The URL can be used to link to this page

June 12 2019 Board_Agenda_PacketAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, JUNE 12, 2019 7:00 P.M. - REGULAR MEETING BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 1.7:00 P.M. - Regular Meeting Call to Order 2.Invocation 3.Pledge of Allegiance 4.Adoption of Agenda 5.Citizen Comments – Agenda Items that are not the subject of a Public Hearing 6.Consent AgendaAttachment 6.A Minutes 1.Service Learning Forum of May 20, 2019 ------------------------------------------- A 2.Work Session of May 22, 2019 --------------------------------------------------------- B 3.Regular Meeting of May 22, 2019 ---------------------------------------------------- C 6.B Committee Reports 1.Public Works Committee Reportof5/28/19----------------------------------------- D 2.Information Technologies Committee Report of 5/29/19 ------------------------- E 3.Developmental Impact Model Oversight Committee Reportof 5/9/19 -------- F MEETING AGENDA PAGE 2 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Wednesday, June 12, 2019 7.Board of Supervisors Comments 8.County Officials 8.ACommittee Appointments--------------------------------------------------------------------G 1.Shawneeland Sanitary District Advisory Committee 2-year term of Lynn Schmitt ends 7/13/19(Eligible for reappointment) 8.B Frederick/Warren County Line –Property Issue---------------------------------------H This is a request for the Board of Supervisors to consider a boundary adjustment to the Warren/Frederick County lines in the Foster Hollow Road area. By way of background, this apparent boundary dispute came up via the Virginia Department of Elections relative to voting precinct lines around the State. The Department wanted to ensure correct voting district classificationswith the area in question affecting the Congressional districts because Warren County is in the 6th District and Frederick County is in the 10th. 8.C Reduction/Offset of FrederickWater DebtObligation---------------------------------I Frederick Water has contracted with Perry Engineering to construct the replacement ball fields at Clearbrook Park and has worked with the County to get an approved site plan for those ballfields. The County has identifiedcertain features that would benefit the users of said fieldsincluding the use of LED lighting technologies within the complex.Frederick Waterhas advisedthe cost of the features exceeds their budget for this project.To accommodate the County’s desirefor the more efficient lighting, as well as provide other additional improvements to the site, Frederick Water has asked if the County would be willing to off-set the costs for those features by forgiving Frederick Water’s existing debt obligation in theamount of $657,083.23. 9.Committee Business 9.APublic Works Committee(See Attachment _D_) 1.Set Public Hearing on Quitclaim Request for Shawneeland. The Committee recommends that the Board set a public hearing on the disposition of any County interest in ShawneelandTax Parcel Number 49A04-1-K-19Lot 19. MEETING AGENDA PAGE 3 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Wednesday, June 12, 2019__________________________________________________________ 9.Committee Business, continued 9.B Developmental Impact Model Oversight Committee 1. Capital Impacts Study-------------------------------------------------------------------------J Frederick County has been working with Tischler-Biseto develop a Capital Impacts Study andModel designed to evaluate the anticipated need for capital facilities based on growth and todetermine the cost of those capital facilities to the County. Further, the model determines thecost to the County for mitigating the infrastructure impacts associated with re-zonings. ThisCapital Impact Study also assists in ensuring the County’s Cash Proffer Policy complies with latest Virginia Cash Proffer legislation.TheCommitteerecommendsacceptingthe Capital Impacts Study and implementingthe use of the Capital Impacts . Model,effective July 1, 2019 10.Public Hearings (Non Planning Issues) 10.A Outdoor Festival Permit Request of Tyler Wakeman– ------------------------------K Peak Leaf Music & Brewers Festival Pursuant to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 86, Festivals; Section 86-3, Permit Required; Application; Issuance or Denial; Fee, for an Outdoor Festival Permit.Festival to be Held on Saturday, October 19, 2019, from 12:00 Noon until 8:00 PM, at the Corner of Valley Pike and State Route 634, Identified as Tax Parcel Number 91-A-117, Middletown, Virginia, Back Creek Magisterial District.Property Owned by Wakeland Manor, Inc. 10.B Cable Television Franchise Agreement with Comcast Of ---------------------------L California/Maryland/Pennsylvania/Virginia/West Virginia, LLC. The Proposed Agreement Would Grant to Comcast a NonexclusiveFranchise to Provide Cable Television Service Within Frederick County for a Period of 10 Years.Comcast Has a Current Cable Television Franchise Agreement with the County Which is Due to Expire on June 30, 2019. 10.C ProposedAmendment(s)totheFrederick CountyCode, ----------------------------M Chapter 118, Noise. ThePurpose of this Proposed Amendment(s)is to Adopt a “Plainly Audible” and Decibel Standard of 60 dB with Respect to Certain Prohibited Noise. 10.D ProposedAmendment(s)totheFrederick CountyCode, ----------------------------N Chapter 48 Animals and Fowl, Article I Dogs Running at Large; Rabies Control, Section 48-3 Dogs Running at Large Unlawful. TheProposed Amendment(s)WouldConform with Recent Changes Made to the Code of Virginia, Section 3.2-6538, Effective July 1, 2019. MEETING AGENDA PAGE 4 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Wednesday, June 12, 2019__________________________________________________________ 11. Planning Commission Business -None 12. Board Liaison Reports 13. Citizen Comments 14. Board of Supervisors Comments 15. Adjourn MINUTES FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SERVICE LEARING FORUM MONDAY,MAY 20,2019 6:00P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES Board of Supervisors:Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman; J. Douglas McCarthy;Judy McCann-Slaughter and Robert W. Wellswere present. Gary A. Lofton, Vice Chairman; Blaine P. Dunn; and Shannon G. Troutwere absent. Staff Present:Kris C. Tierney, County Administrator; Jay E. Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator; Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney; Scott Varner, Director of Information Technology; Karen Vacchio, Public Information Officer; and Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 6:00p.m. SERVICE LEARINNG STUDENT PRESENTATIONS Deputy County Administrator Jay Tibbs explained the Service Learning Program. Twelve student groups representing James Wood, Millbrook, and Sherando High Schools presented the projects they had completed under the supervision of various County departments and community organizations. ChairmanDeHavenand the Board members thanked the students for their efforts. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 7:19p.m. Frederick County Board of Supervisors Service Learning ForumMinutes * May 20, 2019 1 MINUTES FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WORK SESSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 22,2019 5:30P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES Board of Supervisors:Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman;Blaine P. Dunn; J. Douglas McCarthy;Judy McCann-Slaughter and Robert W. Wellswere present. Gary A. Lofton, Vice Chairman; and Shannon G. Trout were absent. Staff Present:Kris C. Tierney, County Administrator; Jay E. Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator;Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney; Cheryl Shiffler, Director of Finance; Sharon Kibler, Assistant Director of Finance; Bill Orndoff, Treasurer; Scott Varner, Director ofInformation Technology; Mike Ruddy, Director of Planning & Development; and Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 5:30p.m. ADOPTION OF AGENDA On motion ofSupervisor Dunn, seconded by Supervisor McCarthy, the agendawas adopted as presented. PRESENTATION BYPFM ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC Kathleen L. Bowe, Senior Managing Consultantat PFM Asset Management LLC, gave a PowerPoint presentation on funding options for Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) and highlighted the advantages of the Irrevocable Trust option. By consensus, the Board agreed to have the Finance Committee continueresearching the matter and make a recommendation to the Board. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 6:29p.m. Frederick County Board of Supervisors Work Session Minutes * May 22, 2019 1 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, MAY 22,2019 7:00P.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. TroutandRobert W. Wells were present. Staff present: Kris C. Tierney, County Administrator; Jay E. Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator; Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney;Karen Vacchio, Public Information Officer; Mike Ruddy, Director of Planning and Development;Candice Perkins, Assistant Director of Planning & Development; John Bishop, Assistant Director of Planning-Transportation; Mark Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Scott Varner, Director of Information Technologies; Andrew Farrar, Program Coordinator, Information Technologies; SharonKibler, Assistant Director of Finance; Patrick Barker, Executive Director of the Frederick County EDA; andAnn W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION The Reverend DonDenHartogof Fellowship Bible Church deliveredtheinvocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Chairman Lofton led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA -APPROVED Upon motion of Vice Chairman Lofton,seconded bySupervisor McCarthy,theagenda was adoptedon a voice vote. CITIZENS COMMENTS Therewere no speakers. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA –APPROVED Upon motion of Supervisor Slaughter, seconded by Vice Chairman Lofton,the consent agenda was adoptedon aroll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 1 -Minutes: Joint Work Session with Parks & Recreation Commission of May 8, 2019 - CONSENT AGENDAAPPROVAL -Minutes: Regular Meeting of May 8, 2019 - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Code & Ordinance Committee Report of 5/9/19 - , Appendix 1 CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Finance Committee Report of 5/15/19 - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL, Appendix 2 -Parks & Recreation Commission Report of 5/14/19 - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL, Appendix 3 -Request for Refundsand Corresponding Supplemental Appropriations- CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL Handy Mart, LLC-$3,089.89 Kevin Campbell Trucking Inc. –$10,860.84 Undisclosed Taxpayer-Disabled Veteran's Relief-$4,545.39 Undisclosed Taxpayer-Disabled Veteran's Relief-$6,790.67 -Resolution Adding Conns Road East to Secondary Road System - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL Resolution 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 Cou WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have en an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which appli 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 Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Res Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS-None COUNTY OFFICIALS: COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS MARK GAYLOR APPOINTED TO HANDLEY REGIONAL LIBRARY BOARD –APPROVED Supervisor McCarthy moved to appoint Mark Gaylor to the Handley Regional Library Board to fill an unexpired four-year term ending November 30, 2019. Supervisor Trout seconded the motion which carried on a voice vote. ROBERT MEADOWS REAPPOINTED AS STONEWALL DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE HISTORIC RESOURCESADVISORY BOARD –APPROVED Uponmotion of Supervisor Slaughter,seconded by Supervisor McCarthy,RobertMeadows wasreappointedas Stonewall District Representative to the Historic Resources Advisory Board for a four-year term ending June 10,2023.The motion carried on a voice vote. Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 2 COMMITTEE BUSINESS: CODE & ORDINANCE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 118 (NOISE) OF THE COUNTY CODE –FORWARDED TO PUBLIC HEARING –APPROVED Upon motion of Supervisor Trout, seconded bySupervisor McCarthy, Amendments to Chapter 118 (Noise) of the County Code, to adopt a “plainly audible” and/or 60 decibels standard were forwarded to public hearing with a recommendation of approval. The motion carriedon a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannonG. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye AMENDMENT TO SECTION 48-3 (DOGS RUNNING AT LARGE UNLAWFUL) OF ARTICLE I (DOG LICENSING; RABIES CONTROL) OF CHAPTER48 (ANIMALS AND FOWL) OF THE COUNTY CODE, FORWARDED TO PUBLIC HEARING –APPROVED Upon motion ofSupervisor Trout,seconded by Supervisor McCarthy, Amendment to Section 48-3 (Dogs running at large unlawful) of Article I (Dog Licensing; Rabies Control) of Chapter 48 (Animals and Fowl) of the County Code, to conform with changes to Virginia Code § 3.2-6538, effective July 1, 2019, was forwarded to public hearing with a recommendation of approval. The motion carriedon a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye FINANCE COMMITTEE Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of the following: 1.The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $3,693.07. This amount represents an insurance claim for a damaged vehicle. 2.The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $862.31. This amount represents restitution for damaged cruisers. 3.The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $100. This amount represents a DARE donation. 4.The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $11,853.47. This amount represents reimbursements from the Secret Service. 5.The Sheriff request a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $3,550. This amount represents proceeds from the sale of a retired cruiser. Vice Chairman Loftonseconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 3 J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of: The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $30,450 forPhase II of the eSummons project. This amount represents eSummons funds collected throughthe courts and earmarked for the implementation of an electronic summons system.Supervisor Wells 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 Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of: The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $24,750. This amount represents recovered costs for traffic control for overtime. Supervisor McCarthyseconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonNoRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharlesS. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of: The Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $270,870. This amount represents funds to purchase (9) nine 2019 vehicles at a cost savings of approximately $3,000 per vehicle. Funds were budgeted in FY 2020 and will be returned. She further moved that the supplemental appropriation come from the Capital Reserve in FY 2019 to be returned from the FY 2020 funds budgeted for Sheriff vehicles. Supervisor McCarthy seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonNoRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye The NRADC Superintendent requests a Court Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of: Services budget transfer in the amount of $7,000out of a personnel line item to operations to meet projected operational shortfalls.Vice ChairmanLofton 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 Judith McCann-SlaughterAye SupervisorSlaughtermoved for approval of: The Airport Director requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $245,737. This amount represents the County’s share of legal fees in the amount of $326,345 incurred in prior years (identified in the Airport CAFR as “Cash overdraft”). Supervisor Dunn seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 4 Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of: The Parks & Recreation Director requests a change order in excess of 10% for the Sherando Park Recreation Access Project. Vice Chairman Lofton secondedthe 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 Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of: The VJCCCA Director requests a General Fund budget transfer in the amount of $6,400 out of a personnel line item to operations to provide client services and training. Vice Chairman Loftonseconded 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 Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of: The VJCCCA Director requests an FY19 General Fund supplemental appropriation for up to $50,000 representing one-time supplemental funding from the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) for the purchase of equipment and supplies as Shenandoah Valley Achievement Center is launched. Funding will be on a reimbursement basis for actualexpenses, and she further moved that that the Board to authorize the County Administrator to sign the MOA Plan Addendumseconded the .Vice Chairman Lofton 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 Judith McCann-SlaughterAye + + + + + + + + + + + + + + PUBLIC HEARING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, PURSUANT TO VIRGINIA CODE SECTION 15.2-1800, REGARDING THE CONVEYANCE, BYA DEED FOR TWO HUNDRED YEARS, OF THE COUNTY’S INTEREST IN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET, IN THE CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA, IDENTIFIED AS CITY TAX PARCEL NUMBER 193-1-N-4,TO THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY BATTLEFIELDS FOUNDATION.-APPROVED Supervisor Slaughter recused herself from participation in this item. Mr. Tierney provided backgroundsaying the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation has operated a museum for a number of years on the premises of the former Frederick County Court House at 20 North Loudoun Street, and has expressed interestin seeking ownership of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 5 property. He said the County has negotiated a deed of transfer for a period of two hundred (200) years, or so long as the conditions contained in the deed are met, whichever period is shorter. He continued noting the contingencies of the deed as follows: The conveyance is contingent upon the Property being used for preservation of local history and the operation of a museum, such as the Shenandoah Valley Civil War Museum, which is presently operational on the site, and upon the Grantee or its assigns maintaining the layout of the historic courtroom within the structure on the site as it exists at the time of conveyance. Should the Grantee or its assigns cease to use the property for the above purpose or fail to maintain the layout of the historic courtroom, the property and all improvements thereon shall revert back to the ownership of Frederick County (the Grantor). Also, it is noted that the structure in place on the Property is designated as a historic structure and that the conveyance of the Property is contingent on the structure being maintained in such a fashion that it maintains his historic structure designation. Lastly, the Property contains a historic statue in its curtilage. The Grantee may not remove or alter said statue. Should the Grantee fail to abide by this condition, the Property shall revert to the Grantor. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. There were no speakers. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. SupervisorDunn moved for continuing thepublic hearing until the next meeting and delaying a decision until further information can be obtained from the constituents. Supervisor McCarthyseconded the motionwhich failed on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutNo Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsNo J. Douglas McCarthyNoCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.No Judith McCann-Slaughter(Recused) Supervisor McCarthy moved for approval of the conveyance, by a deed for two hundred years, of the County’s interest in real property located at 20 North Loudoun street, in the city of Winchester. Supervisor Trout seconded the motion which carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnNoShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S.DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-Slaughter(Recused) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN AMENDMENT (CPPA) #02-19 BRUCETOWN ROAD AREA AMENDMENT –SEWER AND WATER SERVICE AREA (SWSA)EXPANSION AND LAND USE DESIGNATION ASSOCIATED WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT #02-18 FOR THE CARTER TRACT -DENIED Assistant Planning DirectorPerkinssaid this is a Request to Amend the Northeast Land Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 6 Use Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Planandproposes to add 109 acres into the Sewer and Water ServiceArea (SWSA) and remove 109 acres from the SWSA. She said this amendment also seeks to designate the 109 acres for industrial uses.She said the Planning Commission recommended denial of thisamendment. Vice Chairman Lofton clarified that the subject property is not within the Brucetown Rural Community Area. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. Kay Dawson, Red Bud District, said recently disclosed information needs to be reviewed before a decision is made. Unknown resident of Brucetown Road discussed waivers for the kiln height at the Carmeuse quarry and said the cat litter plant will cause additional pollution. He noted other employers in the County which do not cause pollution. Tina Bragg of Stephenson noted problems with the existing Carmeuse plant including lights, noise, and dust, and said the roads can’t handle more traffic. George Sempeles, Red Bud District, said industry pays the lion’s share of the budget and failure to pass this amendment will cost the County $500,000 per year. He added that Clorox will be a good neighbor. Lindsey Wade, Stonewall District, said she searched for two years before purchasing her home for a little over $200,000 in the Brucetown area. She said she was not expecting a plant down the road and that it will damage property values. Charles Brown, a 38-yearemployee of Clorox, cited the environmental and sustainability record of Clorox, adding that Clorox will be a good neighbor. He noted that the Amherst, Virginia, plant has received a 0 waste to landfill rating. Susan Herbaugh, Stonewall District, said she is a direct neighbor of the subject property and is concerned about the history of the area and does not want her home to lose value. She asked the Board to vote no on the amendment. Tom Macomber, Stonewall District, said the proposal contravenes the Comprehensive Plan. He said there is no positive impact in the proposal to justify amending the Plan. Tom Edens, of Brucetown, said he has beenconcerned for years about strip mining at Clear Brook and is concerned about traffic, noise and air pollution from the proposed Clorox plant. He noted that Clorox has offered $1,000,000 toward road repairs but has been given $5,000,000 by the state. He asked the Board to honor the Comprehensive Plan. Doug Long of the Winchester & Western Railroad said the railroad is interested in reducing the carbon footprint of the Clorox project by taking trucks off the road. He said the railroad will give land to realign Brucetown Road. Chris Jenkins, Chief of the Clear Brook Volunteer Fire Department, cited the dangers of emergency vehicle accidents for EMS personnel. He discussed the road widths in the Brucetown area compared to the vehicle widths. He invited Board members to serve a shift at the fire hall to get a better idea of the danger of large EMS vehicles on narrow roads. Stacy Sampson, Stonewall District, asked the Board to vote no on the plan amendment. Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 7 She said the County says it wants to maintain safe roadways but amending the comprehensive plan will make it less safe. She said all residents will be at risk if more traffic is added. Unnamed resident discussed the projected $500,000 revenue saying that employees from out of state will pay taxes in their home states rather than in Frederick County. He noted the added infrastructure costs and asked the Board to vote no. Rick Warner, 28-year Clorox employee in Amherst, Virginia, notedthe company’s partnerships sayingCloroxwill be a tremendous community partner. Dave Rinehart asked the Board to vote against the comprehensive plan amendment saying avote in favor will change Brucetown and Clear Brook forever. He said property values will go down if big industry wins, and the current comprehensive planis the hero of the story by providing protection against industrial overreach. Victoria Hitchcock, Stonewall District, said she is a direct neighbor of the subject property an understands change and progress. She cited current noise and light pollution fromthe Carmeuse quarry adding that the roads are not built for industrial traffic. Brian Nuri, Opequon District, notedthe environmental issues surroundingthe proposal. He said theCounty needs businesses, but not the one currently proposed. He asked the Board to keep the community smartly developed. Cathy Whittier reminded the Board they are dealing with two global corporations that have money and do not care about the residents. She said the Board must decide between the corporations and the residents and asked the Board to direct Clorox to find land already zoned for industrial use. Michael Holly of the Clorox Company highlighted how the proposal would help achieve the broadgoals of the comprehensive plan noting projected tax revenues. He said theproject will not impact the community center, contains green initiatives, will not increase the sewer water service area, will not discharge water into the ground, but will provide new jobs and balance the tax base. He noted the company will minimize visibility of the complex by placing it in the interior of the property, will improve site lines by planting trees, and will minimize noise onsite. He said Clorox has a proven track record and the proposal meets the requirements of the comprehensiveplan. He reminded the Board that the plan has been modified a few times in recent years. Brenda Fristoe, Stonewall District, asked the Board to vote no because the proposal does not conform to the comprehensive plan. She said the property in question is designed to be a buffer between industrial activity and the Rural Community Center. She asked the Board to vote no and to protect the residents and maintain the 2035 Comprehensive Plan. Elmer Simsack, Stonewall District, referenced a small Oklahoma town that had strip-mining and later became a superfund site. He said he is concerned about increased activity at the quarry to serve the Clorox facility. Arthur Bragg, Stonewall District, said the proposal does not conform the comprehensive plan. He noted the historic area surrounding Brucetown and asked the Board to vote no on the amendment. Eric Federman, 19-year Clorox employee, noted the company’s outreach programs saying Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 8 the company hopes to bring similar outreach to Frederick County. He urged the Board tovote yes on the amendment. Vice Chairman Lofton read a letter of support for the proposal from John Riley, Vice Chair of the Frederick County Economic Development Authority. He quoted: “The EDA is supportive of this project. The EDA Board unanimously agrees that it is very important to show businesses, like the Clorox Company, that Frederick County is a safe and easy place to do business. Frederick County and Virginia are known for their positive business climate. Welcoming Clorox would only further concrete Frederick County's position as a premier east coast location for manufacturing and other businesses.” Tim Stowe, engineer representative of the Applicant, said the comprehensiveplan is a guide rather than legislation, and can be amended to seize opportunities. He said water is provided for in the proposal and what is needed isthe sewer water service area location change and the land use change. He said Clorox has modified language in response to concerns and he asked the Board to accept the proposal. Susan Howard, Stonewall District, noted noise in the community from the Carmeuse quarry and asked the Board to consider the residents who live in the area of the proposed project. She said no one would want to live next to the quarry as it is now, and that the County does not need what the Applicant is promising. Susan Watkins said there has been much growth in the area in five years and she questioned how much planning there has been for infrastructure. She said the residents do not want the Clorox plant and that there is a difference between Amherst County and Frederick County. She asked the Board to vote no. Tina Rinehart said she lives twomiles fromthe quarry and there is noise all night. She noted trucks speeding and dangerous road conditions and asked the Board to vote no. Brenda Fristoe, StonewallDistrict,continued her remarks saying she had met with the Economic Development Authority and does not believe the dollar figures given to the Authority by Clorox. She said the Authority should guide businesses to appropriate parcels of land. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. Supervisor Slaughter moved for denial of CCPA #02-19. Supervisor Wells seconded the motion. Vice Chairman Lofton said the comprehensive plan can be amended, adding that there have been two amendments for land in and around the Brucetown and Clear Brook area. He said the current vote is not to decide on a proposal by Clorox but rather a vote on the land use of a particular parcel. He said a vote to amend the plan does not imply or guarantee that a proposal brought forth by Clorox will be approved. He said the Carmeuse quarry has been in operation for over 50 years, and if the amendment is denied, Carmeuse will continue to operatewith no proffers forthcoming. In reference to how industry helps the whole county, he said that industry provides tax revenuewithout demands on services,adding that the landowner of the parcel wishes to sell and if this amendment is denied,the next optionwill be residential development on the site. He concluded saying that residential growth does not increase revenue, noting that the Board recently Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 9 turned down another opportunity and he fears that real estate taxes will continue to increase to raise revenue. Supervisor McCarthy said he is not opposed to changing the comprehensive plan but the ability to do road improvements needs to be addressed. He said he does not want the proposed $500,000 in revenue to be canceled by the millions it will take to upgrade the roads. He continued saying he learned recently that there are numerous other parcels either owned by Carmeuse or which there is an option for purchase by Carmeuse. He said he also learned that Carmeuse has only 15 to 30 years of material necessary, instead of 50 years as previously discussed, toserve Clorox on its current location. He said Carmeuse would probably be returning to the Board for futureamendmentsto gain access to the other propertieswhichit owns or on which it hasoptions topurchase, and these opportunities will increase traffic as a conveyor will not be of use with the distance to the additional parcels. He urged the Board to fully study the costs of transportation before voting on the matter. Supervisor Slaughter said the citizens have said all that is necessary. She said the Board is looking at both Clorox and Carmeuse as they will be in partnership. She noted her concern about the failing road network saying that it will take 30 years to recoup the $15 million necessary to upgrade the roads in the ares of the proposal. She said she does not want future Boards to be strong-armed toagree to re-zonings to supply the needs of the Clorox plant. Supervisor Dunn said the sentiment in the room supportsthe reasoning of Supervisor Slaughter. He said the possibility that the conveyor belt will not be a possibility means the traffic issues and road costs are much more likely. Vice Chairman Lofton said he cannot understand the reference to using tax revenue to pay for county road improvements, noting that companies do not pay taxes to pay for roads. He said all other taxes at the state level, such as the gasoline tax, are what fund transportation costs. Supervisor McCarthy said all taxes are paid by the citizens and therefore road improvements are paid by the citizens in one way or another. Supervisor Dunn said Clorox has tried to minimize its impact and if the Board votes no on the amendment, Carmeuse will still be operating in 50 years. Supervisor Dunnmoved to delay the vote until the July meeting for Carmeuse to respond with information about its sources of material. There was no second to the motion. Supervisor Slaughter’s motion for denial of CPPA #02-19 carried on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonNoRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.No Judith McCann-SlaughterAye + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 10 COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN AMENDMENT (CPPA) #01-19 BLACKBURN PROPERTY WORKFORCE HOUSING –URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA (UDA) EXPANSION AND LAND USE DESIGNATION CHANGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT #01-19 FOR BLACKBURN PROPERTY REQUEST -DENIED Assistant Planning Director Perkins said this is a request to amend the Kernstown Area Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan to add 71.849 Acres to the UDAand also seeks to designate the 71 acres for workforce housing. The Applicant is requesting the UDAexpansion and land use designation change to allow for the development of workforce housingthat is intended to provide affordable housing opportunities for residents of the community locatedwithin reasonable proximity of workplaces in the community. Shesaid the Planning Commission sent this item forward tothe Board of Supervisors with a recommendation for denial. Avram Fechter of Equity Plus, the Applicant,explained the definition of workforce housing as that for citizens earning 60% of the median income in the County. He said in Frederick County, those with annual incomes of $35,000 to $50,000 would qualify for the housing. He noted the proposal is for single family homes rather than apartments or attached units. Supervisor Wells and the Applicant discussed the tax credit program used to finance the program. Supervisor Trout and the Applicant discussed the rules on rents and terms of leases. Supervisor McCarthy and the Applicant discussed the wait list in relation to discrimination. Vice Chairman Lofton,the Applicant, and Evan Wyatt, engineering consultant representing the Applicant,discussed the location of the proposed project siteand its wetland characteristics. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. Kerri Ann Kite, Shawnee District,expressed her support for the workforce housing project. John Wright, Red Bud Districtresident and President of the FrederickCounty Professional Firefighters Association, said he supports the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning for the project saying housing costsare out of reach for many. Heidi David Young, Gainesboro District, spoke in favor of the project and asked the Board to use compassion and wisdom when voting on the issue. Tamara Bayliss, Back Creek District, said she supports affordable housing, and this is a wonderful opportunity to provide for those working in the service industry in the County. She said the Planning Commission did not give compelling reasons for denying the project. Mike Faison, Gainesboro District, read a letter of support for the project fromthe chairman of the Frederick County NAACP. He said denying workforce housing in higher income districts is akin to red-lining and suggested that the County could be inviting further scrutiny if the Board denies the project. John South, Back Creek District, said the need for workforce housing is real but the proposed location does not meet the requirements of being close to services. He cited traffic concerns. Jennifer Hall, Shawnee Districtresidentand United Way Valley Assistance Network employee, explained workforce housing and how it is different from government, Section 8, or low- Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 11 income housing. She urged the Board to vote for the amendment. Brian Nuri, Opequon District, said property values are rising but incomes are not keeping up. He said affordable housing makes areas more attractive to professional employers. Matthew Motz, Back Creek District, said those opposing the proposal are being framed as anti-poor and anti-police officer. He said the reality is the particular parcel of land is not suited for the development. He cited road conditions which will lead to a tax burden in the future. He said the class of person is not what will cause an increase in necessary services, but rather an increase in the number ofpersonscauses an increase in the demand for services. He asked the Board not to overturn the Planning Commission’s decisions. Tom Maloney of Apple Valley Road said the roads are not currently ready for the proposed project. Tom Hindman, business partner of the Applicant, referenced letters of support from the Frederick County Education Association, and Fellowship Bible Church, and cited employee statistics form Valley Health. Rick Brown, Back Creek District, commended the Board for maintaining the current tax rate and said industry pays the bills. He said there is plenty of affordable housing in the area. He said Apple Valley Road is not designed for traffic and asked the Board not to change the comprehensive plan. Darla McCreary, Back Creek District, said affordable housing is needed but the proposed site is not appropriate. She said the project will not bring revenue to the County and will not result in home ownership. She concluded saying the project is not harmonious with the surrounding area and asked the Board to vote no. Steven Pettler, representing the Applicant, said the proposal is not for low income or subsidized housing. He said the comments have been addressing the impacts of the proposed development, but the item for debate is a comprehensive plan amendment that would allow the opportunity for the project to be explored. He noted a plan amendment is necessary for transferred development rights to be used, and heconcluded saying it is unfair to the Applicant to have the Board focusing on the impacts when the Applicant cannot discuss those until the rezoning process. Bob Bolter, Opequon District, is involved with Faithworks Inc. He noted recent rent increases have displaced many, and said it is essential to amend the comprehensiveplan. He said the site is uniquely suited to the proposed development. Tabitha Jablonski,Red Bud District, spoke in support of affordable housing saying she is concerned about young families not being able to afford to live in the County. Roy Sampson, Back Creek District,said there is a lot of available affordable housing and the proposed site is not the place for the development. He said the roads need updating and the proposal will hurt the values of other homes in the neighborhood. Joseph Jablonski, Red Bud District resident and employee of Valley Assistance Network said there are a few affordable unitsin the County,but they are grabbed so quickly they are really not available.He said having the workforce housing option will actually increase the number of homeowners in the area by allowing people to save for a down payment. Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 12 Steve Lobell, Back Creek District, said the area cannot support the type of housing proposed. He said workforce housing is needed, but not in the currently proposed location. Richard Kennedy, Shawnee District resident and representative of the Top of Virginia Chamber of Commerce, encouraged the Board to vote for the plan amendment in order totake the next step and analyze the project. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. Because of the late hour, Chairman DeHaven polled the Board. By consensus, the Board agreed to continue the meeting. Vice Chairman Lofton moved for approval of CPPA # 01-19and Supervisor Trout seconded the motion. Supervisor Trout said she was appalled by some of the prejudicial remarks regarding the people living in workforce housing. She asked the Board members to vote yes to allow further discussion of the proposed project. Vice Chairman Lofton said he was originally conflicted because industrialdevelopment is his preference, but the proposed site has been for sale and is not conducive to industrial development. He said he would like the opportunity to explore the impacts of the project to the surrounding community, adding that workforce housingis needed. Supervisor McCarthy said he would like to have the discussion on impactsbefore the plan is changed, and hemoved to amend the main motion to delay the vote until the August meeting to allow additional road impact data to be obtained. Supervisor Slaughter seconded the motion. Vice Chairman Lofton said he is not in favor of a delay, and it appears the applicant is being asked to go through the rezoning process now. Supervisor McCarthy said he would like the transportation information before deciding on a plan amendment. Supervisor Dunn noted that if the plan amendment is made, but the project is not approved, the land designation remains residential. Supervisor Trout agreed with Vice Chairman Lofton, citing that theparcel has beencast asideas not viable for industrial development. Chairman DeHaven said he did not know why the Board would continuecomprehensive planning if they were going to have rezoning discussions prior to consideration of the comprehensive plan. The motion to amend the main motion by adding a delay until August failed on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutNo Gary A. LoftonNoRobert W.WellsNo J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.No Judith McCann-SlaughterAye The motion for approval of CPPA # 01-19 failed on a roll call vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnNoShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsNo J. Douglas McCarthyNoCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterNo Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 13 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + DRAFT UPDATE OF THE 2019-2020 FREDERICK COUNTY PRIMARY AND INTERSTATE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLANS-APPROVED THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 33.2-331 OF THECODE OF VIRGINIA, WILL CONDUCT A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING.THE PURPOSE OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE PROPOSED SIX YEAR PLAN FOR SECONDARY ROADS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2020 THROUGH 2025 IN FREDERICK COUNTY AND ON THE SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020.–APPROVED Assistant Director of Planning -Transportation John Bishop discussedthis annual update to the road plans saying this is an opportunity to communicate priorities and desires to VDOT. He reviewed updates that have been incorporated into the plans. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. There were no speakers. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Lofton moved for approval of the Primary, Interstate, and Secondary Road Plans. SupervisorMcCarthy seconded the motion which carriedas follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeShannon G. TroutAye Gary A. LoftonAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye + + + + + + + + + + + + + + BOARD LIAISON REPORTS Supervisor McCarthy said the Handley Library Board approved the concept forwarded from Parks & Recreation regarding the addition of a trail around the lake at the Bowman Library. CITIZEN COMMENTS John Wright, Red Bud District resident and President of the Frederick County Professional Firefighters Association, discussed the traffic issues on Brucetown Road saying the issues are known,and asking why they are not being addressed. He said the County should work toward fixing this serious safety issue. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS-None ADJOURN On motion of Vice Chairman Lofton, seconded by Supervisor Wells,the meeting was adjourned at 11:25 p.m. Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * May 22, 2019 14 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Tuesday, May 28, 2019 8:00 a.m. 107 NORTH KENT STREET, SUITE 200, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE ATTENDEES: Committee Members Present: J. Douglas McCarthy, Chairman; Gary A. Lofton; Whitney Whit L.Wagner; Gene E. Fisher; and Harvey E. Ed Strawsnyder, Jr. Committee Members Absent: Robert W. Wells Staff present: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works; Mike Stewart, Senior Project Manager; Kevin Alderman, Shawneeland District Manager; Rod Williams, County Attorney; Kris Tierney, County Administrator; Gloria Puffinburger, Solid Waste Manager; Ron Kimble, Landfill Manager; Kathy Whetzel, Animal Shelter Manager; Holly Grim, Assi Manager Attachment 1 Agenda Packet ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: 1-Quitclaim request for Shawneeland. County Attorney Rod Williams explained the quitclaim request to t discussion Supervisor Lofton made a motion to forward the request to the Board of Supervisors for scheduling of a public hearing on the disposition of any county inte 19.The motion was seconded by committee member Ed Strawsnyder. The committee unanimously approved the motion. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION ONLY 1-Contribution from the Community Inmate Workforce. Gloria Puffinburger discussed the positive impact the Community Inm contribution has made in conjunction with the Virginia Adopt-A-Highway program. 2-Proposed Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Carry Forward Requests for Shawneeland, Animal Shelter, Solid Waste and the Landfill. Each department has on-going projects related to the carry forward requests. In general, the requests are for any remaining funds left in the line items to be carried forward. These requests will go the Finance Committee on July 17, 2019 for their consideration. a.Shawneeland line item 16-8108-8800-00 Buildings request for $30,000 to be carried forward for construction of additional office space. Supervisor Lofton made a motion to approve the request and forward to the Finance Committee. Th seconded by committee member Whit Wagner. The committee unanimo approved the motion. b.Shawneeland line item 16-8108-3004-04 Road Improvements. Due to the on-going culvert and road repairs, any remaining funds in this line item d into fiscal year 2019/2020. Supervisor Lofton made a motion to and forward to the Finance Committee. The motion was seconded by committee member Gene Fisher. The committee unanimously approved the moti c.Animal Shelter line item 10-4305-3001-00 Professional Health Services and line item 10-4305-3002-02 Professional Services/Engineering and Design. Both line items represent requests from donated funds. The 3001 code represents spay/neuter programs. The 3002 code represents funds for on-going engineering support for construction of the new Animals Shelter training facility. This facility will be built using all donated funds. Supervisor Lofton made a motio request and forward to the Finance Committee. The motion was se committee member Ed Strawsnyder. The motion was unanimously app committee. d.Refuse Collection line items 10-4203-3002-00 Professional Services, 10-4203-3004-03 Repair and Maintenance/Buildings, line item 10-4203-3010-00 Contractual Services. The request was for any remaining balances from these line items to be carry forward into fiscal year 2019/2020 budget. Committee member Ed Strawsnyder made a motion to approve the carry forward request and to forward them to the Finance Committee for their consideration. The motion was seconded by committee member Gene Fisher. The committee unanimously approved the motion. e.Landfill line items 12-4204-3002-00 Professional Services and line item 12-4204-8900-00 Improvements Other Than Buildings. Both line items are for on- going projects at the Landfill. The requests were for any remaining balances to be carried forward into fiscal year 2019/2020. Committee member Whit Wagner made a motion to approve the request and to forward them to the Finance Commit motion was seconded by committee member Ed Strawsnyder. The committee unanimously approved the motion. 4-Update on Public Works and Landfill Projects. We updated the committee that work has begun on construction of the Crossover Boulevard road project. The contractor is currently obtaining permits andmobilizing equipment to the site. We are planning to bid the construction of the Animal Shelter tra The anticipated construction time is nine (9) months. We are currently getting the agreements in place and signed for the replacement Albin Convenience Site at the old bus shop facility (SFW). We anticipate getting pricing in August of 2019. We should be completing the construction of the Landfill leachate lagoon and force main systems by July 2019. 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 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 ofMay 28, 2019 DATE: May 22, 2019 There will be a meeting of the Public Works Committee on Tuesday, May 28, 2019 at 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 far is as follows: 1.Quitclaim request forShawneeland Lot 19. (Attachment 1) 2.Discuss the contribution from the Community Inmate Workforce. (Attachment 2) 3.Proposed Fiscal Year 2018/2019 carry forward requests for Shawneeland, Animal Shelter, Solid Waste and the Landfill. (Attachment 3) 4.Update on Landfill Projects and Public Works projects. 5.Miscellaneous Reports: a.Tonnage Report: Landfill (Attachment 4) b.Recycling Report Attachment 5) ( c.Animal Shelter Dog Report: (Attachment 6) d.Animal Shelter Cat Report (Attachment 7) JCW/kco Attachments:as stated 107 North Kent Street, Second Floor, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 May 14, 2019 Sgt. Neal Steward Community Inmate Workforce Northwestern Adult Detention Center 141 Fort Collier Road Winchester, VA 22603 RE:Virginia Adopt-A-Highway Dear Sgt. Steward: As we close out another fiscal year, I would like to take this opportunity to highlight the Community InmateWorkforces contribution to the Virginia Adopt-a-Highway Program. In partnership with Frederick County Clean Sweep, the Regional Detention Center adopted two roadways (Sulpher Spring Road and Aylor Road) in 2017. According to the states records, from the adoption date in January of 2017 until the close of March 2019, the CIWF had contributed 1,058 man hours collecting litter along its two adopted roads. This is an in-kind contribution of $25,910,benefitting both the county and the state litter control programs.These adoptions represent only a portion of the crews efforts during the year. Altogether, Virginia AAH estimates that its 18,000 volunteers provide $1.35 million in cleanup services each year to the state.This is money that is saved for other much-needed expenses outside of litter pickup. Therefore, I would encourage the CIWF to renew these adoptions when they expire in 2020. In closing, Itrust that the CIWF andjail staff are proud of thisoutstanding commitment toward a cleaner and greener Frederick County. Regards, Gloria M. Puffinburger Solid Waste Manager cc:J.Whitley, superintendent, NRADC J.Wilder, director, PublicWorks C.Caswell, Clean Sweep crew supervisor 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 18/19CarryForwards DATE: 5/15/19 ________________________________________________________________________ The Shelter is requesting a funding carry forwardfrom FY 18/19intoline item 10-4305-3001-00 Professional Health Servicesin the amount of $4,426.88or the remaining portion thereof. 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 carryforward from FY 18/19into line item 10- 4305-3002-02 Professional Services Engineering and Designin the amount of $22,401.70 or the remaining portion thereof. 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 MEMORANDUM TO: Joe C. Wilder Director of Public Works FROM: Gloria M. Puffinburger Solid Waste Manager RE: Carryforward Request; FY 18/19 Refuse Collection (4203) DATE: May 22, 2018 _______________________________________________________________________ The purpose of this memo is to request a carryforward amount of $89,200, or the remaining balance at the end of the fiscal year, from line item 10-4203-8900-00 (Improvements Other Than Buildings) for costs associated with the final completion of the Stephenson citizens convenience site. Requested funds should be placed into the 10-4203-8900-00 line item in the FY 19/20 fiscal year. Also requested carryforwards from the current fiscal year to FY 19/20 from the Refuse Collection (4203) budget include: Line item 10-4203-3002-0 (Professional Services) -- $66,200 or the remaining balance; fund continued design work for relocation of the Albin citizens convenience site Line item 10-4203-3004-03 (Repair and Maintenance/Building) -- $68,425 or the remaining balance; funds for completion of site improvements at the Middletown convenience sites. Work is in the design phase. Line item 10-4203-3010-00 (Contractual Services) -- $140,000 or remaining balance; funds for increased hauling costs based on May CPI figures and increased costs associated with recycling program. Carryforward requests total $363,825 or such balances that remain in the various line items at the close of the current fiscal year. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at Extension 8219. MEMORANDUM TO: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works FROM: Ron Kimble, Landfill Manager SUBJECT: Carry Forwards to 2019/2020 DATE: May 22, 2019 ________________________________________________________________________ The purpose of this memo is to request a carry forward of the remaining balance at the end of the fiscal year, from line item 12-4204-8900-00 (Improvements Other Than) for cost associated with on-going projects at the landfill.Requested funds should be placed into the 12-4204-8900-00 line item in the fiscal year 2019/2020budget. We also request the remaining balance from at the end of the fiscal year from line item 12-4204-3002-00 (Professional Services). If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me at 540-665-5658. 107 North Kent Street, Second Floor, Suite 200Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: MonthlyTonnage Report -Fiscal Year 18/19 DATE: May 22, 2019 The following is the tonnage for the months of July 2017through June 2018, and the average monthly tonnage for fiscal years 03/04 through 18/19. 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: 17,785TONS (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) FY 18-19:AVERAGE PER MONTH:16,317TONS(UP 572 TONS) MONTHFY 2017-2018FY 2018-2019 JULY 15,46517,704 AUGUST 17,69418,543 SEPTEMBER 16,81314,799 OCTOBER 15,85318,158 NOVEMBER 16,10915,404 DECEMBER 12,64414,426 JANUARY 13,29513,973 FEBRUARY 13,10012,764 MARCH 15,51017,079 APRIL 15,46920,313 MAY 18,755 JUNE 18,228 JCW/gmp Development Impact Model Oversight Committee (DIM-OC) COMMITTEE REPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA A Development Impact Model Oversight Committee meeting was held in the Public Works Department Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. ATTENDEES: Committee Members Present: Chuck DeHaven (BOS), Gary Lofton (BOS), Kris Tierney (County AdmFrogale (TVBA), Stephen Pettler (TVBA). Committee Members Absent: Frank Wright (School Board), Roger Thomas (Planning Commission), Commission). Staff Present: Mike Ruddy (Planning), Candice Perkins (Planning), Tyler Klein (Planning), Jay Tibbs (County Admin.), Rod Williams (County Admin.), Jason Robertson (Parks & Rec), Jon Turkel (Parks & Rec), Al Orndorff (FCPS), Kevin Kenney (FCPS & Planning Commission), Wayne Lee (FCPS). Others Present: Julie Herlands (Consultant, VP, Tischler-Bise), Colin McAweeney (Consultant, Tischler-Bise), Blaine Dunn (BOS), William Aikens (TVBA). ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: 1. Review and endorsement of the Capital Impacts Study and updated Development Impact Mode (see attachments). Frederick County has been working with Tischler-Bise to develop a Capital Impact Study and Model designed to evaluate the anticipated need for capital faci determine the cost of those capital facilities to the County. Further, the model would determine the cost to the County for mitigating the infrastructure impacts-zonings. This Capital Impacts Study will Virginia Cash Proffer legislation. Staff and the consultant presented the draft final version of th Frederick County, Virginia to DIM-OC. The presentation covered what the model does and does not analyze and methodologies and cost analysis of cash proffer-eligible categories. Details and screenshots were provided of how the model will be used and Tischler-Bise went through an example of input and resulting impact. Following the presentation and informed discussion, DIM-OC moved to accept the Capital Impacts Study and implement the use of the Capital Impacts Model, effect motion for approval was conditioned on an adjustment to the schocomponent of the model to reflect the use of school attendance zones for the attributable impact of a project oschool service area. Based on the Committees direction, the model has been amended to update the school scenarios by attendance zone for each facility. Following the endorsement of DIM-OC, a motion from the Board of Supervisors is being sought to accept the Capital Impacts Study and implement the use of the Capital Impacts Model, effective July 1, 2019. