Loading...
August 8 2018 Board_Agenda_PacketAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2018 6:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION & 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 6:00P.M. Closed Session The Board of Supervisors will convene in closed session pursuant to Virginia Code § 2.2-3711(A)(3) for discussion of 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. 7:00 P.M. Regular Meeting Call to Order Invocation Pledge of Allegiance Adoption of Agenda Consent AgendaAttachment ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A 1.Minutes Joint Meeting of School Board and Board of Supervisors of July 24, 2018 Regular Board of Supervisors Meeting of July 25, 2018 2.Committee Reports --------------------------------------------------------------- B Public Works Committee Report -----------------------------------------------------------------------C Transportation Committee --------------------------------------------------------------- D 3.Amendment of Rules of Procedure - Citizen Comments – Agenda Items that are not the subject of a Public Hearing MEETING AGENDA PAGE 2 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Wednesday, August 8, 2018 Board of Supervisors Comments County Officials Amendment to the 2018-2019 Fiscal Year Budget------------------------------------------------ E 1. Pursuant to Section 15.2-2507 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, the Board of Supervisors will Hold a Public Hearing to Amend the Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Budget to Reflect: School Construction Fund Supplemental Appropriation in the Amount of $45,500,000 for the Acquisition of Land, Design and Construction of a Replacement Robert E. Aylor Middle School. Request for Appropriation of funds for replacement Aylor Middle School Building Committee Appointments-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- F 2. a.Historic Resources Advisory Board Member-At-Large Representative 4-year term, Applicationattached b.Conservation Easement Authority 3-year term of Elaine Cain, Co. Representative, ends 8/24/18 (Eligible and willing to be reappointed) 3-year term of Robert Solenberger, Co. Representative ends 8/24/18 (Has been contacted, status pending) 3-year term of Charles Triplett, Planning Comm. Representative ends 8/24/18 (Eligible and willing to be reappointed) c.Economic Development Authority 4-year term of Heather McKay ends 9/10/18 (Eligible for reappointment) 4-year term of Bob Claytor ends 9/10/18 (Eligible for reappointment) d.Shenandoah Area Agency on Aging 4-year term of current representativeends 9/30/18 (Not eligible for reappointment) e.Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission 3-year term of Kris Tierney as Frederick County Representativeends 9/30/18 (Eligible for reappointment) 3-year term of Eric Lawrence as FrederickCounty Representative ends 9/30/18 (Eligible for reappointment) 3-year term of Jay Tibbs as Frederick County Alternate ends 9/30/18 (Eligible for reappointment) Committee Business - None MEETING AGENDA PAGE 3 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Wednesday, August 8, 2018 Public Hearings (Non Planning Issues) 1.Outdoor Festival Permit Request of Rotary Club of Winchester rd –43Annual Shenandoah Valley Apple Harvest Festival--------------------------- G Pursuant to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 86, Festivals; Section 86-3, Permit Required; Application; Issuance or Denial; Fee, for an Outdoor Festival Permit. Festival to be Held on Saturday, September 15, 2018, from 10:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. and Sunday, September 16, 2018 from 10:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.; on the Grounds of Frederick County Fairgrounds, 250 Fairground Road, Clearbrook, Virginia. Property Owned by Frederick County Fair. Planning Commission Business Public Hearings 1.Rezoning #01-18 for Stonewall IV------------------------------------------------------------------ H Submitted by Walsh Colucci Lubeley & Walsh,to Rezone 88.91+/- Acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (Light Industrial) District with Proffers.The Properties are Located at the Southern Terminus of Lenior Drive (Route F-732) and are Identified by Property Identification Numbers 43-A-21, 43-A-21B, 43-19-4 and 43-A-24. Other Planning Items 1.Ordinance Amendment – Shipping Containers--------------------------------------------- I This is a proposed amendment to Chapter 165 –Zoning Ordinance to restrict the use of shipping containers (i.e. pre-fabricated, durable, steel shipping containers, also known as intermodal containers, cargo containers, freight containers, or ISO containers) as accessory storage in certain zoning districts. Shipping containers are typically 8-feet (FT) wide, 8-FT tall and 20-40-FT long. The current zoning ordinance does not specifically address shipping containers, only where tractor trailers may be parked or stored. Ordinance Amendment –Storage Facilities, self-service, in RA District----------- J 2. This is a proposed amendment to Chapter 165 –Zoning Ordinance to allow storage facilities, self-service, in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District as a conditional use (requiring an approved Conditional Use Permit – CUP). Currently, storage facilities, self-service, are only allowed in the B2 (General Business), B3 (Industrial Transition), ) and M2 (Industrial General) Zoning Districts. M1 (Light Industrial MEETING AGENDA PAGE 4 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Wednesday, August 8, 2018 Board Liaison Reports Citizen Comments Board of Supervisors Comments Adjourn MINUTES Frederick County Board of Supervisors – Frederick County School Board Joint Meeting Tuesday, July 24, 2018 5:30 p.m. Board Room, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA ATTENDEES Board of Supervisors: Chairman Charles S. DeHaven, Jr.; Vice Chairman Gary A. Lofton; Blaine P. Dunn;Judith McCann-Slaughter; J. Douglas McCarthy; Robert W. Wells and Shannon G. Troutwere present.Staff present: Kris C. Tierney, County Administrator; and Ann W.Phillips, Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. School Board: Dr. John Lamanna; Michael Lake; Seth Thatcher; Jay Foreman; and Shontya’ Washington were present. Kali Klubertanz and Frank Wright were absent. Staff present: Dr. David Sovine, Superintendent; Dr. Al Orndorff, Assistant Superintendentfor Administration; Dr. James Angelo, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction;andPatty Camery, Executive Director of Finance. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Upon motion of Vice Chairman Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Dunn, the agendawas approved. DISCUSSION Chairman Lamanna provided an overview of the process in planning for a replacement AylorMiddle School beginning with the discussion at the January 2018 joint meeting of the two bodies. He said the current situation involves balancing the cost and the size of the replacement building, adding that a 160,000 square foot building is what is needed. Noting Supervisor Dunn’s recent comments, he questioned why building a replacement building the same size as the current Admiral Byrd Middle School would not be appropriate for the Aylor community. Supervisor Dunn explained his concerns about the costs and the use of numbers showing overcrowding. He questioned whether the School Board was trying to predetermine the outcome of the decision on a replacement building. He discussed changes in the CIP priorities. Chairman Lamanna noted the CIP shows theneeds, but that there is no expectation that all the projects on the CIP are affordable at one time. He stated that the School Board and staff never present data just to sway the course of a decision. He questioned why the School Board would want to do anything other than provide the best option for the students. Minutes * Joint Meeting with Frederick County School Board FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS July 24, 2018 1 Supervisor Dunn and Chairman Lamanna discussed square footage needs. Chairman Lamannanoted that Admiral Byrd is 160,000 square feet and is functioning well. Supervisor Dunn noted the comparison to Brambleton Middle School in Loudoun County. Mr. Thatcher noted the capacity of two of the three County middle schools has gone up. Supervisor McCarthy expressed his dismay atreading about the School Board vote on the resolution requesting the $45.5 million appropriation. He said he does not want the Board of Supervisors to vote on the matter only to have the new school be under capacity, adding that he is uneasy about voting if the product will not meet the needs. He discussed square footage benchmarks and the comparison to Brambleton Middle school in Loudoun County. He said the Boards should reach a compromise solution noting that the time frame before the deadline on entering the bond market cycle is nearing. Supervisor Lofton discussed the change in recommended space sizes, including collaborative learning spaces, needed space, and the reference to the 140,000 square foot building in the School Board’s January presentation. He expressed a desire for a process to get the right information to the Board members. Dr. Sovine explained the process used for reviewing options for renovation versus replacement of the Aylor building, saying the 140,000 square foot building was an option reviewed during the process. He said it was determined that replacement with a 160,000 square foot building was the best option, and the 140,000 square foot building was not found to be a viable choice. Supervisor Lofton said he found the January presentation misleading since the 140,000 square foot building was shown as an option. Chairman Lamanna said Admiral Byrd Middle School has a capacity of 900 students, is functioning well, and is asignificant reference point for the Board. He and Supervisor Lofton discussed recommended space sizes and how they relate to student performance. Dr. Sovine noted the new Frederick County Middle School is the most energy efficient in the County and has the most inspiring learning environment. Dr. Orndorff apologized for any confusion surrounding the January presentation slide showing a 140,000 square foot building. He clarified that the slide showed the process and steps the School Board took in determining the recommended replacement option. Chairman DeHaven said there had been good discussion and that he heard absolute commitment from the Boards to work more closely in the future. He said the County needs to build a school right now. In reference to Supervisor McCarthy’s comment that the vote could be a mistake,Mr. Thatcher said it would not be a mistake for the Board to appropriate the $45.5 million at this time. Ms. Washington said that there have been many meetings and much information has been supplied. She said recommended numbers are minimum guidelines, but the best environment is what the students should have in a new school. She questioned why the Supervisors would visit another County for building prototypes when the Admiral Byrd building is here in Frederick County. She asked why the Boards would want the Aylor students to have anything less than Minutes * Joint Meeting with Frederick County School Board FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS July 24, 2018 2 Admiral Byrd students? She said the Boards need to look to the future rather than what has happened in the past to figure out what is best for the children and the community. Mr. Foreman said that if therewere a way for the Boards to agree on the higher funding number, his only concern is doing so in time to meet the fall bond cycle. Supervisor McCarthy said he would need more transfer of information from the School Board before discussing a change in the proposed funding. Supervisor Wells said he has listened to all the comments and if there is not enough space in a 140,000 square foot building, then the Board needs to spend more and now is the time to do so. He said he had all the information that he requires, and he does not want to see quality education in Frederick County sacrificed. He said that the discussion is about increasing the funding so that the County is not shooting itself in the foot and suggested the County build to the standards needed by building another Admiral Byrd sized school. Supervisor Trout concurred with Supervisor Wells and suggested the Board approve $52 million for a Byrd sized school so that it will not reach capacity as soon as it is built. Supervisor McCarthy said the School Board is firm about the need for the 160,000 square foot building and he is open to discussion on that ifthere is understanding of how decisions have been made. Chairman DeHaven reiterated that both Boards are in favor of a more collaborative relationship. He restated the need to focus the effort on replacing the Aylor school building. Supervisor Trout explained the need for the larger square footage and said that reducing the size from that of the Admiral Byrd Middle School size is not the best option. Chairman Lamanna said that the School Board is not saying the design of the new school will be exactly like Byrd Middle School, but the capacity would be similar if it is built at 160,000 square feet. Mr. Tierney noted that if the Board does not decide on the appropriation at the July 25, 2018, meeting there would be limited time for the two Boards to reconveneto discuss the difference between the 140,000 versus the 160,000 square foot building size. He asked the members what additional information would be desiredby the Board of Supervisors and if they wished to schedule another meeting. Supervisor Lofton asked for detail on the state standards and what lab sizes are based on. Supervisor Dunn said if a 140,000 square foot building will meet the needs he is not prepared to spend the extra money, but that if it will not meet the needs then he is willing to discuss the matter. Supervisor McCarthy said he has requested information on what things are not included in the state Department of Education minimums but are still required by the School Board. Supervisor Wells said considering the time constraint, the Board will not receive all the answersit has requested. He said the Board needs to trust the School Board and added the capacity of the new building will be fuller by the time it opens. Minutes * Joint Meeting with Frederick County School Board FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS July 24, 2018 3 Dr. Sovine said he and the School Board are committed to being responsive to getting the project completed. He said he will make his very best effort to respond to thequestions asked by the Board members. Mr. Tierney noted that a meeting may be preferable and more informative than simply distributing the information that has been requested. Dr. Sovine restated the requests of the members of the Board of Supervisors. He said understood the Board members are interested in learning more information about the Department of Education Standards and the differences and justification for the common standards used recently by Frederick County Public Schools. ADJOURN Upon motion of Supervisor McCarthy, seconded byVice Chairman Lofton,the meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Minutes * Joint Meeting with Frederick County School Board FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS July 24, 2018 4 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, JULY 25, 2018 7:00 P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES Board of Supervisors: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman; Gary A. Lofton, Vice Chairman; Blaine P. Dunn; J. Douglas McCarthy; Judith McCann-Slaughter; Shannon G. Trout and Robert W. Wells were present. Staff present: Kris C. Tierney, County Administrator; Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney;Karen Vacchio, Public Information Officer; John Bishop, Assistant Director of Planning –Transportation; Candice Perkins, Assistant Director of Planning; Mark Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Scott Varner, Director of Information Technology; and Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Other: Karen Beck-Herzog, Site Manager of Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historic Park; Dr. John Lamanna, Frederick County School Board Chairman;Dr. David Sovine, Frederick County Public Schools Superintendent CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to orderat 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION Supervisor McCarthy delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Chairman Lofton led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA - APPROVED Upon motion of Supervisor Slaughter, seconded by Supervisor McCarthy, the agenda was adopted on a voice vote. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA –APPROVED Mr. Tierney said the applicant for Conditional Use Permit # 07-18 had requested the item be postponed. By consensus of the Board, it was agreed the item would not be postponed. Upon motion of Supervisor Slaughter, seconded by ViceChairman Lofton,the consent agenda was adopted on a voice vote. -Minutes: Called Meeting and Closed Session of June 27, 2018- CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Code and Ordinance Committee Report (Attachment 1) - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Finance Committee Report (Attachment 2) - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Parks and Recreation Commission Reports (two) (Attachment 3) - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL 1 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 -Public Safety Committee Report (Attachment 4) - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Transportation Committee Report (Attachment 5) - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Northwestern Community Services’ Fiscal Year 2018 Performance Contract- CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Resolution Adding Business Boulevard to Secondary Road System - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on July, adopted the following: WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM-4.3, fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerks Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportati that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdiv Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have eninto an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Form AM-4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 33.2-705, Code of Virginia, and the Departments Subdivision Street rements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportati + + ++ + + + + + ++ + -Resolution Supporting Concepts from the Commission on Local Government Draft Report on Annexation Alternatives - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONCEPTS FROM THE COMMISSION ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT DRAFT REPORT ON ANNEXATION ALTERNATIVES WHEREAS, the structure of Virginia local government originated from a n needs of citizens at a more geographical proximate level; and WHEREAS, counties were established as the general form of local governm standard level of service; and WHEREAS, cities and towns originated to provide urban types of services sewer infrastructure, in addition to other mandated services; and WHEREAS, cities in Virginia are independent, which means they do not sh bases with counties, in the same manner as towns, this feature b WHEREAS, annexation has been historically used toallow cities and towns to extend the delivery of service and for future economic development, which allowed citie WHEREAS, annexations have caused disputes and other disagreements which have resulted in costly and lengthy legal battles and created a general sprit of distrust an and counties; and WHEREAS, the General Assembly, during its 2016 regular session, extendetoria for city annexation, county immunity from city annexation, and the g and directed the Commission on Local Government to study and pro by 2018 on the following: 1.Evaluate the structure of cities and counties in the Commonwealth; 2.Evaluate the impact of annexation upon localities; 3.Consider alternatives to the current moratorium; and 4.Consult with and seek input from the Virginia Municipal League Counties and localities directly affected by the moratorium; and WHEREAS, the Commission on Local Government prepared a draft report reg alternatives dated June 2018; and WHEREAS, the Commission believes that granting cities the ability to anhe future to be a very low probability and an ineffective solution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, supports making the annexation moratoria permanent; an BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board supports the concept of granting additional powers to counties through reversion and other interlocal agreements, whic granting/relaxing taxing and debt power/limits to counties affec taxing and debt powers/limits to counties that participate in ec-sharing agreements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board supports the concept of incentivizing addition cooperation and regional programs through restoration of previou Commissions and evaluation of other state programs to identify o 2 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board supports the concept of modifying consolidatiotutes to remove obstacles to include removing or altering the required vo + + ++ + + + + + ++ + CITIZEN COMMENTS - None BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS – None COUNTY OFFICIALS: REPORT OF KAREN BECK-HERZOG, SITE MANAGER OF CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK Karen Beck-Herzogmade a presentation to the Boardhighlighting the activities and attractions of Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park. REAPPOINTMENT OF GENEFISHER TO THE WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY –APPROVED Upon motion of Chairman DeHaven, seconded by Supervisor Dunn, Gene Fisher was reappointed to the Winchester Regional Airport Authority for a four-year term ending June 30, 2022. REQUESTS FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE FOR REFUNDS - APPROVED Mr. Tierney explained there were four requests for refunds that have been reviewedby the County Attorney. Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of and the corresponding supplemental appropriations for the refund requests byAcar Leasing LTD for $ 2,520.83; BMW Financial Services NA LLC for $ 2,789.61; Bowman Properties LLC for $ 3,282.61; and Capital Meats, Inc. for $ 23,136.35. Supervisor Dunn seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. Trout Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye COMMITTEE BUSINESS CODE AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Upon motion of Supervisor Trout, seconded by Vice Chairman Lofton and passing unanimously on a voice vote, a public hearing was set on a proposed amendment to Chapter 48 (Animals and Fowl), Article I (Dog Licensing; Rabies Control), Section 48-18 (License Taxes), of the County Code, to allow for lifetime licensing of dogs. Upon motion of Supervisor Trout, seconded by Supervisor Dunn and passing unanimously on 3 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 a voice vote, a public hearing was set on proposed amendments to Chapter 52 (Building Construction), Section 52-5 (Issuance of Permits) and Chapter 143 (Stormwater/Erosion and Sediment Control), Section 143-194 (Issuance, time limit, modification, maintenance, transfer and/or termination of Frederick County land-disturbing permit and VSMP authority permit), of the County Code, to require payment of delinquent real estate taxes before issuance of certain permits. Upon motion of Supervisor Trout, seconded by Supervisor Slaughter and passing unanimously on a voice vote, a public hearing was set on proposed amendments to Chapters 48 and 118, of the County Code, to adopt a “plainly audible” standard with respect to certain prohibited noise. Supervisor Dunn noted he will forward his comments on the matter to the other Board members. Upon motion of Supervisor Trout, seconded by Vice Chairman Lofton and passing unanimously on a voice vote, a public hearing was set on a proposed amendment to Chapter 155 (Taxation), Article VIII (Tax on Purchasers of Utility Service), Section 155-34 (Tax Imposed), of the County Code, to correct a typographical error with respect to the tax on electric service. FINANCE COMMITTEE Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of the following requests: The Planning Director requests an FY19 General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $59,066.50. This amount represents a carry forward of unspent budgeted FY18 funds for completion of the Capital Impact Study and Model. The Sheriff requests an FY18 General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $4,713.36.This amount represents reimbursements from the Treasury Department. No local funds required. The Sheriff requests an FY18 General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $5,155.01.This amount represents travel reimbursements from the State. No local funds required. The Sheriff requests an FY19 General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $15,191.16. This amount represents a carry forward of unspent FY18 funds from auto insurance claims. The Parks & Recreation Director requests the funds received in FY18 for the PLAY Fund in the amount of $6,488.62 be reserved, subject to future appropriations. The balance will be reduced by the financial assistance provided during FY18 in the amount of $1,270.50. No local funds required. The Parks & Recreation Director requests an FY19 General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $121,807. This amount represents a carry forward of unspent FY18 funds for Northwest Sherando Park project, Clearbrook Park parking lot, Frederick Heights trail and parking lot, and Abrams Creek trail. The Parks & Recreation Director requests an FY19 General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $531,589.70. This amount represents a carry forward of unspent FY18 funds for the Northwest Sherando Park project. The Fire & Rescue Chief requests an FY18 General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $13,915.40. This amount represents an auto claim reimbursement. No local funds required. Supervisor Trout seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. Trout Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye 4 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of the following request and further moved that the topic be forwarded to the Public Safety Committee for discussion to determine the need for a policy: The Sheriff requests an FY18 General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $13,700. This amount represents traffic control reimbursements. No local funds required. Supervisor Trout seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAye Shannon G. Trout Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of the following request: An FY18 Fire & Rescue Expense Recovery Fund (Fund 30) supplemental appropriation in the amount of $697,923.95 is requested. This amount represents $433,487.95 in FY18 revenue received over budgeted revenue, and $264,436 in fund balance funds for prior years distributions. No local funds are required. Supervisor Trout seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. Trout Aye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of the Fire & Rescue Chief’s request to move forward with hiring two (2) additional training officers with funds having been budgeted in FY19. Supervisor Trout seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. Trout Aye Gary A. Lofton No Robert W. Wells Aye J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter recognized the Finance Department under the direction of Cheryl Shiffler for their work resulting in the awards bestowed recently by the Government Finance Officers Association. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Vice Chairman Lofton moved for approval of the Resolution of Support for Frederick County and Regional SmartScale Applications. Supervisor Slaughter seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. Trout Aye Gary A. Lofton AyeRobert W. Wells Aye J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OR FREDERICK COUNTY AND REGIONAL SMARTSCALE APPLICATIONS WHEREAS, this resolution supports the following Frederick County and Regional SmartScale Applications within Frederick County for the following projects: 5 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 Frederick County Applications 1. Exit 317 NB Ramp Realignment/Redbud Road 2. Route 11 North Corridor Improvements 3. Route 522 at Costello Drive Turn Lane and Intersection Operations Improvements 4. Route 11/Shawnee Drive/Opequon Church Lane Intersection Impro Winchester Frederick County MPO Applications 5. I-81 Exit 317 Accel/Decel Lane Extensions 6. I-81 Exit 307 Roundabouts 7. I-81 Exit 313 Bridge Capacity Improvement 8. I-81 Winchester Hard Running ShouldersWinchester Frederick County MPO Applications Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission Applications 9. Route 11 South Corridor Enhancements WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation (hereafter referred to as the DEPARTMENT) has adopted procedures for evaluating and scoring projects consistent with SmartScale requirements; and WHEREAS, the DEPARTMENT has requested applications to be submitted by localities to be considered for inclusion in the DEPARTMENTS Six-Year Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2020 through 2025; and WHEREAS, projects will be evaluated for inclusion in the Six-Year Improvement Program through screening and scoring process to be undertaken by the DEPARTMENT; and WHEREAS, each of the listed projects play important roles in the Countys-range transportation plan, and near-term traffic safety concerns; and WHEREAS, the County of Frederick is an eligible entity to apply for transportation funding under House Bill 2; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Frederick County Board of Supervisors is supportive of each of these applications for inclusion into the Six-Year Improvement Program fiscal years 2020 through 2025. + + + + + + + + + + + + Vice Chairman Lofton moved for approval of the updated language drafts of the Transportation Partnership Opportunity Fund Agreement and Backstop Agreement regarding Intersection Improvements AtUS Route 50/17 and Independence Drive (Route 1092) Related to Navy Federal Credit Union Facility Expansion. SupervisorSlaughter seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye Agreement Regarding Transportation Partnership Opportunity Fund Grant To Frederick County for Intersection Improvements At US Route 50/17 and Independence Drive (Route 1092) Related to Navy Federal Credit Union Facility Expansion THIS AGREEMENT made and dated this25th day of July, 2018, is made by and between the COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA (the "County"), a political subdivision of Virginia, and NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION ("NFCU"), a federally chartered credit union. RECITALS: WHEREAS, NFCU has previously announced its intention to expand, equip, im support and service operations center located in Frederick County (the "Facility"), making a new capital investment of $100,000,000 in Frederick County and creating and County, all as of December 31, 2022 (the "Expansion"); and WHEREAS, NFCU anticipates receiving various state-level and local-level incentives for the Expansion, including, from the Commonwealth of Virginia, from the Commonwea Fund, from the Virginia Jobs Investment Program, and from a Virgve Grant, and, from the County, through the County's Economic Devel Development Incentive Grant; and WHEREAS, the Expansion will result in increased traffic to and from the F intersection of US Route 50/17 and Independence Drive (Route 1092) (the "Inte WHEREAS, to mitigate such impacts, various improvements, generally iden A (Intersection Improvements Exhibit, August 22, 2017, prepared ay Engineering), to the Intersection (the "Road Improvements") are appropriate; and WHEREAS, the County has applied for a Transportation Partnership Opportun (the "TPOF Grant"), pursuant to the provisions of Section 33.2-1529.1 of the Code of Virginia, a copy of the application for the TPOF Grant being attached as Exhibit B, address the transportation aspects of economic development oppor being to obtain funding for all or a portion of the construction and construc 6 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 Improvements (the construction and construction management of th Improvements Project"); and WHEREAS, as the TPOF Grant would be to the County, with the Virginia De ("VDOT") administering the Road Improvements Project and NFCU pr completion of the Road Improvements Project, to the extent that Project exceed the amount of the TPOF Grant; and WHEREAS, the guidelines and criteria for TPOF require that a locality r grant funds enter into a TPOF agreement with VDOT governing the such agreement provide that, among other things, in the event an economic developme a TPOF grant is awarded does not meet the job creation/retention performance date and maintain those levels throughout a thirty-six month period following such date, the government entity receiving funds from TPOF must repay a specifi WHEREAS, the parties desire to provide a means by which NFCU is to reim and all costs of the Road Improvements Project that may be incur all costs exceed the amount of the TPOF Grant, and (ii) for any in the event NFCU fails to meet specified job creation/retentionestment levels by a specified performance date and maintain those levels throughout a thirty-six month period following such date. NOW, THEREFORE, WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars, ($10. cash in hand paid by each of the parties hereto unto the other, acknowledged, the parties do agree as follows: THIS AGREEMENT supersedes the Agreement made and dated January 11, 2018, by an County and NFCU, as well as, as set forth in section 6a, any oth written, of the parties regarding the subject matter of the Agre 1.RECITALS: The Recitals are made a material part hereof and incore as if set out in full. 2: THE PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT: NFCU and the County have entered into Commonwealth's Development Opportunity Fund Performance Agreemen Agreement"), for NFCU to receive various state-level and local-level incentives for the Expansion, including, from the Commonwealth of Virginia, from the Commonweay Fund, from the Virginia Jobs Investment Program, and from a Virgi Grant, and, from the County, through the County's Economic Devel Development Incentive Grant. 