HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 01-07-15 Meeting Agenda AGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Board Room
Frederick County Administration Building
Winchester, Virginia
January 7, 2015
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Adoption of Agenda: Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission
should adopt the Agenda for the meeting ................................................................ (no tab)
2) Election of Officers, Meeting Schedule, & Adoption of Bylaws & Roles &
Responsibilities 2015 ....................................................................................................... (A)
3) November 5, 2014 Minutes.............................................................................................. (B)
4) Committee Reports .................................................................................................. (no tab)
5) Citizen Comments ................................................................................................... (no tab)
PUBLIC HEARING
6) Rezoning #05-14 CB Ventures, LLC., submitted by CB Ventures, LLC., to rezone 2.42
acres of property from B1 (Neighborhood Business) District to B2 (General Business)
District with proffers. The property is located at 1033 Aylor Road in Stephens City and
is identified by Property Identification Numbers 74-((A))-104 and 74-((A))-105 in the
Opequon Magisterial District.
Mr. Ruddy ...................................................................................................................... (C)
INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS
7) 2015 – 2016 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP is a prioritized list of capital
projects requested by various County Departments and Agencies. The Plan is created as
an informational component of the 2030 comprehensive Plan
Mr. Ruddy ......................................................................................................................... (D)
8) Other
Adjourn
Commonly Used Planning Agenda Terms
Meeting format
Citizen Comments – The portion of the meeting agenda offering an opportunity for the public to provide
comment to the Planning Commission on any items not scheduled as public hearing items.
Public Hearing– A specific type of agenda item, required by State law, which incorporates public comment as a
part of that item prior to Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors action. Public hearings are held for
items such as: Comprehensive Plan policies and amendments; Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance
amendments; and Rezoning and Conditional Use Permit applications. Following the Public Hearing, the
Planning Commission will take action on the item (see below).
Action Item–There are both public hearing and non‐public hearing items on which the Planning Commission
takes action. Depending on the actual item, the Planning Commission may approve, deny, table, or forward a
recommendation to the Board of Supervisors regarding the agenda item. No public comment is accepted
during the Action Item portion of the agenda.
Information/Discussion Item– The portion of the meeting agenda where items are presented to the Planning
Commission for information and discussion. The Planning Commission may offer comments and suggestions,
but does not take action on the agenda item. No public comment is accepted during the
Information/Discussion Item portion of the agenda.
Planning Terminology
Urban Development Area or UDA – The UDA is the county’s urban growth boundary identified in the
Comprehensive Plan in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. The UDA is an area
of the county where community facilities and public services are more readily available and are provided more
economically.
Sewer and Water Service Area or SWSA – The SWSA is the boundary identified in the Comprehensive Plan in
which public water and sewer is or can be provided. The SWSA is consistent with the UDA in many locations;
however the SWSA may extend beyond the UDA to promote commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses
in area where residential land uses are not desirable.
Land Use – Land Use is the nomenclature which refers to the type of activity which may occur on an area of
land. Common land use categories include: agricultural, residential, commercial, and industrial.
Zoning District ‐ Zoning district refers to a specific geographic area that is subject to land use standards.
Frederick County designates these areas, and establishes policies and ordinances over types of land uses,
density, and lot requirements in each zone. Zoning is the main planning tool of local government to manage
the future development of a community, protect neighborhoods, concentrate retail business and industry, and
channel traffic.
Rezoning – Rezoning is the process by which a property owner seeks to implement or modify the permitted
land use activities on their land. A rezoning changes the permitted land use activities within the categories
listed above under Land Use.
Conditional Use Permit or CUP ‐ A CUP allows special land uses which may be desirable, but are not always
appropriate based on a location and surrounding land uses. The CUP requested use, which is not allowed as a
matter of right within a zoning district, is considered through a public hearing process and usually contains
conditions to minimize any impacts on surrounding properties.
Ordinance Amendment – The process by which the County Code is revised. Often the revisions are the result
of a citizen request with substantial justification supporting the change. Amendments ultimately proceed
through a public hearing prior to the PC forwarding a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.
County Bodies Involved
Board of Supervisors or BOS ‐ Frederick County is governed by an elected Board of Supervisors composed of
seven members, one from each magisterial district, and one chairman‐at‐large. The Board of Supervisors is the
policy‐making body of the county. Functions of the Board of Supervisors related to planning include making
land use decisions, and establishing growth and development policies.
Planning Commission or PC ‐ The PC is composed of 13 members, two from each magisterial districts and one
at‐large, appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The Planning Commission serves in an advisory capacity to the
Board of Supervisors which then takes final action on all planning, zoning, and land use matters.
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee or CPPC – The CPPC is a major committee of the PC whose
primary responsibility is to formulate land use policies that shape the location and timing of development
throughout the County. Included in the work are studies of specific areas to develop guidelines for future land
use within those areas. The CPPC also considers requests for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
Decisions by CPPC are then forwarded to the PC for consideration.
Development Review and Regulations Committee or DRRC – The DRRC is the second major committee of the
PC whose primary responsibilities involve the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan in the form of
Zoning and Subdivision ordinance requirements. Requests to amend the ordinances to the DRRC are made by
the Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission, local citizens, businesses, or organizations. DRRC decisions
are also forwarded to the PC for consideration.
A
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/ 665-5651
Fax: 540/ 665-6395
Eric R. Lawrence, AICP
Director
107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Eric R. Lawrence, AICP, Planning Director
SUBJECT: Election of Officers, Committee Appointments, Meeting Schedule
DATE: December 18, 2014
________________________________________________________________________
ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR 2015
At the first meeting of each year, the Planning Commission elects a Chairman, Vice
Chairman and Secretary. These three Planning Commission officers assume office
immediately, and hold such office for the duration of the calendar year.
For each office, the Commission will: open the nominations; accept nominations; close
nominations; and, vote to fill the officer position.
ADOPTION OF MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 2015
At the first meeting of each year, the Planning Commission adopts their meeting
schedule for the ensuing year.
Historically, the Commission has held meetings on the first and third Wednesdays of
each month at 7:00 p.m., to be held in the Board of Supervisors meeting room; the
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee meets on the second Monday of each
month at 7:00 p.m. in the first floor conference room and the Development Review &
Regulations Committee meets on the fourth Thursday of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the
first floor conference room.
Memorandum: Elections, Appointments, and Meeting Times
December 18, 2014
Page 2 of 2
COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS FOR 2015
At the first meeting of each year, the Chairman appoints the membership for the
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC) and the Development Review &
Regulations Committee (DRRC). The Chairman also appoints a Planning Commission
liaison to the: Transportation Committee (TC); Historic Resources Advisory Board
(HRAB); Conservation Easement Authority (CEA); Economic Development Commission
(EDC); Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA); and, the Winchester Planning
Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS FOR 2015
At the first meeting of each year, the Planning Commission adopts their Bylaws, and
Roles and Responsibilities for the ensuing year. These documents are attached.
Please contact staff should you have questions.
Attachment: Proposed 2015 Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed 2015 Planning Commission Roles and Responsibilities
ERL/pd
PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS
County of Frederick, Virginia
Proposed
at the January 7, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting
ARTICLE I - AUTHORIZATION
1-1 The Frederick County Planning Commission is established by and in conformance with
Chapter 21 of the Code of Frederick County, and in accord with the provisions of Section
15.2-2210 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
1-2 The official title of this body shall be the Frederick County Planning Commission,
hereinafter referred to as the "Commission".
ARTICLE II - PURPOSE
2-1 The primary purpose of the Commission is to advise the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors and to carry out all duties and functions described by the Code of Virginia, as
amended.
ARTICLE III - MEMBERSHIP
3-1 The membership of the Commission shall be determined by the Frederick County Board
of Supervisors as specified in Chapter 21 of the Code of Frederick County. Methods of
appointment and terms of office shall be determined by Chapter 21 of the Code of
Frederick County.
3-2 Within the first month of initial appointment, new Commissioner appointees shall: 1)
participate in an orientation to familiarize themselves with the operations of the
Department and the Commission, and 2) meet with planning staff representatives in an
effort to review and better understand specific agenda items by no later than their second
Planning Commission meeting.
Page 2
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
ARTICLE IV - OFFICERS
4-1 Officers of the Commission shall consist of a chairman, vice-chairman and secretary.
The chairman and vice-chairman must be voting members of the Commission. The
secretary shall be a member of the Commission or a county employee.
4-2 Selection
4-2-1 The officers shall be elected by the voting members of the Commission at
the first meeting of the calendar year.
4-2-2 Nomination of officers shall be made from the floor. Elections of officers
shall follow immediately. A candidate receiving a majority vote of the
entire voting membership shall be declared elected.
4-3 Duties
4-3-1 The Chairman shall:
4-3-1-1 Preside at meetings.
4-3-1-2 Appoint committees.
4-3-1-3 Rule on procedural questions. A ruling on a procedural question by the
chairman shall be subject to reversal by a two-thirds majority vote of the
members present.
4-3-1-4 Report official communications.
4-3-1-5 Certify official documents involving the authority of the Commission.
4-3-1-6 Certify minutes as true and correct copies.
4-3-1-7 Carry out other duties as assigned by the Board of Supervisors and the
Commission.
4-3-2 The Vice-Chairman shall:
4-3-2-1 Assume the full powers of the chairman in the absence or inability of the
chairman to act.
4-3-2-2 When acting as chair, the vice-chairman shall carry out other duties as
assigned by the Board of Supervisors and the Commission Chairman.
Page 3
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
4-3-3 The Secretary shall:
4-3-3-1 Ensure that attendance is recorded at all meetings.
4-3-3-2 Ensure that the minutes of all Commission meetings are recorded.
4-3-3-3 Notify members of all meetings.
4-3-3-4 Prepare agendas for all meetings.
4-3-3-5 Maintain files of all official Commission records and reports. Official
records and reports may be purged in accordance with applicable state
codes.
4-3-3-6 Give notice of all Commission meetings, public hearings and public
meetings.
4-3-3-7 Provide to the Board of Supervisors reports and recommendations of the
Commission.
4-3-3-8 Attend to the correspondence necessary for the execution of the duties and
functions of the Commission.
4-4 Term of Office
4-4-1 Officers shall be elected for a one-year term or until a successor takes office.
Vacancies shall be filled for an unexpired term by a majority vote of the
Commission. In such cases, the newly elected officer shall serve only until the
end of the calendar year or until a successor takes office.
4-5 Temporary Chairman
4-5-1 In the event of the absence of both the chairman and the vice-chairman from any
meeting, the Commission shall designate from among its members a temporary
chairman who shall act for that meeting in the absence of the chairman or vice-
chairman.
Page 4
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
ARTICLE V - COMMITTEES
5-1 The Commission shall establish committees necessary to accomplish its purpose.
5-2 In establishing committees, the Commission shall describe the purpose for each
committee.
5-3 Members of the committees shall be appointed by the chairman and will serve for a term
of one year. The chairman may request recommendations from the Commission or
committee members on committee appointments.
5-4 Members of the committees may be Commission members, employees of the County, or
citizen volunteers.Commission members, employees of the County, and citizen
volunteers may be members of the committee.
5-5 The chairman and vice-chairman of the Planning Commission shall be ex-officio
members of every committee.
5-6 The committees will elect a chairman and vice-chairman annually. These officers shall
be current Commission members and should represent different Magisterial Districts, if
possible.
5-7 The committees may operate as a committee of the whole or by executive committee,
with current and past Commission members serving as members of the executive that
committee.
5-8 The committees may establish standing subcommittees whose activities will be a specific
responsibility of the parent committee. One executive committee member will serve as
liaison to the standing subcommittee and will assist staff in managing its activities.
Membership will be comprised of past Commission members and citizens. Membership
will be appointed by the chairman of the Committee with concurrence by the
Commission Chairman.
5-9 The committees may establish working groups to assist in specific, carefully-defined tasks
for a limited period of time. Important considerations for membership on the working
group are skills and experience necessary to assist in providing acceptable solutions.
Membership will be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee with concurrence by
the Commission Chairman.
Page 5
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
ARTICLE VI – COMMISSION MEETINGS
6-1 At the first meeting of each calendar year, the Commission shall fix the date, time, and
place of all its regular meetings for the ensuing calendar year, and shall fix the day on
which a regular meeting shall be continued should the Chairman declare that weather or
other conditions make it hazardous for members to attend.
6-2 Special meetings may be called by the chairman or by the secretary after due notice and
publication by the secretary.
6-3 Notice of all meetings shall be sent by the secretary with an agenda at least five days
before the meeting.
6-4 All meetings of the Commission shall be open to the public except for Closed Sessions
held in accordance with the provision specified under Section 2.2-3711(A) of the Code of
Virginia, 1950, as amended.
6-5 Work sessions shall be held at the adjournment of regular meetings or at the time and
place set by the Commission and/or the Board of Supervisors.
ARTICLE VII - VOTING
7-1 A majority of voting members shall constitute a quorum. No action shall be taken or
motion made unless a quorum is present.
7-2 No action of the Commission shall be valid unless authorized by a majority vote of those
present and voting.
ARTICLE VIII - OPERATING RULES
8-1 Order of Business for a regular meeting
8-1-1 Call to Order.
8-1-2 Adoption of the Agenda.
8-1-3 Consideration of Minutes.
8-1-4 Committee Reports.
Page 6
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
8-1-5 Citizen Comments on Items not on the Agenda.
8-1-6 Public Hearings.
8-1-7 Action Items.
8-1-8 Information/Discussion Items
8-1-9 Other.
8-1-10 Adjournment.
8-2 Minutes
8-2-1 The Commission shall keep minutes of each meeting. The chairman and
secretary shall sign all minutes following approval by the Commission certifying
that the minutes are true and correct. Minutes made available to the public prior
to formal approval by the Commission shall be clearly identified as a draft version
of the meeting.
8-3 Procedures
8-3-1 Parliamentary procedure in the Commission meetings shall be governed by
Robert's Rules of Order, except where otherwise specified in these procedures.
8-3-2 Whenever an agenda item involves a recommendation to the Board of
Supervisors, the Commission shall continue to consider the item until a definite
recommendation is made. If a motion has been made and defeated, additional,
different motions may be made concerning the item under consideration.
8-3-3 The initial motion on an agenda item shall be made by a member representing the
application’s Magisterial District. If both District representatives are absent or
decline to make the initial motion, then any other Commissioner may act.
8-3-4 Business items on the agenda shall be considered using the following procedures:
8-3-4-1 Report by County Staff.
8-3-4-2 Presentation by Applicant.
8-3-4-3 Citizen Comment.
Page 7
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
8-3-4-4 Applicant Response.
8-3-4-5 Staff Summary.
8-3-4-6 Discussion by Commission.
8-3-4-7 Motion and Action by Commission.
8-3-5 Public comment shall be allowed in all cases required by the Code of Virginia,
1950, as amended, or the Code of Frederick County. In other cases, the chairman
may allow public comment.
8-3-6 The Commission members may ask questions of clarification and information
after the staff report, applicant presentation, and/or citizen comment.
8-3-7 Petitions, displays, documents or correspondence presented at a meeting may be
made part of the official record of the meeting by motion of the Commission and
are to be kept on file by the secretary. Such items need not be made part of the
published minutes.
8-3-8 Public Hearings
8-3-8-1 The Commission shall hold public hearings on all items for which
hearings are required by the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, or by the
Code of Frederick County. Such public hearing shall be advertised and
notifications provided as required by the Code of Virginia, 1950, as
amended.
8-3-8-2 The Chairman may establish special rules for any public hearing at the
beginning of said hearing. These rules may include limitations on the time
of staff report, applicant presentation and citizen comment.
8-3-8-3 In addition to those required by law, the Commission may hold public
hearings on any matter, under the purview of the Commision, which it
deems to be in the public interest. In such cases, the public hearings shall
follow all procedures described for public hearing in these bylaws.
8-3-8-4 The 90-day period (Section 165-102.03 of the Frederick County Zoning
Ordinance) for the Planning Commission to make a rezoning
recommendation to the Board will start at the date of the first completed
public hearing start after the first Commission meeting following the
referral of the amendment to the Commission.
Page 8
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
8-3-9 Tabling
8-3-9-1 The Planning Commission shall have the authority to table agenda items
45-days (less if reaching the limits of Section 165-102.03) for any one of
the following:
A) The agenda item does not meet the requirements of the Code of
Virginia, 1950, as amended.
B) The agenda item does not meet the requirements of the Code of
Frederick County.
C) Insufficient information has been provided for the agenda item.
D) Revised proffers have been received from the applicant less than
twenty-one (21) days of the advertised Planning Commission
meeting.
E) Issues or concerns that arise during formal discussion of the
agenda item warrant additional information or study.
F) The applicant provides the Frederick County Planning Department
with a written request to table the agenda item.
G) The Frederick County Planning Department is advised of an
emergency situation that prevents attendance by the applicant.
H) The applicant fails to appear at the meeting in which the
application has been advertised to appear.
8-3-9-2 The applicant shall be permitted to request that an agenda item be tabled
from a scheduled Planning Commission meeting one time. The Planning
Commission shall table the application for a specific period of time to
ensure that the requirements of Section 165-102.03 of the Frederick
County Zoning Ordinance are not exceeded unless the applicant requests a
waiver from this requirement. In no case shall an application be tabled for
more than 12 months from the time the complete application was received
by the Zoning Administrator or applicable staff.
8-3-9-3 An application that has been tabled for an unspecified period of time shall
be re-advertised for consideration by the Planning Commission once the
following steps have been completed:
Page 9
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
A) The applicant has requested in writing that the agenda item be
considered by the Planning Commission.
B) The applicant has provided all required information to the
Frederick County Planning Department which addresses all
concerns of the Planning Commission.
8-3-10 Work sessions
8-3-10-1 The Commission may hold work sessions at which the procedural rules of
these bylaws shall not apply.