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION ONLY None. Respectfully submitted, Development Impact Model Oversight Committee By Mike Ruddy, AICP, Director Planning and Development. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM Board of Supervisors TO: FROM: Mike Ruddy, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Review and endorsement of the Capital Impacts Study and updated RE: Development Impact Model DATE: June 5, 2019 Overview Frederick County has been working with Tischler-Bise to develop a Capital Impacts Study and Model designed to evaluate the anticipated need for capital facilities based on growth and to determine the cost of those capital facilities to the County. Further, the model determines the cost to the County for mitigating the infrastructure impacts associated with re-zonings. This Capital Impact Study also assists in ensuring the Please find attached the Capital Impacts Study, Frederick County, Virginia. The Executive Summary provides an overview of the study. This is supported by more detailed information regarding the study and model. Report from 05/09/19 DIM-OC meeting. The Development Impact Model - Oversight Committee (DIM-OC) met on Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. to review of the Capital Impacts Study and updated Development Impact Model. At the DIM-OC meeting a presentation was made to DIM-OC by the consultant, Tischler-Bise, thatcovered what the model does and does not analyze, and methodologies and cost analysis of cash proffer-eligible categories. Details and screenshots were provided of how the model will be used and the consultants went through an example of input and resulting impact. Following the presentation and informed discussion, DIM-OC moved to accept the Capital Impacts Study and implement the use of the Capital Impacts Model, effective July 1, 2019. This motion for approval was conditioned on an adjustment to the school 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 -2- component of the model in order to reflect the use of school attendance zones for the attributable impact of a project on a service area school. Based on the Committees direction, the model has been amended to update the school scenarios by attendance zone for each facility. School capital impact service area adjustment. In an effort to achieve a greater level of attribution of capital impacts to service areas, the model evaluated more granular service areas for the Schools, and also Fire and Rescue, capital impact analysis. Several service area options were discussed with County Staff when determining the service area for the School analysis. As noted in the report, a properly calibrated service area is needed to accurately identify the local school utilization (enrollment compared to capacity) at each of the three grade levels. More general and larger service areas (i.e., Countywide or Urban and Rural) would reflect utilization of the schools within that area being analyzed. More detailed service areas (i.e., based on school attendance zones) would result in the model analyzing only the utilization of the specific school that would be directly affected by the development. sed on the General Service Areas (i.e., Urban and Rural) with the Elementary School analysis splitting the Urban Service Area into North and South areas. This would provide some flexibility as school boundaries are adjusted to address growth-related needs. After review from the Frederick County Development Impact Model Oversight Committee (DIM-OC), a consensus was reached that the service areas should be the school attendance zones. Thus, when a development is being inputted into the Capital Impact Model, the local school at each grade level is chosen. The model then analyzes just the utilization of those schools. This adjustment is consistent with the consensus of the DIM- OC. Recommendation. The Development Impact ModelOversight Committee forwarded a recommendation to accept the Capital Impacts Study and implement the use of the Capital Impacts Model, effective July 1, 2019. This motion for approval was conditioned on an adjustment to the school component of the model to reflect the use of school attendance zones for the attributable impact of a project on a service area school. This adjustment has been incorporated into the study and model. Action from the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate at this time. Tischler-Bise and County Staff will be available to provide a brief overview of how the study and model is anticipated to be implemented by Frederick County. MTR/slc Attachment: Capital Impacts Study, Frederick County, Virginia Capital Impacts Study Frederick County, Virginia Submitted to: Frederick County, Virginia June 3, 2019 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda, Maryland 20816 800.424.4318 www.tischlerbise.com CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia TischlerBise 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda, Maryland 20816 800.424.4318 www.tischlerbise.com June 2019 N i CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Background on Cash Proffers ...................................................................................................................... 2 Capital Impacts Approach ........................................................................................................................... 3 Methodologies ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Generic Cash Proffer Calculation ................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 1. Generic Cash Proffer Formula ................................................................................................ 5 Credits ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Summary of Capital Impacts Approach ....................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2. Summary of Frederick County Capital Impacts Methodolog ............................................. 8 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................................................................... 9 Service Areas ............................................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 3. Frederick County Service Area Map ..................................................................................... 10 Household Size .......................................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4. Countywide Persons per Housing Unit ................................................................................. 11 Figure 5. Persons Per Housing Unit by Service Area ........................................................................... 11 Service Area Residential Proportion of Frederick County ......................................................................... 12 Figure 6. Service Area Proportion of Frederick County, 2016 ............................................................. 12 Building Permit Activity ............................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 7. Building Permit Totals 2013-2017 ........................................................................................ 12 Current Population and Housing Units ..................................................................................................... 13 Figure 8. Countywide Base Year Population ....................................................................................... 13 Figure 9. Base Year Population by Service Area .................................................................................. 13 Figure 10. Countywide Base Year Housing Units ................................................................................. 14 Figure 11. Service Area Base Year Housing Unit ................................................................................. 14 Population and Housing Unit Projections ................................................................................................. 15 Figure 12. Population and Housing Unit Projections (2019-2028) ...................................................... 15 Student Generation Rates and Current Enrollment .................................................................................. 15 Figure 13. Student Generation Rates .................................................................................................. 16 Figure 14. Current Student Enrollment, as of Spring 2018.................................................................. 16 Student Generation Projections ................................................................................................................ 16 Figure 15. Countywide Student Enrollment Projections (2019-2028) ................................................ 16 Current Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Estimates ............................................................... 17 Figure 16. 2018 Countywide Employment by NAICS Code ................................................................. 17 Figure 17. Base Year Countywide Employment by Industry Sector .................................................... 17 Figure 18. Base Year Countywide Nonresidential Floor Area by Ind ............................... 18 Figure 19. Square Foot per Job Factors ............................................................................................... 18 Service Area Current Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area .......................................................... 19 Figure 20. Job Split by Service Area ..................................................................................................... 19 Figure 21. Nonresidential Floor Area by Service Area ......................................................................... 19 Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections .......................................................................... 20 Figure 22. Percent of Job Growth by Industry ..................................................................................... 20 .................................................... 20 Figure 24. Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections ................................................... 22 ii CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Vehicle Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 25. Customized Residential Trip End Rates .............................................................................. 23 Figure 26. Frederick County Trip Adjustment Factor for Commuters ................................................. 24 Figure 27. Institute of Transportation Engineers Nonresidential Trip Fa .................................... 25 Figure 28. Frederick County Summary of Averages Daily Vehicle Trip Factors ................................... 25 Figure 29. Frederick County Total Daily Vehicle Trip Projections-2028) ................................... 27 Functional Population ............................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 30. Frederick County Functional Population ............................................................................ 28 PROJECT APPROACH .......................................................................................................................................... 29 PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL IMPACTS .................................................................................................................. 31 Figure 31. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ............................... 31 School Capital Impact Service Areas ......................................................................................................... 32 Public School Students per Housing Unit .................................................................................................. 32 Figure 32. Frederick County Student Generation Rates ...................................................................... 32 Public School Facilities Level of Service Standards ................................................................................... 33 Figure 33. Frederick County Public Schools Elementary Schools Le .............................. 33 Figure 34. Frederick County Public Schools: Middle Schools Level .................................... 34 Figure 35. Frederick County Schools: High School Level of Service..................................................... 34 Figure 36. Frederick County Schools: Education Centers .................................................................... 35 Figure 37. Frederick County Schools: Support Facilities ...................................................................... 35 Figure 38. Frederick County Schools: Transportation Vehicles ........................................................... 36 Public School Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan................................................................................ 36 Figure 39. School Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan .................................................................... 36 Credit for Future Debt Payments for School Improvements .................................................................... 37 Figure 40. Payment Schedule for School Debt .................................................................................... 37 Public Schools Capital Impact Input Variables .......................................................................................... 38 Figure 41. Elementary School Level of Service and Cost Factors ........................................................ 38 Figure 42. Middle School and High School Level of Service and Co ..................................... 39 Capital Impacts for Public Schools ............................................................................................................ 40 Figure 43. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impact by Hou ...... 40 Figure 44. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impact by Hou ............. 40 Figure 45. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impact by Hou ................. 41 School Cash Proffer Eligibility .................................................................................................................... 41 PARKS & RECREATION CAPITAL IMPACTS .......................................................................................................... 42 Figure 46. Parks & Recreation Capital Impact Methodology Chart ..................................................... 43 Park Inventory ........................................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 47. Parks & Recreation Inventory ............................................................................................. 45 Parks & Recreation Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan ...................................................................... 46 Figure 48. Park Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan by Type a .............................. 46 Parks & Recreation Level of Service and Cost Factors .............................................................................. 47 Figure 49. Parks Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors ............................................................. 47 Community Center Level of Service and Cost Factors .............................................................................. 48 Figure 50. Community Center Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors ....................................... 48 Indoor Recreational Facility Level of Service and Cost Factors ................................................................. 48 Figure 51. Indoor Recreational Facility Level of Service and Cos .......................................... 48 Parks & Recreation Input Variables and Capital Impacts .......................................................................... 49 Figure 52. Parks & Recreation Input Variables and Capital Impact ..................................................... 50 Parks & Recreation Cash Proffer Eligibility ................................................................................................ 50 PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: SHERIFF ...................................................................................................... 51 Figure 53. Sheriff Capital Impact Methodology Chart ......................................................................... 51 Cost Allocation for Sheriff Facilities .......................................................................................................... 52 iii CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 54. Frederick County Sheriff Calls for Service ........................................................................... 52 Sheriff Facilities Inventory and Level of Service ........................................................................................ 53 Figure 55. Sheriff Facilities Level of Service Standards ....................................................................... 53 Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts .............................................................................................. 54 Figure 56. Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land U ............................... 54 Figure 57. Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land U ......................... 55 Sheriff Cash Proffer Eligibility .................................................................................................................... 55 PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: FIRE & RESCUE ........................................................................................... 56 Figure 58. Fire & Rescue Capital Impact Methodology Chart ............................................................. 56 Cost Allocation for Fire & Rescue Facilities ............................................................................................... 57 Figure 59. Frederick County Proportionate Share Factors .................................................................. 57 Fire & Rescue Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................................... 58 Figure 60. Fire & Rescue Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan ........................................................ 58 Fire & Rescue Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors ........................................................................ 59 Figure 61. Fire & Rescue Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors.................................................. 59 Fire Apparatus Capital Impact ................................................................................................................... 60 Figure 62. Fire & Rescue Apparatus Level of Service and Cost Fac ................................................ 60 Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts .................................................................... 61 Figure 63. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Land Use, Residential ..... 61 Figure 64. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital 62 Figure 65. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital 63 Figure 66. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital 64 Figure 67. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital ............................................................................................................................................................. 65 Figure 68. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital ............................................................................................................................................................. 66 Fire & Rescue Cash Proffer Eligibility ........................................................................................................ 66 Figure 69. Fire & Rescue Capital Projects ............................................................................................ 66 PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: ANIMAL PROTECTION ................................................................................ 67 Figure 70. Animal Protection Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ..................................................... 67 Animal Protection Facilities Inventory and Level of Service ..................................................................... 68 Figure 71. Animal Protection Facilities and Level of Service ............................................................... 68 Animal Protection Input Variables and Capital Impacts ........................................................................... 69 Figure 72. Animal Protection Input Variables and Capital Impacts ............. 69 Animal Protection Cash Proffer Eligibility ................................................................................................. 70 LIBRARY CAPITAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................................................ 72 Figure 73. Library Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ....................................................................... 72 Library Facilities Inventory ........................................................................................................................ 73 Figure 74. Library Facilities Level of Service Standards and Cost Fa ........................................... 73 Library Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan .......................................................................................... 73 Figure 75. Planned Library Facility Level of Service Standards a ................................ 73 Library Level of Service and Cost Factors .................................................................................................. 73 Figure 76. Library Level of Service and Cost Factors ........................................................................... 73 Library Input Variables and Capital Impacts ............................................................................................. 74 Figure 77. Library Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Type oHousing Unit ............................... 74 GENERAL GOVERNMENT CAPITAL IMPACTS ..................................................................................................... 75 Figure 78. General Government Facilities Capital Impact Methodol ................................... 75 Cost Allocation for General Government Facilities ................................................................................... 76 Figure 79. Frederick County Proportionate Share Factors .................................................................. 76 General Government Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors ............................................................ 77 Figure 80. General Government Facilities Level of Service Standa .................... 77 iv CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia General Government Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impact ........................................................ 78 Figure 81. General Govt. Facilities Input Variables and Capital ..... 78 Figure 82. General Govt. Facilities Input Variables and Capital 79 COURTS CAPITAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................................................ 80 Figure 83. Courts Capital Impact Methodology Chart ......................................................................... 80 Cost Allocation for Court Facilities ............................................................................................................ 81 Figure 84. Frederick County Sheriff Calls for Service ........................................................................... 81 Court Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors ..................................................................................... 82 Figure 85. Court Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors............................................................... 82 Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts ................................................................................. 83 Figure 86. Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts .................. 83 Figure 87. Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts ............ 84 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES/SOLID WASTE CAPITAL IMPACTS ......................................................................... 85 Figure 88. Environmental Services Capital Impacts Methodology Ch ............................................ 85 Environmental Services Inventory ............................................................................................................ 86 Figure 89. Environmental Services Facilities Level of Service St ................. 86 Environmental Services Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................... 86 Figure 90. Planned Environmental Services Facility Level of Serv ..... 86 Environmental Services Level of Service and Cost Factors ....................................................................... 87 Figure 91. Environmental Services Level of Service and Cost Factors ................................................. 87 Environmental Services Input Variables and Capital Impacts ................................................................... 88 Figure 92. Environmental Services Input Variables and Capital Im ..... 88 SUMMARY OF CAPITAL IMPACTS ...................................................................................................................... 89 Figure 93. Example Summary of Capital Impacts by Land Use ............................................................ 89 Figure 94. Summary of Capital Impacts by Land Use .......................................................................... 90 APPENDIX A: EXAMPLE OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS ........................................................................................ 91 Figure 95. Example CapIM Test Results ............................................................................................... 91 APPENDIX B: CASH PROFFER BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................... 92 Definition .................................................................................................................................................. 92 Approach ................................................................................................................................................... 93 Cash Proffer Implementation and Administration Considerations ........................................................... 96 Credits and Reimbursements .................................................................................................................... 96 v CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overview TischlerBise has been retained by Frederick County, Virginia, to analyze the capital impacts of new development. The objective is to quantify the capital costs generated by new development in the County, specifically in light of changes to Cash Proffer law in Virginia. The assignm of a Capital Impacts Model (CapIM) for use in: 1.Calculating the capital impact of new development by type of land use and 2.To allow County staff to use the Capital Impacts Model to determine the capital costs for development projects that take into consideration whether capaci therefore, whether a cash proffer can be offered and accepted by TischlerBise evaluated capital impacts for the following categories of public capital improvements: (1) Public Schools, (2) Parks and Recreation, (3) Public Safety: Sheriff, (4) Public Safety: Fire & Rescue, (5) Public Safety: Animal Protection, (6) Library, (7) General Government, (8) Courts, and (9) Environmental Services/Solid Waste. Methodologies and calculations are presented in this report as s documentation for estimating capital impacts from new growth as well as potential support for cash proffers. 1 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Background on Cash Proffers Cash proffers are one-time voluntary monetary commitments made at the time of rezoning impact on certain public facilities from new residential development. The funds ultimately collected from cash proffers are used to construct capital improvements to mitigate capital impacts with the goal of maintaining levels of service. Funds can only be used for capital improvements that provide additional capacity, not operations or maintenance. Cash proffer are calculated using level of service standards to account for infrastructure that may currently have excess capaci Cash proffers cannot be used to correct existing deficiencies. However, since cash proffers do not apply t- new growth can be mitigated through cash proffers. Cash proffers are a small part of an overall funding strategy and should not be regarded as a total solution for infrastructure financing needs. Therefore, other strategies and revenue sources are needed to offset the impact to infrastructure from new growth. Cash proffers are authorized under Virginia Code §15.2-2303 and §15.2-2298. A major change to cash proffer authority was enacted in 2016 affecting Section 15.2-2303.4(B) that added requirements to the acceptance of cash proffers. The new section states that localities cannot require an unreasonable proffer 1 submit an unreasonable proffer. The implementation of this change to the cash proffer law hingesunreasonable proffer, or more positively, defining a reasonable proffer. Defining reasonable proffers requires the analysis of existing capacity in public facilities as well as the demand for additional capacity from growth. This report and the accompanying Capital Impacts Model address this requirement specifically for Frederick County and provides a tool for ongoing implementation of the cash proffer law. Furthermore, the changes to the cash proffer law restrict the infrastructure categories to public transportation facilities, public safety facilities, public school facilities, and public parks and further restricts the impacts that can be addressed to capacity improvem projects. Virginia Code Section 15.2-2303.4(B) was revised in 2019 from restricting a local governing body frommerely requesting or 1 accepting an unreasonable proffer, to restricting a local governing body from requiring an unreasonable proffer. This allows a local governing body to discuss and negotiate with a developer t 2 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Capital Impacts Approach TischlerBise evaluated possible methodologies and documented appr of land use for the infrastructure categories addressed in this study. The formula used to calculate each capital impact is diagrammed in a flow chart at the beginning of each chapter. Specific capital costs have been identified using local data and current dollars (2019). Because cash proffers reflect a point in time, the calculations and study should be updated periodically (typiclect the direct impact of new development on the need for new facilities and inf or indirect impacts. Capital impacts and resulting cash proffer amounts are calculated to recognize three key elements: need, benefit, and proportionality. First, to justify a cash proffer for public facilities, it must be demonstrated that new development/rezonings will create a need for capital improvements (including an assessment of existing capacity). Second, new development/rezonings must derive a benefit from the payment of the cash proffers (i.e., in the form of public facilities constructed within a rea Third, the cash proffer to be paid by a particular type of development (land use) should not exceed its proportional share of the capital cost for system improvements. For each capital impact calculation, the report includes a summary table indicating the specific fa used to derive the amounts. The capital impacts outlined in this report reflect the actual cost to the County generated from new residential and nonresidential development, and as such, each retrue capital impact generated by type of land use for each public facility category. The Capital Impacts Model developed for the County by TischlerBise is the tool to use to determine if a r not. The Model provides a cash proffer calculation for County staff to use in determining the reasonableness of a c particular development project. 3 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Methodologies Any one of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate cash proffers. The choice of a particular method depends primarily on the service characteristics and plan being addressed. Each method has advantages and disadvantages in a particular sit extent can be interchangeable, because each allocates facility costs in proportion to the needs created by development. Reduced to its simplest terms, the process of calculating cash proffers involves two main steps: (1) determining the cost of development-related capital improvements and (2) allocating those costs equitably to various types of development. In practice, though, cash proffers can become quite complicated because of the many variables involved development and the need for facilities. The following paragraphs discuss calculating cash proffers and how those methods can be applied. Plan-Based Calculation. The plan-based method allocates costs for a specified set of improvementsa specified amount of development. The improvements are identified by a facility plan and development is identified by a land use plan. In this method, the total cost offuture demand to calculate a cost per unit of demand. Then, the cost per unit of demand is multiplied by the amount of demand per unit of development (e.g., housing units or square feet of building area) in each category to arrive at a cost per specific unit of development (e.g., single family detached unit). Incremental Expansion Calculation. The incremental expansion method documents the current level of service (LOS) for each type of public facility in both quantitatasures, based on an existing service standard (such as square feet per student). This approach ensures that there are no existing infrastructure deficiencies or surplus capacity in infrastructure. New development is only paying its proportionate share for growth-related infrastructure. The level of service standards are determined in a manner similar to the current replacement cost approach use However, in contrast to insurance practices, the cash proffer revenues would not be for renewal and/or replacement of existing facilities. Rather, revenue will be used to expand or provide additional facilities, as needed, to accommodate new development. An incremental expans public facilities that will be expanded in regular increments, wsed on current conditions in the community. Cost Recovery or Buy-In Calculation. The rationale for the cost recovery approach is that new develop is paying its share of the useful life and remaining capacity ofalready built or land already purchased from which new growth will benefit. This methodology is often used for oversized systems. At the beginning of each capital facility chapter the chosen met illustrated with a figure. 4 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Generic Cash Proffer Calculation In contrast to development exactions, which are typically referr-level improvements, cash proffers fund growth-related infrastructure that will benefit multiple development pr jurisdiction. The basic steps in a generic cash proffer formula are illustrate Figure 1. The first step is to determine an appropriate demand indicator, the particular type of infrastructure. The demand/service indicator measures the number unit of development. For example, an appropriate indicator of th enrollment and the increase in enrollment can be estimated from the average number of stud housing unit. The second step in the generic formula is to determine infrastructure units per demand unit, typically called level of service (LOS) standards. In keeping with the school example, a common LOS standard is square feet per student. The third step in the generic formula is the cost of various infrastructure units. To complete the school example, this part per square foot for school construction. Figure 1. Generic Cash Proffer Formula Demand Demand Infrastructure Infrastructure Dollars Dollars Units Units Units Units XXXX per per per per per per Infrastructure Infrastructure Development Development Demand Demand UnitUnit UnitUnitUnitUnit Level of Service Cost {e.g., $ per Students per {e.g., Sq. Ft. per housing unit Sq. Ft.} student} 5 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Credits A general requirement common to cash proffer methodologies is th credits. Two types of credits should be considered, future revenue credits and site-specific credits. Future revenue credits are necessary to avoid potential double payment situations arising from a one-time cash proffer payment plus the payment of other revenues that may also fund the same growth-related capital improvements. Future revenue credits are dependent upon the cash proffer methodology used in the cost The incremental expansion methodology is best suited for public faci in the future. Because new development will provide front-end funding of infrastructure, there is a potential for double payment of capital costs due to future principal payments on existing debt for public facilities. That is, because new development that may pay a cash proffer wil for the same type of infrastructure, a credit is included in the to account for this. (A credit is not necessary for interest payments if interest cost) The second type of credit is a site-specific credit for system improvements that have been included in the cash proffer calculations. A site-specific credit is handled during implementation and would reduce the impact on the infrastructure needs covered in the cash proffer p Policies and procedures related to site-specific credits for system improvements should be addressed in Cash Proffer program. However, the general concept is that developers may be eligible for site-specific credits or reimbursements only if they provide system improvements that have been included proffer calculations. Project improvements normally required as part of the developm process would not be eligible for credits against cash proffers. 6 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Summary of Capital Impacts Approach A summary of infrastructure categories is listed in Figure 2. To be eligible for a cash proffer, the facility must be for Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, or Public Safe are noted in the figure. The noneligible infrastructure categoripture a developments total capital impact to Frederick County. The Count categories; however, understanding the full impact of a development (or a collection can be a tool in the long-term planning process. The figure includes the components and serve areas used in the analysis as well. The geographies used for an infrastructure category were determined based on how the through discussions with County staff. For example, most of the Parks & Recreation facilities serve only the local population, so the Urban and Rural service areas are i are serving the whole County. More granular service areas were needed for the School and Fire capital impact a Several service area options were discussed with County staff when determining the service area for the School analysis. A properly calibrated service area is needed to accurately identify the local school utilization (enrollment compared to capacity) at each of the thr service areas (i.e., countywide or Urban and Rural) would reflect utilization of the schools within that area being analyzed. More detailed service areas (i.e., based on school attendance zones) would result in the model analyzing only the utilization of the specific school that development. for the School analysis were programmed based on the General Service Areas (i.e., Urban and Rural) with the Elementary School analysis splitting t North and South areas. This would provide some flexibility as school boundaries are adjress growth-related needs. After review from the Frederick County Development Impact Model Committee (DIMOC), a consensus was reached that the service area zones. Thus, when a development is being inputted into the Capital Impact Model, the local school at each grade level is chosen. The model then analyzes just the utilizat 7 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 2. Summary of Frederick County Capital Impacts Methodologies Type of Public Cost Infrastructure Components and Geography Used Methodology Facility Allocation Countywide Attendance Zones Public School Transportation Elementary School Students from Incremental Vehicles Middle School Public Schools* Residential Approach Education Centers High School Development Support Facilities Countywide Urban & Rural Service Area Indoor Recreation District, Community, Parks and Incremental Facilities Neighborhood Parks Residential Recreation* Approach Paved & Unpaved Trails Community Centers Residential Public Safety: Incremental Public Safety Building: Countywide and Sheriff* Approach Nonresidential Residential Public Safety: Incremental Fire Stations & Apparatuses: Fire Districts and Fire & Rescue* Approach Nonresidential Public Safety: Incremental Animal Shelter: Countywide Residential Animal Protection* Approach Incremental Library: Countywide Libraries Residential Approach Residential General Incremental General Government Facilities: Countywide and Government Approach Nonresidential Residential Incremental Court Facilities: Countywide Courts and Approach Nonresidential Environmental Convenience Sites: Urban & Rural Service Area Incremental Services/Solid Residential Approach Landfill: Countywide Waste *Note: the public facilities with an asterisk are eligible for ca 8 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS This chapter documents the demographic data and land use projections to be us Model for Frederick County. The following includes discussion and findings on: Service Areas Household Sizes Current population and housing unit estimates Residential projections Student Generation Rates Current employment and nonresidential floor area estimates Nonresidential projections Vehicle Trip Generation Note: calculations throughout this technical memo are based on a software. Results are discussed in the memo using one-and two-digit places (in most cases), which represent rounded figures. However, the analysis itself uses figures carried to their ultimate decimal places; therefore, the sums and products generated in the analys the reader replicates the calculation with the factors shown in ures shown, not in the analysis). 9 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Service Areas After interviews with County staff, it has been decided that the impact model: Rural and Urban. The Rural Service Area is west of Service Area east of the highways. Furthermore, the Stephens City and Middletown municipalities are in the Urban Service Area. Being an independent city, development i in the Capital Impact Model. Additional service areas may be usethe model (i.e., school attendance zones and fire districts). In the impact model, development will generate their service area and capacity issues will be identified with m county as one service area. Figure 3. Frederick County Service Area Map 10 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Household Size The capital impact analysis will use per capita standards and persons per housing unit (household size) to derive demand from housing types. (A household is a housing unit that is occupied by year-round residents.) When persons per housing unit are used in the calculations, infr derived using year-round population. TischlerBise recommends that capital impacts for residential development in Frederick County be analyzed according to the number of year-round residents per housing unit. Utilizing the most recent census tract data providFigure 5 lists the 2016 countywide population and housing stock and persons per In the lower half of Figure 5, the PPHU for each service area is found. For single family units in the Rural Service Area the PPHU is 2.37 and in the Urban Service Area the PPHU is 2.62. For multifamily the Rural Service Area the PPHU is 1.46 and in the Urban Service Area the PPHU is 2.08. Based on this information, households are smaller in the Rural Service Area co Figure 4. Countywide Persons per Housing Unit Countywide Units in StructurePersonsHsing UnitsPPHU Single Family [1]77,01330,417 2.53 Multifamily [2]4,1212,055 2.01 Total81,13432,472 2.50 [1] Includes attached and detached single family homes and mobil [2] Includes all other types Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey Figure 5. Persons Per Housing Unit by Service Area Rural Service AreaUrban Service Area Units in StructurePersonsHsing UnitsPPHUPersonsHsing UnitsPPHU Single Family, Detached/Attached24,17810,1392.3847,39017,9552.64 Mobile Homes1,0814992.174,3651,8252.39 2 to 4127821.558954541.97 5 or More2541791.422,8461,3422.12 Rural Service AreaUrban Service Area Units in StructurePersonsHsing UnitsPPHUPersonsHsing UnitsPPHU Single Family [1]25,25910,638 2.37 51,75519,780 2.62 Multifamily [2]381260 1.46 3,7411,795 2.08 [1] Includes attached and detached single family homes and mobil [2] Includes all other types Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey 11 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Service Area Residential Proportion of Frederick County In Figure 6 the population and housing units are totaled for each service area. According to census tract data from the US Census Bureau, about two- Service Area. Additionally, the majority of single family and mu Service Area. Most of the housing in the Rural Service Area is single family uni Figure 6. Service Area Proportion of Frederick County, 2016 Single Family Multifamily Service AreaPopulation%Units [1]%Units [2]% Rural Service Area25,63932%10,63835%26013% Urban Service Area55,49568%19,78065%1,79587% Frederick County81,134100%30,417100%2,055100% [1] Includes attached and detached single family homes and mobil [2] Includes all other types Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey Building Permit Activity Provided by the County, Figure 7 lists the annual building permit data for 2013-2017. Over the past five years, there are been a steady increase of new single family hom homes) being built, averaging 547 units annually. Significantly fewer multifam constructed, only 45 new units on average each year. In total, tCounty has grown by about 600 housing units every year, with an uptick in the last three years. Figure 7. Building Permit Totals 2013-2017 Annual Housing Type20132014201520162017Average Single Family300325428473501405 Townhouse5611199180104110 Multifamily00137246445 Mobile Home171845374132 Total373454709714710592 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Department Annual Housing TypeAverage Single Family547 Multifamily45 Total592 12 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Current Population and Housing Units data is added to data from the Weldon Cooper Center for Public S of July 1, 2017, the Weldon Cooper Center esti estimate covers half of 2017, the new residents from half of the Figure 8, the persons per housing unit factors are applied to the building permit totals to find the re second half of 2017. As a result of adding the new residents to the 2017 population estimate, there are 86,702 residents in the base year. Figure 8. Countywide Base Year Population Half of 2017 Persons per New Building Housing Residents Housing TypePermits [1]Unit [2]Generated Single Family3232.53 818 Multifamily322.01 64 Total355 882 July 1, 2017 Base Year Pop. (2018) Pop. Estimate [3]Estimate 85,820 86,702 [1] Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Department [2] Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Sur [3] Source: Demographics Research Group of the Weldon Cooper Ce Population estimates for each service area is necessary as well.lation in each service area, the population split found in Figure 6 is applied (32 percent Rural/68 percent Urban). Shown below, there are 27,399 residents estimated to be in the Rural Service Area and 59,303 residents estimated to be in the Urban Service Area. Figure 9. Base Year Population by Service Area Base Year Population2018 Rural Service Area27,399 Urban Service Area59,303 Countywide Total86,702 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 ACS 5-Year Estimates; Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, March 2017; TischlerBise analysis 13 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Base year housing totals are provided by County staff. To align data, single family- detached, single family-attached, and mobile homes are combined into the single family c result, 96 percent of the 35,566 housing units in Frederick Coun Figure 10. Countywide Base Year Housing Units Housing TypeUnits% Single Family - Detached27,91478% Single Family - Attached3,91811% Multifamily1,2484% Mobile Homes2,4867% Total35,566100% Housing TypeUnits% Single Family34,31896% Multifamily1,2484% Total35,566100% Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Department Along with population, the housing stock for each service area needs to be estimated for the capital impact model. By applying the US Census data in Figure 6 to the Countywide housing totals, the single family and multifamily housing stock is estimated. Shown in Figure 11, there are 12,160 housing units in the Rural Service Area and 23,406 housing units in the Urban Service Area. Figure 11. Service Area Base Year Housing Unit Base Year Service Area2018 Rural Service Area Single Family Units12,002 Multifamily Units158 Total12,160 Urban Service Area Single Family Units22,316 Multifamily Units1,090 Total23,406 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 ACS 5-Year Estimates; Frederick County Planning & Development Dept; TischlerBise analysis 14 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Population and Housing Unit Projections Countywide population projections were estimated by applying a straight-line approach to the University t, or 11,790 residents. The annual percent increase in population is applied to housing totals to p housing units are estimated to develop in the next ten years, th To estimate the servi population and housing units are applied to the Countywide total growth over the next ten years in the Frederick County is anticio occur in the Urban Service Area. Figure 12. Population and Housing Unit Projections (2019-2028) Base YearTotal 20182019202020212022202320242025202620272028Increase Frederick County Population86,70287,74888,79489,83990,88591,93192,97794,02395,51297,00298,49211,790 Increase1,0461,0461,0461,0461,0461,0461,0461,4901,4901,490 Housing Units Single Family34,31834,72735,13635,54535,95436,36336,77237,18137,76138,34138,9214,603 Multifamily1,2481,2631,2781,2931,3071,3221,3371,3521,3731,3941,415167 Total35,56635,99036,41436,83837,26237,68538,10938,53339,13439,73540,3364,770 Increase424424424424424424424601601601 Rural Service Area Population27,39927,72928,05928,39028,72029,05129,38129,71230,18330,65331,1243,726 Increase330330330330330330330471471471 Housing Units Single Family12,00212,14512,28812,43112,57412,71712,86013,00313,20613,40913,6111,610 Multifamily15816016216416516716917117417617921 Total12,16012,30512,45012,59412,73912,88413,02913,17413,38013,58513,7911,631 Increase145145145145145145145205205205 Urban Service Area Population59,30360,01960,73461,44962,16562,88063,59564,31165,33066,34967,3688,064 Increase7157157157157157157151,0191,0191,019 Housing Units Single Family22,31622,58222,84823,11423,38023,64623,91224,17824,55524,93225,3092,993 Multifamily1,0901,1031,1161,1291,1421,1551,1681,1811,1991,2181,236146 Total23,40623,68523,96424,24324,52224,80125,08025,35925,75526,15026,5463,139 Increase279279279279279279279396396396 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 ACS 5-Year Estimates; Weld Student Generation Rates and Current Enrollment Frederick County provided student generation rates for elementar Public school students are a subset of school-aged children, which also includes students in private schools and home-schooled children. Student generation rates (SGR) for single fam-detached, single family- attached, multifamily, and mobile home units are provided in Figure 13. 15 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 13. Student Generation Rates Elem School Middle School High School Housing TypeSGRSGRSGRTotal SGR Single Family-Detached0.1550.0910.1260.371 Single Family-Attached0.1880.0850.0930.367 Multifamily0.1640.0760.0770.317 Mobile Home0.2200.1090.1230.452 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept From information provided by Frederick County staff, the current Figure 14. Current Student Enrollment, as of Spring 2018 Number of Percent of Grade Level StudentsTotal Elementary5,82844% Middle3,24324% High4,28332% Total13,354100% Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept Student Generation Projections Student enrollment is projected based on housing growth. In the include single family-detached, single family-attached, and mobile homes. To accurately apply the student generation rate to the housing projections, the weighted average Over the next ten years, it is projected that Frederick County w students. The largest increase is in the Elementary school level. Figure 15. Countywide Student Enrollment Projections (2019-2028) Base YearTotal 20182019202020212022202320242025202620272028Increase Frederick County Students Elementary5,8285,8845,9536,0236,0926,1616,2316,3006,3986,4966,595767 Middle3,2433,2743,3133,3513,3903,4283,4673,5063,5603,6153,670427 High4,2834,3244,3754,4264,4774,5284,5794,6304,7024,7744,846563 Total13,35413,48313,64113,80013,95914,11814,27714,43514,66014,88615,1111,757 Increase129159159159159159159225225225 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept; TischlerBi 16 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Current Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Estimates To allow for employment estimates to be determined for the service areas, base year data is sourced Figure 16 lists the 2018 employment in Frederick County. It is estimated that there are 28, Figure 16. 2018 Countywide Employment by NAICS Code NAICS SectorEmployment% Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting950.3% Mining500.2% Utilities1940.7% Construction2,97810.6% Manufacturing4,48015.9% Wholesale Trade2,1277.5% Retail Trade4,83817.1% Transportation & Warehousing9073.2% Information3631.3% Finance & Insurance5421.9% Real Estate, Rental & Leasing5291.9% Professional, Scientific & Tech Services1,1614.1% Management of Companies & Enterprises40.0% Administrative & Support5872.1% Educational Services2,0197.2% Health Care & Social Assistance1,1274.0% Arts, Entertainment & Recreation2560.9% Accommodation & Food Services3,33311.8% Other Services (except Public Administration)1,4755.2% Public Administration1,1474.1% Total28,212100% Source: ESRI Business Analyst, 2018 To streamline projections, the NAICS employment totals are simplsectors: Retail, Office, Industrial, and Institutional. In Figure 17, it is shown that the largest employment industry in the County is Industrial. Retail has a significant presence as well, while Office and Institutional hav proportion of the employment market. Figure 17. Base Year Countywide Employment by Industry Sector IndustryEmployment% Retail8,42730% Office4,66117% Industrial10,83138% Institutional4,29315% Total28,212100% Source: ESRI Business Analyst, 2018 17 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Base year countywide nonresidential floor area has been provided by the Planning & Development Department. As of 2018, there is 19.2 million square feet of Ind Retail, 5.2 million square feet of Institutional, and 1.9 millioillion square feet. Following development trends, the Industrial indust due to warehousing and manufacturing developments. Conversely, t much smaller floor area to conduct business. Figure 18. Base Year Countywide Nonresidential Floor Area by Industry Sec Nonres. Floor IndustryArea (sq. ft.)