. SWPPP not available for review; e. failure to install starmwater BMP or Erosion and Sediment Controls; f. stormwater BMP facilities improperly installed or maintained; g. operational deficiencies; h. failure to conduct xequixed inspections; i. incomplete, improper, or missed inspections; and j. discharges not in compliance with the requirements of the VSMP Construction General Permit. k. na approved Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05128!14 409 2. The Administrator may issue a summons for collection of the civil penalty and the action may be prosecuted in the appropriate court. 3. In imposing a civil penalty pursuant to this subsection, the court may consider the degree of harm caused by the violation and also the economic benefit to the violator from noncompliance. 4. Any civil penalties assessed by a court as a result of a summons issued by Frederick County shall be paid into the treasury of the Frederick County to be used for the purpose of minimizing, preventing, managing, or mitigating pollution of the waters of Frederick County and abating environmental pollution therein in such manner as the court may, by order, direct. G. Notwithstanding any other civil or equitable remedy provided by this section, any person who willfiilly ar negligently violates any provision of this chapter, any order of Frederick County or the Department, any condition of a permit, or any order of a court, other than any violation that relates solely to the erosion and sediment control requirements of any of the foregoing, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by confinement in jail for not more than 12 months and a fine of not less than $2,500 nor more than $32,500, either or both. H. Notwithstanding any other civil ar equitable remedy provided by this section, any person who violates any pravisiori of this chapter, any order of Frederick County or the Department, any condition of a permit, or any order of a court relating to the erosion and sediment control requirements of any of the foregoing shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by confinement in jail for not more than 12 months and a fine of not more than $2,500, either or both. Reference: Va. Code § 62.1- 44.15:63. § 62.1 - 44.15;48. � 143 -230 Hearings Any permit applicant, permittee, or person subject to the Frederick County Land - Disturbing Permit, VSMP Authority Permit, or state permit requirements under this article aggrieved by any action of the Department of Public Works taken without a formal hearing, ar by inaction of the Department of Public Works may demand in writing a formal hearing by the County Board of Supervisors, provided a petition requesting such hearing is filed with the Board of Supervisors within 30 days after notice of such action. Any hearings conducted by the Board of Supervisors shall be in accordance with § 62.1- 44.15:45 of the Code of Virginia .Hearings must be conducted by the Board of Supervisors at a regular or special meeting. In reviewing the agent's actions, the County Board of ,Supervisors shall consider evidence and opinions, and the County Board of Supervisors may affirm, reverse or modify the action. Verbatim record of proceedings must be taken and filed with the County Board of Supervisors. The County Board of Supervisors decision shall be final, subject only to review by the Circuit Court of the County. Reference: § 62.1- 44.15:44, Right to hearing § 62.1- 44.15:45. Hearings § 143 -232 Appeals Any permittee or party aggrieved by a state permit or enforcement decision of the Frederick County Public Works under this article, or any person who has participated, in person or by submittal of written comments, in the public comment process related to a final decision of the Department of Public Works or Board of Supervisors under this article, whether such decision is affirmative or negative, is entitled to judicial review thereof in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Process Act (§ 2.2 -4000 et seq.) if such person meets the standard for obtaining judicial review of a case or controversy pursuant to Article III of the Constitution of the United States. Final decisions shall be subject to review and appeal to the Circuit Court of the County, provided an appeal is filed within 30 days from the date of any written decision adversely affecting the rights, duties, ar privileges of the person engaging in or proposing to engage in the land disturbance activity occurs or is proposed to occur. Unless otherwise provided by law, the circuit court shall conduct such review in accordance with the standards established in § 2.2 -4027, and the decisions of the circuit court shall be subject to review by the Court of Appeals. A person shall be deemed to meet such standard if {i) such person has suffered an actual or imminent injury that is an invasion of a legally protected interest and that is concrete and particularized; (ii) such injury is fairly traceable to the decision of the Department or the Board and not the result of the independent actiori of some third party not before the court; and (iii) such injury will likely be redressed by a favorable decision by the court. Minute Boak Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 0512$114 4� U § 143 -235 Fees The Board of Supervisors, by resolution, may establish a schedule of fees for the application, modification, transfer and maintenance of stormwater/ erosion and sediment control permits and plans. Reference: Part XiII of the VSMP Regulations § 143 -240 Performance Bands A. Prior to the issuance of any land - disturbing permit, the owner or permittee shall execute and file with the Administrator a Frederick County Erosion and Sediment Cantxol and Stormwater