8-3-10-2 Work sessions shall be held after the adjournment of regular meetings or
at the time and place set by the Commission.
8-3-10-3 Notice of work sessions shall be sent to the Planning Commissioners at
least five days before the session.
8-3-10-4 The chairman shall lead the session and require orderly behavior and
discussion.
8-3-10-5 No actions shall be taken or motions made at a work session.
8-3-10-6 Work sessions shall be open to the public. Public comment is not required
at a work session.
8-3-10-7 The secretary shall keep a general record of all work sessions and the
items discussed.
8-3-11 Adjournment
8-3-11-1 In no case shall the Commission consider any new items
after 10:30 P.M. and the meeting shall be adjourned by
11:00 P.M. In the instance that an item begun before
10:30P.M. has not been acted on by the 11:00 P.M. hour,
the Commission may, by majority vote, lift the
adjournment time until a recommendation has been made,
or such time, after 11:00 P.M., as the Commission may fix.
ARTICLE IX - AMENDMENTS
9-1 These bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of the entire voting
Page 10
Planning Commission Bylaws
Proposed on January 7, 2015
membership after thirty days prior notice at any time during the calendar year.
9-2 The Planning Commission shall conduct an annual review of these bylaws in
November of each calendar year to ensure their accuracy.
9-3 At the first meeting of the calendar year, the By-Laws will be adopted.
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Proposed
at the January 7, 2015 Planning Commission meeting
This document has been prepared to assist Frederick County Planning Commissioners in
understanding what their role and responsibilities are in the myriad of activities that they
accept as a member of the Planning Commission. This compilation is a companion
document to the Commission’s By-Laws.
APPLICATION COMMUNICATIONS
There are three primary sources of information gathered by and weighed by the Planning
Commission in order to make quality planning recommendations to the Board of
Supervisors. They are ex-parte communications, staff reports and public input.
Ex-Parte Communications:
Individual meetings between Commissioners and an applicant/developer regarding a
specific application shall follow the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. During this
discussion or at any other time prior to action taken by the Commission on the
application, a Planning Commissioner should make no commitments or endorsements.
Any new written materials provided by the applicant to any one Commissioner shall be
made available to all commissioners and staff by the applicant prior to the application
appearing on the agenda. To not do so may result in the application being tabled at the
Planning Commission public hearing.
Staff Application Briefings/Work Sessions:
Prior to the first public hearing being held, staff will hold a briefing for the Planning
Commissioners, with an invitation extended to the Board of Supervisors to participate,
regarding any application deemed sufficiently complicated / controversial to warrant
detailed explanation. The purpose is to apprise the Commissioners regarding the details
of the application, both those items that meet the ordinance and those that do not. This
provides the opportunity for the Commissioners to have a common understanding of the
application prior to the public hearing. The decision to hold a briefing on a specific
application will be made jointly by the Director of Planning and the Chairman of the
Planning Commission. In addition to complexity, the application shall be basically
complete prior to scheduling the briefing.
Page 2
Planning Commission Roles and Responsibilities
Proposed at the January 7, 2015 Planning Commission meeting
The Planning Commission may request a work session for an application which, after the
first public hearing is concluded, is subsequently tabled. The purpose of the work session
is to discuss amongst each other and with staff details of the application, any revised
proffers provided or anticipated by the applicant, and other improvements which could be
made to the application.
For either a briefing or a work session:
-The applicant should attend, but will not have an active role.
-The format of a Planning Commission work session as identified in paragraph 8-
3-10 of the Commission’s By-Laws will be used.
-In no case will the legal timeline for consideration before the Planning
Commission be changed.
Public Hearing/Meeting:
Efficient and effective public hearings are an essential part of enabling the Commission
to make reasoned recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.
Every attempt will be made to obtain focused and broad representation of opinion or
information from the public. When possible, specific time limitations will not be used.
However, both rules of order as well as time constraints most appropriate for the specific
application will be implemented when there is either large interest in or controversy
regarding an application.
One constant during this process on both the part of the public, the applicant and the
Commission itself is civility and respect for information offered or a differing opinion.
Deviation from this behavior is unacceptable.
COMMISSIONER DEVELOPMENT:
Each Commissioner shall be committed to preparing for and keeping knowledge current
in order to do the most effective job for the community.
New initial appointees should strive to obtain Planning Commissioner certification from
an acceptable training program within the first year of appointment. This training is
supported by the Planning Department budget.
Further continuing education through many offerings should be pursued and will be
supported by the Planning budget as possible. These opportunities should be shared
Page 3
Planning Commission Roles and Responsibilities
Proposed at the January 7, 2015 Planning Commission meeting
amongst the number of Commissioners who are serving. Examples include PlanVirginia
annual meeting, other special offerings as well as the American Planning Association’s
readings and meetings. A library is maintained by the Planning office.
COMMISSIONER ATTENDANCE
Commissioners are expected to participate in 80% of the regularly scheduled meetings
per year. Members who cannot attend a meeting due to illness, business, and other
governmental or family reasons should notify the Commission Chairman and/or staff
Administrative Assistant prior to the scheduled meeting in order for the absence to be
noted. It may affect quorum considerations.
Especially essential is preparation and readiness for each of the Commission’s meetings
in order to use not only the Commission’s but the staff’s and public’s time wisely.
COMMISSION COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS:
Appointments to a Commission committee or liaison assignments are made by the
chairman and shared by the membership. Generally, they involve a once per month
meeting.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
Each Commissioner needs to be familiar with Commonwealth of Virginia information on
conflict of interest. If a Commissioner is unsure if there is conflict, the County Attorney
is the correct resource.
Upon determination that there is or might be perceived to be a conflict, the Commissioner
should state immediately after the agenda item is read that recusal action is necessary
(with, preferably, stating the reason) then step down from the dais until the item is
concluded.
PUBLIC REPRESENTATION:
Commissioners are citizens, too. If there is a public item that is of interest, the
Commissioner should participate, but not identify themselves as members of the
Frederick County Planning Commission unless acting in an official capacity and directed
to do so. Implied endorsements by the Commission should be avoided.
B
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3159
Minutes of November 5, 2014
MEETING MINUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in
Winchester, Virginia on November 5, 2014.
PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice
Chairman/Opequon District; Robert S. Molden, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; J.
Stanley Crockett, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel,
Shawnee District; J. Rhodes Marston, Back Creek District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Charles
E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Kevin Kenney, Gainesboro District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud
District; Charles F. Dunlap, Red Bud District: Roderick B. Williams, County Attorney; Robert Hess,
Board of Supervisors Liaison; Mark Loring, City of Winchester Liaison.
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Director; John A.
Bishop, Deputy Director-Transportation; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator;
Candice E. Perkins, Senior Planner; and Shannon L. Conner, Administrative Assistant.
-----------
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Wilmot called the November 5, 2014 meeting of the Frederick County
Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Wilmot commenced the meeting by inviting
everyone to join in a moment of silence.
-------------
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Upon motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, the
Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for this evening’s meeting.
-------------
MINUTES
Upon motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Molden, the
Planning Commission unanimously adopted the minutes of their October 1, 2014 meeting.
-------------
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3160
Minutes of November 5, 2014
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Frederick County Sanitation Authority – 10/28/14 Mtg.
Commissioner Unger reported rainfall for last month was .61 inches, with the previous
month being 3.28 inches, making this a fairly good average for the year. Water usage at the Diehl Plant
was 2.6 mgd; water usage at the Anderson Plant was 2.0 mgd; and right around 1.0 mgd was purchased
from the City. The daily average use is about 5.67 mgd, which is very normal for this time of year. The
elevation at the Diehl Quarry did go down a few feet, it is now at 657 and was at 662 last month, due to
repairs made on a pump at the plant; the Anderson Quarry elevation rose about a foot.
Commissioner Unger also reported the water leaks in the County are improving. The
leaks are running around 3% versus 17% from the previous month. He noted there has been a lot of work
done on the water lines to accomplish this. The Sanitation Authority was audited last month and
Commissioner Unger noted it went very well.
-------------
City of Winchester Planning Commission – 10/21/14 Mtg.
Commissioner Loring reported the Planning Commission for the City of Winchester
considered three actions items and four administrative actions. The items were as follows, a CUP for
VFW post to operate a private club, two zoning ordinance amendments, one affecting side and rear
setbacks in CM1 district and one affecting nonconforming uses in vested rights across the city. There
were two administrative approvals. The approval being for the Chop Stix Café for a major revision taking
place and also approve the site plan for The Lofts at Jubal Square.
-------------
Transportation Committee – 10/27/14 Mtg.
Commissioner Oates reported the committee reviewed the Transportation portion of the
Capital Improvement Plan, and noted there are no changes at this time due to lost funding, therefore
several projects remain idle.
-------------
Board of Supervisors Report – 10/8/14 Mtg.
Board of Supervisors’ Liaison, Supervisor Robert Hess, reported there were two Planning
Commission items addressed at the October 8, 2014 meeting. The Governors Hill proffer amendment
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3161
Minutes of November 5, 2014
was presented and approved by the Board of Supervisors. An informational item was presented in
regards to the Black Diamond site plan, of which the Board took note of the uncertainty of funding for
Route 37 and that it is unreasonable to suggest the property owner/s carry this burden.
-------------
Citizen Comments
Chairman Wilmot called for citizen comments on any subject not currently on the
Planning Commission’s agenda or any item that is solely a discussion item for the Commission. No one
came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the citizen comments portion of the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING
Rezoning #04-14 Baker and Lepley properties, submitted by Lewis and Melissa Baker, Fred and
Alice Baker, and Krista Lepley to rezone 8.59+/- acres from MH1 (Mobile Home Community)
District and RA (Rural Area) District to the RA (Rural Area) District. The properties are located
on Sinking Springs Lane in Gore. The properties are identified by Property Identification Numbers
28-A-75, 28-A-76, and 28-A-82 in the Back Creek Magisterial District.
Action – Recommended Approval
Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, reported this is a request to rezone 8.59 +/- acres
from the MH-1 (Mobile Home Community) and RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District to the RA Zoning
District. Ms. Perkins noted that this rezoning consists of three parcels that are currently split zoned and
the proposal is to down zone all to the RA District. The land use proposed in the application is consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and promotes the County’s rural areas. Ms. Perkins noted this is a positive
rezoning application as it removes areas of mobile home communities that would not typically be used for
a mobile home park due to the location outside of the water and sewer service area and the urban
development area. Commissioner Unger reiterated that this is a positive rezoning application.
Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for anyone who wished to speak regarding this
request to come forward. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public
comment portion of the hearing.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Unger and seconded by Commissioner Triplett,
BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend
approval of the Rezoning #04-14 Baker and Lepley properties, submitted by Lewis and Melissa Baker,
Fred and Alice Baker, and Krista Lepley to rezone 8.59+/- acres from MH1 (Mobile Home Community)
District and RA (Rural Area) District to the RA (Rural Area) District.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3162
Minutes of November 5, 2014
-------------
Conditional Use Permit #03-14 for Caroline E. Watson, for in Home Child Care. This property is
located at 215 Westmoreland Drive in Stephens City. The property is identified with Property
Identification Number 75E-1-3-165 in the Opequon Magisterial district.
Action – Recommended Approval with Conditions
Zoning and Subdivision Administrator, Mark R. Cheran, reported the property is
currently zoned RP (Residential Performance) and the land use is Residential. This licensed child care
facility has been in operation at this principal structure for 14 years. Mr. Cheran noted the applicant was
not aware that a CUP (Conditional Use Permit) was needed for this service until this point; Staff made
note there are conditions that will apply to the applicant for this CUP.
Mrs. Caroline Watson was present and available for questions. Commissioner Thomas
asked Mrs. Watson if she understood the conditions listed within the permit. He inquired as to if
condition #2 would cause any problems (7 a.m. to 5 p.m.) and would it be more feasible if it were 6 a.m.
to 6 p.m. Mrs. Watson responded this would not cause any problem and a child being at the residence
after 5 p.m. is very rare.
Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for anyone who wished to speak
regarding this request to come forward. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the
public comment portion of the hearing.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Oates,
BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend
approval of Conditional Use Permit #03-14 for Caroline E. Watson, for in Home Child Care at 215
Westmoreland Drive with the following conditions:
1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times.
2. Hours of operation shall be permitted from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday.
3. The applicant shall satisfy the licensing requirements of the Virginia Department of Social
Services and the County of Frederick.
4. No business sign associated with this Conditional Use Permit (CUP) shall be erected on the
property.
5. Other than those children residing on the property, there shall be no more than twelve (12)
children being cared for at any given time.
6. Other than those persons residing on the property, there shall be no more than one (1) employee
working at the daycare at any time.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3163
Minutes of November 5, 2014
7. Any expansion or change of use will require a new Conditional Use Permit.
-------------
Rezoning #02-14 Heritage Commons, L.L.C., submitted by Lawson and Silek, P.L.C., to rezone
96.28+/- acres from BS (Business General) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District
and 54+/- acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to R4 (Residential Planned
Community) District and .31+/- acres from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the R4 (Residential
Planned Community) District with proffers. The properties are located west of the intersection of
Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Airport Road (Route 645) and are identified by the Property
Identification Numbers 63-A-150, 64-A-10, and 64-A-12 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Action – Recommended Denial by Unanimous Vote
Senior Planner, Candice E. Perkins, provided a detailed history of the applicant’s pursuit
in Rezoning #02-14 Heritage Commons. Ms. Perkins reported this rezoning contains proffers and
modifications that go along with the R4 zoning request. This same property was rezoned in 2005,
formally known as the Russell 150 property. She noted this rezoning request was discussed by the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors at a staff briefing held on September 3, 2014.
Ms. Perkins reported the R4 district is a mixed use district that allows an applicant to
modify or tailor the ordinance to further meet the needs of the community that they envision. The key
points of the modification document are: 100% per townhouse and multifamily whereas the R4 limits the
development to 40%; an increase in the residential density, proposing twelve units an acre whereas the R4
is typically four units an acre; an increase in the commercial maximum; a decrease in the open space from
30% to 15%; request to have private streets rather than public streets; commercial building height up to
80 feet; as well as inclusion of a modified apartment building dimensional layout.
Ms. Perkins noted the land uses presented with this rezoning application are not
consistent with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the application does not adequately address
the negative impacts associated with this request; in particular, the negative transportation and fiscal
impacts. Also noted, many of the reviewing agencies concerns and comments remain unaddressed,
specifically VDOT, Frederick County Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, the County Attorney, as well
as Public Works. She reiterated the R4 district zoning enables a mixed use development, this could be a
town center type use, however as proffered this application would clearly allow for separate uses whereas
the residential and commercial areas could be clearly segregated from each other.
Ms. Perkins reported the negative fiscal impacts associated with the residential uses
proposed on the property have not been satisfactorily addressed, the market and fiscal impact analysis
shows a positive fiscal gain however it does require full build out to achieve this which could be upwards
of fifteen years. Ms. Perkins noted that proffer fazing falls grossly short of achieving what the model is
utilizing to achieve the positive fiscal gain. Also explained, it does not proffer the multifamily units to be
market rate as shown in the analysis. Ms. Perkins reported the analysis does not reflect the Commissioner
of Revenue or the Treasurer’s comments regarding inaccurate data that was used.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3164
Minutes of November 5, 2014
Ms. Perkins reported the County’s development impact model projects a negative impact
of $13,062 per single family attached or town house unit and $11,339 per multifamily unit on County
capital facilities. She explained that based on the unit cap in the proffers the potential negative impact of
the residential units will have on the County facilities is $13.9 million. Also noted, the development
should not be utilizing the future tax contributions of the commercial land bays to offset the negative
impacts of the residential units without guaranteed phasing of the commercial uses to be built in
conjunction with the residential uses. Ms. Perkins continued that within the proffers the applicant has
included a phasing proffer with the proposal being; receive a building permit for 50,000 sq. ft. of
commercial with the first 300 units, then secure an occupancy permit for that 50,000 sq. ft. prior to
starting the 600th unit; then receive a building permit for an additional 50,000 sq. ft. of commercial at the
600th multifamily unit however there is no trigger for the occupancy permit for the second 50,000 sq. ft.
Therefore, the proffer would allow the construction of 599 multifamily residential and 184 townhouses
with the construction of 50,000 sq. ft. of commercial area. She noted, with the development impact
model projections, that is over $1 million annually in negative impacts. This is not consistent with the
analysis that was provided by the applicant to maintain economic balance nor does it guarantee to offset
the impacts from the residential units.
In regards to Comprehensive Plan conformance, Ms. Perkins reported the land uses
shown within land bays 3 and 7 are not supported by the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, land bay 3 is shown
with mixed residential and commercial land uses; the Comprehensive Plan designates this area entirely
for employment land uses. Also noted, land bay 7 is shown with the ability to develop with 100%
commercial or industrial uses. The Comprehensive Plan shows the land bay 7 area as solely high density
residential.
Deputy Director-Transportation, John A. Bishop, provided an overview in regards to the
Transportation concerns on this rezoning. He reported that after some questions and a bit of confusion it
is to be noted that the County has not previously nor is actively doing any design work on the portion of
the property in question. Mr. Bishop reported there are several concerns as follows: $1,000,000 in cash
proffers currently on the property that is not listed in the current package; Chapter 527, approximately
1,000 additional units and 500,000 sq. ft. of office/commercial/industrial under the 1.2 million sq. ft.;
Warrior Drive, Mr. Bishop believes the language has improved however it appears easy to avoid; the
construction commitments are completely reliant on a revenue sharing agreement between the County and
the applicant, which does not exist at this point; the road section details that have been added are very
helpful.
Commissioner Wilmot requested Mr. Bishop share with everyone the importance of
Chapter 527. Mr. Bishop explained that Chapter 527 is the state code requiring the study of development
which is going to increase vehicle trips on state roads. He noted if the County knowingly accepts
something that should have previously been studied, the County would be in violation of Chapter 527.