3.THE TPOF GRANT: The County has received approval of its applicn the amount of $1,290,000.00, and the County may, in its reasonablTPOF agreement (the "TPOF Agreement") with VDOT. In the event, howevero the TPOF Agreement, or to the extent that the County does not rec shall have no further obligations to each other under this Agreement and this Agreement shall be otherwise null and void. 4.NFCU'S PAYMENT OBLIGATIONS: a.As soon as practicable after being notified by VDOT of receipt bof the estimate for the Road Improvements Project, the County shall notify NFCU o should it exceed the available awarded funding. Within five (5) may notify the County that it does not wish to proceed with the Road Improvements Project, in which case the County shall notify VDOT of the same and request t for the Road Improvements Project. If NFCU does not so notify thd Improvements Project will proceed, subject to the other provisions of this Agreement. b.To the extent that any and all costs of the Road Improvements of the TPOF Grant, NFCU shall pay to the County such excess costng an invoice from the County for the same, with the County thereafty basis as to previously unpaid excess costs and as to new incurred the provisions of subsection c of this section. c.In the event NFCU fails to meet the following job creation/retention and capital invet levels and, to the extent that VDOT, pursuant to the terms of the County the repayment of any or all of the TPOF Grant, NFCU shall notice, on a pro rata basis based on the extent to which NFCU faob creation/retention and capital investment levels, to the County t VDOT requires from the County: i.New capital investment of $100,000,000 in Frederick County by not later than December 31, 2022; and ii.Creating and maintaining 1,400 new jobs in Frederick County, as 31, 2022; and iii.Maintaining the levels in (i) and (ii) through and including Dece d.In the event NFCU fails to satisfy any outstanding obligations to this Agreement, NFCU agrees that the County may, and authorizes h sums from any amounts that may be due to NFCU from the County, in Performance Agreement, and including whether such amounts are pa Commonwealth's Development Opportunity Fund, the Virginia Jobs I Virginia Economic Development Incentive Grant, or whether such aom the County, through the County's Economic Development Authority, as a Local E Incentive Grant. Furthermore, NFCU indemnifies and holds harmles and employees from and against any and all claims against them that may arise from or relate to the withholding of funds as provided for in this section 4d. 7 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 + + ++ + + + + + ++ + TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY FUND AWARD AGREEMENT This Award Agreement (this "Agreement") is made and entered into as of July 25, 2018, by and among the Virginia Department of Transportation ("VDOT" or the "Department Virginia (the "Commonwealth"), and the County of Frederick, Virg political subdivision of the Commonwealth. Explanatory Statement A.The Transportation Partnership Opportunity Fund ("TPOF" or the "Fon §33.2-1529.1 of the Code of Virginia (the "Code") to provide funds tocts of economic development opportunities. B.The Governor is authorized to award assistance from the Fund in v subdivision of the Commonwealth. C.The Recipient is a duly created and validly existing political suvision of the Commonwealth and is eligible to receive financial assistance from the Fund. D.The Recipient submitted an application requesting one million, tw ($1,290,000.00) in the form of a grant from the Fund to assist i Drive Intersection Improvements project as defined in Exhibit A "Project"). The Project facilitates an economic development oppoby meeting the Transportation Evaluation Criteria established for the Fund, and d by Frederick County to perform the work prescribed. The projected con Exhibit B (the "Project Budget and Sources of Funds") to this Agreement. E.The TPOF Advisory Panel (the "Panel") has evaluated the applicati requirements of the Code and the Transportation Evaluation Crite and Criteria, dated January 2016. The Panel recommended on Decem Transportation and the Secretary of Commerce and Trade, an awardo hundred and ninety thousand dollars ($1,290,000.00) grant, subject to certain condi. F.On January 11, 2018 the Governor approved the award of the one miy thousand dollars ($1,290,000.00) (the "Grant") to the Recipient. Governor is provided as Exhibit C. G.Sufficient monies exist in the Fund to consider the recipient's request for NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged by the partiesrties agree as follows: I.Purpose of Agreement. The purpose of this Agreement is to provided for making the Grant, the disbursement and application or use of matters related thereto. 2.Disbursement Authorization and Application and Use of TPOF Gra (a)Disbursement. The County will allow VDOT to administer the funds grant funding after expenditures are incurred. Prior to applying County will be provided project expenditure details to review th expenditures. (b)Application and Use of Grant Proceeds. The Grant proceeds shall b funding the cost and expenses of the activities and tasks undert and procurement of the Project as generally summarized in the Pr in the Recipient's TPOF application (the "Work" or "Work Product"). Project expenditures will be composed of but not limited to right-of-way acquisition, profess, construction contractor payments and a contingency. The Grant wild and ninety thousand dollars ($1,290,000.00) and along with the ot adequate to fully fund the tasks identified in the Project Budge the Grant shall be paid for by the Recipient using its own monie. (c)As soon as practical after receipt of the estimate for the projece amount of the estimate should it exceed the available awarded fun proceed with award of the contract for the project until the Cou estimate. If the County does not respond within 10 working days, is approved and proceed to enter into the contract as received. (d)Performance Date. Means December 31, 2022. If the Recipient, in cooperation w full faith and reasonable efforts have been made and are being m Targets, as defined in section 2 (e), VDOT may extend the Performance Date by six (6) months. If the Performance Date is extended, this new Performance Date will fore Performance Date. The Performance Date shall only be extended twice during the lif (e)Targets. The Recipient agrees that the capital investment will be $100,000,000 and the number of jobs created, as defined by the Commonwealth Opportunity Fund agreeme will be achieved on or prior to the Performance Date and shall b months after the Performance Date. The average annual wage of new jobs will be $60,314. The capital investment is limited to the capital investment spec reporting period is from the date of this Agreement to thirty-six (36) months after the Performance Date. 3.Project Schedule. Every good faith effort shall be made by the Recipient to cause k no later December 31, 2019. 8 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 4. Reports and Records. (a) Maintenance Requirements. Full and detailed accounts and records maintained, as appropriate, by the Department for the Project an exercised as may be necessary for proper financial management, ung accounting and control systems in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and sta to fully support the use of the Grant proceeds to pay any cost a the performance of the Work, access shall be afforded by the parties to and agents to the records, books, correspondence, receipts, subc memoranda and other data, including but not limited to electronic schedules and other electronic data (all collectively referred to as the "Books and Records") relating to shall be maintained at the Edinburg Residency located at 14031 O. (b) Periodic Reports. On April 1 and October 1 of each year unti Recipient shall provide to VDOT's Chief Financial Officer a summ monies and the status of the Project. The Department will provide a project status update to the Recipient to support the report. This report should also provide an update on Project's investment and employment Targets set forth in sectionl be responsible for obtaining. In addition, the Recipient shall promptly notify affect the Recipient's ability to meet its financial obligations 5. Extension in the Performance Date. If the Recipient has not achieved at least 90% of its new jobs and capital investment Targets by the Performance Date set forth granted, as long as the Recipient can provide sufficient evidenc underway in achieving its Targets. Generally, an extension will which it is reasonable to believe that the Recipient is likely t performance Targets by the extension date. 6. Failure of Compliance. If Targets are not met, the Recipient wil will be held responsible for any repayments as calculated by VDO Thirty (30) days to respond to a failure and repayment notice, after which time the Recipient will be required and responsible for returning the grant monies to the C the Notice of Failure. 7. Repayment Obligation. Repayment obligations will be assessed based on an equal weighting of the Targets. In the event that the Project covers Jobs and Investmen repayment obligation will be based on the combined level of fail only have a single Target, this Target will be the only calculation for repayment ob + + + + + + + + + + + + Vice Chairman Lofton moved for approval of the attached Resolution for the Board of SupervisorsCommenting on the Interstate 81 Corridor Study.SupervisorDunn seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye A RESOLUTION FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA TO COMMENT ON THE INTERSTATE 81 CORRIDOR STUDY WHEREAS, under Senate Bill 971 VDOT is conducting a corridor study for -81; and, WHEREAS, VDOT and the Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment are seeking comments from individuals and localities on various items under study; and, WHEREAS, The Frederick County Board of Supervisors has congestion and s- 81 Interchanges but particularly Exits 307, 313, 315, 317, and 323 primarily during peak hours of operation; and WHEREAS, The Frederick County Board of Supervisors has congestion and saf through lanes of I-81, particularly the area between exit 310 and 317 through the mf the operational day which results in numerous accidents and delays; WHEREAS, The Frederick County Board of Supervisors would continue to enco the future Route 37 Eastern loop as a potential alternative to I-81 widening or to reduce the extent of I-81 widening; and WHEREAS, The Frederick County Board of Supervisors is supportive of ana scenarios and particularly federal and state funding options so an unequitable burden on Frederick County Taxpayers; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick hereby submits this resolution for the first round of public com-81 corridor study and looks forward to further opportunities for continued involvement. + + + + + + + + + + + + 9 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 PUBLIC HEARINGS(Non-Planning Items) - TH 1. OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT REQUEST OF CONCERN HOTLINE –19 ANNUAL FRIDAY FISH FRY -APPROVED Pursuant to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 86, Festivals; Section 86-3, Permit Required; Application; Issuance or Denial; Fee, for an Outdoor Festival Permit. Festival to be Held on Friday, September 7, 2018, from 4:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M.; on the Grounds of Grove’s Winchester Harley-Davidson, 140 Independence Drive, Winchester, Virginia. Property Owned by Jobalie, LLC. Mr. Tierney provided background information on the event. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. There were no speakers. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. Upon motion of Supervisor Trout seconded by Supervisor Slaughter, the Outdoor Festival permit th for the Concern Hotline 19Annual Fish Fry was approved on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye 2.AMENDMENT to the 2019 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET –POSTPONED TO THE AUGUST 8, 2018 MEETING Pursuant to Section 15.2-2507 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, the Board of Supervisors will Hold a Public Hearing to Amend the Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Budget to Reflect: School Construction Fund Supplemental Appropriationin the Amount of $45,500,000 for the Acquisition of Land, Design and Constructionof a Replacement Robert E. Aylor Middle School. Request for Appropriation of funds for replacement Aylor Middle School Building Supervisor Trout stated she wants to disclose for the record, relative to this item and pursuant to the State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, thatshe is employed by Frederick County Public Schools as a teacher and therefore is a member of agroup who is or may be affected by the item, and that she is able to participate in the transaction fairly, objectively, and in the public interest. Mr. Tierney said the request is for a supplemental appropriation to the annual budget for the acquisition of land, design and construction of a replacement Aylor Middle school. He said this is a required step before the School Board can go to the bond market to borrow for the project. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing.The speakers were as follows: Eva Stein, Opequon District, said she is a future Aylor student. She asked the Board to approve the building of a new Aylor Middle school that is the same size as other County middle schools. She asked that the vote not be delayed. Jackson Stein, Opequon District, asked the Board to approve the funding for a new Aylor School. He asked the Board not to delay the vote on the issue,so the project will not be delayed. He asked that the replacement be the same size as other County middle schools. Jennifer Myers, Stonewall District, said she is disappointed with the direction the Board is taking and compared it to a game of approving housing and then withholding infrastructure. She named many new housing developments in the Aylor school district andsaid forcing the Aylor School to have a smaller building is irresponsible. She suggested a tax increase would allow the 10 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 building to be completed. Katie Bocker, employee of Frederick County Public Schools, asked that the Board not delay the vote on the funding for Aylor Middle School. She said the current Aylor building does nothave the needed space for the students and needs to be replaced. Adam Stein, Opequon District, asked the Board to fully fund the Aylor replacement Building without delay. He said growth in the community means the school is needed and said the delay will cost tax payers in the long run on. Kelly Harvey, Back Creek District, said she is in favor of a new Aylor buildingwith square footage comparable to the other middle schools and the flexibility to accommodate growth in the future. Amber Wallin, Opequon District, noted the comparisons to Brambleton Middle School in Loudoun County. She asked why the two most recently built County middle schools were planned for 160,000 but now the Board says this size is excessive. She said the fact that the County built these two schools means they were a need rather than a want. Marcella Simmons, Assistant Principal at Aylor Middle School, said she is dismayed by the continued denial of funding for the most important needs. She said children are not dollars and cents and minimum square footage. She said functional square footage is not minimum square footage andsaid that having the lowest tax rate in the commonwealth is not being fiscally responsible. Shawn Graber, Back Creek District, suggested that many of the speakers were responding to a letter from the superintendent. He noted the cost of fully funding the Schools’ five-year CIP projects and cited the County’s personal property tax rates as being higher those in neighboring counties. Robin Young, Back Creek District, said she supports the Board funding the larger requested size, and asked that the plans allow for expansion if the full size is not built at this time. Brandi Hammond, Shawnee District, referencedthe discussion about different funding amounts and said that at least $52 million will be required to complete the project. She said each month of delay coststhe County between $125,000 to $150,000 with the delay costing about a half million already. She encouraged the Board members to listen to their constituents and build a building for the future. Jill Couturiaux, teacher at Aylor Middle School, said the Aylor teachers and students need space and compared the building to Byrd Middle School where the building allows flexibility. She said the students are owed the best possible learning environment. Mike Faison, GainesboroDistrict, stressedthe importance of collaborative learning spaces in schools. He said group working environments prepare students for the workplace, citing his experience as a substitute teacher. He encouragedthe Board to move forward with funding for the Aylor replacement. Mara Guntang, Back Creek District, urged the Board to fund the Aylor Middle School replacement building. She said she is disappointed that the current funding proposal will build 20,000 square feet less than the Byrd Middle School and citedapproximately 3,500 new homes projected for the area. She said the proposal would build the smallest middle school in the County and asked the Board not to make themistake of building school that is too small for future growth. 