Management Performance Agreement and cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit (or other form of a performance bond as approved by the Frederick County Attorney) in an amount determined in accordance with the Frederick County Bond Estimate Worksheet which shall be equal to the approximate total cost of providing erosion and sediment control and stormwater quality and quantity improvements as required by this ordinance and shown on the approved plans in addition to a 25% contingency of the total bond amount. B. The Frederick County Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management Performance Agreement and performance band is to ensure that measures could be taken by Frederick County at the applicant's expense should, he fail, after proper notice as outlined in § 143 -225, within the time specified to initiate or maintain appropriate actions which may be required of him by the permit conditions as a result of his land- disturbing activity. If Frederick County takes such action upon such failure by the applicant, Frederick County may collect from the applicant for the difference should the amount of the reasonable cost of such action exceed the amount of the security held. C. Upon successful completion of the land- disturbing activity, to include submittal of the construction as -built drawings of permanent starmwater management facilities described in § 143 -165 and prior to termination of the VSMP Permit, the owner or permittee must provide written notification to Frederick County. Upon verification of adequate stabilization of land disturbing activity in the project or any section thereof, the director shall reduce, return, or. terminate the required .band, cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit to the owner, as the case may be, within 60 days. D. if the applicant/awner fails to comply with the approved S WPPP as documented through the site inspections described in § 143 -210, and after proper notification, the Administrator may determine that the performance bond ar escrow may be used to execute the plan. Reference: §62.1- 44.15:34; 9VAC25 -874 -104 (D }. The above motion was approved by the fallowing 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 Absent PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC HEARING - ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT GREEN SPRINGS AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT -- THE PROPOSED DISTRICT CONTAINS 385.63 +l- ACRES WITHIN TWO PARCELS AND IS LOCATED IN THE GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FRONTING GLAIZE ORCHARD ROAD (ROUTE 682} TO THE SOUTH, AND GREEN SPRINGS ROAD (ROUTE 671) TO THE EAST. — (RESOLUTION #057 -14) - APPROVED Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors iiegular Meeting of 05/28114 411 Vice - Chairman DeHaven advised that he would be abstaining from consideration of this item due to a conflict of interest. Zoning Administrator Mark Cheran appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this was a request to create a new Agricultural and Forestal District in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. The proposed district would be known as the Green Springs Agricultural and Forestal District. The Agricultural District Advisory Committee recommended approval of this new district at their April 21, 2014 meeting. The Planning Commission also recommended approval. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board approved the establishment of the Green Springs Agricultural and Forestal District. WHEREAS, a proposal to create the Green Springs Agricultural & Forestal District to consist of 385.63 +1- acres, was considered. The properties are located in the Gainesboro Magisterial District, fronting Glaize Orchard Road (Route 682) to the south and Green Springs Road (Route 6T 1) to the east, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 21 -A -25 and 21 -A -36. This application was reviewed by the Agricultural District Advisory Committee {ADAC }, and the Planning Commission during their regularly scheduled meetings; and WHEREAS, the Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) recommended approval of this proposal on Apri121, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval on the proposal to establish the Green Springs Agricultural &Forestal District on May 21, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this proposal to establish the Green � Springs Agricultural &Forestal District contributed to the conservation and preservation of agricultural and forestall land in Frederick County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as follows: The Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby establishes the Green Spring Agricultural &Forestal District to consist of 3$5.63 acres +/- in the Gainesbaro Magisterial District with an expiration and renewal date of May ls�' 2015. This Agricultural &Forestal District is as described on the attached map. This ordinance shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Passed this 28�' day of May, 2014 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Abstain Christopher E. Collins Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Minute Book ]Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of p5 /28I1a 41 Robert W. Wells Absent PUBLIC HEARING - ADDITION TO THE SOUTH TIMBER RIDGE AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT —THE PROPOSED ADDITION CONTAINS A TOTAL OF 85 +1- ACRES WITHIN ONE PARCEL AND IS LOCATED IN THE GAINESBORO MAGTSTERIAL DISTRICT ALONG HOLLOW ROAD OUTE 707 TO THE NORTH MUSE ROAD OUTE 610 AND GOLD ORCHARD ROAD OUTE 708 TO THE EAST. -- RESOLUTION #058 -14) - APPROVED Zoning Administrator Mark Cheran appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this was a request for an addition to the South Timber Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District. The proposed addition contains a total of 85 acres +/- and is located in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. The Agricultural District Advisory Committee recommended approval of this addition at its April 21, 2014 meeting. The Planning Commission also recommended approval. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Hess, seconded by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, the Board approved the addition to the Sauth Timber Ridge Agricultural and Forestal District. WHEREAS, a proposal to increase the South Timber Ridge Agricultural & ForestaI District by 85 +/- acres was considered. The properties are located in the Gainesboro Magisterial District along Hollow Road (Route 709) to the north, Muse Road (Route 610) and Gold Orchard Road (Route 708} to the east, and is identified by Property Identification Number 26 -A -49. This application was reviewed by the Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC), and the Planning Commission during their regularly scheduled meetings; and WHEREAS, the Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) recommended this proposal to increase the South Timber Ridge Agricultural &Forestal District on April 21, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval of this proposal to increase the South Timber Ridge Agricultural &Forestal District on May 21, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this proposal to increase the South Timber Ridge Agricultural &Forestal District on May 28, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the addition to the South Timber Ridge Agricultural &Forestal District contributes to the conservation and preservation of agricultural and forestal land in Frederick County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as follows: The Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby increases the South Timber Ridge Agricultural &Forestal District by 85 +/- acres, to total 979 acres in the Gainesboro Magisterial District, with an expiration and renewal date of May 1St, 2015. This Agricultural &Forestal District is as described on the attached map. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05128 /lA �� This ordinance shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Passed this 2$�' day of May, 2014 by the fallowing 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 Absent PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE — CHAPTER 165 ZONING, ARTICLE VIII DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND APPROVALS, PART 801- MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS, 165- 801.03 WAIVERS. PROPOSED REVISION TO ALLOW FOR A WAIVER OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN RE UIREMENT IF AN APPLICANT CHOOSES TO PROCESS A DETAIL SITE PLAN IN LIEU OF A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN. - APPROVED Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised this was a proposed revision to Frederick County Cade Chapter 165 Zoning 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. 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 Hess, the Board approved the ordinance amending the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165 Zoning, Article VIII — Development PIans and Approvals, Part 801 -- Master Developments g 165- 801.03 Waivers. WHEREAS, an ordinance to amend Chapter 165, Zoning to allow for a Master Development Plan {MDP) waiver if an applicant chooses to process a detailed site plan in lieu of a MDP was considered; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance on May 21, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance on May 28, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that the adoption of this ordinance to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in good zoning practice; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 Zoning,- is annended to update Article VIII -- Development Plans and Approvals, Part 801 — Master Developments, g16S- 801.03 to allow for a MDP' waiver if an applicant chooses to process a detailed site plan in lieu of a MDP, ARTICLE VIII DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND APPROVALS Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 4�� Part 801 — Master Development Plans § 165- 801.01 Intent. The purpose of the master development plan (MDP) is to promote orderly and planned subdivision and development of property within. Frederick County. Tt is the purpose of the MDP to ensure that such development occurs in a manner that suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious with adjoining property and is in the best interest of the general public. The MDP shall be used to illustrate the characteristics of the property proposed far subdivision and/or development and of surrounding properties and ensure that the requirements of the County Cade have been satisfied. § 165801.02 When required. A. A preliminary Master Development Plan (MDP) shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Development, and shall be presented to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors as an informational item. Ultimately, the MDP must receive administrative approval from the Director of Planning and Development and the County Administrator prior to any subdivision or development of property in any of the following zoning districts: RP Residential Performance District R4 Residential Planned Community District R5 Residential Recreational Community District MH1 Mobile Home Community District HE High Education District MS Medical Support District B I Neighborhood Business