Mr. Bishop stated that a representative from VDOT was present and available for any questions.
Ms. Perkins returned to the podium and reiterated that this rezoning application is not in
conformance with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. She noted staff was available for any questions.
Commissioner Oates asked in regards to the entrance language in the proffers, would it
be appropriate to have the GDP revised. Mr. Bishop responded that the language that has been presented
resolves the issue. Commissioner Oates inquired regarding proffers: is there anything in the proffers that
prohibits the County from getting 1,050 units of low income apartments the way they are currently
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3165
Minutes of November 5, 2014
written? Ms. Perkins responded that is correct, the proffers in the package do not proffer market rate
units.
Mr. Thomas (Ty) Moore Lawson, P.C. with Lawson & Silek, P.L.C. was present on
behalf of the property owner and the contract purchaser/developer. Mr. Lawson gave an overview of the
rezoning request. He noted this rezoning was originally filed in September 2013. He stated this rezoning
is intended to replace the approved rezoning of 2005 in its entirety, which was a rezoning with proffers.
The approved rezoning had a road alignment which is not the current road alignment that has been
approved by VDOT. Mr. Lawson noted there are two revenue sharing programs in place, one that Mr.
Bishop mentioned as well as another that runs from the traffic circle down to Airport Road and shows the
beginning of Warrior Drive. Mr. Lawson mentioned that under the original Russell 150 there was CDA
funding, that has since failed. He also emphasized that the Russell 150 is bankrupt and has failed.
Mr. Lawson explained that he had circulated revised proffers that contained significant
changes over those proffers included in the agenda. The first change being that the multifamily would be
market rate as proffered and as the market analysis depicted. The word “market rate” will appear in front
of every reference to multifamily throughout the document. There was a request to drop the industrial
and that has been deleted. The other change suggested was regarding the Chapter 527 issue, the result
after meeting with staff was to cap the trips from this development at 23,177 and put in a mechanism that
notes if that number is reached how it will be addressed with subsequent traffic studies. That will
eliminate any complaint or issue about traffic study. Mr. Lawson next talked about the guarantee of mix,
the guarantee of commercial along with the multifamily. He noted the wording has been changed and tied
to certificate of occupancy. He stated in order to get a certain number of certificates of occupancy for
multifamily; there has to be a certificate of occupancy for a certain square footage of commercial. Those
are the only changes in the proffers at this time.
Mr. Lawson next talked about the generalized development plan. He presented a slide
showing the drawing and alignment of roads that was received from Pennoni Associates Inc. who is the
contractor working for the State and the County to design and build a road network pursuant to two
revenue sharing programs between the State and the County which includes a bridge over I-81 to connect
to Tevis Street; it shows a two lane traffic circle that connects the Northern Y, Warrior Drive, and the
main boulevard. He noted that the design of this is coming from Pennoni Associates Inc. on behalf of the
State and the County. Mr. Lawson stated it has been suggested the applicant get and engineer drawing
which became problematic because there is only one engineering firm working for the State and the
County. He noted it has been proffered to dedicate the road alignment that is necessary and also proffered
to back stop the County for its share under these revenue sharing programs.
Mr. Lawson presented slides of the staff stated comments; mixed use development and
the concern that the mixed use urban center concept has been lost and not assurances of what
development will materialize, he noted the language they are using is mix and are guaranteeing a mix
within certain ranges and caps; next comment was regarding R4 zoning would enable a mixed use
however there are no assurances, he stated the property needs to be looked at as a whole and with the
tables presented they believe the ordinance will be satisfied and there will the mix of residential and
commercial and a very desirable mix, there is a cap on the residential of 1,200 and there is no cap on the
commercial other than the safeties that have been put in for traffic etc…; the concern regarding
Comprehensive Plan conformity, in particular proffered uses in certain land bays, he emphasized this
project needs to be considered as a whole, suggests in doing so will be in conformity to the
Comprehensive Plan; the concerns regarding the revenue sharing plan and no guarantees if the revenue
sharing fails, he noted it is being put in the proffers and it’s being proposed that they will be paying the
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3166
Minutes of November 5, 2014
County’s share and it is a condition that runs with the land if this is approved; the next concern is for
Warrior Drive and there needs to be more of an accommodation for it, it has been proffered to dedicate a
right of way at such time when it’s designed; the comments there are no guarantees to offset impacts and
needs to be commercial development in conjunction with residential, Mr. Lawson noted that the Market
and Fiscal Impact Analysis provided reflects all of the components being tax positive; the concern on
phasing and lack of proffered phasing, there is phasing, a cap on residential is now in place; TIA (traffic
impact analysis) has been satisfied by capping trips at 23,177; PPEA and the need for this proffer is
unclear and there is no commitment for a County Administration building on this property, he noted they
agree and that the offer is still there with a timeline of one year; a mention of a height issue, this is not in
the flight path of Winchester Regional Airport and will abide by any FAA regulations.
Mr. Stuart M. Patz, President of Patz & Associates, Inc. author of the applicant’s market
and fiscal impact analysis, came forward to explain more about the proposed project. He noted the
current copy of the analysis has been reviewed by the Commissioner of the Revenue for the County and
has been deemed to be successful and accurate with one small error being changed. Mr. Patz reported the
report shows a phased development not based on proffers but based on market trends to show that the
fiscal impact analysis could be positive/would be positive in five year increments. The conclusions of the
fiscal impact analysis are at build out the County will have revenue benefits of net 3.2 million dollars a
year. That is based on how the fiscal impact analysis is composed of onsite revenue and expenses as well
as offsite, which differs from the County’s DIM model. Mr. Patz noted that in the report the minimum
household income required to support the rents at the market rate upscale communities would be $40,000
for a one bedroom unit, increased for two and three bedroom units, townhouses would require higher
income at a minimum of $75,000 income level, therefore the report uses and average of $65,000 for the
expenditure potential. This type of fiscal impact analysis is used all over the country by the firm. Mr.
Patz stated that the report presented at this time has been approved by the Frederick County Commission
of the Revenue.
Mr. Patz commented that: onsite and offsite expenditures are used in the analysis;
determined apartment units at the income rage being proposed and the upscale has a smaller pupil per
generation rate; the market study is based on market trend and not on proffers. Mr. Patz emphasized that
this project is unique to the area, more upscale than anything else in the area, and will generate a positive
impact no matter how the numbers are calculated. Mr. Patz noted the County Administration building
would be constructed on the site and was used in this analysis. It was done with the understanding that
the public investment is a key anchor for this property to generate 3.2 million annually in net revenue at
build out. He noted the importance of this.
Mr. Lawson presented a video on behalf of The Cathcart Group which depicts a
community in Charlottesville VA that is very similar to the project at hand. Mr. Cathcart explained their
primary focus is luxury apartments. He noted they develop them, they build them, and they own and
manage them. Mr. Cathcart stated the envision for Heritage Commons is similar to their property known
as The Reserve at Belvedere, and also building the same design in Harrisonburg VA. The outlook is to
build the finest residential communities in the market area which will be a high end community. Mr.
Cathcart gave a brief overview of all the amenities within the communities. Mr. Cathcart passed out
company information documents to Commission Members. Mr. Cathcart noted that his business is in this
for the long haul and feels that is important when developing a project like this. He stated he is convinced
these types of properties are successful and will produce high tax revenue.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3167
Minutes of November 5, 2014
Mr. Lawson gave closing comments, he noted this is a lot to digest, it’s a big project, and
he insists everything is tax positive. Mr. Lawson asked for comments and that this be forwarded to the
Board of Supervisors for approval on December 10, 2014.
Chairman Wilmot asked Commission Members if there were any questions for the
presenters at this point. There were no questions at this time.
Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for anyone who wished to speak
regarding this request to come forward.
Mr. Alan Morrison who resides in the Gainesboro District spoke in opposition of this
rezoning request. He noted he appreciates the use of imagination; however he is concerned it is too far
from reality. Mr. Morrison is concerned that the impact on the County taxpayer will be that of a negative
one.
Mrs. Ellen Murphy, Commissioner of the Revenue for Frederick County, VA spoke in
reference to mathematical errors that affected the type of revenue she is familiar with. Mrs. Murphy
contacted Mr. Patz and explained that she had concerns and most of the adjustments were made for this
presentation. She also noted that by doing so did not mean she was endorsing or anyway encouraging this
project at this time. Mrs. Murphy stated she is not in a position to disapprove and her involvement was to
bring the errors to the forefront for correction.
Mr. Clarence Davis Jr., Pastor of Calvary Church of the Brethren which borders the
Heritage Commons property spoke in favor of the rezoning. He stated he and his congregation are
excited about the possibility of having the transportation issues made easier in regards to entering and
exiting the church property. Mr. Davis noted the Heritage Commons property has been neglected for
many years and he and the congregation are anxious to see it cleaned up and more presentable to the
community.
Chairman Wilmot asked if anyone else would like to speak, no one came forward. The
public hearing portion of the application review was closed.
Chairman Wilmot asked Staff if they had any additional thoughts or comments. Mr.
Bishop came forward to clarify a few points. He noted currently there are three revenue sharing awards
that apply to the various roads involving this property. Mr. Bishop clarified that revenue sharing projects
are not State projects, the state is involved however, the County applies for funds and are subject to
approvals and all the processes that go along with being involved in a revenue sharing project.
Chairman Wilmot asked for a recommendation based on the information currently at
hand and not the new proffers that were recently submitted. Commissioner Thomas noted that from a
macro standpoint this could be a nice project, however this project contains significant inconsistencies
and many details that need to be resolved. He stated he hopes this project can move forward as shown but
not as written in the proffers. Commissioner Manuel posed a question to Mr. Bishop, he asked for
clarification on the most recent TIA. Mr. Bishop stated the most recent TIA for this location was 2004.
Commissioner Manuel posed a question to Ms. Perkins, he inquired as to the status of water and sewer.
Ms. Perkins stated that in 2013 FCSA stated they do have adequate water and sewer available in terms of
the plants to serve the property however there is question about the lines and infrastructure being adequate
in serving the property. The question still remains as to what may have to be upgraded and installed to
accommodate the property and who will pay for that.
Frederick County Planning Commission Page 3168
Minutes of November 5, 2014
Commissioner Manuel made a motion to recommend denial of this rezoning to the Board
of Supervisors. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Triplett and passed by a unanimous vote.
BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously deny approval
of Rezoning #02-14 Heritage Commons, L.L.C., submitted by Lawson and Silek, P.L.C., to rezone
96.28+/- acres from BS (Business General) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District and
54+/- acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to R4 (Residential Planned Community) District
and .31+/- from the RA (Rural Areas) District to the R4 (Residential Planned Community) District with
proffers.
-------------
OTHER
Cancelation of the Regular Meeting on November 19, 2014
Chairman Wilmot announced there were no pending items for the Planning
Commission’s November 19, 2014 meeting.
A motion was made by Commissioner Thomas to cancel the November 19, 2014 meeting
of the Planning Commission. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Dunlap and unanimously
passed.
-------------
ADJOURNMENT
No further business remained to be discussed and a motion was made by Commissioner Oates to adjourn
the meeting. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas and unanimously passed. The
meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________
June Wilmot, Chairman
____________________________
Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary
C
REZONING APPLICATION #05-14
CB VENTURES, LLC
Staff Report for the Planning Commission
Prepared: December 17, 2014
Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 01/07/15 Pending
Board of Supervisors: 01/28/15 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.42 acres from the B1 (Neighborhood Business) District to B2 (General
Business) District with proffers.
LOCATION: The property is located at 1033 Aylor Road in Stephens City.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 01/07/15 PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING:
This is an application to rezone a total of 2.42 acres of land from the B1 (Neighborhood Business)
District to the B2 (Business General) with proffers, to accommodate commercial uses.
The B2 (Business General) District land use proposed in this rezoning is generally consistent with the
commercial designation of the Southern Frederick Area Plan and the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
However, the existing neighborhood character of the adjacent land uses should be a consideration when
evaluating this proposed rezoning.
The transportation impacts associated with this request appear to have generally been addressed by the
Applicant, subject to the unequivocal approval of the County Attorney regarding right-of-way
dedication proffer, Proffer 2. The community facility impacts associated with this request should be
addressed to a greater extent.
The adjacent properties should be a consideration with this rezoning application. With this rezoning,
the applicant has proffered height restrictions on site lighting to mitigate potentials impacts to the
adjacent residential properties. No additional site development standards have been proffered. The
Planning Commission should determine if the neighborhood character of the area will be adversely
impacted.
Following the required public hearing, a recommendation regarding this rezoning application to
the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately
address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission.
Rezoning #05-14CB Ventures, LLC
December 17, 2014
Page 2
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. Unresolved issues
concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report.
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 01/07/15 Pending
Board of Supervisors: 01/28/15 Pending
PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.42 acres from the B1 (Neighborhood Business) District to B2 (Business
General) District with proffers.
LOCATION: The property is located at 1033 Aylor Road in Stephens City.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 74-((A))-104 and 74-((A))-105
PROPERTY ZONING: B1 (Neighborhood Business) District
PRESENT USE: Car wash / vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
North: B1 (Neighborhood Business) Use: Commercial
South: B1 (Neighborhood Business) Use: Commercial
East: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential
West: Aylor Road/Interstate 81 Use: State Highway
Town of Stephens City
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Virginia Dept. of Transportation: Please see attached email dated August 8, 2014, from Lloyd
Ingram, VDOT.
Fire Marshall: Plan approved
Fire and Rescue: Plan approved
Public Works Department: Recommend approval
Rezoning #05-14CB Ventures, LLC
December 17, 2014
Page 3
Frederick County Sanitation Authority: Please see attached letter dated June 6, 2014, from Uwe
Weindel, Engineer-Director FCSA.
Service Authority: No comments
Frederick County Attorney: Please see attached letter dated December 4, 2014, from Rod Williams,
County Attorney.
Town of Stephens City: No issues
Planning & Zoning:
1) Site History
The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Stephens City Quadrangle) identifies the
subject parcels as being zoned B-1 (Neighborhood Business) District. The intent of this district
is to provide small business areas to serve the daily household needs of surrounding residential
neighborhoods. Uses allowed primarily consist of limited retailing and personal service uses.
Business uses in this district should be small in size and should not produce substantial vehicle
traffic in excess of what is usual in the residential neighborhoods.
2)
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan is the guide for the future growth of Frederick County.
Comprehensive Policy Plan
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan is an official public document that serves as the community's
guide for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key
components of community life. The primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the
living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to
plan for the future physical development of Frederick County.
Land Use.
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Southern Frederick Area Plan provide guidance on the
future development of the property. The property is located within the UDA and SWSA. The
2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies the general area surrounding this property with a Business
land use designation. In general, the proposed commercial land use designation for this
property is consistent with this land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan. Commercial
land uses would include both B1 Neighborhood Business and B2 Business General zoning
designations. The existing land use in this area is neighborhood business in character. The
existing character of the land use is a consideration when evaluating this proposed rezoning.
Immediately to the east of this property is an existing residential neighborhood. The Plan
recognizes the existing residential land uses. Care should be afforded to the transition between
the business and residential land uses, both of which are located in this general area.
Site Access and Transportation.
Rezoning #05-14CB Ventures, LLC
December 17, 2014
Page 4
The subject properties have frontage on and access to Route 647, Aylor Road. Aylor Road is
identified as a major collector road in the County’s Eastern Road Plan.
Transportation improvements to Route 277, Fairfax Pike, are planned on the VDOT Six-Year
Improvement Plan. This project includes improvements to Aylor Road. A copy of this section
of the VDOT plans has been attached to the package for your information. Similar to other
recent projects in the vicinity, it is not anticipated that this project constructs improvements to
Route 277 or Aylor Road at this time, rather, dedicates appropriate right-of-way, designs access
to this site that is consistent with those improvements anticipated with the VDOT Six-Year Plan
Project, and provides some contribution to transportation improvements resulting from the
impacts of this new development; further, that the value of any contribution has a nexus to the
project and its impacts.
The rezoning application should fully address this road project as designed by VDOT in the
most recent improvement plans for this project. In particular, the right-of-way needs of the
project. Any improvements associated with the development of the site within the future road
right-of-way should be consistent with those identified in the plans and to the satisfaction of
VDOT.
The provision of two entrances is proposed. Given the anticipated design for Aylor Road, such
an approach may work in this location. The southernmost entrance appears to align with the
new and existing road configuration.
3) Site Suitability/Environment
The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site
development. There are no identified areas of steep slopes, floodplains or woodlands.
4) Potential Impacts
The subject properties are currently zoned B1 (Neighborhood Business) District. Therefore, the
rezoning of these properties to the B2 (Business General) District will have the potential to
generate additional impacts. However, it is recognized that the impacts associated may not be
as significant as if this property was zoned RA (Rural Areas) District.
As noted previously, immediately to the east of this property is an existing residential
neighborhood. Care should be afforded to the transition between the business and residential
land uses that are both located in this general area. With the exception of addressing the
potential lighting impacts by limiting the height of any lighting to twenty feet, the Applicant has
not provided any additional means to minimize the potential impact associated with the more
intensive commercial use of the property beyond the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. It
should be noted that the height of certain commercial structures may increase to sixty feet from
the currently enabled thirty-five feet.
Rezoning #05-14CB Ventures, LLC
December 17, 2014
Page 5
With regards to the potential transportation impacts, at this time, the project has the intention of
providing the right-of-way for the future improvements to Aylor Road. This should be
unconditionally guaranteed. Otherwise, the transportation impacts associated with this request
would not be fully addressed. The additional trips would simply add to the transportation issues
in this area.
The Applicants Impact Analysis states that this site will negatively impact Police Protection,
Fire and Rescue Protection, Water and Sewer Usage, and Solid Waste Disposal. The capital
needs associated with these impacts have not been quantified and have not been addressed by
way of mitigation other than to say that there may be a potential increase in tax revenue and
fees from this development.
