The URL can be used to link to this page

February 12 2020 Board_Agenda_PacketAGENDA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2020 7:00 PM BOARD MEETING ROOM 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 Call to Order 1. Invocation 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Adoption of Agenda 4. Citizen Comments –For agenda items that are not the subject of a Public Hearing 5. Consent Agenda 6.Roll Call Vote Required 6.A. Minutes of January 22, 2020 Budget Work Session MinutesBOSWorkSession200122.pdf 6.B. Minutes of January 22, 2020 Regular Meeting MinutesBOS200122.pdf 6.C. Minutes of February 5, 2020 Special Meeting & Budget Work Session MinutesBOSWorkSession200205.pdf 6.D. Human Resources Committee Report of January 24, 2020 CommitteeReportHR200124.pdf 6.E. Parks and Recreation Commission Report of January 14, 2020 CommitteeReportParksRec200114.pdf 1 2 Board of Supervisors RegularMeeting Agenda February 12, 2020 _____________________________________________________________________ Consent Agenda, continued 6.F.Public Works Committee Report of January 28, 2020 CommitteeReportPublicWorks200128.pdf 6.G.Transportation Committee Report of January 27, 2020 CommitteeReportTransp200127.pdf 6.H.Request from the Commissioner of the Revenue for Refund and Supplemental Appropriation BFI Waste Services, LLC -$9,594.24 Refunds200212.pdf 6.I.Road Resolution For Additions to the Secondary System of State Highways - Southern Hills Subdivision Phase I BOS 02-12-20 Road Resolution -Southern Hills, Phase 1.pdf 6.J.Road Resolution For Additions to the Secondary System of State Highways - Snowden Bridge Section 5 BOS 02-12-20 Road Resolution -Snowden Bridge -Section 5.pdf 6.K.Road Resolution For Additions to the Secondary System of State Highways - Commonwealth Court Ext. BOS 02-12-20 Commonwealth Business Park -Commonwealth Court Ext RoadResolution.pdf 6.L.Resolution in Support of Right to Work ResolutionSupportOfRightToWork.pdf Board of Supervisors Comments 7. 2 3 Board of Supervisors RegularMeeting Agenda February 12, 2020 _____________________________________________________________________ County Officials 8. Committee Appointments 8.A. Planning Commission 4-year term expired 1/26/20 -Back Creek District Representative (Mr. Unger does not wish to serve another term. See attached application of John Jewell.) BoardCommitteeAppts(021220BdMtg).pdf Committee Business 9. 9.A. Human Resources Committee 1.Request for approval of creation of Deputy Director of Security position in the IT Department. The committee recommends approval. 2.Request for approval of creation of basicREC Coordinator position in the Parks and Recreation Department. The committee recommends approval. CommitteeReportHR200124.pdf Public Hearings (Non Planning Issues) 10. Twelve Month Outdoor Festival Permit Request of Waveland Farm, LLC 10.A. and Cynthia J. Layman. Pursuant to the FrederickCounty Code, Chapter 86, Festivals; Section 86-3, Permit Required; Application; Issuance or Denial; Fee; Paragraph D, Twelve Month Permits.All Events to be Held on the Grounds of Waveland Farm, LLC, 1211 Marlboro Road, Stephens City, Virginia, Back Creek Magisterial District. Property Owned by Waveland Farm, LLC and Cynthia J. Layman. WavelandFarmLLCOutdoorFestivalPermitApplication(2020).pdf 3 4 Board of Supervisors RegularMeeting Agenda February 12, 2020 _____________________________________________________________________ Planning Commission Business -Public Hearings 11. Ordinance Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165 Zoning, 11.A. Article II Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffer; andRegulations for SpecificUses, Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses, §165-204.19 Telecommunication Facilities, Commercial. Revisions to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to §165-204.19 to Allow Telecommunication Structures up to 100-Feet Above the Ground Level asAdministrative Review-Eligible Projects in Certain Areas of the County. BOS 02-12-20 OA-Telecommunication facilities-McCarthy Amendment.pdf Planning Commission Business -Other Planning Business 12. Rezoning #07 -19 for Gentle Harvest LC, Postponed from the Meeting of 12.A. January 22, 2020 Submitted by Thomas Lawson, PC, to Rezone 1.204 Acres from the B2 (General Business) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with Proffers. The Property is Located at 120 Front Royal Pike and is Identified by Property Identification Number 64-A-1C in the Shawnee Magisterial District BOS 02-12-20 REZ 07-19 Gentle Harvest, LC-Discount Tire.pdf Board Liaison Reports 13. Citizen Comments 14. Board of Supervisors Comments 15. Adjourn 16. 5 4 6 MINUTES BUDGET WORK SESSION FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2020 6:00P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES Board of Supervisors: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman; Blaine P. Dunn; Judith McCann-Slaughter;J. Douglas McCarthy;Gene E. Fisher; Shawn L. Graber; andRobert 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; Scott Varner, Director of Information Technology; Cheryl Shiffler, Director of Finance; Sharon Kibler, Assistant Director of Finance;Jennifer Place, Risk Manager/Budget Analyst; Bill Orndoff, Treasurer; Seth Thatcher, Commissioner of the Revenue; 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. DISCUSSION OF INFORMATION REQUESTED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING County Administrator Kris Tierney provided information on the question of the County’s obligation to proceed with a project if a bond referendumonfinancing a project were passedby the County’s voters. Mr. Tierney presented two budget scenarios based on projected revenue with no tax increase. The Board discussed the scenarios and the possible need to have a real estate tax increase as well as other possible revenue sources including a possible meals tax increase. By consensus, Board Members Dunn, Graber, and McCarthy said they were not in favor of a real estate tax increase while Board Members Fisher, Slaughter, Wells, and Chairman DeHaven were in favor of staff developing budget scenarios based on a possible five cent real estate tax increase. 7 The Board reviewed information on the status of School Security Officers and an update on the radio system improvement project. ADJOURN At 6:55p.m., Chairman DeHaven adjourned the meeting until the 7:00p.m. regular meeting. 8 9 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 22,2020 7:00P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES Board of Supervisors: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman; Gene E. Fisher; Shawn L. Graber;Blaine P. Dunn; Judith McCann-Slaughter;J. Douglas McCarthy;andRobert W. Wells, Vice Chairmanwere 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;Mark Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Tyler Klein, Planner; John Bishop, Assistant Director of Planning-Transportation; Mike Marciano, Director of Human Resources; Scott Varner, Director of Information Technology; andAnn W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m. INVOCATION Vice Chairman Wells delivered theinvocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice ChairmanWells led the Pledgeof Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA –APPROVED Upon motion of Supervisor McCarthy,seconded by Supervisor Dunn,theagendawas adoptedon a voice votewith Item 12.A Rezoning #06-19 Winchester Medical Centerpostponed to the February 26, 2020, meeting. : Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 1 CITIZENS COMMENTS Thomas Ressler of Berkeley County, West Virginia, noted the West Virginia legislature’s resolution inviting Frederick County to join West Virginia. He said he is seeking to file a petition to have Berkeley County join Virginia. Eds Coleman, Gainesboro District, said he was representing Nancy Johnson in Rezoning #06-19 that was postponed. He said he would reserve his comments until the matter is back before the Board. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA –APPROVED Upon motion of Supervisor Slaughter,seconded bySupervisor Dunn,the consent agenda was adoptedonarecorded vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher Aye Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye -Minutes of Budget Work Session and Regular Meeting of January 8, 2020- CONSENT AGENDAAPPROVAL -Minutes of Budget Work Session of January 15, 2020- CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL -Finance Committee Report of January 15, 2020- CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL, Appendix 1 -Request from the Commissioner of the Revenue for Refunds and Corresponding Supplemental Appropriations- CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL Marcus Eugene Truelove -$2,530.58 C. Wilson Fletcher-$3,560.77 21 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 2 -Resolution Honoring Shelia Harden-January Employee of the Month - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL Employee of the Month Resolution Shelia Harden WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors recognizes that the County's employees are a most important resource; and on September 9, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution which established the Employee of the Month award and candidates for the award may be nominated by any County employee; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors upon recommendation by the Human Resources Committee selects one employee from those nominated; and WHEREAS, Shelia Harden, a member of the Division of Court Services team at the Northwest Regional Adult Detention Center, provided assistance for the majority of the workload for a full-time employee who was out on Medical Leave from June 5, 2019 to October 15, 2019, and during this time Shelia did an excellent job working the front desk and taking on a majority of tasks assigned to that position as well as keeping her own job responsibilities in check; and WHEREAS, in September of 2019 the Division was informed by the Commission on VASAP that the old client database system would be replaced by a new system by the end of 2019 requiring all active cases to be re-entered into the new system, and WHEREAS, during the month of October Shelia audited over 500 active cases on the old system and working with the case managers was able to close services for approximately 200 offenders, greatly reducing the number of cases needing to be entered into the new system, and WHEREAS, on more than one occasion Shelia has taken on additional job responsibilities to help the agency without being asked and without hesitation, and over the last few years Shelia has always been the first to help wherever or however she can. As a dependable employee, Shelia displays quality work and leadership skills and takes pride in her position with Frederick County, Division of Court Services. nd NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors this 22 day of January 2020, that Shelia Harden is hereby recognized as the Frederick County Employee of the Month for January 2020; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors extends gratitude to Shelia Harden for her outstanding performance and dedicated service and wishes her continued success in future endeavors; and BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that Shelia Harden is hereby entitled to all of the rights and privileges associated with this award. -Resolution of Support for HB 785 - CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL Resolution Supporting HB 785 -Local Taxing Authority WHEREAS, Equal taxing authority between cities and counties has been a long-standing legislative priority for the Frederick County Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, Delegate Watts has filed HB 785, which proposes to equalize city and county taxing authority; and WHEREAS, Delegate Kilgore is chief co-patron of HB 785; and WHEREAS, HB 785 would grant counties the same authority as cities to impose taxes on cigarettes, admissions, transient room rentals, meals, and travel campgrounds without limitation on the rate that may be imposed; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, expresses its support for HB 785, which would equalize city and county taxing authority. 22 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Frederick County’s Delegates and Senator. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS-None COUNTY OFFICIALS: PRESENTATION OF EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH AWARD TO SHELIA HARDEN Chairman DeHavenand Vice Chairman Wells presented Shelia Harden with the January 2020 Employee of the Month award. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS SHAREN GROMLING APPOINTED TO THE SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD-APPROVED On motion of Supervisor Slaughter,seconded by Supervisor McCarthy,SharenGromling was appointedon a voice vote as Stonewall District Representative to the Social Services Board for a four-year term ending 1/22/24. MARK BERG APPOINTMENTTO PLANNING COMMISSION -DENIED Supervisor Graberthanked Greg Unger, who chose not to seek reappointment to the Planning Commission, for his service. He moved to appoint Dr. Mark Berg as a Back Creek District Representative to the Planning Commission and the motion was seconded by Supervisor Dunn. Themotion failed on a recorded vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher No Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsNo J. Douglas McCarthyNoCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.No Judith McCann-SlaughterNo 23 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 4 CHAIRMAN’S 2020 CITIZEN COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS ANNOUNCED Chairman DeHaven presented the 2020 Citizen Committee assignments as follows: Code & Ordinance Committee Derek C. Aston Stephen G. Butler James A. Drown Finance Committee Jeffrey S. Boppe Angela L. Rudolph Human Resources Committee Don Butler Beth Lewin Kim McDonald Information Technologies Committee Quaisar Absar Todd Robertson Public Safety Committee Walter “Walt” Cunningham Helen Lake Charles R. Torpy Public Works Committee Ed Strawsnyder, Jr. Whitney “Whit” L. Wagner Transportation Committee Gary R. Oates James M. Racey, II Cordell Watt + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 24 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 5 COMMITTEE BUSINESS FINANCE COMMITTEE Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of the following items: The Sheriff requests representing donations to the aGeneral Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $250 department; and the VJCCCA requests a General Fund supplemental appropriationin the amount of $19,109.57 representing unspent FY19 funds to be returned to the State. Vice Chairman Wells seconded the motion which carried on a recorded vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher Aye Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter said theSheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $4,551representingproceedsfrom the sale of surplus vehicles in excess of budgeted revenue. The funds will be used toward the purchase of a new vehicle. Supervisor Fisherseconded the motion which carried on a recorded vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher Aye Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye Supervisor Slaughter saidthe Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $98,145from reserved,restricted eSummons funds representing 15 rugged laptops and associated software and equipment. Supervisor McCarthyseconded the motion which carried on a recorded vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher Aye Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye 25 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 6 Supervisor Slaughter saidthe Sheriff requests a General Fund supplemental appropriation in the amount of $7,900.33representing two auto claim reimbursements.Supervisor McCarthy seconded the motion which carried on a recorded vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher Aye Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye + + + + + + + + + + + + + + PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS –PUBLIC HEARINGS REZONING #03-19 FOR BERLIN STEEL AND DENNIS RIDINGS, SUBMITTED BY PAINTER- LEWIS, PLC, TO REZONE 15.3933+/-ACRES FROM THE RA (RURAL AREAS) DISTRICT TO THE M1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) DISTRICT WITH PROFFERS. THE PROPERTIES ARE ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF RIDINGS LANE,WHICH INTERSECTS WITH ROUTE 277 AND ARE IDENTIFIED BY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 86-A-179C AND 87-A-12 IN THE OPEQUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. –APPROVED Planning Director Mike Ruddy explained this applicationto rezone 15.3933+/-acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (LightIndustrial) District with proffers.He said the site is located within the limits of the Southern Frederick LandUse Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan and the proposed M1 Zoning is generally consistent with the Southern Frederick Land UsePlan as it relates to this area. He said these properties are not located within the limits of the Sewer and WaterService Area (SWSA)and while the Comprehensive Plan states that it is expected that the land uses within theUDA and SWSA will be served by public water and sewer,as this site is contiguous toexisting M1 Zoning and is intended to facilitate an expansion to an existing business (Berlin Steel), thisrequest to rezone property outside of the SWSA may be appropriate. Mr.Ruddy reviewed the proffer statement and staff comments on the statement adding that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning. John Lewis, representing the Applicant, responded to Board concerns about the addition of a turn lane on Rt. 277. He said the Applicant will sponsor a traffic study and install a turn lane if VDOT requiresthat they do so. 26 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 7 Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. Garry Pearson, Stonewall District, said he is a member of Liberty Baptist Church next to the subject property at Ridings Lane. He asked for clarification of impacts to Ridings Lane and whether the line of pine trees shown on the graphic is on the Church property or the Applicant’s. Chairman DeHavennoted the graphics are not survey-quality. Phil Shifflett, Opequon District, said he is a member of Liberty Baptist Church. He expressedconcern about the addition of a turn lane and how the Church entranceand traffic may be affected. Chairman DeHaven closed the publichearing. John Lewis responded to concerns saying there are no plans to widen Ridings Lane. He said the pine trees will not be disturbed because no widening will occur. He said the turn lane, if installed, will be for traffic coming from the east,or Double Tollgate area, and would serve both the entrance of the Applicant and the Churchentrance. The Board discussed the turn lane and its impact on the Church. Vice Chairman Wells moved for approval of Rezoning #03-19. Supervisor McCarthy secondedthe motion which carried on a recorded vote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher Aye Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #03-19 BERLIN STEEL REAL ESTATE, INC. WHEREAS, REZONING #03-19 Berlin Steel Real Estate, Inc., submitted by Painter-Lewis, P.L.C. to rezone 15.3933+/- acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (Light Industrial) District with proffers, with a final revision date of November 18, 2019. The subject property is located at 280 Ridings Lane which intersects with Route 277, in the Opequon Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 86- A-179C and 87-A-12; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on October 16, 2019 and tabled the rezoning for sixty (60) days; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public meeting on this rezoning on December 18, 2019 and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on January 22, 2020; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the 27 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 8 best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINEDby the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to rezone 15.3933+/- acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the M1 (Light Industrial) District with proffers, with a final revision date of November 18, 2019. The conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the Applicant and the Property Owner are attached. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + REZONING #05-19 FOR MARTINSBURG PIKE, LLC., SUBMITTED BY PAINTER-LEWIS, PLC, TO REZONE 1.724+/-ACRES FROM THE RA (RURAL AREAS) DISTRICT TO THE B2 (GENERAL BUSINESS) DISTRICT WITH PROFFERS. THE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED AT 2674 AND 2682 MARTINSBURG PIKE, APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET SOUTH OF STEPHENSON ROAD AND ARE IDENTIFIED BY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 44- A-58, 44-A-59 AND 44-A-60 IN THE STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.-APPROVED Assistant Planning Director John Bishop explained this application to rezone 1.724+/- acres from the RA (Rural Areas)District to the B2 (General Business) District with proffers. He said the site contains three properties, one containsa nonconforming structure that was once operated as a store but has been closed more than two years, oneparcel is vacant, and one parcel contains a single-family dwelling.He said the site is located within the limits of the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan of the 2035 ComprehensivePlanwhich identifies theseproperties with a mixed use industrial/office land use, and the ownerintends to operate a restaurant in the existing commercial structure. He said the site was previously utilized as acountry general store (Oates Grocery), and in general, the proposed commercial zoning is inconsistent with thecurrent land use supported by the Comprehensive Plan. However, he added, considering the site is bordered byresidential property to the south and east and was previously utilized for commercial purposes, the requested commercial may be acceptable as it is of a lesser impact to the surrounding properties.Mr. Bishop reviewed the proffer statement and said that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning. Supervisor McCarthy and Mr. Bishop discussed whether other uses under this zoning would require a turn lane. John Lewis, representing the Applicant, said the proposed use isperfect for the location. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. There were no speakers. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. 28 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 9 Supervisor Slaughter moved for approval of Rezoning #05-19. Supervisor McCarthy secondedthe motion which carried on a recordedvote as follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher Aye Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #05-19 MARTINSBURG PIKE, LLC WHEREAS, REZONING #05-19 MARTINSBURG PIKE, LLC, submitted by Painter-Lewis, P.L.C. to rezone 1.724+/- acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District with proffers with a final revision date of October 17, 2019. The subject properties are located at 2674 and 2683 Martinsburg Pike approximately 1,000 feet south of Stephenson Road, in the Stonewall Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 44-A-58, 44-A-59 and 44-A-60; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on December 18, 2019 and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on January 22, 2020; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINEDby the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to rezone 1.724+/- acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the B2 (General Business) District with proffers with a final revision date of October 17, 2019. The conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the Applicant and the Property Owner are attached. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + REZONING #07-19 FOR GENTLE HARVEST LC, SUBMITTED BY THOMAS LAWSON, PC, TO REZONE 1.204 ACRES FROM THE B2 (GENERAL BUSINESS) DISTRICT TO THE B3 (INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION) DISTRICT WITH PROFFERS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 120 FRONT ROYAL PIKE AND IS IDENTIFIED BY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 64-A-1C IN THE SHAWNEE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.-POSTPONED UNTIL FEBRUARY 12, 2020 Senior Planner Tyler Klein explained this applicationto rezone 1.204+/-acres from the B2 (General Business) District to the B3(Industrial Transition) District with proffers. He said the site is located within the limits of theSenseny/Eastern Urban Area Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan and is identified withcommercial land use designation. In general, he said, the existing B2 zoning and the proposed B3 zoning areconsistent with the current land use supported by the Comprehensive Plan, however; the Comprehensive Plan states that this area should be designed specifically to accommodate and promote 29 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 10 highway commercial land uses. He added staff would note that the site was previouslyutilized for a Mr. Kleinreviewed restaurant which is now closed and the intended user for this site is a DiscountTire. the proffer statement and said that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning. The Board and staff discussed uses that had been proffered out of the rezoning, clarification of the proffers staying with the property should the owner change, and traffic concerns. Ty Lawson, representing the Applicant, discussed the proposal saying it follows the earlier rezoning for Valvoline. Mark Walters of Discount Tire, the Applicant, spoke about his company. The Board and Mr. Walters discussed product delivery,storage and noise issues. Qatar Sidnor, engineer representing the Applicant, reviewed the site plan and discussed traffic, landscaping, and drainage issues. Ty Lawson reviewed additional uses that the Applicant has agreed to exclude as a proffer forthe rezoning. Chairman DeHaven opened the public hearing. Brook Middleton, owner of the subject property, spoke in favor of the rezoning. Earl Hahn, owner of the Travelodge hotel adjacent to the subject property, noted concerns about pneumaticdrill noise and its effect on the hotel’s future repeat customers. He also discussed delivery trucks and access to the property in relation to his hotel. Steve Parrish, Back Creek District, representing the Aikens property adjacent to the subject property, raised concern about how the rezoning will affect his tenantsnext door in the Aikens building. He asked the Board to wait for a more suitable use for the subject property. Jason Aikens, owner of the Aikens building next to the subject property, expressed concern about the rezoningsayingit was being doneto facilitate the sale of the propertyand questioned what happens when Discount Tire leaves and a new business comes in. Chairman DeHaven closed the public hearing. Mr. Lawson made a concluding statement. Supervisor Fisher said he had visited the site noting traffic noise from I-81 is worse than the propose business will generate. He said traffic will be less with the proposed use than the previous use as a restaurant. In order for staff to review the newly received proffer information, 2: Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 11 Supervisor Fisher moved to postpone consideration of Rezoning #07-19until the next meeting on February 12. Supervisor McCarthy seconded the motion to postpone which carried on a recorded voteas follows: Blaine P. DunnAyeGene E. Fisher Aye Shawn L. GraberAyeRobert W. WellsAye J. Douglas McCarthyAyeCharles S. DeHaven, Jr.Aye Judith McCann-SlaughterAye + + + + + + + + + + + + + + PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS –OTHER PLANNING BUSINESS 2020-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN (CIP)–FORWARDED TO PUBLIC HEARING Planning Director Mike Ruddy explained the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) is a document that consists of a schedule of major capital expenditures for the County for the ensuing five-year period, as well as, a category for long term projects (6 + years out). He said while the document does not ensure funding, the CIP is intended to assist the Board of Supervisors in preparation of the County budget, and in addition to determining priorities for capital expenditures, the County must also ensure that projects contained within the CIPconform to the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, he said, the projects are reviewed with considerations regarding health, safety, the general welfare of the public, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, adding that when the CIP is adopted, it becomes a component of the Comprehensive Plan. He said staff was seeking a decision from the Board of Supervisors as to whether the 2020-2025 CIP is ready to be scheduled for public hearing. He noted that there is an additional item for Fire and Rescue’s expansion at Clear Brook which was just received. The Board and staff discussed the CIP and whether projects are ever ranked for priority. Upon motion Supervisor McCarthy, seconded by Vice Chairman Wells, the CIP was forwarded to public hearing on a voice vote. 31 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 12 BOARD LIAISON REPORTS Supervisor Dunn noted that Fire and Rescue has completed review of Chapter 89 which will help all the volunteer companies better work together. CITIZEN COMMENTS Alan Morrison, Gainesboro District, said he has conflicts with how governments operate. He noted the County’s debt, demand for services and fixed income base. He said he is concerned that government only grows, while businesses find ways to conserve and get more from their money. He discussed the life values of County natives versus the values of those moving into the community. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS-None ADJOURN On motion of Vice Chairman Wells, seconded by Supervisor McCarthy,the meeting was adjourned at 8:34p.m. 32 Frederick County Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting Minutes * January 22, 2020 13 33 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING AND BUDGET WORK SESSION FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2020 6:00P.M. BOARD ROOM, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES Board of Supervisors: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman; Blaine P. Dunn; Judith McCann-Slaughter;J. Douglas McCarthy;Gene E. Fisher; and Shawn L. Graber.Robert W. Wells was absent. Staff present: Kris C. Tierney, County Administrator; Jay E. Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator; Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney;Karen Vacchio, Public Information Officer; Scott Varner, Director of Information Technology; Cheryl Shiffler, Director of Finance; Sharon Kibler, Assistant Director of Finance;Jennifer Place, Risk Manager/Budget Analyst; Bill Orndoff, Treasurer; Seth Thatcher, Commissioner of the Revenue; Mike Marciano, Director of Human Resources; Denny Linaburg, Fire Chief; Steve Majchrzak, Assistant Fire Chief; Chester Lauck, Deputy Emergency Management Coordinator; Jason Robertson, Director of Parks and Recreation; and Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Also present was Jeff Boppe, Finance Committee member. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeHaven called the meeting to order at 6:00p.m. ADOPTION OF AGENDA -APPROVED The agenda was adopted on motion of Supervisor Dunn, seconded by Supervisor Slaughter, passing on a voice vote. ADOPTION OF EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN -APPROVED County Administrator Tierney said the current Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) was adopted in January 2016 andis due for re-adoption. He said the document has been through a 34 customary review by the various department heads as well as the Virginia Department of Emergency Management and suggested changes have been made. Deputy Emergency Management CoordinatorChester Lauck and Board members discussed the frequency of full-scale mock emergency drills and the possibility of holding a mock emergency operation drill with Board members attending. The draft Emergency Operations Plan was adopted on motion of Supervisor Graber, seconded by Supervisor McCarthy, passing on a voice vote. At 6:05 p.m., Chairman DeHaven adjourned the special meeting and convened the work session. BUDGET WORK SESSION Mr. Tierney reviewed the updated budget scenario spreadsheet and discussed with Supervisor McCarthy which of the priorities listed had revenues attached to them. SupervisorDunn asked Mr. Tierney to be looking for positions that could be eliminated if they were no longer performing a necessary service. Supervisor Fisher said tipping fees could be increased to offset higher recycling costs. Supervisor Graberinquired how much moneythe County has spent on studies by outside firms and suggested some studies could be done by staff. Supervisor McCarthy inquired if the costs would be less if the County recycled only the mandated 25% rather than a higher percentage. Supervisor Graber said Shawneeland has a deficit budget and asked the Board to direct staff to explore cutting staff and having the Public Works Committee review the budget. The Board discussed the matter noting that the Shawneeland Advisory Committee should address concerns to the Public Works Committee prior to the Board’s involvement. Deputy County Administrator Tibbs provided an update on legislation currently before the General Assembly. Supervisor Slaughter requested that Mr. Tierney inquire if the School Board could reschedule the joint meeting from February 26 to February 19. SupervisorGraber requested a second joint meeting of the Board and School Board with no staff participation. 35 Supervisor Dunn discussed the probability of the meals tax item beingapproved by the General Assembly. Supervisor Slaughter referenced budget priorities saying that 7.5 firefighter positions are a top priority. Supervisors McCarthy and Graber said revenue sharing with the volunteer fire departments needs to be reviewed, especially as it affects apparatus. Supervisor Dunn suggested approaching VACo to push for cost recovery options including the possibility of a transfer tax. ADJOURN At 7:12p.m., Chairman DeHaven adjourned the meeting. 36 37 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE REPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Friday, January 24, 2020 9:00 a.m. 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA A Human Resources Committee meeting was held in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Friday, January 24, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. ATTENDEES: Committee Members Present: Blaine Dunn, Chairman; Don Butler; Doug McCarthy; Beth Lewin; Kim McDonald; and Bob Wells. Staff present: Kris Tierney, County Administrator; Jay Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator; Rod Williams, County Attorney; Michael Marciano, Director of Human Resources; Scott Varner, Director of IT; Jason Robertson, Director of Parks & Recreation; and Jennifer Place, Risk Manager Budget Analyst. Others present: None ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: 1.Scott Varner, Director of Information Technology, sought approval to create a “Deputy Director of Security” position (Range 11) (Exhibit A). The committee recommends approval, 6 in favor & 0 against. 2.Jason Robertson, Director of Parks and Recreation, sought approval to create a “basicREC Coordinator” position (Range 5) (Exhibit B). The committee recommends approval, 6 in favor & 0 against. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY 1.The Human Resources Committee further discussed the Workers’ Compensation Policy and decided that no substantive changes will be made to the policy. Specifically, the current policy requires that paid leave benefits will not accrue while the employee is out on a workers’ compensation claim. Additionally, should the employee not have enough paid leave to cover the difference between the wage replacement benefit and full salary amount, leave without pay will be used. At a future Human Resources Committee meeting, staff will bring the policy back with procedural enhancements that further clarify what occurs when an employee is injured on the job and receives workers’ compensation benefits. The committee approved this approach, 4 in favor & 1 against. Respectfully submitted, HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Blaine Dunn, Chairman Don Butler Beth Lewin Doug McCarthy Kim McDonald Robert (Bob) Wells By 38 Michael J. Marciano, Director of Human Resources Exhibit A Position Justification for “Deputy Director of Security” Position Presented at January 24, 2020 Human Resources Committee Meeting 39 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Information Technologies (540) 665-5614 M E M O R A N D U M To: Human ResourcesCommittee From: Scott Varner,Director of Information Technology and GIS Subject: Request for Deputy Director of Security Date: December 16, 2019 The Department of Information Technology(IT)is requesting to add afull-time employeeto IT’sorganization chart. The position requested is a Deputy Director of Security. Governments have become prime targets for recent cyber- attacks and protection of our security plan, procedures and posture is vital. The consequences of a cybersecurity incident are significant--estimated by some at $4 million on average, taking months to years to recover from, involving legal liability, insurance loopholes, and loss of public trust.To date, the IT Department has handled the increasing workloadof cybersecurity by delegating various portions of the response requirements. Our current staffing levels are already maxed with workloads that consistently require more than the 40-hourwork week. The importance of protecting our vital technology infrastructure warrants a position that will focus on the following areas: • Oversight and Develop of Security Standards • Employee Cybersecurity Training Program • Security Monitoring and Response • Policy Enforcement • Building Access, Camera Surveillance, and Physical Security Oversight • Liaison with Fusion Center and Local Enforcement • Responsible for Department Operations when the Director of ITis absent The reality is that we will be subject to a cybersecurity attack at some point. Our preparation, monitoring, education, and response are crucial to keeping any breach contained and mitigated. The potential for adevastating breach increases significantly without a position dedicated to focusing on our security infrastructure. To date, we have had several Microsoft portal accounts compromised, an average of 50 targeted phishing attempts a day, at least one successful direct deposit scam, not to mention the 100+ attempts daily to get through our firewall. The requested position would also be responsible for ensuring our compliance with new State mandates on cybersecurity compliance as well as federal regulations for the protection of personally identifiable information. Additionally,the position would act as the Director of Information Technology in the Director’s absence. With the majority of our workforce dependent on their desktop computer, phone, and network access to complete the majority of their duties at the Kent Building, Public Safety Building, NRADC, and all other remote sites, the importance of the technological infrastructure warrants having a deputy-level position to maintain continuity and ensure any issue that interrupts the business of the County is handled swiftly and decisively. Thank you for your consideration, Allen Scott Varner 107North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601-5039 svarner@fcva.us 3: COUNTY OF FREDERICK Information Technologies (540) 665-5614 M E M O R A N D U M To: Michael Marciano, Director of Human Resources From: Scott Varner,Director of Information Technology and GIS Subject: Request for Deputy Director of SecuritySalary Information Date: December 16, 2019 In support of our request for a new full-time employeeforthe Information Technology Department, I have included several localities’information below. You will note a combination of Information SecuritySalaries as well as Deputy Director Salaries as this position request combines the two positions. Our neighbor localities are too small to have the level of position requested so the examples below include Henrico County, Fairfax County, and the City of Alexandria. I have requested that the position be set to a range of 11(salary starts at $82,723), with a salary dependent on qualifications. Iconsideredthe higher cost of living in the localities referenced belowin determiningthe range. Several other localities have the position in a senior management pay group that does not have a range, which leaves flexibility in the hiring process. LocalityPosition TitleSalary Range Henrico CountyAssistant Director of IT$102,828.44 -$189,157.74 Fairfax CountyDeputy Director DIT$107,506.46-$179,177.86 Fairfax CountyIT Security Program Director$93,119.73 -$155, 198.78 City of AlexandriaDeputy Director ITS$101,757.24 -$184,410.85 City of AlexandriaIT Security Manager$83,723.64 -$137,620.45 York CountyDeputy Director$91,983 -$156,460 Stafford CountySecurity Analyst$66,289.60-$102,731.20 Shenandoah UniversityIT Security Officer$63,000 -$75,000 Thank you for your consideration, Allen Scott Varner 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601-5039 svarner@fcva.us 41 County of Frederick, Virginia Position Details Position Title: Deputy Director of IT -SecurityDate Position Created: Department: Information TechnologiesReports To: IT Director Exempt Non-ExemptDate Prepared: 11/7/2019Prepared By: Scott Varner Salary:Depends of Qualifications -$82,723 Range:11Grade: -$132,271 --DOE/DOQ G/L Line Item:New Position Request Job Description Assists the Director of Information Technology in the management and administrative oversight of the County’s central information technology/data processing agency.Individual hired will be responsible for strategic planning, policy formulation, financial administration/budget, system/network security, and supervision of the department’s day-to-day operations and activities staff.Person hired directsand manages the County's information/cybersecurity program; ensuresCounty's compliance with all federal and state information security regulations(including homelanddefense security initiatives); coordinates privacy and security requirements with HIPAA coordinator, Department of Finance for Payment Card Industry (PCI)and County agencies using Personally Identifiable Information (PII)and other privacy standards to ensure integrity, sensitivity and confidentiality of data. Works with law enforcement and legal authorities in investigations of digital files;provides architectural oversight,direction and recommendations for enterprise-wide information/cybersecurity technology; and performsother duties as required. Essential Functions The requirements for this position include, but are not limited to, those outlined below. All job functions, education and experience, general knowledge and abilities, and physical requirements are subject to possible modification to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities to enable them to perform the essential functions of the job. This document does not create an employment contract, implied or otherwise. It is the employer’s discretion to add or change the duties or requirements of this position at any time. Directly supervises employees involved in network engineering, network security, server and data center planning and operations, end-user support, and service desk operations. Develops and manages all information security policies, standards, procedures, and internal controls which includes establishing procedures and requirements with key stakeholders to ensure compliance with local, state, and federal laws. Possesses knowledge of information security best practices and baseline security configurations for operating systems, applications and networking, and telecommunications equipment. Drafts strategies and plans to enforce security requirements and addresses identified risks. Develops, documents, and implements the enterprise security program by assessing residual risks, vulnerabilities and other security exposures including the misuse of information assets, and noncompliance with security policies and procedures. Compiles and manages disaster recovery plans and procedures including managing security incidents, providing 'after-action' reports and analysis of information security breaches, violations, malicious activity and incidents to management. Recommends corrective technical options and revisions to Information Technology (IT)security initiatives and policies to prevent future occurrences. Represents the Countywith local, regional, state and federal agencies on issues related to cybersecurity and protection of local government's critical IT infrastructure assets. Works with counterparts in other jurisdictions and external agencies to continuously evaluate and address emerging security threats. 42 Provides guidance and direction while working with all facets of management within the Countyin developing secure and confidential technical solutions. Investigates and recommends new technologies that reduce the risk of cyber security threats and provides potential cost savings for the County. Delivers the IT Security awareness program through structured training and staff communications. Provides written or verbal communication to all levels of staff, leadership and elected officials on security issues and recommendations. Assists in the development of security architecture and security policies, procedures and standards. Evaluates all third-party systems that directly or indirectly access the County's network and reviewsterms and conditions for vendor solutions and or new technology acquisitions. Performs other duties as assigned. Job Requirements: Education:Bachelor's degreein a relevant IT field. Experience:Five years of experience in risk management, information security and IT of which three years are in a leadership role and developing IT security policies and procedures; or any equivalent combination of experience and training which provides the required knowledge, skills and abilities. Knowledge/Skills:Comprehensive knowledge of information security management and technology (audit compliance, regulatory compliance, disaster recovery, vulnerability assessment, firewalls, and endpoint security); comprehensive knowledge of security administration in a Windows based network environment; comprehensive knowledge of server administration as applied to network and internet security; thorough knowledge of information protection standards, guidelines, and applied procedures (i.e. industry "bestpractices"); thorough knowledge of common information security management frameworks, such as ISO/IEC 27001, ITIL, COBIT as well as those from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), including 800-53 and Cybersecurity Framework; thorough knowledge of business needs with the ability to establish and maintain a high level of customer trust and confidence in the security team's concern for customers; the ability to work independently; the ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with coworkers, representatives of other countydepartments and agencies, and the public; and the ability to communicate clearly and effectively, both verbally and in writing. Working Conditions: Physical Demands:The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is regularly required to sit; use hands to finger, handle, or feel; and talk or hear. The employee frequently is required to reach with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to stand; walk; and stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 40 pounds unassisted. Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision for extended periods of viewing a computer screen or screens, distance vision, color vision, depth perception, and ability to adjust focus. Supervisory Responsibilities: Number of Employees Supervised:12Number of Subordinate Supervisors Reporting to Job:2 Approvals: Department Director:Date: HR Director:Date: Finance Director:Date: County Administrator:Date: 43 Board of Supervisors Approval:Date: Exhibit B Position Justification for “basicREC Coordinator” Position Presented at January 24, 2020 Human Resources Committee Meeting 44 To: Human Resource Committee From: Jason Robertson, Director of Parks and Recreation Subj: basicREC Coordinator position Date: December 12, 2019 The Parks and Recreation Commission is recommending a basicREC Coordinator position be added to the Frederick County Salary Administration Program (SAP) and be filled in the Fiscal Year 2020/2021 budget. The basicREC Coordinator is a range 5 position with a starting salary of $39,638. The basicREC Coordinator will provide daily support to the basicREC program. Attendance at basicREC has grown to over 700 for the school year and 450 for the full day summer program each day. Revenue received from basicREC program fees will offset all expenses associated with the basicREC program including the full- time salary and benefits of the basicREC Coordinator. There is no cost to the local taxpayer for the basicREC Coordinator position. The basicREC Coordinator will assist the basicREC Manager with the management of on-site staff at twelve school year locations and eight summer locations. The basicREC Coordinator will assist with program development and evaluation, substitute for a Recreation Technician in emergency situations, answer inquiries regarding the program, assist with the collection of revenues from late paying accounts, and schedule staff. There is no local government position comparable to the basicREC Coordinator. Please find the attached job description for the basicREC Coordinator. 45 County of Frederick, Virginia Position Details Position Title: basicRECCoordinatorDate Position Created: Department: Parks and RecreationReports To: basicRECManager Exempt Non-ExemptDate Prepared: 10/3/2019Prepared By: Ashley Martin Range:5Grade:Salary:$39,638-$63,334–DOE/DOQ G/L Line Item: Job Description Job Purpose: Plans and supervises county-wide specialized recreation programs and activities; does related work as required. The basicREC Coordinator will supervise the work of part-time professional staff, volunteer helpers and activity participants. The employeemay be required todirect recreation activities of a highly specialized nature. General supervision is received from the basicREC Manager. Essential Functions The requirements for this position include, but are not limited to, those outlined below. All job functions, education and experience, general knowledge and abilities, and physical requirements are subject to possible modification to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities to enable them to perform the essential functions of the job. This document doesnot create an employment contract, implied or otherwise. It is the employer’s discretion to add or change the dutiesor requirements of this position at any time. Reports directly to the basicREC Managerin the Recreation Division; Assists with the development, planning, implementation, and evaluation of basicREC and Camp basicRECprograms; Develops a comprehensive recreation program, including site procurement, recruitment, and preparation of promotional information and securing of community support; Compiles figures to prepare budget recommendations for activities in assigned division; Prepares and maintains administrative records andreports of revenues, expenditures, activities, work schedule, program attendance, supplies,and other recreational information; Interacts with the Marketing Manager to prepare plan for promoting assigned activities through newsletters, program brochures, posters,and other promotional materials for programs; Recruits, selects, trains, and supervises part-time, seasonal, and volunteer staff to fulfill program needs; Serves as professional/technical liaison with various agency and interagency staff members, as well as community organizations and committees; Assists with the basicREC program as needed including monitoring timesheets, substituting on site, and other tasks as defined; Supervises all aspects of the basicREC and Camp basicREC program in absence ofthe basicREC Manager;and Ability to assist other program areas as needed and based on availability. Job Requirements: Education: Possession of, or ability to acquire in six months, CPR and Community First Aid certification, UkeruCrisis Training, and Medication Administration Training (MAT)Certification. Must have the ability to acquire Ukeru Crisis Trainer and CPR/First Aid Trainer. 46 Experience: Any combination of education and/or experience equivalent to graduation from an accredited college with a degree in recreation or a related field or relevant experience. Knowledge/Skills: Thorough knowledge of the principles and practices of professional recreation work; good knowledge of one or more phases of community recreation activities; abilityto schedule and coordinate a recreation program on a County-wide basis; ability to provide working leadership to a group of recreation personnel; knowledge of methods involved in age appropriate recreational activities for youth; abilityto act independently and make decisions; possession of good oral and written communication skills; ability to establish effective working relationships with other governmental agencies, co-workers, and program participants. Working Conditions: Physical Demands: Walking, talking, stooping, kneeling, bending, reaching and gripping. May be required on occasion to move up to 30 lbs. Supervisory Responsibilities: Number of Employees Supervised:0Number of Subordinate Supervisors Reporting to Job:0 Approvals: Department Director:Date: HR Director:Date: Finance Director:Date: County Administrator:Date: Board of Supervisors Approval:Date: 47 48 49 4: 51 52 53 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEEREPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Tuesday, January 28, 2020 8:00 a.m. 107 NORTH KENT STREET, SUITE 200, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE ATTENDEES: Committee Members Present: J. Douglas McCarthy, Chairman; Robert W. Wells; Gene E. Fisher; and Harvey E. “Ed” Strawsnyder, Jr. Committee Members Absent: Whitney “Whit” L. Wagner Staff and others present: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works; Kris Tierney, County Administrator; Gloria Puffinburger, Solid Waste Manager; Ron Kimble, Landfill Manager; Mike Stewart, Senior Project Manager; Erin Swisshelm, Assistant County Attorney Attachment 1 – Agenda Packet ITEM FOR INFORMATION ONLY 1-Update on Public Works projects. Staff updated the committee on several on-going projects. The Crossover Boulevard Road Project is on-going with steel beams being placed this week and into next week for the new bridge over I-81. The project is currently ahead of schedule. The new Frederick County Animal Shelter Training Facility, which will be solely funded by donated funds, is currently out for bid. Bids are due on February 19, 2020. Once the bids are received, staff will come back to the committee to request the donated funds be transferred to begin construction. 2-Update on Sunnyside Plaza and the county office building space needs study. Currently, our on-call architect, OWPR, Inc. is performing an update on the county space needs requirements. They are also performing an as-built of the existing building at Sunnyside Plaza and Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors is performing as-builts of the site and utilities. We anticipate discussing our findings at the February 25, 2020 Public Works Committee Meeting. 3-Update on the relocation of the Albin Convenience Center. We anticipate beginning construction of the new site in February. We met with school officials recently in an effort to coordinate traffic control during construction. The project is fully funded, and we anticipate completion by early summer 2020. 4-Transfer request for the Frederick County Landfill into Professional Services. Due to on-going projects at the Frederick County Regional Landfill, we requested a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $600,000.00 from the landfill unreserved fund 54 balance into the Professional Services line item 12-4204-3002-00. Multiple project designs and studies are on-going to evaluate several possible projects at the landfill. A motion was made by Supervisor Wells recommending approval of the request and to forward the request to the Finance Committee for further consideration. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Fisher. The motion was unanimously approved by the committee and has been forwarded to the Finance Committee. 5-Update on holiday usage at the citizen convenience centers. Staff gave an update on recent tonnage from the holiday season. We saw an increase in tonnage of 24% over 2018. 6-Discuss the recycling study performed by SCS Engineers. Due to continual uncertainty in recycling collections and markets for Frederick County and the region, we had our on-call consultant, SCS Engineers perform a study of current options related to recycling. The report focused on the option of utilizing the Frederick County Regional Landfill as a location for a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF)/recycling collection center. Also, part of the study evaluated the costs for our current recycling contract with Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, Maryland. The study was performed by Stacey Demers, Project Director with SCS Engineers. She worked with Gloria Puffinburger, Solid Waste Manager as well to ensure she got all available data, tonnages, costs and updated information on our contracts. In summary of the report, the option to construction a MRF at the landfill would be too costly. Our current option of hauling recycled materials to Apple Valley Waste is our most economical option for now. Another possible option that was studied to help cut costs would be for a private company to open a MRF locally to receive recycled goods. One local company is attempting to move forward with starting a MRF in our area. We will have to see if that option materializes. Currently, increased hauling costs have led to increased budgetary costs for getting the recycled goods to Hagerstown, Maryland. Staff continues to monitor costs and all available options but there is not any local MRF’s so hauling materials to Hagerstown is our only real option, at this time. Discussion during the meeting highlighted that this is not just a local problem, but nationwide. As we determine what our future options are, Frederick County is required to meet Virginias mandated 25% recycling rate. Any options that would eliminate or curtail recycling efforts in the county would impact the county’s ability to reach that mandate. SCS Engineers is also working on the larger Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission (NSVRC) recycling study that includes all of our local counties. We anticipate that study to be completed by early March 2020. Once that study is complete, we will update the committee with those results and determine what our next steps will be. 55 Respectfully submitted, Public Works Committee J. Douglas McCarthy, Chairman 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 file 56 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works SU BJECT: Meeting of January 28, 2020 DATE: January 22, 2020 There will be a meeting of the Public Works Committee on Tuesday, January 28, 2020 at in the conference room located on the second floor of the north end of the County 8:00 a.m. Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Suite 200. The agenda thus far is as follows: 1.Update on Public Works projects – Crossover Boulevard/Frederick County Animal Shelter. 2.Update on Sunnyside Plaza and the space needs study. 3.Update on the relocation of the Albin Convenience Center construction. 4.Discuss transfer request for the Frederick County Landfill – Professional Services. (Attachment 1) 5.Update on holiday usage at the citizens convenience sites. (Attachment 2) 6.Discuss the recycling study by SCS Engineers. (Attachment 3) 7.Next schedule Public Works Committee Meeting will be February 25, 2020. 8.Miscellaneous Reports and Documents: a.Tonnage Report: Landfill 57 107 North Kent Street, Second Floor, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Public Works Committee Meeting Agenda Page 2 January 22, 2020 (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 58 107 North Kent Street, Second Floor, Suite 200 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 59 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Gloria M. Puffinburger Solid Waste Manager RE: 2019 Holiday Usage Summary; Citizens’ Convenience Sites DATE: January 21, 2020 _______________________________________________________________________ During the 2019 Christmas holiday period which included Christmas Eve through Sunday, December 29, staff conducted traffic counts at the county’s two busiest convenience sites, Albin and Greenwood. A total of 2,034vehicles visited the Greenwood citizens’ convenience site and 2,516utilized the Albin location. As expected, traffic spiked during the period, peaking at 913 at Albin and 659 at Greenwood on Thurs., December 26, the day after Christmas and traditionally the busiest trash day of the year. Traffic totals are up slightly from 2018 figures. Heavier than normal trash flow continued through the post New Year weekend. The Albin site took in nearly 52 tons of holiday refuse while Greenwood managed 60 tons. Overall, the county’s ten convenience sites accepted 402.3 tons of refuse attributable to the holiday season which includes Christmas and New Year’s Eve. This number represents an increase in tonnage of 24 percent over 2018. /gmp cc:file 5: Recycling Program Options Assessment Frederick County, Virginia Public Works Department 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 02197017.24 – Task 15 | January 21, 2020 11260 Roger Bacon Drive Reston, VA 20190 703-471-6150 61 Table of Contents Section Page 1Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 2 2Background ...................................................................................................................................... 5 3Current Program .............................................................................................................................. 6 Convenience Centers ......................................................................................................................... 6 Overview .................................................................................................................................... 6 Usage ...................................................................................................................................... 6 Material Quantities ................................................................................................................... 8 Residuals .................................................................................................................................. 9 Contracts and Costs ........................................................................................................................ 10 Transportation ....................................................................................................................... 10 Transportation to Closest Processing Facility ......................................................... 10 Transportation of All Materials to Apple Valley Waste ........................................... 11 Savings Related to Compaction of Plastic Containers and Cardboard ................. 11 Processing .............................................................................................................................. 12 Tipping Fees at Closest Processing Facility ............................................................ 12 Tipping Fees for All Materials at Apple Valley Waste ............................................. 13 Total Costs ............................................................................................................................. 13 4Recycling Program Options .......................................................................................................... 14 Option #1 Transport Material To Apple Valley Waste ................................................................... 14 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 14 Benefits .................................................................................................................................. 14 Challenges ............................................................................................................................. 15 Costs ................................................................................................................................... 16 Option #2 Develop A County-Owned Local Aggregation and baling facility ................................. 16 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 16 Benefits .................................................................................................................................. 16 Challenges ............................................................................................................................. 17 Facility Specifications ............................................................................................................ 17 Costs ................................................................................................................................... 19 City of Winchester ..................................................................................................... 20 Commercial Sector ................................................................................................... 20 Option #3 Utilize Local Private Facility ........................................................................................... 20 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 20 Benefits .................................................................................................................................. 21 Challenges ............................................................................................................................. 21 Costs ................................................................................................................................... 22 5Conclusions................................................................................................................................... 23 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 62 i Exhibits Unit Cost Ranges for Recycling Program Options ............................................................... 4 Citizen Convenience Centers in Frederick County .............................................................. 7 Recyclable Materials Collected through County Convenience Centers ............................. 9 Unit Cost Ranges for Recycling Program Options ............................................................ 24 Tables Table 1.Average Daily Vehicle Trips by Convenience Center ........................................................... 8 Table 2.Materials Accepted for Recycling at County Convenience Centers ................................... 8 Table 3.Contamination Rates from Select Months in 2019 ............................................................ 9 Table 4.Annual Transportation Cost to Closest Processing Facility ............................................. 10 Table 5.Annual Transportation Cost to Apple Valley Waste .......................................................... 11 Table 6.Savings Related to Compaction of Plastic and Cardboard .............................................. 12 Table 7.Annual Tipping Fees at Closest Processing Facilities ...................................................... 12 Table 8.Annual Tipping Fees for All Materials to Apple Valley Waste .......................................... 13 Table 9.Annual Transportation Cost to Apple Valley Waste .......................................................... 13 Table 10.Current Annual Recycling Program Costs ......................................................................... 16 Table 11.Annual Quantity of Recyclables from Other Programs ..................................................... 18 Table 12.Aggregation and Baling Facility Costs for Varying Throughput ........................................ 19 Table 13.Annual Transportation Costs to a Local Processing Facility ............................................ 22 Table 14.Cost for Transportation and Processing for Recycling Options ....................................... 23 Appendices A Ï Facility Size Calculations B Ï Facility Construction Cost Calculations C Ï Concept Facility Drawing Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 63 ii 1EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Frederick County (County) requires a new sustainable long-term recycling solution. The CountyÔs long- time recyclable material processer, Southern Scrap, announced in the summer of 2019 that it will close at the end of 2019. Southern ScrapÔs decision to close is not entirely unexpected. Recycling processors across the U.S. have been scrambling to find markets for recyclable materials since January 2018, when China implemented their Operation National Sword. These policies have banned the import of certain types of scrap materials and implemented much stricter and more rigorous contamination standards for materials accepted. As a result, there is an over-saturation of the domestic recycling market as materials that had been previously sent to China are now being marketed domestically. This has led to depressed pricing for recycled commodities. Across the country, local governments who had become accustomed to receiving rebates on their recyclable materials are now paying higher fees to continue their recycling programs. Since Southern ScrapÔs announcement to close, the County has been searching for new facilities that will accept the recyclable materials collected through the CountyÔs convenience center program. As a result, the County has issued three Invitations to Bid (IFBs) for recycling processing and hauling. The closest recycling processing facility that accepts all commodities collected at the CountyÔs convenience centers, Apple Valley Waste, is located in Hagerstown, MD about 50 miles from the convenience centers in the County. Hauling all recyclable materials to a local market is $120 per ton but hauling all recyclable materials to Apple Valley Waste will be $201 per ton, an increase of $81 per ton. The CountyÔs current plans are to haul recyclable material collected at its convenience to Apple Valley Waste for just over $312,000 annually or $221 per ton ($201 for transportation and $20 for tipping fees). The cost to transport recyclable materials to Hagerstown for processing is creating a significant financial burden on the County which threatens the viability of the recycling program. The County commissioned this recycling assessment study to identify recycling options that will help control program costs while still serving the needs of Frederick County residents. SCS identified the following three options as paths forward for the CountyÔs recycling program. Option #1 Ï Transport all Recyclable Materials to Apple Valley Waste (Status Quo) After a competitive bid process, the County opted to have their recyclable materials (1,410 tons annually) collected and transported by Republic Services to Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, Maryland for processing and marketing. Annual costs for this option are just over $312,000 or $221 per ton ($201/ton for transportation and $20 in tipping fees) Option #2 Ï Develop Local Aggregation and Baling Facility SCS estimated three options for a County-owned aggregation and baling facility, varying by quantity of incoming recyclables and program: om the Frederick County recyclables only. A facility to process only the recyclables fr Countand bale yÔs convenience centers would need to be 13,750 square feet to store 1,410 tons of recyclables annually. This facility would cost between $3.0M and $4.2M, resulting in a unit cost of $261 to $365 per ton. Frederick County, Clarke County, and City of Winchester recyclables. A facility to process the recyclables from convenience centers in Frederick and Clarke counties and the curbside collection from the City of Winchester residents (assumes separation by material type) would need to be 18,000 square feet to store and bale 3,535 tons of 64 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 2 material annually. This facility would cost between $3.6M and $5.0M resulting in a unit cost of $123 to $173 per ton. Frederick County, Clarke County, City of Winchester and privately-collected commercial sector recyclables. A facility to process the recyclables from convenience centers in Frederick and Clarke counties and the curbside collection from the City of Winchester residents (assumes separation by material type) and the privately-collected commercial sector cardboard would need to be 27,000 square feet to store and bale 8,425 tons of material annually. This facility would cost between $4.9M and $6.9M resulting in a unit cost of $71 to $99 per ton. If the facility was constructed to be 27,000 square feet but only received half of the annual recyclables generated from the City of Winchester and the privately-collected commercial sector, the unit cost would increase to $132 to $184 per ton Option #3 Ï Utilize a Local Privately-Owned Facility With the closing of Southern Scrap, there are no existing recycling processing facilities in the County. This also presents issues to the commercial sector who relies on private haulers for collecting their cardboard and transporting it to a recycling facility. Private haulers had also relied on Southern Scrap for accepting cardboard. It is estimated that almost 5,000 tons of cardboard are collected annually from the commercial sector in the County. As such, private haulers are considering investments in an aggregation and baling facility for the material they haul from the commercial sector. It is estimated that the CountyÔs cost to transport recyclables from their convenience centers to a local facility is about $170,000 annually or $120 per ton. The tipping fees at Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, Maryland vary between $0 for cardboard to $60 per ton for plastic bottles, with a weighted average of $20 per ton for all recyclable commodities. It is expected that a local commercial baling facility could process the CountyÔs recyclables for about the same. The recycling program in nearby Page County, Virginia bales its recyclable materials and is therefore able to attract a recycling processing facility to collect their baled materials at no cost to the County. It is assumed that a local privately-owned baling facility could also receive the same benefit. However, it is conservatively estimated that a local facility could accept the CountyÔs recyclable materials for between $20 to $80 per ton to accommodate additional transportation to markets if needed. A private facility would also help Clarke County and the City of Winchester reduce their recycling program costs. Exhibit 1 presents the recycling program unit costs ($/ton) for the options described above. The costs presented include transportation, processing and/or amortization of capital costs. The current recycling program unit cost is displayed by the red diamond; the unit cost ranges for a program that includes a county-owned baling facility are presented by the blue bars (four options for facility sizing based on throughput); and the green bar presents the unit cost range for utilizing a privately-owned facility. It should be noted that a privately-owned facility does not currently exist; however, this option is presented for comparison purposes. 65 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 3 Unit Cost Ranges for Recycling Program Options $500 $450 $400 $350 $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 $50 $0 1,4101,4103,5358,4254,545NA TonsTonsTonsTonsTons CurrentCounty-Owned FacilityPrivately- ProgramOwned Facility Recycling Program Option 66 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 4 2BACKGROUND The County owns and operates 11 convenience centers for residents to dispose of household refuse and segregated recyclable materials. The County strives to staff each convenience center with an attendant to assist residents in placing materials, whether trash or recyclables, in the correct collection container. Republic Services has been contracted to haul individual containers of mixed paper, cardboard, plastic containers and metal cans (steel and aluminum cans) to Southern Scrap in Winchester for processing and marketing; however, Southern Scrap informed the County that it will cease operations in December 2019 and terminate its contract to accept the CountyÔs recyclable materials. Southern ScrapÔs decision to close is not entirely unexpected. Recycling processors across the U.S. have been scrambling to find markets for recyclable materials since January 2018, when China implemented their Operation National Sword. These policies have banned the import of certain types of scrap materials and implemented much stricter and more rigorous contamination standards for materials accepted. As a result, there is an over-saturation of the domestic recycling market as materials that had been previously sent to China are now being marketed domestically. This has led to depressed pricing for recycled commodities. Recycling processors have responded in a number of ways to these challenges. Some have limited or rejected the types and/or quantities of material they accept. Others have invested in additional processing equipment (at additional cost) to remove contaminants from recyclable materials. Still others have stockpiled recyclable material in the hopes that the markets improve or are scrambling to find new markets for their material. This means higher fees to local governments who had become accustomed to receiving rebates on their recyclable materials. In surveys across the U.S., most residents still support recycling programs even if they have to pay more to continue the service. Larger communities are investing in education and other outreach efforts to reduce contamination and improving operational efficiencies to reduce the impact of higher recycling costs. Smaller communities are trying to do the same but do not have the same flexibility to maintain their programs. Due to its rural nature, Frederick County has limited access and proximity to recycling processors and markets. However, the use of convenience center attendants, collection methods that keep recyclable material types separated, and exclusion of glass result in a low level of contamination. This makes the CountyÔs recyclable materials more attractive to recycling processors. To continue the recycling program, the County needs to assess their options to either reduce transportation and processing costs to recycling processing facilities outside the County or develop processing capacity within the County. 67 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 5 3CURRENT PROGRAM In fiscal year 2019, Frederick County collected and diverted over six million pounds of materials through their recycling programs: about half of this quantity was comprised of plastic bottles, metal cans, mixed paper and cardboard that was delivered to Southern Scrap for processing and marketing; the remaining half was comprised of textiles, electronics, and scrap metals that were delivered to other local markets. There has been a consistent moderate growth in the quantity of material diverted from landfill disposal for the past four years. The County calculates a recycling rate of 53.9 percent which far exceeds the state mandate of recycling 25 percent of waste produced. In fiscal year 2019, the CountyÔs recycling program received about $42,000 in rebates from the sale of recyclable material; although this was significantly less than the rebates the County received in fiscal year 2018 due to the depressed recycling market. Because the County staffs each of its convenience centers with attendants that assist residents place correct material in the recycling collection containers, their materials have a low level of contamination (below five percent by weight). This clean stream of recyclable materials positions the County well for finding facilities that will accept their recyclable materials and receiving the highest rebates for their materials. CONVENIENCE CENTERS Overview The County operates 11 convenience sites throughout the County. Sites are open to residents of Frederick County, Clarke County, and the City of Winchester to use for the disposal of trash and recyclable materials at no charge. Most convenience sites are open six days a week (closed Wednesdays) to provide County residents a high level of service. The County staffs each site to monitor usage and occasionally relies on outside groups such as United Way to supply volunteers to help enforce recyclable material preparation guidelines. Usage Resident usage of the convenience centers varies significantly from one site to another. In 2019, the County reports that annual usage ranged from about 600 vehicle trips (Star Tannery) to over 15,000 (Albin). Not surprisingly, convenience centers located closer to urban areas (Albin and Greenwood) received more vehicle trips per day on average. Overall, daily vehicle trips for The Albin site in particular received a 17 percent increase in vehicle trips from 2018 to 2019. Four sites (Back Creek, Round Hill, Gore, and Star Tannery) receive on average less than 150 vehicle trips each day. Exhibit 2 provides of map of Frederick County with designated markers to indicate the location of the convenience centers. Convenience centers with lower daily usage tend to be located in the more rural western part of the County. Overall, the number of vehicle trips taken to the convenience centers decreased by about one percent in 2019 from 2018, from 911,916 vehicle trips to 902,976. Table 1 lists the average daily vehicle trips for each convenience center for 2018 and 2019 and calculates how usage of the individual sites has changed over the last year. 68 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 6 Citizen Convenience Centers in Frederick County 69 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 7 Table 1.Average Daily Vehicle Trips by Convenience Center Convenience Center 2018 Vehicle Trips 2019 Vehicle Trips Percent Change Greenwood14.22213,459-5.2% Albin13,286 15,552 17.1% Middletown7,0917,1701.1% Stephenson9,59810,72711.8% Double Tollgate 7,950 7,793 -2.0% Shawneeland6,5776,7712.9% Gainesboro/Back Creek 4,987 5,162 3.5% Round Hill 4,257 4,409 3.6% Gore3,361 3,544 5.4% Star Tannery 654 661 1.1% Materials Recyclable materials collected through Frederick CountyÔs convenience center program are collected source-separated. All convenience centers are equipped with either 30-yard roll-off containers or 8- yard dumpsters for the placement of recyclable materials. Residents are required to separate recyclable materials from trash and by material type (cardboard, mixed paper, plastic bottles, and metal cans) when they use the convenience centers. Table 2 lists the materials that are accepted as part of the CountyÔs recycling program. Table 2.Materials Accepted for Recycling at County Convenience Centers Material Examples Special Instructions Inserts, magazines, catalogues, office Must be dry and may be contained in a Paper paper, shredded paper, phone books paper bag No pizza boxes or coated/waxed Cardboard Corrugated boxes, paperboard materials Aluminum/ steel food and beverage Metal Cans Empty, dry, and clean cans Bottles and containers that have a neck Clean, empty and dry; lids are not Plastic (typically #1 PET and #2 HDPE) accepted; no plastic bags Material Quantities SCS reviewed Frederick County records for the amount of recyclable materials collected through the convenience center program. Cardboard and mixed paper comprise the largest portion of the recyclable material stream. These materials comprise about 80 percent of the collected materials by weight. In 2019, the County collected 1,400 tons of recyclable materials through their convenience center program. Exhibit 3 provides the quantity of recyclable materials collected by commodity for the last three years. 6: Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 8 Recyclable Materials Collected through County Convenience Centers Residuals One successful element of the CountyÔs recycling program is the limited amount of residuals (contamination) in the loads of recyclable materials transported for processing. The County provides educational materials to residents on the proper way to recycle. Additionally, County staff monitor residentsÔ usage of the convenience centers to facilitate proper recycling and correct behavior when necessary. This level of attention and scrutiny brought to the program has resulted in a clean streams of materials brought to market. Earlier in 2019, the CountyÔs recyclable materials processor required that the County pay for the disposal of residual material from their program. This requirement was implemented to help the processor manage increased costs because of the depressed market value of materials. SCS analyzed several months of data using scale tickets from Southern Scrap to estimate the residual rate from the CountyÔs recyclable materials. Contamination rates for the months analyzed did not exceeded four percent by weight, which is extraordinary based on recent studies conducted nationwide of municipal recycling programs. Table 3 summarizes recycling contamination rates for select months in 2019. Table 3.Contamination Rates from Select Months in 2019 Recycling Collected Contamination Contamination Month (Tons) (Tons) Rate (%) February 146 3.8 2.6% April 103 2.5 2.4% May 113 3.7 3.3% June 97 3.7 3.8% 71 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 9 CONTRACTS AND COSTS Between July and October 2019, as a result of Southern Scrap announcing it would close by December 2019, Frederick County issued multiple invitations to bid (IFBs) for transportation and processing/marketing services for the recyclable materials collected through its convenience centers, The IFBs were for the following services: July 18, 2019 - Recycling Processing and Marketing Services: The County received four bids to accept all or select commodities of its recyclable materials. Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, MD offered the lowest tipping fees for all segregated recyclable material types. August 8, 2019 - Plastics Hauling Services: Because Southern Scrap stopped accepting plastic, the County issued an IFB for transporting plastic containers to Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, MD. Two bids were submitted and Republic Services offered the lowest fee for collecting plastic from 8-cy collection containers in a front end loading collection vehicle that compacted plastic containers from multiple 8-cy collection containers. October 25, 2019 - Recyclables Hauling Services: In preparation of Southern Scrap closing in December 2019, the County issued an IFB for transporting recycling all commodities to Apple Valley Waste, cardboard to Republic Services in Hagerstown, MD, and metal cans to Winchester Scrap. Republic Services was the sole bidder. Republic has been transporting plastic containers from the convenience centers to Apple Valley Waste since August 2019. The County will begin transporting all recyclable materials to Apple Valley Waste (via hauling services by Republic) in December 2019. Transportation Transportation to Closest Processing Facility Transporting recycling materials to the nearest recycling processing facility helps to minimize transportation costs. Table 4 presents the annual transportation costs associated with hauling recyclable commodities to their closest market. Table 4.Annual Transportation Cost to Closest Processing Facility Container Annual Cost per CommodityDestinationAnnual Cost SizePullsPull Mixed PaperApple Valley Waste30-yard120$321.00$38,520 BC CardboardRepublic, Hagerstown, MD8-yard2,496$52.64$145,789 A Plastic ContainersApple Valley Waste8-yard1,144$70.31$80,435 Metal Cans Winchester Scrap30-yard60$125.00$7,500 (steel & aluminum) Total$272,244 $/ton$193 A Assumes one frontload truck, containing 22 8-cy containers, per week (52 weeks/yr x 22 8-cy containers =1,144 pulls/yr) B Assumes 48 8-cy containers each week (48 containers x 52 weeks/yr = 2,496 pulls/yr) C Includes $14,400 for annual cost to rent 48 8-cy containers. 