TC 08-27-12 Meeting AgendaCOUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
In
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Transportation Committee
FROM: John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director - Transportation, �
RE: August 27, 2012 Transportati6n Committee Meeting
DATE: August 20, 2012
The Frederick County Transportation Committee will be meeting at 8:30 a.m. on Monday,
August 27, 2012 in the first floor conference room of the Frederick County Administration
Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia.
AGENDA
1. BDAS Committee Update
2. Dairy Corner Lane Proposal
3. Removing Portion of Golds Orchard Road from State System
4. Hayfield Road
5. Other
Please contact our department if you are unable to attend this meeting.
Attachments
JAB/bad
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Item 1: BDAS Committee Update
Attached please find materials that have recently been forwarded to the Planning Commission, as
well as a memorandum from Mr. Eric Lawrence, Director of Planning and Development. Staff
will be updating you on the progress of this effort and going into greater discussion regarding
strategies for addressing transportation needs.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
MEMORANDUM 540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
TO: Frederick County Transportation Committee
FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director.
SUBJECT: Discussion — Business Development Advancement Study Report and
Recommendation
DATE: August 20, 2012
This past February, the Chairman of the Planning Commission established the Business
Development Advancement Study (BDAS) Committee and tasked them to take the lead role in
evaluating improved business development opportunities in the County. The Committee was
structured to include representation from the Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission,
Frederick County Sanitation Authority, and Winchester -Frederick County Economic
Development Commission.
Shortly after convening for its first meeting, the BDAS Committee adopted its Mission Statement:
"To forward to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors a
recommendation of priority business areas based on the evaluation of all
information and infrastructure funding programs readily available, prioritization
of planned industrial sites, advancement of preparations to accommodate
shovel -ready sites, and providing economic development interests better choices
in competitive locations."
On July 12, 2012, the BDAS Committee concluded their study and endorsed their report and
recommendation titled "A New Strategy: Advancing the Comprehensive Plan from Vision to
Shovel -Ready Business Development Sites". This report and recommendation are now
forwarded to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors for consideration. An aspect
of the recommendation involves a process by which transportation planning and infrastructure
improvements could be implemented to enable and improve access to business development
sites. Attached is the BDAS Committee's report and recommendation, as well as the report's
appendixes. An Executive Summary is located on pages 3-5.
At the Transportation Committee's August 27, 2012 meeting, staff will present the report and
recommendation as a discussion item and solicit comments. All comments heard during this
discussion will be captured and shared with the Board of Supervisors.
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Page 2
Transportation Committee Discussion — BDAS Report and Recommendation
August 20, 2012
Please contact staff with questions. Thank you.
cc: Business Development Advancement Study Committee
Attachments: BDAS Report. A New Strategy
Appendix. Financing Tools For Promoting Business Development
Appendix. Business Development — Office and Industrial
Appendix. Achieving Fiscal Balance Through Land Use Planning
Appendix. Cost Benefit Analysis
ERL/bad
BDAS Report &
Recommendations
A New Strategy:
Advancing the Comprehensive Plan from
Vision to Shovel -Ready Business Development Sites
Business Development Advancement Study (BDAS)
Committee Recommendation
July 12, 2012
Business development plays an important role in our local economy through employment
opportunities and tax contributions. Efforts to advance its investment through welcoming and
accommodating new construction would enhance our community's competiveness. The
Frederick County 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies areas for future business development,
yet without the appropriate site zoning and infrastructure those future business development
sites may not be deemed shovel -ready and capture prospective business investment.
Following three months of research, presentations, discussions, and evaluations, the Business
Development Advancement Study (BDAS) Committee offered their Preliminary Thoughts
regarding Frederick County's planned business development areas. The Committee finalized
their research and on July 12, 2012 forwarded a recommendation to the Frederick County
Planning Commission and the Frederick County Board of Supervisors. This recommendation is
included in the Business Development Advancement Study Report & Recommendation.
July 12, 2012
Executive Summary
BDAS Committee
Business Development Defined
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Page
3
6
6
Issues Prompting Business Development Advancement Study 6
2030 Comprehensive Plan 10
Evaluation for Site Shovel -Readiness 13
BDAS Committee's Preliminary Thoughts 16
Cost — Benefit Analysis 18
BDAS Recommendation 20
Appendix
Financing Tools for Promoting Business Development
2030 Comprehensive Plan - Business Development - Office and Industrial
2030 Comprehensive Plan —Achieving Fiscal Balance Through Land Use Planning
Cost Benefit Analysis background
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 2 of 23
!!ply 12, 2012 Business Deve!opment Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Executive Summary
Business investment within Frederick County is essential to our quality of life. The investment
offers quality high wage employment opportunities for our residents. The investment offers
stability to the workforce. The investment provides tax revenue to support the quality county
services that meet our community's demand for a high quality of life.
Frederick County is well positioned geographically to capture future business development.
The community could better capitalize on its geographic location by zoning properties for
business development and securing funds to address associated infrastructure improvements.
In order to harness the benefits of business development, it is essential to have quality sites
available for business to utilize.
The BDAS has identified seven key business development areas reflective of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan's business development land use designation and goals, as well as ease in
terms of facilitating transportation and water and sewer infrastructure improvements.
The BDAS recommends that the County undertake the following initiatives which collectively
will enhance the community's advancement of business development within the targeted
business development areas identified in this report.
Business Development Initiatives
• Secure zoned and shovel -ready sites
o Identify and prioritize key areas/sites
o Encourage property owner initiated rezoning within prioritized areas
o Utilize staff expertise to analyze sites and provide comment for rezoning
applications
o Waive rezoning application fee and detailed Impact Analysis (including TIA
Transportation Impact Analysis ) if proffer statement adequately addresses
mitigation of impacts
• Establish public-private agreements to enable the Economic Development Commission's
(EDC) marketing of key business development sites
o Owner agreed upon sales price that can be marketed to prospective targeted
business users
■ Utilize independent appraisal that is updated every 3 years
o Establish a pre -determined time frame to market property
10 years for target areas that are envisioned to development in the near
future
■ 20 years for target areas that are envisioned to development in the long
term
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 3 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
• Annually refund real estate land uSP tax dpfprmpnt fnr hllslners rlpvpinnmpnt sltps
o Calculate deferment : Land Use Tax Assessment value minus new Real Estate
Assessment after rezoning
o Utilize a Performance Agreement between property owner and Industrial
Development Authority (IDA)
■ Performance measures will include: proper zoning, executed sales price
agreement, documented effort as a willing seller for EDC clients
■ Do not include Rollback
■ Deferment refund would continue until site is developed
• Perform preliminary site analysis for large tracts
o Conduct wetlands and historic reviews in advance of site development
o Design and construct regional stormwater management facilities per new state
code
• Fastrack Development Review Process for targeted businesses
o Establish a coordinated review agency effort to enable targeted businesses to
receive prompt development reviews.
o Allow concurrent development application reviews
o Assure that review agencies will provide development proposal review
comments within set time frames all in an effort to promptly secure
development review approvals
■ Development Application Review and agency review response time
• Rezoning —10 days for review agency comment; then 45 days for
public hearings
• Master Development Plan — 30 days
• Subdivision — 30 days
• Site Plan — 30 days
• Land Disturbance — 5 days
• Building Permit — 5 days
o Fastrack program will enable cumulative approvals needed for building
construction to be issued in less than 3 months, rather than the typical 12-24
month process
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 4 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
•
Pursue public investment towards infrastructure needs associated with target
businesses
o Seek local, state, and federal financing
■ Grants, low interest financing, bonding
o Utilize Return on Investment (ROI) analysis when considering fiscal contributions
■ 20 year ROI payoff
o Explore the use of an Industrial Development Corporation -type (IDC) of structure
to invest, manage, and develop the business sites to fruition
• Reserve water and sewer capacity for planned business development areas
o Work with FCSA to assure that adequate capacities (within transmission systems
as well as treatment facilities) will be available to serve the targeted EDC users
within the planned business development areas.
On July 12, 2012 the BDAS Committee forwarded this recommendation to the Board of Supervisors
and Planning Commission for their consideration. Additional details on the recommendation are
located beginning on page 20 of the report.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 5 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Business Development Advancement Study Committee
In February 2012, the Planning Commission set out to establish the Business Development
Advancement Study (BDAS) Committee to take the lead role in evaluating improved business
development opportunities in the County. The Committee was structured to include
representation from the Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission, Frederick County
Sanitation Authority, and Winchester -Frederick County Economic Development Commission.
Mission Statement:
"To forward to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors a
recommendation of priority business areas based on the evaluation of all
information and infrastructure funding programs readily available, prioritization
of planned industrial sites, advancement of preparations to accommodate
shovel -ready sites, and providing economic development interests better choices
in competitive locations."
Business Development Defined
For the purpose of this study, the Committee coined the term Business Development to
encompass the business and industrial sectors that have been identified as targeted businesses
in the County's 2030 Comprehensive Plan as well as by the Winchester -Frederick County
Economic Development Commission (EDC). Those targeted businesses include:
• Healthcare Research and Development
• Food Processing,
• Plastics Manufacturing,
• Back Office Support,
• Distribution/Repackaging and Assembly Centers, and
• Government Activity
The County's 2030 Comprehensive Plan accommodates business development within the
planned business and industrial land use areas of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Zoning
Ordinance permits the business development uses in the OM Office Manufacturing, M1 Light
Industrial, and the M2 Industrial General Zoning Districts.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 6 of 23
;uly 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Issues Prompting Business Development Advancement Study
Because of the use of the internet and the work of consultants, the economic developer's tirne
to influence and work with a prospect has diminished significantly. By the time state and local
economic developers learn of a project, it is generally more advanced and consequently the
prospect is closer to making a decision. While a project could have required eighteen months to
reach a conclusion ten years ago, today it is not unusual for a project to run its course in
four to six months.
The challenge then is to understand and confront these changes. Business cannot be done the
way it has always been done. If prospects are making decisions faster, then the availability of
information and the responsiveness of economic development organizations must also be
faster. If customers are using the internet as a way to collect data, websites must be accurate,
complete and easy to navigate.
If consultants have been integrated into the process, then understanding their needs and
including them in marketing efforts is essential. Knowledge of active business sectors and those
community assets which align with their needs will offer value to the consultant and the client.
The critical factors of business in deciding a location include:
• Labor
• Product (sites and buildings)
• Transportation and Markets
• Business Climate
• Quality of Life
In the product category, quality sites and buildings must be available and ready to go. The
competition has them, so a community that does not is at a distinct disadvantage. Once
a decision has been made to move forward on a project, businesses want to begin without
delay. It is not acceptable to be held up by zoning issues or other public hearing procedures.
Getting the new project underway is essential and anything that hinders this reduces a
community's chances of success
While with labor considerations, it is most likely the prospect will want to explore the
availability of sites, existing buildings, or build -to -suit opportunities. Business expects ready -to -
go properties; as was mentioned previously, the time frame for projects is such that business
cannot wait for property to be rezoned or for extensive site work. Nor do businesses want to
endure what is many times a distasteful public process, especially if speed -to -market and
competitive opportunities are in play.
Product is not just the responsibility of local government. The private sector plays a critical role
in providing this location factor. The local economic development organization and local
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 7 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
government must encourage and assist the private sector where possible in the development
of quality product. Part of the product development effort that does fall squarely on local
government is the development of adequate local infrastructure, especially water and sewer.
Having capacity available helps to ensure competitiveness, and it is an essential element in
encouraging the local private sector developer to invest his or her resources to provide quality
product. Local governments must also work with the private sector to encourage the
development of telecommunications, especially broadband networks.
Th i ',1 4'?�"tees jf r'�tifi�.e 101,01--40,11,S�af..:'�.,ti�ssho s have k..'+. n'iali `saw" Iap!!', ty i;%e.R'rhia e
last 10,+e.a s., All otscc..,+ thhn4m 1"'efi'ng a..q...'al r.' e=a �l�it��a yr .+Mwr� hyS build, +Fgs
blusi wre S %Lrk°n'7 z ow?. If7hose Tmfwici? did ).`wt.