5) Proffer Statement – Dated May 13, 2014 and revised on November 19, 2014
A)
The Applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan. The Plan identifies the
properties to be developed and recognizes the transportation and access related
commitments made with this rezoning application; including the Aylor Road right-of-
way dedication area and the two potential entrances to the site.
Generalized Development Plan
B) Land Use
The Applicant’s proffer statement does not place any limitation on the amount or type
of commercial development that may occur on the property. It is recognized that this
is a relatively small parcel, however, the potential increase in intensity of the use
including the size of the structure should be considered.
The Applicant has, in Proffer 3, addressed the potential impacts associated with site
lighting by proffering that all lighting shall be no higher than 20’.
C)
The proffer statement supports the Route 277 Improvement Project as the Applicant
has identified the correct area of right-of- way dedication consistent with the VDOT
project along Aylor Road and described this in proffer 2, Right-of-way dedication.
Transportation
In general, the trigger for conveying said right-of-way is acceptable. The proffer states
that the right-of-way shall be conveyed within 90 days of a written request from
VDOT or the County. The final sentence of proffer 2 should be carefully evaluated
as it contains a mechanism that removes the conveyance of the right-of-way. This
would be problematic as the language is vague and the right-of-way is necessary. In
addition, this would result in a rezoning application that in no way addresses the
additional transportation impacts generated from the more intensive commercial use
of the property.
Recent rezoning applications in the vicinity of this project have also proffered a
Rezoning #05-14CB Ventures, LLC
December 17, 2014
Page 6
monetary contribution to transportation improvements in the County in an amount they
believed was consistent with the transportation impacts of their project.
D)
This application does not include a proffer aimed at mitigating the community facility
impacts of this request. The Applicant has stated that the additional tax revenue
generated would address this. Recent rezoning applications in the vicinity of this
project have also proffered a monetary contribution to offset the fire and rescue
impacts of their project.
Community Facilities
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 01/07/15 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
This is an application to rezone a total of 2.42 acres of land from the B1 (Neighborhood Business)
District to the B2 (Business General) District with proffers, to accommodate commercial uses.
The B2 (Business General) District land use proposed in this rezoning is generally consistent with the
commercial designation of the Southern Frederick Area Plan and the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
However, the existing neighborhood character of the adjacent land uses should be a consideration when
evaluating this proposed rezoning.
The transportation impacts associated with this request appear to have generally been addressed by the
Applicant, subject to the unequivocal approval of the County Attorney regarding right-of-way
dedication proffer, Proffer 2. The community facility impacts associated with this request should be
addressed to a greater extent.
The adjacent properties should be a consideration with this rezoning application. With this rezoning,
the applicant has proffered height restrictions on site lighting to mitigate potentials impacts to the
adjacent residential properties. No additional site development standards have been proffered. The
Planning Commission should determine if the neighborhood character of the area will be adversely
impacted.
Following the required public hearing, a recommendation regarding this rezoning application to
the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately
address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission.
50’200’150’100’
Chris.Colson@VDOT.Virginia.gov
Comments may also be sent to:
Staunton, VA 24401
811 Commerce Road
Virginia Department of Transportation
Project Manager
Chris Colson, PE
Aerial Overview (1 of 3)
Fairfax Pike (Route 277)
Frederick County
Imagery Courtesy of the Commonwealth of Virginia copyright 2009/2010.
plans.
relocations may be required beyond the propposed right-of-way shown on these
of construction or the acquisition of right of way. Additional easements for utility
These plans are unfinished and unapproved and are not to be used for any type
STP-034-8(032)
UPC 18003
0277-034-103,PE-101, RW-201, C-501
Frederick County, Virginia
Fairfax Pike (Route 277)
Utility Easement
Proposed Permanent
Project Location
North Arrow & Scale
N
0
SCALE
Proposed Road
Use Path
Proposed Shared
Proposed Sidewalk
Management Basin
Stormwater
Signal
Existing Right of Way
Right of Way Line
Proposed
Construction - Cut
Proposed Limits of
Construction - Fill
Proposed Limits of
Contact Information
Legend
N
Construction Easement
Proposed Temp.
C F
Easement
Proposed Permanent
of Transportation
Virginia Department
to be Removed
Building Potentially
(See Plans for additional demolition items)
B
l
o
c
k
R
e
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
W
a
l
l
R
i
p
R
a
p
C
o
n
c
.
D
i
t
c
h
W
e
l
l
W
e
l
l
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
P L
P L
P L
P L
PL
P L
PL
PL
P L
PL
PL
P L
PL
P L
P L
PL
P L
P L
P L
PL
P
L
PL
PL
P L
PL
PL
PL
P
L
P
L
P L
PL
P L
P
O
T
10
0
+0
0
.0
0
1 0
0
1 0
1
10
2
P
C
1 0
2
+9
6
.9
3
1 0
3
10
4
1 0
5
1
0
6
1
0
7
1
0
8
P
T
1
0
8
+
7
6
.
8
7
1
0
9
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
4
1
1
5
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
P
O
T
1
4
+
0
0.
0
0
POT 10+00.0010
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
PC 17+45.22
18
19
20
PT 20+35.12
21
22
23
24
PC 24+01.21
25
26
PRC 26+01.57
27
28
29
PRC 29+73.74
30
31
32
33
34
PT 34+73
.93
35
36
POT 10+00.00
1
1
POT 12+00.00
10
P
C 10+44.8
211
13
PT 13+85.64
14
15
POT 15+24.95
Station 105+21.00 Construction Baseline
Begin Project 0277-034-103, PE-101, RW-201, C-501
LOWE
’S
HOME
CENTERS
,
INC
.
BURGERBUSTERS III, L. C.
WINCHESTER CAPITAL GROUP, INC
R. C. G. T. , INC.
W I N
C
H
E
S
T
E
R
C
A
P
I T
A
L
G
R
O
U
P
, I N
C
GEORGE M. SOBIEN, II
MARSHALL MONROE &
EWT
PROPERT
IES
,
LLC
WILLIAM
L
STIEBEL
U
P
P
E
R
C
R
U
S
T
, LL
C
C
R
A
U
N
, L
L
C
&
E
D
W A
R
D
P
.
B
R
O
W N
I N
G
,
I V
JAI EUK LEE
E
A
S
T
E
R
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
.
L
L
C
RED APPLE, INC.
MCDONALDS CORP.
WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER INC.
FRANK WEAVER WELCH, JR
GARRETT ENTERPRISES, LTD
HARRY F. STIMPSON, III
HARRY F. STIMPSON, III
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
STEPHENS VILLAGE I
HARRY F. STIMPSON, III
W I N
C
H
E
S
T
E
R
C
A
P
I T
A
L
G
R
O
U
P
,
I N
C
HARRY F. STIMPSON, III
MCDONALDS CORP.
C
E
N
T
E
R
I
N
C
.
W
I
N
C
H
E
S
T
E
R
M
E
D
I
C
A
L
C
E
N
T
E
R
I
N
C
.
W
I
N
C
H
E
S
T
E
R
M
E
D
I
C
A
L
C
E
N
T
E
R
I
N
C
.
W
I
N
C
H
E
S
T
E
R
M
E
D
I
C
A
L
015
014
011
013
011
005
001
002
003
003
004
004
007
008
009
081
ARUN
&
PURNIMA
SAREEN
CONNER
MARSHALL MONROE
KAREN M. PAWLAK
H
A
R
R
Y
F
.
S
T
I M
P
S
O
N
, II
I
STACEY E. CHAPMAN
KEVIN R. &
CYNTHIA J. LAYMAN
ROGER A. &
C. CARRIDERULYSSES & DOROTHY
SANDRA N. MITCHELL
RONALD A. &
NORMA L. COMBSRALPH S. &
J
U
L
I
E
W
O
R
K
M
A
N
J
O
H
N
W
E
R
T
&
K
A
T
H
Y
J
.
W
O
R
T
H
M
A
N
R
O
D
N
E
Y
J
.
&
M
O
L
L
Y
S
.
K
U
S
H
N
E
R
J
E
S
S
E
A
.
&
M
A
R
G
A
R
E
T
A
.
F
O
W LE
R
T
A
M
A
R
A
A
. P
A
S
S
M
A
N
&
JULIA R. SPAID
DONALD G. SPAID
013
013
012
016
082
017
019
006
018
AIKENS INVESTMENTS LP LLP
ANDREWS CONNER
DOROTHY MAE
004
004
020
E
A
S
T
E
R
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
.
L
L
C
021
DAVID FERN
ANDREA HAMRICK
84
85
I - 8
1
R
a
m p
I
-
8
1
R
a
m
p
Fairfax Pike (Rte. 277)
E
x
i
s
t
A
y
l
o
r
C
u
l
-
d
e
-
S
a
c
T
o
w
n
R
u
n
L a
n
e
(R
t e
. 10
1
2
)
A
y
l
o
r
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
6
4
7
)
S
t
i
c
k
l
e
y
D
r
i
v
e
(
R
t
e
. 1 0
8
5
)
A y l o r R
o a d C
on
n
ec
ti on
A
y
l
o
r
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
6
4
7
)
Fairfax Pike (Rte. 277)
Management Basin
Stormwater
F C
C F
F C
F
C
C
F
F
C
C
F
C
F
C
F
F C
C F
C
F
F
C
C
F
F
C
C
F
F
C
C
F
F
C
C
F
F
C
C
F
F C
C
F
F
C
C
F
FC
C F
F C
F
C
C
F
F
C
Management Basin
Stormwater
P
r
o
p
.
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
.
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
EasementProp. Utility
P
r
o
p
.
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
.
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
.
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
. U
t
i
l
i
t
y
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t P
r
o
p
.
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
Prop. Utility Easement
Prop. Permanent Drainage Easement
Prop. Permanent Drainage Easement
Prop. Permanent Drainage Easement
Prop. Permanent Drainage Easement
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
P
r
o
p
.
T
e
m
p.
C
o
n
s
t
r.
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
. R
W
P
r
o
p
.
T
e
m
p
.
C
o
n
s
t
r
.
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
Easement
Prop. Temp. Constr.
Prop. RW
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
.
T
e
m
p
.
C
o
n
s
t
r
.
P
r
o
p
.
A
c
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
L
i
n
e
Prop. Acquisition Line
L
i
n
e
P
r
o
p
.
A
c
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
Prop. Acquisition Line
P
r
o
p
.
A
c
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
L
i
n
e
P
r
o
p
.
T
e
m
p
.
C
o
n
s
t
r
.
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
P
r
op
. R
W
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
P
r
o
p
.
A
c
q
u
i s
i
ti
o
n
L i n
e
P
r op
. R
W
P
r
o
p
.
T
e
m
p
.
C
o
n
s
t
r
.
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
Prop. Utility Easement
Prop. Utility Easement
Perm.Traffic Control Device Easement
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
Prop.
R
W
Prop. RW
Beg Prop Limited Access Line
Access LineEnd Prop Limited
R
e
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
W
a
l
l
R
e
q
’
d
P
r
o
p
. T
e
m
p
. C
o
n
s
t
r
. E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
P
r
o
p
.
R
W
D
FREDERICK COUNTY
VIRGINIA
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
2015-2016
Fiscal Year
Adopted by the
Frederick County
Board of Supervisors
TBD, 2015
Recommended by the
Frederick County
Planning Commission
TBD, 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………. 1
PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS………………………………………………. 2
Frederick County Public Schools…………………………………………...2
Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department………………………. 3
Handley Regional Library ……………………………………………….. 4
Transportation Committee…………………………………………………. 4
Winchester Regional Airport………………………………………………. 4
County Administration ……………………………………………………..5
Fire & Rescue……….. ……………………………………………………..5
2015-2016 CAPITAL PROJECTS MAP………………………………………….. 7
2015-2016 COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL PROJECTS MAP……….. 9
2015-2016 COUNTY PARKS AND REC. CAPITAL PROJECTS MAP…………11
2015-2016 TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS MAP………………..……………. 13
2015-2016 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TABLE……………………15
CIP TABLE EXPLANATIONS…………………………………………………… 21
PROJECT FUNDING……………………………………………………………… 21
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS………………………………………………………. 23
Frederick County Public Schools…………………………………………...23
Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department………………………. 29
Handley Regional Library…………………………………………………..36
Transportation Committee…………………………………………………..39
Winchester Regional Airport………………………………………………. 44
County Administration…………………………………………………….. 51
Fire and Rescue……………..……………………………………………….54
Individual Fire & Rescue Company Requests……………………….57
1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
FREDERICK COUNTY
2015-2016
INTRODUCTION
Section 15.2-2239 of the Code of Virginia assigns the responsibility for preparation of
plans for capital outlays to the local Planning Commissions. The Capital Improvements
Plan (CIP) consists of a schedule for major capital expenditures for the county for the
ensuing five years.
The CIP is updated annually. Projects are removed from the plans as they are completed
or as priorities change. The plan is intended to assist the Board of Supervisors in
preparation of the county budget. In addition to determining priorities for capital
expenditures, the county must also ensure that projects contained within the CIP conform
to the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Specifically, the projects are reviewed with
considerations regarding health, safety, and the general welfare of the public, and the
policies of the Comprehensive Plan. When the CIP is adopted, it becomes a component
of the Comprehensive Plan. Frederick County approved the 2030 Comprehensive Plan on
July 14, 2011.
The CIP is strictly advisory; it is intended for use as a capital facilities planning
document, not for requesting funding allocations. Once adopted, project priorities may
change throughout the year based on changing circumstances. It is also possible that
particular projects may not be funded during the year that is indicated in the CIP. The
status of any project becomes increasingly uncertain the further in the future it is
projected.
Transportation projects are included in the CIP. The inclusion of transportation projects
to the CIP is in no way an indication that Frederick County will be independently
undertaking these projects. Funding projects will continue to come from a combination of
state and federal funds, developer contributions, and revenue sharing.
The 2015-2016 CIP continues to emphasize the connection between the CIP,
Comprehensive Plan, and potential proffered contributions made with future rezoning
projects. This effort continues to be exemplified with the collaboration between Frederick
County Public Schools and the Parks and Recreation Department with their identification
of joint community facility opportunities.
2
PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS
Frederick County Public Schools
Frederick County Public Schools continue to commence and complete capital projects
that have been priorities from previous years. The replacement Frederick County Middle
School has recently been initiated and has therefore been removed from this year’s CIP.
Previously removed projects include the James Wood Middle School parking lot safety
enhancement project, the new transportation facility located adjacent to Armel
Elementary School, and the school renovations proposed to prepare school facilities for
an all-day Kindergarten program. It should be recognized that the all day kindergarten
program had been delayed for several years in light of the recent fiscal climate so it was
very positive to see the all-day kindergarten program be introduced through the joint
efforts of Frederick County Public Schools and the Board of Supervisors.
The joint top Capital improvement priority for the Schools is the 12th Elementary School
and the addition to, and renovation of Armel Elementary School. This is in recognition of
the anticipated community growth in these two general locations. Improvements to
Robert E. Aylor Middle School are the second highest priority. The construction of the
County’s fourth High School is the third priority. The new high school, and new middle
school have been requested in anticipation of the future demand of a growing student
population.
A new project, an addition and renovations to Dowell J. Howard Center is included in
this year’s CIP. This school was opened 44 years ago. Facility modernization and changes in
career and technical education are the driving needs for this project, including additional
careers, improved delivery of instruction, and improved classroom technologies.
An addition and renovations to Indian Hollow Elementary School, is proposed. Indian
Hollow Elementary School opened in 1988 and is the County’s smallest elementary
school building with a program capacity of 492 students. Renovations to the existing
portion of the building will address several major issues, including classroom storage,
ADA compliance, energy conservation, security, and upgrades of fire alarm, electrical,
plumbing, and mechanical systems. A building addition will be needed to maintain
program capacity. Other schools included for renovation projects include Apple Pie
Ridge Elementary School, Bass Hoover Elementary School, and James Wood High
School. This year’s CIP continues to include a request to renovate and expand the current
administration building on Amherst Street.
In an effort to maintain educational facilities that will handle the growing student
population, the construction of two additional schools is recommended within the UDA
(Urban Development Area), a new elementary school and a fifth middle school.
However, the timeframe for these facilities has been extended out several years.
3
Parks & Recreation
Swimming improvements continue to be a focus for Parks and Recreation. The upgrade
of pool amenities at the swimming pools at both parks will include the addition of water
slides and a spray ground. Added to the scope of this project is an overall pool complex
renovation. This project is expected to increase pool attendance by 30 percent while
providing recreational opportunities for both the Sherando and Clearbrook Park service
areas.
The indoor aquatic facility continues to be proposed as a high priority of the Parks and
Recreation Department. This project has been moved up to the Departments #3 priority in
recognition of Frederick County Public Schools 4th High School land opportunity.
This year’s CIP continues to be reflective of the previous effort to seek community input
into the parks and recreation programs and facilities. The recently completed survey has
been taken into consideration when prioritizing parks and recreation capital projects.
The majority of the recommended projects are planned for the county’s two regional
parks (Sherando & Clearbrook). However, a new project the Snowden Bridge Park
Development has been identified in recognition of an endorsed site plan on the proffered
park and school site. This project has been separated from the Community Park Group
where it was previously considered.
The effort of the Parks and Recreation Department and their identification of their
comprehensively planned parks including community, neighborhood, and district parks,
further emphasizes the connection between the CIP, Comprehensive Plan, and potential
proffered contributions made with rezoning projects.
Projects planned for Sherando Park include: upgrade of baseball lighting, upgrade pool
amenities, a softball complex, a soccer complex, maintenance compound and office,
skateboard park, parking and multi-purpose fields with trail development, picnic area
with a shelter, and an access road with parking and trails. The projects planned for the
Clearbrook Park include, upgrade of baseball lighting, upgrading pool amenities, a new
open play area, a tennis/basketball complex, and shelter with an area for stage seating.