District B2 Business General District B3 Industrial Transition District OM Office- Manufacturing Park District M 1 Industrial bight District M2 Industrial General District EM Extractive Manufacturing District B. The MDP shall include the subject property proposed fox subdivision or development as well as all contiguous land under single or common ownership in the above zoning districts. C. A MDP may be submitted with an application for a rezoning but shall not be considered binding until approval of a final MDP. § 165- 801.03 Waivers. A. RP, R4, RS, and MH1 Districts, The Director of Planning and Development may waive the requirements of a MDP in the RP (Residential Performance District), the R4 (Residential Planned Community District), the RS (Residential Recreational Community District), and the MH -1 (Mobile Home Community District), if the proposed property for subdivision or development: (1) Contains 10 or less single- farr�ily detached rural traditional, single - family detached traditional or single - family detached urban dwelling units (all other permitted housing types shall require a MDP); Minute Book Humber 39 Board of supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28114 �f� (2) Is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for future development or subdivision; {3) Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding properties and land uses; and {�} Does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of its zoning district and the intent of this article. (S) A MDP may also be waived if the applicant chooses to process a site plan in lieu of a MDP. The site plan ►Host contain all information generally required on a MDP and a site plan. Once the site plan is in an administratively approvable form the plan wilt be presented to the Plannin Commission and the Board_�Supervisors Her S 165- 80.1.06. B. M1, EM and M2 Districts. The Director of Planning and Development may waive the requirement of a MDP in the M1 (Light Industrial), the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), or the M2 {Industrial General) Zoning Districts if the proposed subdivision or development: (1) Includes no new streets, roads or rights -of- -way, does not further extend any existing or dedicated street, road or rights -of- -way and does not significantly change the layout of any existing or dedicated street, road or rights -of way; (2) Does Hat propose any_ stormwater management system designed to serve more than one lot and does not necessitate significant changes to existing stormwater management systems designed to serve more than one lot; {3) Is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for future development ar subdivision; . (4) Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding properties and land uses; and {5) That such development does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of this chapter. (6) A MDP may also be waived if the applicant chooses to process a site plan in lieu of a MDP, The site plan must contain all information, generally required on a MDP and a site lan. Once the site lan is in an administrativel a rovable arm the lan will he presented to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors Her S 1bS- 801.06. C. B1, B2, B3, MS and HE Districts. The Director of Planning and Development may waive the requirement of a master development plan in the B1 (Neighborhood Business), B2 (Business General), B3 (Industrial Transition }, MS {Medical Support) or HE (Higher Education) Zoning Districts if the proposed subdivision or development: (1) Contains less than five acres in the B 1 District and less than 10 acres in the B2, B3, MS or HE District; {2} Includes no new streets, roads or rights -of- -way, does not further extend any existing ar dedicated street and does not significantly change the layout of any existing or dedicated street; (3} Does not propose any stormwater management system designed to serve more than one lot and does not necessitate significant changes to existing stormwater man_ agement systems designed to serve more than one lot; (4) Is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for fiiture development or subdivision; (5) Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding properties and land uses; and (6) That such development does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of this Minute Baok Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 4 ! �7 chapter. 7 A MDP ma also be waived i the a licant chooses to rocess a site Can in lieu o a MDP. The site_plan must contain all information generally required on a MDP and a site plan. Qnce the site plan i�_in an administratively approvable form the elan will be — presented to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors per � 165- $01.06. § 165- 801.04 Preapplication- conference. Prior to submission of a master development plan for review, the Department of Planning and Development staff may require, or an applicant may request a preapplication- conference. The purpose of the preapplication- conference is to review and discuss the nature of the proposal in relation to the requirements of the County Code and to discuss the preparation of a master development plan. A. Tf required, at the preapplication- conference the applicant shall provide a land use plan describing the following: { 1 }The general location of the site. (2} The general location of proposed roads. {3} The general location and types of proposed uses, environmental features on the site, housing types or open space. (4} The uses on adjoining properties. § 165 -801.5 Contents of master development plans. A. The following items shall be required for MDP's in all Zoning Districts. All required items shall be shown