It is the Committee's opinion that it is time to consider an enhancement to the implementation
process in an effort to advance the positive tax advantages of targeted business developments.
Business Opportunities Lost
It is recognized that not all businesses that express interest in locating in Frederick County may be
appropriate fits for the county. But, regardless, the county should be prepared to accommodate all
businesses with an emphasis on those targeted business (see attached table for businesses). Land
must be planned and be available to accommodate business interest.
The conclusion is that there are limited sites to market.
Year
Parcels
Total Acres
Average
2011
Parcels
Acreage
Parcel
2007
6
235
Size
Total Undeveloped Industrial)
158
2,500
15.8
Zoned Land
9
1035
110
Acreage Available > 19.99 acre
34
1,440
42.3
Parcels with Agreed Upon
13
650
50
Predetermined Sale Price
(available for EDC marketing)
The conclusion is that there are limited sites to market.
Year
Parcels
Total Acres
Largest Tract
2011
13
650
120
2007
6
235
110
2006
6
460
110
2000
9
1035
110
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 8 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
And the amount of acreage available for marketing has, decreased s;gnMf ntly .—or the past
decade.
Our community's limited inventory of pre -qualified Virginia Economic Development Partnership
(VEDP) sites has contributed to our being removed very early from the site selection process. Why
or How the system is broken?
• Time needed for rezoning
• Increased taxes to property owner when rezoned from rural to business development
lands
• Cost of proffers
• Wastewater availability/capacity/costs
• Cost of land, when compared to competing jurisdictions
• Less cost to property owner to develop rural residential lots versus business
development lands.
• Fluidity of required transportation demands
• Replenishment rate of economic development lands
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 9 of 23
July 12, 2012 Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
2030 Comprehensive Plan
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan offers guidance for future land use decisions and, more importantly,
identifies key areas that are planned for future business development opportunities. The
development of commercial and industrial sites is vital to the financial success of Frederick County,
and our efforts to achieve our fiscal goals in providing services to county residents.
A number of Policies of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan were specifically crafted to support Business
Development such as:
• Identify and recognize areas in the county most strategically suited to meet the
requirements of office and industrial development
• Proactively attract desired business entities, and
• Consider regulations encouraging and/or requiring service redundancy in office and
industrial areas
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan's planned industrial land uses are so designated after consideration
of: site topography and geology; existing and planned transportation networks; existing and
potential for public water and sewer service infrastructure; existing and potential for electric and
communication network improvements; and proximity to residential land uses to avoid use
conflicts.
It is through The Plan that these key sites are identified and reserved for future business
development, all in an effort to achieve the targeted tax assessment ratio of 25 percent C/I to 75
percent Other land uses such as residential.
Implementation of business development land uses depicted in The Plan has been by a property
owner's initiative to seek a rezoning. It is through the rezoning process that a property owner is
expected to mitigate transportation impacts, and extend water and sewer to the property
presuming the property is not already served.
Target: Plan for C/I to Represent 25 Percent of Real Estate Assessments
In an effort to maintain the county's ability to provide high quality services while at the same
time maintaining low real estate tax rates, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is utilizing land use
planning and C/I opportunities to offset impacts from existing and planned residential uses. If it
is a goal for Frederick County to have 25 percent of the total county assessments come from C/I
land use values, then it is obvious that at only 13.56 percent (4,556 acres) the county needs
additional developed C/I uses. To achieve the 25 percent assessment target in 2010, an
additional 2,761 developed acres of C/I land uses are needed.
Recognizing the county's 2.9 percent annual growth rate over the past 3 decades, the 2030
Comprehensive Plan is designed to accommodate an additional 4,859 acres of new C/I
opportunities. This projection indicates that the 2030 Comprehensive Plan contains a minimum
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 10 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
designation of 12,176 acres for C/I land uses within the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA).
Further fluctuations may be anticipated with additional residential growth.
The Committee looked at planned industrial areas depicted in the County's 2030
Comprehensive Plan, more specifically depicted on the Eastern Frederick Long Range Land Use
Plan, as locations to accommodate future business development. These business development
areas were further refined to include only areas that contained planned industrial land use
opportunities and were vacant. Seven key Planned Business Development Areas were targeted
for further study as part of the BDAS.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 11 of 23
lily 12 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Plannecd Business Development Areas
Based an 2030 Comprehensive Plan
8
------ .,
1
F
erre• anE':'.a�e•oe: nce area
t ' ,
.._. bnedr8 - Arra..
� • D 0-5. 1
If -k+
H
_-_ rh
...----- _._ _�_�-------- _�
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 12 of 23
July 12, 2012
Evaluation for Site Shovel -Readiness
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
In an effort to advance business development, and increase the quantity of quality shovel -ready
sites, the BDAS Committee reviewed the following:
• The 2030 Comprehensive Plan's Planned Industrial sites;
• Geological conditions;
• Water and sewer availability;
• Transportation; and,
• Known funding and incentive programs in an effort to prioritize and advance sites towards a
shovel -ready status.
Geology
The areas planned for business development are generally located within either shale or karst
geology. Shale is the dominant geology east of Interstate 81; Karst is the dominant geology
west of Interstate 81.
Shale geology offers excellent advantages as shale may be utilized for fill materials eliminating
the need to import fill. Shale also offers a solid base on which structure foundations and
stormwater facilities may be constructed. The shale geology is generally more economical for
development purposes.
The soluble nature of Karsts geology makes the soil susceptible to sinkholes, and the limestone
deposits add to blasting and rock removal expenses. Due to the dissolution of karsts soils,
stormwater management facilities generally need to be lined to avoid washouts. The soluble
materials could also lead to building pad failures. Construction expenses associated with karst
soils may be minimized with advance exploration techniques such as deep boring, air probes,
and seismic refractions to identify deep bedrock depositions; such an exploration could indicate
areas that could be susceptible to sinkholes and therefore areas that should be avoided.
Best locations for business development, from a geology perspective: Reliance Road area;
Route 522S/Tasker Road area; and the Route 522S/Route 37/Parkins Road area.
The committee concluded that while construction costs associated with developing sites in
karsts dominated areas are typically higher, the price differential is rarely significant enough to
justify not marketing those sites for C/I development.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 13 of 23
July 12, 2012 Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Water and Sewer Availability
ThP PrPriPrick County Canitatinn Aiithnrity /FC'CA1 rPrnani7P1Z the C'niinhf c CP%AiPr and \A/::iter
Service Area (SWSA) as county policy which defines the boundary limits for water and sewer
service as provided by the FCSA. The SWSA does not guarantee the availability of water and
sewer service. The FCSA is responsible for the water supply and sanitary sewer transmission
within the designated sewer and water service area.
The FCSA manages the system with a water capacity of 7.42 Million Gallons per Day (MGD),
with an average annual use of 4.75 MGD. Various quarries provide the majority of the system's
water supply, with an agreement with the City of Winchester supplementing the system with
up to 2MGD. On the sanitary side, FCSA is able to treat 11.895 MGD.
Based on various factor such as existing conveyance system infrastructure, and proximity to
supply and treatment facilities, the FCSA indicated that some of the 2030 Plan's planned
industrial areas are more economical to serve than others. As such, the FCSA identified three
areas that warrant consideration as priority areas from a service perspective:
Rt522S/Future Route 37 vicinity
o Water main is located on Rt522 adjacent to area
o Sewer plant (Parkins Mill Plant) is located adjacent to area on Parkins Mill Road
• 1-81/Route 37/Martinsburg Pike vicinity
o Area is presently served by water and sewer; additional capacities are available
o Red Bud Run pump station is capable of increased flows (a 1.8 MGD capability,
operating at 1.0 MGD)
• Rest Church Road vicinity & Hopewell Road vicinity
o Area could ultimately be served by a new sewer package plant ("plant #4")
designed solely for non-residential uses.
o Estimated $5,000,000 plant
o 2-3 MGD
o Implement composting and other land applications (creative solutions) to
address nutrient limitations
o Water supply to area is limited so no food processing or other heavy water users
envisioned
o Does need a water storage tank of approximately 150-200 feet high to satisfy
water pressure needs
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 14 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Transportation
The transportation improvements that were evaluated and discussed were those
improvements included on the adopted Eastern Road Plan (ERP), a component of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan. It was noted that while all the improvements identified in the ERP may
not be needed to bring a single site to shovel -ready status, the overall planned road
improvements would be essential to accommodate the traffic generated with ultimate build-
out of the planned Business Development areas.
It was noted that some of the studied planned industrial areas were more suitable than others
for business development simply reflective of the economics of being able to utilize existing
transportation infrastructure. With consideration of the additional expense of new
infrastructure, the following areas were identified as cost effective areas to support business
development:
• Rt522S/Future Route 37 vicinity
o Good transportation access today; planned improvements would enable
additional business development without burdening transportation network
o Could potentially use the Route 522/Route 37 (planned intersection) as access
point into Area to accommodate initial access. Preliminary access could be
constructed to ultimate Route 37 design standards
o This area offers the most desirable site in terms of cost of improvements
compared to potential acreage and existing capabilities
o This is a significant land bay that is well set up to be able to distribute traffic to
roadways with available capacity as well as potential future interchanges
1-81/Route 37/Martinsburg Pike vicinity
o Economic Access Funding is being utilized to assist the developer construct
Snowden Bridge Boulevard from Route 11 to the Graystone Industrial Park.
o Economic Access Funding has been reserved for upgrading and signalization of
Ebert Road, but this funding may be returned to VDOT for redistribution in the
near future if the developer match is not committed
Creative financing may be needed regardless of the planned industrial area. TIF and BID -type
financing should be evaluated. VDOT Revenue Sharing and Economic Access Funding programs
should be promoted. Sensible roads and not roads designed to last forever should be
considered. Possibly utilize one program (i.e. TIF) to represent required match funding for
another program.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 15 of 23
July 12, 2012
BDAS Committee's Preliminary Thoughts
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Following presentations and discussions by experts in the fields of water and sewer,
transportation, geology, and economic development, the BDAS Committee generated their
Preliminary Thoughts for how the County could best advance shovel -ready business
development sites.
The Business Development Advancement Study (BDAS) Committee's Preliminary Thoughts:
• Prioritize future business development areas that could contain shovel -ready sites and
serve the community over the next 20 — 30 years. Some areas will be available in the
near term, others toward the end of the 20-30 period. The Planned Business
Development areas identified below are listed in order of priority considering the
shovel -readiness criteria.
■ Route 522 South and Parkins Mill Road (and future Route 37 East) area
■ 1-81/Route 37/Route 11 North Stephenson area
■ Kernstown area— Route 37/Route 11/Shady Elm Road
• Clearbrook area —1-81 Exit 321 and Exit 323, around interchanges and
east of Route 11
■ Stephens City east area— northwest of Route 277 and Route 522
■ Stephens City south area — within town boundaries
■ Reliance Road area
Secure business development zoning for planned business areas.
o Encourage and support property owner initiated rezoning of Comprehensive
Plan identified business areas/sites
o Business Development zoning includes:
■ M1 Light Industrial
■ M2 Industrial General
■ OM Office -Manufacturing Park
• Secure infrastructure funding to improve transportation access and water and sewer
service to the business areas
• Secure Real Estate Tax Relief for business zoned yet agriculturally used properties
o Current Virginia law states that if a property owner requests a rezoning, then the
property will no longer qualify for the Land Use (LU) Tax Assessment program.