The Sherando Park Softball Complex has been moved up in recognition of scheduling
pressure at existing facility and the number of Community Parks has been reduced to
three in recognition of work underway at Rose Hill and separation of identified Snowden
Bridge Site.
A project that continues to be a high priority for Parks and Recreation is the Abrams
Creek Greenway Trail. This facility would provide recreational opportunities for
residents of this corridor along with the surrounding communities and was emphasized in
the Senseny/Eastern Frederick Urban Areas Plan completed during 2012. This project
will provide trails with bicycle, walking and joggings opportunities, which ranks #1 in
the 2007 Virginia Outdoors Plan survey for all outdoor recreational activities.
4
Handley Regional Library
The Handley Regional Library recommends three projects, marking a change from their
2014-2015 request of four. The library’s top priority is a new library branch in the
Gainesboro area.
The two remaining projects request that funding be provided for new library branches
throughout the county which include the areas of Senseny/Greenwood Road and Route
522 South, both of which are anticipated to be located within the UDA (Urban
Development Area) in locations consistent with recently approved area plans; The
Senseny/Eastern Frederick Area Plan, and the Southern Frederick Area Plan.
The parking lot sidewalk extension project, designed to promote sidewalk access at the
Bowman Library as phase 2 of the parking lot expansion project by extending the
sidewalks to serve residents traveling from the east to Lakeside Drive, is the project
removed from their submission.
Transportation Committee
The Transportation Committee continues to provide project requests for the CIP.
Virginia State Code allows for transportation projects to be included within a locality's
CIP. Funding for transportation project requests will likely come from developers and
revenue sharing. Implementation of transportation projects does not take away funding
for generalized road improvements.
The Transportation Committee has requested funding for sixteen projects. The sixteen
requests include projects that entail widening of major roads; key extensions of roads that
help provide better networks, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and the addition of
turn lanes at current unsafe intersections. The inclusion of the Eastern Road Plan
Improvements item once again emphasizes the connection between the CIP and potential
proffered contributions made with rezoning projects which are aimed at mitigating
potential transportation impacts identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
The major change to the transportation project list in recent year’s CIPs is the
classification of the projects into funded and unfunded priorities.
Winchester Regional Airport
Funding for airport projects is derived through a complex formula where the federal and
state governments contribute a majority of the funding, with Frederick County and the
other jurisdictions providing the remaining funding.
The Airport has recently completed a major improvement of their runway. With this
project moving from the CIP, The Airport Authority is now focusing their CIP efforts on
Taxi way improvements and Property acquisition in support of airport development to
5
meet Federal Aviation requirements for general aviation facilities. The vast majority of
the funding for these improvements came from the FAA and VDA.
The construction of a new general aviation terminal to support future airport operations
and associated parking improvements is a project that has been elevated to number one in
this year’s CIP. The previous number one priority for the Airport was the acquisition of
property to support airport operations. The authority continues to be successful in their
pursuit of this priority. A relatively new project for the airport is the Fuel Storage
Facility.
The number of projects that are included in this CIP has been consolidated in recent years
as the Airport Authority is further aligning the County’s CIP with the one provided to the
Virginia Department of Aviation.
County Administration
With the potential necessary relocation of the Clearbrook citizen convenience center in
the future, the number one priority is a new facility proposed as a replacement for the
current Convenience site at another location in the immediate vicinity to the existing
convenience site. The other request is for the expansion/relocation of both the Albin and
the Gore Refuse Site to allow for a trash compactor, which will reduce operational costs,
by compacting trash before it reaches the landfill.
The joint County Administration and School Administration Building that was included
in last year’s amended CIP remains in this year’s project list. A new project for County
Administration this year is the Joint Judicial Center renovation and replacement project.
This new project consists of an expansion to the existing Joint Judicial Center Building as
the first phase of the project, and the potential further renovation or relocation as a second
phase. The project is to be located generally in the City of Winchester or in the County’s
Urban Development Area. The need for this project has been established through ongoing
communication with the court system and the City of Winchester.
Previously, an item was added to enhance the connection between the CIP and proffered
contributions made to mitigate the impacts of development projects is an item that
addresses general government capital expenditures that may fall below the established
$100,000 departmental threshold. This is similar to the approach previously taken for Fire
and Rescue Capital Equipment. The structure of the County Administration section of the
CIP has been modified and no longer includes Fire and Rescue. Fire and Rescue has its
own section which is as follows.
Fire and Rescue
The top project for the Fire and Rescue component remains the creation of Fire & Rescue
Station #22 in the vicinity of Route 277, with the ability to provide an annex facility for
other county related offices. The collaboration of this project with other community
6
users and a land use planning effort was a key element of the Route 277 Land Use Plan.
Fire and Rescue has also included a project which provides for the capital apparatus
needs of this facility.
Fire & Rescue has once again requested the relocation of a current fire station in order to
operate more efficiently; Clearbrook. The Round Hill replacement project has moved of
the CIP based on the successful initiation of this project. Three newer projects for Fire
and Rescue are the creation of Station #23, a new facility located in the vicinity of
Crosspointe, the creation of Station #24 in the vicinity of Cross Junction/Lake Holiday,
and a Fire & Rescue Regional Training Center. Such a Regional Public Safety Training
Center potentially consisting of an administrative building, multi-story burn building,
multi-story training tower, vehicle driving range, shooting range, and numerous other
training props. This project will incorporate emergency medical services, fire, hazardous
materials, rescue, law enforcement, industrial, and educational institutions located within
the region.
Fire and Rescue Volunteer Company Capital Equipment Requests
Previously, a project consisting of a revolving fund in the amount of $1,000,000 for the
benefit of Fire and Rescue Services was established. It is the intention of this capital
expenditure fund to be for the purpose of purchasing additional and replacement capital
equipment fire and rescue vehicles and equipment that may fall below the guidelines
established by the Finance Committee. It was determined that the inclusion of such a
project would be beneficial in ensuring that this significant capital expense is identified in
the County’s capital planning and budget process. This project is primarily for the
benefit of the individual Volunteer Fire and Rescue Companies.
The individual Fire and Rescue Companies have identified their own Capital Requests
which have been added to the CIP in no particular order. Most of the Capital requests
meet the $100,000 guideline established by the Finance Committee. Those requests that
do not meet this guideline have been noted and therefore relate to the Fire & Rescue
Capital Equipment project category.
§¨¦81
§¨¦66
§¨¦81
0137
01259
01277
0155
0150
0111
01127
01522
017017
0150
0111
0150
01522
01522
0111
0137
0150
0 11,000 22,0005,500
Feet03 61.5
Miles
2015 - 2016Frederick CountyCapital Improvements Plan
V
2015 - 2016Capital ImprovementsSpecific or Approximate Locations
3
3
6
4
1
1
4
2
3
5
7
2
1
1 Clearbrook Convenience Site2 Albin Convenience Site Expansion3 Gore Convenience Site Expansion4 Fire & Rescue Station 225 Clearbrook Fire Station Relocation6 Fire & Rescue Station 237 Fire & Rescue Station 24
Airport
1 Library Branch - Gainesboro2 Library Branch - Senseny & Greenwood3 Library Branch - Rt 522 South
Library
County Administration
1
7
8
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Elementary School
Replacement Frederick County Middle School
Snowden Bridge
Middle School
West Jubal Early
Fourth High School
Elementary School
Elementary School
Elementary School
Multi-Use Campus
Villages at Artrip
Buildings & Grounds
Old Transportation Facility
Administration
Senseny Road
Dowell J. Howard
New Transportation Facility
GBES
SWES
RRES
APRES
EES
AES
BHES
MTES
OVES
IHES
GMES
FCMS
JWMS
REAMS
ABMS
SHS
MHS
JWHS
WinchesterVirginia
MiddletownVirginia
StephensCityVirginia
0155
0111
01259
0111
0137
0111
01277
01522
01127
0150
01522
0150
017
01522
0150
01522
0111
01522
0137
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
!High Schools
!Middle Schools
!Elementary Schools
!Support Facilities
Potential School Facility Locations
Potential School Locations
Purchased Land
Proffered Land
Potential Proffer
Urban Development Area
SWSA
V
0 2 41 Miles
Note:Created by Frederick County Department ofPlanning & Development
Map represents the Capital Improvment Requests submitted by Frederick County School Board12/1/14
School LocationsAre MostAppropriateWithin the UDA
2015 - 2016Frederick CountyCapital Improvements Plan
Existing and Potential School Locations
9
10
§¨¦81
£¤55
£¤50£¤259
£¤522
£¤522
£¤277
£¤522
£¤50
£¤11
£¤37
£¤11
£¤37
§¨¦81
ClearbrookPark
SherandoPark
Rose HillPark
Snowden BridgePark
EAST
NE
SW
NW
V
0 2 41 Miles
Note:Created by Frederick County Department ofPlanning & Development
Map represents the Capital Improvment Requests submitted by The Dept of Parks & Recreation12/1/2014
Existing County Parks
District Park
l Community Park
[k Neighborhood ParkProposed ParksDistrictCommunityNeighborhoodAbrams Creek TrailUDA
2015 - 2016Frederick CountyCapital Improvements Plan
New Parks/Rec Locations
11
12
12
3
8
15
11
7
11
6
13 9
2
4
4
4
4
0111
01522
0137
0111
01277
01522
01522
0150
017
01522
0111
0150
0137
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
§¨¦81
Winchester
StephensCity
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
Frederick County Dept ofPlanning & Development107 N Kent StWinchester, VA 22601www.CO.FREDERICK.VA.US12/1/14
V
2015 - 2016Frederick CountyCapital Improvement Plan
Transportation Projects
2015 - 2016Capital Improvement PlanTransportation Projects
$+
$+
Funded Priorities
Unfunded Priorities
16, EASTERN ROAD PLANIMPROVEMENTS16
2, ROUTE 277 WIDENING & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS (PH 1)3, EAST TEVIS EXTENSION & BRIDGE OVER I81
4, CONTINUE RT37 PLANNING & ENGINEERING WORK
6, ROUTE 277 WIDENING & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS (PH 2)
7, REDBUD ROAD REALIGNMENT
8, WARRIOR DR EXTENSION TO NEW EXIT 307
9, CHANNING DR EXTENSION TO RT50
11, RT11 N OF WINC WIDENING TO WV LINE
12, SENSENY RD WIDENING
13, INVERLEE WAY; CONNECTION FROM RT50 TO SENSENY RD
15, RENAISSANCE DR
10, BRUCETOWN RD/HOPEWELL RD; ALIGNMENT AND INTERSECTION
10
14
ðñò""310 1, I-81 EXIT 310 IMPROVEMENTS
ðñò""310
1
5, I-81 EXIT 307 RELOCATIONðñò""307
ðñò""307
5
14, FOX DR; INSTALL RT TURNLANE ONTO RT522$+14
$+10
13
14
Department Priority County Contribution Per Fiscal Year
County
Contributions Notes
Total Project
Costs
Projects 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020+
Ensuing
Fiscal Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Beyond Year 6+
Public Schools
Elementary School #12 $32,400,000 $32,400,000
Armel Elementary School
Addition and Renovation
Robert E. Aylor Middle School $31,000,000 $31,000,000
Addition and Renovation
Fourth High School $91,900,000 $91,900,000
James Wood High School Renov.TBD TBD
Sherando High School Parking Lot
& Softball Field Improvements TBD TBD
Dowell J. Howard Center
Addition and Renovation TBD TBD
Apple Pie Ridge Elementary
Phase 2 Renovation $8,900,000 $8,900,000
Bass Hoover Elementary
Phase 2 Renovation $9,000,000 $9,000,000
County/School Board
Administration Building TBD TBD
Indian Hollow Elementary
Addition and Renovation TBD TBD
Elementary School #13 $24,700,000 $24,700,000
Fifth Middle School $49,500,000 $49,500,000
$0 $247,400,000
Parks & Recreation
Clearbrook & Sherando Water Slide/Spray Ground $1,352,000 $1,352,000 $1,352,000
Sherando Access Road w/Parking/Trails $1,567,000 $1,567,000 $1,567,000
Indoor Aquatic Facility $480,000 $14,683,000 $15,163,000 $15,163,000
Snowden Bridge Park Development $3,161,000 $3,161,000 $3,161,000
Sherando Softball Complex $682,000 $682,000 $682,000
Abrams Creek Greenway Trail $85,000 $148,000 $2,702,000 $2,935,000 $2,935,000
Sherando Lake/Trails/Parking- 2 Fields $103,000 $1,281,000 $1,384,000 $1,384,000
Community Parks (3)$6,352,000 $6,352,000 $6,352,000
Neighborhood Parks (3)$2,285,000 $2,285,000 $2,285,000
District Parks (4)$15,717,000 $15,717,000 $15,717,000
Sherando Picnic Areas $818,000 $818,000 $818,000
Indoor Ice Rink $6,102,000 $6,102,000 $6,102,000
Community Center $8,952,000 $8,952,000 $8,952,000
Clearbrook Open Play Areas $487,000 $487,000 $487,000
Baseball Field Lighting Upgrade $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000
Soccer/Multi Use Fields $1,141,000 $1,141,000 $1,141,000
Clearbrook Tennis/Basketball Complex $535,000 $535,000 $535,000
Sherando Skateboard Park $522,000 $522,000 $522,000
Clearbrook Shelter Stage $517,000 $517,000 $517,000
Fleet Trip Vehicles $295,000 $295,000 $295,000
1
5
16
Department Priority County Contribution Per Fiscal Year
County
Contributions Notes
Total Project
Costs
Projects 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020+
Ensuing
Fiscal Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Beyond Year 6+
Sherando Maintenance Compound $381,000 $381,000 $381,000
$6,645,000 $71,648,000
Regional Library
Gainesboro Library $155,023 $1,465,736 $128,275 $1,749,034 $1,749,034
Senseny/Greenwood Library TBD TBD
Route 522 South LibraryBranch TBD TBD
$0 $1,749,034
Transportation
Funded Priorities
I-81 Exit 310 Improvements $49,121,000 $49,121,000 E $49,121,000
Route 277, Fairfax Pike, Widening
and Safety Improvements (ph 1)$36,082,000 $36,082,000 E $36,082,000
East Tevis Street Extension and
Bridge over 81 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 E $6,000,000
Unfunded Priorities
Route 37 Engineering & Construction $300,000,000 $300,000,000 E $300,000,000
I-81 Exit 307 Relocation $60,000,000 $60,000,000 E $60,000,000
Route 277, Fairfax Pike, Widening
and Safety Improvements (ph 2)$15,000,000 $15,000,000 E $15,000,000
Redbud Road Realignment $2,500,000 $2,500,000 E $2,500,000
Warrior Drive Extension $23,200,000 $23,200,000 E $23,200,000
Channing Drive Extension $20,600,000 $20,600,000 E $20,600,000
Brucetown/Hopewell Realign.$3,000,000 $3,000,000 E $3,000,000
Widening of Route 11 North $47,800,000 $47,800,000 E $47,800,000
Senseny Road Widening $22,800,000 $22,800,000 E $22,800,000
Inverlee Way $10,200,000 $10,200,000 E $10,200,000
Fox Drive $250,000 $250,000 E $250,000
Rennaisance Drive $2,000,000 $2,000,000 E $2,000,000
Eastern Road Plan Improvements TBD TBD TBD
$300,000,000 $598,553,000
Winchester Airport
New General Avaiation Terminal $380,000 $2,600,000 A,B $2,980,000
Northside Connector $1,250,000 A,B $1,250,000
New Terminal Parking Lot $650,000 A,B $650,000
Land Parcel 64-A-66 $275,000 A,B $275,000
Land Parcel 64-A-67 $275,000 A,B $275,000
Land Parcel 64B-A-33A $175,000 A,B $175,000
Land Parcel 64-A-60 $275,000 A,B $275,000
Land Parcel 64B-A-40 $175,000 A,B $175,000
Land Parcel 64-A-64 $275,000 A,B $275,000
Fuel Storage Facility $1,000,000 A,B $1,000,000
Land Parcel 64B-A-47 $300,000 A,B $300,000
Land Parcel 64-A-49 $300,000 A,B $300,000
Land Parcel 64-A-50 $300,000 A,B $300,000
Land Parcel 64B-A-51 $235,000 A,B $235,000
1
7
18
Department Priority County Contribution Per Fiscal Year
County
Contributions Notes
Total Project
Costs
Projects 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020+
Ensuing
Fiscal Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Beyond Year 6+
Land Parcel 64B-A-52 $300,000 A,B $300,000
Land Parcel 64-A-59 $300,000 A,B $300,000
North Side Svc Road $400,000 A,B $400,000
Taxiway "A" Relocation $200,000 $4,650,000 $4,800,000 A,B $9,650,000
$2,660,000 $19,115,000
County Administration
Clearbrook Convenience Site $20,000 $357,850 $377,850 E $377,850
Albin Convenience Site $24,000 $418,850 $442,850 $442,850
Relocation/Expansion Gore Site $24,000 $325,550 $349,550 $349,550
General Government Capital Expen $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 E $1,000,000
County/School Board
Administration Building TBD TBD E TBD
Joint Judicial Center
Renovation / New Facility $4,065,500 $20,000,000 $24,065,500 E $24,065,500
$4,285,500 $26,235,750
Fire & Rescue
Fire & Rescue Station #22 (277)$400,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $3,400,000 $3,400,000
F&R Station #22 (277) Apparatus $100,000 $805,000 $905,000 $905,000
Fire & Rescue Station #23 $550,000 $2,150,000 $1,000,000 $3,700,000 $3,700,000
Regional Training Center $75,000 $100,000 $1,250,000 $10,000,000 $9,500,000 $10,250,000 $31,175,000 $31,175,000
Fire & Rescue Station #24 (Gainesboro)$250,000 $3,500,000 $3,750,000 C $3,750,000
Station #13 (Clearbrook) Relocation $33,000 $88,000 $4,275,000 $4,396,000 E $4,396,000
$608,000 $47,326,000
Fire & Rescue Company Capital Requests
Fire & Rescue Capital Equipment 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 E $1,000,000
* See Fire & Rescue Company Requests (<$100K)
Apparatus Ventilation System for Greenwood Vol. Fire & Rescue Co.$550,000 $550,000 C $550,000
Office and Living Quarters for Greenwood Vol. Fire & Rescue Co.$550,000 $550,000 C $550,000
Life Pack x3 for Middletown Vol. Fire & Rescue Co.$100,000 $100,000 C $100,000
Rescue Engine Replacement for Middletown Vol. Fire & Rescue Co.$800,000 $800,000 C $800,000
North Mountain Fire & Rescue Co.Building Expansion $342,766 $342,766 C $342,766
$2,342,766 $2,342,766 $3,342,766
Total $316,541,266 $1,015,369,550
* Fire & Rescue Company Capital Equipment Requests (<$100K)
None
$0
A= Partial funding from VA Dept. of Aviation N/A= Not Available
B= Partial funding from FAA TBD= To be Determined
C= Partial funding from private donations
D= Funding goes beyond displayed 5 years
E= Partial funding anticipated through development & revenue sources
F= Funding initiated prior to displayed 5 years
1
9
20
21
THE CIP TABLE
CONTENT DESCRIPTIONS
The Capital Improvements Plan table, on the previous pages, contains a list of the capital
improvement projects proposed for the ensuing five years. A description of the
information in this table is explained below.