clearly on the plan. All MDP's shall be prepared in accordance with the following specifications: {1 }The scale shall be one inch equals 100 feet or larger (the ratio of feet to inches shall be no more than one hundred feet to one inch} or at a scale acceptable to the Director. The scale shall be sufficient so that all features are discernible. (2) No sheet shall exceed 42 inches in size unless approved by the Director of Planning and Development. Tf the MDP is prepared on more than one sheet, match lines shall clearly indicate where the sheets join, {3 }All MDP's shall include a North arrow, a scale and a legend describing all symbols. (4} A boundary survey of the entire property related to true meridian and certified by a certified Virginia surveyor, architect or engineer, with all dimensions in feet and decimals of feet, is required for all MDP'S. (5) The total area of the property shall be specified on the MDP. {6} The topography shall be shown at contour intervals acceptable to the Director. (7} The title of the proposed project; the date, month, year the plan was prepared or revised; the name of the applicants }, owner(s) and contract owner {s }; and the names of the individuals or firms preparing the plan shall be clearly specified. {8} A schedule of phases, with the approximate location of phase boundaries and the order in which the phases are to be developed, shall be provided. (9} The use of all adjoining properties shall be clearly designated on the MDP. {10) Ail existing, approved or planned public roads, streets or rights -af way on the project or within 2,000 feet of the boundaries of the project. Minute Book Number 39 Board of supervisors Regular Meeting of 45/28/14 4 I (11} Any approved proffers associated with property. { 12) The location and treatment proposed for all histoxieal structures and sites recognized as significant by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or as identified on the Virginia Historical Landmarks Commission Survey for Frederick County. (13) A history of all land divisions that have occurred in relation to the tract since the adoption of this requirement. (14) The approximate location of sewer and water mains with statements concerning the connection with and availability of existing facilities. (15} The ownership and use of all adjoining parcels, including parcels across road right of ways. (16) Description of any changes made since approval of any prior MDP's. (17) An approval block and signature lines for the Director of Planning and Development. B. Contents of a master development plan in the RP {Residential Performance) District, the R4 (Residential Planned Community) District, the RS (Residential Recreational Community) District and the MH�1 (Mobile Horne Community) District. The MDP shall contain a conceptual plan, showing the location and functional relationship between all proposed housing types and land uses, including the following information: {1) A land use plan, showing the location, arrangement and approximate boundaries of all proposed land uses. (2) The approximate acreage in common open space, in each use and housing type and in roads, streets or rights -of way for each phase and the total development. (3) The location and approximate boundaries of proposed housing types conceptually shown in accord with residential performance dimensional requirements. (4) The proposed number of dwelling units of each type in each phase and in the total development. (5) The location and approximate boundaries of existing environmental features, including floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater retention areas, steep slopes and woodlands. (b) The location of environmental protection land to be included in common open space. (7) The approximate acreage of each type of environmental protection land, the amount and percentage of each type that is to be disturbed and the amount and percentage of each type to be placed in common open space. (8) The amount, approximate boundaries and location of common open space, with the percentage of the total acreage of the site to be placed in common open space. (9} The location and general configuration of recreational facilities, with a general statement of the types of recreational facilities to be provided. {10) The location and extent of proposed buffers, with statements, profiles, cross sections or examples clearly specifying the screening to be provided. (11) The proposed location, arrangement, and right -of- -way widths of roads and streets, including roads and streets providing access to adjoining parcels, shall be in accordance with § i65- 202,04. (12} The location and arrangement of street entrances, driveways and parking areas. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of OS /Z8 /14 f �] (13) A conceptual plan for stormwater management with the location of stormwater facilities designed to serve more than one Iot. (14) Calculations describing all proposed bonus factors with the location of and specifications for bonus improvements, when proposed. C. Contents of a master development plan in the M1 (Light Industrial) District, the M2 (Industrial General) District, the EM {Extractive Manufacturing) District, the HE {Higher Education) District, the B 1 (Neighborhood Business) District, the B2 (Business General) District, the B3 {Industrial Transition) District, the OM {Office- Manufacturing Park} District and the MS (Medical Support} District. The MDP shall contain a conceptual plan, showing the location and fixnctional relationship between streets and land uses, including the following: (1) A conceptual plan, showing the location and arrangement of proposed uses. (2) The location and approximate boundaries of existing