% Retail5,950,97718% Office1,894,2706% Industrial19,161,95360% Institutional5,173,52716% Total32,180,727100% Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept In Figure 19re found by applying the base year employment to the nonresidential floor area. As shown in the figure, it is exp industries have much higher factors because of the uses of the s areas. Figure 19. Square Foot per Job Factors Nonres. Floor Sq. Ft. IndustryArea (sq. ft.)Employmentper Job Retail5,950,9778,427 706 Office1,894,2704,661 406 Industrial19,161,95310,831 1,769 Institutional5,173,5274,293 1,205 Total32,180,72728,212 1,141 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept; ESRI Business Analyst; TischlerBise analysis 18 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Service Area Current Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area As noted above, at least two service areas are anticipated to be used in the and Urban. A map is provided at the begin of this memo, Figure 3 online Business Analyst tool is used to determine the employment split between the areas. Shown Figure 20, 72 percent of the jobs in Frederick County are in the Urban Service Area. In the Urban Service Area, the Industrial cate 7,800 jobs and the Retail sector has over 6,500 jobs, while the the Rural Service Area, there are approximately 7,300 jobs (26 pof the County), the Industrial industry being the largest employer. Figure 20. Job Split by Service Area RuralUrban IndustryJobs%Jobs%Total Retail1,89723%6,53077%8,427 Office1,35329%3,30871%4,661 Industrial3,01728%7,81472%10,831 Institutional1,00523%3,28877%4,293 Total7,27226%20,94074%28,212 Source: ESRI Business Analyst, 2018 The square foot per job factors listed in Figure 19 are applied to the employment totals in the service areas to calculate the nonresidential floor area. In the Urban S square feet of nonresidential floor area, the Industrial industr for the highest share. In the Rural Service Area, there is estimated to be 8.4 million square Industrial industry accounting for the highest share as well. Ov floor area in the County is in the Urban Service Area. Figure 21. Nonresidential Floor Area by Service Area RuralUrban IndustryJobsSq. Ft.JobsSq. Ft. Retail1,8971,339,7346,5304,611,243 Office1,353549,8573,3081,344,414 Industrial3,0175,338,2117,81413,823,742 Institutional1,0051,210,6963,2883,962,831 Total7,2728,438,49720,94023,742,230 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept; ESRI Business Analyst; TischlerBise analysis 19 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections 2035 Comprehensive Plan, from 2015 to 2025 the County is expected to Plan, an average of 615 jobs per year is applied to the Countywide base year total to project employment in the Ce Plan anticipates Institutional (healthcare) and Retail jobs to be the Industrial then Office having the smallest shares. To account foFigure 22 lists the assumed percent of the job growth for each industry that is used in the projecti Figure 22. Percent of Job Growth by Industry Percent of IndustryJob Growth Retail30% Office15% Industrial25% Institutional30% Nonresidential floor area is projected based on the employment growth and average square feet per Figure 23 are the square feet per employee factors for a number of land uses. Based on the totals, the Shopping Center (ITE 820) land use factor will be us Office (ITE 710) for Office, Manufacturing (ITE 140) for Industr Hospital (ITE 610) for Institutional. Figure 23 ITEDemandWkdy Trip EndsWkdy Trip EndsEmp PerSq Ft CodeLand UseUnitPer Dmd Unit*Per Employee*Dmd UnitPer Emp 110Light Industrial1,000 Sq Ft4.963.051.63615 130Industrial Park1,000 Sq Ft3.372.911.16864 140Manufacturing1,000 Sq Ft3.932.471.59628 150Warehousing1,000 Sq Ft1.745.050.342,902 254Assisted Livingbed2.604.240.61na 320Motelroom3.3525.170.13na 520Elementary School1,000 Sq Ft19.5221.000.931,076 530High School1,000 Sq Ft14.0722.250.631,581 540Community Collegestudent1.1514.610.08na 550University/Collegestudent1.568.890.18na 565Day Carestudent4.0921.380.19na 610Hospital1,000 Sq Ft10.723.792.83354 620Nursing Home1,000 Sq Ft6.642.912.28438 710General Office (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft9.743.282.97337 760Research & Dev Center1,000 Sq Ft11.263.293.42292 770Business Park1,000 Sq Ft12.444.043.08325 820Shopping Center (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft37.7516.112.34427 * Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017) Listed in Figure 24, over the next ten years, it is projected that Frederick County 20 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Institutional sector is projected to grow by 1,844 jobs, Retail sector by 1,844 jobs, Industrial sector by 1,536 jobs, and Office sector by 922 jobs. Based on the job growth, the County is projected to grow by 2.7 area. About a third of the growth comes from the Industrial sectional sectors have significant growth as well. Additionally, Countywide employment projections are split into t proportional base year totals. The Urban Service Area is project Service Area is projected to grow by 1,542 jobs. To calculate the floor foot per job factors are applied to the job growth. As a result, square feet and the Rural Service Area grows by 700,000 square feet. 21 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 24. Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections Base YearTotal 20182019202020212022202320242025202620272028Increase Frederick County Employment Retail8,4278,6118,7968,9809,1649,3499,5339,7179,90210,08610,2711,844 Office4,6614,7534,8454,9385,0305,1225,2145,3065,3985,4915,583922 Industrial10,83110,98511,13811,29211,44611,59911,75311,90612,06012,21412,3671,536 Institutional4,2934,4774,6624,8465,0305,2155,3995,5835,7685,9526,1371,844 Total28,21228,82729,44130,05630,67031,28531,89932,51433,12833,74334,3576,145 Increase615615614615615614615615615615 Floor Area (1,000 square feet) Retail5,9516,0306,1086,1876,2666,3446,4236,5026,5806,6596,738787 Office1,8941,9251,9561,9872,0182,0492,0812,1122,1432,1742,205310 Industrial19,16219,25919,35519,45219,54819,64519,74119,83819,93420,03120,127966 Institutional5,1745,2395,3045,3695,4345,4995,5655,6305,6955,7605,825652 Total32,18132,45232,72432,99533,26633,53833,80934,08134,35234,62434,8952,714 Increase271271271271271271271271271271 Rural Service Area Employment Retail1,8971,9391,9802,0222,0632,1052,1462,1882,2292,2712,312415 Office1,3531,3801,4061,4331,4601,4871,5141,5401,5671,5941,621268 Industrial3,0173,0603,1033,1463,1893,2313,2743,3173,3603,4033,445428 Institutional1,0051,0481,0911,1341,1771,2201,2631,3071,3501,3931,436431 Total7,2727,4267,5807,7357,8898,0438,1978,3518,5068,6608,8141,542 Increase154154154154154154154154154154 Floor Area (1,000 square feet) Retail1,3401,3571,3751,3931,4111,4281,4461,4641,4811,4991,517177 Office55055956857758659560461362263164090 Industrial5,3385,3655,3925,4195,4465,4735,5005,5265,5535,5805,607269 Institutional1,2111,2261,2411,2561,2721,2871,3021,3171,3331,3481,363153 Total8,4388,5078,5768,6458,7148,7838,8528,9218,9899,0589,127689 Increase69696969696969696969 Urban Service Area Employment Retail6,5306,6736,8166,9587,1017,2447,3877,5307,6737,8157,9581,428 Office3,3083,3733,4393,5043,5703,6353,7013,7663,8313,8973,962654 Industrial7,8147,9248,0358,1468,2578,3688,4798,5898,7008,8118,9221,108 Institutional3,2883,4303,5713,7123,8533,9944,1364,2774,4184,5594,7001,412 Total20,94021,40021,86122,32122,78123,24123,70224,16224,62225,08325,5434,603 Increase460460460460460460460460460460 Floor Area (1,000 square feet) Retail4,6114,6724,7334,7944,8554,9164,9775,0385,0995,1605,221610 Office1,3441,3661,3881,4111,4331,4551,4771,4991,5211,5431,565220 Industrial13,82413,89313,96314,03314,10214,17214,24214,31114,38114,45114,520697 Institutional3,9634,0134,0634,1134,1634,2124,2624,3124,3624,4124,462499 Total23,74223,94524,14724,35024,55324,75524,95825,16025,36325,56525,7682,026 Increase203203203203203203203203203203 Source: Frederick County 2035 Comprehensive Plan; Trip Generatio Business Analyst; TischlerBise analysis 22 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Vehicle Trip Generation Residential Vehicle Trips A customized trip rate is calculated for the single family and mFigure 25, the most recent data from the American Community Survey is inputted into equations provided by the ITE to calculate the trip ends per housing unit factor. A si 10.54 trip ends on an average weekday and a multifamily unit is 1 trip ends on an average weekday. Figure 25. Customized Residential Trip End Rates Households (2)Vehicles per VehiclesSingle FamilyMultifamilyTotalHousehold Available (1)Units*UnitsHouseholdsby Tenure Owner-occupied55,62323,16620023,3662.38 Renter-occupied10,5684,7321,8166,5481.61 TOTAL 66,19127,8982,01629,9142.21 Housing Units (6) =>30,4172,05532,472 PersonsTripVehicles byTripAverage Trip Ends perITE Trip EndsDifference (3)Ends (4)Type of HousingEnds (5)Trip Ends Housing UnitPer Unitfrom ITE Single Family77,013231,67262,784409,313320,493 10.54 9.4412% Multifamily Units4,1219,3563,40713,71711,537 5.61 5.443% TOTAL 81,134241,02866,191423,030332,02910.23 * Includes Single Family Detached, Attached,and Manufactured Homes (1) Vehicles available by tenure from Table B25046,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. (2) Households by tenure and units in structure from Table B250American Community Survey, 2011-2015. (3) Persons by units in structure from Table B25033, American C-2015. (4) Vehicle trips ends based on persons using formulas from Trip Generation(ITE 2017). For singlefamilyhousing (ITE 210), the fitted curve equation is EXP(0.89*LN(persons)+1.7To approximate the average population of the ITE studies, persons were divided by 286 and the equation resultFor multifamily housing (ITE 221), the fitted curve equation is (2.29*persons)-81.02. (5) Vehicle trip ends based on vehicles available using formulas froTrip Generation(ITE 2017). For singlefamily housing (ITE 210), the fitted curve equation is EXP(0.99*LN(vehiTo approximate the average number of vehicles in the ITE studies, vehicles available were divided For multifamily housing (ITE 220), the fitted curve equation is (ITE 2012). (6) Housing units from TableB25024, American Community Survey, 2011-2015. 23 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Residential Vehicle Trips Adjustment Factors A vehicle trip end is the out-bound or in-bound leg of a vehicle trip. As a result, to not double count trips, a standard 50 percent adjustment is applied to trip ends to calc- home is attributed to the employer. -bound trips that are outside of the County. The trip adjustment factor includes two cAccording to the National Household Travel Survey (2009), home-based work trips are typically 31 percent of out-bound trips (which are 50 percent of all trip ends). Also, utilizing the most recent data from the Census Bureau's web percent of the Frederick County workers travel outside the County for work. In combination, these factors account for 12 percent of additional production trips (0.31 x 0.50 x 0.77 = 0.12). Shown in Figure 26, the total adjustment factor for residential housing units includes attraction trips (50 percent of trip ends) plus the journey-to-work commuting adjustment (12 percent of production trips) for a total of 62 percent. Figure 26. Frederick County Trip Adjustment Factor for Commuters Employed Frederick County Residents (2015) 38,410 Frederick County Residents Working in County (2015)8,830 Frederick County Residents Commuting Outside County for Work29,580 Percent Commuting out of the County77% Additional Production Trips12% General Trip Adjustment Factor50% Residential Trip Adjustment Factor62% Source: U.S. Census, OnTheMap Application Nonresidential Vehicle Trips th rates and adjustment factors found in their recently published 1 edition of Trip Generation. The weekday trip end per 1,000 square feet factors highlighted in Figure 27 are used to estimate the trip generation in Frederick County. 24 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 27. Institute of Transportation Engineers Nonresidential Trip Fact ITEDemandWkdy Trip EndsWkdy Trip EndsEmp PerSq Ft CodeLand UseUnitPer Dmd Unit*Per Employee*Dmd UnitPer Emp 110Light Industrial1,000 Sq Ft4.963.051.63615 130Industrial Park1,000 Sq Ft3.372.911.16864 140Manufacturing1,000 Sq Ft3.932.471.59628 150Warehousing1,000 Sq Ft1.745.050.342,902 254Assisted Livingbed2.604.240.61na 320Motelroom3.3525.170.13na 520Elementary School1,000 Sq Ft19.5221.000.931,076 530High School1,000 Sq Ft14.0722.250.631,581 540Community Collegestudent1.1514.610.08na 550University/Collegestudent1.568.890.18na 565Day Carestudent4.0921.380.19na 610Hospital1,000 Sq Ft10.723.792.83354 620Nursing Home1,000 Sq Ft6.642.912.28438 710General Office (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft9.743.282.97337 760Research & Dev Center1,000 Sq Ft11.263.293.42292 770Business Park1,000 Sq Ft12.444.043.08325 820Shopping Center (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft37.7516.112.34427 * Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017) For nonresidential land uses, the standard 50 percent adjustment is applied to Office, Indu Institutional development types. A lower vehicle trip adjustment this type of development attracts vehicles as they pass-by on arterial and collector roads. For example, when someone stops at a convenience store on their way home from work primary destination. An average pass-by rate from ITE is applied to Retail, resulting in a trip adjus factor of 38 percent. In Figure 28 adjustment factor is listed for each land use. Figure 28. Frederick County Summary of Averages Daily Vehicle Trip Factors Vehicle Trip Trip Adj. Avg. Daily Vehicle Land UseEnds%Trip Rate (Adj.) Residential (per housing unit) Single Family 10.54 0.62 6.53 Multifamily 5.61 0.62 3.48 Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet) Retail 37.75 0.38 14.35 Office 9.74 0.50 4.87 Industrial 3.93 0.50 1.97 Institutional 19.52 0.50 9.76 Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017); TischlerBise analysis 25 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Vehicle Trip Projections The base year vehicle trip totals and vehicle trip projections a end factors, the trip adjustment factors, and the residential and nonresidential and floor area growth. In the base year, residential land uses a nonresidential land uses account for 182,739 vehicle trips in Frrick County. Through 2028, there will be a total increase of 51,708 daily vehicle trips with the major family units (58 percent) and Retail (22 percent) development. Furthermore, 70 percent of the current vehicle trips in the County are generated in the Urban Service Area. In total, by 2028, the Urban Service area will increase by Area will increase by 15,586 vehicle trips. 26 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 29. Frederick County Total Daily Vehicle Trip Projections (2019-2028) Base YearTotal 20182019202020212022202320242025202620272028Increase Frederick County Residential Single Family224,189226,861229,533232,205234,877237,549240,221242,893246,682250,470254,25930,069 Multifamily4,3444,3964,4474,4994,5514,6034,6544,7064,7804,8534,926583 Subtotal228,533231,257233,981236,704239,428242,152244,876247,599251,461255,323259,18530,652 Nonresidential Retail85,36786,49587,62488,75289,88191,01092,13893,26794,39595,52496,65211,286 Office9,2259,3769,5279,6799,8309,98110,13210,28310,43410,58610,7371,512 Industrial37,65337,84338,03338,22238,41238,60238,79238,98139,17139,36139,5511,897 Institutional50,49451,13051,76652,40253,03853,67454,31054,94655,58356,21956,8556,361 Subtotal182,739184,844186,950189,055191,161193,267195,372197,478199,583201,689203,79421,056 Grand Total411,272416,101420,931425,760430,589435,418440,248445,077451,045457,012462,98051,708 Increase4,8294,8294,8294,8294,8294,8294,8295,9685,9685,968 Rural Service Area Residential Single Family78,40479,33880,27381,20782,14283,07684,01184,94586,27087,59588,92010,516 Multifamily55055656356957658258959560561462374 Subtotal78,95479,89580,83681,77782,71883,65984,60085,54186,87588,20989,54310,590 Nonresidential Retail19,21819,47319,72719,98120,23520,48920,74320,99721,25121,50521,7592,541 Office2,6782,7222,7662,8092,8532,8972,9412,9853,0293,0733,117439 Industrial10,49010,54210,59510,64810,70110,75410,80710,86010,91210,96511,018529 Institutional11,81611,96512,11412,26312,41212,56112,71012,85813,00713,15613,3051,489 Subtotal44,20244,70245,20245,70146,20146,70147,20047,70048,20048,69949,1994,997 Grand Total123,156124,597126,037127,478128,919130,359131,800133,240135,074136,908138,74215,586 Increase1,4411,4411,4411,4411,4411,4411,4411,8341,8341,834 Urban Service Area Residential Single Family145,785147,523149,260150,998152,735154,473156,211157,948160,412162,875165,33919,553 Multifamily3,7943,8393,8853,9303,9754,0204,0664,1114,1754,2394,303509 Subtotal149,580151,362153,145154,928156,711158,493160,276162,059164,587167,114169,64220,062 Nonresidential Retail66,14867,02367,89768,77269,64670,52171,39572,27073,14474,01974,8938,745 Office6,5476,6556,7626,8696,9767,0847,1917,2987,4067,5137,6201,073 Industrial27,16427,30127,43727,57427,71127,84827,98528,12228,25928,39628,5321,369 Institutional38,67739,16439,65240,13940,62641,11441,60142,08842,57543,06343,5504,873 Subtotal138,536140,142141,748143,354144,960146,566148,172149,778151,384152,990154,59516,059 Grand Total288,116291,505294,893298,282301,671305,059308,448311,837315,970320,104324,23736,121 Increase3,3893,3893,3893,3893,3893,3893,3894,1344,1344,134 Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017); Ti 27 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Functional Population Both residential and nonresidential developments increase the de To calculate the proportional share between residential and nonrential demand on service and facilities, a functional population approach is often used. The the cost of the facilities to residential and nonresidential dev and workers in the County through a 24-hour day. Residents that do not work are assigned 20 hours per day to resi to nonresidential development (annualized averages). Residents t assigned 14 hours to residential development and 10 hours to nonresidential develop work outside the County are assigned 14 hours to residential dev day are assumed to be spent outside of the County working. Inflouters are assigned 10 hours to nonresidential development. Based on 2015 functional population accounts for 77 percent of the functional population, while nonr percent, see Figure 30. Figure 30. Frederick County Functional Population Demand Units in 2015 Residential DemandPerson Hours/Day^Hours Population*80,230 Residents Not Working41,82020836,400 Resident Workers**38,410 Worked in County**8,83014123,620 Worked Outside of County**29,58014414,120 Residential Subtotal1,374,140 Residential Share ==>77% Nonresidential Non-Working Residents41,8204167,280 Jobs Located in County**24,747 Residents Working in County**8,8301088,300 Non-Resident Workers (Inflow Commuters)15,91710159,170 Nonresidential Subtotal414,750 Nonresidential Share ==>23% TOTAL1,788,890 * Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011-2015 American Community Surve ** Source: 2015 Inflow/Outflow Analysis, OnTheMap Application, U ^ Hours per day allocated to land use (residential or nonresiden 28 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PROJECT APPROACH The assignment for Frederick County involves two main elements: 1. 2.To allow County staff to use the Capital Impacts Model to determ development projects that take into consideration whether capaci therefore, whether a cash proffer can be offered and accepted byy). This report provides the static list of capital impacts and supp The Model calculates the cost to serve the land use first and th needs in the service area for the particular facility. Therefore, throughout this report, service areas/regions are identified with levels of service reported in Two sections are provided in the following pages: (I) Cash Proff-Cash Proffer Categories. 29 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia I.Cash Proffer Categories 30 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL IMPACTS Public School capital impacts are determined using the incremental methodology and costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. The methodology is based on the cost to provide future public school capacity due to growth and is calculated using the current average Frederick County public school student generation rates, Capital Improvement Plan (by type of unit), level of service standards (capacity), and local costs. The incremental methodology used to calculate the capital impacts is illustratedFigure 31. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the components. Sc capital impacts are derived from the product of students per housing unit (by type oand the net capital cost per student. The boxes in the next level down indicate detail on the components included in the proffer. A credit for future payments on existing General Obligation and ot Figure 31. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impacts Methodology Chart FREDERICK COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL IMPACT Residential Development Students per Housing Unit by Multiplied By Net Local Capital Type (Student Generation Cost per Student Rate) School Construction Cost per Education Center Cost per StudentStudent Support Facility Cost per Transportation Vehicle Cost Studentper Student Minus Debt Payments per Student 31 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia School Capital Impact Service Areas Several service area options were discussed with County staff. A properly calibrated service area is needed to accurately identify the local school utilization (enrollment compared to capacity) at each of the three grade levels. More general and larger service areas (i.e. countywide or Urban and Rural) would result in utilization of the schools within that area being analyzed. While more detailed service areas (i.e. based on school attendance zones) would result in the model analyzing only the utilization of the specific school that would be directly affected by the development. based on the General Service Areas (i.e. Urban and Rural) with the Elementary School analysis splitting the Urban Service Area into North and South areas. After review from the Frederick County Development Impact Model consensus was reached that the service areas should be the schooThus, when a development is being inputted into the Capital Impact Model, the local school at each grade level is chosen. The model then analyzes just the utilization of those sc Public School Students per Housing Unit Frederick County provided student generation rates by type of housing unit and grade level. The term the County. (Public school students are a subset of school-age children, which includes students in private schools and home-schooled children. Data reflect public school students only.) Student generation rates are calculated for four housing unit types: (1) single family detached; (2) single family attached; (3) multifamily; (4) age-restricted single family. Rates are provided for three school grade levels: (1) Elementary School (grades K-5); (2) Middle School (6-8) and (3) High School (grades 9-12). Average rates for Frederick County Public Schools are shown below. The Age-Restricted Single Family housing unit is assumed to not generate any students. Figure 32. Frederick County Student Generation Rates Housing TypeESMSHSTotal Single Family-Detached0.1550.0910.1260.372 Single Family-Attached0.1880.0850.0930.366 Multifamily0.1640.0760.0770.317 Age Restricted Single Family0.0000.0000.0000.000 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept. 32 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Public School Facilities Level of Service Standards This section provides current inventories and levels of service for elementary, middle, and high schools in Frederick County Public Schools. The data contained in these tables determine Level of Service infrastructure standards for school buildings and sites on whichcapital impacts are based. Levels of service are shown based on two sets of figurescurrent enrollment and capacity. The enrollment in the model will be updated annually and set to the enrollment as of D Elementary Schools As indicated in Figure 33, County elementary schools have a total of 823,826 square feet of floor area on 235 acres. At the end of 2018, the total enrollment was 6,155 students and the total capacity was 5,973 students. Utilization is calculated by dividing enrollment by school capacity and calculated for each school. At a countywide level, Frederick County is currently at 103 percent utilization. Levels of service are shown in the far right column of Figure 33. Level of service standards are calculated by dividing the amount of infrastructure by total capacity. Calculations are done for each school and at a countywide level there are 138 square feet per student. The utilization percentages shown are used in the Capital Impacts Mo proffer is triggered. Capacity needs are triggered at an Attendance Zone level and based on a utilization percentage at 100 percent or higher. Figure 33. Frederick County Public Schools Elementary Schools Level of Service SiteBuilding31-Dec-18CurrentSq. Ft. per Attendance ZoneAcreageSquare FeetEnrollment CapacityUtilizationCapacity Apple Pie Ridge14.265,12045645999%142 Armel15.070,281641558115%126 Bass-Hoover18.364,630627553113%117 Evendale27.7782,58553562486%132 Gainesboro18.996,48845956282%172 Greenwood Mill15.2100,46563969692%144 Indian Hollow19.559,065424405105%146 Middletown15.070,28147948299%146 Orchard View37.476,227495450110%169 Redbud Run43.770,697727670109%106 Stonewall10.067,987673514131%132 Countywide Total235.0823,8266,1555,973103%138 Source: Frederick County Public School Planning Office; Virginia Middle School As indicated in Figure 34, County middle schools have a total of 612,690 square feet of flo acres. At the end of 2018, the total enrollment was 3,227 studen 33 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia students. Utilization is calculated by dividing enrollment by scty and calculated for each school. At a countywide level, Frederick County is currently at 94 perce utilization. Levels of service are shown in the far right column of Figure 34. Level of service standards are calculated by dividing the amount of infrastructure by total capacity. Calculations are done for each school and at a countywide level there are 179 square feet per student. The utilization percentages shown are used in the Capital Impacts Mo proffer is triggered. Capacity needs are triggered at an Attendance Zone level and bas percentage at 100 percent or higher. Figure 34. Frederick County Public Schools: Middle Schools Level of Service SiteBuilding31-Dec-18CurrentSq. Ft. per Attendance ZoneAcreageSquare FeetEnrollment CapacityUtilizationCapacity Admiral Byrd27.77159,966975900108%178 Frederick County39.09187,76471390079%209 James Wood MS26.91149,952925900103%167 Robert E. Aylor23.90115,00861472085%160 Countywide Total117.7612,6903,2273,42094%179 Source: Frederick County Public School Planning Office; Virginia High School As indicated in Figure 35, County high schools have a total of 722,547 square feet of floor area on 196 acres. At the end of 2018, the total enrollment was 4,265 studen students. Utilization is calculated by dividing enrollment by school capaci At a countywide level, Frederick County is currently at 113 perc utilization. Levels of service are shown in the far right column of Figure 35. Level of service standards are calculated by dividing the amount of infrastructure by total capacity. Calculations are done for each school and at a countywide level there are 191 square feet per student. The utilization percentages shown are used in the Capital Impacts Mo proffer is triggered. Capacity needs are triggered at an Attendance Zone level and bas percentage at 100 percent or higher. Figure 35. Frederick County Schools: High School Level of Service SiteBuilding31-Dec-18CurrentSq. Ft. per Attendance ZoneAcreageSquare FeetEnrollment CapacityUtilizationCapacity James Wood HS68.9229,1871,3321,200111%191 Millbrook84.8253,8431,4541,300112%195 Sherando40.0239,5171,4791,285115%186 Countywide Total193.6722,5474,2653,785113%191 Source: Frederick County Public School Planning Office; Virginia 34 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Education Centers The level of service for Education Centers is calculated at a coFigure 36, there are 133,286 square feet of Education Centers in the County enrollment was 13,647 students. The countywide level of service is calculated by dividing the total floor area by enrollment. As a result, there are 10 square feet per st Figure 36. Frederick County Schools: Education Centers SiteBuildingValue Per FacilityRegionValueAcreageSquare FeetSquare Feet Dowell J. Howard CenterCountywide$7,456,6002070,417$106 NREP/Senseny Road SchoolCountywide$5,064,4009.762,869$81 TOTALS$12,521,00029.7133,286$94 Sumary by Region/SchoolDemand Units Value perAcres perBuilding (Students)StudentStudentSF per Student LOS based on Current Enrollment13,647$9170.00210 LOS based on Capacity13,178$9500.00210 Support Facilities The level of service for Support Facilities is calculated at a countywide level. As indicated Figure 37, there are 160,755 square feet of Support Facilities in the Countotal countywide enrollment was 13,647 students. The countywide level of service area by enrollment. As a result, there are 12 square feet per st Figure 37. Frederick County Schools: Support Facilities SiteBuildingValue Per FacilityRegionValueAcreageSquare FeetSquare Feet Buildings & Ground FacilityCountywide$2,132,60012.1349,626$43 Support Facilities Services WestCountywide$676,0006.0210,423$65 School Board OfficeCountywide$3,601,7006.6435,494$101 Smithfield FacilityCountywide$789,8761.326,380$124 Transportation FacilityCountywide$11,044,20057.358,832$188 TOTALS$18,244,37683.4160,755$113 Sumary by Region/SchoolDemand Units Value perAcres perBuilding (Students)StudentStudentSF per Student LOS based on Current Enrollment13,647$1,3370.00612 LOS based on Capacity13,178$1,3840.00612 35 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Transportation Vehicles The level of service for Transportation Vehicles is calculated aFigure 38, there are 229 school buses in operation. At the end of 2018, the total cou 13,647 students. The countywide level of service is calculated b by enrollment. As a result, there are 16.78 buses per 1,000 students. Figure 38. Frederick County Schools: Transportation Vehicles Vehicle TypeCountCost per VehicleTotal Cost School Bus229$100,000$22,900,000 Total Enrollment13,647 Buses per 1,000 Students16.78 Cost per Student$1,678 Public School Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan The cost factor applied to the levels of service for school cons analyzing planned or new schools. The recently constructed Jordan Springs Elementary factor. And, the New High S Figure 39. School Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan BuildingValue per FacilityValueSquare FeetSquare Feet Jordan Springs ES$28,500,00084,375$337 Aylor MS Replacement$45,500,000133,000$342 New High School$122,200,000297,149$411 TOTAL$167,700,000430,149$390 Source: Frederick County Capital Improvement Plan 2019-2024 Plan 36 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Credit for Future Debt Payments for School Improvements Because the County has debt financed recent school construction projects and will be debt financing future school construction, TischlerBise recommends including a credit for future principal payments. Along with debt from previous projects, the County anticipates tings Elementary School and the Aylor Middle School projects. A credit is necessary since new residential units that may pay school cash proffers will also contribute to future principal payments on school debt through property taxes.Credits are calculated on a per student basis to reflect the proportionate share of debt service per development unit, which is based on demand specific to the land use receiving the credit (i.e., for schools to property value, which would shift the cash proffer approach away fro tax. The credit amount of $9,322 is subtracted from the gross capital cost per student to derive cost per student for school facilities Figure 40. Payment Schedule for School Debt Existing Plus Projected New Total Planned Debt Service Fiscal Debt per PrincipalInterestTotalEnrollment YearStudent FY19$10,784,583$4,969,168$15,753,75113,483$1,168 FY20$10,341,220$4,518,435$14,859,65513,641$1,089 FY21$11,017,547$5,009,436$16,026,98313,800$1,161 FY22$12,306,040$5,913,528$18,219,56813,959$1,305 FY23$13,304,444$6,094,369$19,398,81314,118$1,374 FY24$12,540,784$5,661,720$18,202,50414,277$1,275 FY25$11,730,000$5,112,387$16,842,38714,435$1,167 FY26$10,805,000$4,605,382$15,410,38214,660$1,051 FY27$9,950,000$4,147,714$14,097,71414,886$947 FY28$9,375,000$3,738,542$13,113,54215,111$868 Discount Rate4.0% Net Present Value$9,322 37 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 45. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impact by Housing Unit, High School SCHOOL CAPITAL IMPACT: Frederick County Public Schools James Wood Capital Impact Per Housing Unit HSMillbrookSherando Single Family-Detached$9,211$6,002$8,973 Single Family-Attached$6,799$5,607$6,623 Multifamily$5,629$5,013$5,484 Age Restricted Single Family$0$0$0 School Cash Proffer Eligibility To comply with the 2019 Cash Proffer law, a capacity need must be established. The Schoo analysis in the CapIM model is programmed to calculate cash prof city of the building). Once enrollment has exceeded capacity the capital impact is eligible for cash proffe a development may not generate enough students to exceed the thr triggered. In other cases, if there is excess capacity and a devel exceed the capacity, only the impact from the number of students eligible for cash proffer. 41 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PARKS & RECREATION CAPITAL IMPACTS Frederick County has a parks and recreation system with facilities that se To determine the capital impact on parks and recreation from new following types of facilities are analyzed for the geographic areas noted: Countywide Indoor Recreation Facilities Service Areas District Parks Community Parks Neighborhood Parks Unpaved Trails Paved Trails Community Centers Figure 46 diagrams the incremental methodology used to calculate the Parks & Recreation capital impact. Costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. It ie, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the componenParks & Recreation capital impacts are derived from the product of persons per housing unit capital cost per person. The net capital cos the level of service standard calculated at either a Countywide 42 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 46. Parks & Recreation Capital Impact Methodology Chart PARKS & RECREATION CAPITAL IMPACTS Residential Development Persons per Housing Unit by Multiplied By Net Capital Cost Type of Unit per Person Indoor Recreation Facilities Cost District Parks Cost per Person per Person Community Parks Cost per Neighborhood Parks Cost per PersonPerson Unpaved Trails Cost per Paved Trails Cost per Person Person Community Center Cost per Person 43 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Park Inventory Shown in Figure 47, there are a number of current parks, trails, and community cen Parks & Recreation Department. Parks have been organized into three categories: District (392 acres), Community (32 acres), and Neighborhood (11.5 acres). Trails have miles) and paved trails (4.1 miles). There is also 50,077 square 44 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 47. Parks & Recreation Inventory District Parks NameUseAcresValueService Area SherandoMultipurpose337$21,881,047Urban ClearbrookMultipurpose55$10,033,814Urban Total392$31,914,861 Average Cost Per Acre$81,415 Community Parks NameUseAcresValueService Area Rose HillMultipurpose7$669,913Rural Snowden BridgeMultipurpose25$615,938Urban Total32$1,285,850 Average Cost Per Acre$40,183 Neighborhood Parks NameUseAcresValueService Area Frederick HeightsMultipurpose11$500,980Urban Reynolds StoreMultipurpose0.5$188,500Rural Total11.5$689,480 Average Cost Per Acre$59,955 Unpaved Trails NameUseMilesValueService Area Sherando ParkHiking1.5$126,720Urban Rose Hill ParkHiking1.3$109,824Rural Sherando ParkMountain Biking3.0$62,400Urban Total5.8$298,944 Average Cost Per Mile$51,542 Paved Trails NameUseMilesValueService Area Sherando ParkMultiuse3$1,143,999Urban Clearbrook ParkMultiuse1$228,800Urban Frederick HeightsMultiuse0.5$190,667Urban Total4.1$1,563,465 Average Cost Per Mile$381,333 Community Centers NameUseSq. Ft.ValueService Area EvendaleMultipurpose11,761$175,000Urban GreenwoodMultipurpose11,802$250,000Urban SherandoMultipurpose6,843$250,000Urban Orchard ViewMultipurpose7,869$175,000Rural GainesboroMultipurpose11,802$250,000Rural Total50,077$1,100,000 Average Cost Per Square Foot$22 Source: Frederick County Parks and Recreation Asset Inventory 45 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Parks & Recreation Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan In Figure 48, the Park & Recreation facilities f serve their population are listed. Figure 48. Park Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan by Type and Service Area District Parks Park NameProject PurposeAcresValue$/AcreService Area Sherando ParkArea 1 Development$1,290,000$0Urban Sherando ParkWater Slide$327,500$0Urban Clearbrook ParkWater Slide$327,500$0Urban Sherando ParkSoftball Complex$1,723,000$0Urban Sherando ParkBallfield Lighting$856,000$0Urban Sherando ParkArea 3 Development$2,250,000$0Urban New District ParksLand Aquisition300.0$8,262,000$27,540Urban New District ParkLand Aquisition150.0$4,131,000$27,540Rural Total450.0$19,167,000$42,593 Community Parks Park NameProject PurposeAcresValue$/AcreService Area Snowden Bridge ParkPark Development$2,410,000$0Urban New Community ParkMulti-Purpose Park35.0$2,194,000$62,685Urban Total35.0$4,604,000$131,542 Neighborhood Parks Park NameProject PurposeAcresValue$/AcreService Area New Neighborhood ParksMulti-Purpose Park20.0$1,745,320$87,266Urban New Neighborhood ParksMulti-Purpose Park40.0$3,490,640$87,266Rural Total60.0$5,236,000$87,266 Paved Trails Trail NameProject PurposeMilesValue$/MileService Area Abrams Creek TrailPaved Walking Trail3$1,219,900$406,633Urban Total3.0$1,219,900$406,633 Indoor Facilities Facility NameProject PurposeSq. Ft.Value$/SFService Area Field HouseIndoor Recreation44,000$9,067,000$206Countywide Indoor Swimming PoolSwimming35,000$11,841,000$338Countywide Total79,000$20,908,000$264 The CapIM model will evaluate the capital impact a development has on all types of Park & Recreation facilities. However, to comply with the 2019 Virginia Cash Proffer law, it is only the park and recreation facilities that are included in Frederick are considered to be eligible for cash proffers at this time. 46 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Parks & Recreation Level of Service and Cost Factors For all the Parks & Recreation components, except Indoor Recreation Facilities, capital impacts are calculated based on current levels of service for existing parks and facilities. The analysis first establishes a countywide level of service for each type of facility and then determines whether there is excess capacity or a deficit in each park region for that type of park. Figure 49 lists the level of service and cost factors for District Parks, Community Parks, Neighborhood Parks, Unpaved Trails, and Paved Trails. Levels of services are calculated at a Service Area level for each type of park based on acreage totals. Level of services are calculated at a Service Area level for each type. The methodology is based on the assumption that the County will main developing parks to serve new development. In some cases, there are not any facility types in a Service Area (District Park and Paved Trails in the Rural Service). In t applied. The figure also lists the construction cost per unit of each facility. Most cost factors originate from the calculate the cost per capita. For example, in the Urban Service Area the acres per 1,000 persons and the construction cost for an acre of capital cost per person in the Urban Service Area for District Parks is $124.51. Figure 49. Parks Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors Current LOS Imp. Acres Reqd Current Excess (Units / 1,000 at County LOS by Capacity or Construction Cost Per Park CategoryService AreaUnitPopulationpersons)Category of Park(Deficit)Cost Per UnitCapita AcresAcres/1,000 persons Urban392.059,3034.52268.12123.88$27,540$124.51 District ParkRural0.027,3994.52123.88(123.88)$27,540$124.51 Total392.086,7024.52392.000.00$27,540$124.51 Urban25.059,3030.4221.893.11$62,685$26.43 Rural7.027,3990.2610.11(3.11)$62,685$16.02 Community Park Total32.086,7020.3732.000.00$62,685$23.14 Urban11.059,3030.197.873.13$87,266$16.19 Neighborhood Rural0.527,3990.023.63(3.13)$87,266$1.59 Park Total11.586,7020.1311.500.00$87,266$11.57 MilesMiles/1,000 persons Urban4.559,3030.083.970.53$51,542$3.91 Unpaved TrailsRural1.327,3990.051.83(0.53)$51,542$2.45 Total5.886,7020.075.800.00$51,542$3.45 Urban0.559,3030.010.340.16$406,633$3.43 Paved TrailsRural0.027,3990.010.16(0.16)$406,633$2.35 Total0.586,7020.010.500.00$406,633$2.35 Cost from CIP Cost from Inventory 47 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Community Center Level of Service and Cost Factors The level of service for Community Centers in Frederick County is illustrated in Figure 50. The five centers are allocated to the Service Areas based on their location. The pulation to determine the level of service. For example, there i Community Center in the Urban Service Area which has a populatio of service of 0.51 square feet per capita. The cost per square foot is multiplied by the level of service to find the ca example, the level of service in the Urban Service Area is 0.51 square foot is $22.20. As a result, the capital cost per person is $11.32. Figure 50. Community Center Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors Current LOSCost per Cost per Service AreaPopulationSq. Ft.Value(Sq. Ft./Capita)Square FootPerson Urban59,30330,406$675,0000.51$22.20$11.32 Rural27,39919,671$425,0000.72$21.61$15.56 Total86,70250,077$1,100,0000.58$21.97$12.69 Indoor Recreational Facility Level of Service and Cost Factors nned to be constructed oversized to accommodate future growth and to serve the whole Co facilities is based on the 2039 population. This results in the square feet per capita. In Figure 51, the capital cost per person is calculated by multiplying the l cost per square foot. Figure 51. Indoor Recreational Facility Level of Service and Cost Factors 2039Current LOSCost per Cost per Service AreaService AreaPopulationSq. Ft.Value(Sq. Ft./Capita)Square FootPerson Field HouseCountywide113,34444,000$9,067,0000.39$206.07$80.37 Indoor Swimming PoolCountywide113,34435,000$11,841,0000.31$338.31$104.88 Total113,34479,000$20,908,0000.70$264.66$184.46 Source: Frederick County 2019-2034 CIP 48 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Parks & Recreation Input Variables and Capital Impacts Factors used to determine parks and recreation capital impacts are summarized in Figure 52. Capital impacts for Parks & Recreation facilities are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) and are only determined for residential development. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand unit by type of facilit there are seven components to the capital impact calculation: District Park (determined by Service Area) Community Park (determined by Service Area) Neighborhood Park (determined by Service Area) Unpaved Trails (determined by Service Area) Paved Trails (determined by Service Area) Community Center (determined by Service Area) Indoor Recreation Facilities (determined Countywide) Parks & Recreation capital impacts are the product of persons per housing unit multiplied by the total net capital cost per person. An example of the calculation for a single family housing unit in the Urban Service Area is: the net capital cost per person for the Countywide portion ($184.46) and the net capital cost per person for the Service Area portion ($185.79) are multiplied by the persons per housing unit (2.62) and then summed to arrive at the capital impact for this component for a single family unit of $970 (rounded). Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impact for in the lower portion of Figure 52. Please note: Costs are shown for infrastructure share of the cost to provide the facilities. Despite capacity bein some Service Areas, there is capital cost impactHowever, due to the current cash proffer law, capacity triggers are required for cash proffer acceptance.capacity triggers are integrated into the CapIM and allows the user to identify the total cost of grow amount (which may be different due to service area differences and existing capacitie 49 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 52. Parks & Recreation Input Variables and Capital Impact REGIONS Infrastructure CostDemand UnitCountywideUrbanRural District Parksper capita-$124.51$124.51 Community Parksper capita-$26.43$16.02 Neighborhood Parksper capita-$16.19$1.59 Unpaved Trailsper capita-$3.91$2.45 Paved Trailsper capita-$3.43$2.35 Community Centersper capita-$11.32$15.56 Indoor Recreation Centersper capita$184.46-- GROSS COST PER PERSON$184.46$185.79$162.48 Debt Service Credit$0.00$0.00$0.00 NET CAPITAL COST $184.46$185.79$162.48 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: REGION Housing Unit Urban CountywideUrbanTotal Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$483$487$970 Single Family-Attached2.62$483$487$970 Multifamily2.08$384$386$770 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$308$310$618 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: REGION Housing Unit Rural CountywideRuralTotal Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$437$385$822 Single Family-Attached2.37$437$385$822 Multifamily1.46$269$237$506 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$279$245$524 Parks & Recreation Cash Proffer Eligibility To comply with the 2019 Cash Proffer law, a capacity need must be established. The Parks & Recreation s based on current capacity. A park type must have a deficit supply of facilities (i.e. park acres, trail eligible for a cash proffer. 50 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: SHERIFF There are three public facility subcategories included under Public Safety: Sheriff, Fire & Rescue, and Animal Control. An incremental methodology approach is used to determine capital impacts for Sheriff facilities, which is diagrammed below. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the components. The residential portion of the Sher product of Sheriff service calls per person multiplied by person the net capital cost per person. The nonresidential portion is derivenonresidential vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential development multiplied b vehicle trip. The Sheriff capital impacts are ba facilities to serve growth. Sheriff capital impacts are calculat7 Sheriff calls for service data. The calls for service data provided by the County to TischlerBis able to be delineated by residential and nonresidential. Figure 53. Sheriff Capital Impact Methodology Chart SHERIFF CAPITAL IMPACTS Residential DevelopmentNonresidential Development Persons per Housing Unit by Vehicle Trips per 1,000 Square Unit Type Feet by Type of Development Multiplied by Net Capital Cost Multiplied by Net Capital Cost per Vehicle Trip per Person Cost per Person for Sheriff Cost per Vehicle Trip for Sheriff FacilitiesFacilities 51 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cost Allocation for Sheriff Facilities A report of 2017 sheriff service calls to business was provided by the . In total, there were 62,828 calls for service. Of the total, 60 percent were attributed to r were attributed to nonresidential land uses. Sheriff services are provided on a countywide basis in Frederick County; substations are not used in the County. Therefore, it is recommended that one service area be us Sheriff facilities. Figure 54. Frederick County Sheriff Calls for Service Calls for Land UseService% Residential37,56560% Nonresidential25,26340% Total62,828100% Source: Frederick County Sheriff's Office 52 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts Level of service standards and cost factors for the Sheriff capi shown in Figure 56 and Figure 57. Capital impacts are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) for residential development and vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area for nonresidential development. For further discussion on demand factors, see the Land Use Assumptions Chapter. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand unit by type of faci there is just one capital component in the capital impact calcul sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impact for each Service Area is listed in the lower portion of the following figure. Figure 56. Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Sheriff Facilitiesper capita$90.64 GROSS COST PER PERSON$90.64 Debt Service Credit$0.00 NET CAPITAL COST $90.64 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$237 Single Family-Attached2.62$237 Multifamily2.08$189 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$151 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$215 Single Family-Attached2.37$215 Multifamily1.46$132 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$137 54 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 57. Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Sheriff Facilitiesper vehicle trip$27.89 GROSS COST PER VEHICLE TRIP$27.89 Debt Service Credit$0.00 NET CAPITAL COST $27.89 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Urban Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripsCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$400 Office and Other Services4.87$136 Industrial1.97$55 Institutional9.76$272 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Rural Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripsCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$400 Office and Other Services4.87$136 Industrial1.97$55 Institutional9.76$272 Sheriff Cash Proffer Eligibility To be eligible for a cash proffer, the facility must be for Publ& Recreation, or Public Safety (Sheriff, Fire, and Animal Services) and a development requires additional capacity in excess of capac available in current facilities. For Sheriff, there are no facilities listed in the CIP that would indicate a capacity increase is necessary to service future population, the component is not included in the cash proffer calculation at this time. 55 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: FIRE & RESCUE Fire & Rescue is the second facility type included under the Public Safety capital impacts category. Frederick County Fire & Rescue services operate out of eleven stations. The County has invested in new and/or renovated fire and rescue stations in the recent past and CIP. & Rescue capacity. These new facilities will be able to serve the current population and futuBecause fire stations are organized by geographic fire districts, capital impacts are determined based on Service Area needs. The incremental methodology is used to calculate the Fire & Rescue capital impact and is outlined in Figure 58. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing the components. The residential portion of the fire and rescue c of persons per housing unit (by type) multiplied by the net capital cost per person. The nonresidential portion is derived from the product of vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential space multiplied by the net capital cost per vehicle trip. Figure 58. Fire & Rescue Capital Impact Methodology Chart FIRE & RESCUE CAPITAL IMPACTS Nonresidential Residential Development Development Vehicle Trip per 1,000 Persons per Housing Unit by Square Feet by Type of Type of Unit Development Multiplied by Net Capital Multiplied by Net Capital Cost per Person Cost per Vehicle Trip Cost per Person for Fire Cost per Vehicle Trip for Fire Stations Stations Cost per Person for Fire Cost per Vehicle Trip for Fire Apparatus Apparatus 56 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cost Allocation for Fire & Rescue Facilities Proportionate share factors are used to allocate demand to resid where appropriate. For facilities that serve both residential and nonresidential development and without Fire & Rescue service call data, TischlerBise recommends using a proportionate share allocation based on a functional population approach. The functional population approach estimates the residential and nonresidential activity in the county by using the hours in a day. For the residents their day is estimated to be split with 20 hours attributed to r nonresidential purposes. For resident workers, 14 hours are attr to residential purposes and 10 hours to nonresidential purposes. For non-resident workers in the county, 10 hours are attributed to nonresidential purposes in Frederick County. Figure 59 provides detail on the approach and results, which indicate that demand in Frederick County is from residential development and 2 Figure 59. Frederick County Proportionate Share Factors Demand Units in 2015 Residential DemandPerson Hours/Day^Hours Population*80,230 Residents Not Working41,82020836,400 Resident Workers**38,410 Worked in County**8,83014123,620 Worked Outside of County**29,58014414,120 Residential Subtotal1,374,140 Residential Share ==>77% Nonresidential Non-Working Residents41,8204167,280 Jobs Located in County**24,747 Residents Working in County**8,8301088,300 Non-Resident Workers (Inflow Commuters)15,91710159,170 Nonresidential Subtotal414,750 Nonresidential Share ==>23% TOTAL1,788,890 * Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011-2015 American Community Surve ** Source: 2015 Inflow/Outflow Analysis, OnTheMap Application, U 57 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Fire & Rescue Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan In Figure 60, the capacity improvement projects for Fire & Rescue listed. The two stations in the CIP that include both a cost and floor area estimate result in an average cost per square foot of $355. Figure 60. Fire & Rescue Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan Value $ FacilityService AreaSq. Ft.ValuePer Sq. Ft. Fire & Rescue Station 22Stephens City 10,000 $3,400,000$340 Fire & Rescue Station 23/Annex FacilityMillwood 10,000 $3,700,000$370 Greenwood Fire Station RenovationsGreenwood--$0 Clear Brook ReplacementClear Brook--$0 Middletown ReplacementMiddletown--$0 Total 20,000 $7,100,000$355 Source: Frederick County 2019-2024 CIP 58 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Fire & Rescue Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors The Fire & Rescue capital impacts are based on current levels of service, which ar current inventory of square footage of fire station space. Found in Figure 61, the current total fire station square footage is 134,232 square feet. To attribute the floor area to residential and nonresidential development, the proportionate share factors are applied. The le the attributed floor area by the demand unit. For example, 103,359 square feet are at residential development and is a countywide population of 86,702 of 1.19 square feet per capita. The average value per square foot of capital projects in the CIP ($355) is applied to the levels of ser determine the capital impact. For example, the level of service feet per capita. As a result, the capital impact is $422 per per square foot x 1.19 square feet per person = $422 per person). Figure 61. Fire & Rescue Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors ResidentialNonresidential Proportionate Share77%23% Service AreaSquare FeetRes. Sq. Ft.Nonres. Sq. Ft. Stephens City15,03211,5753,457 Middletown5,8144,4771,337 Clear Brook7,3255,6401,685 Gore12,4969,6222,874 Round Hill16,43512,6553,780 Gainesboro11,9889,2312,757 Star Tannery3,4082,624784 Greenwood22,00016,9405,060 North Mountain7,7545,9711,783 Reynolds Store14,72011,3343,386 Millwood17,26013,2903,970 Total134,232103,35930,873 Value $Demand Unit -Residential Res. LOSRes. Capital Per Sq. Ft.PopulationSquare Feet(Sq. Ft./Capita)Impact/Capita Countywide$35586,702103,359 1.19$422 Value $Demand Unit -Nonresidential Nonres. LOSNonres. Capital Per Sq. Ft.Vehicle TripsSquare Feet(Sq. Ft./Trip)Impact/Trip Countywide$355182,73930,873 0.17$60 59 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Fire Apparatus Capital Impact In addition to new station space, it is anticipated that the County will purchase apparatuses for the new fire stations. It is assumed that the County will expand its fleet at the same the current inventory of apparatuses is analyzed, Figure 62. The inventory is used to determine the current level of service. replacement cost of $26,930,000. The cost of the apparatuses is nonre current population or nonresidential vehicle trips. Figure 62. Fire & Rescue Apparatus Level of Service and Cost Factor UnitTotal Apparatus# of UnitsCost ($2017)Cost ($2017) Engine15$500,000$7,500,000 Ladder3$1,200,000$3,600,000 Ambulance23$250,000$5,750,000 Tanker14$500,000$7,000,000 Other30$102,667$3,080,000 Total85$26,930,000 ResidentialNonresidential Proportionate Share77%23% Cost Allocation$20,736,100$6,193,900 Population or Nonres. Trips86,702182,739 Cost per Person or Nonres. Trip$239$34 60 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts Level of service standards and cost factors for Fire & Rescue capital impact are summarized from above and shown below. Capital impacts for Fire & Rescue facilities are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) for residential development and vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area for nonresidential development. For further discussion on demand factors, see the Land Use Assumptions Chapter. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand there are two components in the capital impact calculation: Fire Stations (determined by Service Area) Fire Apparatus (determined by Service Area) Since the capital cost and household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impactfire district is listed. Figure 63. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand UnitMillwood Fire Stationper capitan/a$422 Fire Appratusper capitan/a$239 GROSS COST PER PERSON$0$661 Debt Service Credit$0$0 NET CAPITAL COST $0$661 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Stephens City Stephens CityTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Single Family-Attached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Multifamily2.08$0$1,374$1,374 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$0$1,103$1,103 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Middletown MiddletownTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$1,566$1,566 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$1,566$1,566 Multifamily1.46$0$965$965 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$998$998 61 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 64. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential cont. Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Clear Brook Clear BrookTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Single Family-Attached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Multifamily2.08$0$1,374$1,374 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$0$1,103$1,103 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Gore GoreTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Round Hill Round HillTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Gainesboro GainesboroTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Star Tannery Star TanneryTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 62 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 65. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential cont. Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Greenwood GreenwoodTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Single Family-Attached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Multifamily2.08$0$1,374$1,374 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$0$1,103$1,103 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit North Mountain North MountainTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Reynolds Store Reynolds StoreTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Millwood MillwoodTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Single Family-Attached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Multifamily2.08$0$1,374$1,374 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$0$1,103$1,103 63 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 66. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand UnitMillwood Fire Stationper vehicle tripn/a$60 Fire Apparatusper vehicle tripn/a$34 GROSS COST PER VEHICLE TRIP$0$94 Debt Service Credit$0$0 NET CAPITAL COST $0$94 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Stephens City Stephens CityTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Middletown MiddletownTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Clear Brook Clear BrookTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Gore GoreTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 64 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 67. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential cont. Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Round Hill Round HillTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Gainesboro GainesboroTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Star Tannery Star TanneryTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Greenwood GreenwoodTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet North Mountain North MountainTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 65 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 68. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential cont. Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Reynolds Store Reynolds StoreTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Millwood MillwoodTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Fire & Rescue Cash Proffer Eligibility To comply with the 2019 Cash Proffer law, a capacity need must be established. The Fire & Rescue analysis a new fire station, an improvement that increases capacity) in corresponding Service Area needs capacity improvements to accommodate future growth. When that is that case, the capital impact is triggered as cash proffer eligiFigure 69 lists those Service Areas (fire districts) that have capacity increasing projects listed in the C Figure 69. Fire & Rescue Capital Projects Fire DistrictCapital Need? Stephens City Yes Middletown Yes Clear Brook Yes Gore No Round Hill No Gainesboro No Star Tannery No Greenwood Yes North Mountain No Reynolds Store No Millwood Yes Source: Frederick County 2019-2024 CIP 66 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: ANIMAL PROTECTION Animal Protection is the third subcategory under Public Safety capital impacts. Similar to the Sheriff facility type, there were no Animal Protection facilities included in theFrederick Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Therefore, the CapIM Model uses an incremental methodology to calculate the capital impact, . Additionally, since there is no identified animal shelter capacity increasing project to accommodate future demand, the capital impacts are not eligible for cash proffers. Figure 70 diagrams the incremental methodology used to calculate Animal Protection capital impacts. Costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. It i lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the componen the product of persons per housing unit (by type of unit) multiplied by the Figure 70. Animal Protection Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ANIMAL PROTECTION SERVICES CAPITAL IMPACT Residential Development Persons per Housing Unit by Multiplied By Net Capital Type of UnitCost per Person Animal Shelter Cost per Person 67 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Animal Protection Facilities Inventory and Level of Service Frederic shelter is 13,369 square feet and has a value of $2,507,000. This results in a total cost of $187.52 per square foot. In Figure 71, floor area is attributed 100 percent to residential development. To find the level of service, the floor area is div current population (13,369 square feet / 86,702 residents = 0.15 square feet per person). This factor is multiplied by the average cost per square foot to calculate the cost per person of $28.13. Figure 71. Animal Protection Facilities and Level of Service FacilitySq.Ft.Value$/Sq. Ft. Animal Shelter13,369$2,507,000$187.52 GRAND TOTAL13,369$2,507,000$187.52 Source: Frederick County Building Inventory ResidentialNonresidential Proportionate Share100%0%Total Total Animal Protection Facility Sq. Ft. 13,369 - 13,369 Base Year Population or Jobs86,70228,212 Square Feet per Person or Job0.150.00 ResidentialNonresidential Square Feet per Person or Job0.150.00 Total Cost per Sq. Ft. $187.52$187.52 Cost per Person or Job$28.13$0.00 68 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Animal Protection Input Variables and Capital Impacts Factors used to determine the Animal Protection services capital impacts are summarized below. Capital impacts for Animal Protection capital impacts are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) and are only determined for residential development. For further discussion on household size see the Land Use Assumptions Chapter. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand there is one component in the capital impact calculation, Animalal Protection services are provided on a countywide basis. Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capi for each Service Area is listed in the lower portion of Figure 72. Figure 72. Animal Protection Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Type of Housing Unit COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Animal Shelterper capita$28.13 GROSS COST PER PERSON$28.13 Debt Service Credit$0.00 NET CAPITAL COST $28.13 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$74 Single Family-Attached2.62$74 Multifamily2.08$59 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$47 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$67 Single Family-Attached2.37$67 Multifamily1.46$41 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$42 69 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Animal Protection Cash Proffer Eligibility To be eligible for a cash proffer, the facility must be for Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, or Public Safety (Sheriff, Fire, and Animal Services) and a development requires additional capacity in excess of capacity available in current facilities. For Animal Protection, there are no facilities listed in the CIP that would indicate a capacity increase is necessary to service future population, therefore, the capital impacts found in Figure 72 are not included in the cash proffer calculation at this time. 70 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia )).®# ²§ 0±®¥¥¤± # ³¤¦®±¨¤² 71 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia LIBRARY CAPITAL IMPACTS Frederick County has a library system that currently includes one Central Library with two capacity Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Both projects are to construct additional Countywide libraries. An incremental methodology will be used to determine the capital impact and is analyzed on a Countywide basis. Only residential developments will be included in the impact calculat Figure 73 diagrams the methodology used to determine Library capital impacts. Costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. It is intended to read like more detailed breakdown of the components. Library capital impact is derived from the product of persons per housing unit (by type of unit) and the net capital cost per person. The level of service standard is planned facilities and projected population. The level of service is combined with the cost per square foot of the new facilities to cost per person. Figure 73. Library Capital Impacts Methodology Chart LIBRARY CAPITAL IMPACT Residential Development Persons per Housing Unit Multiplied By Net Capital by Type of UnitCost per Person Library Facilities Cost per Person 72 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Library Facilities Inventory As shown in Figure 74, the current library square footage is 31,264 square feet and has a value of $4,465,000. The entire Bowman Library is attributed to residential developme Figure 74. Library Facilities Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors FacilitySq.Ft.Res %Nonres %Res SFNonres SFValue$/Sq. Ft. Bowman Library31,264100%0%31,2640$4,465,000$142.82 GRAND TOTAL31,26431,2640$4,465,000$142.82 Source: Frederick County Building Inventory Library Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan To address future growth, the County plans to build two more libraries. The square footage and cost of the projects are listed in Figure 75. In total, the CIP includes plans for 12,000 new square feet of l facilities which will cost $4,792,269, an average cost of $399 puare foot. Figure 75. Planned Library Facility Level of Service Standards and Cost F FacilityService AreaCostSq. Ft.$/Sq. Ft Library Branch - GainesboroCountywide$1,749,0345,000$350 Library Branch - South LibraryCountywide$3,043,2357,000$435 Total$4,792,26912,000$399 Source: Frederick County 2019-2024 CIP Library Level of Service and Cost Factors Shown in Figure 76, since 100 percent of library services is attributed to residential development, the level of service for libraries is calculated by dividing the current i result, there is 0.36 square feet per person. The average cost f the level of service to calculate the capital impact per person ($ Figure 76. Library Level of Service and Cost Factors ResidentialNonresidential Proportionate Share100%0%Total Total Library Sq. Ft.31,264 - 31,264 Base Year Population or Jobs86,70228,212 Square Feet per Person or Job0.360.00 ResidentialNonresidential Square Feet per Person or Job0.360.00 Total Cost per Sq. Ft. $399.36$399.36 Cost per Person or Job$143.77$0.00 73 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Library Input Variables and Capital Impacts Factors used to determine library capital impacts are summarized in Figure 77. Capital impacts for libraries are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) and are only determined for residential development. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand In this case, there is one component to the capital impact calcu, Library Facilities (Countywide). Library capital impacts are the product of persons per housing unit multiplied by the total net capital cost per person. An example of the calculation for a single family detached unit in the Urban Service Area is: the net capital cost per person for Central Library ($143.77) multiplied by the persons per housing unit (2.62) to arrive at the capital impact for the Library Facilities for a single family detached unit of $377 (rounded). Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capi Area is listed in the lower portion of Figure 77. Figure 77. Library Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Type of Housing COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Library Facilitiesper capita$143.77 GROSS COST PER PERSON$143.77 NET CAPITAL COST $143.77 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$377 Single Family-Attached2.62$377 Multifamily2.08$299 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$240 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$341 Single Family-Attached2.37$341 Multifamily1.46$210 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$217 74 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia GENERAL GOVERNMENT CAPITAL IMPACTS General cost to expand those facilities to serve growth. This is the incremental methodology. General Government Facilities Capital Impact is calculated on a per capita basis for residential development and a per employee basis for nonresidential developmFigure 78 illustrates the methodology used to determine the capital impact. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the components. The residential portion of the General Government Facilities capital impact is derived from the product of persons per housing unit (by type) multiplied by the net capital cost per person. The nonresidentia employees per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential space multipli (job). Figure 78. General Government Facilities Capital Impact Methodology Chart GENERAL GOVERNMENT CAPITAL IMPACTS Residential DevelopmentNonresidential Development Employees (jobs) per 1,000 Persons per Housing Unit by Square Feet by Type of Type and Size of Unit Development Multiplied by Net Capital Cost Multiplied by Net Capital Cost per Job per Person Cost per Person for General Cost per Job for General Government BuildingsGovernment Buildings 75 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cost Allocation for General Government Facilities Proportionate share factors are used to allocate demand to resid where appropriate. For facilities that serve both residential and nonresidential development, TischlerBise recommends using a proportionate share allocation based on a fun The functional population approach estimates the residential and nonin the county by using the hours in a day. For the residents that are not working, their day is estimated t attributed to residential purposes and 4 hours to nonresidential are attributed to residential purposes and 10 hours to nonresidential purposes. Fo-resident workers in the county, 10 hours are attributed to nonresidential purposeFrederick County. Figure 79 provides detail on the approach and results, which indicate that77 percent of demand in Frederick County is from residential development and 23 percent from nonresidential. Figure 79. Frederick County Proportionate Share Factors Demand Units in 2015 Residential DemandPerson Hours/Day^Hours Population*80,230 Residents Not Working41,82020836,400 Resident Workers**38,410 Worked in County**8,83014123,620 Worked Outside of County**29,58014414,120 Residential Subtotal1,374,140 Residential Share ==>77% Nonresidential Non-Working Residents41,8204167,280 Jobs Located in County**24,747 Residents Working in County**8,8301088,300 Non-Resident Workers (Inflow Commuters)15,91710159,170 Nonresidential Subtotal414,750 Nonresidential Share ==>23% TOTAL1,788,890 * Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011-2015 American Community Surve ** Source: 2015 Inflow/Outflow Analysis, OnTheMap Application, U 76 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia General Government Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts Level of service standards and cost factors for the General Gove from above and shown in Figure 81. Capital impacts for general government facilities are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) for residential development and employees per 1,000 square feet of floor area for nonresidential development. (For further discussion on demand factors, see the chapter Land Use Assumptions.) The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demands case, there is only one component in the capital impact calculation, General Government Facilities. An example of the calculation for a single family housing unit in the Urban Service Area is: the net capital cost per person ($311.50) multiplied by the persons per housing unit (2.62) to arrive at the capital impact per single family detached unit of $816 (rounded). Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impact for each Service Area is listed in the lower Figure 81. Figure 81. General Govt. Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit General Government Facilitiesper capita$311.50 GROSS COST PER PERSON$311.50 NET CAPITAL COST $311.50 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$816 Single Family-Attached2.62$816 Multifamily2.08$648 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$520 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$738 Single Family-Attached2.37$738 Multifamily1.46$455 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$471 78 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia For nonresidential land uses, the number of employees per 1,000 square feet for the respective land use is multiplied by the net cost per job. For example, the calculated as follows: 2.34 employees per 1,000 square feet x $287 to yield an amount of $673 per 1,000 square feet (rounded). Figure 82. General Govt. Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit General Government Facilitiesper job$287.00 GROSS COST PER JOB$287.00 NET CAPITAL COST $287.00 Nonresidential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE 1,000 Square Feet Urban Nonresidential Land Use EmployeesCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail2.34$673 Office and Other Services2.97$852 Industrial1.59$457 Institutional2.83$812 Nonresidential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE 1,000 Square Feet Rural Nonresidential Land Use EmployeesCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail2.34$673 Office and Other Services2.97$852 Industrial1.59$457 Institutional2.83$812 79 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia COURTS CAPITAL IMPACTS Court facilities capital impacts are those facilities to serve growth. This is the incremental methodology. In Figure 83, the methodology used to determine the capital impact is illustrated. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed bredential portion of the Courts capital impact is derived from the persons the net capital cost per person. The nonresidential portion is dvehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential space multiplied by the net capital cost per vehicle trip (job). Figure 83. Courts Capital Impact Methodology Chart COURTS CAPITAL IMPACTS Nonresidential Residential Development Development Vehicle Trips per 1,000 Persons per Housing Unit by Square Feet by Type of Type of Unit Development Multiplied by Net Capital Multiplied by Net Capital Cost per PersonCost per Vehicle Trip Cost per Vehicle Trip for Cost per Person for Court Court Facilities Facilities 80 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cost Allocation for Court Facilities To allocate floor area and costs of Court facilities, Sheriff calls for service data is used. A report of 2017 sheriff service calls for service . Of the total, 60 percent were attributed to residential land uses a nonresidential land uses. Court services are provided on a countywide basis in Frederick County. Therefore, it is recommended that one service area be used to determine the capital impact on Court facilities. Figure 84. Frederick County Sheriff Calls for Service Calls for Land UseService% Residential37,56560% Nonresidential25,26340% Total62,828100% Source: Frederick County Sheriff's Office 81 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts Level of service standards and cost factors for courts capital i shown in Figure 86. Capital impacts for court facilities are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) for residential development and vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area for nonresidential development. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand there is only one component in the capital impact calculation, Court Facilities. Court services are provided on a countywide base and it is recommended that one service area impact on court facilities. Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the ca each Service Area is listed in the lower portion of Figure 86. Figure 86. Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Courts Facilitiesper capita$83.99 GROSS COST PER PERSON$83.99 NET CAPITAL COST $83.99 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$220 Single Family-Attached2.62$220 Multifamily2.08$175 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$140 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$199 Single Family-Attached2.37$199 Multifamily1.46$123 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$127 83 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 87. Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Courts Facilitiesper vehicle trip$26.25 GROSS COST PER VEHICLE TRIP$26.25 NET CAPITAL COST $26.25 Nonresidential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE 1,000 Square Feet Urban Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripsCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$377 Office and Other Services4.87$128 Industrial1.97$52 Institutional9.76$256 Nonresidential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE 1,000 Square Feet Rural Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripsCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$377 Office and Other Services4.87$128 Industrial1.97$52 Institutional9.76$256 84 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES/SOLID WASTE CAPITAL IMPACTS Frederick County provided both convenience sites and landfill services to its res . As such, the incremental methodology is used in the CapIM Model to determine the capital impact. Figure 88 diagrams the general methodology used to calculate environmental services capital impact. Costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the components. The capital impact is derived from the product of persons per housing unit (by type of unit) multipt per person. Frederick County provides convenience sites at a Service Area level and landfill centers at a Countywide level. Figure 88. Environmental Services Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CAPITAL IMPACT Residential Development Persons per Housing Multiplied By Net Unit by Type of UnitCapital Cost per Person Convenience Sites Cost per Person Landfill Cost per Person 85 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Environmental Services Inventory As shown in Figure 89, there are nine convenience sites and one landfill provided by the C. Figure 89. Environmental Services Facilities Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors FacilityService AreaPurposeAcres AlbinRuralWaste & Compact1.0 StephensonUrbanWaste & Compact3.0 GainesboroRuralWaste & Compact1.5 ShawneelandRuralWaste & Compact1.0 Round HillRuralWaste & Compact6.7 MiddletownUrbanWaste & Compact0.3 Double TollgateUrbanWaste & Compact1.4 GoreRuralWaste Cans1.5 Star TanneryRuralWaste Cans0.5 Landfill Citizen CenterCountywideWaste & Compact5.0 TOTAL22.9 Environmental Services Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan To address future growth, the County plans to add another convenience site. The new Albin Citizens Convenience Site will be two acres and cost $1,224,000, an avera Figure 90. Planned Environmental Services Facility Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors FacilityService AreaAcresValue$/Acre Albin Citizens Convenience SiteRural2$1,224,000$612,000 TOTAL2$1,224,000$612,000 Source: Frederick County 2019-2024 CIP 86 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Environmental Services Level of Service and Cost Factors Shown in Figure 76, since 100 percent of environmental services is attributed to residential development, the level of service is calculated by dividing the current acreage by the population. As a result, there are 0.10 acres per person for convenience sites and 0.06 acres per person for landfill cen. The average cost for the planned convenience site project is applied to the level of service to calculate the capi impact per person. Figure 91. Environmental Services Level of Service and Cost Factors Proportionate ShareProportionate Share ResidentialNonresidential Service Area ResidentialNonresidential Service Area 100%0%UrbanRural100%0%Countywide Convenience Site Acreage5.712.2Landfill Citizen Center Acreage5.0 Base Year Population59,30327,399Base Year Population86,702 Acre per 1,000 Residents0.100.45Acre per 1,000 Residents0.06 Service AreaService Area UrbanRuralCountywide Acre per 1,000 Residents0.100.45Acre per 1,000 Residents0.06 Cost per Acre$612,000$612,000Cost per Acre$612,000 Cost per Capita$61.20$275.40 Cost per Capita$36.72 87 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Environmental Services Input Variables and Capital Impacts Factors used to determine environmental services capital impacts are summarized below. Capital impacts for environmental services are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) and are only determined for residential development. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand. In this case, there are two components in the capital impact calculation, Landfill Centers and Convenience Sites. Environmental Services are provided on a countywide basis. Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impact for each Service Area is listed in the lower portion of Figure 92. Figure 92. Environmental Services Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Ty Housing Unit REGIONS COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand UnitUrbanRural Landfill Centerper capita$36.72n/an/a Convenience Sitesper capitan/a$61.20$275.40 GROSS COST PER PERSON$36.72$61.20$275.40 NET CAPITAL COST $36.72$61.20$275.40 Residential Capital Impact per Housing Service Area: COUNTYWIDEREGION Unit Urban Total Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$96$160$256 Single Family-Attached2.62$96$160$256 Multifamily2.08$76$127$203 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$61$102$163 Residential Capital Impact per Housing Service Area: COUNTYWIDEREGION Unit Rural Total Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$87$653$740 Single Family-Attached2.37$87$653$740 Multifamily1.46$53$402$455 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$55$416$471 88 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia APPENDIX A: EXAMPLE OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS To illustrate the Capital Impact Model (CapIM Model), the following figure provides the results from a hypothetical development project of 100 single family housing units and 20,000 square feet of retail development. The development is in the Urban Service Area, Evendale ES, Admlbrook HS attendance zone, and the Millwood fire district. Results show projected growth and corresponding capital impacts for cash proffer eligible infrastructure. The results also capture the capacity triggers included in the model that reflect where excess capacity currently exists in County infrastructure. The figure is merely provided to illustrate the results of a hypothetical development and do not reflect an actual development. However, they do reflect a legally supportable and reasonable cash proffer amount for these hypothetical developments. Figure 95. Example CapIM Test Results SUMMARY OF PROJECT OUTPUTS Test Project Project Name CAPITAL COST IMPACTS FOR DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL RESIDENTIALNONRESIDENTIALTOTAL Housing Units 100-100 Projected Population 262-262 Projected Students Elementary School Students16-16 Middle School School Students9-9 High School Students13-13 Projected Total Students 37-37 Nonresidential Sq. Ft.-20,00020,000 Projected Jobs-4747 CASH PROFFER ELIGIBILE INFRASTRUCTURE CATEGORIES, RESIDENTIAL Total Capital Housing Capital ImpactImpact per Schools 100$1,447,387$14,474 Parks and Recreation 100$48,329$483 Public Safety^100$173,182$1,732 Total 100$1,668,898$16,689 Total Capital ^Public SafetyHousing Capital ImpactImpact per Sheriff 100$0$0 Fire 100$173,182$1,732 Animal Protection 100$0$0 91 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia APPENDIX B: CASH PROFFER BACKGROUND Definition A proffer is an offer by a landowner during the rezoning process It is a form of conditional zoning, which applies additional conditions, or requirements, in addit existing requirements and regulations. A proffer can include the acceptance of cash payments to mitigate the impacts of a rezoning, called cash proffers, and are allowed under Virginia Code §15.2-2303 and §15.2- 2298. Frederick County meets the requirement under 15.2-2298 of a decennial growth rate of 5 percent or more.2 Cash proffers are voluntary one-time payments used to fund capital improvements necessitated by new growth. Cash proffers are akin to impact fees, which have been utilized by local governments in various 3 forms for at least fifty years. However, unlike impact fees, cash proffers only apply during the -Cash proffers are not to be used to correct existing deficiencies but to provide additional capacity to serve new groBecause cash proffers do not apply to by-right development and only apply during the rezoning process, on new growth can be mitigated with a cash proffer system. Cash proffers therefore have limitations for infrastructure funding and should not be regarded as the total solution for capital improvement needs. Rather, they should be considered one component of a comprehensi provision of public facilities with the goal of maintaining curr of service in a community. Limitations are: Cash proffers only apply to rezonings and are not collected on any by-right development. Cash proffers can only be used to finance capital infrastructure that provides additional capacity and cannot be used to finance ongoing operations and/or maintenance and rehabilitation. Virginia law restricts the infrastructure categories to public transportation facilities, public safety 4 facilities, public school facilities, and public parks. Cash proffers cannot be accounted for separately and earmarked for the capital expenses . Cash proffers cannot be used to correct existing infrastructure deficiencies unegotiated apart from the cash proffer system presented herein, or if there is a funding plan in place to correct the deficiency for all current residents and businesses However, 15.2-2298 provides authority to localities that meet the growth criteria in 15.2-2298 to utilize the conditional zoning 2 authority under 15.2-2303. This study meets the stricter requirements of 15.2-2298. Other than Transportation Impact Fees, localities in the Commonwa are not authorized to implement impact 3 fees. 4 See Virginia Code §15.2-2303.4. 92 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Because cash proffers reflect a point in time, the calculations hould be updated periodically (typically 3 to 5 years). Costs reflect the direct need for new facilities and infrastructure and do not reflect se Approach To ensure a reasonable relationship to new development and rezonings in particular, the cash proffer study focuses on , Demonstrating an Impact. All new development in a community creates additional demands on all, public facilities provided by local government. If the supply of facilities is not increased to satisfy that additional demand, the quality or availability of public servicere community will deteriorate. Cash proffers are calculated in a manner to determine what the applicable cost of development-related facilities, to the extent that the need for facilities is a const that is subject to the cash proffers. In this study, the impact of development on improvement needs isalyzed in terms of quantifiable relationships between various types of development based on applicable level-of-service standards. Demonstrating a Benefit. A sufficient benefit relationship requires that cash proffer funds be segregated from other funds and expended only for the categories for which the proffers were collected. Cash proffers must be expended in a timely manner 5 and the facilities funded by the proffers must benefit the development paying the proffers. However, this does not require that facilities funded with cash proffer revenues be available exclusively to development paying the proffers. In other words, existing development may use and benefit from these improvements as well. Procedures for the earmarking and expenditure of revenues are outlined in Virginia Code (see specifically §15.2303.2(B)). These requirements are intended to ensure that developments benefitcash proffers paid. Thus, an adequate showing of benefit must address procedural as well as practical issues. Demonstrating Proportionality. Proportionality is established through the procedures used to id development-related facility costs, and in the methods used to calculate the cash proffers for various types of facilities and categories of development. The demand for facilities is measured in terms of relevant and measurable attributes of development. For example, school improvements is measured by the number of public school-age children generated by development. 5 Virginia Code §15.2-2303.2(A) states: The governing body of any locality accepting cash payments volun after July 1, 2005, shall, within twelve (12) years of receiving full payment of all cash proffered pursuant t application, begin, or cause to begin (i) construction, (ii) sit-of-way acquisition, (v) surveying, or (vi) utility relocation on the improvements for which the cash payments were proffered. 93 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia The above requirements are further reinforced in the Code of Vir§15.2-2303.4 (effective January 9, 2019). Specifically, Section 15.2-2303.4(B) states that localities shall not require an unreasonable proffer failure or refusal to submit an unreasonable proffer. The implementation of the proffer changes hinges on defining an unreasonable proffer, or more positively, defining a reasonable proffer. The figure below provides further detail on the approach to meet requirements of the law. 94 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia REASONABLE PROFFERS VA Code How to Meet the VA Code Text Interpretation Section Requirement 15.2-2303.4 addresses an impact that is The demand from the residential Establish a nexus between (C) specifically attributable to land use creates a need for types of residential a proposed new residential additional capacity in the development and specific development or other new infrastructure category for which impacts on infrastructure in residential use applied for the cash proffer is being requested locality. (E.g., student or offered generation rates by type of housing unit.) addresses an impact to an The need for the capital Use system-level offsite public facility improvement must be for a infrastructure to establish system-level facility, provided to a current levels of service in larger geographic area than the cash proffer calculations. project site the new residential The impact from the residential Define current levels of development or new development causes a need for service / available capacities residential use creates a additional capacity above what is in cash proffer analysis and need, or an identifiable available to the applicant. The identify when capacities are portion of a need, for one additional capacity can be for a reached. or more public facility single facility or a portion of a Identify incremental impact improvements in excess of facility improvement. Available on facilities from residential existing public facility capacity is determined by analyzing development in cash proffer capacity at the time of the the current and projected levels of analysis. rezoning or proffer service provided in specific condition amendment categories of infrastructure in the locality. each such new residential Entity/applicant paying the cash Localities use cash proffer development or new proffer receives a benefit in the funding to build or purchase residential use applied for form of a facility or portion of a additional capacity in the receives a direct and facility being built or purchased. infrastructure categories for material benefit from a which a cash proffer is proffer made with respect collected. Separate funds to any such public facility established. improvements. Collection and expenditure areas may be necessary to Source: TischlerBise 95 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cash Proffer Implementation and Administration Considerations While cash proffers are voluntary contributions, there are procemust followed per Virginia law and to ensure payers receive benefit from the proffer. Accounting Monies received are placed in a separate fund and accounted for separately and expenditures should be indicated in the capital improvement plan. Within twelve (12) ye committed cash proffers, a locality must begin construction or r proffer was made. Localities that do not begin construction or other authorized alternative improvement must pay the amount to the Commonwealth Transportation Board for construction program or the urban system construction program fooffered cash payments were collected (VA § 15.2-2303.2). Cost Updates All costs in the cash proffer calculations are given in current Necessary cost adjustments can be made as part of the recommendeluation and update of the cash proffer using consumer price index (CPI) or Marshall an recommends using the Marshall Swift, which is specific to constr differences. The index can be applied against the calculated cash proffers. If cost estimates change significantly, calculations should be revisited. As cash proffer calculations are based on a snapshot in time, an adopted Cash Proffer policy should be periodically rviewed and updated. A full update is recommended no later than 5 years to reflect changes in developm costs, funding formulas, etc. Credits and Reimbursements Future Revenue Credits Credits for outstanding and future debt payments have been calculated and integrated into the cash proffer calculations where applicable in this study. A credit is interest costs are not included in the proffer amounts. Site-Specific Credits A site-specific credit could be provided to a developer (or applicant) for contributions of system improvements that have been included in the cash proffer calcula of system improvements included in the calculations, there could be a possible reduction in the cash proffer for the relevant portion. Written Policies Written policies and implementation practices should be established to cover the items identified in this section to provide consistency in the process. 96 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia APPENDIX C: SERVICE AREA MAPS Figure 96. General Service Areas 97 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 97. Elementary School Service Areas 98 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 98. Middle School Service Areas 99 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 99. High School Service Areas 100 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 100. Fire Service Areas 101 COUNTY of FREDERICK Jay E. Tibbs Deputy County Administrator 540/665-5666 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: jtibbs@fcva.us M E M O R A N D U M TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Jay E. Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator SUBJECT: Frederick/Warren County Line Property Issue DATE: July 19, 2018 This is a request for the Board of Supervisors to consider a bou lines in the Foster Hollow Road area. By way of background, this apparent boundary dispute came up via the Virginia Department of Elections relative to voting precinct lin ensure correct voting district classifications. The particular fecting the Congressional districts thth because Warren County is in the 6District and Frederick County is in the 10. We were contacted by Warren County administration regarding the our GIS system regarding the properties. (Exhibit A, which is information produced by the Warren County GIS Office.) After the Warren County data was received we had our GI (Exhibit B) Frederick County data shows the parcel as one large tract. Upon further research, we discovered the deeds for the properties designate them as Warren County propert Frederick County. The various subdivisions of the original tract were approved by Warren County. The properties are currently being taxed in Warren County, the residents of the services from Warren County, and their children have attended sc After discussions between Warren and Frederick County Administrators, it was decided to contra Legge Land Surveyors, PLC to complete a metes and bounds survey Marsh & Legge determined the location of the line based on the rded description that created the line. Their survey shows the line is straight from a point where the Old Val the old church at Route 522. (Exhibit C) On February 28, 2019 Supervisor Wells, Warren CountySupervisor Dan Murray, Warren County Administrator Doug Stanley, and I attended a meeting in Warren County to discuss this matter wit area. Following discussions with the residents and during that same mejustment to the Warren/Frederick line was developed. (Exhibit D) If an adjustment to the county line is desired, both the Frederick County and Warren County Boards of Supervis would have to agree to the adjustment. If such an agreement is reached, both bodies would hold public hearings on the proposed adjustment and, at the conclusion of the hearings, both boards would adopt a resolution consenting to the boundary adjustment. Both boards would then file a joint petition with the Circuit Court of either Warren or Frederick County to have a new boundary line established. Staff is bringing this item to the Board for discussion and is sre are two potential actions for the Board to consider relative to this matter: 1.Affirm the current county line, as surveyed by Marsh & Legge, PLC, per Exhibit C 2.Adjust the county line per Exhibit D and direct staff to adverti boundary adjustment. Staff is seeking action from the Board regarding the county lineoundary issue. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Attachments COUNTY of FREDERICK Jay E. Tibbs DeputyCounty Administrator 540/665-5666 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: jtibbs@fcva.us MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Jay E. Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator SUBJECT: Reduction/Offset of Frederick Water Debt Obligation DATE: June 6, 2019 As you are aware, Frederick Water (aka Frederick County Sanitaticonstructing ballfields on their property in the Stephenson area. These ballfields are to be replacements for the current County operated fields at Clearbrook Park. As you also know, Carmeuse, per the terms of our lease agreement for the existing Clearbrook ballfields, has exercised their option to terminate that lease and has provided us with the requisite notice. The County will be vacating the existing ballfields in November Frederick Water has contracted with Perry Engineering to construsworked withthe County to get an approved site plan for those ballfields. During the site plan and design conversations, the County has identified certain features that would benefit the users of The largest of those features is the use of LED lighting technologies within the complex, which would result in greater efficiencies and performance from an energy perspective. In conversation with Frederick Water, the cost of the featuresexceeds their budget for this project. In an effort to accommodate the Countys desire for the more efficient lighting, as well as provide other additional improvements to the site, Frederick Water has asked if the County would be willing to off-set the costs for those features by forgiving Frederick Waters existing debt obligation in the amount of $657,083.23. In exchange for the reduction in the debt obligation, the County would r 1.Cost difference between Frederick Waters budget and the actual $550,000 above their budget. 2.The remaining $100,000 or so in additional items includes: a.Prime and double seal to a minimum two-inch asphalt topcoat on the parking lots. b.Two storage buildings to serve the ballfields. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 c.Installation of sod for all five fields so they will be playable by March 2020. In addition, Frederick Water will give Frederick County an easement for its use of the ballfields with the intent to transfer fee simple ownership to the County once the Opequon Water Treatment Plant is operational. By way of background concerning the obligation, the Board of Supervisors loaned proceeds to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority to facilitate the establishment of w Abrams Creek drainage areas. The first loan occurred in April 1972 in the amount of $500,000 loaned over a period of three fiscal years. The second loan occurred in December 1974. The total amount loaned for the project was $1,106,500.00. In 1987, the Board of Supervisors voted to defer payment of principal and interest on this loan to facilitate the Sanitation Authoritys ability to float a revenue bond with the of water and sewer facilities in the Bufflick Road area.This loan has been carried on both Frederick Waters and Frederick Countys financial statements as a payable and receivable respectively. The Board of Supervisors has previously approved reductions in th The first was for tap fees for the National Guard Armory totaling $130,639.00, which occurred in December 2008. The second reduction was for tap fees for the Round Hill fire st 2015. It is staffs recommendation that the Board authorize forgiveness of this debt to off-set the costs associated with the lighting and supporting facilities at the replacement Clearbrook. A draft agreement between the County and Frederick Water outlining the terms of the forgiveness is athed. Frederick Water has reviewed this draft agreement and is agreeable to the terms. Staff is seeking Board approval of the agreement and authorizati behalf of the County. Attachments 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 AGREEMENT This agreement is entered into this ______ day of June, 2019, by the County of Frederick, political subdivision of Virginia: WHEREAS, Chemstone and Frederick Water have previously entered into one or more agreements containing provisions for the construction by Frederick Water of replacement ballfields (the for the ballfields the County currently operates at Clearbrook Ballfields; WHEREAS, Frederick Water has executed a contract with Perry Engineering to construct the Replacement Ballfields according to the approved Stephenson Ballfield site plan on property it owns, Frederick County Tax Parcel Number 44-A-95, also identified as 235 Hot Run Drive; WHEREAS, the County has identified certain desired specifications for features of the Replacement Ballfields and supporting facilities, to include utilization of LED lighting technologies that result in greater efficiencies and performance; and WHEREAS, Frederick Water is currently indebted to the County in the amount of $657,083.23 , with respect to certain previous undertakings; NOW, THEREFORE, the County and Frederick Water hereby agree as follows: 1.Frederick Water will construct the Replacement Ballfields according to the approved site plan, such construction to include installation of lighting systems for all five of the Replacement Ballfields (to include the tee ball field) according to the plan prepared by Musco for the County, a copy of which plan is attached hereto. 2.Frederick Water will upgrade the parking lots for the Replacement Ballfields from prime and double seal to a minimum two-inch asphalt topcoat. 3.In addition to three CXT prefabricated restroom/concession buildings, Frederick Water will construct two storage structures, to serve the Replacement Ballfields. 4.Frederick Water will sod all five outfields in order for the Replacement Ballfields to be playable March 15, 2020. 5.Frederick Water will Replacement Ballfields property, such easement being in substantially the same form as the easement Frederick Water previously granted the County for the convenience site also located on Tax Parcel Number 44-A-95. 6.In consideration for and upon completion of the foregoing, the County will forgive the Indebtedness owed to it by Frederick Water. 7.In addition, upon the Opequon Water Treatment Plant, also planned for construction by Frederick Water on a separate portion of Tax Parcel Number 44-A-95, becoming operational, Frederick Water will grant the County a fee simple interest in the Replacement Ballfields property. FREDERICK COUNTY SANITATION COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA AUTHORITY, d/b/a FREDERICK WATER By By Its Its COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM Board of Supervisors TO: FROM: Mike Ruddy, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Review and endorsement of the Capital Impacts Study and updated RE: Development Impact Model DATE: June 5, 2019 Overview Frederick County has been working with Tischler-Bise to develop a Capital Impacts Study and Model designed to evaluate the anticipated need for capital facilities based on growth and to determine the cost of those capital facilities to the County. Further, the model determines the cost to the County for mitigating the infrastructure impacts associated with re-zonings. This Capital Impact Study also assists in ensuring the Please find attached the Capital Impacts Study, Frederick County, Virginia. The Executive Summary provides an overview of the study. This is supported by more detailed information regarding the study and model. Report from 05/09/19 DIM-OC meeting. The Development Impact Model - Oversight Committee (DIM-OC) met on Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. to review of the Capital Impacts Study and updated Development Impact Model. At the DIM-OC meeting a presentation was made to DIM-OC by the consultant, Tischler-Bise, thatcovered what the model does and does not analyze, and methodologies and cost analysis of cash proffer-eligible categories. Details and screenshots were provided of how the model will be used and the consultants went through an example of input and resulting impact. Following the presentation and informed discussion, DIM-OC moved to accept the Capital Impacts Study and implement the use of the Capital Impacts Model, effective July 1, 2019. This motion for approval was conditioned on an adjustment to the school 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 -2- component of the model in order to reflect the use of school attendance zones for the attributable impact of a project on a service area school. Based on the Committees direction, the model has been amended to update the school scenarios by attendance zone for each facility. School capital impact service area adjustment. In an effort to achieve a greater level of attribution of capital impacts to service areas, the model evaluated more granular service areas for the Schools, and also Fire and Rescue, capital impact analysis. Several service area options were discussed with County Staff when determining the service area for the School analysis. As noted in the report, a properly calibrated service area is needed to accurately identify the local school utilization (enrollment compared to capacity) at each of the three grade levels. More general and larger service areas (i.e., Countywide or Urban and Rural) would reflect utilization of the schools within that area being analyzed. More detailed service areas (i.e., based on school attendance zones) would result in the model analyzing only the utilization of the specific school that would be directly affected by the development. sed on the General Service Areas (i.e., Urban and Rural) with the Elementary School analysis splitting the Urban Service Area into North and South areas. This would provide some flexibility as school boundaries are adjusted to address growth-related needs. After review from the Frederick County Development Impact Model Oversight Committee (DIM-OC), a consensus was reached that the service areas should be the school attendance zones. Thus, when a development is being inputted into the Capital Impact Model, the local school at each grade level is chosen. The model then analyzes just the utilization of those schools. This adjustment is consistent with the consensus of the DIM- OC. Recommendation. The Development Impact ModelOversight Committee forwarded a recommendation to accept the Capital Impacts Study and implement the use of the Capital Impacts Model, effective July 1, 2019. This motion for approval was conditioned on an adjustment to the school component of the model to reflect the use of school attendance zones for the attributable impact of a project on a service area school. This adjustment has been incorporated into the study and model. Action from the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate at this time. Tischler-Bise and County Staff will be available to provide a brief overview of how the study and model is anticipated to be implemented by Frederick County. MTR/slc Attachment: Capital Impacts Study, Frederick County, Virginia Capital Impacts Study Frederick County, Virginia Submitted to: Frederick County, Virginia June 3, 2019 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda, Maryland 20816 800.424.4318 www.tischlerbise.com CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia TischlerBise 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda, Maryland 20816 800.424.4318 www.tischlerbise.com June 2019 N i CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Background on Cash Proffers ...................................................................................................................... 2 Capital Impacts Approach ........................................................................................................................... 3 Methodologies ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Generic Cash Proffer Calculation ................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 1. Generic Cash Proffer Formula ................................................................................................ 5 Credits ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Summary of Capital Impacts Approach ....................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2. Summary of Frederick County Capital Impacts Methodolog ............................................. 8 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................................................................... 9 Service Areas ............................................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 3. Frederick County Service Area Map ..................................................................................... 10 Household Size .......................................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4. Countywide Persons per Housing Unit ................................................................................. 11 Figure 5. Persons Per Housing Unit by Service Area ........................................................................... 11 Service Area Residential Proportion of Frederick County ......................................................................... 12 Figure 6. Service Area Proportion of Frederick County, 2016 ............................................................. 12 Building Permit Activity ............................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 7. Building Permit Totals 2013-2017 ........................................................................................ 12 Current Population and Housing Units ..................................................................................................... 13 Figure 8. Countywide Base Year Population ....................................................................................... 13 Figure 9. Base Year Population by Service Area .................................................................................. 13 Figure 10. Countywide Base Year Housing Units ................................................................................. 14 Figure 11. Service Area Base Year Housing Unit ................................................................................. 14 Population and Housing Unit Projections ................................................................................................. 15 Figure 12. Population and Housing Unit Projections (2019-2028) ...................................................... 15 Student Generation Rates and Current Enrollment .................................................................................. 15 Figure 13. Student Generation Rates .................................................................................................. 16 Figure 14. Current Student Enrollment, as of Spring 2018.................................................................. 16 Student Generation Projections ................................................................................................................ 16 Figure 15. Countywide Student Enrollment Projections (2019-2028) ................................................ 16 Current Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Estimates ............................................................... 17 Figure 16. 2018 Countywide Employment by NAICS Code ................................................................. 17 Figure 17. Base Year Countywide Employment by Industry Sector .................................................... 17 Figure 18. Base Year Countywide Nonresidential Floor Area by Ind ............................... 18 Figure 19. Square Foot per Job Factors ............................................................................................... 