Department Priority- The priority rating assigned by each agency or department for
their requested projects.
Project Description- The name of the capital improvement projects.
County Contribution- The estimated dollar value that will be contributed for each
project. This value is listed by individual fiscal years and by total contributions over the
five-year period. The total contribution column, located to the right of the fiscal year
columns, does not include debt service projections.
Notes- Indicates the footnotes that apply to additional funding sources for particular
projects.
Total Project Costs- The cost for each project, including county allocations and other
funding sources.
PROJECT FUNDING
The projects included in the 2015-2016 Capital Improvements Plan have a total project
cost to the county of $1,015,369,550. While the CIP is primarily used to cover the next
five years, much of the project costs have been identified beyond the next five years.
• School projects are funded through a combination of loans from the
Virginia Public School Authority and the Virginia Literary Fund.
• Funding for Parks and Recreation Department projects will come from the
unreserved fund balance of the County. The Parks and Recreation
Commission will actively seek grants and private sources of funding for
projects not funded by the county.
• Airport projects will be funded by contributions from the federal, state,
and local governments. The local portion may include contributions from
Frederick, Clarke, Shenandoah, and Warren Counties, and the City of
Winchester.
• The inclusion of transportation projects to the CIP is in no way an
indication that Frederick County will be independently undertaking these
projects. Funding projects will continue to come from a combination of
state and federal funds, developer contributions, and revenue sharing.
22
23
Frederick County Public Schools Project Priority List
PRIORITY 1
Elementary School #12 / Armel Elementary School Addition and Renovation
Description: Armel Elementary School opened in 1991 and currently has a program
capacity of 662 students. Currently, the building serves grades K-5. The building is in
good condition; however, several major areas need to be addressed. Renovations to the
existing portion of the building will address several major issues, including classroom
storage, ADA compliance, energy conservation, security, and upgrades of fire alarm,
electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems. A building addition will be needed to
maintain program capacity.
Capital Cost: $32,400,000
Justification: Armel Elementary School is ?? years old and nearing design life of much
of the infrastructure. Renovation to a number of areas and an addition are needed to
ensure the effective, economical, and efficient delivery of modern instruction at this
school.
Construction Schedule: 30 Months
Elementary School #12
Description: This is a single-story elementary school with a floor area of approximately
100,000 square feet located on 15 acres. The facility will be designed to accommodate a
student membership of 850.
Capital Cost: $TBD
Justification: This project will address anticipated growth in student enrollment in the
school division over the next several years. It is anticipated that student enrollment will
increase at all levels. A projection using cohort migration shows enrollment in the
elementary schools by the fall of 2020 to be 6,452. Based on this projection,
implementation of full-day kindergarten, and renovations at Apple Pie Ridge and Bass-
Hoover Elementary Schools, it will be necessary to construct the 12th elementary school
in Frederick County to open in that time frame. This school will be located in an area to
relieve overcrowding and to accommodate expected new housing development.
Locations for this project are on the Comprehensive Plan’s Potential New School
Locations Map and could be placed on one of the two currently proffered pieces of
property (Villages of Artrip or Snowden Bridge).
Construction Schedule: Construction will take 42 months.
PRIORITY 2
Robert E. Aylor Middle School Renovation
Description: Robert E. Aylor Middle School opened in 1969 and has served as a middle
school since that time. The school contains 113,643 square feet and has a program
24
capacity of 850 students. Currently, the building serves grades 6-8. The building is in
good condition; however, several major areas need to be addressed in a renovation.
Major areas of this renovation project include the following: additional classroom and
storage space, complete replacement of fire alarm and communication systems, roof
replacement, upgrade of electrical and plumbing, and complete replacement of
mechanical systems. Other areas to be addressed are security, repaving of asphalted
areas, and the installation of an emergency system.
Capital Cost: $31,000,000
Justification: Robert E. Aylor Middle School is soon to be 37 years of age and
renovations are needed to a number of different areas to ensure economic and efficient
operation of the school for years to come.
Construction Schedule: 48 Months
PRIORITY 3
Fourth High School
Description: The fourth high school project will have a program capacity of 1,250
students and serve grades 9-12. The location of this project has been added to the
Comprehensive Plan’s Capital Project Map for the east side of Frederick County,
centered on Route 522. The facility will have a floor area of approximately 254,000
square feet and be located on approximately 80 areas of land.
Capital Cost: $70,000,000
Justification: This project will address expected growth in high school student
enrollment in the school division over the next several years. We project that enrollment
in the high schools by the fall of 2016 will be 4,252. Based on this projection, it is
necessary to construct the fourth high school in Frederick County to open in that time
frame. The location of this project is shown on the Comprehensive Policy Plan’s
Potential New School Locations Map.
Construction Schedule: Construction will take 54 months
PRIORITY 4
James Wood High School Renovation
Description: James Wood High School opened in 1980 and has served as a high school
since that time. The school contains 234,095 square feet and has a program capacity of
1400 students. Currently, the building serves grades 9-12. The building is in good
condition; however, several major areas need to be addressed in a renovation. Major
areas to be included in this renovation project are increased electrical service and
distribution to support technology, technology cabling, hardware and its installation,
upgrade of plumbing and mechanical systems, and modification of instructional areas to
support instructional delivery.
Capital Cost: $TBD
25
Justification: Updating the facility will assist the school division in meeting the
community needs for the citizens and high school student in the James Wood High
School attendance zone.
Construction Schedule: 36 Months
PRIORITY 5
Sherando High School Parking Lot and Softball Field Improvements
Description: This project is being undertaken to address several traffic safety concerns
identified at Sherando High School over the years and equity issues (there is no softball
field at SHS). Traffic safety concerns have reached a level that we have completed two
studies of the site. Concerns exist for pedestrians, school buses, student drivers, parents,
and staff. Rearrangement of the site and the flow of traffic on the site is necessary to
address these needs.
Capital Cost: $5,000,000
Justification: This is a two-part project. For transportation safety, concerns exist on the
school site at Sherando High School during arrival and dismissal. The students, many of
their parents, and the staff necessary to serve them are exposed to these safety concerns
on a daily basis. The flow of traffic at arrival is so slow that at times vehicles back up
past Double Church Road. For the softball field, SHS does not have a softball field
onsite, instead using a softball field in neighboring Sherando Park. This represents an
equity issue between boys and girls sports. FCPS strives to attain equity between boys
and girls sports. Additionally, this is a Title IX issue.
Construction Schedule: 30 Months
PRIORITY 6
Dowell J. Howard Addition and Renovation
Description: Indian Hollow Elementary School opened in 1988. The school contains
59,065 square feet and has a program capacity of 492 students. Indian Hollow is our
smallest elementary school building. Currently, the building serves grades K-5. The
building is in good condition; however, several major areas need to be addressed.
Renovations to the existing portion of the building will address several major issues,
including classroom storage, ADA compliance, energy conservation, security, and
upgrades of fire alarm, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems. A building
addition will be needed to maintain program capacity.
Capital Cost: $TBD
Justification: Indian Hollow Elementary School is 24 years old and nearing design life
of much of the infrastructure. The school was built without classroom storage.
Renovation to a number of areas and an addition are needed to ensure the effective,
economical, and efficient delivery of modern instruction at this school.
Construction Schedule: 30 Months
26
PRIORITY 7
Apple Pie Ridge Elementary School Phase 2 Renovations
Description: Currently, the building serves grades K-5. The building is in good
condition; however, several major areas need to be addressed. These items will be
addressed in two phases. The first phase, kindergarten renovation, was completed this
summer. In the second phase, a renovation of the remaining facility will be completed.
Several of the major issues to be addressed in this renovation include open classroom
space, ADA compliance, energy conservation, security, and upgrades of fire alarm,
electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems.
Capital Cost: $8,900,000
Justification: Apple Pie Ridge Elementary School is over 30 years old and renovation is
needed to a number of areas to ensure the economical and efficient operations of the
school for years to come.
Construction Schedule: 36 Months
PRIORITY 8
Bass Hoover Elementary School Phase 2 Renovations
Description: Currently, Bass-Hoover serves grades K-5. The building is in good
condition, but several major issues need to be addressed. Renovation of the remaining
facility will be completed. Several of the major issues to be addressed in this renovation
include open classroom space, ADA compliance, energy conservation, security, and
upgrades of fire alarm, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems. A building addition
will be needed to maintain program capacity.
Capital Cost: $9,000,000
Justification: These renovations are needed to a number of areas to insure economic and
efficient operation of the schools for years to come and to accommodate a full day
kindergarten program.
Construction Schedule: 30 Months
PRIORITY 9
County/School Board Administration Building
Description: This new project consists of a County/School Board Administration
Building, to be located generally in the County’s Urban Development Area.
Capital Cost: TBD
Justification: The inclusion of this capital facility will allow for improvements to
general governmental facilities and services for the benefit of the residents of Frederick
County and will meet the increasing need for office space, meeting space, and
government services in an accessible location.
27
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 10
Indian Hollow Elementary School Addition and Renovation
Description: Indian Hollow Elementary School opened in 1988. The school contains
59,065 square feet and has a program capacity of 492 students. Indian Hollow is our
smallest elementary school building. Currently, the building serves grades K-5. The
building is in good condition; however, several major areas need to be addressed.
Renovations to the existing portion of the building will address several major issues,
including classroom storage, ADA compliance, energy conservation, security, and
upgrades of fire alarm, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems. A building
addition will be needed to maintain program capacity.
Capital Cost: $TBD
Justification: Indian Hollow Elementary School is 24 years old and nearing design life
of much of the infrastructure. The school was built without classroom storage.
Renovation to a number of areas and an addition are needed to ensure the effective,
economical, and efficient delivery of modern instruction at this school.
Construction Schedule: 30 Months
PRIORITY 11
Elementary School #13
Description: This is a single-story elementary school with a floor area of approximately
100,000 square feet located on 15 acres. The facility will be designed to accommodate a
student membership of 750. The outdoor facilities will include three pods of grade-level
appropriate playground equipment, one asphalt play area, one softball field, and a
physical education field. This facility will meet or exceed all Virginia Department of
Education new construction requirements for K-5 elementary schools.
Capital Cost: $24,700,000.
Justification: Significant residential growth in Frederick County is expected to resume
once the economy recovers, with the result that school enrollment is expected to exceed
program capacity in FY 2019-20.
Construction Schedule: Construction will take 42 months.
PRIORITY 12
Fifth Middle School
Description: The new fifth middle school project will have a program capacity of 850
students and serve grades 6-8. This project has been located on the Comprehensive
28
Policy Plan’s Potential New School Locations Map. The facility will have a floor area of
approximately 166,000 square feet and be located on approximately 35 acres of land.
Capital Cost: $49,500,000
Justification: This project will address growth in student enrollment in the school
division over the next several years. It is anticipated that student enrollment will increase
at all levels. A projection using cohort migration shows enrollment in the middle schools
by the fall of 2021 to be 3,284. Middle school program capacity is 3,280. The
replacement FCMS will increase capacity by 120. We anticipate that student population
growth will necessitate construction of the fifth middle school in Frederick County by the
fall of 2025. As shown on the Comprehensive Plan’s Potential New School Locations
Map, the location of this project previously has been in the eastern part of Frederick
County between Route 7 and Route 50 east. With reconsideration of the location of the
replacement FCMS, the fifth middle school potentially could be located between Route
522 north and Route 50 west.
Construction Schedule: Construction will take 48 months.
29
Parks & Recreation Department Project Priority List
PRIORITY 1
Water Slide/Spray Ground Swimming Pool Improvements – Sherando/Clearbrook
Description: Upgrade the outdoor swimming pools at both Clearbrook and Sherando
Parks. Upgrade would involve the removal of the diving boards and the installation of
one 50' water slide and one 75' water slide at each pool. The upgrade would also include
the addition of a spray ground with 10-12 features at each pool.
Capital Cost: $1,352,000
Justification: This project is expected to increase pool attendance by 30 percent while
providing recreational opportunities for both the Sherando and Clearbrook Park service
areas.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16.
PRIORITY 2
Access Road with Parking and Trails- Sherando Park
Description: This project involves the development of an entrance and 1,800 linear feet
of access roadway from Warrior Drive; a 100 space parking area; and 2.8 miles of trails.
Capital Cost: $1,567,000
Justification: This facility will provide recreational opportunities for the Sherando Park
service area and the entire Frederick County community. The development of this
facility will reduce the needs gap between the number of existing passive recreational
areas and the number required to meet the minimum standards established for the service
area.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-15.
PRIORITY 3
Indoor Aquatic Facility – Competitive/Training/Leisure Pool
Description: This facility would house competitive, instructional, and leisure pools with
an office, adequate storage and locker rooms and would need approximately 10 acres to
construct. This facility should be located on property owned or proffered to the County.
The above pools may be constructed in one facility, separated into multiple facilities, or
collocated with other compatible uses should opportunities arise, reducing the acreage
demand.
Capital Cost: $15,163,000
Justification: There are no public indoor public pools in Frederick County. By
constructing the indoor pool, it would permit the department to meet competition needs,
instructional needs, citizen programming and leisure demands as well as provide a
nucleus to attract new businesses to the community. This facility would be available to
30
all area residents. The construction of this project will provide a facility to offer
competitive scholastic programs and year round recreational programming for the
residents of Frederick County. The Indoor Pool facility should be located in an area
convenient to the major transportation corridors of the county. However, as an
alternative, one of the two county regional parks could be used to house the facility, since
these locations are already identified as centers for recreation programs and activities.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-15.
PRIORITY 4
Snowden Bridge Park Development
Description: Parkland acquisition in the eastern portion of the county.
Capital Cost: $3,161,000
Justification: A new 150-200 acre regional park would be utilized by the entire county
population. The park would be located in the primary growth center of Frederick County,
within the existing urban development area and the approved Southern Frederick Land
Use Plan, which consists of 1,200 acres of new residences. This project would reduce the
gap between the amount of existing parkland and the amount of parkland needed to meet
the minimum standard for the Frederick County service area, as recommended by the
Virginia Outdoors Plan.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-15.
PRIORITY 5
Softball Complex- Sherando Park
Description: Softball fields (2) - 300' radius, fully fenced, backstop, four 50 person
bleachers per field, lighted concrete poles 30/20 FC, concrete deck. Access Road - 500
LF. Parking - 153 spaces, asphalt paved with curbed islands and drop off; line markings
and 6 security lights. Landscaping - 100 shade trees; pine screen. Peripheral Work -
General seeding - 1 acre; miscellaneous signage.
Capital Cost: $682,000
Justification: This facility would provide recreational opportunities for the entire county
population, as well as the Frederick County School System. Presently, there are ten
softball and baseball fields within the county’s regional park system. Eight of the
existing fields must serve a dual purpose of facilitating youth baseball, as well as adult
softball programs. With the increased usage of these fields, it has become increasingly
difficult to facilitate these programs. This project is needed in order for the Parks and
Recreation Department to accommodate the existing demand for youth baseball and adult
softball programs.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-15.
31
PRIORITY 6
Abrams Creek Greenway Trail
Description: 10’ wide asphalt multi-use bicycle/pedestrian trail along Abrams Creek
from Senseny Road to Channing Drive. It is estimated that the trail will have (3) three
bridges (stream crossings) and will be approximately 2.6 miles in length.
Capital Cost: $2,935,000
Justification: This facility would provide recreational opportunities for residents of this
corridor along with the surrounding communities. This project will provide trails with
bicycle, walking and joggings opportunities, which ranks #1 in the 2007 Virginia
Outdoors Plan survey for all outdoor recreational activities.
Construction Schedule: FY 14-15.
PRIORITY 7
Lake, Parking, and Trail Development with two Multi-purpose Fields
Description: This project involves the development of a 12 acre lake; 1.5 mile trail
system around the lake; 800 linear feet of access roadway; lighted parking lot with 125
spaces; and development of two irrigated 70x120 yard multi-purpose fields.
Capital Cost: $1,384,000
Justification: This facility will provide recreational opportunities for the Sherando Park
service area and the entire Frederick County community. The development of this
facility will reduce the needs gap between the number of existing passive recreational
areas and the number required to meet the minimum standards established for the service
area.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16.
