The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 12-05-12 Meeting Agenda AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building Winchester, Virginia December 5, 2012 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) October 17, 2012 and November 7, 2012 Minutes ...................................................... (A) 3) Committee Reports .................................................................................................. (no tab) 4) Citizen Comments .................................................................................................... (no tab) PUBLIC MEETING 5) Rezoning #08-12 of Eastgate Commercial, submitted by Patton Harris Rust & Associates, to revise proffers associated with Rezoning #02-07. This revision relates to the “Transportation” section of the proffers. The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 south) at the intersection of Front Royal Pike and Maranto Manor Drive, on the south side of Maranto Manor Drive. Mr. Bishop ....................................................................................................................... (B) 6) Master Development Plan #06-12 for Snowden Bridge, submitted by Greenway Engineering. The properties are located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and east of Milburn Road (Route 662), in the Stonewall Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 44- A-31B, 44-A-292A and 44-A-293. Mrs. Perkins .................................................................................................................... (C) COMMISSION DISCUSSION 7) 2013 – 2014 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Mr. Ruddy ....................................................................................................................... (D) 8) Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 165 Zoning, Article V Planned Development Districts, Section 502 R5 Residential Recreational Community District – Proposed revision to allow private streets in the R5 District for all types of developments (removal of the age restricted requirement). Mrs. Perkins ................................................................................................................... (E) -2- 9) Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 165 Zoning, Article VIII Development Plans and Approvals, Section 801 Master Development Plans – Revisions to update the MDP submission and processing requirements. This revision also modifies a number of MDP references throughout Chapter 165 to conform with the Section 801 revision. Mrs. Perkins .................................................................................................................... (F) 10) Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 122 Nuisances – Revision to address the cutting of tall grass and weeds in commercial zoning districts. Mrs. Perkins .................................................................................................................... (G) 11) Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 165 Zoning, Article IV Agricultural and Residential Districts, Part 401 RA Rural Areas District – Removal of waiver opportunity in the RA District which allows the Board of Supervisors to reduce setbacks for existing lots. Mrs. Perkins .................................................................................................................... (H) 12) Other 13) Adjourn Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2903 Minutes of October 17, 2012 MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The meeting was held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on October 17, 2012. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/ Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; Brian Madagan, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Kevin W. Kenney, Gainesboro District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Kevin O. Crosen, Back Creek District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; and Philip E. Lemieux, Red Bud District; and Roderick B. Williams, Frederick County Attorney. ABSENT: J. Stanley Crockett, Stonewall District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; and Renee’ S. Arlotta, Clerk. ----------- CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. A motion was made by Commissioner Oates to adopt the agenda for this evening’s meeting as presented. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas and unanimously passed. ------------- MINUTES Upon motion made by Commissioner Oates and seconded by Commissioner Thomas, meeting minutes of the August 15, 2012 meeting and the September 5, 2012 meeting were both unanimously approved as presented. ------------- Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2904 Minutes of October 17, 2012 COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC) – 10/08/12 Meeting Commissioner Mohn reported about two Comprehensive Plan Amendment Requests on the CPPC’s agenda. The first, the Lord Fairfax Community College/Middletown SWSA Expansion Request is a discussion item on the Planning Commission’s agenda this evening. The second was a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to revisit the Eastern Road Plan regarding the proposed realignment of Route 522, where it intersects Route 50 East of Town. Commissioner Mohn said the Eastern Road Plan request will be going to the Transportation Committee to be examined more thoroughly and will be brought back to the CPPC at a later time for a discussion concerning the land use implications. ------------- Business Development Advancement Study (BDAS) – 10/01/12 Workshop Chairman Wilmot reported about the work session with the Board of Supervisors concerning the BDAS Report and Recommendation. Chairman Wilmot stated it was a good discussion and there were some pluses and there were other items that will need further examination. ------------- Sanitation Authority – 10/16/12 Meeting Commissioner Unger said the