72 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 10 Transportation of All Materials to Apple Valley Waste Apple Valley Waste, while 40 miles farther than Winchester Scrap (the closest processing facility for metal cans), offers lower tipping fees for some materials. Table 5 presents the annual transportation costs associated with hauling all recyclable materials from the CountyÔs convenience centers to Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, MD. Table 5.Annual Transportation Cost to Apple Valley Waste Container Annual Cost per CommodityDestination Annual Cost SizePullsPull Mixed PaperApple Valley Waste30-yard120$321.00$38,520 BC CardboardApple Valley Waste8-yard2,496$52.64$145,789 A Plastic ContainersApple Valley Waste8-yard1,144$70.31$80,435 Metal Cans D Apple Valley Waste30-yard 60$321.00$19,260 (steel & aluminum) Total$284,004 $/ton$201 A Assumes one frontload truck, containing 22 8-cy containers, per week (52 weeks/yr x 22 8-cy containers =1,144 pulls/yr) B Assumes 48 8-cy containers each week (48 containers x 52 weeks/yr = 2,496 pulls/yr) C Includes $14,400 for annual cost to rent 48 8-cy containers. D Assumes that Republic will charge similar fees as hauling cardboard. Hauling metal cans to Apple Valley Waste instead of Winchester Scrap will cost the county an additional $12,000 annually. Savings Related to Compaction of Plastic Containers and Cardboard The annual transportation costs presented in Table 4 and Table 5 include collection of plastic containers and cardboard from 8-cy collection containers via a front end load collection vehicle. This collection method allows a Ñmilk runÒ by a front end load collection vehicle to aggregate materials from multiple convenience centers in the County before hauling them roughly 40 miles to Apple Valley Waste and/or RepublicÔs Cardboard Facility, both in Hagerstown, MD. Front end load collection vehicles are typically more expensive for hauling material than roll-off containers due to the many mechanical features used to lift and empty dumpsters and compact the contents. Cardboard and single-stream recyclables (bottles/cans and paper/cardboard all mixed together) are frequently collected from the commercial sector by private haulers utilizing front end load collection vehicles; however, it is uncharacteristic for source separated plastic bottles to be collected using a front end load collection vehicle. The willingness of Republic Services to use a front end collection vehicle for plastic bottles and jugs has reduced the number of trips to Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, MD thus reducing transportation costs for the County. By compacting multiple collection containers of plastic bottles/jugs and cardboard via a front end load collection vehicle before transportation to processing facilities 40 miles away, the County is able to reduce the number of trips necessary to transport these materials to a processing facility. This reduction in annual transportation costs has allowed the recycling program to continue. 73 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 11 Table 6 presents the cost savings related to the Ñmilk runÒ collection method for plastic bottles and jugs and cardboard which is about $216,000 annually. Table 6.Savings Related to Compaction of Plastic and Cardboard Container Annual Cost per CommodityDestinationAnnual Cost SizePullsPull A $321.00$208,650 30-yard650 Plastic ContainersApple Valley Waste B 8-yard1,144$70.31$80,435 Savings by Compacting Plastic Containers$128,215 C 30-yard728$321.00$233,688 CardboardApple Valley Waste DE 8-yard2,496 $52.64$145,789 Savings by Compacting Cardboard$87,899 Total Annual Savings from Compaction$216,114 A Assumes 54 pulls per month (54 x 12 = 648 pulls/yr) plus two pulls from Star Tannery per year = 650 B Assumes one frontload truck, containing 22 8-cy containers, per week (52 weeks/yr x 22 8-cy containers =1,144 pulls/yr) C Average collection frequency from FY2019 D Assumes 48 8-cy containers each week (48 containers x 52 weeks/yr = 2,496 pulls/yr) E Includes $14,400 for annual cost to rent 48 8-cy containers. Processing Tipping Fees at Closest Processing Facility As shown in Table 7, minimizing transportation by sending each material commodity to its closest processing facility results in about $44,000 in annual tipping fees. Tipping fees at Apple Valley Waste, the closest facility that accepts mixed paper and plastic bottles/jugs, are $25 and $60 per ton, respectively. Even though transportation costs to Apple Valley Waste and RepublicÔs Cardboard Baling Facility in Hagerstown are the same, there is a significant difference in tipping fees: Apple Valley Waste charges $0 whereas Republic charges $30/ton. Similarly, Winchester Scrap charges no tipping fee for metal cans; however, as shown in Table 8, Apple Valley Waste charges significantly higher tipping fees for metal cans Table 7.Annual Tipping Fees at Closest Processing Facilities Annual Tipping Fee CommodityDestinationAnnual Cost Tons($/Ton) Mixed PaperApple Valley Waste500$25.00$12,500 CardboardRepublic, Hagerstown, MD620$30.00$18,600 Plastic ContainersApple Valley Waste215$60.00$12,900 A Steel CansWinchester Scrap50$0.00$0 A Aluminum CansWinchester Scrap25$0.00$0 Total1,410$44,000 $/ton$31 A Winchester Scrap does not have a processing fee for metals 74 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 12 Tipping Fees for All Materials at Apple Valley Waste Apple Valley Waste, while 40 miles farther than Winchester Scrap (the closest processing facility for metal cans), offers lower tipping fees cardboard but higher tipping fees for metal cans. The overall result for sending all materials to Apple Valley waste is a savings in tipping fees of $15,850 as presented in Table 8. Table 8.Annual Tipping Fees for All Materials to Apple Valley Waste Annual Tipping Fee CommodityDestinationAnnual Cost Tons($/Ton) Mixed PaperApple Valley Waste500$25.00$12,500 CardboardApple Valley Waste620$0.00$0 Plastic ContainersApple Valley Waste215$60.00$12,900 Steel CansApple Valley Waste50$30.00$1,500 Aluminum CansApple Valley Waste25$50.00$1,250 Total1,410$28,150 Total Costs Annual transportation costs and tipping fees associated with the collection of about 1,410 tons of material collected from Frederick County convenience centers is just over $312,000. As presented in Table 9 below, the County will save just over $4,000 annually by sending all recyclable materials to Apple Valley Waste for processing and marketing. Table 9.Annual Transportation Cost to Apple Valley Waste CommodityDestinationTransportationTipping FeesTotal Cost Closest Facility$272,244$44,000$316,244 All Materials Apple Valley Waste$284,004$28,150$312,154 Annual Savings from Using Apple Valley Waste for All Material$4,090 75 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 13 4RECYCLING PROGRAM OPTIONS This section provides details on potential long-term recycling program options, which include the following: OPTION #1 TRANSPORT MATERIAL TO APPLE VALLEY WASTE Overview For this option the County would continue to operate their recycling program as is and the materials would be transported to Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, MD. Throughout the latter half of 2019, Frederick County secured contracts for the transportation and processing/marketing of recyclable materials with Apple Valley Waste as they offered the most favorable tipping fees, This is because Apple Valley Waste directs separated materials delivered from Frederick County directly to their baler, avoiding the single-stream sorting system. Recycling facilities operated by Waste Republic Services cardboard baling operation in Management and Republic Services in Hagerstown, Maryland Manassas, Virginia offered tipping fees significantly higher during the IFB process. These facilities both process single-stream recyclables and likely planned to process the CountyÔs separated materials through their system, offering no discount for the material being separated by material type. The CountyÔs low contamination rates likely played a role in Apple Valley WasteÔs favorable tipping fees, allowing the material to bypass the sorting system and go directly to the baler. Benefits SCS identified the following benefits for the County to continue utilizing Apple Valley Waste: Established/Known Market Ï Apple Valley Waste has invested significant capital in the infrastructure and equipment of their facility and has established buyers for the commodities that are produced. SCS toured their facility and found it to be clean and well managed; the facility manager has over 20 years of experience working for recycling processing facilities. Although there is no guarantee that this facility will continue to operate over the long-term, it appears to be well managed with a fair number of customers and material flow. Less Risk Over Short-Term Ï Relying on private industries to provide the essential processing and marketing of recyclable materials contains some risk. The current situation with Southern Scrap illustrates how market forces can have a strong impact on a well-established recycling program. However, industry experts are cautiously optimistic that the recycling markets will rebound, albeit 76 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 14 in two to five years. Using Apple Valley Waste allows the County to maintain its recycling program investment until additional options develop. Public Desire to Recycle Maintained - As Frederick County experienced, residents demand opportunities to recycle and that requires outlets for materials to flow. Benefit from Low Contamination Ï The County has built a reputation for providing clean recyclable materials for processing and marketing. In utilizing the existing markets with Apple Valley Waste, the County has established credibility in providing pure streams of materials with little contamination. In todayÔs market, having a trusted partner in the recycling loop is a significant advantage and one that many recyclable material processers desire. Public Education Maintained Ï Frederick County recognizes that modifying the operations of their current source-separated convenience-center based recycling program, while can be done, is not desirable as the public is trained on how to properly use the program. Thus, Recyclable materials utilizing Apple Valley WasteÔs MRF allows the service to processing at Apple Valley continue. Waste in Hagerstown, Maryland Challenges SCS identified the following challenges of using Apple Valley Waste: Reduced Control ÏRelying on privately owned and operated recycling facilities to accept materials is common practice by local governments throughout the country. Contracts can be structured to require advance notice of changes to the materials accepted; however, local governments will ultimately need to modify their recycling program to conform to the requirements of the recycling facility. The County experienced this situation when Southern Scrap suddenly stopped accepting plastic containers in mid-2019. This left the County only a short window of opportunity to find an additional market, as residents expected to continue recycling plastics. The solution was a new market outside of Virginia that significantly increased transportation costs for the County. Loss of Economic Benefit Ï Previously, Frederick County had relied on a local Winchester-based facility to accept their recyclable materials. Managing waste and recyclable materials locally has contributed to the local economy. Processing recyclable materials locally has economic benefits to Frederick County by creating jobs which are lost when the materials need to be transported to a distant facility. Transportation Costs Ï Currently, the effect of transportation on recycling program expenditures far outweighs the processing costs. Transportation costs to Hagerstown, about 50 miles away, are 90 percent of the recycling program costs; processing costs are only about 10 percent. The County has taken steps to reduce transportation costs, such as collecting materials in front-load containers in order to reduce the number of trips needed to Hagerstown. 77 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 15 Environmental Ï Another challenge with transporting recyclable materials to markets in Hagerstown is the additional emissions that result from trucks moving these materials. The emissions related to the additional hauling is contributing additional air pollution that negatively impacts the community. Costs The CountyÔs plans of contracting with Republic Services to haul recyclable materials to Apple Valley Waste in Hagerstown, Maryland will be about $312,000 annually in transportation and processing fees. This equates to $221 per ton. Table 10 presents the current annual recycling program costs. Table 10.Current Annual Recycling Program Costs CommodityDestination$/TonTransportationProcessingTotal Mixed PaperApple Valley Waste$38,520$12,500$51,020$102 CardboardApple Valley Waste$145,789$0$145,789$235 Plastic ContainersApple Valley Waste$80,435$12,900$93,335$434 Steel CansApple Valley Waste$1,500$20,760$415 $19,260 Aluminum CansApple Valley Waste$1,250$1,250$50 Total$284,004$28,150$312,154$221 Percent of Total Annual Cost91.0%9.0% OPTION #2 DEVELOP A COUNTY-OWNED LOCAL AGGREGATION AND BALING FACILITY Overview With the anticipated closure of Southern Scrap, the County can consider developing its own facility to aggregate and condense its recyclables, thus reducing transportation costs. The added expense to remove contaminants and sort materials into marketable commodities is unnecessary because the CountyÔs source-separated recycling program produces clean streams of materials. Page County, Virginia operates a similar program for its recyclable materials. Their convenience centers collect separated materials which are delivered to a County facility to be baled. The County uses two balers and stores the bales until sufficient quantities have accumulated to warrant collection from a private recycling company, Recycling and Disposal Solutions in Roanoke, Virginia. RDS does not charge the County for transportation or processing and even provides a nominal rebate to the County for their materials. Most notably, recycling companies often provide transportation at no cost to the local government to collect clean baled recyclable materials. Benefits SCS identified the following benefits of establishing recycling capacity in the region: Increased Options & Reduced Transportation Costs Ï Establishing an aggregation and baling facility for the CountyÔs recyclables affords the County with more options for their materials. Once materials are baled, and the bales have little to no contamination, there are more options to market the material. The condensed baled material will require significantly fewer trips to a 78 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 16 market, but more importantly, there are companies that will arrange for pickup of the baled material from the CountyÔs facility, allowing the County to avoid hauling costs to out-of-county markets. Economic ExpansionÏ By establishing their own recycling facility, the County will be investing in local infrastructure to serve the needs of their constituents. A local recycling facility will create jobs during the planning, construction, and operational phases of the project. This can fuel economic growth in the County and region. Environmental Impacts Ï As discussed above, trucking recyclable materials to Hagerstown has a negative impact on the environment in the Shenandoah Valley. Conversely, managing recyclable materials locally mitigates those environmental concerns such as air pollution by reducing the number of miles it take to transport materials to market. Existing Experience Ï Other local governments, notably Page County, have established their own recycling facility where materials are baled. Frederick County would not be the first local government to implement this type of a program. The County could rely on the experience and information provided by Page County and others to help with implementing their own aggregation and baling facility. Relying on such experience has the potential to avoid pitfalls and common mistakes that may otherwise occur and be overlooked throughout all phases of the project. Challenges SCS identified the following challenges of establishing recycling capacity in the region: Increased Risk Ï With any new facility, there is risk associated with its implementation. The risk of such a facility is greater if the County opts to develop a facility sized to accept materials collected from programs that are not their own. Cost Ï As discussed above, having local recycling capacity affords the significant benefit of reducing transportation costs. However, should the County opt to finance a capital project such as an aggregation and baling facility, a significant amount of capital would be required. Market Development Ï If the County were to construct an aggregation and baling facility, additional planning would be required to identify markets for the baled materials. Facility Specifications The quantity of material processed affects the size of the building required for aggregating the materials and housing a baler. The County has options to size their facility to accept recyclable materials from recycling programs of other jurisdictions and/or the commercial sector. Additional material would improve economies of scale. Table 11 presents the annual quantities of material in the CountyÔs recycling program as well as recycling programs in Clarke County, City of Winchester, and the commercial sector. The City of Winchester collects is recyclables through a curbside dual stream program. To participate in the CountyÔs program, the City would need to separate material types either during or after collection. 79 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 17 Table 11.Annual Quantity of Recyclables from Other Programs Mixed Card-Metal Plastic SourceTotal PaperboardCans Bottle/Jugs Frederick County500620215751,410 Clarke County6144125 A 5807205902102,100 City of Winchester B 04,890004,890 Commercial Sector Total1,0866,2448092868,425 A The City of Winchester collectes about 2,100 tons annually through their curbside dual stream recylcing program. Annual tons by commodity have been estimated for this report. B County businesses and organizations contract directly with private haulers such as Republic Services and Ridge Runner to deliver their source-separated cardboard to a recyclng facility. SCS identified facility costs for the following four scenarios: Option 2A (1,410 tons/year) Ï Facility sized to accept only materials collected through Frederick County convenience centers; Option 2B (3,353 tons/year) Ï Facility sized to accept materials collected through Option 2A (1,410 tons/year from Frederick County) and materials collected from Clarke County (25 tons/year) and the City of Winchester (2,100 tons/year); Option 2C (8,424 tons/year) Ï Facility sized to accept materials collected through Option 2B and materials collected from the commercial sector (4,890 tons/year). Option 2D (4,545 tons/year) Ï Facility sized to accept materials collected through Option 2C; however, receives only half of the materials currently collected from the City of WinchesterÔs curbside program and half of the privately-collected commercial sector cardboard. The size of the aggregation and baling facility will vary based on the quantity of materials accepted. The following specifications are consistent for all size facilities: Facility will be constructed on County-owned land at the Landfill. See Appendix C for concept drawing. Recyclable materials will arrive at the facility source-separated by commodity; no separation or screening of materials for contamination will occur at the facility; Facility operation is for eight hours/day for five days/week (260 days/year); Facility can hold up to five days of incoming materials in bunkers. Bunkers will have walls that are 10 feet high and designed to hold a pile with 1:1 slope at the front; Facility will contain four bunkers, one each for cardboard, mixed paper, plastics, and metal cans; size of each material bunker will vary; Facility will include the following areas: 7: Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 18 Incoming Storage Area Ï The storage area is where the recyclable materials will be stored in bunkers; Unload Area Ï The unload area will be located in front of the bunkers and will measure the full width of the combined bunkers with 45 feet from the front of the bunkers; Baler Area Ï The baler area will include space (65Ô x 5Ô) for the baler and 15Ô of open space immediately around three sides of the baler and 30Ô of space in front Bale Storage Area Ï The bale storage area will provide enough storage space for two trucks worth of each baled commodity (26 bales/truck for a total area of 208 bales). Costs Using the anticipated quantities of recyclable materials to be accepted under the options described above, the corresponding facility sizes and costs are presented in Table 12. Detailed facility sizing calculations are presented in Appendix A, and detailed construction cost estimates are presented in Appendix B. Table 12.Aggregation and Baling Facility Costs for Varying Throughput Frederick CoFrederick Co CommunitiesFrederick Co Clark Co Clark Co Frederick Co Only A B Included Clark Co Winchester Winchester A CD Winchester Commercial Commercial Tons/Year1,4103,5358,4254,545 Facility Size (sf) 13,75018,00027,00027,000 $ 195,000 $ 238,000 $ 329,000 $ 329,000 Mobilization $ 2,377,0001,947,000$ 3,286,000$ 3,286,000$ Construction $ 97,000 $ 119,000 $ 164,000 $ 164,000 Erosion & Sediment Control $ 195,000 $ 238,000 $ 329,000 $ 329,000 Stormwater Management Equipment Baler500,000$ 500,000$ 650,000$ 650,000$ Engineering97,000$ 119,000$ 164,000$ 164,000$ Total Cost3,031,000$ 3,591,000$ 4,922,000$ 4,922,000$ B Annual Cost $ 436,000368,000$ 598,000$ 598,000$ Annual Cost/Ton261$ 123$ 71$ 132$ Total with 40% Contingency4,243,000$ 5,027,000$ 6,891,000$ 6,891,000$ B Annual Cost $ 611,000515,000$ 837,000$ 837,000$ Annual Cost/Ton365$ 173$ 99$ 184$ A Assumes recyclable material from City of Winchester can be separated by materal type. B Assumes only 50% of annual curbside recycling tonnage can be separated and delivered to a County baling facility. C Assumes all privately hauled cardboard will be delivered to a County baling facility. D Assumes only 50% of the commercial cardboard will be delivered to a County baling facility. 81 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 19 City of Winchester Although a facility to serve the recycling needs of Frederick and Clarke counties and the City of Winchester is needed, variations in the types of programs operating may make cooperation on a facility challenging. The City of WinchesterÔs curbside dual stream recycling program is in contrast to both Frederick and Clarke counties material-separated convenience-center based program. If the County were to build a facility and the City of Winchester participated, the City would need to modify their program so that materials are separated by commodity in addition to paying between $123 and $184 per ton for baling at the CountyÔs facility. Transitioning a curbside program from dual stream to material-separated is a significant hurdle. SCSÔs discussions with staff from the City of Winchester indicate that the City may be willing to modify their program to accommodate a baling facility that processes materials from source- separated programs. Commercial Sector The County could establish a baling facility that not only accepts recyclable materials from municipal programs, but also accepts materials from private haulers operating in the County and surrounding region. A facility sized to accept material from private haulers would provide a recycling solution on a more regional scale and would fill a void that limits recycling in the commercial sector. Much of the additional capacity needed to accommodate material collected by the commercial sector is for cardboard. SCS met with two local haulers, Republic Services and Ridgerunner Container Services, which together comprise about 85 percent of the commercial recycling hauling market in the County and surrounding area. These haulers primarily collect cardboard. Building an aggregation and baling facility sized to accept all the recyclable materials from municipal programs (Frederick, Clarke, and Winchester) in addition to the majority of commercial cardboard would require a tipping fee between $71 and $99 per ton. If the County builds a facility sized to accept all municipal programs and the majority of the commercial sector, but only 50 percent of material from the City of Winchester and the commercial sector is delivered, the tipping fee would need to be between $132 and $184 to pay the debt service for the facility. OPTION #3 UTILIZE LOCAL PRIVATE FACILITY Overview Another option for the County to consider as a long-term recycling solution is to utilize local recycling facilities that may become available. Similar to Option #2, the development of new recycling capacity by the private sector will take time so this option would not be available immediately. Currently, only Southern Scrap operates a recycling facility in Frederick County. However, this facility is expected to close in late 2019 or early 2020. This will leave a significant void in recycling capacity that will impact both municipalities and private industries. The challenge of having no recycling capacity in the County may prompt private companies to invest in a local recycling facility. SCS had a number of conversations with staff from local waste management companies serving Frederick County about the expected recycling facility void created when Southern Scrap closes. Haulers expressed concern over the impact this will have on recycling, particularly the expected cost increases related to transporting materials longer distances. At least one local hauler that SCS interviewed, Ridgerunner Container Service (RCS), indicated they are 82 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 20 exploring the possibility of building their own recycling facility. RCS is well-established in the Northern Shenandoah Valley and boasts a significant share of the commercial recycling market. RCS mainly collects cardboard from commercial entities and will be forced to transport the materials out of the county when Southern Scrap closes. In exploring the construction of their own recycling facility, RCS desires to find a permanent long-term solution to control costs while continually meeting the recycling needs of Frederick County businesses. There may be opportunities for the County to dialogue with RCS to support this potentially new recycling facility. SCS understands that having a local recycling facility serves the interests of residents and business owners in Frederick County. As such, the County may consider providing incentives to support the development of the facility. In return, the County needs to make sure that if a new recycling facility were to be built, that it can accommodate County materials as collected (i.e. separated by material type). Even though RCS primarily collects cardboard, it would be important for a new facility to accept other recyclable commodities such as plastic, metal cans, and mixed paper collected as part of the CountyÔs program. Benefits Reduced Costs Ï Of the three recycling options presented in this report, this option has the potential to be the lowest cost option to the County for the following reasons: The facility would be local, which significantly reduces recycling program operational costs, notably transportation; A private entity would provide the capital needed to build the facility, so no capital expenditures would be required from the County. Public-Private Partnership Ï Should private industry invest in a local-recycling facility, the County would have the opportunity to show support for the project through tax rebates or expedited processing of regulatory approvals. The County could be viewed as leading an effort to establish recycling capacity that benefits residents and business owners. Environmental and Economic Ï Similar to option #2, a local recycling facility would provide for environmental and economic benefits. Environmental benefits would be realized through the significant reduction in transportation that would result in cleaner air. Investment in a local facility puts money into the local economy by creating local jobs and expanding the needs for goods and services throughout the planning, construction, and operating phases of the facility. Challenges Reduced Control Ï Similar to option #1, relying on the private industry to be the sole provider of recycling capacity limits the CountyÔs ability to modify and expand its program. The County will be at the mercy of the entity that establishes the facility and will have little leverage if the owner and/or operator of the new facility decides to make a change to their operation that is inconsistent with the CountyÔs recycling program. 