PRIORITY 8
Community Parks (3)
Description: Acquisition of Parkland; 60 acres
Capital Cost: $6,352,000
Justification: To reduce the gap between the amount of existing parkland and the
amount of parkland needed to meet the minimum standard for our service area, as
recommended by the Virginia Outdoors Plan. The project meets policy recommendations
for the development of parks and recreation facilities, insuring that adequate and
appropriate open space and recreational facilities are provided.
Construction Schedule: FY 17-18.
32
PRIORITY 9
Neighborhood Parks (3)
Description: Acquisition of Parkland; 20 acres
Capital Cost: $2,285,000
Justification: To reduce the gap between the amount of existing parkland and the
amount of parkland needed to meet the minimum standard for our service area, as
recommended by the Virginia Outdoors Plan. The project meets policy recommendations
for the development of parks and recreation facilities, insuring that adequate and
appropriate open space and recreational facilities are provided.
Construction Schedule: FY 17-18.
PRIORITY 10
District Parks (4)
Description: Acquisition of Parkland; 200 acres
Capital Cost: $15,717,000
Justification: To reduce the gap between the amount of existing parkland and the
amount of parkland needed to meet the minimum standard for our service area, as
recommended by the Virginia Outdoors Plan. The project meets policy recommendations
for the development of parks and recreation facilities, insuring that adequate and
appropriate open space and recreational facilities are provided.
Construction Schedule: FY 17-18.
PRIORITY 11
Picnic Area- Sherando Park
Description: This project includes a restroom/concession area; four picnic shelters;
playground area; access paths; parking; and landscaping.
Capital Cost: $818,000
Justification: These facilities would be used by the residents of Sherando Park service
area. This area of the county is growing and is deficient in passive recreational
opportunities. This development is needed to reduce the gap between the number of
existing facilities and the minimum standards for the Sherando Park service area and
southeastern Frederick County.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 16-17.
PRIORITY 12
Indoor Ice Rink
33
Description: The Ice Rink project would be approximately 40,000 square feet and
include an indoor area large enough to accommodate a single 200’ x 85’ ice rink, locker
rooms, party/meeting rooms, and concession area and would need approximately 10 acres
to construct. This facility should be located on property owned or proffered to the
County. The ice rink may be collocated with other compatible uses should opportunities
arise, reducing the acreage demand.
Capital Cost: $6,102,000
Justification: There are no public indoor ice rinks in Frederick County and county
residents currently must travel over one hour to use an indoor ice facility. By
constructing the indoor ice rink, it would permit the department to meet competition
needs, instructional needs, citizen programming and leisure demands as well as provide a
nucleus to attract new businesses to the community. This facility would be available to
all area residents. The construction of this project will provide a facility to offer year
round recreational programming for the residents of Frederick County. This project is
intended to meet the needs of the community as identified in the 2012 Frederick County
Parks and Recreation Community Survey.
Construction Schedule: FY 16-17.
PRIORITY 13
Multi-Generational Community Center
Description: The project involves building a 44,000 square foot facility that would
contain an indoor track and at least two basketball courts. The court area would be
designed to be used by indoor soccer, baseball, softball, wrestling, volleyball, tennis and
badminton. The area could also be used for special events. Additionally, the project
would house a fitness center, multi-purpose rooms, office, storage, and locker rooms.
Capital Cost: $8,952,000
Justification: This facility would give the Parks and Recreation Department the ability
to offer year round recreational programming to the residents of Frederick County. The
department can no longer meet the programming and facility needs of the County
residents.
Construction Schedule: FY 16-17.
PRIORITY 14
Open Play Area – Clearbrook
Description: This project includes development of a picnic shelter; six horseshoe pits; a
volleyball court; croquet turf; shuffleboard; parking; refurbishing the existing concession
stand; landscaping (14 shade trees); peripheral work; and renovations to existing shelters,
restrooms, access paths, and parking areas on the south side of the lake.
Capital Cost: $487,000
Justification: These facilities will provide recreational opportunities for the Clearbrook
Park Service Area which will lessen the disparity between the number of passive
34
recreational areas needed to meet the minimum standards for this service area.
Clearbrook Park offers the best location for this development.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16.
PRIORITY 15
Baseball Field Lighting Upgrade
Description: Upgrade the ball field lighting at both Clearbrook and Sherando Parks
Baseball facilities. The upgrade would involve the removal of the 30/20 FC (footcandle)
level fixtures, lamps, and wood poles and replace with 50/30 FC (footcandle) level
fixtures, lamps and steel poles on (4) four fields at Clearbrook Park and (4) four fields at
Sherando Park. This upgrade is required by Little League International on all little
league fields.
Capital Cost: $1,300,000
Justification: This project will provide recreational opportunities for the Clearbrook
Park and Sherando Park service area which includes all county residents. Park visitation
at the two district parks exceeds 425,000 annually and is growing. The field lighting
fixtures are over 25 years old and the majority of the poles are over 35 years old. With
the decrease in the quality of lighting with the age of the system, with most of the poles
being warped and decayed and in need of replacement and to achieve the recommended
50/30 FC (footcandle) level on the playing surface, the Commission is recommending
these facilities be upgraded.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-15
PRIORITY 16
Soccer Complex- Sherando Park
Description: Soccer field - 210' x 360' artificial grass surface with goals. Access paths -
1500 LF; 10' wide; asphalt paved. Restroom/concession - 820 SF; masonry with concrete
roof deck; full concession hookup. Plaza - 22,000 SF; 50% paved/50% planted; kiosk.
Picnic shelters (1) - 24' x 24': 6 picnic tables each; concrete pad; wood frame structure;
asphalt shingles. 12 sets of bleachers. Landscaping - 90 shade trees. Lighting - 1 field
(210' x 360')
Capital Cost: $1,141,000
Justification: This facility would be used by the entire Frederick County area. In
addition to its use as a recreational facility, the soccer complex will also be used by the
Frederick County school system. To reduce the gap between the number of existing
soccer fields and the number of fields which are needed to meet the minimum standard
for our service area. Sherando Park, currently owned by Frederick County, represents the
very best location for soccer field development. The fact that the county will not have to
acquire property for this facility means that the most costly aspect of this development
has already been completed. Sherando Park also provides a location that is situated in
the fastest growing area of the county and is adjacent to the new county high school.
35
With joint use of facilities between the park and school system, the construction of
additional soccer fields will benefit both agencies.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16.
PRIORITY 17
Tennis/Basketball Complex- Clearbrook Park
Description: This project includes the development of four tennis courts; two basketball
courts; a shelter; access paths; parking; and landscaping.
Capital Cost: $535,000
Justification: These facilities will be available to all county residents. Currently, there
are no tennis courts or basketball courts in the Clearbrook Park Service Area. Clearbrook
Park is utilized by over 180,000 visitors annually; therefore, these facilities are needed.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 16-17.
PRIORITY 18
Skateboard Park - Sherando Park
Description: This project recommends the development of a skateboard bowl; a half
pipe; an open skate area; vehicle parking; an access road; fencing; and landscaping.
Capital Cost: $522,000
Justification: This facility will enable the County to provide a recreational facility that
has been identified in the County Comprehensive Plan for recreational facility
development.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16.
PRIORITY 19
Shelter/Stage Seating- Clearbrook Park
Description: This project includes the development of a shelter with a performance
stage; refurbishing existing restrooms and access paths; and renovations to the lake.
Capital Cost: $517,000
Justification: This facility would be used by the entire county population. Presently,
there are no facilities to accommodate cultural programs within the county’s park system.
This project is needed to provide a facility for cultural activities.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 16-17.
PRIORITY 20
Fleet Trip Vehicles
36
Description: The Parks and Recreation Department needs to upgrade the current vehicle
fleet to offer a comprehensive package of trips for Frederick County citizen’s recreation
needs. The addition of the below vehicles would replace the current 1994 bus and 1999
van. These are necessary to adequately offer trip packages and provide reliable
transportation for program participants. Bus #1 – 40-50 Passenger Bus, Bus #2 – 30-40
Passenger Bus, Van #1 – 12 Passenger Van
Capital Cost: $295,000
Justification: To offer a comprehensive package of trips where the population of
Frederick County could begin to rely on the Parks and Recreation Department to meet
their trip needs.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16
PRIORITY 21
Maintenance Compound and Office – Sherando Park
Description: This project involves the construction of a 1,200 square-foot office and a
3,200 square-foot storage shed for operation at Sherando Park.
Capital Cost: $381,000
Justification: This facility will enable the county to maintain its equipment and facilities
in a more responsible and effective manner. Also, with the additional responsibility of
maintaining all outdoor facilities at Sherando High School, Armel Elementary School,
Orchard View Elementary School, Bass-Hoover Elementary School, Middletown
Elementary School, R. E. Aylor Middle School, Admiral Byrd Middle School, Evendale
Elementary School, and the Public Safety Facility there is a need for more storage,
maintenance and office space. Sherando Park, currently owned by Frederick County,
will provide the best location for the development of this maintenance facility. Since the
maintenance equipment, staff and facility is needed to serve as a maintenance function
for Sherando Park’s grounds and facilities, this project should be located at Sherando
Park.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16.
Handley Regional Library Project Priority List
PRIORITY 1
Northern Frederick County – Gainesboro Library Branch
Description: Construction of a 7,000 to 10,000 sq.ft. branch library. Either as a
standalone facility or co-located with a planned Frederick County Facility (e.g. the new
middle school). Initial parking should be for at least 50 vehicles. The proposed location
would be on Rt. 522 in the Gainesboro district, but this could change depending on
patterns of library use and on whether donated land could be located or if co-located with
37
a Frederick County project already in the early planning stage.
Capital Cost: $1,749,034
Justification: This branch would serve citizens living in this growing area. In 2010-
2011 Frederick County citizens of all ages checked out 481,244 items. 38,321 Frederick
County residents have library cards and averaged 63.1% of all materials checked out of
the regional system. 2,743 Frederick County residents, adults and children, registered for
library cards for the first time in 2000-2011. Of Frederick County residents over five
years of age (when you can get a library card), approximately 52% of the total have
library cards. This population group is not close to a library in the regional system. The
Library will provide materials and programming for patrons from toddlers to senior
citizens. It will provide recreational and educational materials. It will be a prime source
for homework help since it will be open nights and on weekends when school libraries
are closed. The library will supply computer access for word processing and other office
applications and for Internet usage. There will be a meeting room of 425 square feet in
which area groups can meet.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 16-17
PRIORITY 2
Frederick County Library Branch – Senseny/Greenwood
Description: Construction of a 10,000 sq.ft. branch library with expansion possible to
15,000 square feet. Initial parking should be for a minimum of 35 vehicles. The
proposed location is yet to be determined and is dependent on future development. The
first step of the project would be the acquisition of the land of 5 to 8 acres.
Capital Cost: TBD
Justification: This branch would serve citizens living in this growing area. In 2010-
2011 Frederick County citizens of all ages checked out 481,244 items. 38,321 Frederick
County residents have library cards and averaged 63.1% of all materials checked out of
the regional system. 2,743 Frederick County residents, adults and children, registered for
library cards for the first time in 2000-2011. Of Frederick County residents over five
years of age (when you can get a library card), approximately 52% of the total have
library cards. This population group is not close to a library in the regional system. This
area also lacks a community center that a library with meeting room could help fill this
need. The Library will provide materials and programming for patrons from toddlers to
senior citizens. It will provide recreational and educational materials. It will be a prime
source for homework help since it will be open nights and on weekends when school
libraries are closed. The library will supply computer access for word processing and
other office applications and for Internet usage. There will be a meeting room of 425
square feet in which area groups can meet.
Construction Schedule: TBD
38
PRIORITY 3
Frederick County Library Branch- Route 522 South
Description: Construction of a 7,000 sq.ft. branch library with expansion possible to
10,000 square feet. Initial parking should be for a minimum of 35 vehicles. The
proposed location is yet to be determined and is dependent on future development. The
first step of the project would be the acquisition of the land of 3 to 4 acres.
Capital Cost: TBD
Justification: This population group is not close to a library in the regional system. This
area also lacks a community center that a library with meeting room could help fill this
need. The Library will provide materials and programming for patrons from toddlers to
senior citizens. It will provide recreational and educational materials. It will be a prime
source for homework help since it will be open nights and on weekends when school
libraries are closed. The library will supply computer access for word processing and
other office applications and for Internet usage. There will be a meeting room of 425
square feet in which area groups can meet.
Construction Schedule: TBD
39
Transportation Committee Project Priority List
Funded Priorities
PRIORITY 1
Interstate 81, Exit 310 Improvements
Description: Construct improvements to Exit 310 interchange.
Capital Cost: $49,121,000
Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion
in many areas of the County and address coming development to the surrounding areas.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 2
Route 277 Widening and Safety Improvements (Ph 1)
Description: Construct a 4-lane divided roadway beginning at I-81 and continuing to
Sherando Park. Project would include realignment of Aylor Road to align with Stickley
Drive.
Capital Cost: $36,082,000
Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion
in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas.
Construction Schedule: 2013-2017
PRIORITY 3
East Tevis Street Extension and Bridge over I-81
Description: Construct a 4-lane divided roadway beginning at Route 522 and going west
approximately 0.2 miles to connect to the road network being constructed by the Russell
150 development. Project includes bridge over Interstate 81.
Capital Cost: $6,000,000
Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion
in many areas of the County and address development to the surrounding area. The
location is as identified by joint planning efforts between the county, VDOT, and the
developer.
Construction Schedule: TBD
Unfunded Priorities
PRIORITY 4
Planning, Engineering, Right of Way and Construction Work for Route 37
40
Description: This project would be to continue work on the Eastern Route 37 extension.
More specifically, to update the Environmental Impact Statement to the point of a new
Record of Decision and to update the 1992 design plans to address the current alignment,
engineering guidelines, and possible interchange improvements. In addition, this allows
for advanced engineering, right of way purchase and construction.
Capital Cost: $300,000,000 +
Justification: This project moves the County closer to completion of a transportation
improvement that would benefit the entire county and surrounding localities.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 5
Interstate 81, Exit 307 Relocation
Description: Construct a relocated Exit 307 interchange.
Capital Cost: $60,000,000
Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion
in many areas of the County and address coming development to the surrounding areas.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 6
Route 277 Widening and Safety Improvements (Ph 2)
Description: Construct a 4-lane divided roadway beginning at I-81 and continuing to
Sherando Park. Project would include realignment of Aylor Road to align with Stickley
Drive.
Capital Cost: $15,000,000
Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion
in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas.
Construction Schedule: 2013-2017
PRIORITY 7
Redbud Road Realignment
Description: Realign Redbud Road from its current location through development land
in the vicinity of Route 11 north and Snowden Bridge Boulevard.
Capital Cost: $2,500,000
Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on
Eastern Frederick County. This project is identified in the adopted Eastern Road Plan.
Construction Schedule: TBD
41
PRIORITY 8
Warrior Drive Extension
Description: Construct a 4-lane divided roadway beginning at Route 277 where Warrior
Drive intersects from the north and continuing that roadway south and west to intersect
with I-81 at the location of the relocated Exit 307 interchange.
Capital Cost: $23,200,000
Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion
in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 9
Channing Drive Extension
Description: Construct a 4-lane divided roadway beginning at Senseny Road where
Channing Drive intersects from the north and continuing that roadway south to intersect
with Route 50 East at Independence Drive.
Capital Cost: $20,600,000
Justification: This project has been identified in the Eastern Road Plan, and will address
congestion in Eastern Frederick County and address development to the surrounding
areas.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 10
Brucetown Road/Hopewell Road Alignment and Intersection Improvements
Description: Realign Brucetown Road to meet Hopewell Road at Route 11.
Improvements to this intersection will address comprehensive planned development’s
traffic generation in the area.
Capital Cost: $3,000,000
Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on
the Route 11 corridor. The location is identified by joint planning efforts between the
county and VDOT.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 11
Widening of Route 11 North to the West Virginia State Line
42
Description: Improve Route 11 to a divided 4 and 6-lane facility as detailed in the
Eastern Road Plan.
Capital Cost: $47,800,000
Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion
over a large area of the County and address development to the surrounding area. This
project improves the safety for the traveling public by reducing congestion and improving
the flow of traffic.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 12
Senseny Road Widening
Description: Widen Senseny Road to a 4-lane divided roadway. This project is not
dependent upon, but is being coordinated with the implementation of Route 37, Channing
Drive, and development in the area.
Capital Cost: $22,800,000
Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on
Eastern Frederick County. This project is identified in the adopted Eastern Road Plan.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 13
Inverlee Way
Description: Construct a 4-lane divided roadway beginning at Senseny Road and going
south to Route 50 East. This project is being planned in conjunction with improvements
to Senseny Road and surrounding development.
Capital Cost: $10,200,000
Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion
and provide an additional needed link between Senseny Road and Route 50 East.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 14
Fox Drive
Description: Add additional turning lane(s) to Fox Drive where it intersects with Route
522 North.
Capital Cost: $250,000
Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will address congestion at this
intersection.
Construction Schedule: TBD
43
PRIORITY 15
Renaissance Drive, Phase 2
Description: Construct a connector road between Route 11 and Shady Elm Drive.
Capital Cost: $2,000,000
Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will address congestion at key
points along Route 11 and Apple Valley Dr. This project is identified in Secondary Road
Improvements Plan.
Construction Schedule: Phase I construction was recently completed.
PRIORITY 16
Frederick County Eastern Road Plan
Description: This project is intended to address all of the planned transportation
improvements in the County Comprehensive Plan, Eastern Road Plan that are not noted
individually above.
Capital Cost: $TBD
Justification: This project prepares the county for future development by addressing the
projects needed to support that development in a manner consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Construction Schedule: N/A
44
Winchester Regional Airport Project Priority List
PRIORITY 1
New General Aviation Terminal Construction
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport proposes to construct a new general
aviation terminal building. The new facility will be constructed in a new location slightly
east of the existing terminal building.