environmental features, including flaodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater detention areas, steep slopes and woodlands, as defined, and the approximate acreage of each type of environmental feature, including the amount and percentage of each type that is to be disturbed and the amount and percentage of each type to be placed in open or landscaped areas. (3) The proposed location and arrangement of all proposed and existing utility systems. {4) The location and arrangement of existing and proposed public or private roads, existing or proposed entrances, and driveways from existing and proposed public or private streets. (5} A conceptual plan for stormwater management and description and the location of all stormwater facilities designed to serve more than ane parcel. (6) The location and extent of proposed buffers required by this Chapter, with statements, profiles, cross sections or examples clearly specifying the screening to be provided. § 16S -80L06 Master development plan submission. Applicants shall submit the number of copies of the preliminary MDP to the Department of Planning and Development specified by the Department of Planning and Development MDP application, together with completed application materials required by the Department of Planning and Development. A. Applicants shall provide approval comments on the proposed development from various review agencies or departments as required by the Department of Planning and Development. The submission shall be complete and the application shall commence through the public meeting process when the plans, application materials and review agency approval comments have been received by the Director of Planning and Development. B. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA} shall be prepared and submitted to the Department of Planning and Development with all MDP applications in accordance with the adapted Traffic Impact Analysis Standards. C. When the submission is complete, the Director of Planning and Development shall submit the plans, application materials and review agency approval comments to the Planning Commission as an informational item. D. Following the informational presentation of the MDP to the Planning Commission, copies of the plan, application materials and agency comments shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors as an informational item. E. The preliminary MDP submitted to the Board of Supervisors for review shall not be substantially changed from plans reviewed by the Planning Commission. Changes may be made that were discussed by the Planning Commission. Other substantial changes to the plan shall require that the Planning Commission review the plan as a new MDP. Minute Soak Number 39 Board of Supervisors 12egular Meeting of 05128l1A 4�9 F. Site plans or final subdivision plats may be submitted concurrently with preliminary master development plans far review according to the procedures set forth in this chapter and Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the County Code. Master Development Plan Approval Process ,;:�, ��,.. § 165- 801.07 Final master development plan. A. The final MDP shall conform to all requirements of the County Code. B. Applicants shall submit a minimum of five copies of the final MDP to the Department of Planning and Development. Final approval of the final MDP shall be given by the Director of Planning and Develapment and the County Administrator. C. The Director shall approve the final MDP if all requirements of the County Code and all review agencies have been met, and if a preliminary MDP was presented to the Plairrling Commission and Board of Supervisors D. A MDP shall not be considered final until it is signed by the Director of Planning and Develapment and the County Administrator. § 165 -$OL08 Changes to approved Master Develapment Plans. Changes to an approved MDF shall occur only after review by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors using the procedures required for the approval of a new plan. The Director of Planning and Development may approve minor changes without following the full procedures, if such approval does not violate the intent of this chapter and section. Such minor changes shall not include increases in the density or intensity of development, changes to entrance or street layout, changes to stormwater layout or other major design changes. ,§ 165- 8019Master development plan review fees. The Board of Supervisors may adopt a schedule of fees to be paid by the applicant to the County for the costs associated with the review of the MDF. This amendment shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Miuute Book ]Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of ©5128114 420 Passed this 28�' day of May, 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 Absent OTHER PLANNING ITEMS 2�D DISCUSSION — COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN AMENDMENT CPPA — MIDDLETOWN/LFCC SWSA — FUTURE EXPANSION AREA.. — POSTPONED ACTION UNTIL JUNE 25 201.4 MEETING. Deputy Director of Planning Michael Ruddy appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised this was a discussion of the future study of the Middletown/Lord Fairfax Community College Sewer and Water Service Area expansion. He advised that staff was seeking Board direction regarding this item. Chairman Shickle advised that he had been approached by another landowner about being included in the proposed study area. He supported the original request, but would like to have time to explore the property owner's request to be included. Supervisor Lofton stated this was an excellent opportunity to make some good decision and he would like to see the request considered. Upon a motion by Supervisor Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the board postponed this item until the June 25, 2014 meeting. Supervisor Fisher stated there were more details he would like to have from the Frederick County Sanitation Authority regarding this request. Supervisor Lofton stated he hoped the owner knows what the Board is trying to accomplish. Evan Wyatt, Greenway Engineering, appeared before the Board on behalf of the applicant. He understood the proposal would be coming back up with the possibility of other parcels being included. 