83 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 21 Costs Costs to transport all recyclable materials from the CountyÔs convenience centers to a local baling facility is about $170,000 annually or $120 per ton as presented in Table 13. Table 13.Annual Transportation Costs to a Local Processing Facility Container Annual Cost per CommodityDestinationAnnual Cost SizePullsPull C Mixed PaperLocal Facility30-yard120$125.00$15,000 BDE CardboardLocal Facility8-yard2,496$20.50$65,564 AC Plastic ContainersLocal Facility30-yard650$125.00$81,250 Metal Cans C Local Facility30-yard60$125.00$7,500 (steel & aluminum) Total$169,314 $/ton$120 A Assumes 54 pulls per month (54 x 12 = 648 pulls/yr) plus two pulls from Star Tannery per year. B Assumes 48 8-cy containers each week (48 containers x 52 weeks/yr = 2,496 pulls/yr) C Assumes that Republic will charge similar to fees for hauling metal cans to Winchester Scrap D Assumes 61 percent reduction due to delivery to local facility E Includes $14,400 for annual cost to rent 48 8-cy containers. A local facility will dictate tipping fees but it is envisioned that the CountyÔs separated materials and low contamination rate will result in a favorable tipping fee. The CountyÔs current cost per ton (including both transportation and processing) at Apple Valley Waste is $221 per ton. Assuming $120 per ton to haul recyclables to a local facility, the tipping fee could be as low as $20 per ton (weighted average processing fee offered by Apple Valley Waste). The recycling program in nearby Page County, Virginia bales its recyclable materials and is therefore able to attract a recycling processing facility to collect their baled materials at no cost to the County. It is assumed that a local privately-owned baling facility could also receive the same benefit. However, it is conservatively estimated that a local privately-owned facility could accept the CountyÔs recyclable materials for between $20 to $80 per ton to accommodate additional transportation to markets if needed. A private facility would also help Clarke County and the City of Winchester reduce their recycling program costs. 84 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 22 5CONCLUSIONS Frederick CountyÔs recycling program has been a well-organized and efficient operation that relied on contracts with private haulers and recyclers operating in the County. Unfortunately, in the summer of 2019, the single recycling processor in the County announced it would cease operation by December 2019. As a result, the County has issued three Invitations to Bid (IFBs) for recycling processing and hauling. The closest recycling processing facility that accepts all commodities collected at the CountyÔs convenience centers, Apple Valley Waste, is located in Hagerstown, MD about 50 miles from the convenience centers in the County. The CountyÔs recycling program has experienced significant cost increases during the past two years, from the nationally depressed market for recyclable materials and the impending closure of the only local recycling processing facility. Hauling all recyclable materials to a local market is $120 per ton but hauling all recyclable materials to Apple Valley Waste will be $201 per ton, an increase of $80 per ton. The CountyÔs current plans are to haul recyclable material collected at its convenience to Apple Valley Waste for just over $312,000 annually or $221 per ton ($201 for transportation and $20 for tipping fees). Developing an aggregation and baling facility at the CountyÔs landfill property has the potential to decrease transportation. Table 14 presents the Annual unit costs per ton of recyclable materials processed. Table 14.Cost for Transportation and Processing for Recycling Options Annual Cost per Ton Annual Processing/ Option Transport- Tons Ammortization of Total System Cost ation Capital Costs (All County Material to Status Quo 1,410$201$20 $221 1 Apple Valley Waste) Frederick County Baling Facility to Process Recyclables from: AFrederick County Only1,410$120 $261 to$365$381 to$485 Frederick Co., Clarke Co. & B3,535$120 $123 to$173$243 to$293 Winchester 2 Frederick Co., Clarke Co. C8,425$120 $ 71 to$99$191 to$219 Winchester, Commercial Frederick Co., Clarke Co. & 50% D4,545$120 $132 to$184$252 to$304 of Winchester/Commercial All County Material to Local Private 1,410$120 $ 20 to$80$140 to$200 3 Facility Exhibit 4 presents the recycling program unit costs ($/ton) for the options described above. The costs presented include transportation, processing and/or amortization of capital costs. The current recycling program unit cost is displayed by the red diamond; the unit cost ranges for a program that includes a county-owned baling facility are presented by the blue bars (four options for facility sizing based on throughput); and the green bar presents the unit cost range for utilizing a privately-owned facility. 85 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 23 Unit Cost Ranges for Recycling Program Options $500 $450 $400 $350 $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 $50 $0 1,4101,4103,5358,4254,545NA TonsTonsTonsTonsTons CurrentCounty-Owned FacilityPrivately- ProgramOwned Facility Recycling Program Option Development of an aggregation and baling facility at the County landfill property reduces recycling system costs only if the City of Winchester can separate its collected recyclables by material type and private haulers to deliver all of their commercial sector cardboard. Both of these scenarios are unlikely and even then the tipping fee would need to be between $71 and $99 (depending on the cost to build the facility) to pay the annual debt service. Construction costs presented in this report are planning-level cost estimates and are inherently high. To cover the increased cost of transporting material to Hagerstown instead of a local facility, the County could invest up to $1,2M (amortized over 10 years at an interest rate of four percent). Options to reduce the planning-level construction costs presented in this report include: Utilizing or leasing an existing structure in the County or on County-owned property, Purchase a smaller baler or a used baler, Reduce size of building: 86 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 24 Buildings under 12,000 s.f. do not require fire protection sprinklers Decrease incoming storage area and bale storage area Consider storing plastic and metal outdoors Use gravel instead of asphalt paving, Reduce lighting and branch wiring. 87 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 25 Appendix A Facility Size Calculations 88 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 26 Facility Accepting 1,410 Tons/Year Plastic Card-MixedMetal AreaBottlesTotal boardPaperCans & Jugs Incoming Storage Area Annual Tons634506219761,435 A Tons/Day 2.41.90.80.35.5 B Storage Desired (pounds) 24,00019,0008,0003,00055,000 Material Density (lbs/cy)1063233250 C Storage Volume (cy) 2265925060595 Dimensions of Storage Bunkers Height (ft)10101010 Width (ft)1515301575 Depth (ft) D46162816 Total Incoming Storage Area (sf)6902408402402,010 Unload Area Distance in front of bunkers (ft)- -- -- -- -45 Total Width (ft)- -- -- -- -75 Total Unload Area (sf)- -- -- -- -3,375 Baler Area Baler w/Feed Conveyor (sf)- -- -- -- - Width (ft)- -- -- -- -5 Depth (ft)- -- -- -- -65 Allow 15 ft around 3 sides- -- -- -- -95 Allow 30 feet in front- -- -- -- -50 Total Baler Area (sf)- -- -- -- -4,750 Bale Storage Area Number of 53' Trailers22228 Number of Bales per Trailer26262626104 Area per Bale (4'x8') (sf)- -- -- -- -32 C Total Bale Storeage Area (sf) 3,328 Total Building Area (rounded)13,750 A Facility will operate 8 hours/day, 5 days/week which equals 260 days per year B Five days of material storage are planned C Assume bales are stacked two high, floor area needed is for 104 bales 89 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 27 Facility Accepting 3,535 Tons/Year Plastic Card-MixedMetal AreaBottlesTotal boardPaperCans & Jugs Incoming Storage Area Annual Tons1,3541,0868092863,535 A Tons/Day 5.24.23.11.113.6 B Storage Desired (pounds) 52,00042,00031,00011,000136,000 Material Density (lbs/cy)1063233250 C Storage Volume (cy) 4911309692201810 Dimensions of Storage Bunkers Height (ft)10101010 Width (ft)30154515105 Depth (ft) D49286345 Total Incoming Storage Area (sf)1,4704202,8356755,400 Unload Area Distance in front of bunkers (ft)- -- -- -- -45 Total Width (ft)- -- -- -- -105 Total Unload Area (sf)- -- -- -- -4,725 Baler Area Baler w/Feed Conveyor (sf)- -- -- -- - Width (ft)- -- -- -- -5 Depth (ft)- -- -- -- -65 Allow 15 ft around 3 sides- -- -- -- -95 Allow 30 feet in front- -- -- -- -50 Total Baler Area (sf)- -- -- -- -4,750 Bale Storage Area Number of 53' Trailers22228 Number of Bales per Trailer26262626104 Area per Bale (4'x8') (sf)- -- -- -- -32 C Total Bale Storeage Area (sf) 3,328 Total Building Area (rounded)18,000 A Facility will operate 8 hours/day, 5 days/week which equals 260 days per year B Five days of material storage are planned C Assume bales are stacked two high, floor area needed is for 104 bales 8: Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 28 Facility Accepting 8,524 Tons/Year Plastic Card-MixedMetal AreaBottlesTotal boardPaperCans & Jugs Incoming Storage Area Annual Tons6,2441,0868092868,425 A Tons/Day 244.23.11.132.4 B Storage Desired (pounds) 240,00042,00031,00011,000324,000 Material Density (lbs/cy)1063233250 C Storage Volume (cy) 22641309692203583 Dimensions of Storage Bunkers Height (ft)10101010 Width (ft)90156015180 Depth (ft) D73284945 Total Incoming Storage Area (sf)6,5704202,94067510,605 Unload Area Distance in front of bunkers (ft)- -- -- -- -45 Total Width (ft)- -- -- -- -180 Total Unload Area (sf)- -- -- -- -8,100 Baler Area Baler w/Feed Conveyor (sf)- -- -- -- - Width (ft)- -- -- -- -5 Depth (ft)- -- -- -- -65 Allow 15 ft around 3 sides- -- -- -- -95 Allow 30 feet in front- -- -- -- -50 Total Baler Area (sf)- -- -- -- -4,750 Bale Storage Area Number of 53' Trailers22228 Number of Bales per Trailer26262626104 Area per Bale (4'x8') (sf)- -- -- -- -32 C Total Bale Storeage Area (sf) 3,328 Total Building Area (rounded)27,000 A Facility will operate 8 hours/day, 5 days/week which equals 260 days per year B Five days of material storage are planned C Assume bales are stacked two high, floor area needed is for 104 bales 91 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 29 Appendix B Facility Cost Calculations 92 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 30 Facility Accepting 1,410 Tons/Year Number AreaUnit Measure Unit Cost Cost of Units Mobilization Assume 10% of Construction CostL.S.- -1194,694$ Substructure A S.F. SLAB25.00$ 13,750343,750$ Slab on Grade B Slab and Foundation Excavation S.F. GROUND0.50$ 13,7506,875$ 4'Foundation WallL.F.100.00$ 47547,500$ Structure Shell C Pre-Engineered Steel Building S.F.25.00$ 13,750343,750$ Interiors D S.F.15.00$ 3,00045,000$ Concrete Push Walls Wall Finishes/PaintingS.F.1.50$ 12,00018,000$ Services Water DistributionS.F. FLOOR2.50$ 13,75034,375$ Exhaust Fans / LouversS.F. FLOOR0.35$ 13,7504,813$ E S.F. FLOOR8.00$ 13,750110,000$ Fire Protection Sprinklers Standpipe & Fire PumpS.F. FLOOR5.00$ 13,75068,750$ F Electrical Service & Distribution S.F. FLOOR1.50$ 13,75020,625$ H S.F. FLOOR11.00$ 13,750151,250$ Lighting & Branch Wiring I Communications & Security S.F. FLOOR2.00$ 13,75027,500$ Site/Civil Work J Aggregate Sub-Base 8" Thick S.Y.35.00$ 9,500332,500$ K Asphalt Intermediate Base 6" Thick S.Y.25.00$ 9,500237,500$ L S.Y.10.00$ 9,50095,000$ Asphalt Top Coat 2" Thick Pavement, Striping 6" WidthL.F.2.00$ 250500$ Finish / Fine GradingS.Y.2.00$ 9,50019,000$ M B.C.Y.6.00$ 1,5009,000$ General Excavation / Trenching N Compaction E.C.Y.1.50$ 1,5002,250$ BackfillL.C.Y.6.00$ 5003,000$ General FillL.C.Y.6.00$ 5003,000$ O Testing & Inspections DAY500.00$ 4522,500$ SignageEA.100.00$ 5500$ TOTAL CONSTRUCTION1,946,938$ Erosion & Sediment Control Assume 5% of Construction CostL.S.-$ 197,347$ Stormwater Management Assume 10% of Construction CostL.S.-$ 0194,694$ Equipment BalerEA.2.00$ 2500,000$ Engineering (5% of Construction Cost)L.S.26.00$ 2697,347$ Total$3,031,019 Contingency (40%)1,212,408$ GRAND TOTAL$4,243,426 93 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 31 Facility Accepting 3,535 Tons/Year Number AreaUnit Measure Unit Cost Cost of Units Mobilization Assume 10% of Construction CostL.S.- -1237,745$ Substructure A Slab on Grade S.F. SLAB25.00 $ 18,000$ 4 50,000 B Slab and Foundation Excavation S.F. GROUND0.50$ 18,0009,000$ 4'Foundation WallL.F.100.00$ 55555,500$ Structure Shell C Pre-Engineered Steel Building S.F.25.00 $ 18,000$ 4 50,000 Interiors D Concrete Push Walls S.F.$ 15.00 3,500$ 52,500 Wall Finishes/PaintingS.F.1.50 $ 14,000$ 21,000 Services Water DistributionS.F. FLOOR2.50$ 18,00045,000$ Exhaust Fans / LouversS.F. FLOOR0.35$ 18,0006,300$ E Fire Protection Sprinklers S.F. FLOOR$ 8 .0018,000$ 1 44,000 Standpipe & Fire PumpS.F. FLOOR5.00$ 18,00090,000$ F Electrical Service & Distribution $ S.F. FLOOR$ 1 .5018,00027,000 H Lighting & Branch Wiring S.F. FLOOR11.00 $ 18,000$ 1 98,000 I Communications & Security $ S.F. FLOOR$ 2 .0018,00036,000 Site/Civil Work J Aggregate Sub-Base 8" Thick S.Y.35.00 $ 10,450$ 3 65,750 K Asphalt Intermediate Base 6" Thick S.Y.25.00 $ 10,450$ 2 61,250 L Asphalt Top Coat 2" Thick S.Y.10.00 $ 10,450$ 1 04,500 Pavement, Striping 6" WidthL.F.$ 2.00250500$ Finish / Fine GradingS.Y.$ 10,45020,9002.00$ M General Excavation / Trenching B.C.Y.$ 1,5009,0006.00$ N E.C.Y.$ 1,5002,2501.50$ Compaction BackfillL.C.Y.$ 6.005003,000$ General FillL.C.Y.$ 6.005003,000$ O Testing & Inspections DAY$ 500.004522,500$ SignageEA.$ 100.005500$ TOTAL CONSTRUCTION$2,377,450 Erosion & Sediment Control Assume 5% of Construction CostL.S.$ - 1$ 118,873 Stormwater Management Assume 10% of Construction CostL.S.$ - 0$ 237,745 Equipment BalerEA.$ 2.00 2$ 500,000 Engineering (5% of Construction Cost)L.S.$ 26.00 26$ 118,873 Total $3 ,590,685 Contingency (40%)$1,436,274 GRAND TOTAL $5 ,026,959 94 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 32 Facility Accepting 8,524 Tons/Year Number AreaUnit Measure Unit Cost Cost of Units Mobilization Assume 10% of Construction CostL.S.- -1328,640$ Substructure A Slab on Grade S.F. SLAB25.00 $ 27,000$ 6 75,000 B Slab and Foundation Excavation S.F. GROUND0.50$ 27,00013,500$ 4'Foundation WallL.F.100.00$ 70070,000$ Structure Shell C Pre-Engineered Steel Building S.F.25.00 $ 27,000$ 6 75,000 Interiors D Concrete Push Walls S.F.$ 15.00 5,200$ 78,000 Wall Finishes/PaintingS.F.1.50 $ 17,000$ 25,500 Services Water DistributionS.F. FLOOR2.50$ 27,00067,500$ Exhaust Fans / LouversS.F. FLOOR0.35$ 27,0009,450$ E Fire Protection Sprinklers S.F. FLOOR$ 8 .0027,000$ 2 16,000 Standpipe & Fire PumpS.F. FLOOR5.00 $ 27,000$ 1 35,000 F Electrical Service & Distribution $ S.F. FLOOR$ 1 .5027,00040,500 H Lighting & Branch Wiring S.F. FLOOR11.00 $ 27,000$ 2 97,000 I Communications & Security $ S.F. FLOOR$ 2 .0027,00054,000 Site/Civil Work J Aggregate Sub-Base 8" Thick S.Y.35.00 $ 12,350$ 4 32,250 K Asphalt Intermediate Base 6" Thick S.Y.25.00 $ 12,350$ 3 08,750 L Asphalt Top Coat 2" Thick S.Y.10.00 $ 12,350$ 1 23,500 Pavement, Striping 6" WidthL.F.$ 2.00250500$ Finish / Fine GradingS.Y.$ 12,35024,7002.00$ M General Excavation / Trenching B.C.Y.$ 1,5009,0006.00$ N E.C.Y.$ 1,5002,2501.50$ Compaction BackfillL.C.Y.$ 6.005003,000$ General FillL.C.Y.$ 6.005003,000$ O Testing & Inspections DAY$ 500.004522,500$ SignageEA.$ 100.005500$ TOTAL CONSTRUCTION$3,286,400 Erosion & Sediment Control Assume 5% of Construction CostL.S.$ - 1$ 164,320 Stormwater Management Assume 10% of Construction CostL.S.$ - 0$ 328,640 Equipment BalerEA.$ 2.00 2$ 650,000 Engineering (5% of Construction Cost)L.S.$ 26.00 26$ 164,320 Total $4 ,922,320 Contingency (40%)$1,968,928 GRAND TOTAL $6 ,891,248 95 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 33 A Note: Assumed 12" reinforced concrete with vapor barrier & subbase B Site prep for slab and excavation for footings & foundation walls C 50' to 100' Clear Span, 24' eave height D 12" thick, 10' high with amror plating E Sprinklers, extra hazard, dry system system F 200 amp service, panel and feeders H High intensity discharge fixtures, recepticles, switches, etc. I Alarm systems and emergency lighting J Aggregate sub-base for pavement K Aggregate intermediate base for pavement L Asphalt top coat M 4' to g' depth N Compaction w/vibrating roller O 8 hours/day 96 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 34 Appendix C County Aggregation and Baling Facility Concept Drawing 97 Recycling Program Options Assessment www.scsengineers.com 35 www.scsengineers.com 36 Recycling Program Options Assessment 98 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Joe C. Wilder, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: MonthlyTonnage Report -Fiscal Year 19/20 DATE: January 22, 2020 The following is the tonnage for the months of July 2018through June 2020, and the average monthly tonnage for fiscal years 03/04 through 19/20. 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(UP1,238 TONS) FY 18-19:AVERAGE PER MONTH:16,594 TONS(UP849TONS) FY19-20:AVERAGE PER MONTH:17,900TONS (UP 1,306TONS) MONTHFY 2018-2019FY 2019-2020 JULY 17,70417,956 AUGUST 18,54317,267 SEPTEMBER 14,79917,985 OCTOBER 18,15822,528 NOVEMBER 15,40417,304 DECEMBER 14,42614,362 JANUARY 13,973 FEBRUARY 12,764 MARCH 17,079 APRIL 20,313 MAY 19,443 JUNE 16,519 JCW/gmp 99 :1 CARRIED OVER NEXT MONTH 226 343448324038 ESCAPED/ STOLEN 0000000 KENNEL DIED AT 0000011 DISPOSED FREDERICK COUNTY ESTHER BOYD ANIMAL SHELTER FY 2019-2020 15 711312 RECLAIMED In the month of December - 106 dogs in and out of kennel. 5 dogs transferred to other agencies. 169 381924253132 DOG REPORT ADOPTED 196 543921301933 BORN AT KENNEL 0000000 CASES BITE 1010114 BROUGHT IN BY ACO 188 362923233641 AT KENNEL RECEIVED 164 333036192224 FIRST OF MONTH ON HAND AT 251 633434483240 MONTH TOTAL JULY OCTNOVMARMAY DEC AUG SEPAPR FEB JUN JAN :2 NEXT MONTH CARRIED TO 117124147659 989974 ESCAPED/ STOLEN 0000000 KENNEL DIED AT 17 533411 DISPOSED 303 FREDERICK COUNTY ESTHER BOYD ANIMAL SHELTER FY 2019-2020 783751833618 RECLAIMED In the month of December - 143 cats in and out of shelter. 17 cats transferred to other agencies. 12 112233 CAT REPORT ADOPTED 253 365739512347 BORN AT KENNEL 2040 79400 CASES BITE 2130107 BROUGHT IN BY ACO 27 855621 AT KENNEL RECEIVED 136501 9090816143 FIRST OF MONTH ON HAND AT 117124147669 849899 MONTH TOTAL JULY OCTNOVMARMAY DEC AUG SEPAPR FEB JUN JAN :3 TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Monday, January 27, 2020 8:30 a.m. 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA ATTENDEES: Committee Members Present: Judith McCann-Slaughter, Chairman (Voting), Cordell Watts (Voting), Gary Oates (Voting), James Racey (Voting) and Lewis Boyer (Liaison Stephens City). Committee Members Absent Mark Davis (Liaison Middletown) and Charles DeHaven, Jr. (Voting). Staff Present: Assistant Director-Transportation John Bishop, and Kathy Smith, Secretary. ACTION ITEMS 2- Northern Y Project Status: Staff gave a brief overview of the Northern Y funding agreement between Frederick County and the private partner Glaize Developments. The estimated cost exceeded what was contemplated in the agreement rising cost to about 6 million dollars based upon 60% design. In accordance with the terms of the agreement, Glaize has not authorized the County to continue design of the roadway. Staff asked for guidance on the disposition of the project, as it cannot move forward without identifying a funding source for the shortfall. The funds are not eligible for a transfer to another project and without action the funds will become subject to deallocation in January 2021. The Committee discussed the options for the project with the lack of funding and unable to use County funds. It was recommended to cancel the project so the VDOT Revenue Sharing funds would then go back into the pool, which would make the revenue-sharing pool bigger with the likelihood of other applications getting approved. Upon a motion by James Racey, seconded by Gary Oates the Committee recommended to cancel the project. Other Ed Carter of VDOT gave an update on the Old Charlestown Road Bridge with the plans to install metal safety gates to deter drivers from using the be installed on the Clarke County side and the Frederick County side. When the water levels rise, VDOT workers and law enforcement officials will be able to close the gates. VDOT is seeking concurrence from the County prior to installation. Upon a motion by, Gary Oates and seconded by James Racey the Committee recommended to forward a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors for the installation of the metal gates. :4 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION ONLY: 1-Smartscale Discussion with VDOT: Mr. Terry Short of VDOT joined the meeting by way of a conference call to discuss with the Committee on SmartScale strategies. Terry suggested to the Committee to focus more on the immediate needs of the community. This would include focusing less on maxing out the applications and more focus on maxing out the quality. Currently, Kimley-Horn and Associates has been hired by the MPO to study the area North of Winchester at the exit 317 interchange which will provide information to aid in applications. Also, a STARS (Strategically Target Affordable Roadway Solutions) study is being done for Route 7 (Berryville Ave. & Berryville Pike) from N Pleasant Valley Road to Greenwood Road which is ongoing. Those study results should be in by the preapplication window in March. John gave an overview of the preapplication window which will be opening in March with the final applications due in August 2020. John discussed the current rules allowed for the County which include four (4) applications and an additional application for qualifying projects through the (MPO) Metropolitan Planning Organization and Planning District Commission which each get four (4) applications. 3-County Project Updates: Crossover Boulevard aka Tevis Street Extension/Airport Road/I-81 Bridge: The construction continues to go well; the bridge beams are scheduled to be set this week. The schedule for the beam placement and lane closures was communicated through the news media and social media 4-Renaissance Drive: VDOT has completed their review of the 60% consultant is addressing the comments. An updated design review agreement has been received from CSX and is being reviewed by Staff. 5-Upcoming Agenda Items: SmartScale (ongoing discussion and development) and the MPO Study progress. Other: Ed Carter, VDOT gave an update on the Oakdale Crossing traffic study that has been completed. The traffic study revealed no major problems with cut through traffic or speeding issues. The Traffic Engineering Division of VDOT suggested that crosswalks be installed along with line painting to help with the issues the residents are having. Those improvements would cost around 8 thousand dollars and would need to secondary allocation for safety. The Committee asked for correspondences to support the suggested improvements to be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. :5 :6 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 E-mail rwillia@fcva.us MEMORANDUM TO: Seth T. Thatcher, Commissioner of the Revenue Frederick County Board of Supervisors CC: Kris Tierney, County Administrator FROM: Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney DATE: February 4, 2020 RE: Exoneration BFI Waste Services, LLC I , dated January 29, 2020, to authorize the Treasurer to refund BFI Waste Services, LLC the amount of $9,594.24, for exoneration of personal property taxes for 2018 and 2019 and vehicle license fees for 2018 and 2019. This refund resulted from an incorrect garage jurisdiction DMV listing as the personal property was in Fredericksburg rather than Frederick County. The Commissioner verified that documentation and details for this refund meet all requirements. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 58.1-3981(A) of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), I hereby note my consent to the proposed action. The Board of Supervisors will also need to act on the request for approval of a supplemental appropriation, as indicated i memorandum. Attachment :7 Frederick County, Virginia hCCL/9 hC /haaL{{Lhb9w hC I9 w99b 9 107 North Kent Street P.O. Box 552 Winchester VA 22601 Winchester VA 22604-0552 seth.thatcher@fcva.us www.fcva.us/cor SETH T. THATCHER Phone: 540-665-5681 COMMISSIONER Fax: 540-667-6487 * ´ ±¸ ΑΘǾ ΑΏΑΏ 4/Ȁ 2®£ 7¨««¨ ¬²Ǿ #®´³¸ !³³®±¤¸ #§¤±¸« 3§¨¥¥«¤±Ǿ &¨ ¢¤ $¨±¤¢³®± &±¤£¤±¨¢ª #®´³¸ "® ±£ ®¥ 3´¯¤±µ¨²®±² +±¨² 4¨¤±¤¸Ǿ #®´³¸ !£¬¨¨²³± ³®± &2/-Ȁ 3¤³§ 4ȁ 4§ ³¢§¤±Ǿ #®¬¬¨²²¨®¤± ®¥ ³§¤ 2¤µ¤´¤ 2%Ȁ %·®¤± ³¨® "&) 7 ²³¤ 3¤±µ¨¢¤² ,,# ͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑͑ Please approve a refund of $9,594.24 for personal property taxes and vehicle license fees for 2018 and 2019 in the name BFI Waste Services LLC. This refund reflects an exoneration of personal property taxes and vehicle license fees due to an incorrect garage jurisdiction DMV listing as the personal property was actually located in Fredericksburg rather than Frederick County. 4® ¢®¬¯«¸ ¶¨³§ ³§¤ ±¤°´¨±¤¬¤³² ¥®± ³§¤ 4±¤ ²´±¤± ³® ¨²²´¤ ³§¨² ±¤¥´£Ǿ "® ±£ ¢³¨® ¨² ±¤°´¨±¤£ȁ ³§¤ #®¬¬¨²²¨®¤± ®¥ ³§¤ 2¤µ¤´¤ȁ 0«¤ ²¤ «²® ¯¯±®µ¤ ²´¯¯«¤¬¤³ « ¯¯±®¯±¨ ³¨® ¥®± ³§¤ &¨ ¢¤ $¨±¤¢³®± ® ³§¨² ±¤°´¤²³ȁ %·®¤± ³¨® ¨² ȁ $9,594.24 :8 :9 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 Memorandum To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator Date: February 3, 2020 RE: Southern Hills Subdivision Phase 1 The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Hayvenhurst Court, State Route Number 1537 0.08 miles Hayvenhurst Court, State Route Number 1537 0.06 miles Hayvenhurst Court, State Route Number 1537 0.10 miles Wakefield Court, State Route Number 1615 0.12 miles Norwich Court, State Route Number 1579 0.09 miles Westchester Drive, State Route Number 1543 0.15 miles Hayvenhurst Court, State Route Number 1537 0.17 miles Staff is available to answer any questions. MRC/dlw 211 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on the 12th day of February, adopted the following: WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM-4.3, fully incorporated h Court of Frederick County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Form AM-4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 33.2-705, Code of Virginia, and the Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Shawn L. Graber J. Douglas McCarthy Robert W. Wells Blaine P. Dunn Gene E. Fisher Judith McCann-Slaughter A COPY ATTEST _____________________________ Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Administrator PDRes. #06-20 212 In the County of Frederick By resolution of the governing body adopted February 12, 2020 Uif!gpmmpxjoh!WEPU!Gpsn!BN.5/4!jt!ifsfcz!buubdife!boe!jodpsqpsbufe!bt!qbsu!pg!uif!hpwfsojoh!cpez(t!sftpmvujpo!gps! dibohft!jo!uif!tfdpoebsz!tztufn!pg!tubuf!ijhixbzt/ B!Dpqz!Uftuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Tjhofe!)Dpvouz!Pggjdjbm*;!```````````````````````````````````````````` Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision Southern Hills, Phase I Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Reason for Change: New subdivision street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute:33.2-705,33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number Hayvenhurst Court, State Route Number 1537 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 1543, Westchester Drive To: Route 1579, Norwich Court, a distance of: 0.08 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr.060011588, Pg 0745 Right of Way width (feet) = 56' Street Name and/or Route Number Hayvenhurst Court, State Route Number 1537 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 1012, Town Run Lane To: Route 1543, Westchester Drive, a distance of: 0.06 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr.060011588, Pg 0745 Right of Way width (feet) = 56' Street Name and/or Route Number Hayvenhurst Court, State Route Number 1537 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 1615, Wakefield Court To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.10 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr.060011588, Pg 0745 Right of Way width (feet) = 50' 213 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: February 12, 2020 Page 1 of 2 Street Name and/or Route Number Wakefield Court, State Route Number 1615 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 1537, Hayvenhurst Court To: 0.12 mile north of Route 1537, Hayvenhurst Court, a distance of: 0.12 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr.060011588, Pg 0745 Right of Way width (feet) = 50' Street Name and/or Route Number Norwich Court, State Route Number 1579 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 1537, Hayvenhurst Court To: 0.09 mile north of Route 1537, Hayvenhurst Court, a distance of: 0.09 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr.060011588, Pg 0745 Right of Way width (feet) = 50' Street Name and/or Route Number Westchester Drive, State Route Number 1543 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 1537, Hayvenhurst Court To: 0.15 mile north of Route 1537, Hayvenhurst Court, a distance of: 0.15 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr.060011588, Pg 0745 Right of Way width (feet) = 56' Street Name and/or Route Number Hayvenhurst Court, State Route Number 1537 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 1579, Norwich Court To: Route 1615, Wakefield Court, a distance of: 0.17 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr.060011588, Pg 0745 Right of Way width (feet) = 53' 214 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 2 of 2 215 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 Memorandum To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator Date: February 3, 2020 RE: Snowden Bridge Subdivision Section 5 The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Blackford Drive, State Route Number 897 0.08 miles Pinwheel Court, State Route Number 899 0.11 miles Dutchman Court, State Route Number 900 0.09 miles Blackford Drive, State Route Number 897 0.06 miles Blackford Drive, State Route Number 897 0.07 miles Garrett Court, State Route Number 898 0.06 miles Staff is available to answer any questions. MRC/dlw 216 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on the 12th day of February, adopted the following: WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM-4.3, fully incorporated h Court of Frederick County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Form AM-4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 33.2-705, Code of Virginia, and the Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Shawn L. Graber J. Douglas McCarthy Robert W. Wells Blaine P. Dunn Gene E. Fisher Judith McCann-Slaughter A COPY ATTEST _____________________________ Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Administrator PDRes. #07-20 217 In the County of Frederick By resolution of the governing body adopted February 12, 2020 Uif!gpmmpxjoh!WEPU!Gpsn!BN.5/4!jt!ifsfcz!buubdife!boe!jodpsqpsbufe!bt!qbsu!pg!uif!hpwfsojoh!cpez(t!sftpmvujpo!gps! dibohft!jo!uif!tfdpoebsz!tztufn!pg!tubuf!ijhixbzt/ B!Dpqz!Uftuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Tjhofe!)Dpvouz!Pggjdjbm*;!