18 Service Area Current Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area .......................................................... 19 Figure 20. Job Split by Service Area ..................................................................................................... 19 Figure 21. Nonresidential Floor Area by Service Area ......................................................................... 19 Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections .......................................................................... 20 Figure 22. Percent of Job Growth by Industry ..................................................................................... 20 .................................................... 20 Figure 24. Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections ................................................... 22 ii CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Vehicle Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 25. Customized Residential Trip End Rates .............................................................................. 23 Figure 26. Frederick County Trip Adjustment Factor for Commuters ................................................. 24 Figure 27. Institute of Transportation Engineers Nonresidential Trip Fa .................................... 25 Figure 28. Frederick County Summary of Averages Daily Vehicle Trip Factors ................................... 25 Figure 29. Frederick County Total Daily Vehicle Trip Projections-2028) ................................... 27 Functional Population ............................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 30. Frederick County Functional Population ............................................................................ 28 PROJECT APPROACH .......................................................................................................................................... 29 PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL IMPACTS .................................................................................................................. 31 Figure 31. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ............................... 31 School Capital Impact Service Areas ......................................................................................................... 32 Public School Students per Housing Unit .................................................................................................. 32 Figure 32. Frederick County Student Generation Rates ...................................................................... 32 Public School Facilities Level of Service Standards ................................................................................... 33 Figure 33. Frederick County Public Schools Elementary Schools Le .............................. 33 Figure 34. Frederick County Public Schools: Middle Schools Level .................................... 34 Figure 35. Frederick County Schools: High School Level of Service..................................................... 34 Figure 36. Frederick County Schools: Education Centers .................................................................... 35 Figure 37. Frederick County Schools: Support Facilities ...................................................................... 35 Figure 38. Frederick County Schools: Transportation Vehicles ........................................................... 36 Public School Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan................................................................................ 36 Figure 39. School Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan .................................................................... 36 Credit for Future Debt Payments for School Improvements .................................................................... 37 Figure 40. Payment Schedule for School Debt .................................................................................... 37 Public Schools Capital Impact Input Variables .......................................................................................... 38 Figure 41. Elementary School Level of Service and Cost Factors ........................................................ 38 Figure 42. Middle School and High School Level of Service and Co ..................................... 39 Capital Impacts for Public Schools ............................................................................................................ 40 Figure 43. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impact by Hou ...... 40 Figure 44. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impact by Hou ............. 40 Figure 45. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impact by Hou ................. 41 School Cash Proffer Eligibility .................................................................................................................... 41 PARKS & RECREATION CAPITAL IMPACTS .......................................................................................................... 42 Figure 46. Parks & Recreation Capital Impact Methodology Chart ..................................................... 43 Park Inventory ........................................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 47. Parks & Recreation Inventory ............................................................................................. 45 Parks & Recreation Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan ...................................................................... 46 Figure 48. Park Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan by Type a .............................. 46 Parks & Recreation Level of Service and Cost Factors .............................................................................. 47 Figure 49. Parks Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors ............................................................. 47 Community Center Level of Service and Cost Factors .............................................................................. 48 Figure 50. Community Center Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors ....................................... 48 Indoor Recreational Facility Level of Service and Cost Factors ................................................................. 48 Figure 51. Indoor Recreational Facility Level of Service and Cos .......................................... 48 Parks & Recreation Input Variables and Capital Impacts .......................................................................... 49 Figure 52. Parks & Recreation Input Variables and Capital Impact ..................................................... 50 Parks & Recreation Cash Proffer Eligibility ................................................................................................ 50 PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: SHERIFF ...................................................................................................... 51 Figure 53. Sheriff Capital Impact Methodology Chart ......................................................................... 51 Cost Allocation for Sheriff Facilities .......................................................................................................... 52 iii CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 54. Frederick County Sheriff Calls for Service ........................................................................... 52 Sheriff Facilities Inventory and Level of Service ........................................................................................ 53 Figure 55. Sheriff Facilities Level of Service Standards ....................................................................... 53 Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts .............................................................................................. 54 Figure 56. Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land U ............................... 54 Figure 57. Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land U ......................... 55 Sheriff Cash Proffer Eligibility .................................................................................................................... 55 PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: FIRE & RESCUE ........................................................................................... 56 Figure 58. Fire & Rescue Capital Impact Methodology Chart ............................................................. 56 Cost Allocation for Fire & Rescue Facilities ............................................................................................... 57 Figure 59. Frederick County Proportionate Share Factors .................................................................. 57 Fire & Rescue Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................................... 58 Figure 60. Fire & Rescue Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan ........................................................ 58 Fire & Rescue Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors ........................................................................ 59 Figure 61. Fire & Rescue Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors.................................................. 59 Fire Apparatus Capital Impact ................................................................................................................... 60 Figure 62. Fire & Rescue Apparatus Level of Service and Cost Fac ................................................ 60 Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts .................................................................... 61 Figure 63. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Land Use, Residential ..... 61 Figure 64. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital 62 Figure 65. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital 63 Figure 66. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital 64 Figure 67. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital ............................................................................................................................................................. 65 Figure 68. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital ............................................................................................................................................................. 66 Fire & Rescue Cash Proffer Eligibility ........................................................................................................ 66 Figure 69. Fire & Rescue Capital Projects ............................................................................................ 66 PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: ANIMAL PROTECTION ................................................................................ 67 Figure 70. Animal Protection Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ..................................................... 67 Animal Protection Facilities Inventory and Level of Service ..................................................................... 68 Figure 71. Animal Protection Facilities and Level of Service ............................................................... 68 Animal Protection Input Variables and Capital Impacts ........................................................................... 69 Figure 72. Animal Protection Input Variables and Capital Impacts ............. 69 Animal Protection Cash Proffer Eligibility ................................................................................................. 70 LIBRARY CAPITAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................................................ 72 Figure 73. Library Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ....................................................................... 72 Library Facilities Inventory ........................................................................................................................ 73 Figure 74. Library Facilities Level of Service Standards and Cost Fa ........................................... 73 Library Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan .......................................................................................... 73 Figure 75. Planned Library Facility Level of Service Standards a ................................ 73 Library Level of Service and Cost Factors .................................................................................................. 73 Figure 76. Library Level of Service and Cost Factors ........................................................................... 73 Library Input Variables and Capital Impacts ............................................................................................. 74 Figure 77. Library Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Type oHousing Unit ............................... 74 GENERAL GOVERNMENT CAPITAL IMPACTS ..................................................................................................... 75 Figure 78. General Government Facilities Capital Impact Methodol ................................... 75 Cost Allocation for General Government Facilities ................................................................................... 76 Figure 79. Frederick County Proportionate Share Factors .................................................................. 76 General Government Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors ............................................................ 77 Figure 80. General Government Facilities Level of Service Standa .................... 77 iv CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia General Government Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impact ........................................................ 78 Figure 81. General Govt. Facilities Input Variables and Capital ..... 78 Figure 82. General Govt. Facilities Input Variables and Capital 79 COURTS CAPITAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................................................ 80 Figure 83. Courts Capital Impact Methodology Chart ......................................................................... 80 Cost Allocation for Court Facilities ............................................................................................................ 81 Figure 84. Frederick County Sheriff Calls for Service ........................................................................... 81 Court Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors ..................................................................................... 82 Figure 85. Court Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors............................................................... 82 Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts ................................................................................. 83 Figure 86. Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts .................. 83 Figure 87. Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts ............ 84 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES/SOLID WASTE CAPITAL IMPACTS ......................................................................... 85 Figure 88. Environmental Services Capital Impacts Methodology Ch ............................................ 85 Environmental Services Inventory ............................................................................................................ 86 Figure 89. Environmental Services Facilities Level of Service St ................. 86 Environmental Services Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................... 86 Figure 90. Planned Environmental Services Facility Level of Serv ..... 86 Environmental Services Level of Service and Cost Factors ....................................................................... 87 Figure 91. Environmental Services Level of Service and Cost Factors ................................................. 87 Environmental Services Input Variables and Capital Impacts ................................................................... 88 Figure 92. Environmental Services Input Variables and Capital Im ..... 88 SUMMARY OF CAPITAL IMPACTS ...................................................................................................................... 89 Figure 93. Example Summary of Capital Impacts by Land Use ............................................................ 89 Figure 94. Summary of Capital Impacts by Land Use .......................................................................... 90 APPENDIX A: EXAMPLE OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS ........................................................................................ 91 Figure 95. Example CapIM Test Results ............................................................................................... 91 APPENDIX B: CASH PROFFER BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................... 92 Definition .................................................................................................................................................. 92 Approach ................................................................................................................................................... 93 Cash Proffer Implementation and Administration Considerations ........................................................... 96 Credits and Reimbursements .................................................................................................................... 96 v CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overview TischlerBise has been retained by Frederick County, Virginia, to analyze the capital impacts of new development. The objective is to quantify the capital costs generated by new development in the County, specifically in light of changes to Cash Proffer law in Virginia. The assignm of a Capital Impacts Model (CapIM) for use in: 1.Calculating the capital impact of new development by type of land use and 2.To allow County staff to use the Capital Impacts Model to determine the capital costs for development projects that take into consideration whether capaci therefore, whether a cash proffer can be offered and accepted by TischlerBise evaluated capital impacts for the following categories of public capital improvements: (1) Public Schools, (2) Parks and Recreation, (3) Public Safety: Sheriff, (4) Public Safety: Fire & Rescue, (5) Public Safety: Animal Protection, (6) Library, (7) General Government, (8) Courts, and (9) Environmental Services/Solid Waste. Methodologies and calculations are presented in this report as s documentation for estimating capital impacts from new growth as well as potential support for cash proffers. 1 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Background on Cash Proffers Cash proffers are one-time voluntary monetary commitments made at the time of rezoning impact on certain public facilities from new residential development. The funds ultimately collected from cash proffers are used to construct capital improvements to mitigate capital impacts with the goal of maintaining levels of service. Funds can only be used for capital improvements that provide additional capacity, not operations or maintenance. Cash proffer are calculated using level of service standards to account for infrastructure that may currently have excess capaci Cash proffers cannot be used to correct existing deficiencies. However, since cash proffers do not apply t- new growth can be mitigated through cash proffers. Cash proffers are a small part of an overall funding strategy and should not be regarded as a total solution for infrastructure financing needs. Therefore, other strategies and revenue sources are needed to offset the impact to infrastructure from new growth. Cash proffers are authorized under Virginia Code §15.2-2303 and §15.2-2298. A major change to cash proffer authority was enacted in 2016 affecting Section 15.2-2303.4(B) that added requirements to the acceptance of cash proffers. The new section states that localities cannot require an unreasonable proffer 1 submit an unreasonable proffer. The implementation of this change to the cash proffer law hingesunreasonable proffer, or more positively, defining a reasonable proffer. Defining reasonable proffers requires the analysis of existing capacity in public facilities as well as the demand for additional capacity from growth. This report and the accompanying Capital Impacts Model address this requirement specifically for Frederick County and provides a tool for ongoing implementation of the cash proffer law. Furthermore, the changes to the cash proffer law restrict the infrastructure categories to public transportation facilities, public safety facilities, public school facilities, and public parks and further restricts the impacts that can be addressed to capacity improvem projects. Virginia Code Section 15.2-2303.4(B) was revised in 2019 from restricting a local governing body frommerely requesting or 1 accepting an unreasonable proffer, to restricting a local governing body from requiring an unreasonable proffer. This allows a local governing body to discuss and negotiate with a developer t 2 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Capital Impacts Approach TischlerBise evaluated possible methodologies and documented appr of land use for the infrastructure categories addressed in this study. The formula used to calculate each capital impact is diagrammed in a flow chart at the beginning of each chapter. Specific capital costs have been identified using local data and current dollars (2019). Because cash proffers reflect a point in time, the calculations and study should be updated periodically (typiclect the direct impact of new development on the need for new facilities and inf or indirect impacts. Capital impacts and resulting cash proffer amounts are calculated to recognize three key elements: need, benefit, and proportionality. First, to justify a cash proffer for public facilities, it must be demonstrated that new development/rezonings will create a need for capital improvements (including an assessment of existing capacity). Second, new development/rezonings must derive a benefit from the payment of the cash proffers (i.e., in the form of public facilities constructed within a rea Third, the cash proffer to be paid by a particular type of development (land use) should not exceed its proportional share of the capital cost for system improvements. For each capital impact calculation, the report includes a summary table indicating the specific fa used to derive the amounts. The capital impacts outlined in this report reflect the actual cost to the County generated from new residential and nonresidential development, and as such, each retrue capital impact generated by type of land use for each public facility category. The Capital Impacts Model developed for the County by TischlerBise is the tool to use to determine if a r not. The Model provides a cash proffer calculation for County staff to use in determining the reasonableness of a c particular development project. 3 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Methodologies Any one of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate cash proffers. The choice of a particular method depends primarily on the service characteristics and plan being addressed. Each method has advantages and disadvantages in a particular sit extent can be interchangeable, because each allocates facility costs in proportion to the needs created by development. Reduced to its simplest terms, the process of calculating cash proffers involves two main steps: (1) determining the cost of development-related capital improvements and (2) allocating those costs equitably to various types of development. In practice, though, cash proffers can become quite complicated because of the many variables involved development and the need for facilities. The following paragraphs discuss calculating cash proffers and how those methods can be applied. Plan-Based Calculation. The plan-based method allocates costs for a specified set of improvementsa specified amount of development. The improvements are identified by a facility plan and development is identified by a land use plan. In this method, the total cost offuture demand to calculate a cost per unit of demand. Then, the cost per unit of demand is multiplied by the amount of demand per unit of development (e.g., housing units or square feet of building area) in each category to arrive at a cost per specific unit of development (e.g., single family detached unit). Incremental Expansion Calculation. The incremental expansion method documents the current level of service (LOS) for each type of public facility in both quantitatasures, based on an existing service standard (such as square feet per student). This approach ensures that there are no existing infrastructure deficiencies or surplus capacity in infrastructure. New development is only paying its proportionate share for growth-related infrastructure. The level of service standards are determined in a manner similar to the current replacement cost approach use However, in contrast to insurance practices, the cash proffer revenues would not be for renewal and/or replacement of existing facilities. Rather, revenue will be used to expand or provide additional facilities, as needed, to accommodate new development. An incremental expans public facilities that will be expanded in regular increments, wsed on current conditions in the community. Cost Recovery or Buy-In Calculation. The rationale for the cost recovery approach is that new develop is paying its share of the useful life and remaining capacity ofalready built or land already purchased from which new growth will benefit. This methodology is often used for oversized systems. At the beginning of each capital facility chapter the chosen met illustrated with a figure. 4 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Generic Cash Proffer Calculation In contrast to development exactions, which are typically referr-level improvements, cash proffers fund growth-related infrastructure that will benefit multiple development pr jurisdiction. The basic steps in a generic cash proffer formula are illustrate Figure 1. The first step is to determine an appropriate demand indicator, the particular type of infrastructure. The demand/service indicator measures the number unit of development. For example, an appropriate indicator of th enrollment and the increase in enrollment can be estimated from the average number of stud housing unit. The second step in the generic formula is to determine infrastructure units per demand unit, typically called level of service (LOS) standards. In keeping with the school example, a common LOS standard is square feet per student. The third step in the generic formula is the cost of various infrastructure units. To complete the school example, this part per square foot for school construction. Figure 1. Generic Cash Proffer Formula Demand Demand Infrastructure Infrastructure Dollars Dollars Units Units Units Units XXXX per per per per per per Infrastructure Infrastructure Development Development Demand Demand UnitUnit UnitUnitUnitUnit Level of Service Cost {e.g., $ per Students per {e.g., Sq. Ft. per housing unit Sq. Ft.} student} 5 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Credits A general requirement common to cash proffer methodologies is th credits. Two types of credits should be considered, future revenue credits and site-specific credits. Future revenue credits are necessary to avoid potential double payment situations arising from a one-time cash proffer payment plus the payment of other revenues that may also fund the same growth-related capital improvements. Future revenue credits are dependent upon the cash proffer methodology used in the cost The incremental expansion methodology is best suited for public faci in the future. Because new development will provide front-end funding of infrastructure, there is a potential for double payment of capital costs due to future principal payments on existing debt for public facilities. That is, because new development that may pay a cash proffer wil for the same type of infrastructure, a credit is included in the to account for this. (A credit is not necessary for interest payments if interest cost) The second type of credit is a site-specific credit for system improvements that have been included in the cash proffer calculations. A site-specific credit is handled during implementation and would reduce the impact on the infrastructure needs covered in the cash proffer p Policies and procedures related to site-specific credits for system improvements should be addressed in Cash Proffer program. However, the general concept is that developers may be eligible for site-specific credits or reimbursements only if they provide system improvements that have been included proffer calculations. Project improvements normally required as part of the developm process would not be eligible for credits against cash proffers. 6 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Summary of Capital Impacts Approach A summary of infrastructure categories is listed in Figure 2. To be eligible for a cash proffer, the facility must be for Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, or Public Safe are noted in the figure. The noneligible infrastructure categoripture a developments total capital impact to Frederick County. The Count categories; however, understanding the full impact of a development (or a collection can be a tool in the long-term planning process. The figure includes the components and serve areas used in the analysis as well. The geographies used for an infrastructure category were determined based on how the through discussions with County staff. For example, most of the Parks & Recreation facilities serve only the local population, so the Urban and Rural service areas are i are serving the whole County. More granular service areas were needed for the School and Fire capital impact a Several service area options were discussed with County staff when determining the service area for the School analysis. A properly calibrated service area is needed to accurately identify the local school utilization (enrollment compared to capacity) at each of the thr service areas (i.e., countywide or Urban and Rural) would reflect utilization of the schools within that area being analyzed. More detailed service areas (i.e., based on school attendance zones) would result in the model analyzing only the utilization of the specific school that development. for the School analysis were programmed based on the General Service Areas (i.e., Urban and Rural) with the Elementary School analysis splitting t North and South areas. This would provide some flexibility as school boundaries are adjress growth-related needs. After review from the Frederick County Development Impact Model Committee (DIMOC), a consensus was reached that the service area zones. Thus, when a development is being inputted into the Capital Impact Model, the local school at each grade level is chosen. The model then analyzes just the utilizat 7 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 2. Summary of Frederick County Capital Impacts Methodologies Type of Public Cost Infrastructure Components and Geography Used Methodology Facility Allocation Countywide Attendance Zones Public School Transportation Elementary School Students from Incremental Vehicles Middle School Public Schools* Residential Approach Education Centers High School Development Support Facilities Countywide Urban & Rural Service Area Indoor Recreation District, Community, Parks and Incremental Facilities Neighborhood Parks Residential Recreation* Approach Paved & Unpaved Trails Community Centers Residential Public Safety: Incremental Public Safety Building: Countywide and Sheriff* Approach Nonresidential Residential Public Safety: Incremental Fire Stations & Apparatuses: Fire Districts and Fire & Rescue* Approach Nonresidential Public Safety: Incremental Animal Shelter: Countywide Residential Animal Protection* Approach Incremental Library: Countywide Libraries Residential Approach Residential General Incremental General Government Facilities: Countywide and Government Approach Nonresidential Residential Incremental Court Facilities: Countywide Courts and Approach Nonresidential Environmental Convenience Sites: Urban & Rural Service Area Incremental Services/Solid Residential Approach Landfill: Countywide Waste *Note: the public facilities with an asterisk are eligible for ca 8 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS This chapter documents the demographic data and land use projections to be us Model for Frederick County. The following includes discussion and findings on: Service Areas Household Sizes Current population and housing unit estimates Residential projections Student Generation Rates Current employment and nonresidential floor area estimates Nonresidential projections Vehicle Trip Generation Note: calculations throughout this technical memo are based on a software. Results are discussed in the memo using one-and two-digit places (in most cases), which represent rounded figures. However, the analysis itself uses figures carried to their ultimate decimal places; therefore, the sums and products generated in the analys the reader replicates the calculation with the factors shown in ures shown, not in the analysis). 9 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Service Areas After interviews with County staff, it has been decided that the impact model: Rural and Urban. The Rural Service Area is west of Service Area east of the highways. Furthermore, the Stephens City and Middletown municipalities are in the Urban Service Area. Being an independent city, development i in the Capital Impact Model. Additional service areas may be usethe model (i.e., school attendance zones and fire districts). In the impact model, development will generate their service area and capacity issues will be identified with m county as one service area. Figure 3. Frederick County Service Area Map 10 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Household Size The capital impact analysis will use per capita standards and persons per housing unit (household size) to derive demand from housing types. (A household is a housing unit that is occupied by year-round residents.) When persons per housing unit are used in the calculations, infr derived using year-round population. TischlerBise recommends that capital impacts for residential development in Frederick County be analyzed according to the number of year-round residents per housing unit. Utilizing the most recent census tract data providFigure 5 lists the 2016 countywide population and housing stock and persons per In the lower half of Figure 5, the PPHU for each service area is found. For single family units in the Rural Service Area the PPHU is 2.37 and in the Urban Service Area the PPHU is 2.62. For multifamily the Rural Service Area the PPHU is 1.46 and in the Urban Service Area the PPHU is 2.08. Based on this information, households are smaller in the Rural Service Area co Figure 4. Countywide Persons per Housing Unit Countywide Units in StructurePersonsHsing UnitsPPHU Single Family [1]77,01330,417 2.53 Multifamily [2]4,1212,055 2.01 Total81,13432,472 2.50 [1] Includes attached and detached single family homes and mobil [2] Includes all other types Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey Figure 5. Persons Per Housing Unit by Service Area Rural Service AreaUrban Service Area Units in StructurePersonsHsing UnitsPPHUPersonsHsing UnitsPPHU Single Family, Detached/Attached24,17810,1392.3847,39017,9552.64 Mobile Homes1,0814992.174,3651,8252.39 2 to 4127821.558954541.97 5 or More2541791.422,8461,3422.12 Rural Service AreaUrban Service Area Units in StructurePersonsHsing UnitsPPHUPersonsHsing UnitsPPHU Single Family [1]25,25910,638 2.37 51,75519,780 2.62 Multifamily [2]381260 1.46 3,7411,795 2.08 [1] Includes attached and detached single family homes and mobil [2] Includes all other types Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey 11 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Service Area Residential Proportion of Frederick County In Figure 6 the population and housing units are totaled for each service area. According to census tract data from the US Census Bureau, about two- Service Area. Additionally, the majority of single family and mu Service Area. Most of the housing in the Rural Service Area is single family uni Figure 6. Service Area Proportion of Frederick County, 2016 Single Family Multifamily Service AreaPopulation%Units [1]%Units [2]% Rural Service Area25,63932%10,63835%26013% Urban Service Area55,49568%19,78065%1,79587% Frederick County81,134100%30,417100%2,055100% [1] Includes attached and detached single family homes and mobil [2] Includes all other types Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey Building Permit Activity Provided by the County, Figure 7 lists the annual building permit data for 2013-2017. Over the past five years, there are been a steady increase of new single family hom homes) being built, averaging 547 units annually. Significantly fewer multifam constructed, only 45 new units on average each year. In total, tCounty has grown by about 600 housing units every year, with an uptick in the last three years. Figure 7. Building Permit Totals 2013-2017 Annual Housing Type20132014201520162017Average Single Family300325428473501405 Townhouse5611199180104110 Multifamily00137246445 Mobile Home171845374132 Total373454709714710592 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Department Annual Housing TypeAverage Single Family547 Multifamily45 Total592 12 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Current Population and Housing Units data is added to data from the Weldon Cooper Center for Public S of July 1, 2017, the Weldon Cooper Center esti estimate covers half of 2017, the new residents from half of the Figure 8, the persons per housing unit factors are applied to the building permit totals to find the re second half of 2017. As a result of adding the new residents to the 2017 population estimate, there are 86,702 residents in the base year. Figure 8. Countywide Base Year Population Half of 2017 Persons per New Building Housing Residents Housing TypePermits [1]Unit [2]Generated Single Family3232.53 818 Multifamily322.01 64 Total355 882 July 1, 2017 Base Year Pop. (2018) Pop. Estimate [3]Estimate 85,820 86,702 [1] Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Department [2] Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Sur [3] Source: Demographics Research Group of the Weldon Cooper Ce Population estimates for each service area is necessary as well.lation in each service area, the population split found in Figure 6 is applied (32 percent Rural/68 percent Urban). Shown below, there are 27,399 residents estimated to be in the Rural Service Area and 59,303 residents estimated to be in the Urban Service Area. Figure 9. Base Year Population by Service Area Base Year Population2018 Rural Service Area27,399 Urban Service Area59,303 Countywide Total86,702 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 ACS 5-Year Estimates; Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, March 2017; TischlerBise analysis 13 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Base year housing totals are provided by County staff. To align data, single family- detached, single family-attached, and mobile homes are combined into the single family c result, 96 percent of the 35,566 housing units in Frederick Coun Figure 10. Countywide Base Year Housing Units Housing TypeUnits% Single Family - Detached27,91478% Single Family - Attached3,91811% Multifamily1,2484% Mobile Homes2,4867% Total35,566100% Housing TypeUnits% Single Family34,31896% Multifamily1,2484% Total35,566100% Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Department Along with population, the housing stock for each service area needs to be estimated for the capital impact model. By applying the US Census data in Figure 6 to the Countywide housing totals, the single family and multifamily housing stock is estimated. Shown in Figure 11, there are 12,160 housing units in the Rural Service Area and 23,406 housing units in the Urban Service Area. Figure 11. Service Area Base Year Housing Unit Base Year Service Area2018 Rural Service Area Single Family Units12,002 Multifamily Units158 Total12,160 Urban Service Area Single Family Units22,316 Multifamily Units1,090 Total23,406 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 ACS 5-Year Estimates; Frederick County Planning & Development Dept; TischlerBise analysis 14 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Population and Housing Unit Projections Countywide population projections were estimated by applying a straight-line approach to the University t, or 11,790 residents. The annual percent increase in population is applied to housing totals to p housing units are estimated to develop in the next ten years, th To estimate the servi population and housing units are applied to the Countywide total growth over the next ten years in the Frederick County is anticio occur in the Urban Service Area. Figure 12. Population and Housing Unit Projections (2019-2028) Base YearTotal 20182019202020212022202320242025202620272028Increase Frederick County Population86,70287,74888,79489,83990,88591,93192,97794,02395,51297,00298,49211,790 Increase1,0461,0461,0461,0461,0461,0461,0461,4901,4901,490 Housing Units Single Family34,31834,72735,13635,54535,95436,36336,77237,18137,76138,34138,9214,603 Multifamily1,2481,2631,2781,2931,3071,3221,3371,3521,3731,3941,415167 Total35,56635,99036,41436,83837,26237,68538,10938,53339,13439,73540,3364,770 Increase424424424424424424424601601601 Rural Service Area Population27,39927,72928,05928,39028,72029,05129,38129,71230,18330,65331,1243,726 Increase330330330330330330330471471471 Housing Units Single Family12,00212,14512,28812,43112,57412,71712,86013,00313,20613,40913,6111,610 Multifamily15816016216416516716917117417617921 Total12,16012,30512,45012,59412,73912,88413,02913,17413,38013,58513,7911,631 Increase145145145145145145145205205205 Urban Service Area Population59,30360,01960,73461,44962,16562,88063,59564,31165,33066,34967,3688,064 Increase7157157157157157157151,0191,0191,019 Housing Units Single Family22,31622,58222,84823,11423,38023,64623,91224,17824,55524,93225,3092,993 Multifamily1,0901,1031,1161,1291,1421,1551,1681,1811,1991,2181,236146 Total23,40623,68523,96424,24324,52224,80125,08025,35925,75526,15026,5463,139 Increase279279279279279279279396396396 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 ACS 5-Year Estimates; Weld Student Generation Rates and Current Enrollment Frederick County provided student generation rates for elementar Public school students are a subset of school-aged children, which also includes students in private schools and home-schooled children. Student generation rates (SGR) for single fam-detached, single family- attached, multifamily, and mobile home units are provided in Figure 13. 15 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 13. Student Generation Rates Elem School Middle School High School Housing TypeSGRSGRSGRTotal SGR Single Family-Detached0.1550.0910.1260.371 Single Family-Attached0.1880.0850.0930.367 Multifamily0.1640.0760.0770.317 Mobile Home0.2200.1090.1230.452 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept From information provided by Frederick County staff, the current Figure 14. Current Student Enrollment, as of Spring 2018 Number of Percent of Grade Level StudentsTotal Elementary5,82844% Middle3,24324% High4,28332% Total13,354100% Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept Student Generation Projections Student enrollment is projected based on housing growth. In the include single family-detached, single family-attached, and mobile homes. To accurately apply the student generation rate to the housing projections, the weighted average Over the next ten years, it is projected that Frederick County w students. The largest increase is in the Elementary school level. Figure 15. Countywide Student Enrollment Projections (2019-2028) Base YearTotal 20182019202020212022202320242025202620272028Increase Frederick County Students Elementary5,8285,8845,9536,0236,0926,1616,2316,3006,3986,4966,595767 Middle3,2433,2743,3133,3513,3903,4283,4673,5063,5603,6153,670427 High4,2834,3244,3754,4264,4774,5284,5794,6304,7024,7744,846563 Total13,35413,48313,64113,80013,95914,11814,27714,43514,66014,88615,1111,757 Increase129159159159159159159225225225 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept; TischlerBi 16 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Current Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Estimates To allow for employment estimates to be determined for the service areas, base year data is sourced Figure 16 lists the 2018 employment in Frederick County. It is estimated that there are 28, Figure 16. 2018 Countywide Employment by NAICS Code NAICS SectorEmployment% Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting950.3% Mining500.2% Utilities1940.7% Construction2,97810.6% Manufacturing4,48015.9% Wholesale Trade2,1277.5% Retail Trade4,83817.1% Transportation & Warehousing9073.2% Information3631.3% Finance & Insurance5421.9% Real Estate, Rental & Leasing5291.9% Professional, Scientific & Tech Services1,1614.1% Management of Companies & Enterprises40.0% Administrative & Support5872.1% Educational Services2,0197.2% Health Care & Social Assistance1,1274.0% Arts, Entertainment & Recreation2560.9% Accommodation & Food Services3,33311.8% Other Services (except Public Administration)1,4755.2% Public Administration1,1474.1% Total28,212100% Source: ESRI Business Analyst, 2018 To streamline projections, the NAICS employment totals are simplsectors: Retail, Office, Industrial, and Institutional. In Figure 17, it is shown that the largest employment industry in the County is Industrial. Retail has a significant presence as well, while Office and Institutional hav proportion of the employment market. Figure 17. Base Year Countywide Employment by Industry Sector IndustryEmployment% Retail8,42730% Office4,66117% Industrial10,83138% Institutional4,29315% Total28,212100% Source: ESRI Business Analyst, 2018 17 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Base year countywide nonresidential floor area has been provided by the Planning & Development Department. As of 2018, there is 19.2 million square feet of Ind Retail, 5.2 million square feet of Institutional, and 1.9 millioillion square feet. Following development trends, the Industrial indust due to warehousing and manufacturing developments. Conversely, t much smaller floor area to conduct business. Figure 18. Base Year Countywide Nonresidential Floor Area by Industry Sec Nonres. Floor IndustryArea (sq. ft.)% Retail5,950,97718% Office1,894,2706% Industrial19,161,95360% Institutional5,173,52716% Total32,180,727100% Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept In Figure 19re found by applying the base year employment to the nonresidential floor area. As shown in the figure, it is exp industries have much higher factors because of the uses of the s areas. Figure 19. Square Foot per Job Factors Nonres. Floor Sq. Ft. IndustryArea (sq. ft.)Employmentper Job Retail5,950,9778,427 706 Office1,894,2704,661 406 Industrial19,161,95310,831 1,769 Institutional5,173,5274,293 1,205 Total32,180,72728,212 1,141 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept; ESRI Business Analyst; TischlerBise analysis 18 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Service Area Current Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area As noted above, at least two service areas are anticipated to be used in the and Urban. A map is provided at the begin of this memo, Figure 3 online Business Analyst tool is used to determine the employment split between the areas. Shown Figure 20, 72 percent of the jobs in Frederick County are in the Urban Service Area. In the Urban Service Area, the Industrial cate 7,800 jobs and the Retail sector has over 6,500 jobs, while the the Rural Service Area, there are approximately 7,300 jobs (26 pof the County), the Industrial industry being the largest employer. Figure 20. Job Split by Service Area RuralUrban IndustryJobs%Jobs%Total Retail1,89723%6,53077%8,427 Office1,35329%3,30871%4,661 Industrial3,01728%7,81472%10,831 Institutional1,00523%3,28877%4,293 Total7,27226%20,94074%28,212 Source: ESRI Business Analyst, 2018 The square foot per job factors listed in Figure 19 are applied to the employment totals in the service areas to calculate the nonresidential floor area. In the Urban S square feet of nonresidential floor area, the Industrial industr for the highest share. In the Rural Service Area, there is estimated to be 8.4 million square Industrial industry accounting for the highest share as well. Ov floor area in the County is in the Urban Service Area. Figure 21. Nonresidential Floor Area by Service Area RuralUrban IndustryJobsSq. Ft.JobsSq. Ft. Retail1,8971,339,7346,5304,611,243 Office1,353549,8573,3081,344,414 Industrial3,0175,338,2117,81413,823,742 Institutional1,0051,210,6963,2883,962,831 Total7,2728,438,49720,94023,742,230 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept; ESRI Business Analyst; TischlerBise analysis 19 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections 2035 Comprehensive Plan, from 2015 to 2025 the County is expected to Plan, an average of 615 jobs per year is applied to the Countywide base year total to project employment in the Ce Plan anticipates Institutional (healthcare) and Retail jobs to be the Industrial then Office having the smallest shares. To account foFigure 22 lists the assumed percent of the job growth for each industry that is used in the projecti Figure 22. Percent of Job Growth by Industry Percent of IndustryJob Growth Retail30% Office15% Industrial25% Institutional30% Nonresidential floor area is projected based on the employment growth and average square feet per Figure 23 are the square feet per employee factors for a number of land uses. Based on the totals, the Shopping Center (ITE 820) land use factor will be us Office (ITE 710) for Office, Manufacturing (ITE 140) for Industr Hospital (ITE 610) for Institutional. Figure 23 ITEDemandWkdy Trip EndsWkdy Trip EndsEmp PerSq Ft CodeLand UseUnitPer Dmd Unit*Per Employee*Dmd UnitPer Emp 110Light Industrial1,000 Sq Ft4.963.051.63615 130Industrial Park1,000 Sq Ft3.372.911.16864 140Manufacturing1,000 Sq Ft3.932.471.59628 150Warehousing1,000 Sq Ft1.745.050.342,902 254Assisted Livingbed2.604.240.61na 320Motelroom3.3525.170.13na 520Elementary School1,000 Sq Ft19.5221.000.931,076 530High School1,000 Sq Ft14.0722.250.631,581 540Community Collegestudent1.1514.610.08na 550University/Collegestudent1.568.890.18na 565Day Carestudent4.0921.380.19na 610Hospital1,000 Sq Ft10.723.792.83354 620Nursing Home1,000 Sq Ft6.642.912.28438 710General Office (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft9.743.282.97337 760Research & Dev Center1,000 Sq Ft11.263.293.42292 770Business Park1,000 Sq Ft12.444.043.08325 820Shopping Center (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft37.7516.112.34427 * Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017) Listed in Figure 24, over the next ten years, it is projected that Frederick County 20 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Institutional sector is projected to grow by 1,844 jobs, Retail sector by 1,844 jobs, Industrial sector by 1,536 jobs, and Office sector by 922 jobs. Based on the job growth, the County is projected to grow by 2.7 area. About a third of the growth comes from the Industrial sectional sectors have significant growth as well. Additionally, Countywide employment projections are split into t proportional base year totals. The Urban Service Area is project Service Area is projected to grow by 1,542 jobs. To calculate the floor foot per job factors are applied to the job growth. As a result, square feet and the Rural Service Area grows by 700,000 square feet. 21 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 24. Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections Base YearTotal 20182019202020212022202320242025202620272028Increase Frederick County Employment Retail8,4278,6118,7968,9809,1649,3499,5339,7179,90210,08610,2711,844 Office4,6614,7534,8454,9385,0305,1225,2145,3065,3985,4915,583922 Industrial10,83110,98511,13811,29211,44611,59911,75311,90612,06012,21412,3671,536 Institutional4,2934,4774,6624,8465,0305,2155,3995,5835,7685,9526,1371,844 Total28,21228,82729,44130,05630,67031,28531,89932,51433,12833,74334,3576,145 Increase615615614615615614615615615615 Floor Area (1,000 square feet) Retail5,9516,0306,1086,1876,2666,3446,4236,5026,5806,6596,738787 Office1,8941,9251,9561,9872,0182,0492,0812,1122,1432,1742,205310 Industrial19,16219,25919,35519,45219,54819,64519,74119,83819,93420,03120,127966 Institutional5,1745,2395,3045,3695,4345,4995,5655,6305,6955,7605,825652 Total32,18132,45232,72432,99533,26633,53833,80934,08134,35234,62434,8952,714 Increase271271271271271271271271271271 Rural Service Area Employment Retail1,8971,9391,9802,0222,0632,1052,1462,1882,2292,2712,312415 Office1,3531,3801,4061,4331,4601,4871,5141,5401,5671,5941,621268 Industrial3,0173,0603,1033,1463,1893,2313,2743,3173,3603,4033,445428 Institutional1,0051,0481,0911,1341,1771,2201,2631,3071,3501,3931,436431 Total7,2727,4267,5807,7357,8898,0438,1978,3518,5068,6608,8141,542 Increase154154154154154154154154154154 Floor Area (1,000 square feet) Retail1,3401,3571,3751,3931,4111,4281,4461,4641,4811,4991,517177 Office55055956857758659560461362263164090 Industrial5,3385,3655,3925,4195,4465,4735,5005,5265,5535,5805,607269 Institutional1,2111,2261,2411,2561,2721,2871,3021,3171,3331,3481,363153 Total8,4388,5078,5768,6458,7148,7838,8528,9218,9899,0589,127689 Increase69696969696969696969 Urban Service Area Employment Retail6,5306,6736,8166,9587,1017,2447,3877,5307,6737,8157,9581,428 Office3,3083,3733,4393,5043,5703,6353,7013,7663,8313,8973,962654 Industrial7,8147,9248,0358,1468,2578,3688,4798,5898,7008,8118,9221,108 Institutional3,2883,4303,5713,7123,8533,9944,1364,2774,4184,5594,7001,412 Total20,94021,40021,86122,32122,78123,24123,70224,16224,62225,08325,5434,603 Increase460460460460460460460460460460 Floor Area (1,000 square feet) Retail4,6114,6724,7334,7944,8554,9164,9775,0385,0995,1605,221610 Office1,3441,3661,3881,4111,4331,4551,4771,4991,5211,5431,565220 Industrial13,82413,89313,96314,03314,10214,17214,24214,31114,38114,45114,520697 Institutional3,9634,0134,0634,1134,1634,2124,2624,3124,3624,4124,462499 Total23,74223,94524,14724,35024,55324,75524,95825,16025,36325,56525,7682,026 Increase203203203203203203203203203203 Source: Frederick County 2035 Comprehensive Plan; Trip Generatio Business Analyst; TischlerBise analysis 22 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Vehicle Trip Generation Residential Vehicle Trips A customized trip rate is calculated for the single family and mFigure 25, the most recent data from the American Community Survey is inputted into equations provided by the ITE to calculate the trip ends per housing unit factor. A si 10.54 trip ends on an average weekday and a multifamily unit is 1 trip ends on an average weekday. Figure 25. Customized Residential Trip End Rates Households (2)Vehicles per VehiclesSingle FamilyMultifamilyTotalHousehold Available (1)Units*UnitsHouseholdsby Tenure Owner-occupied55,62323,16620023,3662.38 Renter-occupied10,5684,7321,8166,5481.61 TOTAL 66,19127,8982,01629,9142.21 Housing Units (6) =>30,4172,05532,472 PersonsTripVehicles byTripAverage Trip Ends perITE Trip EndsDifference (3)Ends (4)Type of HousingEnds (5)Trip Ends Housing UnitPer Unitfrom ITE Single Family77,013231,67262,784409,313320,493 10.54 9.4412% Multifamily Units4,1219,3563,40713,71711,537 5.61 5.443% TOTAL 81,134241,02866,191423,030332,02910.23 * Includes Single Family Detached, Attached,and Manufactured Homes (1) Vehicles available by tenure from Table B25046,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. (2) Households by tenure and units in structure from Table B250American Community Survey, 2011-2015. (3) Persons by units in structure from Table B25033, American C-2015. (4) Vehicle trips ends based on persons using formulas from Trip Generation(ITE 2017). For singlefamilyhousing (ITE 210), the fitted curve equation is EXP(0.89*LN(persons)+1.7To approximate the average population of the ITE studies, persons were divided by 286 and the equation resultFor multifamily housing (ITE 221), the fitted curve equation is (2.29*persons)-81.02. (5) Vehicle trip ends based on vehicles available using formulas froTrip Generation(ITE 2017). For singlefamily housing (ITE 210), the fitted curve equation is EXP(0.99*LN(vehiTo approximate the average number of vehicles in the ITE studies, vehicles available were divided For multifamily housing (ITE 220), the fitted curve equation is (ITE 2012). (6) Housing units from TableB25024, American Community Survey, 2011-2015. 