Sanitation Authority reported about 200 new customers for the year. Rainfall for August was 4.65 inches; the previous month was 2.2 inches; water production from the Diehl Plant is about 2mgd; water production from the Anderson plant is slightly over 2mgd; and about 3/4mgd were purchased from the City of Winchester. The daily average use is 5mgd, which is down slightly from the previous month. The Diehl Quarry is up about one foot from the rain; the Anderson Quarry went down slightly more than one foot; the Senseny Road pump station modification has not yet started because they are waiting for materials to arrive; work is continuing at the Hood Plant pump station. Commissioner Unger said there are 50 plus pump stations operating throughout the County and work will soon begin to update those. Commissioner Unger said the Sanitation Authority had a review for the entire year, along with an audit, and everything is looking good and they are performing well. ------------- CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Wilmot called for citizen comments on any issue not on this evening’s agenda. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the citizen comments portion of the meeting. -------------- Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2905 Minutes of October 17, 2012 PUBLIC MEETING Rezoning #07-12 of O-N Minerals d/b/a Carmeuse Lime & Stone and Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department to revise proffers associated with Rezoning #01-11. This revision specifically relates to Section 2.2 of the proffers, Site Development. The properties are located at 508 Quarry Lane, 3004 Martinsburg Pike, and 3180 Martinsburg Pike. The subject parcels are located between the intersections of Route 11 with Brucetown Road (Rt. 672) and with Walters Mill Lane (Rt. 836). The properties are further identified with P.I.N.s 44-A-83, 44-A-83A, and 33-A-144 (portion of) in the Stonewall Magisterial District. Action – Recommended Approval Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported this request is a minor proffer revision and does not represent a significant impact on this project. Mr. Lawrence explained that when this rezoning was approved in December of 2011, one of the proffers approved with the package addressed installing a landscape buffer along Route 11 going north towards the Clearbrook Park. He pointed out an area containing a baseball park and two parking lots which has been leased from the quarry by Frederick County for the past 30-40 years. He said the quarry and Frederick County Parks & Recreation have partnered to make this baseball park available to the community. Mr. Lawrence said the issue is the timing of planting the landscape buffer adjacent to those areas currently leased and used by Frederick County as a ballpark and a citizen’s convenient center. He said the proffer revision would allow the applicant the ability to delay the installation of the proffered buffer until one year after Carmeuse terminates its agreement with Frederick County for the use of the leased area. Commissioner Oates asked if it would be appropriate for the applicant to also amend proffered condition 6.1, Traffic, regarding no entrances on Route 11, because there is an existing entrance going into the landfill’s convenience site and the baseball diamond. Mr. Lawrence agreed it would be appropriate simply for clarification purposes, although it is not in the proffer revision being discussed. No other issues or areas of concern were raised. Commissioner Oates made a motion to recommend approval of Rezoning #07-12 of O-N Minerals d/b/a Carmeuse Lime & Stone and Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department to revise proffers associated with Rezoning #01-11, specifically Section 2.1, Site Development, as well as an additional recommendation that the existing entrance into the baseball fields be exempt from proffered condition 6.1, Traffic, while the site is being used by the Department of Parks & Recreation. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Unger and unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby recommend the approval of Rezoning #07-12 of O-N Minerals d/b/a Carmeuse Lime & Stone and Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department to revise proffers associated with Rezoning #01-11. This revision specifically relates to Section 2.2 of the proffers, Site Development, and would allow the applicant the ability to delay the installation of the proffered buffer until one year after Carmeuse terminates its agreement with Frederick County for the use of the leased area. The Planning Commission does also hereby recommend that the applicant be exempt from Section 6.1 of the proffers, Traffic, as long as there is a lease enabling the Department of Parks & Recreation to utilize the park area. This exemption recognizes the existing entrance from Route 11 into the landfill convenience site and baseball park. (Note: Commissioner Crockett was absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2906 Minutes of October 17, 2012 ------------- DISCUSSION Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment, CPPA #01-12, Lord Fairfax Community College (LFCC)/ Middletown Sewer & Water Service Area (SWSA). A request by LFCC to include land owned by the LFCC Foundation into the SWSA to enable the provision of public water and sewer initiated this proposed amendment. The resulting amendment proposes the establishment of a SWSA that encompasses LFCC and the adjacent Middletown Elementary School and also proposes an institutional land use designation for the area. Water and sewer would continue to be provided by the Town of Middletown and the City of Winchester, respectively. Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that the Lord Fairfax Community College (LFCC) approached the Board of Supervisors about utilizing public water and sewer for the development of buildings on property owned by the Lord Fairfax Community College Foundation. In addition to the property owned by the State of Virginia, which is home to the college, the LFCC Foundation owns approximately 20 acres in two parcels. Mr. Lawrence said this discussion item, which was reviewed last week by the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee (CPPC), has two phases. He said the first phase will be discussed this evening and the second phase will come at a later point; however, he intended to provide the Planning Commission with an overview of both phases this evening. Mr. Lawrence explained that since the LFCC is a State facility, they have been able to expand under State regulations and was not required to adhere to the Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Policies of Frederick County. However, the most recent initiative of the community college is being constructed by a foundation of LFCC and is not a part of the State exemption process. He said this is the reason why LFCC is working with the County at this point. Mr. Lawrence said when this process initially started, the focus was centered on the LFCC site and the LFCC Foundation properties; however, the vision has since been slightly expanded to include the area north of Middletown. Mr. Lawrence said the LFCC would like to expand their facility to include a student union which the Foundation would build on an adjacent property owned by the Foundation. He said the challenge they’ve run into with the Comprehensive Plan is that in order to facilitate the Student Union center, they need to access public water and sewer. The LFCC currently utilizes public water from the City of Winchester and public sewer services from the Town of Middletown. As a State agency, LFCC was permitted to do this; however, with the non-profit foundation stepping forward, we want to make sure they are conforming to County policy. Mr. Lawrence stated Frederick County does not have public water and sewer in this area, nor is there a policy that allows and supports public water and sewer in this area; therefore, a Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment was proposed to consider the SWSA for the community college and the proposed student union and this was taken to the Comprehensive Plan Committee. Mr. Lawrence stated the Comprehensive Plan Committee discussed this last week and believed that not only should the County be looking at the community college and the student union, but they believed there was a need to look at an expanded area. Mr. Lawrence pointed out the expanded study area marked in red and designated as Phase II. However, for this evening’s discussion, the Phase I request is for the area outlined in green and cross-hatched, which includes the community college, the student union, and the Middletown Elementary School. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2907 Minutes of October 17, 2012 Mr. Lawrence indicated that for this first phase of the LFCC expansion, the staff drafted a Comprehensive Policy Plan text to support a SWSA expansion for the continuation and expansion of the institutional uses that have historically been located in this area. He said this draft has received the support of the CPPC and has also received support from the Board of Supervisors last week. Mr. Lawrence said the initial phase consists of approximately 138.36 acres consisting of five parcels. The 138.36 acres could continue to be used for institutional uses and would be enabled to tap into the public water and sewer that is available via the City of Winchester and the Town of Middletown. Mr. Lawrence stated that at the Board of Supervisors’ discussion last week, Board members said they would like to see the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) involved in some of the water and sewer management of this area. He noted that although the FCSA has not been involved in this particular location, the staff is having discussions with them. He said that when this item comes back to the Commission as a public hearing, the staff anticipates having more information from FCSA, as staff attempts to address the Board’s comments. Commissioner Unger inquired if there was a projected amount of water usage for when this project is built out. Mr. Chris Boies, Vice President of the Office of Financial and Administrative Services for LFCC, came forward to answer Commissioner Unger’s question. Mr. Boies said the proposed project is a 32,000 sq. ft. student union. He did not have the estimated amount of water usage; however, he said their engineering firm had discussions with the City of Winchester and the City has agreed they could serve this building. Mr. Boies added this structure will have a fitness center and there will be shower facilities within the building. Commissioner Manuel asked if the cross-hatched area within the green border was to be considered the official institutional delineation. Mr. Lawrence replied yes; he said the intent of the Phase 1 proposal was for SWSA expansion, as well as institutional designation. Commissioner Manuel next asked for clarification of permitted uses within the Phase 2 red area; he asked if only institutional uses would be permitted within the red area. Mr. Lawrence stated the Phase 2 red area is not actually being considered this evening because LFCC has an aggressive construction plan and wants to move forward with their project this winter. Mr. Lawrence said the County is moving forward with only the Phase I area at this time and the red area will continue to be studied at the committee level. He added the initial thoughts about the red area is it probably should be a business development phase, which supports technology and the community college campus, but not residential. Commissioner Thomas believed the project was a good idea, which benefits the County, and supports a growing institution. Commissioner Thomas believed the request should be moved forward as soon as possible. Chairman Wilmot believed the area outside of the hatching could be classified as Higher Education, but written similarly to the Hospital District, where there are a variety of uses within the area that would benefit the County and the institution as well. She suggested it may be cleaner than just classifying it as institutional. Mr. Lawrence said he would forward the Commission’s comments forward to the CPPC and the Board of Supervisors. Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2908 Minutes of October 17, 2012 ------------- OTHER Chairman Wilmot recognized the excellent job Commissioner Mohn has done in his capacity as the Planning Commission’s Liaison to the City of Winchester Planning Commission. She said that Commissioner Mohn’s work schedule outside of the City of Winchester makes it difficult for him to continue with his liaison duties. Chairman Wilmot asked for three or four volunteers who may be available to be the liaisons, to contact her and it would be appreciated. ------------- ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and upon motion by Commissioner Oates and second by Commissioner Crosen, the meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, _______________________________________ June M. Wilmot, Chairman _______________________________________ Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2909 Minutes of November 7, 2012 MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The meeting was held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on November 7, 2012. PRESENT: June M. Wilmot, Chairman/ Member at Large; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/ Opequon District; Brian Madagan, Opequon District; Gary R. Oates, Stonewall District; J. Stanley Crockett, Stonewall District; Lawrence R. Ambrogi, Shawnee District; Kevin W. Kenney, Gainesboro District; Charles E. Triplett, Gainesboro District; Greg L. Unger, Back Creek District; Kevin O. Crosen, Back Creek District; Christopher M. Mohn, Red Bud District; William (Bill) Wiley, Winchester Planning Commission Liaison; and Roderick B. Williams, Frederick County Attorney. ABSENT: H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee District; Philip E. Lemieux, Red Bud District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director; Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director; and Renee’ S. Arlotta, Clerk. ----------- CALL TO ORDER & ADOPTION OF AGENDA Chairman Wilmot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. A motion was made by Commissioner Oates to adopt the agenda for this evening’s meeting as presented. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Thomas and unanimously passed. ------------- COMMITTEE REPORTS Transportation Committee – 10/22/12 Meeting Commissioner Oates reported the Transportation Committee had three items on their agenda. The first, the Capital Improvements Program (CIP), is being forwarded to the Comprehensive Plans & Programs Committee. The second item, the Route 522 South Study, which is supposed to diverge off and go towards Route 50 and around the lumber yard, was discussed; however, the State is commencing a study of that entire transit area, which will take up to five to six years to complete. The third item discussed was a Revenue Sharing Application for the Russell 150 Roadways in the amount of $2-3 million. ------------- Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2910 Minutes of November 7, 2012 Conservation Easement Authority (CEA) – 10/25/12 Meeting Commissioner Triplett reported that the CEA viewed a documentary entitled, “The Last Crop,” by Charles Schultz. Commissioner Triplett said the independent film examines one family’s mission to preserve their small working farm in California with the pressures of development and the assistance they may be able to get through Conservations Easement Authorities. He said the film was about 75 minutes long; however, shorter versions will be made available to local people interested in viewing the film. ------------- Development Review & Regulations Committee (DRRC) – 10/25/12 Meeting Commissioner Unger reported on four items that were discussed at the DRRC meeting. The first was a discussion on revisions to the Zoning Ordinance to revise the Master Development Plan (MDP) review and submission processes. He said if a MDP meets all ordinance requirements, the staff will administratively approve the MDP and the Planning Commission and Board will see it for information only. The second item discussed was tall grass in the commercial and industrial areas. It was determined that problem issues were occurring in the B1 and B2 Districts, rather than the industrial parks. The third item discussed was a minor revision to the RA (Rural Areas) Setback Reductions to remove a waiver opportunity which allows the Board of Supervisors to modify setbacks. The fourth item discussed was a Zoning Ordinance revision to remove the requirement that R5 communities must be “age-restricted communities” to qualify for private streets. ------------- Winchester Planning Commission Winchester Planning Commissioner, Mr. William (Bill) Wiley, reported that the City Planning Commission is working on a rezoning of 7.74 acres of land along Cedar Creek Grade from RO1 to high-density residential for an apartment complex across the street from Harvest Ridge. Commissioner Wiley said the Commission has requested that a traffic study be done. In addition, the Planning Commission has enacted a new article concerning drop-off boxes within the City. He said that basically, there are issues involving out-of-area “for-profit” groups, which have been benefiting from these drop-off boxes and the City is trying to assist the local community “non-profit” groups. ------------- APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONER KEVIN KENNEY AS NEW LIAISON TO THE WINCHESTER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Chairman Wilmot announced the appointment of Commissioner Kevin Kenney as the new Planning Commission Liaison to the Winchester City Planning Commission. ------------- Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2911 Minutes of November 7, 2012 CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Wilmot called for citizen comments on any issue not on this evening’s agenda. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the citizen comments portion of the meeting. -------------- PUBLIC HEARING An ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Part 608, EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District, Section 165-608.05 Setback and Yard Requirements. This amendment will eliminate the waiver opportunity in this section of the code. Action – Recommended Approval Planning Deputy Director, Michael T. Ruddy, reported that this is a straight-forward item that cleans up the waiver modifications that were recently completed. Mr. Ruddy recalled that the waiver modifications granted by the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors, were reallocated through the County’s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. He said this was disposed of by the Board of Supervisors at their September 26, 2012 meeting. However, due to an advertising issue, one section of waivers, Section 165-608.05, pertaining to the EM (Extractive Manufacturing) Zoning District, could not be approved that evening. Mr. Ruddy said this particular section has been re-advertised and is being presented to the Planning Commission this evening as a public hearing item. Specifically, the waiver opportunity that allowed excavations to be closer than 200 feet from property zoned RA, RP, R4, or MH-1, and any dwelling or platted residential subdivision, has been eliminated. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for anyone who wished to speak regarding this ordinance change. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the public comment portion of the hearing. No issues were raised by any of the members of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Thomas made a motion to recommend approval of the ordinance amendment as presented. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Mohn and was unanimously passed. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of an ordinance to amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article VI, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Part 608, EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District, Section 165-608.05 Setback and Yard Requirements. This amendment will eliminate the waiver opportunity in this section of the code. (Note: Commissioners Manuel and Lemieux were absent from the meeting.) Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2912 Minutes of November 7, 2012 ------------- Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment, CPPA #01-12, Lord Fairfax Community College (LFCC)/ Middletown Sewer & Water Service Area (SWSA). A request by LFCC to include land owned by the LFCC Foundation into the SWSA to enable the provision of public water and sewer initiated this proposed amendment. The resulting amendment proposes the establishment of the Middletown/ Lord Fairfax SWSA that encompasses LFCC and the adjacent Middletown Elementary School and an institutional land use designation for the area. Water and sewer would continue to be provided by the Town of Middletown and the City of Winchester, respectively. The parcels included in the Middletown/ Lord Fairfax SWSA are: 91-A-100, 91-A-99B, 91-A-99, 91-A- 99A, and 91-A-78A. Action – Recommended Approval Planning Deputy Director, Michael T. Ruddy, displayed a map identifying the area north of Middletown, just west of I-81, and east of Route 11 which has been established as the Middletown/ Lord Fairfax Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). Mr. Ruddy said this is in response to a request by the Lord Fairfax Community College (LFCC) to include adjacent parcels in order to utilize public water and sewer for their expanding campus. He said this proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan includes both the map and text which describes the institutional land use, the transportation components, and generally describes the operation in and around the community college. Mr. Ruddy commented that although the Frederick County Sanitation Authority (FCSA) has the primary responsibility of providing water and sewer in Frederick County within the SWSA; in this particularly case, the Town of Middletown provides the sewer service to the community college and this area, and the City of Winchester provides the water service. He said this area consists of five properties totaling 130 acres and includes the LFCC Foundation property and the adjacent Middletown Elementary School. Chairman Wilmot opened the public hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak regarding this Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment (CPPA). Mr. Chris Boies, Vice President of the Office of Financial and Administrative Services for LFCC, came forward to address the Commission. Mr. Boies brought a display showing the proposed project, a 32,000 sq. ft. student union building. He said the proposed building would house the campus book store, food service, a fitness center, two classrooms, and some office space. Mr. Boies said it is a much needed addition to the campus; he stated that LFCC has grown over 35% within the last three years. Last spring, LFCC was the fastest growing community college in Virginia and the student enrollment is over 7,300 students this semester. Mr. Boies added that due to State funding issues, they were able to utilize the Foundation’s property for the project and will also use some creative financing to get the project done. No one else wished to speak and Chairman Wilmot closed the citizen comment portion of the hearing. Commission members were very much in favor of this project. No issues were raised. Upon motion made by Commissioner Unger and seconded by Commissioner Crosen, Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2913 Minutes of November 7, 2012 