```````````````````````````````````````````` Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision Snowden Bridge, Section 5 Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Reason for Change: New subdivision street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute:33.2-705,33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number Blackford Drive, State Route Number 897 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 889, Flyfoot Drive To: Route 898, Garret Court, a distance of: 0.08 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. 130008662, Inst. 140003651 Right of Way width (feet) = 58 Street Name and/or Route Number Pinwheel Court, State Route Number 899 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 897, Blackford Drive To: End of State Maintenance, a distance of: 0.11 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. 130008662, Inst. 140003651 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 Street Name and/or Route Number Dutchman Court, State Route Number 900 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 897, Blackford Drive To: End of State Maintenance, a distance of: 0.09 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. 130008662, Inst. 140003651 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 218 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: February 12, 2020 Page 1 of 2 Street Name and/or Route Number Blackford Drive, State Route Number 897 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 899, Pinwheel Court To: Route 900, Dutchman Court, a distance of: 0.06 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. 130008662, Inst. 140003651 Right of Way width (feet) = 58 Street Name and/or Route Number Blackford Drive, State Route Number 897 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 898, Garret Court To: Route 899, Pinwheel Court, a distance of: 0.07 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. 130008662, Inst. 140003651 Right of Way width (feet) = 58 Street Name and/or Route Number Garrett Court, State Route Number 898 Old Route Number: 0 From: Route 897, Blackford Drive To: End of State Maintenance, a distance of: 0.06 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. 130008662, Inst. 140003651 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 219 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 2 of 2 21: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 Memorandum To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors From: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator Date: February 3, 2020 RE: Commonwealth Business Park - Commonwealth Court Ext. The following addition to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Commonwealth Court Extension, State Route Number 1167 0.10 miles Staff is available to answer any questions. MRC/dlw 221 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 RESOLUTION BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, in regular meeting on the 12th day of February, adopted the following: WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM-4.3, fully incorporated h Court of Frederick County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Form AM-4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 33.2-705, Code of Virginia, and the Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Shawn L. Graber J. Douglas McCarthy Robert W. Wells Blaine P. Dunn Gene E. Fisher Judith McCann-Slaughter A COPY ATTEST _____________________________ Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Administrator PDRes. #08-20 222 In the County of Frederick By resolution of the governing body adopted February 12, 2020 Uif!gpmmpxjoh!WEPU!Gpsn!BN.5/4!jt!ifsfcz!buubdife!boe!jodpsqpsbufe!bt!qbsu!pg!uif!hpwfsojoh!cpez(t!sftpmvujpo!gps! dibohft!jo!uif!tfdpoebsz!tztufn!pg!tubuf!ijhixbzt/ B!Dpqz!Uftuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Tjhofe!)Dpvouz!Pggjdjbm*;!```````````````````````````````````````````` Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision Commonwealth Business Park - Commonwealth Court Ext. Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Reason for Change: New subdivision street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute:33.2-705,33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number Commonwealth Court Extension, State Route Number 1167 Old Route Number: 0 From: Roundabout To: 0.10 mile south to cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.10 miles. Recordation Reference: Instr. #060018364 Pg 0335 Right of Way width (feet) = 0 223 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: February 12, 2020 Page 1 of 1 224 COUNTY of FREDERICK Office of the County Administrator Tel: 540.665.6382 Fax:540.667.0370 M E M O R A N D U M To: Board of Supervisors From: Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk Date: February 7, 2020 Re: ============================================================================== The attached resolution was placed on the agenda at the request of Supervisor Dunn, in light of the various legislative proposals seeking to permit collective bargaining. If the Board approves the resolution at the February 12 meeting, staff will forward a copy to our delegates and senator as well as the respective House and Senate committees that are considering these proposals. 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 225 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Resolution inSupport of Right to Work WHEREAS, in 1947 the Virginia General Assembly enacted the Right to Work law; and, WHEREAS, since 1947, it has been “the public policy of Virginia that the right of persons to work shall not be denied or abridged on account of membership or non-membership in any labor union or labor organization.”; and, WHEREAS, maintaining the voluntary nature of union support in our Commonwealth ensures better relationships between employers, employees, and unions, which is one of the important factors in Virginia’s successful economy; and, WHEREAS, Right to Work states have lower tax burdens, greater growth in real household consumption, and greater overall job growth including in the manufacturing sector; and WHEREAS, there are currently pending several legislative proposals to enable collective bargaining in the Commonwealth, and; WHEREAS, many of the collective bargaining legislative proposals could have a significant fiscal impact to Frederick County and its citizens, which could include a higher tax burden to pay for this unfunded mandate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, hereby stands in strong support of the Commonwealth of Virginia’s longstanding laws protecting worker freedom, including the Right to Work law. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, strongly opposes any legislation that would overturn the Right to Work law and would diminish worker choice and economic opportunity in our county. ADOPTED this 12th day of February, 2020. VOTE: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. _____ Judith McCann-Slaughter _____ Robert W Wells _____ Gene E. Fisher _____ Blaine P. Dunn _____ Shawn L. Graber _____ J.Douglas McCarthy_____ A COPY ATTEST __________________________ Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Administrator 226 227 COUNTY of FREDERICK Office of the County Administrator Tel: 540.665.6382 Fax:540.667.0370 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk DATE: February 7, 2020 RE: Committee Appointments Listed below are the vacancies/appointments due through April 2020. As a reminder, in order for everyone to have ample time to review applications, and so they can be included in the agenda, please remember to submit applications prior to Friday agenda preparation. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. JANUARY 2020 Planning Commission Gregory L. Unger –Back Creek District Representative 668 Germany Road Stephens City, VA 22655 Home: (540)869-2606 Term Expires: 1/26/20 Four-year term (Mr. Unger does not wish to serve another term. See Application of John F. Jewell) MARCH 2020 Conservation Easement Authority (CEA) Ron Clevenger –Frederick County Representative 1028 Welltown Road Winchester, VA 22603 Home: (540)323-0630 Term Expires: 03/23/20 Three-year term 228 Memorandum –Board of Supervisors February 7, 2020 Page 2 (Mr. Clevenger does not wish to serve another term.) (The Conservation Easement Authority was established in August 2005. The Authority consists of seven citizen members, one member from the Board of Supervisors and one member from the Planning Commission. Members should be knowledgeable in one or more of the following fields: conservation, biology, real estate and/or rural land appraisal, accounting, farming, or forestry. Members serve a three-year term and are eligible for reappointment.) APRIL 2020 Frederick Water Board of Directors J. Stanley Crockett –Frederick County Representative 139 Panorama Drive Winchester, VA 22603 Phone: (540)535-6782 Term Expires: 04/15/20 Four-year term Martha Dilg –Frederick County Representative 5220 Main Street Stephens City, VA 22655 Home: (540)869-4813 Term Expires: 04/15/20 Four-year term VACANCIES/OTHER Shenandoah Area Agency on Aging (AAA) Vacant unexpired term –Frederick County Representative Term Expires: 09/30/22 Four-year term (Frederick County has one member on this board. According to agency by-laws, each jurisdiction may nominateone individual for appointment, with final appointment being made by the Area Agency on Aging Board.(The member-at-large representative from each locality is selected by the Area Agency Board.) The Area Agency on Aging shall have the right not to accept any nominee it considers to be incompatible with the best interests of the SAAA and Board. Members may only serve two terms.) 229 Memorandum –Board of Supervisors February 7, 2020 Page 3 Winchester-Frederick County Tourism Board Joint Appointment with the City of Winchester Sharon Farinholt –Private Sector Rep. (Crown Trophy) Crown Trophy 661 Millwood Avenue Winchester, VA 22601 Office: (540)665-4485 Term Expires: 06/30/19 Three-year term (Not eligible for reappointment) Andy Gyurisin –Private Sector Rep. (Nerangis Management Corp. –Alamo Draft House) 177 Kernstown Commons Blvd. Winchester, VA 22602 Office: (540)667-1322, Ext. 111 Term Expires: 06/30/19 Three-year term (The Tourism Board was formed by Joint Resolution of the Board of Supervisors and the City Council in April 2001. Recommendation for appointment is contingent upon like approval by the City of Winchester.) AWP/tjp U:\\TJP\\committeeappointments\\MmosLettrs\\BoardCommitteeAppts(021220BdMtg).docx 22: INFORMATIONAL DATA SHEET FOR FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS As a brief personal introduction, please fill out the information requested below for review. (Please Print Clearly. Thank You.) Name:Home Phone: John Jewell 540 869-9021 Address:Office Phone: 4743 Middle Rd Winchester VA 22602N / A Cell/Mobile: 202 359-5071 Fax:__________ ____________ Employer:Email: Retired as of 11/30/19jewell.john@gmail.com/cymru@visuallink.com Occupation: Retired Assistant Sgt at Arms / Chief Information Officer U.S. Senate Civic/Community Activities: Volunteer Karate teacher –Stonebrook Tennis / Racquet club 10 + years(stopped teaching in 2017) Volunteer with Winchester Swim Team 10 + years(stopped after 2011) Volunteer Apple Blossom events 10 + years(currently active) Volunteer Shenandoah Valley Swim Leagueaffiliated with the Frederick County Parks & Recreation program 20 + yrs, (currently active) Member of Masonic Lodge Strasburg VA helping with community events & cooks (currently active) Member of the beekeepers of the Northern Shenandoah Valley Member ofthe Apple Blossom Club Member of a local small church which is very active in the community Will You Be Able To Attend This Committee's Regularly Scheduled Meeting On: Yes:No: ___x___________ Do You Foresee Any Possible Conflicts Of Interest Which Might Arise By Your Serving Ona Committee? Yes:No:Explain: _______ ___x____ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Additional Information Or Comments You Would Like To Provide (If you needmore space, please use the reverse side or include additional sheets): My job kept me from participating in any local government activities because of the Hatch Actandthe work I did for our continuity program. I am looking forward to helping in anyway I canfor our county. My experience as a Government executive managing a $98 million budget, 338 professional and technical staff, and mission critical information technology, telecommunications, and cybersecurity initiatives, leading IT operations and helping with the building of a Continuity of Operation / Continuity of Governmentprogram gives me an extensive background in planning and strategic thinking. Applicant’s Signature:: John F. JewellDate1/24/2020 231 Nominating Supervisor's Comments: Please submit form to: Frederick County Administrator’s Office 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 or email to: tprice@fcva.usor jtibbs@fcva.us 232 John F. Jewell 4743 Middle Road, Winchester, VA 22602 Home: 540 869-9021; Cell: 202 359-5071 jewell.john@gmail.com Top Secret / SCI Cleared, Retired CIO with 39+ years of dedication to the United States Senate Professional Profile: ________________________________________ ______________________________ United States Senate Sergeant at Arms Assistant Sergeant at Arms/Chief Information Officer (April 2018 – November 2019 retired) Acting Assistant Sergeant at Arms/Chief Information Officer (August 2017 – April 2018) Executive representing the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) and managing a $98 million budget, 338 professional and technical staff, and mission critical information technology, telecommunications, and cybersecurity initiatives. Manage digital transformation. Promote the development of the next generation technologies and platforms that support digital transformation, provide interoperability throughout the product portfolio, and continually adapt IT processes and staff skillsets to ongoing changes in the technology and business landscape. Facilitate Senate technology groups to create, coordinate, execute, and maintain a Technology Implementation Plan in support of the SAA’s strategic plan. Oversee the development, operation, and maintenance (engineering, installation, and operation) of the Unite States Senate network supporting Capitol Hill, offsite facilities and a nationwide network of Senate state offices. This support includes a redundant Network Operations Center (NOC), a redundant Cybersecurity Operations Center (CSOC), a robust, geographically diverse three-tier nationwide help desk, Mobile Communications support, telecommunication services, office equipment services, system procurement, and inventory management. Assist with development, implementation, and sustainment plans for IT Continuity of Operations (COOP) and Continuity of Government (COG) including operation and support of Emergency Operations Centers (EOC), Briefing Centers and other activities associated with urgent response to emerging crisis events. United States Senate Sergeant at Arms, IT Support Services IT Contingency Operations, Secure & Mobile Communications Manager (2014 – August 2017) Managed, developed, and maintained the CIO COOP portal SharePoint site. Created, updated, and maintained all SAA CIO Emergency Action Plans (EAP), COOP plans, and Mission Essential System documentation. Managed SAA CIO IT professional and technical staff when dispersed to classified locations for IT projects. Communicated effectively with multiple groups and or organizations supporting the Continuity of Government projects and exercises. Managed of the mission critical Primary Computer Facility (PCF). Served as the Senate Manager responsible for representing the Senate with all other legislative groups located at an offsite location. This includes being the primary point of contact for all Senate SAA related projects, programs, and requests that may have an impact on the facility or require program management of the site. Represented the SAA/CIO for all legislative meetings pertaining to the decisions, functions and programs that impact the SAA CIO organization continuity programs. Primary management representative for the SAA/CIO IT for all non- classified and classified programs, projects and meetings. Maintained a close working relationship with the Secretary of the Senate, Rules Committee, and SAA/Office of Protective Services and Continuity (OPSAC) making technical recommendations and decisions for continuity of operations projects and programs. Maintained documentation regarding mission essential system status and responsible for coordination of failover exercises working with all branches of the SAA CIO. Coordinate all exercise functions related to testing of system validation between the Primary Computer Facility and the Alternate Computer Facility. United States Senate Sergeant at Arms, Network Engineering and Management Network Operations Staffer (May 2002 – 2014) As the sole NOC staffer with a TS/SCI Clearance, attended and provided technical guidance for Classified Briefings by security staff on network security threats and suggested solutions; attended planning and implementation meetings 233 with other agencies as fact finding and deployment initiatives arose. Assisted as a technical lead on exercise John F. Jewell Page 2 deployments working with different government agencies. Implemented strategic and continuity of operations (COOP) plans and procedures Provided project management support as a senior representative of the Network Operations Center staff supporting the roll out of new products and services provided by the Network Engineering and Management Branch. Served as the project manager on assigned projects in coordination with peers in Network Engineering and Implementation; represented networking interests. Served as a peer lead on technical issues and project status, assisted with budgetary proposals, assigning of work and resource allocation, and the timely review and execution of network changes. Provided expert-level technical support of Senate hardware, software, and networking technologies to vendors, technical staff and other departments; provide escalation support to senior and non-senior level Operations and Senate Service Team Staff when troubleshooting network related/infrastructure issues. Managed the installation, configuration and administration of network hardware and monitoring software primarily for the Alternate Computer Facility NOC. Developed policies and procedures, ensuring a moment’s notice readiness. Reviewed and analyzed network performance and monitoring statistics to locate and remediate vulnerabilities in the Senate network configurations, ensuring network stability and security. Provisioned and supported the Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) for the Cisco ONS 15454 platform. United States Senate Sergeant at Arms, Program Management and Innovation Acting Program Manager (February 2002 – May 2002) Assisted in managing the implementation of the Senate Mail Infrastructure (SMI) project conversion from Lotus cc: Mail to Microsoft Outlook. Served as the technical advisor to the Senate Messaging Infrastructure (SMI) working group. Developed policies and procedures for the project’s pilot phase. United States Senate Sergeant at Arms Customer Support Analyst (CSA) (1997 - 2002); Customer Service Records Assistant Foreman (1995 - 1997); Various Support Positions (1980 – 1997) Served as the primary point of contact for SAA services for Senatorial, Leadership, and Committee staff in both Washington, DC and State locations. Provided consultation with Senate office management staff regarding the most efficient use of their office automation budget designs, including communication, document reproduction and transmission and general office support. Analyzed functional operations and provided solutions for more efficient procedures and workflow for Senate office and computer equipment procurement; coordinated planning, ordering and service delivery of IT equipment for Senate offices; ensured validation of franked mail and mass mail postal accounts. Served as the representative for development, validation testing, and implementation of covalent system upgrades with outside vendor services. Researched and recommended new equipment purchases. _________________________ Career Experience: __________________________ Knowledge of the following: Optical DWDM o Cisco 15454 MSTP (GE_XP, GE_XPE modules, TXPP and TXP 2.5 modules, OTU2_XP modules) Cisco 15540 Cisco Router/Switch configuration and troubleshooting o Distribution/Core Layer Access Layer WAN Load Balancers 234 Cisco Firewall / Security / VPN application and hardware solutions o TCP/IP, IP Variable Length Subnetting o DNS / DHCP configuration experience using RSA ACE server and Infoblox Platform o John F. Jewell Page 3 QOS support o Network Monitoring Tools o Proficient in development of failover drill procedures for a complete data center failover including Virtual Machine Infrastructure, Storage, Firewall, and mainframe, spreadsheets, action item reports Continuity experience working with satellite trucks supporting mobile communication standup networks, developing a strategy plan for remote sites, and supporting continuity programs, EDUCATION:__________________________________________________________________________________ Associate of Arts in Business Management Prince George’s Community College (1990) Center for Creative Leadership, Leadership Development Program, Greensboro, NC (2016) AWARDS, RECOGNITION AND OUTSIDE INTERESTS: ___________________________________________________ United States Senate Sergeant at Arms Team Award 2014, 2013, 2010, 2008, 2002 United States Senate Sergeant at Arms Outstanding Employee of the Year 2000 3 rd Degree Black belt and Instructor – WKKA Kenpo Karate BBQ fundraising team for needy families/children Beekeeper 235 236 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE REPORT to the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Friday, January 24, 2020 9:00 a.m. 107 NORTH KENT STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA A Human Resources Committee meeting was held in the First Floor Conference Room at 107 North Kent Street on Friday, January 24, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. ATTENDEES: Committee Members Present: Blaine Dunn, Chairman; Don Butler; Doug McCarthy; Beth Lewin; Kim McDonald; and Bob Wells. Staff present: Kris Tierney, County Administrator; Jay Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator; Rod Williams, County Attorney; Michael Marciano, Director of Human Resources; Scott Varner, Director of IT; Jason Robertson, Director of Parks & Recreation; and Jennifer Place, Risk Manager Budget Analyst. Others present: None ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: 1.Scott Varner, Director of Information Technology, sought approval to create a “Deputy Director of Security” position (Range 11) (Exhibit A). The committee recommends approval, 6 in favor & 0 against. 2.Jason Robertson, Director of Parks and Recreation, sought approval to create a “basicREC Coordinator” position (Range 5) (Exhibit B). The committee recommends approval, 6 in favor & 0 against. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY 1.The Human Resources Committee further discussed the Workers’ Compensation Policy and decided that no substantive changes will be made to the policy. Specifically, the current policy requires that paid leave benefits will not accrue while the employee is out on a workers’ compensation claim. Additionally, should the employee not have enough paid leave to cover the difference between the wage replacement benefit and full salary amount, leave without pay will be used. At a future Human Resources Committee meeting, staff will bring the policy back with procedural enhancements that further clarify what occurs when an employee is injured on the job and receives workers’ compensation benefits. The committee approved this approach, 4 in favor & 1 against. Respectfully submitted, HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Blaine Dunn, Chairman Don Butler Beth Lewin Doug McCarthy Kim McDonald Robert (Bob) Wells By 237 Michael J. Marciano, Director of Human Resources Exhibit A Position Justification for “Deputy Director of Security” Position Presented at January 24, 2020 Human Resources Committee Meeting 238 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Information Technologies (540) 665-5614 M E M O R A N D U M To: Human ResourcesCommittee From: Scott Varner,Director of Information Technology and GIS Subject: Request for Deputy Director of Security Date: December 16, 2019 The Department of Information Technology(IT)is requesting to add afull-time employeeto IT’sorganization chart. The position requested is a Deputy Director of Security. Governments have become prime targets for recent cyber- attacks and protection of our security plan, procedures and posture is vital. The consequences of a cybersecurity incident are significant--estimated by some at $4 million on average, taking months to years to recover from, involving legal liability, insurance loopholes, and loss of public trust.To date, the IT Department has handled the increasing workloadof cybersecurity by delegating various portions of the response requirements. Our current staffing levels are already maxed with workloads that consistently require more than the 40-hourwork week. The importance of protecting our vital technology infrastructure warrants a position that will focus on the following areas: • Oversight and Develop of Security Standards • Employee Cybersecurity Training Program • Security Monitoring and Response • Policy Enforcement • Building Access, Camera Surveillance, and Physical Security Oversight • Liaison with Fusion Center and Local Enforcement • Responsible for Department Operations when the Director of ITis absent The reality is that we will be subject to a cybersecurity attack at some point. Our preparation, monitoring, education, and response are crucial to keeping any breach contained and mitigated. The potential for adevastating breach increases significantly without a position dedicated to focusing on our security infrastructure. To date, we have had several Microsoft portal accounts compromised, an average of 50 targeted phishing attempts a day, at least one successful direct deposit scam, not to mention the 100+ attempts daily to get through our firewall. The requested position would also be responsible for ensuring our compliance with new State mandates on cybersecurity compliance as well as federal regulations for the protection of personally identifiable information. Additionally,the position would act as the Director of Information Technology in the Director’s absence. With the majority of our workforce dependent on their desktop computer, phone, and network access to complete the majority of their duties at the Kent Building, Public Safety Building, NRADC, and all other remote sites, the importance of the technological infrastructure warrants having a deputy-level position to maintain continuity and ensure any issue that interrupts the business of the County is handled swiftly and decisively. Thank you for your consideration, Allen Scott Varner 107North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601-5039 svarner@fcva.us 239 COUNTY OF FREDERICK Information Technologies (540) 665-5614 M E M O R A N D U M To: Michael Marciano, Director of Human Resources From: Scott Varner,Director of Information Technology and GIS Subject: Request for Deputy Director of SecuritySalary Information Date: December 16, 2019 In support of our request for a new full-time employeeforthe Information Technology Department, I have included several localities’information below. You will note a combination of Information SecuritySalaries as well as Deputy Director Salaries as this position request combines the two positions. Our neighbor localities are too small to have the level of position requested so the examples below include Henrico County, Fairfax County, and the City of Alexandria. I have requested that the position be set to a range of 11(salary starts at $82,723), with a salary dependent on qualifications. Iconsideredthe higher cost of living in the localities referenced belowin determiningthe range. Several other localities have the position in a senior management pay group that does not have a range, which leaves flexibility in the hiring process. LocalityPosition TitleSalary Range Henrico CountyAssistant Director of IT$102,828.44 -$189,157.74 Fairfax CountyDeputy Director DIT$107,506.46-$179,177.86 Fairfax CountyIT Security Program Director$93,119.73 -$155, 198.78 City of AlexandriaDeputy Director ITS$101,757.24 -$184,410.85 City of AlexandriaIT Security Manager$83,723.64 -$137,620.45 York CountyDeputy Director$91,983 -$156,460 Stafford CountySecurity Analyst$66,289.60-$102,731.20 Shenandoah UniversityIT Security Officer$63,000 -$75,000 Thank you for your consideration, Allen Scott Varner 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601-5039 svarner@fcva.us 23: County of Frederick, Virginia Position Details Position Title: Deputy Director of IT -SecurityDate Position Created: Department: Information TechnologiesReports To: IT Director Exempt Non-ExemptDate Prepared: 11/7/2019Prepared By: Scott Varner Salary:Depends of Qualifications -$82,723 Range:11Grade: -$132,271 --DOE/DOQ G/L Line Item:New Position Request Job Description Assists the Director of Information Technology in the management and administrative oversight of the County’s central information technology/data processing agency.Individual hired will be responsible for strategic planning, policy formulation, financial administration/budget, system/network security, and supervision of the department’s day-to-day operations and activities staff.Person hired directsand manages the County's information/cybersecurity program; ensuresCounty's compliance with all federal and state information security regulations(including homelanddefense security initiatives); coordinates privacy and security requirements with HIPAA coordinator, Department of Finance for Payment Card Industry (PCI)and County agencies using Personally Identifiable Information (PII)and other privacy standards to ensure integrity, sensitivity and confidentiality of data. Works with law enforcement and legal authorities in investigations of digital files;provides architectural oversight,direction and recommendations for enterprise-wide information/cybersecurity technology; and performsother duties as required. Essential Functions The requirements for this position include, but are not limited to, those outlined below. All job functions, education and experience, general knowledge and abilities, and physical requirements are subject to possible modification to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities to enable them to perform the essential functions of the job. This document does not create an employment contract, implied or otherwise. It is the employer’s discretion to add or change the duties or requirements of this position at any time. Directly supervises employees involved in network engineering, network security, server and data center planning and operations, end-user support, and service desk operations. Develops and manages all information security policies, standards, procedures, and internal controls which includes establishing procedures and requirements with key stakeholders to ensure compliance with local, state, and federal laws. Possesses knowledge of information security best practices and baseline security configurations for operating systems, applications and networking, and telecommunications equipment. Drafts strategies and plans to enforce security requirements and addresses identified risks. Develops, documents, and implements the enterprise security program by assessing residual risks, vulnerabilities and other security exposures including the misuse of information assets, and noncompliance with security policies and procedures. Compiles and manages disaster recovery plans and procedures including managing security incidents, providing 'after-action' reports and analysis of information security breaches, violations, malicious activity and incidents to management. Recommends corrective technical options and revisions to Information Technology (IT)security initiatives and policies to prevent future occurrences. Represents the Countywith local, regional, state and federal agencies on issues related to cybersecurity and protection of local government's critical IT infrastructure assets. Works with counterparts in other jurisdictions and external agencies to continuously evaluate and address emerging security threats. 241 Provides guidance and direction while working with all facets of management within the Countyin developing secure and confidential technical solutions. Investigates and recommends new technologies that reduce the risk of cyber security threats and provides potential cost savings for the County. Delivers the IT Security awareness program through structured training and staff communications. Provides written or verbal communication to all levels of staff, leadership and elected officials on security issues and recommendations. Assists in the development of security architecture and security policies, procedures and standards. Evaluates all third-party systems that directly or indirectly access the County's network and reviewsterms and conditions for vendor solutions and or new technology acquisitions. Performs other duties as assigned. Job Requirements: Education:Bachelor's degreein a relevant IT field. Experience:Five years of experience in risk management, information security and IT of which three years are in a leadership role and developing IT security policies and procedures; or any equivalent combination of experience and training which provides the required knowledge, skills and abilities. Knowledge/Skills:Comprehensive knowledge of information security management and technology (audit compliance, regulatory compliance, disaster recovery, vulnerability assessment, firewalls, and endpoint security); comprehensive knowledge of security administration in a Windows based network environment; comprehensive knowledge of server administration as applied to network and internet security; thorough knowledge of information protection standards, guidelines, and applied procedures (i.e. industry "bestpractices"); thorough knowledge of common information security management frameworks, such as ISO/IEC 27001, ITIL, COBIT as well as those from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), including 800-53 and Cybersecurity Framework; thorough knowledge of business needs with the ability to establish and maintain a high level of customer trust and confidence in the security team's concern for customers; the ability to work independently; the ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with coworkers, representatives of other countydepartments and agencies, and the public; and the ability to communicate clearly and effectively, both verbally and in writing. Working Conditions: Physical Demands:The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is regularly required to sit; use hands to finger, handle, or feel; and talk or hear. The employee frequently is required to reach with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to stand; walk; and stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 40 pounds unassisted. Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision for extended periods of viewing a computer screen or screens, distance vision, color vision, depth perception, and ability to adjust focus. Supervisory Responsibilities: Number of Employees Supervised:12Number of Subordinate Supervisors Reporting to Job:2 Approvals: Department Director:Date: HR Director:Date: Finance Director:Date: County Administrator:Date: 242 Board of Supervisors Approval:Date: Exhibit B Position Justification for “basicREC Coordinator” Position Presented at January 24, 2020 Human Resources Committee Meeting 243 To: Human Resource Committee From: Jason Robertson, Director of Parks and Recreation Subj: basicREC Coordinator position Date: December 12, 2019 The Parks and Recreation Commission is recommending a basicREC Coordinator position be added to the Frederick County Salary Administration Program (SAP) and be filled in the Fiscal Year 2020/2021 budget. The basicREC Coordinator is a range 5 position with a starting salary of $39,638. The basicREC Coordinator will provide daily support to the basicREC program. Attendance at basicREC has grown to over 700 for the school year and 450 for the full day summer program each day. Revenue received from basicREC program fees will offset all expenses associated with the basicREC program including the full- time salary and benefits of the basicREC Coordinator. There is no cost to the local taxpayer for the basicREC Coordinator position. The basicREC Coordinator will assist the basicREC Manager with the management of on-site staff at twelve school year locations and eight summer locations. The basicREC Coordinator will assist with program development and evaluation, substitute for a Recreation Technician in emergency situations, answer inquiries regarding the program, assist with the collection of revenues from late paying accounts, and schedule staff. There is no local government position comparable to the basicREC Coordinator. Please find the attached job description for the basicREC Coordinator. 244 County of Frederick, Virginia Position Details Position Title: basicRECCoordinatorDate Position Created: Department: Parks and RecreationReports To: basicRECManager Exempt Non-ExemptDate Prepared: 10/3/2019Prepared By: Ashley Martin Range:5Grade:Salary:$39,638-$63,334–DOE/DOQ G/L Line Item: Job Description Job Purpose: Plans and supervises county-wide specialized recreation programs and activities; does related work as required. The basicREC Coordinator will supervise the work of part-time professional staff, volunteer helpers and activity participants. The employeemay be required todirect recreation activities of a highly specialized nature. General supervision is received from the basicREC Manager. Essential Functions The requirements for this position include, but are not limited to, those outlined below. All job functions, education and experience, general knowledge and abilities, and physical requirements are subject to possible modification to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities to enable them to perform the essential functions of the job. This document doesnot create an employment contract, implied or otherwise. It is the employer’s discretion to add or change the dutiesor requirements of this position at any time. Reports directly to the basicREC Managerin the Recreation Division; Assists with the development, planning, implementation, and evaluation of basicREC and Camp basicRECprograms; Develops a comprehensive recreation program, including site procurement, recruitment, and preparation of promotional information and securing of community support; Compiles figures to prepare budget recommendations for activities in assigned division; Prepares and maintains administrative records andreports of revenues, expenditures, activities, work schedule, program attendance, supplies,and other recreational information; Interacts with the Marketing Manager to prepare plan for promoting assigned activities through newsletters, program brochures, posters,and other promotional materials for programs; Recruits, selects, trains, and supervises part-time, seasonal, and volunteer staff to fulfill program needs; Serves as professional/technical liaison with various agency and interagency staff members, as well as community organizations and committees; Assists with the basicREC program as needed including monitoring timesheets, substituting on site, and other tasks as defined; Supervises all aspects of the basicREC and Camp basicREC program in absence ofthe basicREC Manager;and Ability to assist other program areas as needed and based on availability. Job Requirements: Education: Possession of, or ability to acquire in six months, CPR and Community First Aid certification, UkeruCrisis Training, and Medication Administration Training (MAT)Certification. Must have the ability to acquire Ukeru Crisis Trainer and CPR/First Aid Trainer. 245 Experience: Any combination of education and/or experience equivalent to graduation from an accredited college with a degree in recreation or a related field or relevant experience. Knowledge/Skills: Thorough knowledge of the principles and practices of professional recreation work; good knowledge of one or more phases of community recreation activities; abilityto schedule and coordinate a recreation program on a County-wide basis; ability to provide working leadership to a group of recreation personnel; knowledge of methods involved in age appropriate recreational activities for youth; abilityto act independently and make decisions; possession of good oral and written communication skills; ability to establish effective working relationships with other governmental agencies, co-workers, and program participants. Working Conditions: Physical Demands: Walking, talking, stooping, kneeling, bending, reaching and gripping. May be required on occasion to move up to 30 lbs. Supervisory Responsibilities: Number of Employees Supervised:0Number of Subordinate Supervisors Reporting to Job:0 Approvals: Department Director:Date: HR Director:Date: Finance Director:Date: County Administrator:Date: Board of Supervisors Approval:Date: 246 247 COUNTY of FREDERICK Office of the County Administrator Tel: 540.665.6382 Fax:540.667.0370 M E M O R A N D U M To: Board of Supervisors From:Ann W. Phillips, Deputy Clerk Date: February 7, 2020 Re: WavelandFarm Twelve Month Festival Permit Request __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The attached festival Permit application was received on January 6, 2020 and scheduled for public hearing on February 12. On January16, 2020, staff received a request, confirmed via email, from the applicant asking that the application be changed to a twelve-month permit request. Background information on this request is as follows: 2018 March 28, 2018 – BOS PH for Outdoor Festival Permit for Fergison wedding – Approved April 9, 2018 – Application for CUP (Special Event Facility) accepted by Frederick County; May 2, 2018 – Planning Commission held public hearing on CUP; recommended denial; 2019 April 19, 2019 – Notice of Violation issued by Zoning Administrator citing no approved CUP for special events and no building permits issued; August 14, 2019 – Board of Supervisors held public hearing on (dormant) CUP application; application denied by BOS; applicant can reapply after 12-months (August 2020); September 25, 2019 – BOS PH for Outdoor Festival Permit for five dates (some of the five had already occurred) – Approved with BOS members expressing disappointment that events were held after the CUP was denied the previous month. 2020 January 6, 2020 – Application for Festival Permit (3 events); scheduled for BOS public hearing on 2/12/2020; January 16, 2020 – Applicant requested the permit be changed to a 12-month permit; PH scheduled for February 12. 107 North Kent StreetWinchester, Virginia 22601 248 APPLICATION FOR OUTDOOR FESTIVAL PERMIT COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA (Please Print Clearly) APPLICANT INFORMATION Waveland Farm, LLC and Cynthia J. Layman Name of Applicant: ________________________________________________________________________ 540-333-6036540-869-1542 Telephone Number(s): _________________ _________________ homeofficecellhomeofficecell 1215 Marlboro Road, Stephens City, VA 22655 Address: _________________________________________________________________________________ clayman@fbvirginia.com Contact Email: _____________________________________________________________________________ FESTIVAL EVENT ORGANIZATIONAL INFORMATION Wedding Festival Event Name of Festival: _________________________________________________________ None 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 60 4-4-20 10:30 pm 11:00 am 11:00 am 80 5-2-20 10:30 pm 10:00 am 6-6-20 10:30 pm 50 1211 Marlboro Road, Stephens City, VA 22655 Location Address: ____________________________________________________________________ Waveland Farm, LLC and Cynthia J. Layman Owner Name(s): ______________________________________________________________________ of Property 1215 Marlboro Road, Stephens City, VA 22655 Address: ____________________________________________________________________ (*N: Applicant may be required to provide a statement or other documentation indicating consent by the owner(s) for use of OTE the property and related parking for the festival.) Waveland Farm, LLC Promoter Name(s): ______________________________________________________________________ 1215 Marlboro Road, Stephens City, VA 22655 Address: ____________________________________________________________________ (*N: For festivals other than not-for-profit, promoter may need to check with the Frederick County Commissioner of Revenue to OTE determine compliance with County business license requirements; in addition, promoters who have repeat or ongoing business in Virginia may be required to register with the VA State Corporation Commission for legal authority to conduct business in Virginia.) Waveland Farm, LLC Financial Name(s): ______________________________________________________________________ Backer 1215 Marlboro Road, Stephens City, VA 22655 Address: ____________________________________________________________________ to be determined, DJ's booked by Wedding Party Performer Name of Person(s) or Group(s): _________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 249 ___________________________________________________________________________ (*N: Applicant may need to update information as performers are booked for festival event.) OTE FESTIVAL EVENT LOGISTICS INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION 1. Attach a copy of the printed ticket or badge of admission to the festival, containing the date(s) and time(s) of such festival (may be marked as “sample”). copy attachedORcopy to be provided as soon as available N/A invitation only to invited guests 2. Provide a plan for adequate sanitation facilities as well as garbage, trash, and sewage disposal for persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the VA Department of Health (Lord Fairfax Health District). _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Covered trash containers and portable restrooms _____________________________________________________________________________________ 3. Provide a plan for providing food, water, and lodging for the persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the VA Department of Health (Lord Fairfax Health District). _____________________________________________________________________________________ Qualified Food Vendors _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 4. Provide a plan for adequate medical facilities for persons at the festival. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the County Fire Chief or Fire Marshal and the local fire and rescue company. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Stephens City Fire and Rescue _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 5. Provide a plan for adequate fire protection. This plan must meet the requirements of all state and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and must be approved by the County Fire Chief or Fire Marshal and the local fire and rescue company. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Stephens City Fire and Rescue _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 6. Provide a plan for adequate parking facilities and traffic control in and around the festival area. (A diagram may be submitted.) _____________________________________________________________________________________ Field parking will be available at the property. Please see the attached diagram _____________________________________________________________________________________ Frederick County Sheriff's department will be hired for traffic control the day of each event. _____________________________________________________________________________________ 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 lights and the proximity relative to the property boundaries and neighboring properties. In addition, show the location of shielding devices or other equipment to be used to prevent unreasonable glow beyond the property on which the festival is located. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ YES NO 8. State whether alcoholic beverages will be served: If yes, provide details on how it will be controlled. _____________________________________________________________________________________ No member of Waveland Farm LLC or it's affiliates will be serving alcohol to any guests. If alcohol is to be provided _____________________________________________________________________________________ the wedding group or contracted individuals renting the Venue are required to obtain an ABC license _____________________________________________________________________________________ and have trained staff/bartenders serve any alcohol on the premises. (N: Evidence of any applicable VA ABC permit must also be provided and posted at the festival as required. Applicant may need to confirm with 24: OTE the VA ABC that a license is not required from that agency in order for festival attendees to bring their own alcoholic beverages to any event that is open to the general public upon payment of the applicable admission fee.) FESTIVAL 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 performance, in such a manner that the sound emanating therefrom exceeds 73 decibels at the property on which the festival is located. C. No person under the age of eighteen (18) years of age shall be admitted to any festival unless accompanied by a parent or guardian, the parent or guardian to remain with such person at all times. (N: It may be necessary to post signs to this effect.) OTE D. The Board, its lawful agents, and/or duly constituted law enforcement officers shall have permission to go upon the property where the festival is being held at any time for the purpose of determining compliance with the provisions of the County ordinance. 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 attendees shall comply with the provisions of the Frederick County ordinance pertaining to festivals as well as the festival provisions contained herein. ___________________________________ Signature of Applicant Waveland Farm, LLC Cynthia J. Layman, manager /member ___________________________________ Printed Name of Applicant 1/6/20 Date: __________________________________ TB HE OARD SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVOKE ANY PERMIT ISSUED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE 251 -. UPON NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS 252 COUNTY ofFREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors FROM: M.Tyler Klein, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment Telecommunications Facilities, CommercialPublic Hearing DATE: February 4, 2020 Background The Board of Supervisors adopted the proposed changes to the ufmfdpnnvojdbujpo!gbdjmjujft-! dpnnfsdjbm!requirements on December 11, 2019which created a two-track process for review and approval of commercial telecommunication facilities(as enabled under recent changes to the Dpef! pg!Wjshjojb). Following approval of the proposed ordinance amendment, the Board directed Staff to draft a subsequentamendment to further allow telecommunications facilities up to 100-feet(FT) in height in areas of theCounty located west of Interstate 81 (I-81)under Proposal The proposed ordinance amendment to Chapter 165 Zoning Ordinance, further provides an allowance for certain areas of the County that:gps!boz!qspqfsuz!mpdbufe!xftu!pg!Joufstubuf!92-!boz! tusvduvsf!uibu!jt!opu!npsf!uibo!211!gffu!bcpwf!hspvoe!mfwfm-!qspwjefe!uibu!uif!tusvduvsf!xjui! buubdife!xjsfmftt!gbdjmjujft!jt!)j*!opu!npsf!uibo!21!gffu!bcpwf!uif!ubmmftu!fyjtujoh!vujmjuz!qpmf!mpdbufe! xjuijo!611!gffu!pg!uif!tusvduvsf!xjuijo!uif!tbnf!qvcmjd!sjhiu.pg.xbz!ps!xjuijo!uif!fyjtujoh!mjof!pg! vujmjuz!qpmft<!)jj*!opu!mpdbufe!xjuijo!uif!cpvoebsjft!pg!b!mpdbm-!tubuf-!ps!gfefsbm!ijtupsjd!ejtusjdu<!boe! )jjj*eftjhofe!up!tvqqpsu!tnbmm!dfmm!gbdjmjujft ispermitted.All other sections of the recently adopted amendment remain unchanged. Staff notes areas west of I-81, as intendedabove,include the entirety of the Back Creek and Gainesboro Magisterial Districts and westernmost portions of the StonewallMagisterial District. The proposed ordinance amendment enablessmaller commercial telecommunications facilities in certain areas of the County to promote better internet service to underserved areas, specifically those areas west of I-81 where topography and dense vegetation maymake thesiting of wireless telecommunication infrastructure challenging. Administrative review eligible projects for telecommunication structures up to 100-FT in height wouldstillrequire review and approval by the Zoning Administratorand building permit review and approval by the Department of Building Inspections prior to construction. 253 Summary of Planning Commission Public Hearing The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance amendment on January 15, 2020. Staff provided an overview of the proposed ordinance amendment, noting it was a request from the Board of Supervisors to provide allowance for telecommunication facilities, up to 100-feet (FT) in height in certain areas of the County. One Planning Commission expressed concern with qspdftt for this proposed ordinance amendment, specifically not sending the item discussion and review by the Development Review and Regulations Committee (DRRC) and discussion by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors prior to holding a public hearing. A Planning Commissioner expressed concern for not providing opportunity for citizen comment on tower proposals that exceed 50-FT in height. Fifteen (15) members of the public spoke regarding the proposed ordinance amendment. Citizens expressed concern with height of towers near residences (homes) without significant buffers, approving commercial telecommunication towers without receiving comments from adjoining property owners, impacts to property values, and existing towers erected illegally. One (1) citizen spoke in favor of the proposed amendment noting the need to have improved broadband connectivity and allowing increased height for such facilities as one solution to improving connectivity in the most rural parts of the County. One (1) citizen representing a local internet service provider also spoke in favor of the proposed amendment. Back Creek District Supervisor, Mr. Shawn Graber, spoke stating that he understood the need to improve internet service in underserved areas of the County but did not support increasing the allowed height, up to 100-FT. Mr. Graber concluded he would propose a compromise to the Board of Supervisors to reduce the conditional use permit (CUP) fee to $300, or the cost of advertising the public hearing as part of the CUP application, which would continue to enable adjoining property owners to provide comment on commercial telecommunication tower proposals. The Planning Commission discussed the tower heights as it may relate to future 5G towers, which may need more equipment to accommodate in residential areas. One Planning Commissioner also stated he did not support new towers without approved CUPs; Staff clarified that towers up to 50-FT in height are currently allowed under the previous ordinance amendment as approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 11, 2019. The Planning Commission also expressed concern with the existing $7,000 fee for commercial telecommunication facilities and stated the Board of Supervisors should evaluate reducing the CUP application fee. Finally, the Planning Commission expressed support for a rural broadband study to better evaluate the need and potential solutions to improve s. The Planning Commission voted 12-0-1 (Commissioner Unger absent) to recommend denial of the proposed ordinance amendment. 254 Action The attached document shows the existing ordinance with the proposed changes (with bold italic This proposed amendment is being presented to the Board of Supervisors as for text added). a public hearing item. A decision by the Board of Supervisors, on this proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is sought. Please contact Staff if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. Revised ordinance with additions shown in bold underlined italics 2. Resolution MTK/pd 255 Revised 12/19/19 ARTICLE II Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses Part 204 Additional Regulations for Specific Uses § 165-204.19. Telecommunication facilities, commercial. A. Definitions. The terms used in this section shall have the same meanings as set out in Virginia Code Section 15.2-2316.3, unless the context requires a different meaning. B. Administrative review-eligible projects. 