23 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Residential Vehicle Trips Adjustment Factors A vehicle trip end is the out-bound or in-bound leg of a vehicle trip. As a result, to not double count trips, a standard 50 percent adjustment is applied to trip ends to calc- home is attributed to the employer. -bound trips that are outside of the County. The trip adjustment factor includes two cAccording to the National Household Travel Survey (2009), home-based work trips are typically 31 percent of out-bound trips (which are 50 percent of all trip ends). Also, utilizing the most recent data from the Census Bureau's web percent of the Frederick County workers travel outside the County for work. In combination, these factors account for 12 percent of additional production trips (0.31 x 0.50 x 0.77 = 0.12). Shown in Figure 26, the total adjustment factor for residential housing units includes attraction trips (50 percent of trip ends) plus the journey-to-work commuting adjustment (12 percent of production trips) for a total of 62 percent. Figure 26. Frederick County Trip Adjustment Factor for Commuters Employed Frederick County Residents (2015) 38,410 Frederick County Residents Working in County (2015)8,830 Frederick County Residents Commuting Outside County for Work29,580 Percent Commuting out of the County77% Additional Production Trips12% General Trip Adjustment Factor50% Residential Trip Adjustment Factor62% Source: U.S. Census, OnTheMap Application Nonresidential Vehicle Trips th rates and adjustment factors found in their recently published 1 edition of Trip Generation. The weekday trip end per 1,000 square feet factors highlighted in Figure 27 are used to estimate the trip generation in Frederick County. 24 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 27. Institute of Transportation Engineers Nonresidential Trip Fact ITEDemandWkdy Trip EndsWkdy Trip EndsEmp PerSq Ft CodeLand UseUnitPer Dmd Unit*Per Employee*Dmd UnitPer Emp 110Light Industrial1,000 Sq Ft4.963.051.63615 130Industrial Park1,000 Sq Ft3.372.911.16864 140Manufacturing1,000 Sq Ft3.932.471.59628 150Warehousing1,000 Sq Ft1.745.050.342,902 254Assisted Livingbed2.604.240.61na 320Motelroom3.3525.170.13na 520Elementary School1,000 Sq Ft19.5221.000.931,076 530High School1,000 Sq Ft14.0722.250.631,581 540Community Collegestudent1.1514.610.08na 550University/Collegestudent1.568.890.18na 565Day Carestudent4.0921.380.19na 610Hospital1,000 Sq Ft10.723.792.83354 620Nursing Home1,000 Sq Ft6.642.912.28438 710General Office (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft9.743.282.97337 760Research & Dev Center1,000 Sq Ft11.263.293.42292 770Business Park1,000 Sq Ft12.444.043.08325 820Shopping Center (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft37.7516.112.34427 * Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017) For nonresidential land uses, the standard 50 percent adjustment is applied to Office, Indu Institutional development types. A lower vehicle trip adjustment this type of development attracts vehicles as they pass-by on arterial and collector roads. For example, when someone stops at a convenience store on their way home from work primary destination. An average pass-by rate from ITE is applied to Retail, resulting in a trip adjus factor of 38 percent. In Figure 28 adjustment factor is listed for each land use. Figure 28. Frederick County Summary of Averages Daily Vehicle Trip Factors Vehicle Trip Trip Adj. Avg. Daily Vehicle Land UseEnds%Trip Rate (Adj.) Residential (per housing unit) Single Family 10.54 0.62 6.53 Multifamily 5.61 0.62 3.48 Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet) Retail 37.75 0.38 14.35 Office 9.74 0.50 4.87 Industrial 3.93 0.50 1.97 Institutional 19.52 0.50 9.76 Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017); TischlerBise analysis 25 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Vehicle Trip Projections The base year vehicle trip totals and vehicle trip projections a end factors, the trip adjustment factors, and the residential and nonresidential and floor area growth. In the base year, residential land uses a nonresidential land uses account for 182,739 vehicle trips in Frrick County. Through 2028, there will be a total increase of 51,708 daily vehicle trips with the major family units (58 percent) and Retail (22 percent) development. Furthermore, 70 percent of the current vehicle trips in the County are generated in the Urban Service Area. In total, by 2028, the Urban Service area will increase by Area will increase by 15,586 vehicle trips. 26 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 29. Frederick County Total Daily Vehicle Trip Projections (2019-2028) Base YearTotal 20182019202020212022202320242025202620272028Increase Frederick County Residential Single Family224,189226,861229,533232,205234,877237,549240,221242,893246,682250,470254,25930,069 Multifamily4,3444,3964,4474,4994,5514,6034,6544,7064,7804,8534,926583 Subtotal228,533231,257233,981236,704239,428242,152244,876247,599251,461255,323259,18530,652 Nonresidential Retail85,36786,49587,62488,75289,88191,01092,13893,26794,39595,52496,65211,286 Office9,2259,3769,5279,6799,8309,98110,13210,28310,43410,58610,7371,512 Industrial37,65337,84338,03338,22238,41238,60238,79238,98139,17139,36139,5511,897 Institutional50,49451,13051,76652,40253,03853,67454,31054,94655,58356,21956,8556,361 Subtotal182,739184,844186,950189,055191,161193,267195,372197,478199,583201,689203,79421,056 Grand Total411,272416,101420,931425,760430,589435,418440,248445,077451,045457,012462,98051,708 Increase4,8294,8294,8294,8294,8294,8294,8295,9685,9685,968 Rural Service Area Residential Single Family78,40479,33880,27381,20782,14283,07684,01184,94586,27087,59588,92010,516 Multifamily55055656356957658258959560561462374 Subtotal78,95479,89580,83681,77782,71883,65984,60085,54186,87588,20989,54310,590 Nonresidential Retail19,21819,47319,72719,98120,23520,48920,74320,99721,25121,50521,7592,541 Office2,6782,7222,7662,8092,8532,8972,9412,9853,0293,0733,117439 Industrial10,49010,54210,59510,64810,70110,75410,80710,86010,91210,96511,018529 Institutional11,81611,96512,11412,26312,41212,56112,71012,85813,00713,15613,3051,489 Subtotal44,20244,70245,20245,70146,20146,70147,20047,70048,20048,69949,1994,997 Grand Total123,156124,597126,037127,478128,919130,359131,800133,240135,074136,908138,74215,586 Increase1,4411,4411,4411,4411,4411,4411,4411,8341,8341,834 Urban Service Area Residential Single Family145,785147,523149,260150,998152,735154,473156,211157,948160,412162,875165,33919,553 Multifamily3,7943,8393,8853,9303,9754,0204,0664,1114,1754,2394,303509 Subtotal149,580151,362153,145154,928156,711158,493160,276162,059164,587167,114169,64220,062 Nonresidential Retail66,14867,02367,89768,77269,64670,52171,39572,27073,14474,01974,8938,745 Office6,5476,6556,7626,8696,9767,0847,1917,2987,4067,5137,6201,073 Industrial27,16427,30127,43727,57427,71127,84827,98528,12228,25928,39628,5321,369 Institutional38,67739,16439,65240,13940,62641,11441,60142,08842,57543,06343,5504,873 Subtotal138,536140,142141,748143,354144,960146,566148,172149,778151,384152,990154,59516,059 Grand Total288,116291,505294,893298,282301,671305,059308,448311,837315,970320,104324,23736,121 Increase3,3893,3893,3893,3893,3893,3893,3894,1344,1344,134 Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017); Ti 27 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Functional Population Both residential and nonresidential developments increase the de To calculate the proportional share between residential and nonrential demand on service and facilities, a functional population approach is often used. The the cost of the facilities to residential and nonresidential dev and workers in the County through a 24-hour day. Residents that do not work are assigned 20 hours per day to resi to nonresidential development (annualized averages). Residents t assigned 14 hours to residential development and 10 hours to nonresidential develop work outside the County are assigned 14 hours to residential dev day are assumed to be spent outside of the County working. Inflouters are assigned 10 hours to nonresidential development. Based on 2015 functional population accounts for 77 percent of the functional population, while nonr percent, see Figure 30. Figure 30. Frederick County Functional Population Demand Units in 2015 Residential DemandPerson Hours/Day^Hours Population*80,230 Residents Not Working41,82020836,400 Resident Workers**38,410 Worked in County**8,83014123,620 Worked Outside of County**29,58014414,120 Residential Subtotal1,374,140 Residential Share ==>77% Nonresidential Non-Working Residents41,8204167,280 Jobs Located in County**24,747 Residents Working in County**8,8301088,300 Non-Resident Workers (Inflow Commuters)15,91710159,170 Nonresidential Subtotal414,750 Nonresidential Share ==>23% TOTAL1,788,890 * Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011-2015 American Community Surve ** Source: 2015 Inflow/Outflow Analysis, OnTheMap Application, U ^ Hours per day allocated to land use (residential or nonresiden 28 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PROJECT APPROACH The assignment for Frederick County involves two main elements: 1. 2.To allow County staff to use the Capital Impacts Model to determ development projects that take into consideration whether capaci therefore, whether a cash proffer can be offered and accepted byy). This report provides the static list of capital impacts and supp The Model calculates the cost to serve the land use first and th needs in the service area for the particular facility. Therefore, throughout this report, service areas/regions are identified with levels of service reported in Two sections are provided in the following pages: (I) Cash Proff-Cash Proffer Categories. 29 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia I.Cash Proffer Categories 30 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL IMPACTS Public School capital impacts are determined using the incremental methodology and costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. The methodology is based on the cost to provide future public school capacity due to growth and is calculated using the current average Frederick County public school student generation rates, Capital Improvement Plan (by type of unit), level of service standards (capacity), and local costs. The incremental methodology used to calculate the capital impacts is illustratedFigure 31. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the components. Sc capital impacts are derived from the product of students per housing unit (by type oand the net capital cost per student. The boxes in the next level down indicate detail on the components included in the proffer. A credit for future payments on existing General Obligation and ot Figure 31. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impacts Methodology Chart FREDERICK COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL IMPACT Residential Development Students per Housing Unit by Multiplied By Net Local Capital Type (Student Generation Cost per Student Rate) School Construction Cost per Education Center Cost per StudentStudent Support Facility Cost per Transportation Vehicle Cost Studentper Student Minus Debt Payments per Student 31 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia School Capital Impact Service Areas Several service area options were discussed with County staff. A properly calibrated service area is needed to accurately identify the local school utilization (enrollment compared to capacity) at each of the three grade levels. More general and larger service areas (i.e. countywide or Urban and Rural) would result in utilization of the schools within that area being analyzed. While more detailed service areas (i.e. based on school attendance zones) would result in the model analyzing only the utilization of the specific school that would be directly affected by the development. based on the General Service Areas (i.e. Urban and Rural) with the Elementary School analysis splitting the Urban Service Area into North and South areas. After review from the Frederick County Development Impact Model consensus was reached that the service areas should be the schooThus, when a development is being inputted into the Capital Impact Model, the local school at each grade level is chosen. The model then analyzes just the utilization of those sc Public School Students per Housing Unit Frederick County provided student generation rates by type of housing unit and grade level. The term the County. (Public school students are a subset of school-age children, which includes students in private schools and home-schooled children. Data reflect public school students only.) Student generation rates are calculated for four housing unit types: (1) single family detached; (2) single family attached; (3) multifamily; (4) age-restricted single family. Rates are provided for three school grade levels: (1) Elementary School (grades K-5); (2) Middle School (6-8) and (3) High School (grades 9-12). Average rates for Frederick County Public Schools are shown below. The Age-Restricted Single Family housing unit is assumed to not generate any students. Figure 32. Frederick County Student Generation Rates Housing TypeESMSHSTotal Single Family-Detached0.1550.0910.1260.372 Single Family-Attached0.1880.0850.0930.366 Multifamily0.1640.0760.0770.317 Age Restricted Single Family0.0000.0000.0000.000 Source: Frederick County Planning & Development Dept. 32 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Public School Facilities Level of Service Standards This section provides current inventories and levels of service for elementary, middle, and high schools in Frederick County Public Schools. The data contained in these tables determine Level of Service infrastructure standards for school buildings and sites on whichcapital impacts are based. Levels of service are shown based on two sets of figurescurrent enrollment and capacity. The enrollment in the model will be updated annually and set to the enrollment as of D Elementary Schools As indicated in Figure 33, County elementary schools have a total of 823,826 square feet of floor area on 235 acres. At the end of 2018, the total enrollment was 6,155 students and the total capacity was 5,973 students. Utilization is calculated by dividing enrollment by school capacity and calculated for each school. At a countywide level, Frederick County is currently at 103 percent utilization. Levels of service are shown in the far right column of Figure 33. Level of service standards are calculated by dividing the amount of infrastructure by total capacity. Calculations are done for each school and at a countywide level there are 138 square feet per student. The utilization percentages shown are used in the Capital Impacts Mo proffer is triggered. Capacity needs are triggered at an Attendance Zone level and based on a utilization percentage at 100 percent or higher. Figure 33. Frederick County Public Schools Elementary Schools Level of Service SiteBuilding31-Dec-18CurrentSq. Ft. per Attendance ZoneAcreageSquare FeetEnrollment CapacityUtilizationCapacity Apple Pie Ridge14.265,12045645999%142 Armel15.070,281641558115%126 Bass-Hoover18.364,630627553113%117 Evendale27.7782,58553562486%132 Gainesboro18.996,48845956282%172 Greenwood Mill15.2100,46563969692%144 Indian Hollow19.559,065424405105%146 Middletown15.070,28147948299%146 Orchard View37.476,227495450110%169 Redbud Run43.770,697727670109%106 Stonewall10.067,987673514131%132 Countywide Total235.0823,8266,1555,973103%138 Source: Frederick County Public School Planning Office; Virginia Middle School As indicated in Figure 34, County middle schools have a total of 612,690 square feet of flo acres. At the end of 2018, the total enrollment was 3,227 studen 33 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia students. Utilization is calculated by dividing enrollment by scty and calculated for each school. At a countywide level, Frederick County is currently at 94 perce utilization. Levels of service are shown in the far right column of Figure 34. Level of service standards are calculated by dividing the amount of infrastructure by total capacity. Calculations are done for each school and at a countywide level there are 179 square feet per student. The utilization percentages shown are used in the Capital Impacts Mo proffer is triggered. Capacity needs are triggered at an Attendance Zone level and bas percentage at 100 percent or higher. Figure 34. Frederick County Public Schools: Middle Schools Level of Service SiteBuilding31-Dec-18CurrentSq. Ft. per Attendance ZoneAcreageSquare FeetEnrollment CapacityUtilizationCapacity Admiral Byrd27.77159,966975900108%178 Frederick County39.09187,76471390079%209 James Wood MS26.91149,952925900103%167 Robert E. Aylor23.90115,00861472085%160 Countywide Total117.7612,6903,2273,42094%179 Source: Frederick County Public School Planning Office; Virginia High School As indicated in Figure 35, County high schools have a total of 722,547 square feet of floor area on 196 acres. At the end of 2018, the total enrollment was 4,265 studen students. Utilization is calculated by dividing enrollment by school capaci At a countywide level, Frederick County is currently at 113 perc utilization. Levels of service are shown in the far right column of Figure 35. Level of service standards are calculated by dividing the amount of infrastructure by total capacity. Calculations are done for each school and at a countywide level there are 191 square feet per student. The utilization percentages shown are used in the Capital Impacts Mo proffer is triggered. Capacity needs are triggered at an Attendance Zone level and bas percentage at 100 percent or higher. Figure 35. Frederick County Schools: High School Level of Service SiteBuilding31-Dec-18CurrentSq. Ft. per Attendance ZoneAcreageSquare FeetEnrollment CapacityUtilizationCapacity James Wood HS68.9229,1871,3321,200111%191 Millbrook84.8253,8431,4541,300112%195 Sherando40.0239,5171,4791,285115%186 Countywide Total193.6722,5474,2653,785113%191 Source: Frederick County Public School Planning Office; Virginia 34 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Education Centers The level of service for Education Centers is calculated at a coFigure 36, there are 133,286 square feet of Education Centers in the County enrollment was 13,647 students. The countywide level of service is calculated by dividing the total floor area by enrollment. As a result, there are 10 square feet per st Figure 36. Frederick County Schools: Education Centers SiteBuildingValue Per FacilityRegionValueAcreageSquare FeetSquare Feet Dowell J. Howard CenterCountywide$7,456,6002070,417$106 NREP/Senseny Road SchoolCountywide$5,064,4009.762,869$81 TOTALS$12,521,00029.7133,286$94 Sumary by Region/SchoolDemand Units Value perAcres perBuilding (Students)StudentStudentSF per Student LOS based on Current Enrollment13,647$9170.00210 LOS based on Capacity13,178$9500.00210 Support Facilities The level of service for Support Facilities is calculated at a countywide level. As indicated Figure 37, there are 160,755 square feet of Support Facilities in the Countotal countywide enrollment was 13,647 students. The countywide level of service area by enrollment. As a result, there are 12 square feet per st Figure 37. Frederick County Schools: Support Facilities SiteBuildingValue Per FacilityRegionValueAcreageSquare FeetSquare Feet Buildings & Ground FacilityCountywide$2,132,60012.1349,626$43 Support Facilities Services WestCountywide$676,0006.0210,423$65 School Board OfficeCountywide$3,601,7006.6435,494$101 Smithfield FacilityCountywide$789,8761.326,380$124 Transportation FacilityCountywide$11,044,20057.358,832$188 TOTALS$18,244,37683.4160,755$113 Sumary by Region/SchoolDemand Units Value perAcres perBuilding (Students)StudentStudentSF per Student LOS based on Current Enrollment13,647$1,3370.00612 LOS based on Capacity13,178$1,3840.00612 35 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Transportation Vehicles The level of service for Transportation Vehicles is calculated aFigure 38, there are 229 school buses in operation. At the end of 2018, the total cou 13,647 students. The countywide level of service is calculated b by enrollment. As a result, there are 16.78 buses per 1,000 students. Figure 38. Frederick County Schools: Transportation Vehicles Vehicle TypeCountCost per VehicleTotal Cost School Bus229$100,000$22,900,000 Total Enrollment13,647 Buses per 1,000 Students16.78 Cost per Student$1,678 Public School Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan The cost factor applied to the levels of service for school cons analyzing planned or new schools. The recently constructed Jordan Springs Elementary factor. And, the New High S Figure 39. School Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan BuildingValue per FacilityValueSquare FeetSquare Feet Jordan Springs ES$28,500,00084,375$337 Aylor MS Replacement$45,500,000133,000$342 New High School$122,200,000297,149$411 TOTAL$167,700,000430,149$390 Source: Frederick County Capital Improvement Plan 2019-2024 Plan 36 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Credit for Future Debt Payments for School Improvements Because the County has debt financed recent school construction projects and will be debt financing future school construction, TischlerBise recommends including a credit for future principal payments. Along with debt from previous projects, the County anticipates tings Elementary School and the Aylor Middle School projects. A credit is necessary since new residential units that may pay school cash proffers will also contribute to future principal payments on school debt through property taxes.Credits are calculated on a per student basis to reflect the proportionate share of debt service per development unit, which is based on demand specific to the land use receiving the credit (i.e., for schools to property value, which would shift the cash proffer approach away fro tax. The credit amount of $9,322 is subtracted from the gross capital cost per student to derive cost per student for school facilities Figure 40. Payment Schedule for School Debt Existing Plus Projected New Total Planned Debt Service Fiscal Debt per PrincipalInterestTotalEnrollment YearStudent FY19$10,784,583$4,969,168$15,753,75113,483$1,168 FY20$10,341,220$4,518,435$14,859,65513,641$1,089 FY21$11,017,547$5,009,436$16,026,98313,800$1,161 FY22$12,306,040$5,913,528$18,219,56813,959$1,305 FY23$13,304,444$6,094,369$19,398,81314,118$1,374 FY24$12,540,784$5,661,720$18,202,50414,277$1,275 FY25$11,730,000$5,112,387$16,842,38714,435$1,167 FY26$10,805,000$4,605,382$15,410,38214,660$1,051 FY27$9,950,000$4,147,714$14,097,71414,886$947 FY28$9,375,000$3,738,542$13,113,54215,111$868 Discount Rate4.0% Net Present Value$9,322 37 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 45. Frederick County Public Schools Capital Impact by Housing Unit, High School SCHOOL CAPITAL IMPACT: Frederick County Public Schools James Wood Capital Impact Per Housing Unit HSMillbrookSherando Single Family-Detached$9,211$6,002$8,973 Single Family-Attached$6,799$5,607$6,623 Multifamily$5,629$5,013$5,484 Age Restricted Single Family$0$0$0 School Cash Proffer Eligibility To comply with the 2019 Cash Proffer law, a capacity need must be established. The Schoo analysis in the CapIM model is programmed to calculate cash prof city of the building). Once enrollment has exceeded capacity the capital impact is eligible for cash proffe a development may not generate enough students to exceed the thr triggered. In other cases, if there is excess capacity and a devel exceed the capacity, only the impact from the number of students eligible for cash proffer. 41 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PARKS & RECREATION CAPITAL IMPACTS Frederick County has a parks and recreation system with facilities that se To determine the capital impact on parks and recreation from new following types of facilities are analyzed for the geographic areas noted: Countywide Indoor Recreation Facilities Service Areas District Parks Community Parks Neighborhood Parks Unpaved Trails Paved Trails Community Centers Figure 46 diagrams the incremental methodology used to calculate the Parks & Recreation capital impact. Costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. It ie, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the componenParks & Recreation capital impacts are derived from the product of persons per housing unit capital cost per person. The net capital cos the level of service standard calculated at either a Countywide 42 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 46. Parks & Recreation Capital Impact Methodology Chart PARKS & RECREATION CAPITAL IMPACTS Residential Development Persons per Housing Unit by Multiplied By Net Capital Cost Type of Unit per Person Indoor Recreation Facilities Cost District Parks Cost per Person per Person Community Parks Cost per Neighborhood Parks Cost per PersonPerson Unpaved Trails Cost per Paved Trails Cost per Person Person Community Center Cost per Person 43 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Park Inventory Shown in Figure 47, there are a number of current parks, trails, and community cen Parks & Recreation Department. Parks have been organized into three categories: District (392 acres), Community (32 acres), and Neighborhood (11.5 acres). Trails have miles) and paved trails (4.1 miles). There is also 50,077 square 44 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 47. Parks & Recreation Inventory District Parks NameUseAcresValueService Area SherandoMultipurpose337$21,881,047Urban ClearbrookMultipurpose55$10,033,814Urban Total392$31,914,861 Average Cost Per Acre$81,415 Community Parks NameUseAcresValueService Area Rose HillMultipurpose7$669,913Rural Snowden BridgeMultipurpose25$615,938Urban Total32$1,285,850 Average Cost Per Acre$40,183 Neighborhood Parks NameUseAcresValueService Area Frederick HeightsMultipurpose11$500,980Urban Reynolds StoreMultipurpose0.5$188,500Rural Total11.5$689,480 Average Cost Per Acre$59,955 Unpaved Trails NameUseMilesValueService Area Sherando ParkHiking1.5$126,720Urban Rose Hill ParkHiking1.3$109,824Rural Sherando ParkMountain Biking3.0$62,400Urban Total5.8$298,944 Average Cost Per Mile$51,542 Paved Trails NameUseMilesValueService Area Sherando ParkMultiuse3$1,143,999Urban Clearbrook ParkMultiuse1$228,800Urban Frederick HeightsMultiuse0.5$190,667Urban Total4.1$1,563,465 Average Cost Per Mile$381,333 Community Centers NameUseSq. Ft.ValueService Area EvendaleMultipurpose11,761$175,000Urban GreenwoodMultipurpose11,802$250,000Urban SherandoMultipurpose6,843$250,000Urban Orchard ViewMultipurpose7,869$175,000Rural GainesboroMultipurpose11,802$250,000Rural Total50,077$1,100,000 Average Cost Per Square Foot$22 Source: Frederick County Parks and Recreation Asset Inventory 45 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Parks & Recreation Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan In Figure 48, the Park & Recreation facilities f serve their population are listed. Figure 48. Park Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan by Type and Service Area District Parks Park NameProject PurposeAcresValue$/AcreService Area Sherando ParkArea 1 Development$1,290,000$0Urban Sherando ParkWater Slide$327,500$0Urban Clearbrook ParkWater Slide$327,500$0Urban Sherando ParkSoftball Complex$1,723,000$0Urban Sherando ParkBallfield Lighting$856,000$0Urban Sherando ParkArea 3 Development$2,250,000$0Urban New District ParksLand Aquisition300.0$8,262,000$27,540Urban New District ParkLand Aquisition150.0$4,131,000$27,540Rural Total450.0$19,167,000$42,593 Community Parks Park NameProject PurposeAcresValue$/AcreService Area Snowden Bridge ParkPark Development$2,410,000$0Urban New Community ParkMulti-Purpose Park35.0$2,194,000$62,685Urban Total35.0$4,604,000$131,542 Neighborhood Parks Park NameProject PurposeAcresValue$/AcreService Area New Neighborhood ParksMulti-Purpose Park20.0$1,745,320$87,266Urban New Neighborhood ParksMulti-Purpose Park40.0$3,490,640$87,266Rural Total60.0$5,236,000$87,266 Paved Trails Trail NameProject PurposeMilesValue$/MileService Area Abrams Creek TrailPaved Walking Trail3$1,219,900$406,633Urban Total3.0$1,219,900$406,633 Indoor Facilities Facility NameProject PurposeSq. Ft.Value$/SFService Area Field HouseIndoor Recreation44,000$9,067,000$206Countywide Indoor Swimming PoolSwimming35,000$11,841,000$338Countywide Total79,000$20,908,000$264 The CapIM model will evaluate the capital impact a development has on all types of Park & Recreation facilities. However, to comply with the 2019 Virginia Cash Proffer law, it is only the park and recreation facilities that are included in Frederick are considered to be eligible for cash proffers at this time. 46 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Parks & Recreation Level of Service and Cost Factors For all the Parks & Recreation components, except Indoor Recreation Facilities, capital impacts are calculated based on current levels of service for existing parks and facilities. The analysis first establishes a countywide level of service for each type of facility and then determines whether there is excess capacity or a deficit in each park region for that type of park. Figure 49 lists the level of service and cost factors for District Parks, Community Parks, Neighborhood Parks, Unpaved Trails, and Paved Trails. Levels of services are calculated at a Service Area level for each type of park based on acreage totals. Level of services are calculated at a Service Area level for each type. The methodology is based on the assumption that the County will main developing parks to serve new development. In some cases, there are not any facility types in a Service Area (District Park and Paved Trails in the Rural Service). In t applied. The figure also lists the construction cost per unit of each facility. Most cost factors originate from the calculate the cost per capita. For example, in the Urban Service Area the acres per 1,000 persons and the construction cost for an acre of capital cost per person in the Urban Service Area for District Parks is $124.51. Figure 49. Parks Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors Current LOS Imp. Acres Reqd Current Excess (Units / 1,000 at County LOS by Capacity or Construction Cost Per Park CategoryService AreaUnitPopulationpersons)Category of Park(Deficit)Cost Per UnitCapita AcresAcres/1,000 persons Urban392.059,3034.52268.12123.88$27,540$124.51 District ParkRural0.027,3994.52123.88(123.88)$27,540$124.51 Total392.086,7024.52392.000.00$27,540$124.51 Urban25.059,3030.4221.893.11$62,685$26.43 Rural7.027,3990.2610.11(3.11)$62,685$16.02 Community Park Total32.086,7020.3732.000.00$62,685$23.14 Urban11.059,3030.197.873.13$87,266$16.19 Neighborhood Rural0.527,3990.023.63(3.13)$87,266$1.59 Park Total11.586,7020.1311.500.00$87,266$11.57 MilesMiles/1,000 persons Urban4.559,3030.083.970.53$51,542$3.91 Unpaved TrailsRural1.327,3990.051.83(0.53)$51,542$2.45 Total5.886,7020.075.800.00$51,542$3.45 Urban0.559,3030.010.340.16$406,633$3.43 Paved TrailsRural0.027,3990.010.16(0.16)$406,633$2.35 Total0.586,7020.010.500.00$406,633$2.35 Cost from CIP Cost from Inventory 47 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Community Center Level of Service and Cost Factors The level of service for Community Centers in Frederick County is illustrated in Figure 50. The five centers are allocated to the Service Areas based on their location. The pulation to determine the level of service. For example, there i Community Center in the Urban Service Area which has a populatio of service of 0.51 square feet per capita. The cost per square foot is multiplied by the level of service to find the ca example, the level of service in the Urban Service Area is 0.51 square foot is $22.20. As a result, the capital cost per person is $11.32. Figure 50. Community Center Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors Current LOSCost per Cost per Service AreaPopulationSq. Ft.Value(Sq. Ft./Capita)Square FootPerson Urban59,30330,406$675,0000.51$22.20$11.32 Rural27,39919,671$425,0000.72$21.61$15.56 Total86,70250,077$1,100,0000.58$21.97$12.69 Indoor Recreational Facility Level of Service and Cost Factors nned to be constructed oversized to accommodate future growth and to serve the whole Co facilities is based on the 2039 population. This results in the square feet per capita. In Figure 51, the capital cost per person is calculated by multiplying the l cost per square foot. Figure 51. Indoor Recreational Facility Level of Service and Cost Factors 2039Current LOSCost per Cost per Service AreaService AreaPopulationSq. Ft.Value(Sq. Ft./Capita)Square FootPerson Field HouseCountywide113,34444,000$9,067,0000.39$206.07$80.37 Indoor Swimming PoolCountywide113,34435,000$11,841,0000.31$338.31$104.88 Total113,34479,000$20,908,0000.70$264.66$184.46 Source: Frederick County 2019-2034 CIP 48 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Parks & Recreation Input Variables and Capital Impacts Factors used to determine parks and recreation capital impacts are summarized in Figure 52. Capital impacts for Parks & Recreation facilities are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) and are only determined for residential development. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand unit by type of facilit there are seven components to the capital impact calculation: District Park (determined by Service Area) Community Park (determined by Service Area) Neighborhood Park (determined by Service Area) Unpaved Trails (determined by Service Area) Paved Trails (determined by Service Area) Community Center (determined by Service Area) Indoor Recreation Facilities (determined Countywide) Parks & Recreation capital impacts are the product of persons per housing unit multiplied by the total net capital cost per person. An example of the calculation for a single family housing unit in the Urban Service Area is: the net capital cost per person for the Countywide portion ($184.46) and the net capital cost per person for the Service Area portion ($185.79) are multiplied by the persons per housing unit (2.62) and then summed to arrive at the capital impact for this component for a single family unit of $970 (rounded). Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impact for in the lower portion of Figure 52. Please note: Costs are shown for infrastructure share of the cost to provide the facilities. Despite capacity bein some Service Areas, there is capital cost impactHowever, due to the current cash proffer law, capacity triggers are required for cash proffer acceptance.capacity triggers are integrated into the CapIM and allows the user to identify the total cost of grow amount (which may be different due to service area differences and existing capacitie 49 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 52. Parks & Recreation Input Variables and Capital Impact REGIONS Infrastructure CostDemand UnitCountywideUrbanRural District Parksper capita-$124.51$124.51 Community Parksper capita-$26.43$16.02 Neighborhood Parksper capita-$16.19$1.59 Unpaved Trailsper capita-$3.91$2.45 Paved Trailsper capita-$3.43$2.35 Community Centersper capita-$11.32$15.56 Indoor Recreation Centersper capita$184.46-- GROSS COST PER PERSON$184.46$185.79$162.48 Debt Service Credit$0.00$0.00$0.00 NET CAPITAL COST $184.46$185.79$162.48 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: REGION Housing Unit Urban CountywideUrbanTotal Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$483$487$970 Single Family-Attached2.62$483$487$970 Multifamily2.08$384$386$770 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$308$310$618 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: REGION Housing Unit Rural CountywideRuralTotal Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$437$385$822 Single Family-Attached2.37$437$385$822 Multifamily1.46$269$237$506 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$279$245$524 Parks & Recreation Cash Proffer Eligibility To comply with the 2019 Cash Proffer law, a capacity need must be established. The Parks & Recreation s based on current capacity. A park type must have a deficit supply of facilities (i.e. park acres, trail eligible for a cash proffer. 50 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: SHERIFF There are three public facility subcategories included under Public Safety: Sheriff, Fire & Rescue, and Animal Control. An incremental methodology approach is used to determine capital impacts for Sheriff facilities, which is diagrammed below. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the components. The residential portion of the Sher product of Sheriff service calls per person multiplied by person the net capital cost per person. The nonresidential portion is derivenonresidential vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential development multiplied b vehicle trip. The Sheriff capital impacts are ba facilities to serve growth. Sheriff capital impacts are calculat7 Sheriff calls for service data. The calls for service data provided by the County to TischlerBis able to be delineated by residential and nonresidential. Figure 53. Sheriff Capital Impact Methodology Chart SHERIFF CAPITAL IMPACTS Residential DevelopmentNonresidential Development Persons per Housing Unit by Vehicle Trips per 1,000 Square Unit Type Feet by Type of Development Multiplied by Net Capital Cost Multiplied by Net Capital Cost per Vehicle Trip per Person Cost per Person for Sheriff Cost per Vehicle Trip for Sheriff FacilitiesFacilities 51 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cost Allocation for Sheriff Facilities A report of 2017 sheriff service calls to business was provided by the . In total, there were 62,828 calls for service. Of the total, 60 percent were attributed to r were attributed to nonresidential land uses. Sheriff services are provided on a countywide basis in Frederick County; substations are not used in the County. Therefore, it is recommended that one service area be us Sheriff facilities. Figure 54. Frederick County Sheriff Calls for Service Calls for Land UseService% Residential37,56560% Nonresidential25,26340% Total62,828100% Source: Frederick County Sheriff's Office 52 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts Level of service standards and cost factors for the Sheriff capi shown in Figure 56 and Figure 57. Capital impacts are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) for residential development and vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area for nonresidential development. For further discussion on demand factors, see the Land Use Assumptions Chapter. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand unit by type of faci there is just one capital component in the capital impact calcul sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impact for each Service Area is listed in the lower portion of the following figure. Figure 56. Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Sheriff Facilitiesper capita$90.64 GROSS COST PER PERSON$90.64 Debt Service Credit$0.00 NET CAPITAL COST $90.64 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$237 Single Family-Attached2.62$237 Multifamily2.08$189 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$151 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$215 Single Family-Attached2.37$215 Multifamily1.46$132 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$137 54 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 57. Sheriff Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Sheriff Facilitiesper vehicle trip$27.89 GROSS COST PER VEHICLE TRIP$27.89 Debt Service Credit$0.00 NET CAPITAL COST $27.89 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Urban Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripsCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$400 Office and Other Services4.87$136 Industrial1.97$55 Institutional9.76$272 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Rural Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripsCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$400 Office and Other Services4.87$136 Industrial1.97$55 Institutional9.76$272 Sheriff Cash Proffer Eligibility To be eligible for a cash proffer, the facility must be for Publ& Recreation, or Public Safety (Sheriff, Fire, and Animal Services) and a development requires additional capacity in excess of capac available in current facilities. For Sheriff, there are no facilities listed in the CIP that would indicate a capacity increase is necessary to service future population, the component is not included in the cash proffer calculation at this time. 55 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: FIRE & RESCUE Fire & Rescue is the second facility type included under the Public Safety capital impacts category. Frederick County Fire & Rescue services operate out of eleven stations. The County has invested in new and/or renovated fire and rescue stations in the recent past and CIP. & Rescue capacity. These new facilities will be able to serve the current population and futuBecause fire stations are organized by geographic fire districts, capital impacts are determined based on Service Area needs. The incremental methodology is used to calculate the Fire & Rescue capital impact and is outlined in Figure 58. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing the components. The residential portion of the fire and rescue c of persons per housing unit (by type) multiplied by the net capital cost per person. The nonresidential portion is derived from the product of vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential space multiplied by the net capital cost per vehicle trip. Figure 58. Fire & Rescue Capital Impact Methodology Chart FIRE & RESCUE CAPITAL IMPACTS Nonresidential Residential Development Development Vehicle Trip per 1,000 Persons per Housing Unit by Square Feet by Type of Type of Unit Development Multiplied by Net Capital Multiplied by Net Capital Cost per Person Cost per Vehicle Trip Cost per Person for Fire Cost per Vehicle Trip for Fire Stations Stations Cost per Person for Fire Cost per Vehicle Trip for Fire Apparatus Apparatus 56 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cost Allocation for Fire & Rescue Facilities Proportionate share factors are used to allocate demand to resid where appropriate. For facilities that serve both residential and nonresidential development and without Fire & Rescue service call data, TischlerBise recommends using a proportionate share allocation based on a functional population approach. The functional population approach estimates the residential and nonresidential activity in the county by using the hours in a day. For the residents their day is estimated to be split with 20 hours attributed to r nonresidential purposes. For resident workers, 14 hours are attr to residential purposes and 10 hours to nonresidential purposes. For non-resident workers in the county, 10 hours are attributed to nonresidential purposes in Frederick County. Figure 59 provides detail on the approach and results, which indicate that demand in Frederick County is from residential development and 2 Figure 59. Frederick County Proportionate Share Factors Demand Units in 2015 Residential DemandPerson Hours/Day^Hours Population*80,230 Residents Not Working41,82020836,400 Resident Workers**38,410 Worked in County**8,83014123,620 Worked Outside of County**29,58014414,120 Residential Subtotal1,374,140 Residential Share ==>77% Nonresidential Non-Working Residents41,8204167,280 Jobs Located in County**24,747 Residents Working in County**8,8301088,300 Non-Resident Workers (Inflow Commuters)15,91710159,170 Nonresidential Subtotal414,750 Nonresidential Share ==>23% TOTAL1,788,890 * Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011-2015 American Community Surve ** Source: 2015 Inflow/Outflow Analysis, OnTheMap Application, U 57 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Fire & Rescue Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan In Figure 60, the capacity improvement projects for Fire & Rescue listed. The two stations in the CIP that include both a cost and floor area estimate result in an average cost per square foot of $355. Figure 60. Fire & Rescue Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan Value $ FacilityService AreaSq. Ft.ValuePer Sq. Ft. Fire & Rescue Station 22Stephens City 10,000 $3,400,000$340 Fire & Rescue Station 23/Annex FacilityMillwood 10,000 $3,700,000$370 Greenwood Fire Station RenovationsGreenwood--$0 Clear Brook ReplacementClear Brook--$0 Middletown ReplacementMiddletown--$0 Total 20,000 $7,100,000$355 Source: Frederick County 2019-2024 CIP 58 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Fire & Rescue Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors The Fire & Rescue capital impacts are based on current levels of service, which ar current inventory of square footage of fire station space. Found in Figure 61, the current total fire station square footage is 134,232 square feet. To attribute the floor area to residential and nonresidential development, the proportionate share factors are applied. The le the attributed floor area by the demand unit. For example, 103,359 square feet are at residential development and is a countywide population of 86,702 of 1.19 square feet per capita. The average value per square foot of capital projects in the CIP ($355) is applied to the levels of ser determine the capital impact. For example, the level of service feet per capita. As a result, the capital impact is $422 per per square foot x 1.19 square feet per person = $422 per person). Figure 61. Fire & Rescue Facilities Level of Service and Cost Factors ResidentialNonresidential Proportionate Share77%23% Service AreaSquare FeetRes. Sq. Ft.Nonres. Sq. Ft. Stephens City15,03211,5753,457 Middletown5,8144,4771,337 Clear Brook7,3255,6401,685 Gore12,4969,6222,874 Round Hill16,43512,6553,780 Gainesboro11,9889,2312,757 Star Tannery3,4082,624784 Greenwood22,00016,9405,060 North Mountain7,7545,9711,783 Reynolds Store14,72011,3343,386 Millwood17,26013,2903,970 Total134,232103,35930,873 Value $Demand Unit -Residential Res. LOSRes. Capital Per Sq. Ft.PopulationSquare Feet(Sq. Ft./Capita)Impact/Capita Countywide$35586,702103,359 1.19$422 Value $Demand Unit -Nonresidential Nonres. LOSNonres. Capital Per Sq. Ft.Vehicle TripsSquare Feet(Sq. Ft./Trip)Impact/Trip Countywide$355182,73930,873 0.17$60 59 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Fire Apparatus Capital Impact In addition to new station space, it is anticipated that the County will purchase apparatuses for the new fire stations. It is assumed that the County will expand its fleet at the same the current inventory of apparatuses is analyzed, Figure 62. The inventory is used to determine the current level of service. replacement cost of $26,930,000. The cost of the apparatuses is nonre current population or nonresidential vehicle trips. Figure 62. Fire & Rescue Apparatus Level of Service and Cost Factor UnitTotal Apparatus# of UnitsCost ($2017)Cost ($2017) Engine15$500,000$7,500,000 Ladder3$1,200,000$3,600,000 Ambulance23$250,000$5,750,000 Tanker14$500,000$7,000,000 Other30$102,667$3,080,000 Total85$26,930,000 ResidentialNonresidential Proportionate Share77%23% Cost Allocation$20,736,100$6,193,900 Population or Nonres. Trips86,702182,739 Cost per Person or Nonres. Trip$239$34 60 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts Level of service standards and cost factors for Fire & Rescue capital impact are summarized from above and shown below. Capital impacts for Fire & Rescue facilities are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) for residential development and vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area for nonresidential development. For further discussion on demand factors, see the Land Use Assumptions Chapter. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand there are two components in the capital impact calculation: Fire Stations (determined by Service Area) Fire Apparatus (determined by Service Area) Since the capital cost and household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impactfire district is listed. Figure 63. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand UnitMillwood Fire Stationper capitan/a$422 Fire Appratusper capitan/a$239 GROSS COST PER PERSON$0$661 Debt Service Credit$0$0 NET CAPITAL COST $0$661 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Stephens City Stephens CityTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Single Family-Attached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Multifamily2.08$0$1,374$1,374 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$0$1,103$1,103 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Middletown MiddletownTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$1,566$1,566 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$1,566$1,566 Multifamily1.46$0$965$965 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$998$998 61 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 64. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential cont. Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Clear Brook Clear BrookTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Single Family-Attached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Multifamily2.08$0$1,374$1,374 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$0$1,103$1,103 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Gore GoreTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Round Hill Round HillTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Gainesboro GainesboroTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Star Tannery Star TanneryTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 62 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 65. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential cont. Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Greenwood GreenwoodTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Single Family-Attached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Multifamily2.08$0$1,374$1,374 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$0$1,103$1,103 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit North Mountain North MountainTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Reynolds Store Reynolds StoreTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$0$0$0 Single Family-Attached2.37$0$0$0 Multifamily1.46$0$0$0 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$0$0$0 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Millwood MillwoodTotal Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Single Family-Attached2.62$0$1,731$1,731 Multifamily2.08$0$1,374$1,374 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$0$1,103$1,103 63 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 66. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand UnitMillwood Fire Stationper vehicle tripn/a$60 Fire Apparatusper vehicle tripn/a$34 GROSS COST PER VEHICLE TRIP$0$94 Debt Service Credit$0$0 NET CAPITAL COST $0$94 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Stephens City Stephens CityTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Middletown MiddletownTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Clear Brook Clear BrookTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Gore GoreTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 64 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 67. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential cont. Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Round Hill Round HillTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Gainesboro GainesboroTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Star Tannery Star TanneryTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Greenwood GreenwoodTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet North Mountain North MountainTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 65 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 68. Fire & Rescue Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential cont. Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Reynolds Store Reynolds StoreTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$0$0 Office and Other Services4.87$0$0$0 Industrial1.97$0$0$0 Institutional9.76$0$0$0 Nonresidential Capital Impact Service Area: FIRE DISTRICT COUNTYWIDE per 1,000 Square Feet Millwood MillwoodTotal Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$0$1,348$1,348 Office and Other Services4.87$0$457$457 Industrial1.97$0$184$184 Institutional9.76$0$917$917 Fire & Rescue Cash Proffer Eligibility To comply with the 2019 Cash Proffer law, a capacity need must be established. The Fire & Rescue analysis a new fire station, an improvement that increases capacity) in corresponding Service Area needs capacity improvements to accommodate future growth. When that is that case, the capital impact is triggered as cash proffer eligiFigure 69 lists those Service Areas (fire districts) that have capacity increasing projects listed in the C Figure 69. Fire & Rescue Capital Projects Fire DistrictCapital Need? Stephens City Yes Middletown Yes Clear Brook Yes Gore No Round Hill No Gainesboro No Star Tannery No Greenwood Yes North Mountain No Reynolds Store No Millwood Yes Source: Frederick County 2019-2024 CIP 66 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL IMPACTS: ANIMAL PROTECTION Animal Protection is the third subcategory under Public Safety capital impacts. Similar to the Sheriff facility type, there were no Animal Protection facilities included in theFrederick Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Therefore, the CapIM Model uses an incremental methodology to calculate the capital impact, . Additionally, since there is no identified animal shelter capacity increasing project to accommodate future demand, the capital impacts are not eligible for cash proffers. Figure 70 diagrams the incremental methodology used to calculate Animal Protection capital impacts. Costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. It i lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the componen the product of persons per housing unit (by type of unit) multiplied by the Figure 70. Animal Protection Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ANIMAL PROTECTION SERVICES CAPITAL IMPACT Residential Development Persons per Housing Unit by Multiplied By Net Capital Type of UnitCost per Person Animal Shelter Cost per Person 67 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Animal Protection Facilities Inventory and Level of Service Frederic shelter is 13,369 square feet and has a value of $2,507,000. This results in a total cost of $187.52 per square foot. In Figure 71, floor area is attributed 100 percent to residential development. To find the level of service, the floor area is div current population (13,369 square feet / 86,702 residents = 0.15 square feet per person). This factor is multiplied by the average cost per square foot to calculate the cost per person of $28.13. Figure 71. Animal Protection Facilities and Level of Service FacilitySq.Ft.Value$/Sq. Ft. Animal Shelter13,369$2,507,000$187.52 GRAND TOTAL13,369$2,507,000$187.52 Source: Frederick County Building Inventory ResidentialNonresidential Proportionate Share100%0%Total Total Animal Protection Facility Sq. Ft. 13,369 - 13,369 Base Year Population or Jobs86,70228,212 Square Feet per Person or Job0.150.00 ResidentialNonresidential Square Feet per Person or Job0.150.00 Total Cost per Sq. Ft. $187.52$187.52 Cost per Person or Job$28.13$0.00 68 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Animal Protection Input Variables and Capital Impacts Factors used to determine the Animal Protection services capital impacts are summarized below. Capital impacts for Animal Protection capital impacts are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) and are only determined for residential development. For further discussion on household size see the Land Use Assumptions Chapter. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand there is one component in the capital impact calculation, Animalal Protection services are provided on a countywide basis. Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capi for each Service Area is listed in the lower portion of Figure 72. Figure 72. Animal Protection Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Type of Housing Unit COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Animal Shelterper capita$28.13 GROSS COST PER PERSON$28.13 Debt Service Credit$0.00 NET CAPITAL COST $28.13 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$74 Single Family-Attached2.62$74 Multifamily2.08$59 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$47 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$67 Single Family-Attached2.37$67 Multifamily1.46$41 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$42 69 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Animal Protection Cash Proffer Eligibility To be eligible for a cash proffer, the facility must be for Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, or Public Safety (Sheriff, Fire, and Animal Services) and a development requires additional capacity in excess of capacity available in current facilities. For Animal Protection, there are no facilities listed in the CIP that would indicate a capacity increase is necessary to service future population, therefore, the capital impacts found in Figure 72 are not included in the cash proffer calculation at this time. 70 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia )).®# ²§ 0±®¥¥¤± # ³¤¦®±¨¤² 71 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia LIBRARY CAPITAL IMPACTS Frederick County has a library system that currently includes one Central Library with two capacity Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Both projects are to construct additional Countywide libraries. An incremental methodology will be used to determine the capital impact and is analyzed on a Countywide basis. Only residential developments will be included in the impact calculat Figure 73 diagrams the methodology used to determine Library capital impacts. Costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. It is intended to read like more detailed breakdown of the components. Library capital impact is derived from the product of persons per housing unit (by type of unit) and the net capital cost per person. The level of service standard is planned facilities and projected population. The level of service is combined with the cost per square foot of the new facilities to cost per person. Figure 73. Library Capital Impacts Methodology Chart LIBRARY CAPITAL IMPACT Residential Development Persons per Housing Unit Multiplied By Net Capital by Type of UnitCost per Person Library Facilities Cost per Person 72 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Library Facilities Inventory As shown in Figure 74, the current library square footage is 31,264 square feet and has a value of $4,465,000. The entire Bowman Library is attributed to residential developme Figure 74. Library Facilities Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors FacilitySq.Ft.Res %Nonres %Res SFNonres SFValue$/Sq. Ft. Bowman Library31,264100%0%31,2640$4,465,000$142.82 GRAND TOTAL31,26431,2640$4,465,000$142.82 Source: Frederick County Building Inventory Library Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan To address future growth, the County plans to build two more libraries. The square footage and cost of the projects are listed in Figure 75. In total, the CIP includes plans for 12,000 new square feet of l facilities which will cost $4,792,269, an average cost of $399 puare foot. Figure 75. Planned Library Facility Level of Service Standards and Cost F FacilityService AreaCostSq. Ft.