Therefore, the rezoned site will be taxed based on the newly rezoned
assessment.
o Current Virginia tax law states that if the zoning is changed by the locality (the
Board's action NOT a request from the landowner) then that farmer may remain
in land use (LU) as long as he continues to farm the property.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 16 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
o In an effort to support property owner initiated rezoning requests and not
penalize same for seeking to implement business development zoning while
continuing to utilize sites for agricultural uses, it may be appropriate to seek
legislation at the General Assembly to enable the Frederick County
Commissioner of the Revenue to permit continued use of the Land Use (LU) Tax
Assessment program for properties that continue to be in agricultural use yet
may have been rezoned to enable future business development. At such time as
the property implements business development use, roll -back taxes for the
proceeding five year should be due
• Establish public-private partnerships to advance key planned business areas to shovel
ready status.
o Enter into agreement with property owner regarding a sales price for their land
holdings, with consideration for annual inflationary adjustments, and a 10 -year
term on the sales price agreement
o Waive rezoning application fees and impact analysis for properties
o Encourage favorable consideration of rezoning applications that adequately
address and mitigate future transportation impacts via a conditional rezoning
proffer statement
o Seek funding opportunities to implement necessary infrastructure
• Evaluate and secure infrastructure funding programs that are appropriate for specific
sites
o Private Consortium Financing
o Grant Funding
o Low Interest Rate Financing
o Tax Increment Financing (TIP)
o Special Tax District Financing
Reserve water and sewer capacity for planned business development areas
o Work with FCSA to assure that adequate capacities (within transmission systems
as well as treatment facilities) will be available to serve the targeted EDC users
within the planned business development areas.
Cost — Benefit Analysis
In an effort to better understand the fiscal benefits (a.k.a. Return on Investment) derived from
business development, the BDAS Committee analyzed a development scenario for three of the
top prioritized BDAS business development areas:
• Parkins Mill (Route 522 South and Parkins Mill Road and future Route 37 East area),
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 17 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Winchester North (1-81/Route 37/Route 11 North Stephenson area), and
Rest Church (Clearbrook area —1-81 Exit 321 and Exit 323, around interchanges and east
of Route 11)
The scenarios included considerations pertaining to: acreage potentially available for business
development; cost of transportation, water and sewer infrastructure improvements necessary
to serve the business development; potential sewer system capacity limitations that directly
correlates with the type of business development that might be possible; non -local
infrastructure improvement funding sources; and projected Return on Investment benefits to
the community. The scenarios consider Manufacturing and Warehousing land uses,
independently as well as a blend of the two uses within each development area scenario. It is
noteworthy to mention that the fiscal benefit analysis does not factor in the number of jobs
and their associated wages.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 18 of 23
July 12, 2012 Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
Return on Investment Scenarios
(Blend - 50/50) 20 year I
--------------- 7------ -- — — -
Break-even Year 6 I 7 ! 3
(Manufacturing) `
Break-even Year 10 j 13 i 3
(Warehousing)
__ --- -- --_- _ __- -- -�- - - - - - - ---- -- - - - - --+----------------- - -- --------- - - -
Break-even Year 7 91 3
(Blend - 50/50)
Assumptions/Notes - ---
• Manufacturing per acre return: $19,355
• Warehousing per acre return: $9,155
• Blend per acre return: $14,225
• First project does not locate until year 3
• Projects occurs every three years absorbing 20 acres
• Bond terms are 4% for 20 year
• Rest Church plan calls for $8 million capital outlay to gain additional 500,000 MGD, added with third
project.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 19 of 23
Parkins Mill
Winchester North
Rest Church
- — - — - -- — -- - —--;-- -----------------------------
Tota I Acreage E
------------,--------------------
1,732
810
1,469
Total Immediate
500 i
250
350
Developable Acge
Acreage
----- --
-- - ---i ----------------------------------------------
L
----------------------------------
Wastewater Capacity
Up to 3 MGD ;
Up to 800,000 MGD
Up to 600,000 MGD
Available
Immediate
$5,275,000 !
$6,250,000
$9,415,500
Infrastructure Cost !
'
Infrastructure Funded !
$1,500,000 j
$1,500,000
$637,500
via Non -Local Funds s *road access
multiple awards *road access multiple awards i
road access
j
*special taxing district I
Net Immediate
$3,775,000
$4,750,000
$8,112,381
Infrastructure Cost
Infrastructure Bonding ;
$5,490,182
$6,908,177
$14,816,221
Costs 20 year
Net Revenues
$18,897,118
$17,479,123
$16,247,919
(Manufacturing) 20 year
Net Revenues Revenues j
:-------------------------_----
$6,045,118
$4,627,123 ?
$3,422,919
(Warehousing) 20 year
------------------ -- - -- - -- — •------------------------------------------r------
Net
Net Revenues I
----
$12,497,118 ;
$11,053,123 i
$9,848,919
(Blend - 50/50) 20 year I
--------------- 7------ -- — — -
Break-even Year 6 I 7 ! 3
(Manufacturing) `
Break-even Year 10 j 13 i 3
(Warehousing)
__ --- -- --_- _ __- -- -�- - - - - - - ---- -- - - - - --+----------------- - -- --------- - - -
Break-even Year 7 91 3
(Blend - 50/50)
Assumptions/Notes - ---
• Manufacturing per acre return: $19,355
• Warehousing per acre return: $9,155
• Blend per acre return: $14,225
• First project does not locate until year 3
• Projects occurs every three years absorbing 20 acres
• Bond terms are 4% for 20 year
• Rest Church plan calls for $8 million capital outlay to gain additional 500,000 MGD, added with third
project.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 19 of 23
July 12, 2012 Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
BDAS Recommendation
The Business Development Advancement Strategy has been designed to bring shovel -ready
sites into readiness for the owner, the potential user, and the county in terms of increased
revenue. There has been an attempt to bring predictability to the economic development
process in an environment which has changed significantly over the past several years. It looks
more like a partnership of owner, user, and County and getting each of the partners to an
effective end result for each.
Efforts have been incorporated that contribute towards the implementation of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan, specifically its business development land use designations (resulting in
OM, M1, and M2 zoning districts). It is also suggested that energies be concentrated at a few
strategic locations so as to maximize the program's benefits: Focus public-private investment in
the highest priority areas to improve transportation and water and sewer availability.
The BDAS has identified seven key business development areas reflective of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan's business development land use designation and goals, as well as ease in
terms of facilitating transportation and water and sewer infrastructure improvements. Those
areas are listed below, with the top prioritized area listed first:
o Parkins Mill area
• Route 522 South / Parkins Mill Road (and future Route 37 E) area
• Approximately 1,732 Acres
• 32 properties over 10 acres in size
• Land Use Plan Designation: Mixed Use Office/Industrial Land Uses
• Envisioned Zoning District: OM Office Manufacturing
o Winchester North area
• 1-81 Exit 317
• Approximately 810 Acres
• 19 properties over 10 acres in size
• Land Use Plan Designation: Industrial Land Uses
• Envisioned Zoning District: M1 Light Industrial
o Rest Church Road area
• 1-81 Exit 323
• Approximately 1,469 Acres
• 32 properties over 10 acres in size
• Land Use Plan Designation: Mixed Use Industrial/Office, Industrial,
Heavy Industrial, and Warehouse Land Uses
• Envisioned Zoning District: OM Office Manufacturing, M1 Light
Industrial, and M2 Industrial General
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 20 of 23
July 12, 2012
o Kernstown area
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
• 1-81 Exit 310/Route 37 South/Route 11 South
• Approximately 378 Acres
• 10 properties over 10 acres in size
• Land Use Designation: Industrial Land Uses
• Envisioned Zoning Designation: M1 Light Industrial
o Clearbrook area
• 1-81 Exit 321/Hopewell Road
• Approximately 665 Acres
• 12 properties over 10 acres in size
• Land Use Plan Designation: Industrial and Mixed Use
Industrial/Office Land Uses
• Envisioned Zoning District: M1 Light Industrial, OM Office
Manufacturing, and B3 Industrial Transition
o Stephens City East area
• Route 277 / Route 522 S / Route 636
• Approximately 1,052 Acres
• 23 properties over 10 acres in size
• Land Use Plan Designation: Mixed Use Industrial/Office and
Industrial
• Envisioned Zoning District: OM Office Manufacturing and M1 Light
Industrial
o Stephens City Proper area
• With the Town of Stephens City
• Approximately 191 Acres
• 3 properties over 10 acres in size
• Land Use Designation: Industrial Land Use
• Envisioned Zoning District: 1-1 Industrial Transition and 1-2 General
Industrial
The BDAS recommends that the County undertake the following initiatives which collectively
will enhance the community's advancement of business development in the target business
areas.
Business Development Initiatives
• Secure zoned and shovel-readv sites
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 21 of 23
July 12, 2012 Business Development Advancement Studv
Report & Recommendation
o Identify and prioritize key areas/sites
o Encourage property owner initiated rezoning within prioritized areas
o Utilize staff expertise to analyze sites and provide comment for rezoning
applications
o Waive rezoning application fee and detailed Impact Analysis (including TIA
Transportation Impact Analysis ) if proffer statement adequately addresses
mitigation of impacts
Establish public-private agreements to enable the Economic Development Commission's
(EDC) marketing of key business development sites
o Owner agreed upon sales price that can be marketed to prospective targeted
business users
■ Utilize independent appraisal that is updated every 3 years
o Establish a pre -determined time frame to market property
10 years for target areas that are envisioned to development in the near
future
20 years for target areas that are envisioned to development in the long
term
Annually refund real estate land use tax deferment for business development sites
o Calculate deferment : Land Use Tax Assessment value minus new Real Estate
Assessment after rezoning
o Utilize a Performance Agreement between property owner and Industrial
Development Authority (IDA)
Performance measures will include: proper zoning, executed sales price
agreement, documented effort as a willing seller for EDC clients
Do not include Rollback
■ Deferment refund would continue until site is developed
Perform preliminary site analysis for large tracts
o Conduct wetlands and historic reviews in advance of site development
o Design and construct regional stormwater management facilities per new state
code
Fastrack Development Review Process for targeted businesses
o Establish a coordinated review agency effort to enable targeted businesses to
receive prompt development reviews.
o Allow concurrent development application reviews
o Assure that review agencies will provide development proposal review
comments within set time frames all in an effort to promptly secure
development review approvals
■ Development Application Review and agency review response time
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 22 of 23
July 12, 2012
Business Development Advancement Study
Report & Recommendation
• Rezoning —10 days for review agency comment; then 45 days for
public hearings
• Master Development Plan — 30 days
• Subdivision — 30 days
• Site Plan — 30 days
• Land Disturbance — 5 days
• Building Permit — 5 days
o Fastrack program will enable cumulative approvals needed for building
construction to be issued in less than 3 months
• Pursue public investment towards infrastructure needs associated with target
hiicinPccPc
o Seek local, state, and federal financing
■ Grants, low interest financing, bonding
o Utilize Return on Investment (ROI) analysis when considering fiscal contributions
■ 20 year ROI payoff
o Utilize an Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) to manage and implement
infrastructure improvements
• Reserve water and sewer capacity for planned business development areas
o Work with FCSA to assure that adequate capacities (within transmission systems
as well as treatment facilities) will be available to serve the targeted EDC users
within the planned business development areas.
Frederick County Planning Commission's Business Development Advancement Study Committee Page 23 of 23
BDAS Report Appendix:
Financing Tools For Promoting
Business Development
BDAS Report Appendix:
Financing Tools for Promoting Business Development
Road Development
1. Transportation Partnership Opportunity Fund
Description
It provides grants, revolving loans, or other financial tools and equity contributions
to encourage the development of transportation projects and to provide monies to
address the transportation aspects of economic development opportunities.
The financial assistance may be used for transportation capacity development, on
and off site; road, rail, mass transit or other transportation access costs beyond the
funding capability of existing programs; studies of transportation projects including
but not limited to environmental analysis, geotechnical assessment, survey, design
and engineering, advance right-of-way acquisition, traffic analysis, toll sensitivity
studies, financial analysis, or any other transportation development activity
permitted by law.
Amount
$30 million = Loans from the Fund of up to $30 million will be interest-free. Loan
terms will vary but shall not exceed seven years.
$5 million = Grants of up to $5 million.
Notes
Must meet Governor's Opportunity Fund criteria
Still eligible for other State road funding pools
2. Virginia Transportation Infrastructure Bank
Description
Bank is intended to alleviate, in part, a critical need for additional sources of funding
to finance present and future needs of the Commonwealth of Virginia for the design
and construction of roads and highways. This includes including toll facilities, mass
transit, freight, passenger and commuter rail, including rolling stock, port and airport
and other transportation facilities.