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, but subject to the requirements of this subsection, the following shall be permitted in all zoning districts: a. any small cell facility \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4\]; b. any structure that is not more than 50 feet above ground level, provided that the structure with attached wireless facilities is (i) not more than 10 feet above the tallest existing utility pole located within 500 feet of the structure within the same public right-of-way or within the existing line of utility poles; (ii) not located within the boundaries of a local, state, or federal historic district; and (iii) designed to support small cell facilities \[Va. Code §§ 15.2-2316.3 & 15.2-2316.4:1(A)\]; or c. for any property located west of Interstate 81, any structure that is not more than 100 feet above ground level, provided that the structure with attached wireless facilities is (i) not more than 10 feet above the tallest existing utility pole located within 500 feet of the structure within the same public right-of-way or within the existing line of utility poles; (ii) not located within the boundaries of a local, state, or federal historic district; and (iii) designed to support small cell facilities; or d. co-location of a wireless facility on the existing structure of a wireless facility that is not a small cell facility \[Va. Code §§ 15.2-2316.3 & 15.2-2316.4:1(A)\]. 2. Any person seeking to install a facility or structure identified in paragraph 1 of this subsection shall make application to the Zoning Administrator, accompanied by payment of a fee of $100 each for up to five facilities or structures on the same application and $50 each for each additional facility or structure on the same application. \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4(B)(2)\] The application shall be subject to consideration as follows: a. The Zoning Administrator shall approve or disapprove the application within 60 days of receipt of the complete application. Within 10 days after receipt of an application and a valid electronic mail address for the applicant, the Zoning Administrator shall notify the applicant by electronic mail whether the application is incomplete and specify any missing information; otherwise, the application shall be deemed complete. Any disapproval of the application shall be in writing and accompanied by an explanation for the disapproval. The 60-day period may be extended by the Zoning Administrator in writing for a period not to exceed an additional 30 days. The application shall be deemed approved if the Zoning Administrator fails to act within the initial 60 days or an extended 30-day period. \[Va. Code § 15.2- 256 14 Page of Revised 12/19/19 2316.4(B)(1)\] b. The Zoning Administrator shall only deny approval for the facility or structure on account of: (i) material potential interference with other pre-existing communications facilities or with future communications facilities that have already been designed and planned for a specific location or that have been reserved for future public safety communications facilities, or (ii) the public safety or other critical public service needs. Otherwise, the Zoning Administrator shall approve the facility or structure and the facility or structure does not require approval from the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors. \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4(B)(4)\] c. The applicant may voluntarily submit, and the Zoning Administrator may accept, conditions that address potential visual or aesthetic effects resulting from the placement, pursuant to this subsection, of a facility or structure. \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4(B)(5)\] C. Standard process projects. 1. Except as provided in subsection B, no wireless facility or wireless support structure shall be sited, constructed, or operated except pursuant to a conditional use permit issued through the process defined in Part 103 of Article I of this Chapter. The issuance of a conditional use permit for the siting, construction, and operation of a wireless facility is permitted within the zoning districts specified in this Chapter, provided that, pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2-2232(A), the general location or approximate location, character, and extent of such facilities are substantially in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof and that adjoining properties, surrounding residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas, and properties of significant historic value are not negatively impacted. \[based on current intro to County Code § 165-204.19\] 2. Any person seeking to install a facility or structure pursuant to this subsection shall make application to the Zoning Administrator, accompanied by payment of a fee of $7,000. \[Va. Code § 15.2- and include the indicated information: a. The Board of Supervisors shall approve or disapprove the application within 150 days of receipt of the complete application by the Zoning Administrator or such shorter period as required by federal law, unless the applicant and the Board agree to a longer period for approval or disapproval of the application. Within 10 days after receipt of an application and a valid electronic mail address for the applicant, the Zoning Administrator shall notify the applicant by electronic mail whether the application is incomplete and specify any missing information; otherwise, the application shall be deemed complete. \[Va. Code § 15.2- 2316.4:1(C)\] b. Information to be included with application: i. A map depicting the search area used in siting the proposed facility or structure \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:2(D); based on current 165-204.19(A)(2)\]; ii. Identification of all service providers and commercial telecommunications facility infrastructure within the search area \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:2(D); based on current 165-204.19(A)(3)\]; iii. Confirmation that attempts to co-locate on existing structures have been made and, if such attempts were unsuccessful, the reasons so \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:2(D); based on current 165-204.19(A)(3)\]; 257 24 Page of Revised 12/19/19 iv. Documentation issued by the Federal Communications Commission indicating that the established ANSI/IEEE standards for electromagnetic field levels and radio frequency radiation \[based on current 165-204.19(A)(4)\]; v. An affidavit signed by the landowner and by the owner of the facility or structure stating that they are aware that either or both of them may be held responsible for the removal of the facility or structure as stated in subsection E \[based on current 165- 204.19(A)(5)\]; and vi. The applicant may voluntarily submit, and the Board may accept, conditions that address potential visual or aesthetic effects resulting from the placement of the facility or structure. \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:2(C)\] 3. If the Board of Supervisors grants a conditional use permit under this subsection, the following standards shall then apply to any property on which a wireless facility or wireless support structure is sited, in order to promote orderly development and mitigate the negative impacts to adjoining properties, residential properties, land use patterns, scenic areas, and properties of significant historic value: a. The Board may reduce the required setback distance for the wireless facility or wireless support structure as required by § 165-201.03(B)(8) of this Code if it can be demonstrated that the location is of equal or lesser impact. When a reduced setback is requested for a distance less than the height of the tower, a certified Virginia engineer shall provide verification to the Board that the wireless facility or wireless support structure is designed, and will be constructed, in a manner that if the wireless facility or wireless support structure collapsed the wireless facility or wireless support structure will be contained in an area around the wireless facility or wireless support structure with a radius equal to or lesser than the setback, measured from the center line of the base of the wireless facility or wireless support structure. In no case shall the setback distance be reduced to less than 1/2 the distance of the height of the wireless facility or wireless support structure. b. Monopole-type construction shall be required for any new wireless facility or wireless support structure. The Board may allow lattice-type construction when existing or planned residential areas will not be impacted and when the site is not adjacent to identified historic resources. c. No more than two signs shall be permitted on any wireless facility or wireless support structure. Such signs shall be limited to 1.5 square feet in area and shall be posted no higher than 10 feet above grade. d. When lighting is required for a wireless facility or wireless support structure, dual lighting shall be utilized which provides daytime white strobe lighting and nighttime red pulsating lighting unless otherwise mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration or the Federal Communications Commission. Strobe lighting shall be shielded from ground view to mitigate illumination to neighboring properties. Equipment buildings and other accessory structures operated in conjunction with the wireless facility or wireless support structure shall utilize infrared lighting and motion-detector lighting to prevent continuous illumination. e. Every wireless facility and wireless support structure shall be constructed with materials of a galvanized finish or be of a non-contrasting blue or gray unless otherwise mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration or the Federal Communications Commission. f. Every wireless facility and wireless support structure shall be adequately enclosed to prevent access by persons other than employees of the service provider. Appropriate landscaping and opaque screening shall be provided to ensure that equipment buildings and other accessory 258 34 Page of Revised 12/19/19 structures are not visible from adjoining properties, roads, or other rights-of-way. \[the entirety of the above subsection C(3) is based on current 165-204.19(B)\] 4. If the Board of Supervisors denies a conditional use permit under this subsection, the Board shall: a. Provide applicant with a written statement of the reasons for the denial \[Va. Code § 15.2- 2316.4:1(E)(1)\]; b. Identify any modifications of which the County is aware that would permit it to approve the conditional use permit \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:1(E)(2)\]; and c. Have supporting substantial record evidence in a written record publicly released within 30 days of denial \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4:1(F)(2)\]. D. Maintenance of existing facilities and/or structures and replacement of existing facilities and/or structures within a 6-foot perimeter with substantially similar or same size or smaller facilities and/or structures is exempt from fees and permitting requirements under this section. \[Va. Code § 15.2- 2316.4:3(A)\] E. Any facility or structure permitted by this section that is not operated or used for a continuous period of 12 months shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such facility or structure shall remove same within 90 days of receipt of notice from the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. If the facility or structure is not removed within the ninety-day period, the County may remove the facility and a lien may be placed to recover expenses. \[Va. Code § 15.2-2316.4(B)(6); based on current County Code § 165-204.19(B)(7)\] 259 44 Page of ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ____________________________ Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: January 15, 2020 Recommended Denial BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: February 12, 2020 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 165 ZONING ARTICLE II SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS; PARKING; BUFFERS; AND REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES PART 204 ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES §165-204.19. TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES, COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, an ordinance to amend Chapter 165, Zoning to allow telecommunications facilities up to 100-feet (FT) in height, in areas of the County located west of Interstate 81 (I-81) under administrative review eligible projects; and WHEREAS, the proposed changes for any property located west of Interstate 81, any structure that is not more than 100-feet above ground level, provided that the structure with attached wireless facilities is: Not more than 10-feet above the tallest existing utility pole located within 500-feet of the structure within the same public right-of-way or within the existing line of utility poles. Not located within the boundaries of a local, state, or federal historic district. Designed to support small facilities is permitted. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this ordinance amendment on January 15, 2020 and recommended denial; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this ordinance amendment on February 12, 2020; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds that the adoption of this ordinance to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare and in good zoning practice; and PDRes #09-20 25: 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 Zoning is amended to allow telecommunications facilities up to 100-feet (FT) in height, in areas of the County located west of Interstate 81 (I-81) under administrative review eligible projects. Passed this 12th day of February 2020 by the following recorded vote: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Shawn L. Graber J. Douglas McCarthy Blaine P. Dunn Gene E. Fisher Robert W. Wells Judith McCann-Slaughter A COPY ATTEST _____________________ Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Administrator PDRes #09-20 261 2 262 REZONING APPLICATION #07-19 GENTLE HARVEST, LC. Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: February 5, 2020 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, CZA, Assistant Director Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 12/18/19 Public Hearing Held; Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 01/22/20 Public Hearing Held; Postponed Board of Supervisors: 02/12/20 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 1.204+/- acres from the B2 (General Business) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with proffers. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 120 Front Royal Pike. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 02/12/20 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: This is an application to rezone 1.204+/- acres from the B2 (General Business) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with proffers. The site is located within the limits of the Senseny/Eastern Urban Area Plan of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan and identifies this property with commercial land use designation. In general, the existing B2 zoning and the proposed B3 zoning are consistent with the current land use supported by the Comprehensive Plan, however; the Comprehensive Plan states that this area should be designed specifically to accommodate and promote highway commercial land uses. Staff would note that the site was previously utilized for a restaurant which is now closed and the intended user for this site is a Discount Tire. This item was postponed from the Board of Supervisors January 22, 2020 meeting to allow Staff the opportunity to review proposed new proffers presented during the meeting. Staff has received a draft change to the proffers; the Applicant is proposing to eliminate additional uses as outlined below proposed changes are shown in underline italics. Please note that these are draft changes Staff has not received a signed copy of the proffers from the Applicant. Dated November 21, 2019 revised (signed proffers not received): Proffer Statement 1. Land Use Restrictions: 1.1The Owner hereby proffers not to engage in the following uses on the Property: Landscape and Horticultural Services (SIC 078) Pggjdf!boe!Tupsbhf!Gbdjmjujft!gps!Cvjmejoh!Dpotusvdujpo!Dpousbdupst-!Ifbwz! Dpotusvdujpo!Dpousbdupst!boe!Tqfdjbm!Usbef!Dpousbdupst!)TJD!26-!27-!28*! Local and Suburban Transit Services (SIC 41) Motor Freight Transportation & Warehousing (SIC 42) Transportation by Air (SIC 45) 263 Utility Facilities and their Accessory Uses (SIC 49) Cvjmejoh!Nbufsjbmt-!Ibsexbsf-!Hbsefo!Tvqqmz-!Npcjmf!Ipnf!Efbmfst!boe! Rezoning #07-19 GENTLE HARVEST LC. February 5, 2020 Page 2 Sfubjm!Ovstfsjft!)TJD!63*! Xipmftbmf!Usbef!Cvtjofttft!! Njtdfmmbofpvt!Sfqbjs!Tfswjdft!)TJD!87*! Drive-In Motion Picture Theaters (SIC 7833) Tfmg.Tupsbhf!Tupsbhf!Gbdjmjujft!! Bddfttpsz!Sfubjmjoh! Qvcmjd!Vujmjuz!Ejtusjcvujpo!Gbdjmjujft! Sftjefoujbm!Vtft!xijdi!bsf!bddfttpsz!up!bmmpxfe!cvtjoftt!vtft! Gmfy.Ufdi! Tractor Truck & Tractor Truck Trailer Parking (No SIC) !Tipvme!uif!Cpbse!bnfoe!uif!C4!)Joevtusjbm!Usbotjujpo*!Ejtusjdu!up!bmmpx!puifs!cz!sjhiu!vtft-!uif! Pxofs!sftfswft!uif!sjhiu!up!vtf!uif!Qspqfsuz!gps!tbje!gvuvsf!bmmpxfe!cz!sjhiu!vtft/!! 1.2When used in these proffers, the Preliminary Landscape Plan, shall refer to the plan entitled Plan dated September 24, 2019. The Preliminary Landscape Plan shall be incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit 1. The Owner proffers that its development of the Property will be in substantial conformity with the Preliminary Landscape Plan. Staff Note: This proffer seeks to implement the Senseny/Eastern Urban Area Plan that states enhanced area of buffer and landscaping shall be provided adjacent to the Interstate 81 right-of-way and its ramps 2Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development 2.1The Owner hereby proffers to provide a monetary contribution of $0.10 per developed building square foot for County Fire and Rescue Services. Following the required public hearing, a decision regarding this rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The Applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. 264 Rezoning #07-19 GENTLE HARVEST LC. February 5, 2020 Page 3 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by Staff where relevant throughout this Staff report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 12/18/19 Public Hearing Held; Recommended Approval Board of Supervisors: 01/22/20 Public Hearing Held; Tabled Board of Supervisors: 02/12/20 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 1.204+/- acres from the B2 (General Business) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with proffers. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 120 Front Royal Pike. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 64-A-1C PROPERTY ZONING : B2 (General Business) District PRESENT USE: Vacant Restaurant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: B2 (General Business) Use: Commercial/Route 50E South: B2 (General Business) Use: Commercial East: B2 (General Business) Use: Commercial West: B2 (General Business) Use: Commercial 265 Rezoning #07-19 GENTLE HARVEST LC. February 5, 2020 Page 4 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: VDOT has no objection to the rezoning as presented. Frederick-Winchester Service Authority: FWSA will defer to Frederick Water.! Frederick Water: Thank you for the opportunity to provide review comments on the Discount Tire rezoning application. The subject property located 120 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, Virginia, is currently served by the City of Winchester. Through redevelopment of the site, the City will continue to provide the water and sewer services.! Frederick County Department of Public Works: We offer no comments at this time. Frederick County Fire Marshall: Plan approved. Winchester Regional Airport: None. County of Frederick Attorney: Proffer is in acceptable legal form.! City of Winchester: The City of Winchester has reviewed the following: Discount Tire Site Plan at 120 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602. Based on our review, we have the following comments: Water 1.The existing water main and water meter may need to be relocated. If it is the case, vacation of existing easement and dedication of new easements may be required. 2.Please show location of all existing utility including water main, sewer main, lateral, water services, clean out and water meter. Planning & Zoning: 1)Site History The original Frederick County Zoning Map (U.S.G.S. Winchester Quadrangle) depicts the zoning for the parcel as B2 (General Business). 2)Comprehensive Plan The 2035 Comprehensive Plan is the guide for the future growth of Frederick County. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan is an official public document that serves as the Community's guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components of Community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County.!! 266 ! Rezoning #07-19 GENTLE HARVEST LC. February 5, 2020 Page 5 The Area Plans, Appendix I of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan, are the primary implementation tool and will be instrumental to the future planning efforts of the County. Mboe!Vtf! The 2035 Comprehensive Plan and the Senseny/Eastern Urban Area Plan provide guidance on the future development of the property. The property is located within the SWSA. The Senseny/Eastern Urban Area Plan identifies this property with commercial land use designation. In general, the existing B2 zoning and the proposed B3 zoning are consistent with the current land use supported by the Comprehensive Plan, however; the Comprehensive Plan states that this area should be designed specifically to accommodate and promote highway commercial land uses.! PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND ACTION FROM THE 12/18/19 MEETING: Staff provided an overview of the application and the proposed proffers. Mr. Ty Lawson, representing the Applicant, stated no mechanical work will be performed at the site or will no hazard waste such as oil or antifreeze will be handled at the site. The customer transactions will be completed in 30 to 45 minutes per vehicle with no unattended or overnight vehicles. The hours of operation are proposed are Monday Friday 8a.m. to 6p.m, Saturday 8a.m. to 5p.m. and closed on Sunday. Also, Civil Engineers of the Kimley-Horn Planning and Design Consultants presented an overview of the proposed new building design with landscaping. The bays will be facing Front Royal Pike. The building is set back about 150 ft. from the road. They concluded that the new building will be set back further than the existing building. Chairman Kenney called for anyone who wished to speak regarding this Public Hearing to come forward at this time. Mr. Steve Parish, Senior Vice President for the Aikens Group, commented against the rezoning to the Industrial Transition District on behalf of the surrounding ow. Mr. Parrish continued, that the zoning allows various uses that could be harmful to their property values. Ms. Becky Morrison came forward and shared her concerns about the used tire recycling procedures. The Kimley-Horn representatives for the Applicant, said that Discount Tire has a vendor that will be picking-up the used tires to be recycled and no tires will be stored outside. The proposed building will have an area for storage of the used tires until they are picked up for recycling. No one else came forward to speak and Chairman Kenney closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Commissioner Ambrogi commented, on the length of time that the building has been vacant. Staff responded that the existing building has been vacant for a few years. Also, Commissioner Ambrogi asked about the how the traffic will access the property. Mr. Lawson said the access is a paved road that was dedicated with less trips than the previous owner because of the different use. Planning Commission ultimately recommended approval of the rezoning application. 267 Rezoning #07-19 GENTLE HARVEST LC. February 5, 2020 Page 6 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SUMMARY AND ACTION FROM THE 01/22/20 MEETING: Staff provided an overview of the application and the proposed proffers. The Board discussed the uses that had been proffered with the rezoning application as well as traffic concerns. Mark Walters of Discount Tire, the Applicant, spoke about his company. The Board questioned product delivery, storage and noise. The project engineer then discussed traffic, landscaping, and drainage issues. Mr. Ty Lawson reviewed additional uses that the Applicant has agreed to exclude as a proffer for the rezoning. Four citizens spoke during the public hearing, one in support of the application and three expressed concerns. This item was postponed from the Board of Supervisors January 22, 2020 meeting to allow Staff the Staff has not received a opportunity to review proposed new proffers presented during the meeting. signed copy of the proffers from the Applicant. Following the required public hearing, a decision regarding this rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The Applicant should be prepared to adequately address all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. 268 REZ # 07 - 19: Gentle Harvest, LC PIN: 64 - A - 1C Rezoning from B2 to B3 Zoning Map £ ¤ 50 160 FRONT ROYAL PIKE REZ #07-19 64 A 1C 980 MILLWOOD £ ¤ PIKE 522 158 FRONT ROYAL PIKE N P M A R T I X E D O O 156 W L L I M DELCO PLAZA £ ¤ 50 § ¨¦ 81 M I L L W O O D § ¨¦ P I K E 81 170 FRONT D E L C ROYAL PIKE O P L Z µ Application Parcels B2 (General Business District) 269 Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 050100200Feet Map Created: November 25, 2019 REZ # 07 - 19: Gentle Harvest, LC PIN: 64 - A - 1C Rezoning from B2 to B3 Location Map £ ¤ 50 160 FRONT ROYAL PIKE REZ #07-19 64 A 1C 980 MILLWOOD £ ¤ PIKE 522 158 FRONT ROYAL PIKE N P M A R T I X E D O O 156 W L L I M DELCO PLAZA £ ¤ 50 § ¨¦ 81 M I L L W O O D § ¨¦ P I K E 81 170 FRONT D E L C ROYAL PIKE O P L Z µ Application Parcels 26: Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 050100200Feet Map Created: November 25, 2019 REZ # 07 - 19: Gentle Harvest, LC § ¨¦ 81 PIN: 64 - A - 1C Rezoning from B2 to B3 Long Range Land Use Map £ ¤ 50 160 FRONT ROYAL PIKE Application REZ #07-19 Parcels Long Range Land Use 64 A 1C Residential Neighborhood Village Urban Center Mobile Home Community Business Highway Commercial Mixed-Use Mixed Use Commercial/Office Mixed Use Industrial/Office Industrial 980 Warehouse MILLWOOD Heavy Industrial PIKE Extractive Mining Commercial Rec Rural Community Center Fire & Rescue Sensitive Natural Areas £ ¤ 522 Institutional 158 Planned Unit Development FRONT Park ROYAL PIKE Recreation N P M A R T I School X E D 156 O O W Employment L L I DELCO PLAZA M £ ¤ Airport Support Area50 § ¨¦ 81 M B2 / B3 I L L W O O D § ¨¦ P Residential, 4 u/a I K E 81 High-Density Residential, 6 u/a 200 FRONT ROYAL High-Density Residential, 12-16 u/a 170 PIKE FRONT D Rural Area E L C O ROYAL PIKE P L Z Interstate Buffer µ Landfill Support Area Natural Resources & Recreation Environmental & Recreational Resources 271 Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 050100200Feet Map Created: November 25, 2019 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 27: 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 28: ORDINANCE Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: December 18, 2019 Public Hearing Held, Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: January 22, 2020 Public Hearing Held, Postponed BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: February 12, 2020 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #07-19 GENTLE HARVEST, LC WHEREASREZONING #07-19 GENTLE HARVEST, LC, , submitted by Thomas Moore Lawson, P.C. to rezone 1.204+/- acres from the B2 (General Business) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with proffers with a final revision date of November 21, 2019. The subject property is located at 120 Front Royal Pike, in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and is identified by Property Identification 64-A-1C; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on December 18, 2019 and recommended approval; and WHEREAS , the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on January 22, 2020 and postponed it to February 12; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public meeting on February 12, 2020; and WHEREAS , the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to rezone 1.204+/- acres from the B2 (General Business) District to the B3 (Industrial Transition) District with proffers with a final revision date of November 21, 2019. The conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the Applicant and the Property Owner are attached. This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 12th day of February 2020 by the following recorded vote: Charles S. DeHaven, Jr., Chairman Shawn L. Graber J. Douglas McCarthy Robert W. Wells Gene E. Fisher Judith McCann-Slaughter Blaine P. Dunn A COPY ATTEST __________________________ Kris C. Tierney Frederick County Administrator 291 PDRes. #05-20 292 293 294 295 296