$/Sq. Ft Library Branch - GainesboroCountywide$1,749,0345,000$350 Library Branch - South LibraryCountywide$3,043,2357,000$435 Total$4,792,26912,000$399 Source: Frederick County 2019-2024 CIP Library Level of Service and Cost Factors Shown in Figure 76, since 100 percent of library services is attributed to residential development, the level of service for libraries is calculated by dividing the current i result, there is 0.36 square feet per person. The average cost f the level of service to calculate the capital impact per person ($ Figure 76. Library Level of Service and Cost Factors ResidentialNonresidential Proportionate Share100%0%Total Total Library Sq. Ft.31,264 - 31,264 Base Year Population or Jobs86,70228,212 Square Feet per Person or Job0.360.00 ResidentialNonresidential Square Feet per Person or Job0.360.00 Total Cost per Sq. Ft. $399.36$399.36 Cost per Person or Job$143.77$0.00 73 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Library Input Variables and Capital Impacts Factors used to determine library capital impacts are summarized in Figure 77. Capital impacts for libraries are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) and are only determined for residential development. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand In this case, there is one component to the capital impact calcu, Library Facilities (Countywide). Library capital impacts are the product of persons per housing unit multiplied by the total net capital cost per person. An example of the calculation for a single family detached unit in the Urban Service Area is: the net capital cost per person for Central Library ($143.77) multiplied by the persons per housing unit (2.62) to arrive at the capital impact for the Library Facilities for a single family detached unit of $377 (rounded). Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capi Area is listed in the lower portion of Figure 77. Figure 77. Library Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Type of Housing COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Library Facilitiesper capita$143.77 GROSS COST PER PERSON$143.77 NET CAPITAL COST $143.77 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$377 Single Family-Attached2.62$377 Multifamily2.08$299 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$240 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$341 Single Family-Attached2.37$341 Multifamily1.46$210 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$217 74 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia GENERAL GOVERNMENT CAPITAL IMPACTS General cost to expand those facilities to serve growth. This is the incremental methodology. General Government Facilities Capital Impact is calculated on a per capita basis for residential development and a per employee basis for nonresidential developmFigure 78 illustrates the methodology used to determine the capital impact. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the components. The residential portion of the General Government Facilities capital impact is derived from the product of persons per housing unit (by type) multiplied by the net capital cost per person. The nonresidentia employees per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential space multipli (job). Figure 78. General Government Facilities Capital Impact Methodology Chart GENERAL GOVERNMENT CAPITAL IMPACTS Residential DevelopmentNonresidential Development Employees (jobs) per 1,000 Persons per Housing Unit by Square Feet by Type of Type and Size of Unit Development Multiplied by Net Capital Cost Multiplied by Net Capital Cost per Job per Person Cost per Person for General Cost per Job for General Government BuildingsGovernment Buildings 75 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cost Allocation for General Government Facilities Proportionate share factors are used to allocate demand to resid where appropriate. For facilities that serve both residential and nonresidential development, TischlerBise recommends using a proportionate share allocation based on a fun The functional population approach estimates the residential and nonin the county by using the hours in a day. For the residents that are not working, their day is estimated t attributed to residential purposes and 4 hours to nonresidential are attributed to residential purposes and 10 hours to nonresidential purposes. Fo-resident workers in the county, 10 hours are attributed to nonresidential purposeFrederick County. Figure 79 provides detail on the approach and results, which indicate that77 percent of demand in Frederick County is from residential development and 23 percent from nonresidential. Figure 79. Frederick County Proportionate Share Factors Demand Units in 2015 Residential DemandPerson Hours/Day^Hours Population*80,230 Residents Not Working41,82020836,400 Resident Workers**38,410 Worked in County**8,83014123,620 Worked Outside of County**29,58014414,120 Residential Subtotal1,374,140 Residential Share ==>77% Nonresidential Non-Working Residents41,8204167,280 Jobs Located in County**24,747 Residents Working in County**8,8301088,300 Non-Resident Workers (Inflow Commuters)15,91710159,170 Nonresidential Subtotal414,750 Nonresidential Share ==>23% TOTAL1,788,890 * Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011-2015 American Community Surve ** Source: 2015 Inflow/Outflow Analysis, OnTheMap Application, U 76 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia General Government Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts Level of service standards and cost factors for the General Gove from above and shown in Figure 81. Capital impacts for general government facilities are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) for residential development and employees per 1,000 square feet of floor area for nonresidential development. (For further discussion on demand factors, see the chapter Land Use Assumptions.) The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demands case, there is only one component in the capital impact calculation, General Government Facilities. An example of the calculation for a single family housing unit in the Urban Service Area is: the net capital cost per person ($311.50) multiplied by the persons per housing unit (2.62) to arrive at the capital impact per single family detached unit of $816 (rounded). Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impact for each Service Area is listed in the lower Figure 81. Figure 81. General Govt. Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit General Government Facilitiesper capita$311.50 GROSS COST PER PERSON$311.50 NET CAPITAL COST $311.50 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$816 Single Family-Attached2.62$816 Multifamily2.08$648 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$520 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$738 Single Family-Attached2.37$738 Multifamily1.46$455 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$471 78 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia For nonresidential land uses, the number of employees per 1,000 square feet for the respective land use is multiplied by the net cost per job. For example, the calculated as follows: 2.34 employees per 1,000 square feet x $287 to yield an amount of $673 per 1,000 square feet (rounded). Figure 82. General Govt. Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit General Government Facilitiesper job$287.00 GROSS COST PER JOB$287.00 NET CAPITAL COST $287.00 Nonresidential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE 1,000 Square Feet Urban Nonresidential Land Use EmployeesCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail2.34$673 Office and Other Services2.97$852 Industrial1.59$457 Institutional2.83$812 Nonresidential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE 1,000 Square Feet Rural Nonresidential Land Use EmployeesCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail2.34$673 Office and Other Services2.97$852 Industrial1.59$457 Institutional2.83$812 79 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia COURTS CAPITAL IMPACTS Court facilities capital impacts are those facilities to serve growth. This is the incremental methodology. In Figure 83, the methodology used to determine the capital impact is illustrated. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed bredential portion of the Courts capital impact is derived from the persons the net capital cost per person. The nonresidential portion is dvehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential space multiplied by the net capital cost per vehicle trip (job). Figure 83. Courts Capital Impact Methodology Chart COURTS CAPITAL IMPACTS Nonresidential Residential Development Development Vehicle Trips per 1,000 Persons per Housing Unit by Square Feet by Type of Type of Unit Development Multiplied by Net Capital Multiplied by Net Capital Cost per PersonCost per Vehicle Trip Cost per Vehicle Trip for Cost per Person for Court Court Facilities Facilities 80 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cost Allocation for Court Facilities To allocate floor area and costs of Court facilities, Sheriff calls for service data is used. A report of 2017 sheriff service calls for service . Of the total, 60 percent were attributed to residential land uses a nonresidential land uses. Court services are provided on a countywide basis in Frederick County. Therefore, it is recommended that one service area be used to determine the capital impact on Court facilities. Figure 84. Frederick County Sheriff Calls for Service Calls for Land UseService% Residential37,56560% Nonresidential25,26340% Total62,828100% Source: Frederick County Sheriff's Office 81 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts Level of service standards and cost factors for courts capital i shown in Figure 86. Capital impacts for court facilities are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) for residential development and vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area for nonresidential development. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand there is only one component in the capital impact calculation, Court Facilities. Court services are provided on a countywide base and it is recommended that one service area impact on court facilities. Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the ca each Service Area is listed in the lower portion of Figure 86. Figure 86. Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Residential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Courts Facilitiesper capita$83.99 GROSS COST PER PERSON$83.99 NET CAPITAL COST $83.99 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Urban Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$220 Single Family-Attached2.62$220 Multifamily2.08$175 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$140 Residential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE Housing Unit Rural Housing Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$199 Single Family-Attached2.37$199 Multifamily1.46$123 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$127 83 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 87. Court Facilities Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Land Use, Nonresidential COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand Unit Courts Facilitiesper vehicle trip$26.25 GROSS COST PER VEHICLE TRIP$26.25 NET CAPITAL COST $26.25 Nonresidential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE 1,000 Square Feet Urban Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripsCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$377 Office and Other Services4.87$128 Industrial1.97$52 Institutional9.76$256 Nonresidential Capital Impact per Service Area: COUNTYWIDE 1,000 Square Feet Rural Nonresidential Land Use Vehicle TripsCapital Impact $ Per 1,000 Sq.Ft.Per 1,000 Sq.Ft. Retail14.35$377 Office and Other Services4.87$128 Industrial1.97$52 Institutional9.76$256 84 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES/SOLID WASTE CAPITAL IMPACTS Frederick County provided both convenience sites and landfill services to its res . As such, the incremental methodology is used in the CapIM Model to determine the capital impact. Figure 88 diagrams the general methodology used to calculate environmental services capital impact. Costs are allocated 100 percent to residential development. It is intended to read like an outline, with lower levels providing a more detailed breakdown of the components. The capital impact is derived from the product of persons per housing unit (by type of unit) multipt per person. Frederick County provides convenience sites at a Service Area level and landfill centers at a Countywide level. Figure 88. Environmental Services Capital Impacts Methodology Chart ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CAPITAL IMPACT Residential Development Persons per Housing Multiplied By Net Unit by Type of UnitCapital Cost per Person Convenience Sites Cost per Person Landfill Cost per Person 85 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Environmental Services Inventory As shown in Figure 89, there are nine convenience sites and one landfill provided by the C. Figure 89. Environmental Services Facilities Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors FacilityService AreaPurposeAcres AlbinRuralWaste & Compact1.0 StephensonUrbanWaste & Compact3.0 GainesboroRuralWaste & Compact1.5 ShawneelandRuralWaste & Compact1.0 Round HillRuralWaste & Compact6.7 MiddletownUrbanWaste & Compact0.3 Double TollgateUrbanWaste & Compact1.4 GoreRuralWaste Cans1.5 Star TanneryRuralWaste Cans0.5 Landfill Citizen CenterCountywideWaste & Compact5.0 TOTAL22.9 Environmental Services Facilities in Capital Improvement Plan To address future growth, the County plans to add another convenience site. The new Albin Citizens Convenience Site will be two acres and cost $1,224,000, an avera Figure 90. Planned Environmental Services Facility Level of Service Standards and Cost Factors FacilityService AreaAcresValue$/Acre Albin Citizens Convenience SiteRural2$1,224,000$612,000 TOTAL2$1,224,000$612,000 Source: Frederick County 2019-2024 CIP 86 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Environmental Services Level of Service and Cost Factors Shown in Figure 76, since 100 percent of environmental services is attributed to residential development, the level of service is calculated by dividing the current acreage by the population. As a result, there are 0.10 acres per person for convenience sites and 0.06 acres per person for landfill cen. The average cost for the planned convenience site project is applied to the level of service to calculate the capi impact per person. Figure 91. Environmental Services Level of Service and Cost Factors Proportionate ShareProportionate Share ResidentialNonresidential Service Area ResidentialNonresidential Service Area 100%0%UrbanRural100%0%Countywide Convenience Site Acreage5.712.2Landfill Citizen Center Acreage5.0 Base Year Population59,30327,399Base Year Population86,702 Acre per 1,000 Residents0.100.45Acre per 1,000 Residents0.06 Service AreaService Area UrbanRuralCountywide Acre per 1,000 Residents0.100.45Acre per 1,000 Residents0.06 Cost per Acre$612,000$612,000Cost per Acre$612,000 Cost per Capita$61.20$275.40 Cost per Capita$36.72 87 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Environmental Services Input Variables and Capital Impacts Factors used to determine environmental services capital impacts are summarized below. Capital impacts for environmental services are based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit) and are only determined for residential development. The top portion of the figure summarizes cost factors per demand. In this case, there are two components in the capital impact calculation, Landfill Centers and Convenience Sites. Environmental Services are provided on a countywide basis. Since the household sizes differ between Service Areas, the capital impact for each Service Area is listed in the lower portion of Figure 92. Figure 92. Environmental Services Input Variables and Capital Impacts by Ty Housing Unit REGIONS COUNTYWIDE Infrastructure CostDemand UnitUrbanRural Landfill Centerper capita$36.72n/an/a Convenience Sitesper capitan/a$61.20$275.40 GROSS COST PER PERSON$36.72$61.20$275.40 NET CAPITAL COST $36.72$61.20$275.40 Residential Capital Impact per Housing Service Area: COUNTYWIDEREGION Unit Urban Total Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.62$96$160$256 Single Family-Attached2.62$96$160$256 Multifamily2.08$76$127$203 Age-Restricted Single Family1.67$61$102$163 Residential Capital Impact per Housing Service Area: COUNTYWIDEREGION Unit Rural Total Unit TypePersonsCapital Impact $Capital Impact $Capital Impact $ Per Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing UnitPer Housing Unit Single Family-Detached2.37$87$653$740 Single Family-Attached2.37$87$653$740 Multifamily1.46$53$402$455 Age-Restricted Single Family1.51$55$416$471 88 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia APPENDIX A: EXAMPLE OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS To illustrate the Capital Impact Model (CapIM Model), the following figure provides the results from a hypothetical development project of 100 single family housing units and 20,000 square feet of retail development. The development is in the Urban Service Area, Evendale ES, Admlbrook HS attendance zone, and the Millwood fire district. Results show projected growth and corresponding capital impacts for cash proffer eligible infrastructure. The results also capture the capacity triggers included in the model that reflect where excess capacity currently exists in County infrastructure. The figure is merely provided to illustrate the results of a hypothetical development and do not reflect an actual development. However, they do reflect a legally supportable and reasonable cash proffer amount for these hypothetical developments. Figure 95. Example CapIM Test Results SUMMARY OF PROJECT OUTPUTS Test Project Project Name CAPITAL COST IMPACTS FOR DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL RESIDENTIALNONRESIDENTIALTOTAL Housing Units 100-100 Projected Population 262-262 Projected Students Elementary School Students16-16 Middle School School Students9-9 High School Students13-13 Projected Total Students 37-37 Nonresidential Sq. Ft.-20,00020,000 Projected Jobs-4747 CASH PROFFER ELIGIBILE INFRASTRUCTURE CATEGORIES, RESIDENTIAL Total Capital Housing Capital ImpactImpact per Schools 100$1,447,387$14,474 Parks and Recreation 100$48,329$483 Public Safety^100$173,182$1,732 Total 100$1,668,898$16,689 Total Capital ^Public SafetyHousing Capital ImpactImpact per Sheriff 100$0$0 Fire 100$173,182$1,732 Animal Protection 100$0$0 91 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia APPENDIX B: CASH PROFFER BACKGROUND Definition A proffer is an offer by a landowner during the rezoning process It is a form of conditional zoning, which applies additional conditions, or requirements, in addit existing requirements and regulations. A proffer can include the acceptance of cash payments to mitigate the impacts of a rezoning, called cash proffers, and are allowed under Virginia Code §15.2-2303 and §15.2- 2298. Frederick County meets the requirement under 15.2-2298 of a decennial growth rate of 5 percent or more.2 Cash proffers are voluntary one-time payments used to fund capital improvements necessitated by new growth. Cash proffers are akin to impact fees, which have been utilized by local governments in various 3 forms for at least fifty years. However, unlike impact fees, cash proffers only apply during the -Cash proffers are not to be used to correct existing deficiencies but to provide additional capacity to serve new groBecause cash proffers do not apply to by-right development and only apply during the rezoning process, on new growth can be mitigated with a cash proffer system. Cash proffers therefore have limitations for infrastructure funding and should not be regarded as the total solution for capital improvement needs. Rather, they should be considered one component of a comprehensi provision of public facilities with the goal of maintaining curr of service in a community. Limitations are: Cash proffers only apply to rezonings and are not collected on any by-right development. Cash proffers can only be used to finance capital infrastructure that provides additional capacity and cannot be used to finance ongoing operations and/or maintenance and rehabilitation. Virginia law restricts the infrastructure categories to public transportation facilities, public safety 4 facilities, public school facilities, and public parks. Cash proffers cannot be accounted for separately and earmarked for the capital expenses . Cash proffers cannot be used to correct existing infrastructure deficiencies unegotiated apart from the cash proffer system presented herein, or if there is a funding plan in place to correct the deficiency for all current residents and businesses However, 15.2-2298 provides authority to localities that meet the growth criteria in 15.2-2298 to utilize the conditional zoning 2 authority under 15.2-2303. This study meets the stricter requirements of 15.2-2298. Other than Transportation Impact Fees, localities in the Commonwa are not authorized to implement impact 3 fees. 4 See Virginia Code §15.2-2303.4. 92 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Because cash proffers reflect a point in time, the calculations hould be updated periodically (typically 3 to 5 years). Costs reflect the direct need for new facilities and infrastructure and do not reflect se Approach To ensure a reasonable relationship to new development and rezonings in particular, the cash proffer study focuses on , Demonstrating an Impact. All new development in a community creates additional demands on all, public facilities provided by local government. If the supply of facilities is not increased to satisfy that additional demand, the quality or availability of public servicere community will deteriorate. Cash proffers are calculated in a manner to determine what the applicable cost of development-related facilities, to the extent that the need for facilities is a const that is subject to the cash proffers. In this study, the impact of development on improvement needs isalyzed in terms of quantifiable relationships between various types of development based on applicable level-of-service standards. Demonstrating a Benefit. A sufficient benefit relationship requires that cash proffer funds be segregated from other funds and expended only for the categories for which the proffers were collected. Cash proffers must be expended in a timely manner 5 and the facilities funded by the proffers must benefit the development paying the proffers. However, this does not require that facilities funded with cash proffer revenues be available exclusively to development paying the proffers. In other words, existing development may use and benefit from these improvements as well. Procedures for the earmarking and expenditure of revenues are outlined in Virginia Code (see specifically §15.2303.2(B)). These requirements are intended to ensure that developments benefitcash proffers paid. Thus, an adequate showing of benefit must address procedural as well as practical issues. Demonstrating Proportionality. Proportionality is established through the procedures used to id development-related facility costs, and in the methods used to calculate the cash proffers for various types of facilities and categories of development. The demand for facilities is measured in terms of relevant and measurable attributes of development. For example, school improvements is measured by the number of public school-age children generated by development. 5 Virginia Code §15.2-2303.2(A) states: The governing body of any locality accepting cash payments volun after July 1, 2005, shall, within twelve (12) years of receiving full payment of all cash proffered pursuant t application, begin, or cause to begin (i) construction, (ii) sit-of-way acquisition, (v) surveying, or (vi) utility relocation on the improvements for which the cash payments were proffered. 93 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia The above requirements are further reinforced in the Code of Vir§15.2-2303.4 (effective January 9, 2019). Specifically, Section 15.2-2303.4(B) states that localities shall not require an unreasonable proffer failure or refusal to submit an unreasonable proffer. The implementation of the proffer changes hinges on defining an unreasonable proffer, or more positively, defining a reasonable proffer. The figure below provides further detail on the approach to meet requirements of the law. 94 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia REASONABLE PROFFERS VA Code How to Meet the VA Code Text Interpretation Section Requirement 15.2-2303.4 addresses an impact that is The demand from the residential Establish a nexus between (C) specifically attributable to land use creates a need for types of residential a proposed new residential additional capacity in the development and specific development or other new infrastructure category for which impacts on infrastructure in residential use applied for the cash proffer is being requested locality. (E.g., student or offered generation rates by type of housing unit.) addresses an impact to an The need for the capital Use system-level offsite public facility improvement must be for a infrastructure to establish system-level facility, provided to a current levels of service in larger geographic area than the cash proffer calculations. project site the new residential The impact from the residential Define current levels of development or new development causes a need for service / available capacities residential use creates a additional capacity above what is in cash proffer analysis and need, or an identifiable available to the applicant. The identify when capacities are portion of a need, for one additional capacity can be for a reached. or more public facility single facility or a portion of a Identify incremental impact improvements in excess of facility improvement. Available on facilities from residential existing public facility capacity is determined by analyzing development in cash proffer capacity at the time of the the current and projected levels of analysis. rezoning or proffer service provided in specific condition amendment categories of infrastructure in the locality. each such new residential Entity/applicant paying the cash Localities use cash proffer development or new proffer receives a benefit in the funding to build or purchase residential use applied for form of a facility or portion of a additional capacity in the receives a direct and facility being built or purchased. infrastructure categories for material benefit from a which a cash proffer is proffer made with respect collected. Separate funds to any such public facility established. improvements. Collection and expenditure areas may be necessary to Source: TischlerBise 95 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Cash Proffer Implementation and Administration Considerations While cash proffers are voluntary contributions, there are procemust followed per Virginia law and to ensure payers receive benefit from the proffer. Accounting Monies received are placed in a separate fund and accounted for separately and expenditures should be indicated in the capital improvement plan. Within twelve (12) ye committed cash proffers, a locality must begin construction or r proffer was made. Localities that do not begin construction or other authorized alternative improvement must pay the amount to the Commonwealth Transportation Board for construction program or the urban system construction program fooffered cash payments were collected (VA § 15.2-2303.2). Cost Updates All costs in the cash proffer calculations are given in current Necessary cost adjustments can be made as part of the recommendeluation and update of the cash proffer using consumer price index (CPI) or Marshall an recommends using the Marshall Swift, which is specific to constr differences. The index can be applied against the calculated cash proffers. If cost estimates change significantly, calculations should be revisited. As cash proffer calculations are based on a snapshot in time, an adopted Cash Proffer policy should be periodically rviewed and updated. A full update is recommended no later than 5 years to reflect changes in developm costs, funding formulas, etc. Credits and Reimbursements Future Revenue Credits Credits for outstanding and future debt payments have been calculated and integrated into the cash proffer calculations where applicable in this study. A credit is interest costs are not included in the proffer amounts. Site-Specific Credits A site-specific credit could be provided to a developer (or applicant) for contributions of system improvements that have been included in the cash proffer calcula of system improvements included in the calculations, there could be a possible reduction in the cash proffer for the relevant portion. Written Policies Written policies and implementation practices should be established to cover the items identified in this section to provide consistency in the process. 96 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia APPENDIX C: SERVICE AREA MAPS Figure 96. General Service Areas 97 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 97. Elementary School Service Areas 98 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 98. Middle School Service Areas 99 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 99. High School Service Areas 100 CAPITALIMPACTSSTUDY Frederick County, Virginia Figure 100. Fire Service Areas 101 APPLICATION FOR OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA (Please Print Clearly) APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Applicant: ______________________________________________________________________ TYLER WAKEMAN 540-686-2038 Telephone Number(s): _________________ _________________ homeofficecellhomeofficecell 7328 VALLEY PIKE, MIDDLETOWN, VA 22645 Address: ________________________________________________________________ PEAKLEAFMUSIC@GMAIL.COM Contact Email: ________________________________________________________________ FESTIVAL EVENT ORGANIZATIONAL INFORMATION PEAK LEAF MUSIC & BREWERS FESTIVAL Festival Event Name of Festival: _________________________________________________________ $35-$45 Cost of Admission to Festival: ______________ Business License Obtained: YesNo Maximum No. Estimated No. Start End Date(s) of Tickets Offered of Attendees Time Time For Sale Per Day Per Day October 19th, 2019 8:00 pm 12:00 pm500 500 CORNER OF VALLEY PIKE & ST. ROUTE 634, MIDDLETOWN, VA 22645 Location Address: ______________________________________________________ WAKELAND MANOR, INC. Owner Name(s): _____________________________________________________________ of Property 300 CRAIG DR, STEPHENS CITY, VA 22655 Address: ________________________________________________________________ (*N: Applicant may be required to provide a statement or other docthe owner(s) for use of OTE the property and related parking for the festival.) TYLER WAKEMAN Promoter Name(s): _____________________________________________________________ 7328 VALLEY PIKE, MIDDLETOWN, VA 22645 Address: _____________________________________________________ (*N: For festivals other than not-for-profit, promoter may need to check with the Frederick County Commissioner of Reve OTE determine compliance with County business license requirements; Virginia may be required to register with the VA State Corporation Commission for legal authority to conduct business in V TYLER WAKEMAN Financial Name(s): _____________________________________________________________ Backer 7328 VALLEY PIKE, MIDDLETOWN, VA 22645 Address: ____________________________________________________________________ FOLK SOUL REVIVAL, 3-4 MORE TBD. Performer Name of Person(s) or Group(s): _________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ (*N: Applicant may need to update information as performers are booked for festival OTE FESTIVAL EVENT LOGISTICS INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION 1. Attach a copy of the printed ticket or badge of admission to the festiv, containing the date(s) and time(s) of such festival (may be marked as sample). copy attachedORcopy to be provided as soon as available 2. Provide a plan for adequate sanitation facilities as well as garl for persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and be approved by the VA Department of Health (Lord Fairfax Health ________________________________________________________________ Numerous trash receptacels with attendant monitoring. Eight (8) toitet, and 2 hand washing sinks. Food trucks to work under thei ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 3. Provide a plan for providing food, water, and lodging for the persons at the festival. This pla requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and re Department of Health (Lord Fairfax Health District). ________________________________________________________________ Food - 2-3 food trucks. Water is for sale at non alcoholic/merch ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 4. Provide a plan for adequate medical facilities for persons at the festiv state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must approved by the County Fire Chief or Fire Marshal and the local fire and rescue company. ________________________________________________________________ Frederick Countv Fire & Rescue, as well as Middletown Fire Stati purposes. First Aid tent staffed by licensed EMT. ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 5. Provide a plan for adequate fire protection. This plan must mee ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the County the local fire and rescue company. ________________________________________________________________ Frederick County Fire & Rescue, as well as Middletown Fire Stati purposes. Fire extinguishers will be available at food kucks, fi ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 6. Provide a plan for adequate parking facilities and traffic contr submitted.) ________________________________________________________________ Enter festival grounds f rom Couqill Rd (Rt. 634). Parking on si southbound shoulder and northbound center lane. Officer to direc ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ YES NO 7. State whether any outdoor lights or lighting will be utilized: If yes, provide a plan or submit a diagram showing the location of such light boundaries and neighboring properties. In addition, show the lo prevent unreasonable glow beyond the property on which the festival is located. ________________________________________________________________ Lights will be hung on stage projecting back and down towards th until everyone leaves by 8:00 PM. Vendors will provide own liqht ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ YES NO 8. State whether alcoholic beverages will be served: If yes, provide details on how it will be controlled. ________________________________________________________________ Obtain a banquet special events permit from VA ABC. 20-30 brewer patrons from 12:00 PM to 3:00 PM for free. Beer will be availabl ________________________________________________________________ 7:00 PM ___________________________________________________________________ (N: Evidence of any applicable VA ABC permit must also be provided amay need to confirm with OTE the VA ABC that a license is not required from that agency in ors to any event that is open to the general public upon payment of the applicable admiss FESTIVAL PROVISIONS Applicant makes the following statements: A. Music shall not be rendered nor entertainment provided for more than eight (8) hours in any twenty-four (24) hour period, such twenty-four (24) hour period to be measured from the beginning of the first performance at the festival. B. Music shall not be played, either by mechanical device or live p the sound emanating therefrom exceeds 73 decibels at the property on which the festival is located. C. No person under the age of eighteen (18) years of age shall be a accompanied by a parent or guardian, the parent or guardian to r times. (N: It may be necessary to post signs to this effect.) OTE D. The Board, its lawful agents, and/or duly constituted law enforc to go upon the property where the festival is being held at any time for the purpose of determi compliance with the provisions of the County ordinance. CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned Applicant, hereby certify that all information, statements, and documents provided in connection with this Application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. In addition, Applicant agrees that the festival event and its atten of the Frederick County ordinance pertaining to festivals as welfestival provisions contained herein. ___________________________________ Signature of Applicant TYLER H. WAKEMAN ___________________________________ Printed Name of Applicant 4/25/2019 Date: __________________________________ TB HE OARD SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVOKE ANY PERMIT ISSUED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE -. UPON NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS COUNTY of FREDERICK Jay E. Tibbs DeputyCounty Administrator 540/665-5666 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail: jtibbs@fcva.us MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Jay E. Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator SUBJECT: Renewal of Cable Franchise Agreement with Comcast DATE: June 6, 2019 Comcast of California/Maryland/Pennsylvania/Virginia/West Virginia, LLC has an existing non- exclusive cable franchise within the County, which was granted b-year period in 2009. This franchise and its governing agreement were set to expire on April 1, 2019; however, the Board of Supervisors at its March 13, 2019 meeting granted a short-term extension to the existing agreement until June 30, 2019. Staff has negotiated the renewal terms for the proposed agreement that would grant Comcas franchise to provide cable television service within Frederick CSome of the terms of the proposed renewal include: Decreased density requirement from the current density of 30 homes per linear mile t mile. In addition, Comcast has agreed to conduct a feasibility sleast 20 homes per square mile. There is a new provision for homes that do not meet the density requirement necessary to get service. Those homeowners would have to pay for the running of cable beyo provision did not exist in our previous franchise agreement. High Definition (HD) output for County channels following a three-year waiting period. County channels will remain in the basic service tier Consideration for relocation of Frederick County Governments and Frederick County Schools current cable drop, should we or the schools relocate our facility during the franchise term. Frederick County would pay the costs for any cable run to a relocated facility located over 200 feet from the main line. In exchange for the above, the only material concession made is giving up the existing Fire and Rescuetraining channel. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Other changes include: Updatesto reflect changes in the law since the franchise agreements last renewal. Caps were established for liquidated damages (This change does not limit Frederick Countys right to move to revoke the franchise agreement should Comcast start approaching those damage caps or otherwise breach its obligations under the agreement). A copy of the renewal agreement is attached for your review. Following the public hearing, staff is seeking Board approval ofl of the cable franchise agreement with Comcast. Attachments 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 CABLE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA AND COMCAST OF CALIFORNIA/MARYLAND/PENNSYLVANIA/VIRGINIA/WEST VIRGINIA, LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.Grant and Acceptance of Franchise................................................................2 Section 2.Definitions.......................................................................................................3 Section 3.Rights Reserved by the County.......................................................................5 Section 4.Term................................................................................................................7 Section 5.Territorial Extent of Franchise........................................................................7 Section 6.Public, Educational, and Governmental Services...........................................7 Section 7.Technical Performance, Test Standards, and Signal Quality........................11 Section 8.Construction Schedule..................................................................................12 Section 9.Standards and Restrictions as to Construction and Installation....................13 Section 10.Maintenance and Customer Service..............................................................15 Section 11.Services to Schools and Municipal Buildings..............................................16 Section 12.Franchise Fee................................................................................................17 Section 13.Enforcement..................................................................................................19 Section 14.Indemnification and Insurance......................................................................22 Section 15.Delegation of Powers....................................................................................23 Section 16.Franchise Revocation....................................................................................24 Section 17.Books and Records, and Related Documents...............................................25 Section 18.Notices..........................................................................................................26 Section 19.Governing Law.............................................................................................27 Section 20.Miscellaneous Provisions..............................................................................27 1 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between Frederick County, Virginia (the "County"), and Comcast of California/Maryland/Pennsylvania/Virginia/West Virginia, LLC (hereinafter referred to as the "Franchisee"). WHEREAS, Franchisee currently holds a cable franchise from the County; WHEREAS, Franchisee has requested that the County renew the franchise; WHEREAS, the County is a "franchising authority" in accordance with Title VI of the Communications Act (see 47 U.S.C. §522(10)) and is authorized to grant one or more nonexclusive cable franchises pursuant to the Code of Virginia, Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2108.20(A) and the Cable Television Chapter of the Frederick County Code ("Cable Ordinance"); WHEREAS, the County has identified the future cable-related needs and interests of the County and its citizens; WHEREAS, the County has found Franchisee to be financially, technically and legally qualified to operate the Cable System; WHEREAS, the County has determined that in accordance with the provisions of the Cable Ordinance and applicable law the grant of a nonexclusive renewal franchise to Franchisee is consistent with the public interest; and, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the faithful performance and strict observance by the Franchisee of all the terms, provisions, conditions, obligations and reservations hereinafter set forth or provided for herein, and in considerationof the grant tothe Franchisee by the County of a cable franchise, it is hereby agreedbetween the parties hereto asfollows: SECTION 1 –Grant and Acceptance of Franchise 1.1The County hereby grants to the Franchisee a non-exclusive franchise to erect, install, construct, reconstruct, replace, relocate, modify, repair, maintain, operate in or upon, under, above, across and from the streets, avenues, highways, sidewalks, bridges, and other public ways, easements, and rights-of-way,including, but not limited to, public utility easements, dedicated utility strips, or easements dedicated for compatible uses and any temporary or permanent fixtures or improvements located thereonas now existing and all extensions thereof, and additions thereto, in and belonging to the County (the "Public Rights-of-Way"), all poles, wires, cable, cables, transformers, amplifiers, underground conduits, manholes and other televisionand/or radioconductorsandfixturesforthepurposeoftheownership,maintenance andoperation 2 intheCountyofaCableSystemfortheprovisionofCableServiceallinstrict accordance with the laws, ordinances and regulations of the United States of America, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the generally applicable laws ordinances and regulations of the County, as now existing or hereafter adopted or amended.Public Rights-of-Way shall also mean any easement now or hereafter held by the Countywithin the Franchise Area for the purpose of public travel, or for utility or public service use dedicated for compatible uses, and shall include other easements or rights-of-wayas shall within their proper use and meaning entitle the Franchisee to the use thereof for the purposes of installing, operating, and maintaining the Franchisee’s Cable System. 1.2The Franchisee hereby accepts the franchise and warrants and represents that it has examined all of the provisions of this Franchise Agreement, and it accepts and agrees to all the provisions containedtherein. 1.3Nothing in this Franchise Agreement shall be construed to prohibit the County from exercising its police powers in accordance with applicablelaw.If the County’s lawful exercise of its police powers materially alters the rights, benefits, obligations, or duties of this Franchise Agreement, the Franchiseeand the County shall negotiatein good faith to modify this Franchise Agreement to the mutual satisfaction of both parties to minimize the negative effects on the Franchisee of the material alteration. SECTION 2-Definitions Terms not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribedto them in theCode of Virginia, Article 1.2, §15.2-2108.19et. seq.and the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended from time to time, 47 U.S.C. §§521 -631 (the “Cable Act”), and Chapter 61 of the Frederick County Code.The following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed to them as follows: 2.1“Access Channel” shall mean a channel which Franchisee shall make available to the County without charge for noncommercial educational or governmental use for the transmission of Video Programming. 2.2“Basic Service” shall mean the service tier that includes the retransmission of local television broadcast signals as well as the Access Channels required by this Franchise. 2.3“Cable Service” shall be defined herein as it is definedunder 47 U.S.C. § 522(6). 2.4“Cable System”shall be defined herein as it is defined under 47 U.S.C. § 522(7). 2.5“Educational Access Channel” shall mean an Access Channel available for educational use as provided herein. 3 2.6“Effective Date” shall meanJuly 1, 2019. 2.7“Federal Communications Commission” or “FCC” shall meanthe present federal agency of that name as constituted by the Communications Act of 1934, or any successor agency created by the United States Congress. 2.8“FranchiseArea”shall meanthe unincorporated portions of the County. 2.9“FCPS”shall meanthe Frederick County Public Schools. 2.10“Government Access Channel”shall meanan Access Channel available for governmental use as provided herein. 2.11“Gross Revenue”shall meanall revenue, as determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, that is actually received by the Franchisee and derived from the operation of the Cable System to provide Cable Services in the Franchise Area; however, "gross revenue" shall not include: (i) refunds or rebates made to Subscribers or other third parties; (ii) any revenue which is received from the sale of merchandise over home shopping channels carried on the Cable System, but not including revenue received from home shopping channels for the use of the Cable Service to sell merchandise; (iii) any tax, fee, or charge collected by the Franchisee and remitted to a governmental entity or its agent or designee, including without limitation a local public access or education group; (iv) program launch fees; (v) directory or Internet advertising revenue including, but not limited to, yellow page, white page, banner advertisement, and electronic publishing; (vi) a sale of Cable Service for resale or for use as a componentpartof orfortheintegrationintoCableServicestoberesold inthe ordinarycourseof business,whentheresellerisrequiredtopayorcollectfranchisefees orsimilarfeesontheresale of the Cable Service; (vii) revenues received by any affiliate orany other person in exchange for supplying goods or services used by the Franchisee to provide Cable Service; and (viii) revenue derived from services classified as non-cable services under federal law, including, without limitation, revenue derived from telecommunications services and information services, and any other revenues attributed by the Franchisee to non-cable services in accordance with rules, regulations, standards, or orders of the Federal CommunicationsCommission. 2.12“School Board” shallmean the County School Board of Frederick County Virginia. 2.13“Subscriber” shall meanaperson or user of the Cable System who lawfully receives Cable Service therefrom with the Franchisee’s express permission. 2.14“Video Programming” shall be defined herein as it is defined under 47 § U.S.C. 522(20). 4 SECTION 3–Rights Reserved by the County 3.1This franchise is granted subject to the right of the County: 3.1.1In accordance with the terms herein, torevoke the franchise for failure to comply with the material provisions of this Agreement or any other generally applicable local, state, or federal laws or regulations, as reasonably determined by theCounty. 3.1.2In accordance with the terms herein, torequire proper and adequate extensions of plant and Service and maintenance thereofat a level meeting the technical performance requirements in Section 7 herein. 3.1.3To prevent unjust discrimination or preferential practices in service or rates, provided, however, that nothing contained herein shall prohibit the Franchisee from offering bulk discounts, promotional discounts, package discounts, or other such pricing strategies as part of its customary business practice, provided that the same are not discriminatory in letter or practice. 3.1.4To require reasonable, continuous, and uninterrupted service to Subscribersthroughout the entire period of thefranchise. 3.1.5To control and regulate the use of its streets, alleys, bridges, rights- ofway, and public places and the space above and beneaththem. 3.1.6Through its appropriately designated representatives, to inspect all construction or installation work performed pursuant to the provisions of this Franchise Agreement and make such inspections as it shall find necessary to ensure compliance with the terms of this Agreement and pertinent provisions of law. 3.1.7To levy upon the Franchisee all taxes and fees otherwise applicable to business organizations within the geographical area encompassed by the Franchisee's operations within the FranchiseArea. 3.2This Franchise Agreement and the right it grants to use and occupy the Public Rights-of-Way to operate a Cable Systemshall not be exclusive, and the County reserves the right to grant other franchises for similar uses or for other uses of the public rights-of-way, or any portions thereofto any person, or to make any such use themselves, at any time during the term of this Franchise Agreement. This Franchise Agreement does not prohibit or grant any authority to use the Public Rights-of-Way for any purpose other than the operation of a Cable System, andthe County reserves all of its rights with respect to any other uses of the Cable System or the Public Rights-of-Way. 3.2.1If the County grants a competitive franchise,or other authorization to provide similar wired video services,which, in the reasonable opinion of the 5 Franchisee, contains more favorable or less burdensome terms or conditions than this Franchise Agreement, the Franchisee may notify the County that it wishes to renegotiate certain specified provisions of the Franchise Agreement. Within thirty (30) days after the Franchisee provides such notice, both parties must begin to negotiate in good faith, and either party to this Franchise Agreement may request changes to amend this Agreement so that neither the Franchisee's Franchise Agreement nor the authorizationof the competitor contains terms that are more favorable or less burdensome than the other. For purposes of this section, the franchises must be viewed as a whole, not on a provision-by-provision basis, and must be compared with due regard for the circumstances existing at the time each wasgranted.Thisprovision shall only apply to the extentthe competitor is utilizing the pubic rights-of-way to provide video services andthe County has the authority to regulate the provision of those video services. 3.2.2In the event an application to provide wired video services,is filed with the County proposing to serve the Franchise Area, in whole or in part, the County shall serve or require to be served a copy of such application upon any existing Franchisee or incumbent cable operatorbyregistered or certified mail or via nationally recognized overnight courier service. 3.2.3In the event that anoperator, providing video services, serves residents of the County under a franchise, or other authorization to provide similar wired video services,issued by the state or federal government that is unavailable to the Franchisee, the Franchisee shall have a right to request Franchise amendments that relieve the Franchisee of regulatory burdens that create a competitive disadvantage to the Franchisee.In requesting amendments, the Franchisee shall file a petition seeking to amend the Franchise. Such petition shall: (1) indicate the presence of a non-franchised competitor or one that has a state or federal franchise; (2) identify the basis for Franchisee's belief that certain provisions of the Franchise place Franchisee at a competitive disadvantage; and (3) identify the regulatory burdens to be amended or repealed in order to eliminate the competitive disadvantage. The Board of Supervisors shallhold apublic hearing to evaluate the petition and hear the views of interested parties. The County shall not unreasonably withhold consent to the Franchisee's petition. SECTION 4-Term The term of this franchise shall be ten (10) years from the Effective Date, unless sooner terminated or renewedin accordance with the terms of this Franchise Agreement. Any renewal of this Franchise shall be governed by and comply with the provisions of Title 15.2, Chapter 21, Article 1.2 of the Code of Virginia and Section 626 of the Cable Act [47 U.S.C. §546], as amended. 6 SECTION 5–Territorial Extent of Franchise The Franchisee is authorized to operate a Cable System throughout the entire Franchise Area, and shall construct, maintain and operate its system throughout such Franchise Area, in accordance with the terms of this Franchise Agreement. SECTION 6–Public, Educational, and Government Services 6.1Access Channels: 6.1.1In order to ensure universal availability of public, educational and governmentprogramming("PEG"),Franchiseeshallcontinue toprovide two(2) AccessChannelson the Basic Service tier,or as required by applicable law,to be used for PEG access video programming provided by the County or its designee. The Access Channels shall be designated as follows: one (1) dedicated Government Access Channel carrying programming related to the government of Frederick County, and one (1) Educational Access Channel dedicated to the FCPS. The County may request an additional Access Channel at its discretion, and Franchisee shall make such an additional channel available uponone-hundred twenty (120) days' written notice, provided that the additional Access Channel shall only be made available if each existingAccess Channels meets the following standard: at least eight (8) hours a day over a consecutive sixteen (16) week period has been programmed with original, non-duplicative, non-character generated, non-alphanumeric, locally-producedPEG Access programming Monday through Friday.The Countymust provide Franchisee with written, detailed documentation evidencing the usage meets the threshold requirement for each channel.Each Access Channel shall consist of the system capacity required to provide the transmission of a video signal, with accompanying audio, that is capable of producing sound and picture ofNTSC quality or better based on the standard compression technology then in use in theSystem. 