The purpose of the bank is also to encourage the investment of both public and
private funds in the development of eligible transportation projects and to provide
an alternative source of financing for present and future transportation needs in the
commonwealth.
Under the VTIB Act, a Project means i) the construction, reconstruction,
rehabilitation or replacement of any interstate, state highway, toll road, tunnel, local
road, or bridge; or ii) the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation or replacement
of any a) mass transit, b) commuter, passenger or freight rail, c) port, or d) airport
facility; or the acquisition of any rolling stock, vehicle or equipment to be used
therewith.
Loans, grants, credit enhancement and other financial assistance available.
Amount
$282 million = Initial capitalization by General Assembly
$56 million = Grants to Governmental Entities to finance projects. Governmental
Entities applying for a grant must demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Manager,
the project cannot be financed on reasonable terms or would otherwise be
financially infeasible without the grant.
3. Economic Development Access Fund
Description
This is a state -funded incentive program intended to assist localities in attracting
sustainable businesses that create jobs and generate tax revenues within the
locality. The program makes funds available to localities for road improvements
needed to provide adequate access for new or substantially expanding qualifying
establishments. Economic Development Access funds are allocated by the
Commonwealth Transportation Board in accordance with its policy and may be used
for financing the construction or improvement of secondary or local system roads
within all counties and cities and certain towns that are part of the Urban System.
"Qualifying Establishments" include manufacturing, processing, research and
development facilities, distribution centers, regional service centers, corporate
headquarters, or other qualifying establishments that also meet basic employer
criteria as determined by the VEDP in consultation with the VDBA.
I_1�"'.TnAm,
$600,000 = unmatched
$150,000 = additional if match by non -State source
Notes
Regular or bond project eligible
Five year window to capture capital investment and jobs on bonded project
It is intended that Economic Development Access Program funds be requested as
reasonably needed by the localities of the state, but that these funds not be
anticipated from year to year. Unused eligibility from a preceding year cannot be
carried forward to an ensuing fiscal year.
Subject to available funding, the maximum unmatched allocation to a locality within
any one fiscal year is $500,000
4. Revenue Sharing
Description
This program provides additional funding for use by a county, city, or town to
construct or improve the highway systems within such county, city, or town, with
statutory limitations on the amount of state funds authorized per locality. Funds can
also be requested for eligible additions in certain counties of the Commonwealth.
Locality funds are matched with state funds for qualifying projects. An annual
allocation of funds for this program is designated by the CTB.
Eligible projects include work including construction, reconstruction, improvement,
and eligible street additions. Any work deemed to be maintenance work is not
eligible for Revenue Sharing funding.
Amount
$10 million = maximum of locality application
Each locality's request for up to $1 million in Revenue Sharing Program funding will
be evaluated before considering additional funding for requests that exceed $1
million. Priority will be given to allocations that accelerate projects in the
Commonwealth Transportation Six Year Improvement Program or the locality's
capital plan and prioritized as follows.
Notes
Requires dollar for dollar match
5. Special Taxing District
Description
A special district is an independent unit of local government organized to perform a
single governmental function or a restricted number of related functions. Special
districts usually have the power to incur debt and levy taxes; however, certain types
of special districts are entirely dependent upon enterprise earnings and cannot
impose taxes. Examples of special districts are water and flood control districts, and
transit authorities, port authorities, and electric power authorities.
Amount
$10 million to 141 million
Notes
Examples
Prince William Parkway Project ($40,000,000) in Prince William County
A levy of $0.20 per $100 assessed value on commercial and industrial
zoned property (including commercial apartments), or property used for
commercial or industrial purposes within the district
State code permits special tax levy on real estate only, creates some challenges
Water & Wastewater Development
1. Community Development Block Grant
Description
The Virginia Community Development Block Grant (VCDBG) is a federally -funded
grant administered by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community
Development (DHCD) since 1982. DHCD provides funding to eligible units of local
government (non -entitlement communities only) for projects that address critical
community needs including housing, infrastructure, and economic development.
The three national objectives for CDBG funding are:
Activities benefiting low- and moderate -income persons;
Activities which aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight;
and
■ Activities designed to meet community needs having a particular
urgency.
Community Improvement Grants (CIG's) enable localities to implement solutions to
identified local community development problems. These grants include acquisition,
construction, reconstruction, installation, and development of comprehensive,
economic development, housing, community facility, and community service facility
projects. A substantial majority of the Virginia CDBG allocation will be made
available to localities in the form of these types of grants.
Amount
$700,000 - $1,000,000 (annual estimate)
Notes
Must go toward projects that create job and business opportunities for low- and
moderate -income persons, particularly in the most economically disadvantaged
2. Water and Waste Disposal Direct Loans and Grants (United Stated Department of
Agriculture Rural Development)
Description
Program seeks to develop water and waste disposal systems in rural areas and
towns with a population not in excess of 10,000. To qualify, applicants must be
unable to obtain the financing from other sources at rates and terms they can afford
and/or their own resources. Funds can be used for construction, land acquisition,
legal fees, engineering fees, capitalized interest, equipment, initial operation and
maintenance costs, project contingencies, and any other cost that is determined by
the Rural Development to be necessary for the completion of the project. Projects
must be primarily for the benefit of rural users.
BDAS Report Appendix:
Business Development
Office and Industrial
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - OFFICE & INDUSTRIAL
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT — OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL
CURRENT CONDITIONS
Strategically placed in the Mid -Atlantic region of the United States, Frederick
County's location on the eastern seaboard is a valuable asset to companies
serving the US markets and Europe.
Frederick County is the northernmost community in the Commonwealth of
Virginia. The County's location places its businesses halfway between the
markets of the north and south, within a one -day haul of 50% of the U.S.
population. Over 60% of the goods manufactured in the United States are
distributed from the 750 -mile (1,207 kilometers) area.
In addition to being half way between Boston and Atlanta, Winchester -
Frederick County is well positioned equidistant between Los Angeles and
London. For national and international companies, being in the Eastern Time
Zone maximizes their hours of operations, which helps to improve
efficiencies.
Excellent road, rail, inland ocean port and the Dulles World Cargo Center
provide access to the major markets in North America, Latin America, and
globally.
Interstate 81 runs directly through the County. Several major airports are
within 100 miles of Frederick County, including Washington -Dulles
International Airport, Baltimore -Washington International Airport, and Ronald
Reagan Washington National Airport. Frederick County is home to a growing
regional general aviation airport. These assets support access to Frederick
County's economic development opportunities.
With the formation of the Washington -Baltimore Metropolitan Statistical Area
after the 1990 US Census, the fifth largest USA market begins at the County
Line. This close proximity to Washington D.C. also provides access to the
unique opportunities associated with the Federal Government and the
County's location is supportive of those policies established for purposes of
Homeland Security.
In addition to the ideal geographic location of Frederick County, other
significant strengths of the Frederick County market, particular to attracting
new office and industrial development, include favorable tax rates, a high
quality of life, education, healthcare, workforce, and a diverse current office
and industrial community. Frederick County is currently home to several
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
5
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - OFFICE & INDUSTRIAL
government agencies including, FEMA, Corps. of Engineers, and the FBI.
Frederick County has an incredibly low tax rate in comparison to neighboring
communities. Supported by a proactive Economic Development Commission
(EDC), the areas workforce has a high work ethic and a low turnover rate.
The area has an educated workforce with 84% of county residents being high
school graduates and 24% with bachelors or more advanced degrees.
Education opportunities abound in Frederick County which has a well
respected primary education system. In addition, higher education
opportunities exist with a growing student base at the following
establishments;
• Shenandoah University
■ Lord Fairfax Community College
The community has an excellent healthcare system which is centered around
the Valley Health Systems. Facilities include:
• Winchester Medical Center
• Regional Referral Center
• Level II Trauma Center
• Quick Care / Urgent Care Centers
• Health and Wellness Center
Frederick County provides a high quality of life which is considered to be an
important factor in recruiting companies and maintaining a desirable
workforce. The City of Winchester, with its successful downtown walking
mall, is a resource for additional workforce and provides numerous retail and
entertainment opportunities.
Current office and industrial operations within the community provide for
diversity in current business markets. The area is not linked to one major
industry or employer. There is a redundancy in resources offered at certain
business parks. In addition, a Foreign Trade Zone with several locations
provides tax free trade areas.
FUTURE Focus
Frederick County should focus on targeted office and industrial economic
development opportunities over the next twenty years. It can be anticipated
that there will be an increased opportunity to capitalize on the following
operations:
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
9
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - OFFICE & INDUSTRIAL
Food Processing
Anticipate increase in number of food processors locating in area as
out -sourcing internationally is not an option. Processers seek access to
resources, location and workforce within a right-to-work locality. Water
resources will be necessary for this industry.
Distribution/Repackaging and Assembly Centers
Anticipate increase in distribution and repackaging centers based on
area location and proximity to transportation
Healthcare Research & Development
Anticipate increase in healthcare related research and development
operations
Plastics Manufacturing
Anticipate increase in plastics manufacturing, an industry already
common in this area. Water resources will be necessary for this
industry.
Back Office Support
Anticipate increase in back office support organizations. Current
examples operating in Frederick County include Navy Federal Credit
Union and American Background.
Government Activity
Anticipate an increase in government agencies locating operations to
Frederick County. Location plays major factor, in particular, Homeland
Security locational factors are extremely favorable in Frederick County.
COOP's, Continuity of Operations Plans, highlight the attributes of
Frederick County.
Additional government activity in Frederick County will result in an increase in
the number of jobs directly related to their presence. Those jobs will typically
be highly skilled, high paying jobs. In addition, there will be an increase in
support and ancillary jobs. Similarly, there will be a significant increase in
ancillary support business opportunities such as support contractors, many of
which will be higher tech. As previously noted, this will drive a need for
services, housing, entertainment, retail, and other businesses.
A well planned business development marketing strategy will not be effective
if insufficient acreage has been set aside to accommodate desired business
uses in suitable key locations. The Area Plans will need to identify and
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
7
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - OFFICE & INDUSTRIAL
incorporate ample areas of business and industrial land use in support of the
business development goals of The Plan.
Frederick County is supportive of green initiatives in the field of economic
development. Sustainable development initiatives should be recognized and
their implementation incentivized. Such an example is rail access and
transportation which will become more valuable and expected in industrial
settings due to desire to operate effectively and efficiently.
Frederick County should be proactive in ensuring the resources necessary for
economic development are planned in a sustainable way and available in
support of the identified office and industrial users.
With regards to water, waste water treatment, and electricity, manufacturers
will be concerned with quantity and availability, but also of equal or greater
importance will be quality and service reliability. There is a finite capacity of
these resources that must be managed accordingly.
The concept of redundancy will need to be a priority. Manufacturers and
government agencies will require redundancy in services necessary to support
their economic investment and growth.
COMMUNITY BENEFITS
The value of office and industrial business development to Frederick County is
immeasurable. As part of the County's economic development effort, office
and industrial growth is a key component for ensuring a selection of
employment opportunities for the citizens of Frederick County.
The continuation of a low residential tax rate is a direct result of the
expansion of the commercial and industrial tax. Currently commercial and
industrial tax revenue accounts for approximately 13% of the County's tax
base. The County's goal indicates this should be around 25% to ensure a
balanced fiscal environment and a continuance of low real estate taxes.
The County's development impact model projection for a single-family home
anticipates tax revenue of approximately fifty percent of the projected costs
to the County. The County's fiscal survival is dependent upon recruiting office
and industrial occupants which offset those residential costs.
An effective office and industrial business development strategy will also
ensure the stabilization of the workforce and maintain low levels of
unemployment. An increase in high skill, high paying jobs locally will result in
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN •
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - UFFICE & INDUSTRIAL
a decrease in number of skilled residents commuting outside the region to the
Northern Virginia region.
Overall, a sound office and industrial business development strategy will
result in the conservation of a variety of finite resources and promote a high
quality of life for the citizens of Frederick County.