11 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 Brian Nury, Opequon District, said he is concerned about the Aylor replacement project. He said there is a huge amount of growth in the County. He asked why the School Board was being prevented from planning for the future and noted the cost of delay in making a decision. Unnamed parent, Opequon District, said his children will benefit if the Board makes a decision. He asked the Board to look forward and build the larger proposed school building. LaonnaRauser, Back Creek District, said she is a School Counselor at Aylor Middle School. She said the community is not asking for what it wants, but for what it needs. She said the 160,000 square foot building is not an unreasonable request and asked that the Aylor community be shown the same consideration as the other County schools. Sophia Guntang, Back Creek District, said a 140,000 square foot building, smaller than all other County middle schools,is not what the community needs with the current student population. She asked Supervisor Lofton to vote in support of funding a 160,000 square foot building. Dr. David Sovine, Superintendent of Schools and Shawnee District resident, thanked the Board for its level of engagement and support for the Aylor replacement project. He noted the ongoing process and the costs of delaying the decision on the appropriation. He noted the high acceptance rate for Frederick Countystudents applying to four-year public colleges or universities in Virginia. Alan Morrison, Gainesboro District, said the Aylor replacement process has been difficult in part because the target is moving. He said there must be balance between emotion and reason and noted a resistance to benchmarking with other districts. He said the County needs to get the most impact from each dollar, but that funds are not unlimited. Dana Newcomb, Gainesboro District, said the proposal and procurement plan for Aylor’s replacement is not structured correctly and could be subject to fraud,waste and abuse. He said the Board should go back to the School Board and ensure that the procurement will be competitively bid in order to ensure the County gets the most for its money. Carrieanne Hite, Shawnee District, noted the square footage of recently built schools and noted design differences in education methodology. She said Byrd Middle School was not controversial, and the School Board should not be held to a design model that does not equate to its education model. She asked that the Board give the Aylor students what the Byrd students are getting. Joy Kirk, Back Creek District, said she had been a teacher at Aylor. She said all students deserve the best learning environment and that a 160,000 square foot building allows a better learning situation. Dr. John Lamanna, Frederick County School Board, said he was speaking in defense of his coworkers. He said there can be disagreementbetween the Boards, but he has difficulty when the integrity of the School Board is challenged. He said the School Board genuinely and through much research and debate has decided that the 160,000 square foot building is the best option. George Hughes, Gainesboro District, asked why schools are so expensive and noted his concern about obsolete school buildings and unnecessary expenses. Jennifer Myers, Stonewall District, said children are learning differently than in the past. She said schools are always catching up and donothave the money to fix current buildings. She 12 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 said the County needs to look to the future and not keep using band-aids. Kevin Barrington, Back Creek District, said he coaches football at Aylor. He said the future of the kids is dependent on a better Aylor building. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. Supervisor Wells said he was in favor of the 160,000 square foot building option for replacing Aylor. He said he did not wish to postpone the vote. He said that while the Board further discusses the 160,000 square foot option he wishes to move forward with the requested appropriation which could be added to at a later time. He moved for approval of the appropriation for $45.5 million while the Board considers an additional amount if needed. Supervisor Trout seconded the motion. Supervisor McCarthy said it may be unwise to vote before the additional requested information is received from the School Board. Vice Chairman Lofton said he supports the replacement but prefers to take time to digest the information that is forthcoming from the School Board. Supervisor Trout said the $45.5 million is a good start that can be added to later. She said she hopes the Board will fully support the original request for $52 million. Supervisor Slaughter said that since the Board has requestedadditional information from the School Board, it is appropriate to take the information into consideration when making a decision.She added that regarding the bond market time frame, the Board has the authority to appropriate the amount in question even if the deadline is missed, and therefore the market timing is not an issue. Supervisor Dunn said that it appears the bond market deadline can be met if a decision is made within two weeks and therefore he will vote no at this time to allow time to receive the additional information from the School Board. Supervisor Slaughter said the consensus of the Board is that a new building is needed to replace Aylor. Supervisor Trout said that previous Boards have approved school construction projects in piecemeal fashion so there is precedent for appropriating the $45.5 million now and adding to it later. She urged the members to make an appropriation now saying that the constituents have spoken many times about the need to start the replacement building. She added that not making the requested appropriation when the vast majority of constituents are in favor of the action is irresponsible. Chairman DeHaven said that appropriating the amount of money that the Board has already said it would do at the current meeting allows the School Board time to work on their application to the bond market. He said he prefers not to leave the matter until the last minute forcing the School Board to rush their application, and that he will call another meeting to allow a decision to be made by August 8 if the motion should fail. Supervisor Wells said much time was spent arriving at the figure that the Board said it would agree to appropriate and he has a hard time understanding how his fellow Board members still have unanswered questions. He said he is disappointed that his motion will not move forward. Supervisor Dunn said he hopes his question about the difference between a 140,000 and 13 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 160,000 square foot building will be answered by the School Board. He added that the earlier citizen comment about the difference in education styles between Loudoun and Frederick Counties was constructive. Supervisor McCarthy moved to amend the motion to delay action until the next meeting. Supervisor Dunn seconded the motion to amend Supervisor Wells’ motion and the amendment was upheld as follows: Blaine P. Dunn Aye Shannon G. TroutNo Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. WellsNo J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. No JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye The amended motion to delay the vote on the $45.5 million appropriation until the next Board meeting carried as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. Trout No Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells Aye J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS Public Hearings 1.REZONING #05-17 for O-N MINERALS (CHEMSTONE) d/b/a Carmeuse Lime & Stone, CONTINUED from March 14, April 25, May 23, and June 13, 2018 - DENIED Submitted by Lawson and Silek, PLC., to Amend the Proffers for this Property; Rezoning 394.2 Acres from the EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District with Proffer to the EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District with Revised Proffers. The Properties are Situated Generally West of the Town of Middletown. Specifically, the Middle MarshProperty is Located East of Belle View Lane (Route 758), and West and Adjacent toHitesRoad (Route 625) and is Further Traversed by Chapel Road (Route 627). TheNorthern Reserve is Bounded to the South by Cedar Creek and is West and Adjacentto Meadow Mills Road (Route 624). The Properties are Identified with Property Identification Numbers 83-A-109 and 90-A-23 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Assistant Planning Director Candice Perkins provided a review of the updated proposed proffer revisions. She clarified the berm provision in response to Supervisor McCarthy’s question. In response to Supervisor Dunn’s question about the proffered smaller footprint of the operation, Ms. Perkins said the applicant could reduce the footprint of the operation administratively without aproffer amendment. George McKotch, Area Operations Manager for the applicant Carmeuse Lime & Stone, provided background information on the updated proposed proffers. He said that berms are farther from residents and that restricting the hours of operation north of Chapel Road is in response to neighbors’ wishes. He told the Board that a no vote means reversion to the 2008 proffers and construction will begin as soon as possible. In response to Supervisor McCarthy’s question about Saturday and Sunday operations, Mr. McKotch said the intent is not to operate on Saturday and Sunday, but they do not wish to limit themselves from doing so if necessary. 14 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. The speakers were as follows: Kevin, Barrington, Back Creek District, said there is wordplay in the proffer amendment documents. He said he is not happy with any of the proffers and the residents are faced with loss of property value and quality of life. Bill Hunter, Back Creek District, said he has asked for help and agreed with the previous speaker about the word games in the proffer language. He said the water issue was slipped into the proffer under the terms of a program that does not exist. Robin Young, Back Creek District, compared the two proffer versions.She said the majority of residents prefer eight moreyears of the existing viewbefore it is disturbed. She said water is critical and she does not want water sold by profiteers. She said 10 years ago the Board forced a bad deal onto the Back Creek residents, and the Board now needs to choose the best of two bad deals. Richard Dye, adjacent property owner, spoke about the berm along Middle Marsh. He questioned why Carmeuse would no longer agree that allowing the trees to grow in 10 years is a good idea. George Hughes, Gainesboro, asked about he extractive life of the mine and asked what is done with the mine when it is no longer in use. Keon Banks, Back Creek District, said the issue is integrity. He said there is a tradeoff in having the hours of operation and having weekends and holidays affected, and he wished that had been resolved prior to tonight to minimize the effect on residents. He said the wording in the document should match what the applicant is saying. Ed Straun, Back Creek District, said he participated in most of the discussions throughthe process. He said the issue comesdown to the old proffer versusthe new one. He said he can only support the revised proffer since the old one was a disaster. Robin Young, Back Creek District, referred to her copy of the proffers and clarified the proffer language regarding spoil heaps in relation to berm heights. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. George McKotch, Area Operations Manager of applicant Carmeuse Lime & Stone, clarified that the word “normal” in reference tooperating hours has been removed from the amendment. Supervisor McCarthy asked for clarification on major holidays being used for operations. Mr. McKotch said “no major holidays” means no major holidays. Vice Chairman Lofton asked whether there is a legal workaround to allow the applicant to work on weekends and holidays. County Attorney Williams said the applicant appears to be saying two different things. Mr. McKotch offered to go on record saying for the property north of Chapel Road the hours of operation will be onlyMonday –Friday from 6pm to 10 pm. He said his intention is not to mine on weekends. Vice Chairman Lofton moved for approval of the rezoning with the amendment of inserting the word “only” into the language about the hours of operation. Supervisor McCarthy seconded the motion. He said he was glad the residents had been involved and sees compromise in the newproffer which he said is the making the best of a bad deal. He added that he finds it 15 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 unconscionable that a company would knowingly make a statement about hours of operation that they intended to violate. Supervisor Dunn reviewed his thought process on the matter beginning with the baseline 2008 proffer. He said his opinion is that Carmeuse wanted a smaller footprint since they are in business to make money. He noted that about eight weeks ago he asked Planning Department staff whether Carmeuse could obtain the smaller footprint administratively without a proffer and he was told yes. He said Carmeuse could have approached the neighbors to work out the time frame and administratively arranged to change to a smaller footprint. He said he has wrestled with the trade off in the time frame and the hours of operation. Vice Chairman Lofton noted the comments on loss of home values saying the quarry has owned the land since 1954 and was likely here before most of the homes. He said 11 items were cited by the residents and all have been addressed. He said there are more protections in the new proffers. The motion for approval failed on the following roll call vote: Blaine P. Dunn No Shannon G. TroutAye Gary A. Lofton Aye Robert W. Wells No J.Douglas McCarthyAye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. No JudithMcCann-SlaughterNo At 9:50 pm the Board recessed for a short break. At 9:55 pm the Board reconvened. 2.CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #07-18 For WINCHESTER 101 LLC - DENIED For a Revision to the Conditions of Conditional Use Permit #13-96 Submitted to Change the Hours of Operation. The Property is Located at 4780 Northwestern Pike, Winchester, Virginia and is Identified with Property Identification Number 40-A-66D in the Gainesboro Magisterial District in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. Note: On July 19, the Applicant requested a deferral of the public hearing. Zoning & Subdivision Administrator Mark Cheran reviewed the Conditional Use Permit request. He said the country store had originally received a conditional use permit in 1996, and the current hours of operation are 5 a.m. to midnight. He said the applicant is now requesting 24- hour operations. Mr. Cheran said the Planning Commission recommend denial of the new conditional use permit at their June 6 meeting. He further explained that the applicant requested deferral of the item at the current meeting in order to address concerns of violations that were raised at the June 6 Planning Commission meeting. He added that a resident’s complaint letter was recently received that raised other issues at the location. Supervisor McCarthy asked for clarification onwhen the application for a new permit was received and Mr. Cheran said that it was received after his letter notifying the applicant of a potential violation. Chairman DeHaven inquired if there had been any other violations at the site. Mr. Cheran said there had not been any others. Supervisor McCarthy asked if there had been other complaints at the site. Mr. Cheran said there have been other complaints on issues other than the 24-hour operations. He said the usual process involves allowing the applicant to address the complaint. 16 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 Supervisor McCarthyand Mr. Cheran discussed the history of revoking conditional use permits in the County, and the frequency of complaints at the applicant’s business site. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. The speakers were as follows: Robin Menefee, Gainesboro District, said she is an adjacent property ownerand requests denial of the new conditional use permit. She further said that in the denial,the term “closed” needs to be defined becausethe current business is stretching the meaning of the word which resultsin the violationof the current conditional use permit. She said the current business is in effect a truckstop rather than a country store and serves many hundredsof vehiclesper day. She said the original owner operated the store with no issues butfollowingthe conditionaluse permit being grantedin 1996 therehas beenan increase in the business. Ms. Menefee said the site plan for the property is unknown and reconfiguration happens with no oversight.She said the residents have been dealing with the matter for 20 years as the business has grown and she requested review of the current permit for compliance. Mary Kay Menefee, Gainesboro District, said she was concerned about the store going to a 24-hour operation. She noted the noise problem with trucks slowing down especially during the night hours even with her windows closed and air conditioning running. Brenda Newcome, Back Creek District, said she lives directly across from the store and hasbeen there for 40 years. She said the noise and lights from the store are dramaticand intrudes into their home and she is also concerned about light pollution, loud trucks and bright lights. She asked the Board to consider having this situation remedied. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. Supervisor McCarthy moved for denial of the application with the matter being referred to Zoning Administrator Cheran for a Planning Commission hearing to consider revocation of the original conditional use permit. Supervisor Slaughter secondedthe motion. Supervisor Trout asked for clarification of the motion. Mr. Cheran explained that in these situations, a letter is sent to the permit holder explaining the violations and offering a date for the hearing.Supervisor McCarthy said the conditional use permit is a privilege and not a right, and a hearing would allow the Board to determine whether the applicanthas violated the CUP to the extent that revocation is appropriate. Supervisor Slaughter asked about light pollution and County standards saying the issue seems to be very large. Mr. Cheran said there are standards in the ordinance that are adhered to. He said that the applicant’s current CUP was approved before lightingstandards were added. She asked whether existing CUPs were reviewed for compliance to new standards. She said that the County may wish to establish a policy for such review. Mr. Tierney said that in the past, CUPs were reviewed annually, but that because of workload and the amount of time involved the practice was discontinued. He said that review of CUPs is complaint driven. The motion for denial of the Conditional Use Permit #07-18 amending Permit #13-96and recommending a hearing to consider revocation of the Permit #13-96was carried on the following roll call vote: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye JudithMcCann-SlaughterAye 17 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 Other Planning Items 1.REQUEST FOR JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The Chairman asked that the Board members notify the Deputy Clerk of their availability to meet on the proposed dates. BOARD LIAISON REPORTS Supervisor Wells read an invitation to attend the Frederick County Fair that he received from a constituent. CITIZEN COMMENTS Alan Morrison, Gainesboro District, said that rampant residential growth for many years is coming back to haunt the County. He said the word integrity has been bandied around during the meeting and noted the meaning of words and their truths is changing. He said the result is people are unable to communicateefficiently. George Hughes, Gainesboro District, said he is disturbed about many things going on at the meeting. He said he is disturbed by the Board not paying attention to all the little things and are not paying attention to the money. He said schools can be renovated for less than building new schools. He said people cannot move next to a business and expect no changes andasked the Board to consider what existing businesses are worth to the County. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS - None ADJOURN On motion of Vice Chairman Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Trout, the meetingwas adjourned at 10:38 p.m. 18 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes *July 25,2018 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Tuesday, July 31, 2018 8:00 a.m. 107 NORTH KENT STREET, SUITE 200, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES: Committee Members Present: J. Douglas McCarthy, Chairman; Gary A. Lofton; Robert W. Wells; Whitney Whit L. Wagner; and Harvey E. Ed Strawsnyder, Jr Committee Members Absent: Gene E. Fisher Staff present: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works; Mike Stewart, Senior Project Manager; Ron Kimble, Landfill Manager; Gloria Puffinburger, Solid Waste Manager; Kathy Whetzel, Animal Shelter Manager; Holly Grim, Assistant Shelter Manager; Kevin Alderman, Shawneeland District Manager; Mark Fleet, Building Official/Code Administrator; Erin Swisshelm, Assistant County Attorney; C. William Orndoff, Treasurer; Wayne Corbett, Deputy Treasurer; Kris Tierney, County Administrator; and Jay Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: 1-None ITEMS FOR INFORMATION ONLY 1-Update on the new Stephenson Convenience Site The new convenience site opened for public use on Monday, July 31, 2018. The contractor, Kee Construction, is completing the final grading, seeding and stabilization of the site, construction of the stormwater facility, placement of the fence and landscaping. All the site work should be completed by the end of August. We should have f-up finished at the old Clearbrook site by Friday, August 10, 2018. 2-Update on the Frederick County Recycling Program and Contract Gloria Puffinburger, Solid Waste Manager, updated the committee on and the hauling contract. The recycling program is still very successful, and we work very hard to ensure we have good, viable markets. We discussed the current China ban on foreign recyclables and how the United States is adjusting many of the m Our local recycler has many domestic markets, so we are in good shape for now. We discussed that the reimbursement for the recycled paper markets have went away. time, Frederick County received reimbursements on recycled papercollections, but the market return has diminished. However, we still have a very robust recycling program and the waste diversion is very important in managing our tonnage at the landf We will work on educating the citizens and businesses to work harder on minimizing contamination of the collection units. This will help our recycled items continue to find good ycling markets. We are entering our fourth year of our waste collection contract with Allied Waste. The costs have gone up due to allowed Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases and a small tipping fee increase at the Landfill. 3-Update on the ongoing regional rainfall event affecting Frederick County Over the past three (3) months, our region has experienced a higher than normal rainfall event. Most areas have received 30-40 inches of rain since April 1, 2018. We have had impacts to many of the citizens in the form of drainage complaints related to flooded basements, water ponding in yards, major washouts of roads, driveways, etc. Staff have responded to over a hundred calls and have done their best to assist when we can. We have had a lot of road damage at Shawneeland and will be fixing culverts and roads over the next few months. Due to the severity of the damage, a contr Company, Inc., has come in to assist with some of the major repairs while the staff works on road, ditch and culvert repairs. We estimate that several hundred thousand dollars will be spent to repair the roads. As the costs come in for the repairs, funds from the Shawneeland transferred to off-set these extra costs. We also informed the committee that we w evaluate the current sanitary district fee structure during the budget process to ensure adequate funding is available in the future. The current annual0 for improved lots and $190 for unimproved lots. We have also had many problems at the Regional Landfill due to theavy rains. We have experienced some significant leachate by-passes over the last couple of months which have resulted in violations of our DEQ solid waste permit. Staff have been very transparent upfront with DEQ officials and continue to work on solutions and projects that can help us handle the large rain events in the fu We are currently designing a large leachate holding pond with a capacity of over 3,000,000 ga. We anticipate the costs to build this pond to be over two million dollars. Funding for these projects is available in the Landfills Reserve Fund balance. We also need to upgrade the leachate force mains and do several other smaller projects to help the Landfill better cope with future large rain events and regulations. We will continue to coordinate the design with the Landfill consultant, SCS Engineers and DEQ. There has also been an on-going issue with sludge that the Landfill is receiving from the Opequon Wastewater Reclamation Facility (OWRF). They changed their process almost (2)years ago and their new process has sludge coming into the Laill with high moisture and low solids. The sludge has properties similar to jello. In working with the Frederick Winchester Service Authority (FWSA) and OWRF staff, they have obtained another contract which allows them to haul the sludge to a Landfill in Pennsylvania. Ultimately, they are seeking permission from Virginia DEQ to obtain a land application permit to spread biosolids. They started shipping the biosolids to Pennsylvania this week. The removal of most of the sludge from OWRF will really improve our Landfill operations and help us in the future as we develop the landfill and strive to comply with DEQ regulations. 4-Discuss a request from Wilde Acres/Mountain Falls Park to become a Sanit Recently, Frederick County received a request from the Wilde Acres/Mountai community to become a sanitary district. There have been some recent changes to Virginia law that transfers the responsibility regarding the creation of sanitary district from the state to the Board of Supervisors in localities. The Board of Supervisors at their June 13, 2018 meeting sent a req Committee to study and research creating a sanitary district. After some discussion occurred during the Public Works Committee Meeting, the committee recommended that an ad hoc subcommittee be formed to work with staff to determine the feasibility of forming a sanitary district at Wilde Acres/Mountain Falls Park. The other task is to create a guidance document to set up procedures for any future requests to create a sanitary district in Frederick CountA motion regarding the creation of a subcommittee was made by citi Strawsnyder and the motion was seconded by Supervisor Wells. The committee unanimously approved the motion. The following committee members volunteereserve on the ad hoc subcommittee: Committee Chairman McCarthy Supervisor Lofton Committee Member Ed Strawsnyder The subcommittee will look at general guidelines in creating a new sanitary distr costs to bring the roads up to certain minimum road standards, long term financing, estimated annual fees, etc. Also, since this will require a lot of staff time, the subcommittee will determine how much effort is reasonably expected of staff to determine the guidelines and proposed costs. It is anticipated that the review by the ad hoc2-3 months before reporting back to the Public Works Committee. 5-Discuss proposed carry forward requests from Solid Waste, Animal Shelter and Landfill a.Solid Waste Budget 10-4203-000 Line item 10-4203-3004-01 Repair and Maintenance/Equipment. Request to carry forward $19,500.00 for rehabilitation of the old compactor unit being removed from the Clearbrook Convenience Center which will be used at a future Line item 10-4203-3004-03 Repair and Maintenance/Building. Request to carry forward $45,000.00 for site improvements at the Middletown Conve was planned for FY 17/18 but was not completed. Line item 10-4203-3010-00 Contractual Services. Request to carry forward $75,000.00 for anticipated increased collection costs of the refuse collect program. Line item 10-4203-9003-00 Lease/Rent Land. Request to carry forward $6,000.00 for payment of the Greenwood Convenience Site lease from Greenwood Fire Hall. The total for the four requests are $145,000.00. A motion was made by Supervisor Wells to approve the request and was seconded by member Ed Straw motion was unanimously approved by the committee to be sent to t Committee for further consideration. b.Solid Waste Budget 10-4203-8900-00 We requested that all unspent funds left over from this line item be carried forward for the completion of the Stephenson Convenience Center. Since we are at year end, we can not determine an exact amount. A motion was made by Supe seconded by Supervisor Lofton recommending the carry forward request. The committee unanimously approved the motion to be sent to the Fina further consideration. c.Animal Shelter Budget 10-4305-000 Line item 10-4305-3001-00 Professional Health Services. Request to carry forward $6,521.00 which is the unused portion of the spay/neuter funding. The fun appropriated from the Fleming donation for spaying and neutering shelter pets. Line item 10-4305-3002-02 Professional Services Engineering and Design. Request to carry forward $6,727.00 which is the unused portion of the new building design fund. The funds were appropriated from the Loy donation for the design building. A motion was made by member Ed Strawsnyder and seconded by member Whit Wagner recommending approval of the carry forward request. The motion was unanimously approved by the committee to be sent to the Finance further action. d.Landfill Budget 12-4204-000 Line item 12-4204-3004-04 Repair and Maintenance-Generators. Request to carry forward $80,000.00 to cover the remaining funds needed for maintenance of the 60,000-hour genset generator. This maintenance includes replacing the engines and upgrading the control systems. Line item 12-4204-5408-03 Generator Spare Parts-Gas to Energy. Request to carry forward $90,000.00 for chiller or blower replacements as needed. The gas treatment skid has accumulated over 60,000 hours of operation and has begun to experience increased breakdowns of blowers and gas chilling equipment. Line item 12-4204-8006-00 Construction Vehicles and Equipment. Request to carry forward $206,000.00 for a back up trash compactor. Currently, the Landfill owns two Caterpillar 826k compactors. During times when either of those compactors are down the current practice is to maintain a compactor at the MSW Landfill and either close down the CDD Landfill or use a loader to pile the CDD waste up u are back in service. Current trends of increased downtime due tnd electronics on the equipment along with continued uptake in wast difficult to continue the current practice and maintain adequate compactio waste. Line item 12-4204-8900-00 Improvements other Than. Request to carry forward $3,330,000 for an additional leachate collection pond and blasting of MSW Cell 3A. These projects are currently moving forward but contracts for th issued before the end of FY 17/18. A motion was made by member Ed Strawsnyder and seconded by Supervisor Wells recommending approval of the carry forward requests. The motio approved by the committee to be sent to the Finance Committee fo consideration. 6-Acquistion/Disposition of Real Estate A Closed Session was convened in Accordance with the Code of Virg Section 2.2-3711, Subsection A, (3), for discussion or consideration of the property for a public discussion in an open meeting would advers position or negotiating strategy of the public body. The Public Works Committee of Frederick County certifies that, to t knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted fr requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were iden the closed meeting were heard, discussed, or considered by the C Respectfully submitted, Public Works Committee J.Douglas McCarthy, Chairman Gary A. Lofton Robert W. Wells Whitney Whit L. Wagner Gene E. Fisher Harvey E. Ed Strawsnyder, Jr. By ____________________ Joe C. Wilder Public Works Director JCW/kco Attachments: as stated cc: Kris Tierney, County Administrator Jay Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator Ron Kimble, Landfill Manager Gloria Puffinburger, Solid Waste Manager Rod Williams, County Attorney Erin Swisshelm, Assistant County Attorney Bill Orndoff, Treasurer Wayne Corbett, Deputy Treasurer Mike Stewart, Senior Project Manager Kevin Alderman, Shawneeland District Manager Kathy Whetzel, Animal Shelter Manager file MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Meeting ofJuly 31, 2018 DATE: July 26, 2018 There will be a meeting of the Public Works Committee on Tuesday, July 31, 2018at 8:00 a.m. in the conference room located on the second floor of the north end of the County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Suite 200. The agenda thus faris as follows: 1.Update on the new Stephenson Citizen Convenience Site. (Replacement for the Clearbrook site.) 2.Discuss/ update on County recycling program and contract 3.Discuss/update on issues related to ongoing regional rainfall event affecting several Public Works Departmentsand the County 4.Discuss request by Wilde Acres/ Mountain Falls Park to become a Sanitary District (Attachment 1) 5.Discuss proposed FY 2017/2018 Carry Forward Requests (Solid Waste budget, Animal Shelterbudget, Landfill budget) 6. Acquisition/Disposition of Real Estate –The meeting will convene to a closed session in accordance with the Code of Virginia §2.2-3711 Subsection A, (3), Acquisition and Disposition . of Real Estate 7.Miscellaneous Reports: a.Tonnage Report: Landfill (Attachment 2) b.Recycling Report Attachment 3) ( c.Animal Shelter Dog Report: (Attachment 4) d.Animal Shelter Cat Report (Attachment 5) JCW/kco Attachments:as stated 107 North Kent Street, Second Floor, Suite 200Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 ATTACHMENT 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Gloria M. Puffinburger Solid Waste Manager THROUGH: Joe C. Wilder Director of Public Works RE: Carryforward Requests from FY 17/18to FY 18/19 DATE: July 25, 2018 _______________________________________________________________________ We are requesting that the following funds be carried forward from the FY 17/18 Solid Waste budgetand into the FY 18/19 budget. Thetotal amount of the request is $145,500 and is itemized as follows: Line item 10-4203-3004-01 (Repair and Maintenance/Equipment)--$19,500 for rehabilitation work for the old compactor unit being removed from Clear Brookwhich will be used at a future site. Line item 10-4203-3004-03 (Repair and Maintenance/Building)--$45,000 for site improvements at the Middletown convenience sites.Planned work was delayed during the current fiscal year due to a lack of contractors interested in performing the workand weather conditions.The work is still needed. Line item10-4203-3010-00 (Contractual Services)--$75,000for anticipated increased collection costs of refuse collection and recycling program Line item 10-4203-9003-00 (Lease/Rent of Land)--$6,000Payment of Greenwood lease. If this request is approved by the Public Works Committee, we will forward this request to the Finance Committee for further consideration. CC: file _________________ __________FREDERICK COUNTY -ANIMAL SHELTER Kathy M. Whetzel Shelter Manager 540/667-9192 ext. 2502 FAX 540/722-6108 E-mail: kwhetzel@fcva.us MEMORANDUM TO:Joe Wilder, Director of Public Works FROM:Kathy M. Whetzel, Shelter Manager SUBJECT:FY 17/18CarryForwards DATE:7/13/18 ________________________________________________________________________ The Shelter is requestingafunding carry forwardfrom FY 17/18intoline item 10-4305-3001-00Professional Health Servicesin the amount of $6,521.00. This amount is the unused portion of spay/neuter funding.The funds were appropriated from the Fleming donation forspaying and neutering shelter pets. The shelter is requesting a funding carry forward from FY 17/18 into line item 10- 4305-3002-02 Professional Services Engineering and Designin the amount of $6,727.00. This amount is the unused portion of the new building design funds. The fundswere appropriated from the Loy donation for the design of the new shelter building. Please contact me if you have any questions. KMW:hag (ATTACHMENT 2) MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: MonthlyTonnage Report -Fiscal Year 16/17 DATE: July 26, 2018 The following is the tonnage for the months of July 2017, through June 2018, and the average monthly tonnage for fiscal years 03/04 through 17/18. FY 03-04:AVERAGE PER MONTH:16,348 TONS (UP 1,164 TONS) FY 04-05:AVERAGE PER MONTH: 17,029 TONS (UP 681 TONS) FY 05-06:AVERAGE PER MONTH: 17,785 TONS (UP 756 TONS) FY 06-07:AVERAGE PER MONTH:16,705 TONS (DOWN 1,080 TONS) FY 07-08:AVERAGE PER MONTH:13,904 TONS (DOWN 2,801 TONS) FY 08-09:AVERAGE PER MONTH:13,316 TONS (DOWN 588 TONS) FY 09-10:AVERAGE PER MONTH:12,219 TONS (DOWN 1,097 TONS) FY 10-11:AVERAGE PER MONTH:12,184 TONS (DOWN 35 TONS) FY 11-12:AVERAGE PER MONTH:12,013 TONS (DOWN 171 TONS) FY 12-13:AVERAGE PER MONTH:12,065 TONS (UP 52 TONS) FY 13-14:AVERAGE PER MONTH:12,468TONS (UP 403TONS) FY 14-15:AVERAGE PER MONTH:13,133TONS(UP 665TONS) FY 15-16:AVERAGE PER MONTH:13,984 TONS (UP 851 TONS) FY 16-17:AVERAGE PER MONTH:14,507TONS(UP 523 TONS) FY 17-18:AVERAGE PER MONTH:15,745TONS(UP 1,238 TONS) MONTHFY 2016-2017FY 2017-2018 JULY 13,39115,465 AUGUST 15,72417,694 SEPTEMBER 14,64916,813 OCTOBER 14,16015,853 NOVEMBER 13,83416,109 DECEMBER 16,821 12,644 JANUARY 12,52013,295 FEBRUARY 12,54213,100 MARCH 13,21615,510 APRIL 14,25215,469 MAY 16,10518,755 JUNE 16,87318,228 JCW/gmp TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Monday, July 23, 2018 8:30 a.m. 