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 Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05128!14 �� E Robert W. Wells Absent DISCUSSION — PRIVATE STREETS IN THE RS ZONING DISTRICT -- �RESOLUTION #D59 -14) -SENT FORWARD FOR PUBLIC HEARING AT THE JULY 9, 2014 MEETING. Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised that staff received a second request to allow private streets in the R -5 zoning district._ Currently, private streets are only permitted in the R�5 District within age - restricted communities. She noted the Board considered this item in late 2012 and early 2013, but did not send this proposal forward for public hearing. This second request has been reviewed by the Transportation Committee for consideration. No recornrnendation was returned to the Board. The Development Review and Regulations Committee and Planning Commission expressed concern over permitting private streets within the R -5 district. She concluded by saying staff was seeking direction from the Board regarding this item. Supervisor Hess asked about the 1,000 lot threshold. Senior Planner Perkins responded this addition was offered by the applicant. She went on to say that new R -5 developments would have to be 1,000 lots in order to utilize this provision. Supervisor Lofton stated the ordinance talks about public streets and notes aright -of- -way of 20 feet. He wondered how wide the streets would be. He went on to say age - restricted private streets do not seem to have the same impacts as non -age restricted. Supervisor DeHaven felt this went to marketability of the development. Supervisor Hess stated there were a number of old subdivisions with private streets. He went on to say this created a nightmare for those developments because the deed of dedication often does not give the homeowners' association the power to levy assessments for the roads. He concluded by saying if that was allowed he did not see it as a problem. Chairman Shickle stated this issue was a challenge "we" inherited. He went on to say at the end of the day it depends on whether ar not the developer stays in it far the long haul. He noted this particular developer's track retard appeared to be good, but there were no guarantees. Supervisor Collins stated the proposed ordinance continues to bother him and he does not like it. He noted age - restricted communities have limited traffic and that is why he was concerned if this provision was opened to every R -5 development. He concluded by saying the Board needs to be concerned about future developments. Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 4�� Supervisor Lofton stated there were a lot of things the Sheriff cannot enforce if a development's streets are private. He noted this was something that would need to be addressed. Supervisor Fisher stated this had been a peculiar development issue. He went an to say if the roads were constructed correctly they could last a long time. He concluded by saying he supported sending it to public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Collins, the Board sent this amendment forward for public hearing at the July 9, 2014 meeting. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Department has been directed to prepare changes to Chapter 165 Zoning, to allow the use of private streets for all types of developments in the RS (Residential .Recreational Community) District with a waiver. WHEREAS, the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on March 2�', 2014; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Committee discussed the proposed changes at their meetings on February 24, 2014 and April 28, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 7, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Soard of Supervisors discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 28, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that in the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and goad zoning practice, directs the Frederick County Planning Commission hold a public hearing regarding an arendment to Chapter 165 to allow the use of private streets for all types of developments in the R5 (Residential Recreational Community) District with a waiver. NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT REQUESTED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the Frederick County Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to consider changes to allow the use of private streets for all types of developments in the_ RS (Residential Recreational Community} District with a waiver. Passed this 28� day of May, 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 Absent DISCUSSION -- SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS — (RESOLUTION #064 -].4) -SENT FORWARD FOR PUBLI C HEARING Senior Planner Candice Perkins appeared before the Board regarding this item. She advised this was a proposed revision to the front setback for multifamily residential buildings. She noted this was a new housing type added in 2013. The text of the ordinance currently requires a 35 foot setback. The Development Review and Regulations Committee