POLICIES/IMPLEMENTATION
POLICY: IDENTIFY AND RECOGNIZE AREAS IN THE COUNTY MOST
STRATEGICALLY SUITED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF OFFICE AND
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
IMPLEMENTATION:
• Complete review of area land use plans to ensure sufficient acreage is
identified and reserved for office and industrial use to enable a
balanced County tax base.
o Lands identified for business use should avoid limestone areas
where karst geology is present.
o Ensure these lands are properly located in relation to
transportation and water, sewer, and natural gas.
• Communications infrastructure, such as voice and data fiber, should be
extended to areas identified for office and industrial use.
• The zoning process and support should be examined by the County to
encourage willingness on the part of landowners of properties
identified in Area Plans (see Appendix I) to proceed with rezoning.
POLICY: PROACTIVELY ATTRACT DESIRED BUSINESS ENTITIES
IMPLEMENTATION:
• Review/revise office and manufacturing zoning to minimize the
number of low tax generating entities locating in the area.
o Minimize distribution centers as they have a minimal personal
property tax, typically result in lower paying jobs, and absorb
greater land mass than other uses.
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
E
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - OFFICE & INDUSTRIAL
o Maximize targeted industries such as governmental facilities, as
well as high -tax base industries that have a low resource
requirement.
• Continue to examine and fund business location marketing that builds
or modifies the current business base to take the County forward to its
goal of increased income for its citizens and tax value for the County.
POLICY: CONSIDER REGULATIONS ENCOURAGING AND/OR REQUIRING
SERVICE REDUNDANCY IN OFFICE & INDUSTRIAL AREAS
IMPLEMENTATION:
• Complete an analysis to determine services most desirable for
redundancy and determine the feasibility of service redundancy in
currently zoned office and industrial areas.
• Create incentives for industrial site developers to implement service
redundancy.
POLICY: FUNDING OF POLICIES
IMPLEMENTATION:
• Determine funding plan for policies such as service redundancy, water
availability, electric service, communication, etc. These could include
public/private funding and transportation access funds for industrial
development.
• Address how the County's public role could be used more effectively in
lowering development costs.
COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND STAKEHOLDERS
• Winchester -Frederick County Economic Development Commission
• Industrial Development Authority
• Industrial Parks Association
• Blue Ridge Board of Realtors
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
10
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - OFFICE & INDUSTRIAL
SUPPORTING MATERIALS AND RESOURCES
• Economic Development Commission Targeted Business Plan
• WinVa.com
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
11
BDAS Report Appendix:
Achieving Fiscal Balance Through
Land Use Planning
APPENDIX II — BACKGROUND ANALYSIS AND SUPPORTING
STUDIES
ACHIEVING FISCAL BALANCE THROUGH LAND USE PLANNING
THE 25% COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL - 75% OTHER REAL ESTATE TAX
ASSESSMENT RATIO
Local governments throughout the country rely on the revenue collected from
real estate taxes to fund their general operation. Therefore, it is
understandable that the revenue -generating potential for properties receives
strong consideration during land use and development decisions. In many
circumstances, a site's ability to generate revenue, and an applicant's
capability to adequately mitigate negative fiscal impacts, are driving factors
behind the development approval process.
Prompted in part by fiscal concerns, local governments plan and ultimately
zone large tracts of land for commercial and industrial use, to ensure that
there is not only adequate land available for current demand but also for
future demand. This practice of using land use policies (a.k.a. Comprehensive
Plan) and the zoning ordinance to achieve fiscal objectives rather than purely
land -use objectives is commonly referred to as 'fiscal zoning'. Under the
fiscal zoning approach, local governments discourage proposed developments
that have the potential to create a net financial burden on the county and will
instead encourage development that promises a net financial gain. Fiscal
consideration is a significant element of land use planning.
The county has successfully utilized the Comprehensive Policy Plan to
designate areas of the county for future commercial and industrial (C/I) land
use opportunities since the early 1970s. Over the years this practice has
helped reserve designated land for vital tax generating land uses. Through
the policies of the Comprehensive Plan areas designated for C/I land uses can
be implemented through the rezoning process, which then allows the property
owner to develop the site into commercial and/or industrial uses. Once the
C/I use has been constructed, the county is then able to bring in additional
tax revenues from the site. Through the support and encouragement of C/I
uses, the county over the past decade has successfully maintained a relatively
low (0.51 to 0.71 percent) real estate tax rate while continuing to provide a
high quality of public services to its citizens.
The Frederick County 2030 Comprehensive Plan strives to incorporate a more
comprehensive analysis of the C/I land uses and their contribution towards
the county's fiscal health into its overall community planning effort. The
importance of the C/I land use has elevated in recent years as the country
strives to overcome the challenging economic times. In an effort to plan for
the county's prosperous future, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan has been
drafted to designate sufficient acreage for C/I land use opportunities that is
necessary to generate tax revenue that is necessary to offset the county's
costs for providing public services to the important but more financially
burdensome residential land use.
35
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
APPENDIX H — BACKGROUND ANALYSIS AND SUPPORTING-
STUDIES
UPPORTING-
STUDIES
It is the county's goal to create a policy plan that balances land uses and their
associated tax contributions to ensure that those contributions offset the
countywide cost of community services. This goal should be achieved by
utilizing the land use plan to assist the county in achieving a real estate tax
assessment ratio of 25 percent C/I to 75 percent Other land uses such as
residential. Ultimately, the land use plan should be designed to plan for
adequate revenue opportunities to ensure that the county is capable of
providing its citizens with desired public services without having to place
additional tax burdens on those citizens to fund the services.
This document strives to provide additional background materials and a better
understanding in support of the C/I policies and goals of Frederick County.
ANALYSIS
Evaluation of Costs of Communis Services (COCS) by land use
A Cost of Community Services study is one of the simplest forms of fiscal
analysis available to local government. This study groups major land use
categories together and evaluates all revenues and expenditures of the land
uses throughout the county. In 2003, the American Farmland Trust (AFT), in
working with the Frederick County Farm Bureau, analyzed Frederick County's
FY02 budget, its revenue and expenditures, in an effort to determine the
Costs of Community Services (COCS) by land use. This study was targeted to
illustrate the minimal impact that agricultural lands place on county services,
but residential and commercial/industrial land uses were also analyzed. The
study concentrated on fiscal year 2002 (July 2001 to June 2002), and
represented a 12 month snap -shot'.
The American Farmland Trust study of Frederick County, VA found the
following:
Land Use
Cost of Service per $1
Revenue Generated
Residential
$ 1.19
Commercial/Industrial
0.23
Agricultural/Open S ace
0.33
The AFT study found that residential land uses receive $1.19 in community
services for every $1 contributed in tax revenue. More importantly, this study
also found that the revenue generated by C/I land uses are more than four
times their projected costs for community service.
While it is noted that this study was conducted a few years ago, the premise
behind the analysis does capture a key aspect of the county's typical financial
situation: C/I is vital to the county's tax base, and that in 2002, the C/I land
uses contributed 18.82% of the total real estate tax revenue.
36
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE FLAN
APPENDIX II — BACKGROUND ANALYSIS AND SUPPORTING
STUDIES
In order to project the capital fiscal impacts that would be associated with
residential developments; Frederick County utilizes a Development Impact
Model (DIM). This DIM is a micro -level model with the ability to analyze site
specific land use data. In 2010, as part of the annual review of the DIM, the
Development Impact Model -Oversight Committee (DIM -OC) utilized the DIM
to evaluate the costs for service for residential land uses. The DIM projects
fiscal analysis over a 20 year period (a 20 year snap -shot'), and considers full
revenue contributions and expenditure demands, traditional budget elements
as well as the associated Capital Improvement Plan projects. The DIM
considers the various revenue sources such as real estate and property taxes,
as well as sales, meals, and other potential taxes enabled within the
community. The findings that were generated from the residential analysis
were surprising. The DIM projected that over a 20 year period a single family
residence valued at $270,000 would cost the county $1.95 for every $1
contributed. The DIM's projections indicate a significant disparity in the
relationship between residential tax contributions and its associated service
expectations.
2010 Development Impact Model (DIM) $270,000 Single
projections over 20 year period Family Dwelling
Tax Revenue $72,881
Real Estate direct contributions $26,125
Personal Property, Sales, Meals, $46,756
etc indirect contributions
County Service Ex enditures
$142,394
Capital (schools, public safety,
library,etc
$ 21,672
Operations
&p120.722
These two studies reinforce the generally accepted belief that residential land
uses require more services than their associated tax contributions cover,
while on the other hand commercial and industrial land uses offer significant
tax revenues which exceed their associated cost for community services.
More importantly, these two studies show that the revenues generated by C/I
land uses are essential in the county being able to mitigate the residential
land use costs for community services, and provide for more opportunities
and quality of life elements that make for a great community.
Evaluation of County Tax Revenue and Expenditures
Utilizing figures for the county's fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, one gains a
better understanding from where funds are derived, and where those funds
are then spent.
37
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
APPENDIX II — BACKGROUND ANALYSIS AND SUPPORTING
STUDIES
Real Estate taxes represented 43 percent ($41.1 million) of the county's tax
revenue Jr, 2010.
R'_ ordatiiJn& l�tility,3.2%
Wills. 1.1%
Vc_'Ild0c,
Licenses, 2.2\%"
fV ej,is &
Loi iping. 3.9%L.
Bcdsi l ics
I_icens -s, 4,5%
CorirrtinicalJons, 1,
5`"u
Locl,l Sale==_, 6
2%
Other tares, C
2010 Tax Revenue
pe; innz
Property, 31,0%
0 Reel Estate -
4 Othef ta Kc -s
Local Sale_; & Use
d Corr�rr.urdicuti��i�s
Busirdca Licc�n<_,cs
MeyaIs & Lodg do
V-ehidc° Licenses
R•aordabon & Wills
Uti!ity
Peison.al Property
This real estate tax revenue is derived from various land uses: residential,
commercial, industrial, and agricultural. In 2010 C/I land uses brought in
$5.6 million in real estate taxes, or 13.56 percent of the total real estate tax
revenue. It should be noted that C/I uses only occupy 1.79 percent of the
County's total land area and contribute $1,229.5 per acre in real estate taxes.
In addition to real estate taxes, C/I land uses are also significant contributors
to personal property, local sales, meals and lodging, business license, and
other local taxes. C/I land uses are vital contributors to the local tax revenue
and ultimately contribute over 75 percent of the County's total tax revenue.
At the other end of the spectrum, residential land uses brought in $24.3
million in real estate taxes, or 59.2 percent of the total real estate tax
revenue. Residential land uses make up 27 percent of the County's total land
area and contribute an average of $353.40 per acre in real estate taxes.
In reviewing the county's expenditures for the same period, a significant
portion of the county's funds are directed towards education ($65.3 million).
At 52.1 percent of the expenditures, the county is clearly committed to
educating its residents, preparing for the future, and providing for a high
quality of life.
38
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
APPENDIX II — BACKGROUND ANALYSIS AND SUPPORTING
STUDIES
I l _-akh
Welfare, 0.5`
Pui lic Works, 1.8%
Ji_digal
/`sii l{in1Strcati. oi , ,7
U
Genet al 1
Governmera, 5.04.
Intere.,t car:
Long-hurni cominui7ity
Debt,5.2% Developmcnt, 1.7%
2010 Expenditures
_ Parks, Rec &
Cultural. 4.2%
Ldt.rcation
a Paiks. Rec & CLJ1 -tr,11
-- C3n-iM, raity DcvoloPmet t
A interest on Lo;l_r-term Debt
& Gen ral Governiii_nt
Judical Administration
Public s4c tv
Public Works
I lei ltl) & Welfare
This review of the County's 2010 tax revenues and expenditures clearly
illustrates that while residential land use contribute a majority of the real
estate taxes collected by the County, the costs for covering services provided
to those resident far exceeds their contributions. As depicted in the chart
above, the expenditures for education (which is a service connected with
residential land uses), is more than three times the contributions made from
residential property.