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES: Committee Members Present: Gary Lofton Chairman (Voting), Judith McCann-Slaughter (Voting), Gary Oates (Liaison PC/Voting), and James Racey (Voting) Committee Members Absent: Barry Schnoor (Voting), Lewis Boyer (Liaison Stephens City) and Mark Davis (Liaison Middletown) Staff Present: Assistant Director -Transportation John Bishop, Traffic Division Commander Lt. Warren Gosnell, and Kathy Smith, Secretary ITEMS FOR INFORMATION ONLY: 1-Hayfield Road Truck Restriction: Staff gave a brief overview of the concerns that Supervisor McCarthy received from a resident of the area, which included trucks entering the roadway on the wrong side of the island at the intersection with Gainesboro Road, site distance at the crest of a hill on the roadway and the road not being wide enough for the truck traffic. Staff has scheduled a drive thru of the area with VDOT. By Consensus, the Committee chose not to send forward a recommendation Supervisors until further input from VDOT has been received. 2-Transportation Forum: A discussion was held with the Committee on planning the Fall Transportation Forum. The Committee would like to see the Forum held in October 2018. The day in October is to be determined based upon the availability of panel members. Some of the items that the Committee would like to see are as follows: County Projects Updates SmartScale Projects Progress Non-Hard-Surfaced Road Improvement Projects VDOT display with a focus on the Interstate 81 Corridor Study Also, the panel guest invites to include representatives from VDOT, Federal and State Legislators, State Senators Office. 3-County Projects Updates: Tevis Street Extension/Airport Road/I-81 Bridge: The VDOT comments have been received for the design plans and Staff will review and address those comments. The bid package items are be advises that the right-of- way plats will be completed the week of July 23, 2018. th Renaissance Drive: A meeting was held with the relevant VDOT sections on July 12. This kicked off the 30% bridge and roadway design. The plans are at 30% and to be completed in October 2018. th Northern Y: A meeting was also held on July 12 for the 30% design on this project from the roundabout to Route 522. Staff has met with the site manager fo impacts to their entrances with this project. Meetings are schelks Club representatives regarding relocation of their entrance. Coverstone Drive: No activity currently. Jubal Early Drive Extension and Interchange with Route 37: No activity currently. 4-Upcoming Agenda Items: August: Ongoing Transportation Forum and Work Program Planning. TBD: Oakdale Crossing Traffic Calming Study. 5-Other-None. COUNTY of FREDERICK Office of the County Administrator To: Members ofthe Board of Supervisors From:Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors Date: 8-2-2018 Re:Updates to Rules and Procedures including Agenda Proceduresand Committee Appointments ________________________________________________________________________ Staff has been discussing changes to the adopted Rules and Procedures to improve transparency of board action on consent agenda items and to clarify the committee appointment process. Two sections of the Rules and Procedures document are proposed for updates. The attached draftsshow the proposed changes. Section 4-1 Order of Business -The current procedure lists the adoption of the Consent Agenda before the Citizen Comment period which, in effect, prevents the citizens from speaking on an agenda item before it is addressed by the Board. The preferred and recommended practice is to place the adoption ofthe Consent Agenda followingthe Citizen Comment period. Section 7.1and 7.2 Appointments -The proposed changes in the draft specify the appointments made by the Chairman and those made via nomination by a Board member. In addition, the committee application process is clarified for the benefit of citizens and staff. 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 DRAFT 8/2/18 ARTICLE IV - CONDUCT OF BUSINESS Section 4-1.Order of Business [Amended 06/11/03]; [Amended 01/14/04]; [Amended 02/14/18] At meetings of the Board, the order of business should be as fol Closed Session (When Required) Call to Order Invocation Pledge of Allegiance Adoption of Agenda Citizen Comments (Agenda Items Only, That Are Not Subject to Public Hearing.) Consent Agenda (Will contain Minutes and Committee Reports) Citizen Comments (Agenda Items Only, That Are Not Subject to Publ Board of Supervisors Comments County Officials Committee Business Public Hearings  Non Planning Issues (When Required) Planning Commission Business Public Hearings (When Required) Other Planning Commission/Department Business Liaison Reports (If Any) Citizen Comments Board of Supervisors Comments Adjournment ARTICLE VII  APPOINTMENTS Section 7-1. Appointments by the Chairman of the Board The Chairman shall appoint members of the Board to such authoriti committees or other organizations or positions as the Board shall so authorize and to appoint various citizen members to Boards standing committees. The following positions are appointed by the Chairman each Janua STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CHAIRMAN: Finance Committee Code and Ordinance Committee Human Resources Committee Public Safety Committee Public Works Committee Technology (IT) Committee Transportation Committee OTHER APPOINTMENTS MADE BY THE CHAIRMAN: Board Liaison to Fire & Rescue Association County Representatives to the Frederick County-Winchester Joint Finance Committee Section 7.2. Committee Appointments by the Board of Supervisors [Amended 01/25/06]; [Amended 02/14/18] Each board member may nominate citizen members to be appointed to boards, commissions, and committees where a representative is ne magisterial district or for the county at large. (Note: A current list of boards and committees is available on the County website, www.fcva.us.) A majority vote of those board members present shall be required to appoint a nominee to said authority, board, commission, or co perspectiveprospectivenominee, the following process shall be followed: 1.Applications are required for positions on bodies created by the non-Frederick County boards such as regional or community-based bodies, the Board of Supervisors will accept and consider nominations from those boar whilereserving the right to appoint its preferred candidate. The application form, or Committee Appointments Informational Data Sheet, for vacancies areis available on the County website, www.fcva.us, or through Board members and the County Administrators Office. A completed application(Informational Data Sheet) shall be required for all initial nominations; however, a comple (Informational Data Sheet) for candidates being reappointed shall not be required. 2.Applications shall mustbe received in the County Administrators Office up toby 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday Wednesday preceding a Board meeting in order that they might to be included in the agenda for review by the members of the Board. 3.Any applications received after the deadline specified above will next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board. REZONING APPLICATION #01-18 STONEWALL IV Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: July 27,2018 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, CZA, Assistant Director John Bishop, AICP, Assistant Director Transportation ReviewedAction Planning Commission: 06/06/18Public Hearing Held;Postponed45 Days Planning Commission: 07/18/18Public Hearing Held; Recommend Approval Board of Supervisors: 08/08/18Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 88.91+/-acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1(Light Industrial) District with proffers. LOCATION: Thesubject properties are located at the southern terminus of Lenoir Drive (Route F-732). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 08/08/18BOARD OF SUPERVISORSMEETING: Thisis an application to rezone a total of 88.91+/-acres of land to the M1 (Light Industrial) District withproffers. The site is located within the limits of the Northeast Land Use Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan and depicts the subject properties with an industrial land use designation. The proposed M1 Zoning is generally consistent with the Northeast Land Use Plan as it relates to this area. The The properties are also located within the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Planning Commission recommended approval of this rezoning at their July 19, 2018 meeting. The proffers associated with this rezoning request areas follows: Proffer Statement Dated June 6, 2018, revised July 27, 2018: 1.Development and use of the property: 1.1.Development of the property shall be limited to the construction of not more than 820,000 gross square feet and solely used for warehousing or high cube transload and short-term storage. 1.2.The development of the property shall be in general conformance with the GDP. 1.3. 2.Transportation: 2.1.Within 90 calendar days of a written request by the County, the Applicant shall dedicate approximately 17.05 acres to the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, as depicted on the GDP,for the future Route 37 bypass. 2.2. Access to the Property shall be as shown on the GDP. Provided that access to the buildable area of the Property is not impeded or eliminated, the Applicant shall not place above grade improvements on the southeast corner of the Property near the terminus of Lenoir Drive in such a way as to preclude the construction of proposed slip ramps that are currently Lenoir Drive Slip Ramp ounty Department of Planning and Development, Rezoning #01-18Stonewall IV July 27, 2018 Page 2 dated October 17, 2017 and attached hereto for reference. The southeast corner of the Property is subject to existing easements and/or covenants of record, as of June 6, 2018. 2.3.The Applicant shall contribute $250,000 to the County for the purpose of general transportation planning, right-of-way acquisition, or construction. It shall make such contribution upon issuance of an occupancy permit for any building. 3.Fire and Rescue: 3.1.The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County $0.10 per gross square foot of construction asdepicted on each site plan, to be used for fire and rescue purposes in the general area. 4.Cultural Resources: 4.1.The Applicant shall retain a qualified professional architectural historian to perform a Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Standard Level III as defined by the National Park Service Heritage Documentation Program on the residential building and its associated architectural buildings on the property. 4.2.The Applicant, working with a qualified professional architectural historian, shall inspect prior to demolition the non-heated areas of the residential building for the presence of partially hidden or obstructed historic artifacts or material. 5.Escalator : 5.1.In the event the monetary contributions set forth in the proffer statement are paid to Frederick County within 18 months after final approval of this rezoning, said contributions shall be in the amounts stated. Any monetary contributions which are paid after 18 months following final approval shall be adjusted in accordance with the Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). Following the required public hearing, a decision regardingthis rezoning applicationby the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The Applicantshould be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. Rezoning #01-18Stonewall IV July 27, 2018 Page 3 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. ReviewedAction Planning Commission: 06/06/18Public Hearing Held;Postponed 45 Days Planning Commission: 07/18/18Public Hearing Held; Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 08/08/18Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 88.91+/-acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (Light Industrial) District with proffers. LOCATION: The subject properties are located at the southern terminus of Lenoir Drive (Route F-732). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 43-A-21, 43-A-21B, 43-19-4 and 43-A-24 PROPERTY ZONING :RA (Rural Areas) District PRESENT USE: Residential and Agricultural ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North:M1 (Light Industrial) DistrictUse:Industrial RA (Rural Areas) DistrictResidential/Vacant South:RA (Rural Areas) DistrictUse:Residential/Route 37 East: M1 (Light Industrial) DistrictUse: Industrial West:RA (Rural Areas) DistrictUse:Residential/Vacant Rezoning #01-18 Stonewall IV July 27, 2018 Page 4 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The Frederick County Transportation Chapter and Northeast Frederick Area Plan of the Comprehensive Plan identifies the extension of Lenoir Drive as an on-ramp to Route 37 west as a future transportation improvement. While the Generalized Development Plan has been revised to locate the future development entrance in a manner that is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan improvement, VDOT strongly recommends Frederick County request right-of-way dedication on the subject property to accommodate the future improvement and the rezoning documents updated accordingly. Frederick -Winchester Service Authority: Capacity consideration deferred to Frederick Water. Frederick Water: Please see letter from Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Executive Director dated February 22, 2018. Frederick County Department of Public Works: A detailed review shall occur at the time of site plan submission. Frederick County Fire Marshall: Plan approved. Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation: The application appears to meet Parks and Recreation requirements. Planning & Zoning: 1)Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Quadrangle) identifies the Winchester subject properties as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural General) District. zoning districts were subsequently combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. 2)Comprehensive Plan The 2035 Comprehensive Plan is the guide for the future growth of Frederick County. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan is an official public document that serves as the Community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of Community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. The Area Plans, Appendix I of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan, are the primary implementation tool and will be instrumental to the future planning efforts of the County. Rezoning #01-18Stonewall IV July 27, 2018 Page 5 Land Use The Northeast Land Use Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan identifies these properties with an industrial land use designation. The proposed M1 ZoningDistrictis generally consistent with the Northeast Land Use Plan as it relates to this area. The land use plan depicts future Route 37 on the western boundary of the properties and access to Route 37 from Lenoir Drive via a slip ramp. 3)Potential Impacts Transportation and Site Access Access to the site will be via Lenoir Drive. The Applicant has proffered to dedicate right-of- way for Route 37and right-of-way for the Route 37 slip ramp. The Applicant has also proffered to contribute $0.30per gross square foot of building area for the planning of this access. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was conducted on the subject development.Studied intersections were as follows:Lenoir Drive at McGhee, McGhee at Welltown Road, Welltown Road at Route 11, Route 11 at the Southbound Exit 317 Ramps, Route 11 at the Northbound Exit 317 exit ramp, and Route 11 at the Northbound Exit 317entrance ramp and Redbud Road. According to the TIA, which has been accepted by VDOT, the build out level of serviceat the studied intersections was maintained from the current level of service with the left turn onto the Exit 317 Northbound entrance ramp.This movement is degraded from a level of service C to level of service D.This is unable to be alleviated due to physical restrictions of the site. Environment The site is relatively flat, with the highest points situated near the center of the site and near Route 37. Redbud Run courses generally along the northern/northeast property boundary. The site contains floodplain for Redbud Run. Historical The Virginia Department of Historic Resources identifies one mapped property located on the subject property DHR #034-1099-Glengary. This structure is potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the rezoning application at their meeting on March 27, 2018. The HRAB requested that the Applicant perform a Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Standard Level III for the Glengary site and Institute protocols for the demolishment of Glengary to ensure preservation and/or documentation of historical features.The Applicant has addressed 4)Proffer Statement Dated June 6, 2018, revised July 27, 2018: 1.Development and use of the property: 1.1.Development of the property shall be limited to the construction of not more than 820,000 gross square feet and solely used for warehousing or high cube transload and short-term storage. 