6.1.2The Franchisee shall also transmit to subscribers in the County all PEG access channels made available to residents of the City of Winchester, for as long as the City and the County are served from the same headend. 6.1.3Following the third anniversary of the Effective Date of this Franchise, upon one hundred twenty (120) days written requestby the County, Franchisee shall distribute the Government Access Channel in High-Definition (HD) format within the Franchise Area. The HD channel shall be a rebroadcast of the current Standard-Definition Government Access Channel. The County acknowledges that HD Access Channels may require Subscribers to buy or lease special equipment, available to all Subscribers, and subscribe to those tiers of Cable Service upon which HD channels are made available. Franchisee is not required to provide free HD equipment to Subscribers or the County. 7 6.1.4The Franchisee shall continue to provide, at its sole expense, (1) a fiber optic link from the County Administration Building, located at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601,to the Franchisee's head-end; and (2) a fiber optic link from the School Administration Building, located at 1415 Amherst Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601,to the head-end. Both links shall include all electronic and other equipment needed to transmit signals from the respective origination sites to the headend, to be provided by Franchisee at its sole expense. Upon receipt of such signals at the headend, Franchisee shall transmit the signals to subscribers in the County over the respective Access Channels. 6.1.4.1Within on hundred eighty (180) days of a written request by the County, Franchiseeshall relocate each fiber link one (1) time during the term of this agreement as follows: (i) the new location must be located within two hundred (200) feet of Franchisee’s main distribution line; and, (ii) The County shall provide access to such new PEG origination site at least ninety (90) days prior to the anticipated use of the PEG origination site. The timeline for relocation of any fiber link shall be subject to the timely granting ofany and all required permits, walk-out, make ready, and the detection of all underground utilities. Franchisee shall be responsible forthe costs associated with the first two hundred (200) feet of cable related to a relocation of any fiber link hereunder.The County shall be responsible for any remaining costs and payment shall be made in advance to Franchisee subject to Franchisee providing the County with a detailed estimate of such costs. 6.1.5Franchisee recognizes that the availability of all of the Access Channels to residents of the County is an important public policy goal of the County. The County recognizes that the burden of obtaining access to PEG programming should be equitably shared among competing providers. Franchisee recognizes that in the event that a competing cable operator obtains a franchise from the County, the County anticipates that any such franchise will require the competing cable operator to make the programming transmitted on the Access Channels available to its subscribers,and that such competing cable operator should obtain the programming from its source as does Franchisee. Direct interconnection between the Franchisee and any competitor shall not be required by this Franchise. Franchisee agrees to cooperate in good faithwith the County in making the Access Channels available to such a competitor in a manner that does not interfere withFranchisee's Cable System, which may include the evaluation and implementation of multiple connections at PEG programming origination points. Franchisee also agrees that it will not interfere in any way with the County's efforts to make the PEG programming available to any such competitor. 6.1.6The Access Channels shall be carried on the Basic Service tierin a format that is technically equivalent to and provides the same technical capabilities as other similar channels carried on the Basic Service tier. 8 6.2In support of the County's production oflocal PEG programming, Franchisee shall provide to the County PEG Capital fundingin the amount of fifty cents ($0.50) per subscriber per month(“Recurring PEG Capital Grant”).The Recurring PEG Capital Grant shall be used by the County for PEG access equipment, including, but not limited to, studio and portable production equipment, editing equipment and program playback equipment, or for renovation or construction of PEG access facilities. The Recurring PEG Capital Grant, along with a brief summary of the subscriber information upon which it is based, shall be delivered to the County no laterthan forty-five (45) days after the end of each calendar quarter throughout the Franchise Term. SECTION 7–Technical Performance Test Standards and Signal Quality 7.1Franchisee's Cable System shall meet or exceed the following requirements: 7.1.1The Cable System shall be designed to be an active two-way plant for subscriber interaction, if any, required for selection or use of Cable Service. The Cable System shall be capable of supporting premium services including High Definition content. 7.1.2The Cable System shall be operated in a manner such that it is in compliance with FCC standards and requirements with respectto interference. The Cable System shall be operated in such a manner as to minimize interference with the reception of off-the-air signals by a subscriber. The Franchisee shall insure that signals carried by the Cable System, or originating outside the Cable System wires, cable, fibers, electronics and facilities, do not ingress or egress into or out of the Cable System in excess ofFCC standards. In particular, the Franchisee shall not operate the Cable System in such a manner as to pose unwarranted interference with emergency radio services, aeronautical navigational frequencies or any airborne navigational reception in normalflight patterns, or any other type of wireless communications, pursuant to FCC regulations. 7.2The Franchisee shall design its Cable System so that it may be interconnected with other cable systems and open video systems in the Franchise Area. Interconnection of systems may be made by direct cable connection, microwave link, satellite, or other appropriate methods. 7.3The Franchisee shall provide standby power generating capacity at the headend and at all hubs. The Franchisee shall maintain standby power capable of at least twenty-four (24) hours duration at the headend and all hubs. Franchisee shall install automatic response systems to alert the Franchiseewhen commercial power is interrupted. The headend generator shall be tested as necessary to assure operational reliability. The power supplies serving the distribution plant shall be capable of providing 9 power to the Cable System for not less than two (2) hours according to manufacturer specifications in the event of an electrical outage. 7.4Franchiseeshall comply with the Emergency Alert System requirements of the FCC in order that emergency messages may be distributed overthe System. 7.5The Cable System shall meet or exceed the applicable technical standards §§ set forth in Title 47, Part 76, SubpartK of the Code of Federal Regulations, 47 C.F.R. 76.601etseqand shall comply with all current applicable codes including the National Electrical Safety Code, the National Electrical Code,and any other applicable federal laws and regulations. SECTION 8-Construction Schedule 8.1Subject to §8.2herein and §61-9 of the Cable Ordinance, the Franchisee shall provide Cable Service to all residents and other persons requesting such service within the Franchise Area. TheareaservedbytheFranchiseeasoftheEffectiveDate isshownonExhibitB.It shall betherightofallSubscriberstocontinuetoreceiveCable ServicefromFranchiseeinsofarastheir financialandotherobligationstoFranchiseeare honored.Franchiseereservestherighttodeny or terminate servicefortheftofservice, damagetoequipment,abusiveconductdirectedtowardsFranchisee's employees or agents, or other good cause. The Franchisee shall act to the best of its ability so as to ensure that all Subscribersreceivecontinuous,uninterruptedCableService.Forthepurposesofthis subsection, "uninterrupted"doesnotincludeshort termoutagesoftheCableSystemfor repair,maintenanceor testing. 8.2The Franchisee shall extend the Cable System to all areas in the County having a density of twenty five (25) occupied homes per linear mile or greatermeasured in strand footage from the nearest point on the Cable System trunk or feeder line from which a usable cable signal can be obtained. If the County believes that an area of the County meets the density standard, the County may at any time inform the Franchisee and direct the Franchisee to verify whether the standard is met. Franchisee shall provide the County a written report within sixty (60) days of receipt of such a request, stating (i) whether the density standard has been met and, if not, the actual density of the area in question; and (ii) how the density was calculated. For purposes of this section, a home shall only be countedin the density calculation if such home is within two hundred seventy-five (275) feet of the public right of way.Should, through new construction, an area within the Franchise Area meet the density requirements, Franchisee shall provide Cable Service to such area within one (1) year after it confirms that the density requirements have been met following notice from the Countythat one (1) or more residents has requested Cable Service. 8.2.1In the event that the owner of any home not meeting the density requirement hereinagrees, in writing, to pay the excess cost of extending Cable Service to their home, then Franchiseeshall provide Cable Service to such home, 10 provided that such homeowner's payment obligation shall only apply to the costs incurred in extending cable more than two hundred seventy-five (275)feet from the public right of way. 8.2.2Inaddition,if the County believes that an area of the County meets a twenty (20) homes per mile or greater density standard, the County may inform the Franchisee and Franchisee shall complete a feasibility survey to determine whether it will complete such build. It will be at Franchisees sole determination as to whether to complete any such build. 8.3The Franchisee agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to inform itself of all newly-planned developments within the County and to work with developers to cooperate in pre-installation of facilities to support Cable Service. The County will endeavor to provide the Franchiseewithnoticeofsuchnewly-planneddevelopments,and willincludetheFranchiseeon its list of entities to be contacted regarding new developmentproposals. SECTION 9–Standards and Restrictions as to Construction and Installation 9.1Prior to the erection or installation of any towers, poles, tower guys, tower anchors, underground conduits, manholes or fixtures for use in connection with the installation, construction, maintenance, or operation of the Cable System under this Franchise Agreement, the Franchisee shall first obtain all generally applicable permits, licenses, or other forms of approval or authorization from the Countyas required by its policies and Ordinances . Notwithstanding such approval, however, the County, or appropriate representatives thereof, shall have the right to inspect all construction of installation work performed under this Agreement and make such inspections as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the terms of the Agreement and other pertinent provisions oflaw.Notwithstanding the requirements herein, Franchisee shall not be required to obtain a permit for individual drop connections to subscribers, servicing or installing pedestals or other similar facilities, or other instances of routine maintenance or repair to its Cable System. 9.2Any contractor proposed for installation, maintenance, or repair of the system or system equipment must be experienced in cable installation or in any other capacity for which retained, and must comply with applicable State laws and local ordinances. 9.3The Franchisee's system and associated equipment erected by the Franchisee shall be located as to cause minimum interference with the proper use of streets, alleys, and other public ways and places, and to cause minimum interference with the rights and reasonable convenience of property owners who adjoin any of the said streets, alleys or other public ways and places. No pole or other fixtures placed in any public ways bytheFranchisee shall be placed in such a manner as to interfere with the usual travel on such public way. 11 9.4All cable system installation shall be underground in those areas of the County where public utilities providing both telephone and electric service are underground at the time ofinstallation.Inareaswhereeithertelephoneorelectricfacilities areabovegroundatthetimeof installation, the Franchisee may install its system above ground, provided that at such time as such utility facilities are required to be placed underground by the County or are placed underground, the Franchisee shall likewise and at the same time reinstall its system underground without additional cost to the County or to the individual subscribers affected by such reinstallation.Franchisee shall be given reasonable notice and access to the public utilities’ facilities at the time that such are placed underground and shall be entitled to reimbursement of its relocation costs from any public or private funds raised for the project and made available to other users of the Public Way.Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require the Franchisee to construct, operate, or maintain underground any ground-mounted appurtenances such as customer taps, line extenders, system passive devices, amplifiers, power supplies, pedestals, or other related equipment. 9.5The desire of the subscriber as to the point of entry into the residence or other structure shall be observed wherever possible. Runs in building interiors shall be as unobtrusiveaspossible,consistentwithnormalinstallationpracticesoftheFranchisee. 9.6If in connection with the construction, operation, maintenance, or repair of the Cable System the Franchisee disturbs any pavement, sidewalk, driveway or other surfacing, Franchisee shall, at its own cost and expense and in a manner approved by the County, replace and restore all paving, sidewalk, driveway or surface of any street or alley disturbed to a condition reasonably comparable to the condition existing before said work was commenced. 9.7Ifthe County lawfully electsto alter or change the grade of any street, alley or other public way, Franchisee, upon reasonable notice by the County(which shall not be less than thirty (30) business days), shall remove, relay and relocate its poles, wires, cables, underground conduits, manholes and other fixtures, provided that the County shall reimburse Franchiseefor removal or relocation of its facilities to the same extent that the County reimburses telephone,electric utilities, or other similarly situated entitiesunder similar circumstances. 9.8Franchisee shall, upon written request of any person holding a building moving permit issued by the County, temporarily raise or lower its wires to permit the moving of buildings. The expense of such temporary removal, raising or lowering of wires shall be paid by the person requesting the same, and the Franchisee shall have the authority to require such payment in advance. The franchisee shall be given not less than seven (7) ) days' advance notice to arrange for such temporary wire changes. 9.9Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to waive, amend or otherwise modify the currently existing standards established and in effect throughout the County as 12 to zoning requirements, permits, fees, or inspections which normally apply to construction activities within theCounty. 9.10Franchisee will comply with all applicable Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)standards as to its installation and maintenance of equipment and facilities within the public rights-of-way. SECTION 10–Maintenanceand Customer Service The Franchisee shall: 10.1Maintain all wires, conduits, cable and other real and personal property and facilities comprising the Cable System in good working order and condition. 10.2Atall times maintain reasonablyaccessible to the Franchise Area a force of agents or employees in sufficient numbers and of sufficient technical qualifications to safely, adequately and promptly repair any structural damages to system equipment which is located in, over, under, or uponpublic streets, ways, or places, and to immediately secure the public safety in the vicinity thereof, prior to, and during the making of said repairs. 10.3Operate the Cable System continuously, with call center personnel available twenty-four (24) hoursa day, seven days per week, through a publicly-listed telephone number, to receive requests for maintenance or repairs. Call center personnel shall be available during Normal Business Hours for all other requests or inquiries. "Normal Business Hours" means those hours during which most similar businesses in the community are open to serve customers, but must include some evening hours at least one night per week and/or some weekend hours. 10.4Render efficient service, locate and repair malfunctions promptly, and begin working on service interruptions promptly and in no event later than twenty-four (24) hours after the interruption becomes known, seven days per weekThe Franchisee must begin actions to correct other service problems the next business day after notification of the service problem.Franchisee must maintain a toll-free telephone line, available twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week for Subscriber calls and complaints. 10.5Furnish information, as subscribers are connected or reconnected to the Cable System, concerning the procedures for making inquiries or complaints. Such information shall include, at a minimum, the address, telephone number and hours of operation of the Franchisee, and the department wheresuch inquiries and complaints are to be addressed. 10.6Bill all subscribers in a consistent (absent promotional pricingas allowed under this agreement), non-discriminatory manner, regardless of subscriber's level of 13 service. In no case shall any subscriber be required to pay for services in excess of thirty (30) days prior to receipt of such service. No late feeshall be imposed for the first twenty (20) days from the date of the mailing of the bill. 10.7Under Normal Operating Conditions and subject to notification and request by affected subscribers and to reasonable verification by Franchiseeof a Cable Service outage, rebate a pro rata portion of the fee charged to any subscriber for each calendar month in which such subscriber has experienced more than 24 hours of Cable Service outage, with the rebate being based on the total hours of outage compared to the total number of hours available in the month to which such rebate applies. SECTION 11–Service to Schools and Municipal Buildings 11.1Franchisee shall continue to provide,without charge,one(1)service drop and one (1) service outlet activated for Basic Service to each existing public building listed in Exhibit Acurrently receiving courtesy service, including, without limitation, each public school, each public library, each police, fire and rescue station, volunteer fire department, and every other location occupied or used by the County for governmental administrative purposes. The County may also, at its sole discretion, from time to time designate additional public buildinglocations to receive one (1) service drop and one (1) service outlet activated for Basic Service, in which case Exhibit A shall be amended to include such locations, provided that at the time of such designation the designated location is located no more than two hundred fifty (250) feet from the nearest point on Franchisee's systemfrom which a usable cable signal can be obtained. Franchisee shall extend service to such additional locations within one hundred twenty (120) days of receiving written notice from the County. 11.2Franchisee shall provide each public school in the County,with the tier of cable service currently known as Digital Starter Service,or the comparable tier of digital cable service at no charge, provided that the School Board shall bear the cost of obtaining and installing cablecards or other end user equipment necessary for television sets in the schools to receive such programming. There shall be no limit on the number of outlets to be served at each school facility, provided that the School Board bears the cost and responsibility of installing, maintaining and repairing all outlets beyond the initial service outlet that Franchisee provides free of charge.Subject to Section 11.1, Franchisee shall extend its obligations under this provision to any school constructed during the term of this Franchise Agreement. Franchisee will extend service to such additional locations within one hundred twenty (120) days of receiving written notice from the County or School Board. SECTION 12–Franchise Fees 12.1Franchisee shall comply with the provisions of Section 58.1-645etseq. of the Code of Virginia, pertaining to the VirginiaCommunications Sales and Use Tax, as 14 amended (the "Communications Tax"), and Sections 12.2 through 12.6 of this Agreement shall not have any effect, for so long as the Communications Tax or a successor state or local tax that wouldconstitute a franchise fee for purposes of 47 U.S.C. §542, as amended, is imposed on the sale of cable services by the Franchisee to subscribers in the County. 12.2In the event that the Communications Tax is repealed and no successor state or local tax is enacted that would constitute a franchise fee for purposes of 47 U.S.C. § 542, as amended, Franchisee shall pay to the County a Franchise fee of five percent (5%) of annual Gross Operating Revenues, beginning on the effective date of the repeal of such tax (the "Repeal Date").Beginning on the Repeal Date, the terms of Section 12.2 through 12.6 of this Agreement shall take effect. In accordance with Title VI of the Communications Act, the twelve (12) month period applicable under the Franchise for the computation of the Franchise fee shall be a calendar year. Such payments shall be made no later than forty-five (45) days following the end of each calendar quarter. Should Franchisee submit an incorrect amount, Franchisee shall be allowed to add or subtract that amount in a subsequent quarter, but no later than ninety (90) days following the close of the calendar year for which such amounts were applicable; such correction shall be documented in the supporting information required under Section 12.3 below. 12.3Each Franchise fee payment shall be accompanied by a brief report prepared by a representative of Franchisee showing the basis for the computation, and a breakdown by major revenue categories (such as Basic Service, premium service, etc.). The County shall have the right to reasonably request further supporting information for each Franchise fee payment. 12.4The period of limitation for recovery of any Franchise fee payable hereunder shall be five (5) years from the date on which payment by Franchisee is due. 12.5If CableServices subject to the franchise fee required under this Section 12 are provided to subscribers in conjunction with other services, the franchise fee shall be applied to the retail priceof the Cable Services, as reflected in the books and records of theFranchisee in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles andFCC or state public utility regulatory commission rules, regulations, standards or orders. Any discounts resulting frompurchasing the services as a bundle shall be reasonably allocated among the respective services that constitute the bundled transaction. Equipment may be allocated at full retail price. 12.6Audit: 12.6.1The County, or such Person or Persons designated by the County, shall have the right to inspect and copy records and the right to audit and to recompute any amounts determined to be payable under this Franchise, without regard to by whom they are held; provided, however, that any such inspection shall take place within three(3) years from the date the Franchising Authority receives such payment, after which period any such payment shall be considered 15 final.. If an audit discloses an overpayment or underpayment of franchise fees, the County shall notify the Franchisee of such overpayment or underpayment within ninety(90) days of the date the audit was completed. The County, in its sole discretion, shall determine the completion date for any audit conducted hereunder. Audit completion is not to be unreasonably delayed by either party. 12.6.2Upon the completion of any such audit by the County, the County shall provide to the Franchisee a final report setting forth the County’s findings in detail, including any and all substantiating documentation. In the event of an alleged underpayment, the Franchisee shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of the report to provide the Countywith a written response agreeing to or refuting the results of the audit, including any substantiating documentation. Based on these reports and responses, the parties shall agree upon a “Final Settlement Amount.” For purposes of this Section, the term “Final Settlement Amount(s)” shall mean the agreed upon underpaymentor overpayment, if any, to the County by the Franchisee as a result of any such audit. If the parties cannot agree on a “Final Settlement Amount,” the parties shall submit the dispute to a mutually agreed upon mediator within sixty (60) days of reaching an impasse. In the event an agreement is not reached at mediation, either party may bring an action to have the disputed amount determined by a court of law. 12.6.3The Franchisee shall be responsible for providing to the County all records necessary to confirm the accurate payment of franchise fees. The Franchisee shall maintain such records for five (5) years. The County's audit expenses shall be borne by the County unless the audit determines the payment to the County should be increased by more than five percent (5%) in the audited period, in which case the reasonable costs ofthe audit, up to tenthousand dollars ($10,000)shall be paid by the Franchisee to the County within thirty (30) days from the date the parties agree upon the “Final Settlement Amount.”If recomputation results in additional revenue to be paid by Franchisee tothe County, such amount shall be subject to an interest charge of the Prime rate. If the audit determines that there has been an overpayment by the Franchisee, the Franchisee may credit any overpayment against its next quarterly payment. The auditor shall not be compensated on a success based formula, e.g., payment based on a percentage of any underpayment, if any.Once the parties agree upon a Final Settlement Amount and such amount is paid by the Franchisee, the Countyshall have no further rights to audit or challenge the payment for that period. 12.6.4The audit provisions set forth in this subsection shall similarly apply to the PEG capital support payments specified in Section 6 of this Franchise. SECTION 13–Enforcement 16 13.1The Franchisee shall at all times during the term of this Franchise Agreement maintain at its own expense a performance bondrunning to the County in the amount of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000). Such performance bondshall be conditioned on the Franchisee's observation, fulfillment and performance of each term and condition of this Agreement. In case of any breach of such condition, the amount of the performance bondshall be available to the County as compensation for all damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' and experts' fees and other reasonable expenses of enforcement of litigation, whether direct or indirect, resulting from the failure of the Franchisee to observe, fulfill and perform any provision of this Agreement. The scope of such performance bondshall include, in addition to ascertainable damages and costs, payment of any fines or penalties for non-performance, liquidated damages as provided in Section 13.2, and compensation to the County for damage to County property or for loss of revenue due to any failure of the Franchisee to observe, fulfill or perform any provision of this Agreement. The Franchisee shall pay all premiums chargeable for such performance bondand shall keep the same in forceand effect at all times that the Franchisee operates its system within the Franchise Area. The performance bondshall not be terminated or otherwise allowed to expire prior to thirty (30) days after written notice to that effect is given to the County.The Countyshall give Franchisee twenty (20) business days’ notice of its intent to draw anyamount owed from the performance bond. If the Franchisee has filed a lawsuit or an appeal to the Board of Supervisors as to an alleged default or amount owed, the County’s ability to draw on the bond related to the facts and circumstances in dispute shall be stayed pending final resolutionof the dispute. 13.2Because the Franchisee's failure to comply with provisions of this Franchise Agreement may result in injury to the County, and because it may be difficult to quantify the extent of such injury, the County and the Franchisee agree that, subject to the procedures in Section 13.5, liquidated damages may be assessable against the Franchisee for certain material violations of provisions of this Franchise Agreement and that such liquidated damages may be chargeable against the Franchisee's performance bondin theevent of non-payment by the Franchisee. The Franchisee hereby agrees that the liquidated damages specified herein are reasonable and do not constitute a penalty or fine. The liquidated damages shall only apply from the date of notice being provided to the Franchisee.The following amounts shall constitute liquidated damages for the specified injuries: 13.2.1For failure to supply information, reports, or filings lawfully required under this Franchise Agreement: $50 per day for each day theviolation continues; 13.2.2For failure to comply with any provision of this Franchise Agreement pertaining to customer service: $100 per day for each day the violation continues; 13.2.3For failure to pay franchise fees when due: $50 per day for each day the violation continues, in addition to the outstanding amount of the unpaid franchise fees; 17 13.2.4For failure to comply with any requirement pertaining to support for the provision of PEG access programming including, without limitation, the provisions of Section 6: $100 per day for each day the violation continues. 13.3The Countymay reduce or waive any of the above-listed liquidated damages if the Board determines that such waiver is in the best interests of the County.In no event shall liquidated damages be assessed for a time period exceeding one hundred and twenty (120) days per violation.Nothing in this subsection is intended to preclude the County from exercising any other right or remedy, including but not limited to commencingrevocation proceedings and/or initiatingaction in law or equity in a court of competent jurisdiction,with respect to a breach that continues past the time the County stops assessing liquidated damages for such breach. 13.4In the event the County believes that the Franchisee has not complied with the material terms of the Franchise, it shall notify the Franchisee in writing with specific details regarding the exact nature of the alleged non-compliance or default.The Franchisee shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of theCounty’s written notice: (i) to respond to the County, contesting the assertion of non-compliance or default; or (ii) to cure such default; or (iii) in the event that, by nature of the default, such default cannot be cured within the thirty(30) day period, initiate commercially reasonable steps to diligently remedy such default and notify the Countyof the steps being taken and the projected date that the cure will be completed.In the event the Franchisee fails to respond to the County’s notice or in the event that the alleged default is not remedied within thirty (30) days or the date projected by the Franchisee, the Countyshall schedule a public hearing to investigate the default. Such public hearing shall be held at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Supervisors that allows the County to comply with advertising requirements for public hearings. In no event may such public hearing be held less than ten (10) business days following Comcast’s failure to cure. The County shall notify the Franchisee in advance, in writing of the time and place of such meeting and provide the Franchisee with a reasonable opportunity to be heard. 13.5If after notice and opportunity to cure under Section 13.4, the County concludes that the Franchisee is in default of any provision listed under Section 13.2,and the County has suffered an injury, the County may assess liquidated damages in accordance with Section 13.2. The County shall , by certified mail, provide a notice of intention to assess liquidated damagesto Franchisee ten (10) days prior to assessment. The notice shall set forth the basis of the assessment, and shall inform the Franchisee that liquidated damages will be assessed from the date of the notice unless the assessment notice is appealed for hearing before the Board of Supervisors and the Board rules (1) that the violation has been corrected, or (2) that an extension of the time or other relief should be granted, or (3) the Board of Supervisors disagrees with the findings of non- compliance or default. If the Franchisee desires a hearing before the Board of Supervisors, it shall send a written notice of appeal, by certified mail, to the County Administrator within ten(10) days of the date on which the County sent the notice of intention to assess liquidated damages. After the hearing, if the Board of Supervisors 18 sustains, in whole or in part, the assessment of liquidated damages, the County Administrator may at any time thereafter draw upon the performance bondfor the amount reviewed by the Board of Supervisors after providing the Franchisee thirty (30) days to pay said amount. Unless the Board of Supervisors indicates to the contrary, said liquidated damages shall be assessed beginning with the date on which the County sent the notice of intention to assess liquidated damages and continuing thereafter until such time as the violation ceases, as determined by the County. 13.6The amount of liquidated damages per annum shall not exceed fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) in the aggregate. With respect to liquidated damages assessed herein, all similar violations or failures occurring at the same timeandfrom the same factual events affecting multiple subscribers shall be assessed as a single violation, and a violation or a failure may only be assessed under any one (1) of the above-referenced categories.Nothing herein is intended to allow duplicative recovery from or duplicative payments by Franchiseeor its surety(s). SECTION 14 –Indemnification and Insurance 14.1Franchisee shall save theCounty harmless from all loss sustained by the County on account of any suit, judgment, execution, claim or demand whatsoever resulting from negligence on the part of the Franchisee in the construction, operation or maintenance of its Cable Systemin the County, provided that the Countyshall give the Franchisee timely written notice of its obligation to indemnify and defend the County within thirty (30) days of receipt of a claim or action pursuant to this Section. The Countyagrees that it will take all necessary action to avoid a default judgment and not prejudice the Franchisee’s ability to defend the claim or action. 14.2The Franchisee shall maintain throughout the term of this Agreement, Commercial GeneralLiability Insurance insuring theFranchisee. Such policy or policies shall be in the minimum amount of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000.00) per occurrence for bodily injury or property damage. In addition, the Franchisee shall provide workers’ compensation coverage in accordance with applicable lawand coverage for copyright infringement.All liability insurance shall include an endorsement in a specific form which names as joint and several insureds the County and the County's officialsand employees, with respect to all claims arising out of the operation and maintenance of the Franchisee's cable system in the County. 14.2.1The inclusion of more than one (1) insured shall not operate to increase the limit of the Franchisee's liability, and the insurer waives any right of contribution with insurance which may be available to the County. 14.2.2All policies of insurance required by this Section shall be placed with companies which are qualified to write insurance in the Commonwealth of Virginia,and which maintain throughout the policy term a General Rating of "A-" 19 or better and a Financial Size Category of "VII" or better as determined by Best Insurance Rating Services. 14.2.3Certificates of insurance obtained by the Franchisee shall be in compliance with this section, and copies shall be provided to the County. The Franchisee shall immediately advise the County Attorney of any litigation that may develop that would affect this insurance. 14.2.4Should the County find an insurance document to be in non- compliance, then it shall notify the Franchisee, and the Franchisee shall be obligated to cure the defect. 14.2.5Neither the provisions of this section, nor any damages recovered by the County thereunder, shall be construed to nor limit the liability of the Franchisee under this Agreement or for damages. 14.2.6The insurance policies provided for herein shall name the County, its officers, and employees and agentsas additional insureds, and shall be primary to any insurance orself-insurance carried by the County. The insurance policies required by this section shall be carried and maintained by the Franchisee throughout the term of this Agreement and such other period of time during which the Franchisee operates or is engaged in the removal of its Cable System. Franchisee shall not cancel, or not renew, any policy hereunder, until thirty (30) days after receipt by the County, by certified mail,of written notice of such intention to cancel or not to renew. SECTION 15–Delegation of Powers 15.1The County shall not be precluded from delegating any power or authority contained within this Franchise Agreement to any agency, employee or department within the political subdivision which comprises the County. 15.2Franchisee shall notsell or transfer its Cable System to another person, nor transfer any rights under itsfranchise to another person, without Countyapproval. No such sale or transfer shall thereafter be effective until the vendee, assignee or lessee has filed in the Countyan instrument, duly executed, reciting the fact of such sale, assignment or lease, accepting and agreeing to be bound by the provisions of the FranchiseAgreementand Cable Ordinance.No approvalshall be required, however, for: (i) a transfer in trust, by mortgage, hypothecation, or by assignment of any rights, title, or interest of the Franchisee in the FranchiseAgreementor in the Cable System in order to secure indebtedness, (ii) a transfer to an entity directly or indirectly owned or controlled by Comcast Corporation, or (iii) the sale, conveyance, transfer, exchange or release of fifty percent (50%) or less of its equitable ownership. 20 SECTION 16–Franchise Revocation 16.1Subject to applicable federal and state law, following the notice and cure procedures in Section 13.4, if the Franchisee fails to comply with any of the material terms of this Franchise Agreement, or practices any fraud or deceit upon the County or its subscribers, or fails to pay franchise fees, PEG support, or the communications tax when due, or if the Franchisee becomes insolvent, as adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction, or is unwilling to pay its uncontested debts, or is adjudged bankrupt, or seeks relief under the bankruptcy laws, then the franchise may be revoked. 16.2In the event the County believes that grounds for revocation exist or have existed, the County may notify the Franchisee, in writing, setting forth the facts and nature of such noncompliance. If, within forty five (45) days following such written notification, the Franchisee has not furnished reasonable satisfactory evidence that corrective action has been taken or is being actively and expeditiously pursued, or that the alleged violations did not occur, or that the alleged violations, except those involving financial matters were beyond the Franchisee's control, the County may holdand give notice of a public hearing to consider revocation of the franchise. The Franchisee shall receive at least thirty (30)days written notice of the date and time of any such hearing. At the designated public hearing, the County shall give the Franchisee an opportunity to fully present its position on the matterand rebut any presentations or assertions made, after which the County, through its Board of Supervisors, shall determine whether or not the Franchise shall be revoked. The public hearing shall be recorded and made available to the Franchisee within fifteen (15) business days. The decision of the County shall be in If the County, following writing and shall be delivered to the Franchisee by certified mail. such hearing, shall find that grounds for revocationexist, it may thereupon by ordinance duly adopted revoke this Agreement and the franchise granted hereunder.Franchisee shall have the right to appeal such decision to a court or appropriate jurisdiction. 16.3The termination of the Franchisee's rights under this Agreement shall in no way affect any other rights the County may have under any provision of law or ordinance. 16.4Franchisee shall not be required to remove its Cable System or to sell the Cable System, or any portion thereof as a result of revocation, denial of renewal, or any other lawful action to forbid or disallow Franchisee from providing Cable Service, if the Cable System is actively being used to facilitate any other services notgoverned by the Cable Act, or any portion thereof [47 U.S.C. §541(b)]. SECTION 17–Books and Records and Related Documents 17.1Upon written request, all books and records of the Franchisee reasonably necessary to monitor the Franchisee’s compliance with the provisions of this franchise shall be made available for inspection and audit by the County or itsdesignee at the Franchisee's local office or at a location mutually agreed to by the County and the 21 Franchisee, provided that the Franchisee must make necessary arrangements forcopying documents selected by the County after the review. Such books and records shall be made available by Franchisee within thirty (30) days after any request for such inspection or audit shall be made.All such documents that may be the subject of an inspection by the Countyshall be retained by the Franchisee for a minimum period of twenty-four (24) months. 17.2Copies of all rules, regulations, terms and conditions established by the Franchisee regarding delivery of CableService to its subscribersshall be made available to the County Administrator or his designee at the office of the County Administrator within thirty (30) days after the request for inspection thereof. 17.3Upon written request,specifically identifyingthe documents in question, the Franchisee shall timely provide to the County copies of any requested correspondence, petitions, reports, applications and other documents of a non-routine or non-repetitive nature pertaining to the operation and maintenanceof the Cable System in the County, filed by the Franchisee with any federal or state agency or received by the Franchisee from any such agency. 17.4Upon written request, the Franchisee shall submit to the County copies of all applicable performanceandsignal qualitytests required bythe FCC's rules and regulations.This section shall satisfy the reporting requirements of Section 61-5 of the Cable Ordinance. 17.5Confidentiality: 17.5.1Franchisee shall not be required to submit information to the County that it reasonably deems to be proprietary or confidential in nature, except as provided herein,nor submit to the County any of its or an affiliate's books and records not relating to the provision of Cable Service in the Franchise Area. Such confidential information shall be identified with specificity upon submission to the County, and shall be subject to the following: 17.5.1.1If the parties agree that an exemption under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act permits the County to maintain the confidentiality of submitted information and the Franchisee submits such information to the County, the Franchisee shall provide the information and, except as otherwise may be provided by court order, the County shall maintain the confidentiality of such information and not disclose it to any public request, provided that the Franchisee, if required by applicable law, upon submission of confidential information to the County(i) invokesthe applicable exemption in writing forthe data or other materials for which protection from disclosure is sought, (ii) identifiesthe data or other materials for which protection is sought, and (iii) statesthe reason why protection is necessary; 22 17.5.1.2Ifthe parties do not agree that an exemption under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act permits the County to maintain confidentiality of information requested by the County, Franchisee may, in its discretion,withhold any documents containing such information, provided that the Franchisee permits the County or its agents to examine all such documents after providing the following documentation to the County: (i) a specific identification of the information; (ii) a statement attesting to the reason(s) theFranchisee believes the information is confidential; and (iii) a statement that the documents are available at the Franchisee's designated offices for inspection by the County. 17.5.2At all times, subject to the County's obligations under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, the County shall take reasonable steps to protect the proprietary and confidential nature of any books, records, maps, plans or other County-requested documents that are provided pursuant to this Agreement to the extent they aredesignated as such by the Franchisee. Nothing in this Section shall be read to require the Franchisee to violate federal or state law protecting Subscriber privacy. SECTION 18–Notices All notices, payments, reports or other information required by this Franchise Agreement shall be sent prepaid registered,certified mail,or as allowed by FCC regulation or the Cable Act, unless alternative means are specifically agreed to by the parties, as follows: To the County: Office of County Administrator 107North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 To the Franchisee: Comcastof California/Maryland/Pennsylvania/Virginia/West Virginia, LLC 55 Construction Lane Fishersville, VA 22939 Attn: Government Affairs Department With a copy to: Comcast Cable nd 7850 Walker Drive, 2Floor Greenbelt, MD 20770 23 Attn: Government Affairs Department And to: Comcast Cable Northeast Division 676 Island Pond Road Manchester, NH 03109 Attn: Government Affairs Department SECTION 19–Governing Law This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The courts ofFrederick County, Virginia, or the Federal court with jurisdiction over Frederick County, shall be the proper fora for any disputes arising hereunder. SECTION 20–Miscellaneous Provisions 20.1Force Majeure:The Franchisee shall not be held in default under, or in non-compliance with, the provisions of the Franchise, nor suffer any enforcement or penalty relating to noncompliance or default (including termination, cancellation or revocation of the Franchise), where such non-compliance or alleged defaults occurred or were caused by lightning strike, earthquake, flood, tidal wave, unusually severe rain, ice or snow storm, hurricane, tornado, or other catastrophic act of nature; riot, war, labor disputes, environmental restrictions, failure of utility service or the failure of equipment or facilities not belonging to Franchisee, denial of access to facilities or rights-of-way essential to serving the Franchise Area necessary to operate the Cable System, governmental, administrative or judicial order or regulation or other event that is reasonably beyond the Franchisee’s ability to anticipate or control. This provision also covers work delays caused by waiting for utility providers to service or monitor their own utility poles on which the Franchisee’s cable or equipment is attached, as well as unavailability of materials or qualified labor to perform the work necessary. 20.1.2The Countyagrees that it is not its intention to subject the Franchisee to penalties, fines, forfeitures or revocation of the Franchise for so- called “technical” breach(es) or violation(s) of the Franchise, which shall include, but not be limited, to the following: 20.1.2.1in instances or for matters where a violation or a breach of the Franchise by the Franchisee was good faith error that resulted in no or minimal negative impact on the Subscriberswithin the Franchise Area; or 20.1.2.2where there existed circumstances reasonably beyond the control of the Franchisee and which precipitated a violation by the 24 Franchisee of the Franchise, or which were deemed to have prevented the Franchisee from complying with a term or condition of the Franchise. 20.2Entire Agreement:This Franchise Agreement and any exhibits or addendums hereto constitute the entire agreement between the Countyand the Franchisee and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous agreements, ordinances, representations, or understandings, whether written or oral, of the parties regarding the subject matter hereof. Any agreements, ordinances, representations, promises or understandings or parts of such measures that are in conflict with or otherwise impose obligations different from the provisions of this Franchise Agreement are superseded by this Franchise Agreement. 20.3Severability:If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or other portion of this Franchise Agreement is, for any reason, declared invalid, in whole or in part, by any court, agency, commission, legislative body, or other authority of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent portion. Such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remainingportions hereof, which other portions shall continue in full force and effect. 20.4Modification:No provision of this Franchise Agreement shall be amended or otherwise modified, in whole or in part, except by an instrument, in writing, duly executed bythe Countyand the Franchisee, which amendment shall be authorized on behalf of the Countythrough the adoption of an appropriate resolution or order by the County, as required by applicable law. 20.5No Third-Party Beneficiaries:Nothingin this Franchise Agreement is or was intended to confer third-party beneficiary status on any member of the public to enforce the terms of this Franchise Agreement. 20.6Incorporation by Reference: 20.6.1All presently and hereafter applicable conditions and requirements of federal, State and generally applicable local laws, including but not limited to the County’s Cable Ordinance, the rules and regulations of the FCC and the State where the Franchise Areais located, as they may be amended from time to time, are incorporated herein by reference to the extent not enumerated herein. However, no such generally applicable locallaws, rules, regulations and codes, as amended, may alter the obligations, interpretation and performance of this Franchise Agreementto the extent that any provision of this Franchise Agreement conflicts with or is inconsistent with such laws, rules or regulations. 20.6.2Should the State, the federal government or the FCC require Franchisee to perform or refrain from performing any act the performance or non- performance of which is inconsistent with any provisions herein, the Countyand Franchisee will thereupon, if they determine that a material provision herein is affected, modify any of the provisions herein to reflect such government action. 25 26 In WITNESS WHEREOF, the County, by the signatures of its duly authorized officers as set forth immediately below, causes this Agreement to be executed as of the date and year indicated below. Acceptance of this Agreement shall be indicated by signature of the Franchisee' s duly authorized officer or agent. Frederick County, Virginia By: ________________________ County Administrator Date: _______________________ Approved as to form:________________________ County Attorney ___________________ Date. 27 ACCEPTANCE: COMCAST OF CALIFORNIA/MARYLAND/PENNSYLVANIA/VIRGINIA/ WEST VIRGINIA,LLC, asevidencedbythesignaturebelowofitsdulyauthorized representative,hereby ACCEPTStheofferedfranchisetooperateaCableSystem,and certifiesthatithascarefully readthetermsandconditionsof thisFranchiseAgreement,and acceptsunequivocally,andagreesto abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this FranchiseAgreement. COMCASTOF CALIFORNIA/MARYLAND/PENNSYLVANIA/VIRGINIA/WEST VIRGINIA, LLC By: ___________________________________________ Mary McLaughlin, Regional Senior Vice President Attest: _________________________Date: _________ 28 EXHIBIT A Service to Schools and County Buildings Schools Apple Pie Ridge Elementary Armel Elementary Bass-Hoover Elementary Evendale Elementary Gainesboro Elementary Greenwood Mill Elementary Indian Hollow Elementary Middletown Elementary Orchard View Elementary New Elementary School (Snowden Bridge) Redbud Run Elementary Senseny Road School Stonewall Elementary Admiral Richard E. Byrd Middle School Frederick County Middle School James Wood Middle School Robert E. AylorMiddle School James Wood High School Millbrook High School Sherando High School FCPS Transportation Department Northwestern Regional Educational Program Dowell J. Howard FCPS Maintenance Department FCPS Administration Building FCPS Records Management Center Support Facility West County Buildings County Administration Building Public Safety Building Animal Shelter Shawneeland Public Works Office Economic Development Authority Fire and Rescue Stations Clearbrook Gore Gainesboro Greenwood Millwood Station 29 Middletown North Mountain Reynolds Store Round Hill Star Tannery Stephens City Parks Sherando Park Clearbrook Park Miscellaneous Regional Facilities Bowman Library Regional Landfill Regional Jail Airport 30 EXHIBIT B ServiceArea Map 31 COUNTY of FREDERICK Office of the County Administrator M E M O R A N D U M To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk Date: June 7, 2019 Re: Frederick County Code Noise Ordinance draft revisions ==================================================================== To refresh the Board on this item, the County adopted its current noise ordinance in 1993. The ordinance uses, as its standard for whether noise is unlawful, whether a person is annoyed, disturbed or vexed by unnecessary and unreasonable noi Court, in the Tanner case, held that a noise ordinance containin language was unconstitutionally vague and therefore unenforceable. In light of the decision in Tanner, the Countys prohibitions against noise may be subject t At its meeting on April 10, 2019, the Board of Supervisors asked Committee to consider again the proposed revisions to Chapter 118 of the County Code that the Committee forwarded to the Board last year, for the Committee ag recommendation to the Board. The revisions are intended to aid in restoring the enforceability of the noise ordinance, in light of the Supreme Court of Virginias 2009 deci City of Virginia Beach, 277 Va. 432. The Code & Ordinance Committee at its meeting on May 9, 2019, agreed to put forth the attached draft revisions to the ordinance. Following the public hearing, staff is seeking a Board decision regarding the draft revision of the noise ordinance. 107 North Kent StreetWinchester, Virginia 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Office of the County Administrator M E M O R A N D U M To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk Date: June 7, 2019 Re: Frederick County Code Dogs running at large draft ordinance revisions ==================================================================== At its recently completed Session, the General Assembly enacted Code § 3.2-6538, effective July 1, 2019. Therefore, it is recommended that County Code § 48- 3 be amended to reflect changes to the Code of Virginia. The revi July 1, 2019, are as follows: Inclusion in subsection A of a definition, drawn from the state of what constitutes running at large. Clarification in subsection A that the prohibition applies to an to run at large, instead of saying his dog, which in the curre prohibition would apply only to the owner of the dog, as opposed to the owner or a custodian of the dog. Clarification in subsection A as to the punishment for violating reference for punishment is to County Code § 48-10, which makes a violation punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor. The maximum penalty for a Class 4 misdemeanor is fine. Inclusion of a new subsection B, to comply with the new mandates-6538 regarding any dog(s) running at large in a pack. Re-designation of the last sentence of current subsection A as a standalone subsection C. Re-designation of former subsection B as subsection D. Inclusion of a new subsection E, to comply with the new mandates-6538. The Code & Ordinance Committee at its meeting on May 9, 2019, agreed to put forth the attached draft revisions to County Code § 48-3. Following the public hearing, staff is seeking a Board decision regarding the draft revisions. 107 North Kent StreetWinchester, Virginia 22601