Through solid land use and financial planning, the county has maintained a
stable, relatively low real estate tax rate for the past decade while continuing
to provide top notch services to its residents. Utilizing the benefits of C/I, an
increase in C/I land uses would offer the county an even greater ability to
provide services or cover the increasing costs of services.
Recognition of C/I Contributions to the Tax Base
Commercial and industrial land uses offer significant benefits to the
community, in terms of tax contributions (real estate, meals, machinery,
room, etc.) with minimal expectations and impacts on county services. C/I
land uses also offer key employment opportunities for the residents of the
county to help improve their individual quality of life and achieve their
personal goals.
39
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
APPENDIX II — BACKGROUND ANALYSIS AND SUPPORTING
STUDIES
Based on the 2010 tax revenues, C/I properties represented more than 13
percent of the total real estate property assessments in the county, but
accounted for less than 2 percent of the land area within the county. While
land values will certainly fluctuate with the ebb and flow of the economy, C/I
values will continue to be significant contributors to the county's tax base and
more importantly, C/I tax contributions will offset the residential land use cost
for services.
Target: Plan for C/I to Represent 25 Percent of Real Estate Assessments
In an effort to maintain the county's ability to provide high quality services
while at the same time maintaining low real estate tax rates, the 2030
Comprehensive Plan is utilizing land use planning and C/I opportunities to
offset impacts from existing and planned residential uses. If it is a goal for
Frederick County to have 25 percent of the total county assessments come
from C/I land use values, then it is obvious that at only 13.56 percent (4,556
acres) the county needs additional developed C/I uses. To achieve the 25
percent assessment target in 2010, an additional 2,761 developed acres of
C/I land uses would have been needed.
Recognizing the county's 2.9 percent annual growth rate over the past 3
decades, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan should be designed to accommodate
an additional 4,859 acres of new C/I opportunities. This projection indicates
that the 2030 Comprehensive Plan should contain a minimum designation of
12,176 acres for C/I land uses within the Sewer and Water Service Area
(SWSA). Further fluctuations may be anticipated with additional residential
growth.
2030 Comprehensive Plan
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan has been developed to incorporate a balance of
land uses in order to achieve needed tax revenues. The Plan achieves the
land use policy target of ensuring that 25 percent of the projected
assessments will be in C/I land uses. This is accomplished by designating
16,700 acres for future C/I land uses, which will occupy approximately 2/3 of
the 25,000 -acre Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA).
The Plan also incorporates opportunities for mixed use developments and
single family residential uses at a minimum density of 4 units per acres within
the designated Urban Development Area (UDA). The policy of directing
residential growth into the UDA also promotes a more efficient use of land
and community services, ultimately offering additional cost savings to the
county.
Mixed use developments also offer additional revenues to address the
demands for services generated by the residential uses. Mixed-use
developments - such as urban center and neighborhood villages - are
planned developments that encourage and accommodate a mix of land uses.
40
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
APPENDIX ii -_ BACKGROUND r -%NJ L -1).1 HND JVFPOKIIIVG
STUDIES
These projects include an appropriate mix of commercial, office, and
residential development. They provide an efficient development pattern that
can foster economic development, provide diversity in land use, and reduce
the number and the length of automobile trips. These mixed uses projects are
encouraged in appropriate locations in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
CONCLUSION
The land use designations contained within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan
accommodate the goal of providing 25 percent C/I land uses to 75 percent
Other land uses. Maintaining a healthy C/I ratio will help the county maintain
its current tax rates while continuing to enhance the services provided the
residents - particularity in the area of education. It is through the use of land
use policies contained within the Comprehensive Plan that these goals will be
supported and achieved.
In an effort to reinforce a sound policy basis that balances land use planning
and fiscal policies, the ratio of 25/75 between C/I and other land uses in
terms of available land areas and taxable value of the land uses shall be the
established benchmark. This policy shall dictate that at least 25 percent of
the taxable land value (land plus improvement value) in the county should
contain C/I land uses, and conversely that no more than 75 percent of the
taxable land area should be for uses other than C/I land. By achieving this
policy goal, the County will ensure that taxable land values equate to the
projected expenditures.
41
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
BDAS Report Appendix:
Cost -Benefit Analysis
BDAS Report Appendix:
Cost -Benefit Analysis
Cost Estimates
Parkins Mill
Item
Unit
Price
Total
Pump Station
1
$
1,250,000
$
1,250,000
8" Force Main
9500
$
30
$
285,000
Waterline
19000
$
30
$
570,000
Fire hyrants
48
$
2,500
$
120,000
24' Rural Road
11000
$
150
$
1,650,000
Improve Ex. Road
10000
$
80
$
800,000
Regional Pond
1
$
600,000
$
600,000
increase sewage capcity
$
5,275,000 Total
Winchester North
Item Unit Price Total
Rt 37 Slip Ramp 1 $ 1,250,000 $ 1,250,000
1-81 Exit 317 NB Ramp
Relocation 1 $ 6,200,000 $ 6,200,000
$ 7,450,000 Total
Rest Church
Item
Unit
Price
Total
Pump Station
1
$
350,000
$
350,000
6" Force Main
3500
$
28
$
98,000
Waterline
8500
$
30
$
255,000
Fire Hydrants
21
$
2,500
$
52,500
24' Rural Road
4500
$
150
$
675,000
$
1,430,500 Total
New Package Plant to
increase sewage capcity
to 500,000 GPD
1
$
8,000,000
$
8,000,000
$
9,430,500 Total
BDAS R01
Scenario: Parkins Mill I Manufacturing
DIRECT REVENUES
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Annual Costs
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year9
Year 10
Annual Revenues
$0
$0
$387,100
$387,100
$387,100
$774,200
$774,200
$774,200
$1,161,300
$1,161,300
Cumulative Revenues
$0
$0
$387,100
$774,200
$1,161,300
$1,935,500
$2,709,700
$3,483,900
$4,645,200
$5,806,500
Annual Costs
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Revenues
$1,161,300
$1,548,400
$1,548,400
$1,548,400
$1,935,500
$1,935,500
$1,935,500
$2,322,600
$2,322,600
$2,322,600
Cumulative Revenues
$6,967,800
$8,516,200
$10,064,600
$11,613,000
$13,548,500
$15,484,000
$17,419,500
$19,742,100
$22,064,700
$24,387,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
Year
Year
Year3
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Annual Costs
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
Cumulative Costs
$274,509
$549,018
$823,527
$1,098,036
$1,372,546
$1,647,055
$1,921,564
$2,196,073
$2,470,582
$2,745,091
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Costs
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
Cumulative Costs
$3,019,600
$3,294,109
$3,568,619
$3,843,128
$4,117,637
$4,392,146
$4,666,655
$4,941,164
$5,215,673
$5,490,182
NET REVENUES
Year
Year
Year3
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Return
($274,509)
($274,509)
$112,591
$112,591
$112,591
$499,691
$499,691
$499,691
$886,791
$886,791
Cumulative Return
($274,509)
($549,018)
($436,427)
($323,836)
($211,246)
$288,445
$788,136
$1,287,827
$2,174,618
$3,061,409
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Return
$886,791
$1,273,891
$1,273,891
$1,273,891
$1,660,991
$1,660,991
$1,660,991
$2,048,091
$2,048,091
$2,048,091
Cumulative Return
$3,948,200
$5,222,091
$6,495,981
$7,769,872
$9,430,863
$11,091,854
$12,752,845
$14,800,936
$16,849,027
$18,897,118
Assumptions
Rewnue
$19,355 peracre per year source.
fOCrecentnewprojecfs
Location of New Projects
One eyery three years on 20
acres first project does not locate until year 3
Bond Financing
$3,775,000
4% for 20 year,.
bond would go toward infrastructure in year 1
BDAS R01
Scenario: Parkins Mill I Warehousing
DIRECT REVENUES
Year
Year2
Year3
Year -4
Year
Year
Year7
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Revenues
$0
$0
$183,100
$183,100
$183,100
$366,200
$366,200
$366,200
$549,300
$549,300
Cumulative Revenues
$0
$0
$183,100
$366,200
$549,300
$915,500
$1,281,700
$1,647,900
$2,197,200
$2,746,500
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Revenues
$549,300
$732,400
$732,400
$732,400
$915,500
$915,500
$915,500
$1,098,600
$1,098,600
$1,098,600
Cumulative Revenues
$3,295,800
$4,028,200
$4,760,600
$5,493,000
$6,408,500
$7,324,000
$8,239,500
$9,338,100
$10,436,700
$11,535,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
Year
Year
Year
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Costs
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
Cumulative Costs
$274,509
$549,018
$823,527
$1,098,036
$1,372,546
$1,647,055
$1,921,564
$2,196,073
$2,470,582
$2,745,091
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Costs
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
Cumulative Costs
$3,019,600
$3,294,109
$3,568,619
$3,843,128
$4,117,637
$4,392,146
$4,666,655
$4,941,164
$5,215,673
$5,490,182
NET REVENUES
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Annual Return
($274,509)
($274,509)
($91,409)
($91,409)
($91,409)
$91,691
$91,691
$91,691
$274,791
$274,791
Cumulative Return
($274,509)
($549,018)
($640,427)
($731,836)
($823,246)
($731,555)
($639,864)
($548,173)
($273,382)
$1,409
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Return
$274,791
$457,891
$457,891
$457,891
$640,991
$640,991
$640,991
$824,091
$824,091
$824,091
Cumulative Return
$276,200
$734,091
$1,191,981
$1,649,872
$2,290,863
$2,931,854
$3,572,845
$4,396,936
$5,221,027
$6,045,118
Assumotlons
Revenue
$9,155 peracreperyear ce:EOCrecentnewprojects
Location of New Projects
One every three years on 20
acres first project does not locate
until year 3
Bond Financing
$3,775,000
4% for 20 years
bond would go toward infrastructure in year 1
BDAS R01
Scenario: Parkins Mill I Manufacturing & Warehousing
DIRECT REVENUES
Year Year Year Year4 Year Year Year Year Year Year 10
Annual Revenues
$0
$0
$285,100
$285,100
$285,100
$570,200
$570,200
$570,200
$855,300
$855,300
Cumulative Revenues
$0
$0
$285,100
$570,200
$855,300
$1,425,500
$1,995,700
$2,565,900
$3,421,200
$4,276,500
Cumulative Costs
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Revenues
$855,300
$1,140,400
$1,140,400
$1,140,400
$1,425,500
$1,425,500
$1,425,500
$1,710,600
$1,710,600
$1,710,600
Cumulative Revenues
$5,131,800
$6,272,200
$7,412,600
$8,553,000
$9,978,500
$11,404,000
$12,829,500
$14,540,100
$16,250,700
$17,961,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
NET REVENUES
Year
Year
Year
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year9
Year 10
Annual Costs
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
Cumulative Costs
$274,509
$549,018
$823,527
$1,098,036
$1,372,546
$1,647,055
$1,921,564
$2,196,073
$2,470,582
$2,745,091
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Costs
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
$274,509
Cumulative Costs
$3,019,600
$3,294,109
$3,568,619
$3,843,128
$4,117,637
$4,392,146
$4,666,655
$4,941,164
$5,215,673
$5,490,182
NET REVENUES
Assumptions
Revenue $14,255 per acre per year n-EDCrecentnewpije
Location of New Projects One every three years on 20 acres first project does not locate until year 3
Bond Financing $3,775,000 4% for 20 years
bond would go toward infrastructure in year 1
Year
Year
Year
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year9
Year 10
Annual Return
($274,509)
($274,509)
$10,591
$10,591
$10,591
$295,691
$295,691
$295,691
$580,791
$580,791.