1.2.The development of the property shall be in general conformance with the GDP. Rezoning #01-18Stonewall IV July 27, 2018 Page 6 1.3. 2.Transportation: 2.1.Within 90 calendar days of a written request by the County, the Applicant shall dedicate approximately 17.05 acres to the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, as depicted on the GDP, for the future Route 37 bypass. 2.2. Access to the Property shall be as shown on the GDP. Provided that access to the buildable areaof the Property is not impeded or eliminated, the Applicant shall not place above grade improvements on the southeast corner of the Property near the terminus of Lenoir Drive in such a way as to preclude the construction of proposed slip ramps that are currently Lenoir Drive Slip Ramp dated October 17, 2017, and attached hereto for reference. The southeast corner of the Property is subject to existing easements and/or covenants of record, as of June 6, 2018. 2.3.Within 90 calendar days of a written request by the County, the Applicant shall further dedicate such right-of-way as it may own at the terminus of Lenoir Drive for the purpose of construction of access to existing Route 37 as described in Proffer 2.2 above. 2.4.The Applicant shall contribute $250,000 to the County for the purpose of general transportation planning, right-of-way acquisition, or construction. It shallmake such contribution upon issuance of an occupancy permit for any building. 3.Fire and Rescue: 3.1.The Applicant shall contribute to Frederick County $0.10 per gross square foot of construction asdepicted on each site plan, to be used for fire and rescue purposes in the general area. 4.Cultural Resources: 4.1.The Applicant shall retain a qualified professional architectural historian to perform a Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Standard Level III as defined by the National Park Service Heritage Documentation Program on the residential building and its associated architectural buildings on the property. 4.2.TheApplicant, working with a qualified professional architectural historian, shall inspect priorto demolition the non-heated areas of the residential building for the presence of partially hidden or obstructed historic artifacts or material. 5.Escalator : 5.1.In the event the monetary contributions set forth in the proffer statement are paid to Frederick County within 18 months after final approval of this rezoning, said contributions shall be in the amounts stated. Any monetary contributions which are paid after 18 months following final approval shall be adjusted in accordance with the Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). Rezoning #01-18 Stonewall IV July 27, 2018 Page 7 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION FROM THE 06/06/18 MEETING: Staff provided an overview of the request and noted that a revised proffer statement was provided prior to the meeting. Mr. John Foote of Walsh Colucci Lubeley & Walsh PC, representing the Applicant provided an overview of their proposal. Mr. Foote presented diagrams that showed the slip ramp. Mr. Foote noted the entrance to the property was adjusted after discussion with Staff regarding the slip ramps. Mr. Foote provided an aerial map of the property and the surrounding area. He presented an overview of the property and its owners. Mr. Foote shared a summary of the proposed warehousing and the traffic this will generate. Mr. Foote presented the ramp design and noted the right-of-way for this design for the Route 37 bypass will be dedicated to the County at no cost when written request from the County is received. Mr. Foote mentioned the Historic Resources review, that is consistent with a specific recommendation made by the HRAB with which the Applicant is in concurrence. He concluded, the Applicant is seeking a favorable recommendation to let Stonewall IV construct 820,000 SF of low impact warehouse in an industrial area planned for that purpose that is an extension of an industrial park in which it already has three buildings that have been constructed over the last several years and would like to do more. A Commission Member requested clarification, there is no access to Route 37 from this property. Mr. Foote noted that is correct. Two citizens spoke during the public hearing and expressed concerns over the access to the property and existing transportation concerns on Welltown Road and Martinsburg Pike. A Commission Member i sensitivity to the traffic problems being brought forth, is there a study taking place that could alleviate the issue. Staff explained there is ongoing work; the traffic study was done and there was not a lot for VDOT to grasp, it was a TIA that was not required under Chapter 527 however, the County required it because of not being comfortable bringing this rezoning forward without even looking at the traffic. He continued, the slip ramp has been on the Comprehensive Plan for some time; during the last round of SmartScale the Transportation Committee was reviewing this vigorously however, updates to the SmartScale requirements hindered this in the terms of a specific study that was now required; since that time this has been put into place through the MPO specifically an interchange justification report. A Commission Member asked is the SmartScale application a very lengthy process. Staff replied yes, for example; the applications being submitted August 1, 2018 have been in process since last summer; the next cycle of applications will start being prepared immediately after submission of these. A motion was made, seconded, and passed to recommend postponement for 45 days. Yes: Marston, Ambrogi, Cline, Kenney, Triplett, Wilmot No: Dawson, Thomas (Note: Commissioners Mohn, Manuel, Molden, and Unger were absent from the meeting.) Rezoning #01-18Stonewall IV July 27, 2018 Page 8 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION FROM THE 07/18/18 MEETING: Staff reported this is a request to rezone four parcels of land that total 88.91 +/-acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (Light Industrial) District with proffers. Staff continued, this item was postponed at the June 6, 2018 Planning Commission meeting for 45 days to provide the Applicant additional time to address transportation concerns. Staff noted since the June 6, 2018 meeting, the Applicant has provided revised proffers that seek to address these concerns. Staff presented the updated proffers: 2.2Access to the Property shall be as shown on the GDP. Provided that access to the buildable area of the Property is not impeded or eliminated, the Applicant shall not place above grade improvements on the southeast corner of the Property near the terminus of Lenoir Drive in such a way as to preclude the construction of proposed slip ramps that are currently created by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development, dated October 17, 2017, and attached hereto for reference. The southeast corner of the Property is subject to existing easements and/or covenants of record, as of June 6, 2018. 2.3Within 90 calendar days of a written request by the County, the Applicant shall further dedicate such right-of-way as it may own at the terminus of Lenoir Drive for the purpose of construction of access to existing Route 37 as described in Proffer 2.2. 2.4The Applicant shall contribute up to $250,000 to the County for the purpose of planning additional access to Stonewall Industrial Park. It shall make such contribution at the rate of $0.30 per gross square foot of building ultimately constructed, to be paid upon issuance of an occupancy permit for any such building or buildings. A Commission Member asked for clarification on what a slip ramp is. Ms. Perkins presented mapping showing the slips ramps and explained using the visual.A Commission Member asked if the $250,000 being dedicated is just for Stonewall Industrial Park.Staff noted that is correct. Mr. John Foote of Walsh Colucci Lubeley & Walsh PC, representing the Applicant reported after the June 6, 2018 meeting there was further discussions with Staff to address the transportation concerns. He explained to make the slip ramps more possible the dedication of the ROW land controlled by the Applicant will be dedicated; in addition, there is approximately 800,000 SF of planned development on this property and at $0.30 persquare foot of building area comes to around $250,000. Mr. Foote noted, right now it is provided for Stonewall Industrial Park because that was what is being addressed and of little concern how the County chooses to use these funds. He continued, the TIA that was conducted demonstrates there is very little truck traffic that is coming out of this and does not affect the function of any intersection. Mr. Foote concluded this will also benefit the Inland Port. A Commission Member inquired what value is the acreage that is being dedicated. Mr. Foote explained the land would be valued atfair market value. A Commission Member asked for clarification of where the $250,000 can be used. Mr. Foote explained it would be used for the purpose of Stonewall Industrial Park and would be payable to the County. Rezoning #01-18 Stonewall IV July 27, 2018 Page 9 A motion was made, seconded, and unanimously passed to recommend approval of REZ #01-18 for Stonewall IV. (Note: Commissioner Mohn was absent from the meeting; Commissioner Oates abstained.) Following the required public hearing, a decision regarding this rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The Applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. 601141252220 MCGHEE RD LAKEVILLE TYSON DR REZ # 01 - 18 MCGHEE RD TYSON DR CIR 650 240 MCGHEE RD TYSON DR 325 625 270 Stonewall IV MCGHEE RD MCGHEE RD TYSON DR 255 PINs: 656 TYSON DR 310 43 - A - 21, 43 - A - 21B, 43 - A - 24, 43 - 19 - 4 MCGHEE RD 645 TYSON DR MCGHEE RD Rezoning from RA to M1 657 Zoning Map 257 MCGHEE RD TYSON DR 305 TYSON DR 360 TYSON DR 334 HANDLEY DR 148 384 206 LENOIR DR TYSON DR 104 LENOIR DR RIGGERS DR 200 LENOIR DR STONEWALL 396 INDUSTRIAL PARK TYSON DR 208 Subdivision LENOIR DR 260 240 LENOIR DR LENOIR DR 340 LENOIR DR REZ #01-18 304 SPRING LENOIR DR LENOIR DR 43 A 21B VALLEY 340 Subdivision LENOIR DR 275 LENOIR DR 325 LENOIR DR 43 A 21 REZ #01-18 1461 389 MARTINSBURG LENOIR DR PIKE 399 REZ #01-18 LENOIR DR 43 19 4 REZ #01-18 403 43 A 24LENOIR DR 425 LENOIR DR 01 37 Applications 1303 MARTINSBURG Sewer and Water Service Area PIKE Parcels 102 Building Footprints 1305 SALVO MARTINSBURG CIR 143 Future Rt 37 Bypass 291 PIKE FORTRESS DR FORTRESS DR 1239 297 287 B1 (Neighborhood Business District) 1303 MARTINSBURG FORTRESS DR 104 100FORTRESS DR B2 (General Business District) MARTINSBURG PIKE BLACKPOWDER CT SALVO CIR 103 PIKE 01 B3 (Industrial Transition District) BLACKPOWDER CT SALVO CIR 288 37 102 EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) 298 FORTRESS DR FORTRESS DR BLACKPOWDER CT FORTRESS DR HE (Higher Education District) 01 § ¨¦ FORTRESS DR 390 103 11 1263 391 81 M1 (Light Industrial District) FORTRESS DR 392 SENTRY CT MARTINSBURG 01 FORTRESS DR 109 370 FORTRESS DR M2 (Industrial General District) PIKE 100 100 522 394 SENTRY CT STINE LN 104 395 SENTRY CT FULL MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) FORTRESS DR MS (Medical Support District) Note: REZ # 01 - 18 OM (Office - Manufacturing Park)Frederick County Dept of Planning & Development Stonewall IV R4 (Residential Planned Community District)I 107 N Kent St R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) PINs: Suite 202 RA (Rural Areas District)43 - A - 21, 43 - A - 21B, 43 - A - 24, Winchester, VA 22601 43 - 19 - 4 540 - 665 - 5651 RP (Residential Performance District) Rezoning from RA to M1 Map Created: April 23, 2018 Eastern Road Plan Zoning Map Staff: cperkins Ramp 03356701,340Feet 601141252220 MCGHEE RD LAKEVILLE TYSON DR REZ # 01 - 18 MCGHEE RD TYSON DR CIR 650 240 MCGHEE RD TYSON DR 325 625 270 Stonewall IV MCGHEE RD MCGHEE RD TYSON DR 255 PINs: 656 TYSON DR 310 43 - A - 21, 43 - A - 21B, 43 - A - 24, 43 - 19 - 4 MCGHEE RD 645 TYSON DR MCGHEE RD Rezoning from RA to M1 657 Location Map 257 MCGHEE RD TYSON DR 305 TYSON DR 360 TYSON DR 334 HANDLEY DR 148 384 206 LENOIR DR TYSON DR 104 LENOIR DR RIGGERS DR 200 LENOIR DR STONEWALL 396 INDUSTRIAL PARK TYSON DR 208 Subdivision LENOIR DR 260 240 LENOIR DR LENOIR DR 340 LENOIR DR REZ #01-18 304 SPRING LENOIR DR LENOIR DR 43 A 21B VALLEY 340 Subdivision LENOIR DR Flood 275 Zone LENOIR DR A 325 LENOIR DR 43 A 21 REZ #01-18 1461 389 MARTINSBURG LENOIR DR PIKE 399 REZ #01-18 Flood LENOIR DR 43 19 4 REZ #01-18 Zone 403 43 A 24LENOIR DR 425 AE LENOIR DR 01 37 1303 MARTINSBURG PIKE 102 1305 SALVO MARTINSBURG CIR 143 291 PIKE FORTRESS DR FORTRESS DR 1239 297 287 1303 MARTINSBURG FORTRESS DR 104 100FORTRESS DR MARTINSBURG PIKE BLACKPOWDER CT SALVO CIR 103 PIKE 01 BLACKPOWDER CT SALVO CIR 288 37 102 298 FORTRESS DR FORTRESS DR BLACKPOWDER CT FORTRESS DR 01 § ¨¦ FORTRESS DR 390 103 Applications 11 1263 391 81 FORTRESS DR 392 SENTRY CT MARTINSBURG 01 FORTRESS DR Sewer and Water Service Area 109 370 FORTRESS DR PIKE 100 100 522 394 SENTRY CT STINE LN 104 395 Parcels SENTRY CT FULL FORTRESS DR Future Rt 37 Bypass Note: REZ # 01 - 18 Building Footprints Frederick County Dept of Planning & Development Stonewall IV Eastern Road Plan I 107 N Kent St Ramp PINs: Suite 202 43 - A - 21, 43 - A - 21B, 43 - A - 24, Winchester, VA 22601 Floodplain 43 - 19 - 4 540 - 665 - 5651 0.2 PCT ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD HAZARD Rezoning from RA to M1 Map Created: April 23, 2018 A Location Map Staff: cperkins AE 03356701,340Feet MCGHEE RD141252TYSON DR 601LAKEVILLE TYSON DR REZ # 01 - 18 CIR MCGHEE RD 240 650 TYSON DR 625 MCGHEE RD MCGHEE RD 270 Stonewall IV TYSON DR 656 PINs: 310 MCGHEE RD TYSON DR 645 43 - A - 21, 43 - A - 21B, 43 - A - 24, 43 - 19 - 4 257 MCGHEE RD TYSON DR Rezoning from RA to M1 657 MCGHEE RD 330 Long Range Land Use Map 305 HANDLEY DR STONEWALL TYSON DR INDUSTRIAL PARK 334360 Subdivision HANDLEY DRTYSON DR 384 104 TYSON DR RIGGERS DR 396 TYSON DR 208 260 LENOIR DR LENOIR DR 340 LENOIR DR 304 REZ #01-18 LENOIR DR 43 A 21B SPRING VALLEY 340 LENOIR DR Subdivision Applications Sewer and Water Service Area Parcels 325 Future Rt 37 Bypass REZ #01-18 43 A 21 LENOIR DR Building Footprints MARTINSBURG 389 Eastern Road Plan LENOIR DR Ramp 399 LENOIR DR REZ #01-18 Long Range Land Use REZ #01-18 43 19 4 Residential 403 43 A 24 LENOIR DR Neighborhood Village 425 LENOIR DR Urban Center Mobile Home Community 01 Business 37 Highway Commercial 1437 1303 WILLIAMS Mixed-Use 335 MARTINSBURG CIR LAUCK DR Mixed Use Commercial/Office 330 PIKE 309 LAUCK DR 104 Mixed Use Industrial/Office 105 323 LAUCK DR SALVO SALVO LAUCK DR Industrial 143 CIR CIR 287 FORTRESS DR Warehouse 304 297 293 FORTRESS DR LAUCK DR 1303 Heavy Industrial FORTRESS DR 104 100 LAUCK DR289 1239 135 MARTINSBURG 103BLACKPOWDER CT SALVO CIR FORTRESS DR Extractive Mining SUNNYSIDE MARTINSBURG 288FORTRESS DR PIKE 101288 BLACKPOWDER CT PIKE Commercial Rec LAUCK DR SALVO CIRFORTRESS DR Subdivision 298 102 133 103 FORTRESS DR BLACKPOWDER CT Rural Community Center FORTRESS DR SENTRY CT 132 390 255 391 264 Fire & Rescue FORTRESS DR FORTRESS DR LAUCK DR FORTRESS DR 253 LAUCK DR 129 1263 Sensitive Natural Areas 393 LAUCK DR 248 FORTRESS DR102 MARTINSBURG FORTRESS DR 127 237LAUCK DR Institutional SENTRY CT PIKE 221106 370 240 FORTRESS DR397 LAUCK DR LAUCK DRSENTRY CT Planned Unit Development 103 1205 STINE LN LAUCK DR 233 399FORTRESS DR 01 123 CALIBER CT MARTINSBURG 107 LAUCK DR LAUCK DR Park FORTRESS DR 37 401 FORTRESS DR 121 PIKE CALIBER CT MARTINSBURG 1187 215 PURCELL LNFORTRESS DR Recreation 403 FORTRESS DR102 108MARTINSBURG LAUCK DR 1197 FORTRESS DR CALIBER CT 01 § ¨¦ 117 405 School 340 PIKE CALIBER CT1167 MARTINSBURG 11 81 106 406 208 195FORTRESS DR FORTRESS DR STINE LN MARTINSBURG PIKE Employment 103 01 CALIBER CT FORTRESS DR LAUCK DR LAUCK DR 115 PIKE SENTINEL DR 1159 522 Airport Support Area 111FORTRESS DR 107 1093412411 185409 184 MARTINSBURG FORTRESS DR B2 / B3 Note: Residential, 4 u/a REZ # 01 - 18 Frederick County Dept of High-Density Residential, 6 u/a Planning & Development Stonewall IV I High-Density Residential, 12-16 u/a 107 N Kent St PINs: Suite 202 Rural Area 43 - A - 21, 43 - A - 21B, 43 - A - 24, Winchester, VA 22601 Interstate Buffer 43 - 19 - 4 540 - 665 - 5651 Landfill Support Area Rezoning from RA to M1 Map Created: April 23, 2018 Natural Resources & Recreation Long Range Land Use Map Staff: cperkins Environmental & Recreational Resources 03757501,500Feet AMENDMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION:June 6, 2018Public Hearing Held; Postponed for 45 days July 18, 2018Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: August 8, 2018 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING#01-18 STONEWALL IV , WHEREAS REZONING#01-18 submittedbyEquus Capital Partners, Ltd., to rezoning 88.91± acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (Light Industrial) District with proffers with a final revision date of07/27/18was considered. The subject properties are located at the southern terminus of Lenoir Drive (Route F-732), in the Stonewall Magisterial District and is identified by Property Identification Nos. 43-A- 21, 43-A-21B, 43-19-4 and 43-A-24; and , WHEREAS the Planning Commissionheld a public hearing on this rezoning on June 6, 2018and postponed the application for 45days; and , WHEREAS the Planning Commission held a public meeting on July 18, 2018 and recommended approval; and , WHEREAS the Board of Supervisorsheld a public hearing on this rezoningonAugust 8, 2018; and , WHEREAS the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning tobe in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors,that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to amended to rezone 88.91± acres from RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (Light Industrial) District with proffers with a final revision date of 07/27/18. The conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the Applicant and the Property Ownerisattached. PDRes #28-18-1- This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 8thday of August 2018by the following recorded vote: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., ChairmanGary A. Lofton J.Douglas McCarthyRobert W. Wells Shannon G. TroutJudith McCann-Slaughter Blaine P. Dunn A COPY ATTEST _________________________________ Kris C. Tierney, Frederick County Administrator PDRes #28-18-2- COUNTY ofFREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax:540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: M.Tyler Klein, AICP, Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment Shipping Containers DATE: July 30, 2018 This is a proposed amendment to Chapter 165 ZoningOrdinanceto restrict the use of shipping containers (i.e. pre-fabricated, durable, steel shipping containers, also know as intermodal containers, cargo containers, freight containers, or ISO containers) as accessory storagein certain zoning districts. Shipping containers are typically 8-feet (FT) wide, 8-FT tall and 20-40-FT long. The current zoning ordinance does not specifically address shipping containers, only where tractor trailersmay be parked or stored. This item was first discussed by the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) on February 26, 2018. This item was then forwarded to the Planning Commission for discussion on April 4, 2018, and subsequently to the Board of Supervisors for discussion on May 9, 2018. The Board of Supervisors directed Staff to take the proposed text amendment back to the DRRC for additional consideration Shipping containers as accessory storage should be allowed in all business and industrial districts. Shipping containers are integral to business and industrial uses for transportation services, warehousing, and distribution. Existing regulations for outdoor storage and tractor trailer parking may already regulate this use and additional restrictions may not be necessary. Shipping containers are designed to be stacked. The original draft revision stated that shipping containers as accessory storage may conflict with residential uses and it may be appropriate for Frederick County to prohibit their use on residential lots of all sizes, including rural residential subdivisions. The Board of Supervisors did not all agree this was an issue that needed to be regulated. Prohibiting storage containers as storage in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District by lot size (i.e. 6-acres or more, or 6-acres or less) may be arbitrary, for example some farms could be as small as 1-acre. thth This item was again discussed by the DRRCat their May 24and June 28regular meetings. After additional consideration, the DRRC proposed prohibitingthe use of shipping containers as accessory storage only in the RP (Residential Performance), R4 (Residential Planned Community) and R5 (Residential Recreation Community) Zoning Districts.Theintent of this modification is to .Under the proposed text from the DRRC, shipping containers would continue to beallowed in all other zoning districts as an accessory use or storage. or designated business and industrial districts. This item was discussed by the Planning Commission on July 18, 2018. As part of the discussion, the Planning Commission asked for clarification regarding if someone could use a shipping container for storage if it were fully enclosed within another structure. Staff confirmed that this would be acceptable if it were fully enclosed within a structure and if the enclosed structure met the appropriate setback requirements for accessory structures. The Planning Commission further expressed concern with not placing additional restrictions on the use of shipping containers as accessory storage on lots in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District primarily used for residential purposes (i.e. rural subdivisions). The attached document shows the proposedordinance as revisedby the DRRC (with bold italic Staff is seeking direction from the Board for text added). This item is presented for discussion. of Supervisors on this Zoning Ordinance text amendment; attached is a resolution directing the item to public hearing should the Board of Supervisors deem it appropriate. Attachments:1.Revisedordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics. 2.Resolution MTK/pd ARTICLE I General Provisions; Amendments; and Conditional Use Permits Part 101 General Provisions §165-101.02 Definitions andword usage Shipping containerspre-fabricated, durable, steel shipping containers, also known as intermodal containers, cargo containers, freight containers, or ISO containers. ARTICLE II Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses Part 201 Supplementary Use Regulations §165-201.05 Secondary or accessory uses. When permitted secondary or accessory uses that are normally or typically found in association with the allowed primary use shall be allowed on the same parcel or lot as the primary use, secondary uses shall meet the requirements of this section as well as any particular standard imposed on such use. G.In no case shall a shipping container, i.e. pre-fabricated steel shipping boxes, be allowed as an accessory use or storage in the RP (Residential Performance), R4 (Residential Planned Community) and R5 (Residential Recreational Community) Zoning Districts. Shipping containers are allowed in all other zoning districts as an accessory use or storage and should meet the applicable setback requirements for accessory uses. ____________________________ Action: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: August 8, 2018 RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CHAPTER 165, ZONING ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS PART 101 GENERAL PROVISIONS §165-101.02 DEFINITIONS &WORD USAGE ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES PART 201SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS §165-201.05SECONDARY OR ACCESSORY USES WHEREAS, aproposed text amendmentto Chapter 165, Zoning to prohibit the use of shipping containers, as an accessory use or storage in the RP (Residential Performance), R4 (Residential Planned Community) and R5 (Residential Recreational Community) Zoning Districtswas considered.Under the proposed text amendment, shipping containers would continue to be allowed in all other zoning districts as an accessory use or storage. This proposed text designated business and industrial districts WHEREAS, The Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) reviewed thth this proposed text amendmentat their May 24and June 28regular meetings;and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on July 18,2018 and agreed with the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, theBoard of Supervisorsdiscussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on August 8, 2018; and PDRes #17-18 -2- WHEREAS, the Frederick CountyBoard 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 regardingthe proposed text amendment to Chapter 165; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REQUESTED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the Frederick County Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to prohibit the use of shipping containers, as an accessory use or storage in the RP (Residential Performance), R4 (Residential Planned Community) and R5 (Residential Recreational Community) Zoning Districts. Shipping containers are allowed in all other zoning districts as an accessory use or storage and should meet the applicable setback requirement for accessory uses. Passed this 8thday ofAugust2018by the following recorded vote: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., ChairmanGary A. Lofton J.Douglas McCarthyBlaine P. Dunn Shannon G. TroutRobert W. Wells Judith McCann-Slaughter A COPY ATTEST ______________________________ Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Administrator PDRes #17-18 COUNTY ofFREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: M.Tyler Klein, AICP, Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment Storage Facilities, self-service,in RA District DATE: July 30, 2018 This is a proposed amendment to Chapter 165 ZoningOrdinancetoallow storage facilities, self- service,in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District as aconditional use (requiring an approved Conditional Use Permit CUP).Currently, storage facilities, self-service,are only allowed in the B2 (General Business), B3 (Industrial Transition), M1 (Light Industrial)and M2 (Industrial General)Zoning Districts. Thistext amendment was previously presented tothePlanning Commission and Board of Supervisors for information/discussionand subsequentlycameforward forpublic hearings (and was subsequently deniedby the Board of Supervisors) inlate-2015.At the February 26, 2018 Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) meeting, Staff was instructed to bring this item as it was proposed in 2015 back for further consideration. This item was presented to the Planning Commission on April 4, 2018; the Commission instructed Staff to take the itemback to the DRRC for further revisions. At the May 24, 2018 DRRC meeting, the DRRC recommended changes to the 2015 proposal. This draft textamendment includes additional requirements for self-storage facilities in the RA District. These supplemental use regulations include: conformance with B2 (General Business) District standards for setbacks, buffering and screening(except where topography or existing vegetation would fulfill the screening requirements);and a requirement for self-storage facilities to have direct access to a state roadway. This item was discussed by the Planning Commission on July 18, 2018. One Planning Commissioner expressed concern for neighboring properties adjacent to a self-storage facility with potential for light pollution, crime, and trash from the facility. Other members of the Planning Commission noted some of the Zoning Ordinance requirements (such as requirement for a site plan) which may address concerns raised by neighbors. It was also noted that this use would require a conditional use permit, and each site would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The attached documentshows the proposed text amendmentas recommended by the DRRC(with Staff is seeking direction from bold italic for text added). This item is presented for discussion. the Board of Supervisors on this Zoning Ordinance text amendment; attached is a resolution directing the item to public hearing should the Board of Supervisors deem it appropriate. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics. 2. Resolution MTK/pd ARTICLE IV Agricultural and Residential Districts Part 401 RA Rural Areas District § 165-401.03. Conditional uses. The following uses of structures and land shall be allowed only if a conditional use permit has been granted for the use: TT. Self-Service Storage Facilities ARTICLE II Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses § 165-204.18 Storage facilities, self-service. Where allowed, self-service storage facilities shall meet the following requirements: A. Self-service storage facility operations shall be permitted as a primary or accessory use in all zoning districts in which they are permitted. B. All parking areas, travel aisles and maneuvering areas associated with the self-service storage facility operations shall be paved with asphalt, concrete or similar material to provide a durable hard surface. C. Buildings are permitted that provide interior and exterior accessible units. Individual units within the self-service storage building shall not exceed 1,000 square feet in area. D. Minimum building spacing shall be 30 feet apart. Loading areas shall be delineated to ensure that adequate travel aisles are maintained between buildings. E. Recreational vehicles and boats shall be permitted to be stored within completely enclosed areas of the self-service storage facility, provided that the storage area is separate from the parking areas and travel aisles and is depicted on the approved site development plan. Areas utilized for this purpose shall be exempt from the surface requirements specified under § 165-204.18B. F. Self-service storage facilities shall meet the following landscaping or screening requirements: (1) Facilities located in the B-2 Business General District shall be completely screened around the perimeter of the property by a double row of evergreen trees that are staggered and planted a maximum of eight feet off center and are a minimum of six feet in height when planted. (2) Facilities located in the B-3 Industrial Transition District or the M-1 Light Industrial District shall be required to landscape the yard area within the front yard setback to provide for a double row of evergreen trees that are staggered and planted a maximum of eight feet off center. The side and rear yards shall be planted with a single row of evergreen or deciduous trees that are planted a maximum of 40 feet off center. All trees shall be a minimum of six feet in height at the time of planting. (3) Facilities located on parcels that are within a master planned industrial park or office park shall be required to landscape the perimeter of the facility with a single row of evergreen or deciduous trees that are planted a maximum of 40 feet off center. All trees shall be a minimum of six feet in height at the time of planting. (4) The required planting of all trees described under this SubsectionF shall occur in an area that is between the adjoining property boundary line and the placement of security fencing. The installation of an opaque wall or fence that is a minimum of six feet in height may substitute for required landscaped areas in all zoning districts. G. Self-service storage facility operations shall be designed to accommodate the storage of residential, commercial and industrial items, excluding hazardous, toxic and explosive materials. No use, sale, repair or activity other than storage shall be permitted to occur in self-service storage facility operations. A copy of the lease agreement which describes the requirements of this subsection shall be approved in conjunction with the site development plan for the self-service storage facility operation. H. In addition to the above, self-service storage facilities in the RA (Rural Areas) District shall adhere to the following requirements: (1) All development shall conform to all B2 (General Business) District standards unless the storage is screened naturally by vegetation or topography. (2) All developments shall have direct access onto a state road. ____________________________ Action: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: August 8, 2018 RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CHAPTER 165, ZONING ARTICLE IV AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT PART 401 RURAL AREAS DISTRICT §165-401.03 CONDITIONAL USES ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS, PARKING, BUFFERS, AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES PART 204 ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES §165-204.18 STORAGE FACILITIES, SELF-SERVICE WHEREAS, a proposed text amendment to Chapter 165, Zoning to allow storage facilities, self-service, in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District as a conditional use (requiring an approved Conditional Use Permit CUP). This proposed text amendment includes additional requirements for self-storage facilities in the RA District. These supplemental use regulations include: conformance with B2 District standards for setbacks, buffering and screening (except where topography or existing vegetation would fulfill the screening requirements); and a requirement to have direct access to a state roadway. WHEREAS, The Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) reviewed th this proposed text amendment at their May 24 regular meeting; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on July 18, 2018 and agreed with the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors discussed the proposed changes at their regularly scheduled meeting on August 8, 2018; and PDRes #29-18 -2- 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 the proposed text amendment to Chapter 165; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REQUESTED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the Frederick County Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to allow storage facilities, self-service, in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District as a conditional use (requiring an approved Conditional Use Permit CUP). This includes additional requirements for self-storage facilities in the RA District. These supplemental use regulations include: conformance with B2 District standards for setbacks, buffering and screening (except where topography or existing vegetation would fulfill the screening requirements); and a requirement to have direct access to a state roadway. Passed this 8th day of August 2018 by the following recorded vote: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Gary A. Lofton J. Douglas McCarthy Blaine P. Dunn Shannon G. Trout Robert W. Wells Judith McCann-Slaughter A COPY ATTEST ______________________________ Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Administrator PDRes #29-18