recommended Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/14 423 a reduction to 20 feet. The Planning Commission discussed this item and it is being brought to the Board as staff is seeking direction. Supervisor Collis asked if this was part of allowing town centers in Frederick County. Senior Planner Perkins responded no. This is for high density residential developments with no commercial component. Supervisor Collins asked if it could apply to a town center development. Senior Planner Perkins responded, if approved, the reduced setback would apply. Vice - Chairman DeHaven stated he was okay with the reduction to 20 feet to allow for parking in the rear. He believed the market would decide if this reduced setback was appropriate, Supervisor Hess agreed with Vice- Chairman DeHaven's comments. Upon a motion by Vice - Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Hess, the Board sent the proposed ordinance amendment forward far public hearing. WHEREAS, the Frederick County Planning Department has received a request to reduce the front setback for Multifamily Residential Buildings from 35 feet to 20 feet; and WHEREAS, the Development Review and Regulations Committee {DRRC) reviewed the change at their March 2414- meeting and recommended that the front setback far Multifamily Residential Buildings be reduced from 35 feet to 20 feet 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 May 7, 2014 and agreed with the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 28, 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REQUESTED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the Frederick County Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to reduce the front setback for Multifamily Residential Buildings from 35 feet to 20 feet. Passed this 28�h day of May, 2414 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Christopher E. Collins Nay Gene E, Fisher Nay Robert A. Hess Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W, Wells Absent BOARD LIAISON REPORTS There were no Board liaison reports. Minute Book dumber 39 Board of Supervisors Regufsr Meeting of pSlz81�4 �2� CITIZEN COMMENTS Ken Hunter, Back Creek District, read the following letter: 1. Who owns Shawnee land? 2, Why is it a political subdivision? 3. Deed dated 3 May 1998 shows Frederick County is owner. 4. 335 lots were conveyed to Frederick County on 17 Jan 1995? Why and for what purpose Jan 17 letter enclosed? 5. Where are the more than two fale cabinets full of Shawnee land historical documents left in the safe keeping of the county At 50 tomahawk trail? 6. Moratorium on all building within Shawnee land until a study is done according to Federal standards on the population density and septic issues? 7. 7 county employees that work here part time but are supposed to be here full time. Why does Shawnee land have the 1.5 million dollar burden just for employee's wages and benefat package? What are there hours of operation? You as a board say you are stewards of the tax payer's dollar. I would lake to see Shawnee land have a real manager and not what it presently there a friend or relative of someone working for Frederick County I strongly suspect? It shows in the non engineering or lack of anything that is done. I can give many examples if you want me to. All services need to be contracted out such as snow, grass mowing and maintenance. If the county would give me 1.5 million dollar a yedr I would fax everything in Shawnee land plus mow the lawns and shovel property owner's snow in the winter. 8. The county Web site far Shawnee land should have photo's and past work history Bios' about each employee? And planned improvements. 9. I would like to see a vote tonight on the four individuals who drive tax payers' vehicles 24/7 on the tax payers all diesel vehicles? Mr. Reilly states the four are given vehicles because of the nature and recall of their job to the county and the residents. I would like to know the recall procedure because everyone I have asked doesn't know the recall procedure for any employees? What is the recall procedure for these folks? What constitutes an emergency in the eyes of the BOS that should warrant a vehicle 24/7 on the tax payers'? Here at Shawneeland we have had murders, deaths, and the dam overflowed, snow, ice, and yet no manager was ever called to Shawnee land? The cost of letting employees use four vehicles is over $200, 000 burden on tax payers not including fuel and maintenance costs. 10. Why doesn't the Shawnee land manager answer his e -mail to concerned residents of issues there at Shawnee land? He refuses to answer any e -mails or give his work cell number out to anyone up here? Why does he have a cell phone and Internet capabilities on the tax payers if he refuses to answer me and other folks? 11. Why does county employees have a -mail when they don't respond to questions about Frederick County especially when it's with in their area of expertise? Example the individual that is responsible for the audit? Why does she have an a -mail account just wondering? 12. Request address of all county vehicle fueling sites? " BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS There were no Board of Supervisors comments. . ADJOURN UPON A MOTION BY VICE - CHAIRMAN DEHAVEN, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR FISHER, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED. (8:40 P.M.) Minute Book 1Vumber 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 45128!]4 ��� Richard C. Shickle Johns it , Jr. Chairman, Board of Supervisors Cler c, Board of Supervisors Mianutes Prepared By: - Jay T�. T' hs� Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors Minute Book Number 39 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 05/28/]4