Cumulative Return
($274,509)
($549,018)
($538,427)
($527,836)
($517,246)
($221,555)
$74,136
$369,827
$950,618
$1,531,409
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year20
Annual Return
$580,791
$865,891
$865,891
$865,891
$1,150,991
$1,150,991
$1,150,991
$1,436,091
$1,436,091
$1,436,091
Cumulative Return
$2,112,200
$2,978,091
$3,843,981
$4,709,872
$5,860,863
$7,011,854
$8,162,845
$9,598,936
$11,035,027
$12,471,118
Assumptions
Revenue $14,255 per acre per year n-EDCrecentnewpije
Location of New Projects One every three years on 20 acres first project does not locate until year 3
Bond Financing $3,775,000 4% for 20 years
bond would go toward infrastructure in year 1
BDAS R01
Scenario: Winchester North I Manufacturing
DIRECT REVENUES
Year
Year
Year
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Revenues
$0
$0
$387,100
$387,100
$387,100
$774,200
$774,200
$774,200
$1,161,300
$1,161,300
Cumulative Revenues
$0
$0
$387,100
$774,200
$1,161,300
$1,935,500
$2,709,700
$3,483,900
$4,645,200
$5,806,500
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Revenues
$1,161,300
$1,548,400
$1,548,400
$1,548,400
$1,935,500
$1,935,500
$1,935,500
$2,322,600
$2,322,600
$2,322,600
Cumulative Revenues
$6,967,800
$8,516,200
$10,064,600
$11,613,000
$13,548,500
$15,484,000
$17,419,500
$19,742,100
$22,064,700.
$24,387,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
Yearl
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year9
Year 10
Annual Costs
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
Cumulative Costs
$345,409
$690,818
$1,036,227
$1,381,635
$1,727,044
$2,072,453
$2,417,862
$2,763,271
$3,108,680
$3,454,088
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Costs
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
Cumulative Costs
$3,799,497
$4,144,906.
$4,490,315
$4,835,724
$5,181,133
$5,526,541
$5,871,950
$6,217,359
$6,562,768
$6,908,177
NET REVENUES
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Annual Return
($345,409)
($345,409)
$41,691
$41,691
$41,691
$428,791
$428,791
$428,791
$815,891
$815,891
Cumulative Return
($345,409)
($690,818)
($649,127)
($607,435)
($565,744)
($136,953)
$291,838
$720,629
$1,536,520
$2,352,412
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Return
$815,891
$1,202,991
$1,202,991
$1,202,991
$1,590,091
$1,590,091
$1,590,091
$1,977,191
$1,977,191
$1,977,191
Cumulative Return
$3,168,303
$4,371,294
$5,574,285
$6,777,276
$8,367,367
$9,957,459
$11,547,550
$13,524,741
$15,501,932
$17,479,123
Assumptions
Bevenu
$19,355 peracreperyear ce:EDCrecentnewpro)ects
Location of New Projects One every three years on 20 acres first project does not locate until year 3
Bond Financing $4,750,000 4%for20years
bond would go toward infrastructure in year i
BDAS ROI
Scenario: Winchester North I Warehousing
DIRECT REVENUES
Year
Year
Year
Year4
Year
Year
Year7
Year8
Year
Year 10
Annual Revenues $0
$0
$183,100
$183,100
$183,100
$366,200
$366,200
$366,200
$549,300
$549,300
Cumulative Revenues $0
$0
$183,100
$366,200
$549,300
$915,500
$1,281,700
$1,647,900
$2,197,200
$2,746,500
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Revenues $549,300
$732,400
$732,400
$732,400
$915,500
$915,500
$915,500
$1,098,600
$1,098,600
$1,098,600
Cumulative Revenues $3,295,800
$4,028,200
$4,760,600
$5,493,000
$6,408,500
$7,324,000
$8,239,500
$9,338,100
$10,436,700
$11,535,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year 10
Annual Costs $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409
Cumulative Costs $345,409 $690,818 $1,036,227 $1,381,635 $1,727,044 $2,072,453 $2,417,862 $2,763,271 $3,108,680 $3,454,088
Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year20
Annual Costs $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409 $345,409
Cumulative Costs $3,799,497 $4,144,906 $4,490,315 $4,835,724 $5,181,133 $5,526,541 $5,871,950 $6,217,359 $6,562,768 $6,908,177
NET REVENUES
Year
Year
Year
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Return ($345,409)
($345,409)
(5162,309)
($162,309)
($162,309)
$20,791
$20,791
$20,791
$203,891
$203,891
Cumulative Return ($345,409)
($690,818)
($853,127)
($1,015,435)
($1,177,744)
($1,156,953)
($1,136,162)
($1,115,371)
($911,480)
($707,588)
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Return $203,891
$386,991
$386,991
$386,991
$570,091
$570,091
$570,091
$753,191
$753,191
$753,191
Cumulative Return ($503,697)
($116,706)
$270,285
$657,276
$1,227,367
$1,797,459
$2,367,550
$3,120,741
$3,873,932
$4,627,123
Assumptions
Revenue. $9,155 peracreperyear source: EDCrecentnew proieLir
Location of New Protects. One every three years on 20 acres first project does not locate until year 3
Bond Financing $4,750,000 4% for 20 years
bond would go toward infrastructure in year 1
BDAS ROI
Scenario: Winchester North I Manufacturing & Warehousing
DIRECT REVENUES
Year
Year
Year
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Revenues
$0
$o
$285,100
$285,100
$285,100
$570,200
$570,200
$570,200
$855,300
$855,300
Cumulative Revenues
$0
$0
$285,100
$570,200
$855,300
$1,425,500
$1,995,700
$2,565,900
$3,421,200
$4,276,500
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Revenues
$855,300
$1,140,400
$1,140,400
$1,140,400
$1,425,500
$1,425,500
$1,425,500
$1,710,600
$1,710,600
$1,710,600
Cumulative Revenues
$5,131,800
$6,272,200
$7,412,600
$8,553,000
$9,978,500
$11,404,000
$12,829,500
$14,540,100
$16,250,700
$17,961,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
Year l
Year 2
Year 3
Year4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Annual Costs
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
Cumulative. Costs
$345,409
$690,818
$1,036,227
$1,381,635
$1,727,044
$2,072,453
$2,417,862
$2,763,271
$3,108,680
$3,454,088
Year 11
Year 12
Year13
Year 14
Year15
Year16
Year 17
Year18
Year19
Year 20
Annual Costs
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
$345,409
Cumulative Costs
$3,799,497
$4,144,906
$4,490,315
$4,835,724
$5,181,133
$5,526,541
$5,871,950
$6,217,359
$6,562,768
$6,908,177
NET REVENUES
Yearl
Year
Year
Year4
Year5
Year6
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Return
($345,409)
($345,409)
($60,309)
($60,309)
($60,309)
$224,791
$224,791
$224,791
$509,891
$509,891
Cumulative Return
($345,409)
($690,818)
($751,127)
($811,435)
($871,744)
($646,953)
($422,162)
($197,371)
$312,520
$822,412
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Return
$509,891
$794,991
$794,991
$794,991
$1,080,091
$1,080,091
$1,080,091
$1,365,191
$1,365,191
$1,365,191
Cumulative Return
$1,332,303
$2,127,294
$2,922,285
$3,717,276
$4,797,367
$5,877,459
$6,957,550
$8,322,741
$9,687,932
$11,053,123
Assumotions
Revenue
$14,255 peracreperyear source,EDCrecentnew,projects
Location of New Projects
One every three years on 20
acres first project does not locate until
year3
Bond Financing
$4,750,000
4% for 20 years
bond would go toward infrastructure in year 1
BDAS R01
Scenario: Rest Church Area I Manufacturing
DIRECT REVENUES
Year Year Year3 Year4 Year Year Year Year Year Year 10
Annual Revenues
$0
$0
$387,100
$387,100
$387,100
$774,200
$774,200
$774,200
$1,161,300
$1,161,300
Cumulative Revenues
$0
$0
$387,100
$774,200
$1,161,300
$1,935,500
$2,709,700
$3,483,900
$4,645,200
$5,806,500
$1,596,054
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year20
Annual Revenues
$1,161,300
$1,548,400
$1,548,400
$1,548,400
$1,935,500
$1,935,500
$1,935,500
$2,322,600
$2,322,600
$2,322,600
Cumulative Revenues
$6,967,800
$8,516,200
$10,064,600
$11,613,000
$13,548,500
$15,484,000
$17,419,500
$19,742,100
$22,064,700
$24,387,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
Year Year Year Year4 Year Year Year Year Year Year 10
Annual Costs
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$638,316
$638,316
Cumulative Costs
$56,574
$113,149
$169,723
$226,297
$282,872
$339,446
$396,021
$452,595
$1,090,910
$1,729,226
$1,596,054
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Costs
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
Cumulative Costs
$2,367,541
$3,005,857
$3,644,172
$4,282,488
$4,920,804
$5,559,119
$6,197,435
$6,835,750
$7,474,066
$8,112,381
NET REVENUES
Year
Year Year3 Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Return
($56,574)
(556,574) $330,526 $330,526
$330,526
$717,626
$717,626
$717,626
$522,984
$522,984
Cumulative Return
($56,574)
($113,149) $217,377 $547,903
$878,428
$1,596,054
$2,313,679
$3,031,305
$3,554,290
$4,077,274
Year 11
Year 12 Year 13 Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year20
Annual Return
$522,984
$910,084 $910,084 $910,084
$1,297,184
$1,297,184
$1,297,184
$1,684,284
$1,684,284
$1,684,284
Cumulative Return
$4,600,259
$5,510,343 $6,420,428 $7,330,512
$8,627,696
$9,924,881
$11,222,065
$12,906,350
$14,590,634
$16,274,919
Assumations
Revenue
$19,355 per acre per year source: EDC recent new projects
Location of New Projects
One every three years on 20
acres first project does not locate until year 3
Bond Financing
$8,778,000
4% fur 20 years
bond would go toward infrastructure
in year 1
$8 million capital outlay to gain additional 500,000 MGD, added with third project
BDAS ROI
Scenario: Rest Church Area I Warehousing
DIRECT REVENUES
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
Year
Year
Year -3
Year4
YearS
Year
Year7
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Revenues
$0
$0
$183,100
$183,100
$183,100
$366,200
$366,200
$366,200
$549,300
$549,300
Cumulative Revenues
$0
$0
$183,100
$366,200
$549,300
$915,500
$1,281,700
$1,647,900
$2,197,200
$2,746,500
Year 14
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Revenues
$549,300
$732,400
$732,400
$732,400
$915,500
$915,500
$915,500
$1,098,600
$1,098,600
$1,098,600
Cumulative Revenues
$3,295,800
$4,028,200
$4,760,600
$5,493,000
$6,408,500
$7,324,000
$8,239,500
$9,338,100
$10,436,700
$11,535,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
NET REVENUES
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year5
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Costs
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$638,316
$638,316
Cumulative Costs
$56,574
$113,149
$169,723
$226,297
$282,872
$339,446
$396,021
$452,595
$1,090,910
$1,729,226
Year 14
Year 11
Year -12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Costs
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
Cumulative Costs
$2,367,541
$3,005,857
$3,644,172
$4,282,488
$4,920,804
$5,559,119
$6,197,435
$6,835,750
$7,474,066
$8,112,381
NET REVENUES
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year6
Year
year
Year
Year 10
Annual Return ($56,574)
($56,574)
$126,526
$126,526
$126,526
$309,626
$309,626
$309,626
($89,016)
($89,016)
Cumulative Return ($56,574)
($113,149)
$13,377
$139,903
$266,428
$576,054
$885,679
$1,195,305
$1,106,290
$1,017,274
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Return ($89,016)
$94,084
$94,084
$94,084
$277,184
$277,184
$277,184
$460,284
$460,284
$460,284
Cumulative Return $928,259
$1,022,343
$1,116,428
$1,210,512
$1,487,696
$1,764,881
$2,042,065
$2,502,350
$2,962,634
$3,422,919
Assumptions
Revenue $9.155 ru,-eoervear source: EDC recent new oroiocts
Location of New Projects One every three years on 20 acres first project does not locate until year 3
Bond rinancing $8,778,000 4% for 20 years
bond would go toward infrastructure in year 1
$8 million capital outlay to gain additional 5DO,000 MGD, added with third project
BDAS R01
Scenario: Rest Church Area I Manufacturing & Warehousing
DIRECT REVENUES
Year
Year2
Yea -3
Year4
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 1O
Annual Revenues
$0
$0
$285,100
$285,100
$285,100
$570,200
$570,200
$570,200
$855,300
$855,300
Cumulative Revenues
$0
$0
$285,100
$570,200
$855,300
$1,425,500
$1,995,700
$2,565,900
$3,421,200
$4,276,500
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Revenues
$855,300
$1,140,400
$1,140,400
$1,140,400
$1,425,500
$1,425,500
$1,425,500
$1,710,600
$1,710,600
$1,710,600
Cumulative Revenues
$5,131,800
$6,272,200
$7,412,600
$8,553,000
$9,978,500
$11,404,000
$12,829,500
$14,540,100
$16,250,700
$17,961,300
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
Years
Year
Year3
Year4
Year
Year
Year7
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Costs
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$56,574
$638,316
$638,316
Cumulative Costs
$56,574
$113,149
$169,723
$226,297
$282,872
$339,446
$396,021
$452,595
$1,090,910
$1,729,226
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Costs
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
$638,316
Cumulative Costs
$2,367,541
$3,005,857
$3,644,172
$4,282,488
$4,920,804
$5,559,119
$6,197,435
$6,835,750
$7,474,066
$8,112,381
NET REVENUES
Year
Year
Year
Year4
Years
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year 10
Annual Return
($56,574)
($56,574)
$228,526
$228,526
$228,526
$513,626
$513,626
$513,626
$216,984
$216,984
Cumulative Return
($56,574)
($113,149)
$115,377
$343,903
$572,428
$1,086,054
$1,599,679
$2,113,305
$2,330,290
$2,547,274
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 16
Year 17
Year 18
Year 19
Year 20
Annual Return
$216,984
$502,084
$502,084
$502,084
$787,184
$787,184
$787,184
$1,072,284
$1,072,284
$1,072,284
Cumulative Return
$2,764,259
$3,266,343
$3,768,428
$4,270,512
$5,057,696
$5,844,881
$6,632,065
$7,704,350
$8,776,634
$9,848,919
Assumptions
Revenue
$14,255 peracreperyear
oo-EDCrecentnewp
)ects
Location of New Projects
One every three years on 20
acres first
project does not locate until
year 3
Bond Financing
$8,778,000
4% for 20 years
bond would go toward infrastructure in year 1
$8 million capital outlay to gain additional 500,000
MGD, added with third project
Item 2: Dairy Corner Lane Proposal
VDOT has recently been approached by a citizen requesting that they consider modifying the
intersection of Dairy Corner Lane and Valley Mill Road to allow only right turn entering traffic
to use that intersection while requiring other traffic movements to take advantage of Dowell J.