Capital Cost: $2,980,000
Justification: Since its opening in the early 1990s, the general aviation terminal building
for the Winchester Regional Airport has had only limited interior work completed.
Interior repairs are necessary due to extensive usage and some damage from water
leaking from the roof prior to its replacement in the Spring of 2006 by necessity. The
heating and cooling systems are approaching 25 years in age and are nearing the end of
their useful life. The exterior of the terminal building is made from Drivet that has failed
in many areas and is generally in fair to poor condition. In addition, the windows are not
energy efficient and several of the window seals have failed. In 2008, a study was
completed to examine needs and costs to renovate the existing terminal building. After
review of the study, the WRAA determined it would be more economical to build a new
energy efficient building slightly east of the existing terminal. The proposed location of
the project will allow enough room to build out a new transient apron during the taxiway
relocation project.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 17-18
PRIORITY 2
Northside Connector
Description: This project proposed to construct a new taxiway connector and a short
partial parallel taxiway on the northwest side of the airfield. The connector would access
the runway at the end of Runway 14 and the parallel taxiway would connect to the
proposed apron and hangar development area on the northside of the airfield.
Capital Cost: $1,250,000
Justification: The Winchester Regional Airport has and continues to experience a
growth in business usage. Over the past several years, businesses have been operating
increasingly larger aircraft. The based aircraft accommodations on the south side of the
airport were developed over 20 years ago, before these larger aircraft were even available
to businesses. Therefore the south side was not developed to accommodate these larger
aircraft. In addition, the airport has effectively "built-out" the available space for any
aircraft hangars on the southside, requiring opening up land on the northside. These
taxiways are the first step in opening up the area.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 17-18
45
PRIORITY 3
New Terminal Parking lot
Description: Expand and rehabilitate the existing auto parking at the terminal building.
Capital Cost: $650,000
Justification: Portions of the existing parking lot will be removed as part of the
demolishing of the terminal building.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 17-18
PRIORITY 4
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 66
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 66 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $275,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16
PRIORITY 5
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 67
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 67 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $275,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16
PRIORITY 6
46
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64B A 33A
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel
64B A 33A on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a
portion is located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $175,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16
PRIORITY 7
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 60
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 60 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $275,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 15-16
PRIORITY 8
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64B A 40
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel
64B A 40 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a
portion is located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $175,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-15
47
PRIORITY 9
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 64
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 64 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $275,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 16-17
PRIORITY 10
Fuel Storage Facility
Description: Construction of a maintenance equipment and storage facility.
Capital Cost: $1,000,000
Justification: This project is necessary to improve the conditions and the lead time
required to access the equipment in case of an emergency.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 16-17
PRIORITY 11
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 47
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 47 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $300,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 18-19
PRIORITY 12
48
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 49
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 49 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $300,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 18-19
PRIORITY 13
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 50
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 50 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $300,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 17+
PRIORITY 14
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64B-A-51
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 49 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $235,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 17+
49
PRIORITY 15
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 52
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 52 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $300,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 18-19
PRIORITY 16
Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 59
Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64
A 59 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is
located within or near the airport primary surfaces.
Capital Cost: $300,000
Justification: Under the FAA part 77 Surface Requirements and the Code of Virginia
15.2, the airport is required to own fee simple property located within the primary
surfaces. There are currently more than 120 based aircraft at the Winchester Regional
Airport. The owners and passengers of these aircraft will have the benefit of increased
safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are
minimized.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 18-19
PRIORITY 17
Northside Service Road
Description: This project proposes to construction a two lane service road around the
end of Runway 14. The road will be approximately 1/2 to 3/4 miles in length so that
vehicles stay clear of navigational aid critical areas. It is proposed that the road will be 2
lanes
Capital Cost: $400,000
Justification: The approved airport layout plan shows new development occurring on the
northside of the runway. By having aircraft ground operations and storage on both sides
50
of the airfield (north and south), ground vehicle traffic requiring access to both sides of
the airfield will be generated. The traffic will include fueling truck operations and
personnel activities for general maintenance. The FAA encourages the construction of
service roads around aircraft activity areas, especially the runways, to prevent
unauthorized ground vehicle access to aircraft movement areas and to promote a safer
operating environment. The service road, located on the west side of the airport (Runway
14 end) will accomplish these goals.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 18-19
PRIORITY 18
Taxiway (A) Relocation
Description: The relocation of Taxiway (1) is part of the overall Airport upgrade to
meet safety design standards for a Group III airport. This relocation will improve the
serviceability and safety of the Airport in regards to ground operations for larger aircraft.
Capital Cost: $9,650,000
Justification: The relocation of Taxiway (1) is necessary to increase the Airport’s ability
to accommodate larger aircraft. This project also will improve the serviceability of the
Airport in regards to ground traffic.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 19+
51
County Administration Project Priority List
PRIORITY 1
Clearbrook Convenience Site Relocation
Description: The relocation of the Clearbrook citizens’ convenience site to property
located within the Clearbrook community is planned for the FY 16/17. The current two
acre facility is now situated on quarry land and is the beneficiary of a no-cost lease which
ends Dec. 31, 2015. Potentially, this agreement could be extended. However, the original
lease agreement and options were extended by the previous owner, O-N Minerals which
planned to long wall mine below the surface. Due to Carmeuse’s intention to use an open
pit approach during its quarry expansion, the convenience site will be forced to relocate
to another site in the Clear Brook/Stephenson community, likely within the next three to
five years.
Capital Cost: $377,850
Justification: Planned quarry expansion will mandate that current facility be relocated,
preferably on county-owned land in the Clear Brook/Stephenson community.
Construction Schedule: Start in FY 16-17
PRIORITY 2
Albin Convenience Site Relocation
Description: The relocation of the Albin citizens’ convenience site to property located
within the Sunnyside/Albin community is planned for the FY 14/15. Design work will be
completed in FY 13/14. A fenced, two-acre site will be constructed along North
Frederick Pike on county-owned property in close proximity to the existing site located
on Indian Hollow Road, ideally on a portion of the current FCPS bus garage property.
This project will require several months to complete and include fencing, earthwork,
retaining wall, electric, equipment, lighting, paving and landscaping.
Capital Cost: $442,850
Justification: During August of 2011 a total of 13,343 residents visited the Albin
facility, according to a site survey. The refuse site serves a geographic area extending
from Sunnyside and the Cedar Creek Grade westward to Gainesboro. The total number of
vehicles using the site, an average of 513 a day, increased by 11 percent between 2008
and 2010. The latest figure represents another 24 percent increase over the previous year.
Weekends are the busiest at Albin when up to 550 residents use the facility on Saturdays.
As trash disposal and the resulting traffic continue to increase at the facility, the present
infrastructure will be unable to safely handle the burden. During the holidays, the site
requires two site attendants in order to move traffic as quickly as possible. However, lines
still back out onto Indian Hollow Road, a hazard noted several times by the Sheriff’s
Office. For residents living between Cedar Creek Grade and Apple Pie Ridge, curbside
pickup is expensive, prompting heavy utilization of the convenience center which attracts
a mix of users from the suburbs and rural community. It is also becoming obviously that
52
residents in the Gainesboro area are foregoing that facility in favor of the Albin location.
Transient university students from the townhouse community also utilize the recycling
facilities.
Construction Schedule: Start in FY 15-16
PRIORITY 3
Gore Refuse Site Relocation/Expansion
Description: The project will expand refuse collection capacity in the Gore community
by installing a surplus trash compactor. With the relocation of the Gainesboro and Albin
sites and purchase of new equipment, there will be an available compactor. Installation of
a compactor at Gore will drive down collection costs at the site where trash is now
collected in 10 8-yard boxes. In order to accomplish this, and account for improved
traffic flow and the construction of necessary concrete walls, the site will be expanded
onto an adjoining parcel owned by the county.
Capital Cost: $349,550
Justification: This project would also provide much-needed capacity during heavy flow
times such as weekends and holidays. All 10 containers now on site fill to capacity during
Saturday afternoons and during the Sunday shift when up to 189 vehicles visit the
facility. A 40-yard roll-off is placed at the site during the Christmas holidays to provide
for increased trash generation. An upgraded site would meet the future solid waste
demands of a growing community.
Construction Schedule: Start in FY 15-16
PRIORITY 4
General Government Capital Expenditures
Description: This new project consists of a revolving fund in the amount of $1,000,000
for the benefit of General Governmental Capital Expenditures. It is the intention of this
capital expenditure fund to be for the purpose of purchasing capital equipment for
governmental agencies and to allow for improvements to general governmental facilities.
Such expenditures may be less than the established $100,000 departmental threshold. It
was determined that the inclusion of such a project would be beneficial in ensuring that
this significant capital expense is identified in the County’s capital planning and budget
process. This project is for the benefit of the County Governmental Entities participating
in the CIP but does not include individual Volunteer Fire and Rescue Companies.
Capital Cost: $1,000,000
Justification: The inclusion of this capital expenditure fund for the purpose of
purchasing capital equipment for governmental agencies and to allow for improvements
to general governmental facilities will enable the County to meet the requirements of the
53
Code of Virginia with regards to the collection and disbursement of cash proffers
accepted on behalf of the governmental entities.
Construction Schedule: N/A
PRIORITY 5
County/School Board Administration Building
Description: This new project consists of a County/School Board Administration
Building, to be located generally in the County’s Urban Development Area.
Capital Cost: TBD
Justification: The inclusion of this capital facility will allow for improvements to
general governmental facilities and services for the benefit of the residents of Frederick
County and will meet the increasing need for office space, meeting space, and
government services in an accessible location.
Construction Schedule: TBD
PRIORITY 6
Joint Judicial Center Renovation/New Facility
Description: This new project consists of an expansion to the existing Joint Judicial
Center, to be located generally in the City of Winchester or in the County’s Urban
Development Area. This is a two-phased project; phase one includes the $4,065,000
renovation to the existing Joint Judicial Center, Phase two is the further renovation and/or
reconstruction of facilities.
Capital Cost: $24,065,500
Justification: The inclusion of this capital facility will allow for improvements to
general governmental facilities and services for the benefit of the residents of Frederick
County and will meet the increasing need for office space, meeting space, and
government services in an accessible location. The need for this project has been
established through ongoing communication with the court system and the City of
Winchester.
Construction Schedule: Start in FY 15-16
54
Fire & Rescue Project Priority List
PRIORITY 1
Fire & Rescue Station #22 / Annex Facilities (Route 277)
Description: Construct a two bay Fire and Rescue Station with satellite Sheriff’s office
and County office space for the Treasurer, the Commissioner of Revenue, and BOS
office with meeting room. The station will be located in the area of Fairfax Pike, White
Oak Road, and Tasker Road to provide service for the heavy growth area east of Stephens
City. An approximate three-acre site will be needed to accommodate this facility. The
fire station will be approximately a 10,000 sq ft facility to house an engine and
ambulance. Those who would occupy the facility will determine the size of the satellite
offices. This facility is specifically identified in the Route 277 Triangle and Urban Center
Land Use Plan approved in 2008.
Capital Cost: $3,400,000
Justification: The development of satellite offices along major transportation networks
and in areas of dense population will provide ease of access for citizens and will improve
services to the county. This facility would facilitate the implement the Route 277
Triangle and Urban Center Land Use Plan approved in 2008. Nearby development is
scheduled to be an active adult resort gated community with age restrictions on 80% of
the homes above 55 and the other 20% above 45. The developer‘s master plan will allow
for 2130 individual dwelling units using a mix of housing types.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-15
PRIORITY 2
Fire & Rescue Station #22 / Apparatus (Route 277)
Description: Purchase one (1) custom pumper equipped and one (1) custom Type I
Advanced Life Support (A.L.S.) capable ambulance equipped to be assigned to Fire and
Rescue Station 22.
Capital Cost: $905,000
Justification: This fire and rescue apparatus will be assigned to Fire and Rescue Station
22 located on Fairfax Pike East in the Stephens City area of Frederick County. The
pumper will be built to N.F.P.A. 1901 specifications and equipped with all of the required
and necessary equipment to function as a Class A Pumper. The ambulance will be built
to the Federal KKK-A-1822E specifications and equipped with all of the required and
necessary equipment to function as an Advanced Life Support ambulance. This fire and
rescue apparatus is needed due to the fact that the Fire and Rescue Department currently
owns one (1) pumper and one (1) ladder truck that are twenty (20) plus years of age and
already assigned to other functions. The currently owned fire and rescue apparatus
would not endure the demands placed on it while being assigned to a high call volume.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-15
55
PRIORITY 3
Fire & Rescue Station #23 / New Facility (Crosspointe)
Description: This project consists of a 10,000 square foot fire station to accommodate 4
pieces of emergency equipment, and to house living and sleeping areas for staff. This
project could also include satellite offices for the Frederick County Sheriff’s Office,
Treasurer’s Office, and Commissioner of Revenue as well as a meeting room for County
Supervisor meetings with their constituents with an additional 2000 square feet of
building area. A two and ½ acre parcel should be sufficient for building, parking and
amenities for approximately 20 to 30 persons. The project is located at Crosspointe
Center at the end of current Rt.37 South, an area of proposed high density residential
development, and commercial development.
Capital Cost: $3,700,000
Justification: The proposed location at the South end of Route 37 provides for quick and
easy access to Interstate 81 North and South at the 310 Exit. Access and response on Rt.
37 will be greatly enhanced from I81 to Route 50 West in the Northbound Lane.
Currently Stephens City and Round Hill Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company’s serve the
area. This location also provides easy access to Rt.11 and the Kernstown area along with
access to Middle Road and Subdivisions of Brookneil, Stonebrook, and Jacksons Woods.
These subdivisions have large single family homes in an area of Frederick County
outside of the UDA. Water supplies are scarce in these areas and a rapid response from
this proposed facility will likely reduce property damage from fire and response times for
Medical Emergencies. Major collector roads such as Tasker Road and Warrior Drive
along with the proposed extension of Rt. 37 and new roadways in the development will
provide quick access to additional homes and businesses in areas including Front Royal
Pike, Papermill Road. These roadway construction efforts will provide for an increased
level of quality emergency service to the citizens in this entire area.
Construction Schedule: To be determined.
PRIORITY 4
Fire & Rescue Regional Training Center
Description: Construct a Regional Public Safety Training Center potentially consisting
of an administrative building, multi-story burn building, multi-story training tower,
vehicle driving range, shooting range, and numerous other training props. This project
will incorporate emergency medical services, fire, hazardous materials, rescue, law
enforcement, industrial, and educational institutions located in Clarke County, Frederick
County, Shenandoah County, Warren County, Winchester City, State Agencies, Federal
Agencies, and potentially jurisdictions within the State of West Virginia.
Capital Cost: $31,175,000
Justification: This project will facilitate realistic training in today’s modern environment
for emergency services and industrial personnel located throughout the Northern
Shenandoah Valley and expanding into the State of West Virginia. This project will
reinforce existing training programs in those respective agencies and jurisdictions as well
as facilitate training that is currently not available within the Northern Shenandoah
56
Valley which causes students and instructors to travel into the Washington Metropolitan
region. The number of potential personnel being trained at this Training Center is
potentially in the thousands based upon training statistics provided in July 2007 by the
participating agencies.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 17-18
PRIORITY 5
Fire and Rescue Station (#24) Relocation
Description: Construct a three (3) bay fire and rescue station with satellite County
Offices. This station is intended to be located on or near Redland Road in the area of
Lake Holiday either at a site provided by Lake Holiday or other tract in the vicinity. An
approximate three to four acre site is necessary for a 10,000 square foot facility, to house
a fire engine, and ambulance and rescue boat.
Capital Cost: $3,750,000
Justification: The Lake Holiday Development is scheduled to have a final build-out of
2800 single family homes.
Construction Schedule: To be determined
PRIORITY 6
Clear Brook Fire and Rescue Station (#13) Relocation
Description: A new facility is proposed to be built on our current property, take down
the current building and extend our parking. The building is to be six (6) drive through
bays, administration, eating and sleeping facilities along with a dining hall. The
estimated size of the structure is to be approximately 28,000 square feet.
Capital Cost: $4,396,000
Justification: At the current time we have outgrown our facility and with the equipment
that we have to provide the service to our community for property and health protection
and with the staffing needs and fund raising operations our current facility is in need of
upgrading /updating.
Construction Schedule: To be determined
Fire & Rescue Company Capital Project Requests
Capital Equipment Fire & Rescue – Vehicles & Equipment
Description: This new project consists of a revolving fund in the amount of $1,000,000
for the benefit of Fire and Rescue Services. It is the intention of this capital expenditure
fund to be for the purpose of purchasing additional and replacement capital equipment
fire and rescue vehicles and equipment. It was determined that the inclusion of such a
project would be beneficial in ensuring that this significant capital expense is identified in
the County’s capital planning and budget process. This project is primarily for the
benefit of the individual Volunteer Fire and Rescue Companies.
57
Capital Cost: $1,000,000
Justification: The inclusion of this capital expenditure fund for the purpose of
purchasing additional and replacement capital equipment fire and rescue vehicles and
equipment will enable the County to meet the requirements of the Code of Virginia with
regards to the collection and disbursement of cash proffers accepted on behalf of the fire
and rescue companies.
Construction Schedule: N/A
The following requests have been added to the CIP in no particular order:
Individual Fire & Rescue Company Capital Equipment Requests.
Greenwood Vol. Fire & Rescue Company
Office and Living Quarters Project
Project Cost: $550,000
Greenwood Vol. Fire & Rescue Company
Apparatus ventilation system project
Project Cost: $550,000
Middletown Vol. Fire & Rescue Company
Life Pack x3
Project Cost: $100,000
Middletown Vol. Fire & Rescue Company
Rescue Engine Replacement
Project Cost: $790,000
North Mountain Vol. Fire & Rescue Company
Building Expansion
Project Cost: $342,766