Circle. Staff is seeking a recommendation from the Committee to the Board of Supervisors.
Staff has requested input from the Sheriff's office as well as the School Division. Please see
attached map for reference.
ormp, 0.1orlsia
i N
. is , ' •'i .rra'
� J r •1
JL
Item 3: Removing Portion of Golds Orchard Road from State System
Staff has recently been contacted by a representative of Mr. Cordel Watt regarding the public
road within property he owns on Golds Orchard Road. He would like to remove the portion
projecting into his property in order to enable him to secure his property. No other property
owners are impacted or landlocked by this action. Attached please find a map of the area with
the portion of Golds Orchard Road that would remain in the system highlighted. Also attached is
the VDOT process for removing a roadway from the state system. Staff is seeking a
recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on whether to begin the process.
A
cw
O
SRD 2/1/93 — 5'h Printing June 2002
ABANDONMENT OF A ROAD9OR1�iM THE SECONDARY SYSTEM OF STATE yl'GH VAYS
UNDER 33.1-151 OR 33.1-155, CODE OF VIRGINIA
The power to abandon a secondary road is vested entirely in the Board of Supervisors of the various counties or equovalent local governing body.
Notes:
ew road been built
th,�,,.n�
the same cfltaens as
erved by the old road?
Yes
1
Has the neer road been added to the
secondary system of state highways?
Yes t
NO
The old road should
be abandoned, per
§33.1-155, C/V and
the new road added,
bn that orderas part
of the same resolution
adopted by the LGB.
BOB adopts resolution declaring the
old road abandoned to the extend
altered, per §33.1-155, CN.
Special wording may be required Ifthe
addition has been completed Contact
Secondary Roads.
Has the SOS provided the prescribed Notice of Intent to Abandon road by:
❑ Positing Notice at Courthouse or 3 places along the road to be abandoned, AND
❑ Publishing Notice in 2 Issues of a local newspaper, AND
❑ Notifying the CTB/Commissloner of the proposed abandonment?
(See Notes 1 and 2)
Note: A public hearing Is required ff, within 30 days following publication of
the Notice of Intent to abandon the road, one Is requested by:
❑ Any citizen that uses the road OR
❑ The CTB (See Notes 1 and 2)
Yes No
REQUIREMENTS NOT SATISFIED
Has a Public Hearing Elements answered NO must be satisfied
been requested? in the afflrmative or the abandonment
dismissed.
NO Yes NO VDOT action required
t
Hasldid the Board of Supervisors:
i ❑ Published notice of time and place in two Issues I
of newspaper prior to the hearing, AND ---Noy
I ❑ NoNed the CTB/Commissioner
(See Notes 1 and 2)
1
I
Based on available Information, has
BOB determined abandonment of the
facility Is warranted because:
• No public necessity Is served? OR
• Current safety and welfare of the
public Is best served?
The BOB should enter an order on its
minutes dismissing the abandonment
within four (4) months after the public
hearing or after the end of the 30 day
public notice advertising the BOB Intent
to abandon the facility.
NO VDOT action required.
Citing §33.1-151, CN, the BOB must enter an order of abandonment In @s minutes within
• four (4) months following the public hearing or
• end of the 30 -day period following the notice of public hearing.
See the Administrative Action Chart for Abandonments, Discontinuances, and Project Adjustments
The Administrative Actions Chart complements this flow chart, detailing actions and time frame requirements
Imposed by statue or policy on the official bodies and offices Involved with the abandonment process.
1. The Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Is to be notified when the proposed abandonment Involves a public landing.
2. The Resident Engineer Is to notify the Secondary Roads Engineer immediately upon leaming of efforts to abandon a
secondary road, advising of the circumstances concerning the potential abandonment, and his recommendations.
3. When the road proposed to be abandoned lies in more than one county, the BOS of each county Involved must agree on the
proposed abandonment. (As a practical matter, this applies to §33.1-151 and §33.1-155, but Is cited only under §33.1-151.)
4. Any appeal from a BOS' order of abandonment under §33.1-151 shall ie to the circuit court of the county pursuant to §33.1-
152.
5. As a practical matter, when the abandonment (or discontinuance of an old road Is associated with the construction of a new
road that serves the same citizens as the old, In the LGB's resolution, the old road is ordered abandoned before the new
road is added.
6. Abandonment of a road has the effect of removing the road from the public domain as a public way.
7. When public service is provided, but is not sufficient to Justify maintenance as a public expense, a discontinuance, pursuant
to §33.1-150, should be considered.
Page 47
F.M. 26-A -63 IPF WITH
TIMBER RIDGE FRUIT FARM LLC
INST. 11060004340 E ALUALUMINUM Pp 83Cg
\S41RS N 25'47_28' JP pR�pE
� 929.48' PSE loo
TM J7-A-74"1-
TIMBER
7-A-74 "� 5� RTS
TIMBER RIDGE FRUITFARM LLC
�p
;�'ST f0600O434C LEGEND -- I
1� u iWE - iRON ROD FOUND
IPF WITH h IRS - IRON ROD SET
w IP WI TH c IPF - IRON PIPE FOUND
CAP N SSF - SET STONE FOUND
3944 i1"E -x-- FENCE
d h VA. SEC. 505.58• /PF CREEK, STREAM" RUN
o ROUTE 708
GOLD FRAME W TM 26-A-62
MILES -1-
TO VA. ip� ORCHARD ROAD CABIN TIMBER RIDGE FRUIT
TO ❑ d
PRIMARY of (GRAVEL SURFACE) R� FARM LLC
ROUTE 259 h N INST. )/060004340
^� 30' PRESCRIPTIVE
+� IRS / EASEMENT
N 3934'18" E
/RS - _ Lo 205.12"
(40.00'
END OF STA TE -1 /RS
MAINTENANCE SIGN
IRF - _
TAX MAP J7 -A-73 I
o = 106.091 ACRES
(/NCI UDING 0.7 ACRES N
(�' Q WITHIN THE PRESCR/P TL VE N
N W h EASEMENT OF VA. SEC. ROUTE 708)
D.B. 974 PG. 411 SSF�411
W REF D. B. 57 PG 505 651.1 TM 27-A-15
JAMES W CRAIG &
REF. D. B. 63 PG. 158
LA E CRAIG
REF. CHANCERY REMAINS W' INST PAME ¢'000011018
W
INDEX #1858-007 OF WIRE ;
W FENCE
PROPERTY LINE PER N I PROPERTY LINE PER
DIVISION OF THE LANDS I RICHARD U. GOODS
? OF ROBERT MUSE `�
CHANCERY INDEX 11858-007 co SURVEY
L 15 DA TED MA Y 6, 1955
SSF D. B. 572 PG 478
Fl Ow /RS .9 H2O s.• S I-��
T.M. 38-A-8 �'?Y��
JAMES A. COOTS /544.48
& REGINA COOTS I TM. 38-A-7 N
INST #070013483 / LESLIE WILLIAMIRSf
WHITACRE
INST. )/050005793 / 16 MARKED
HICKORY /
GRAPHIC SCALE TM. 38-A-5 I TM 38 -A -1A
O' 500' 1000' CHARLES K / ROSALEE ELLIOTT
WILLIAMS ET AL
D. B. 222 D. B 587 PG 795
SCALE: 1 " = 500' PG 129
BOUNDARY SURVEY rLi,.
OF THE LANDS OF LINDA L. BOULDERAND JOEL C. BOULDERDEED BOOK 974 PAGE 411BACK CREEK MAG/STERIAL DISTRICT Marsh
FREDERICK COUNTYVIRGINIA . 001843
DRAWN BY.- JTG I DWG NAME.- 8974-BDS-PLAT I SHEET 3 OF 3 lgNO SURVF.yO�
Marsh, & Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C.
560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET WINCHESTER" VIRGINIA 22601 DATE: 0510612011
%- j/ -J PHONE (540) 667-0468 FAX (540) 667-0469
EMAIL officeC)-norshondlegge.com SCALE- I"= 500'
Item 4: Hayfield Road
Below please find the information presented last time this issue was discussed. At that meeting,
staff was requested to seek input from VDOT regarding the site distance concerns that were
raised. VDOT has had staff measure the distance and finds it to be within state standards. Staff
is now seeking recommendation from the Board on three items as follows:
1. Speed limit on Hayfield Road.
2. Left turn lane from westbound Route 50 to southbound Hayfield Road.
3. Site distance at the intersection of Route 50 and Hayfield Road.
As previously discussed at this Committee, the County has received concerns from Mr. Bruce
Sigurdson regarding the length of the left turn lane from Route 50 west onto Route 600 SB
(Hayfield Road), and also regarding the speed limit on Route 600.
Staff has conducted research with other agencies on the issue and learned the following:
VDOT — VDOT reviewed both issues and determined that a speed study was unlikely to yield a
recommendation of a change in speed limit in this area. In addition, VDOT determined that a
warrants analysis would be borderline as to whether lengthening the left turn lane would be
warranted.
Frederick County Schools — I spoke with Mr. Puglisi, who is in charge of the school's bus fleet.
He indicated that they are always supportive of more room in the turning lane. He also noted
that there was an issue with site distance in this location. He did not have an issue with the speed
limit.
Frederick County Sherriff's Office — I spoke with Lieutenant Mike Richardson and he did not
have an issue with the speed limit on that roadway, but noted that they had been giving it
increased attention due to some citizen concerns in the area. Regarding the need for a turn lane,
he wasn't sure it was really necessary. When asked about the site distance issue brought up by
Mr. Puglisi, he thought that was a very valid concern.
Item 5: Other