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendment, CPPA #01-12 for the Lord Fairfax Community College (LFCC)/ Middletown Sewer & Water Service Area (SWSA). A request by LFCC to include land owned by the LFCC Foundation into the SWSA to enable the provision of public water and sewer initiated this proposed amendment. The resulting amendment proposes the establishment of the Middletown/ Lord Fairfax SWSA which encompasses LFCC and the adjacent Middletown Elementary School with an institutional land use designation for the area. Sewer and water would continue to be provided by the Town of Middletown and the City of Winchester, respectively. The parcels included in the Middletown/ Lord Fairfax SWSA are: 91-A-100, 91-A-99B, 91-A-99, 91-A-99A, and 91-A-78A. (Note: Commissioners Manuel and Lemieux were absent from the meeting.) ------------- COMMISSION DISCUSSION ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS AND THE RULES & REGULATIONS Planning Director, Eric R. Lawrence, reported that the Planning Commission’s Bylaws direct an annual review in November of the Bylaws. Mr. Lawrence said he was aware of one modification needed in Article VI, Commission Meetings, Section 6-5, “Work Sessions shall be held at the adjournment of regular meetings or at the time and place set by the Commission.” He said this statement could be amended by simply adding, “and/or the Board of Supervisors.” Mr. Lawrence said if there are any other comments, corrections, or concerns from the Commission members, please let the staff know before the Commission’s December 5 meeting and the staff will bring the bylaws back to the Commission in January for adoption. ------------- OTHER CANCELLATION OF THE NOVEMBER 21, 2012 MEETING Chairman Wilmot announced there were no pending items for the Planning Commission’s November 21, 2012 meeting. Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Oates, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to cancel their November 21, 2012 meeting. ------------- Frederick County Planning Commission Page 2914 Minutes of November 7, 2012 PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Chairman Wilmot announced a Planning Commission Joint Work Session with the Board of Supervisors prior to the Board’s regularly scheduled meeting on November 14, 2012. She said the work session will start at 5:30 p.m. Chairman Wilmot said that revisions to the RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District and setback requirements for accessory structures in the RA (Rural Areas) District will be discussed. ------------- ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and upon motion by Commissioner Oates and second by Commissioner Thomas, the meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. by a unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, _______________________________________ June M. Wilmot, Chairman _______________________________________ Eric R. Lawrence, Secretary REZONING APPLICATION #08-12 EASTGATE COMMERCIAL Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: November 13, 2012 Staff Contact: John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director-Transportation Reviewed Planning Commission: 12/05/12 Pending Action Board of Supervisors: 01/09/13 Pending PROPOSAL : To revise proffers associated with Rezoning #02-07. This revision relates to the “Transportation” section of the proffers. LOCATION : The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 south) at the intersection of Front Royal Pike and Maranto Manor Drive, on the south side of Maranto Manor Drive. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 12/05/12 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This is a minor proffer revision to allow left turn access into the parcel from Maranto Manor Drive. This access was previously proffered out. In addition, the proffers construct the access point and clarify the limited access to the parcels on the north side of Maranto Manor Drive in this location. This modification has been modeled and VDOT and Staff are satisfied that it will function properly as proposed, although VDOT does note continued reservations in their comment. 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 #08-12 – Eastgate Commercial November 13, 2012 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 Planning Commission: 12/05/12 Pending Action Board of Supervisors: 01/09/13 Pending PROPOSAL : To revise proffers associated with Rezoning #02-07. This revision relates to the “Transportation” section of the proffers. LOCATION : The properties are located west of Front Royal Pike (Route 522 south) at the intersection of Front Royal Pike and Maranto Manor Drive, on the south side of Maranto Manor Drive. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT : Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS : 76-A-53J, 76-A-53K, 76-A-53L, 76-A-53M and 76-A-53N PROPERTY ZONING : B2 (General Business) District PRESENT USE : Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE : North: B2 Use: Commercial South: RA Use: Residential/Ag East: RA Use: Residential West: M1 Use: Distribution Center REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dept. of Transportation: VDOT staff has completed the technical review of the revised TIA for the Winchester South Median Crossover for Lots 3A & 3B and also the revised proffers dated October 2, 2012. We concur with the analytical findings of the TIA and have no additional comments on the revised proffers. Therefore, VDOT would allow the installation of the crossover, if the County approves the proffer amendment. Even though the TIA shows the crossover working and there are no regulations that would prevent its installation, VDOT still has concerns with the short weave and how this crossover location will actually function under real traffic conditions. Please be aware, in the future, should safety issues arise and the crossover becomes problematic, VDOT could remove the crossover. Rezoning #08-12 – Eastgate Commercial November 13, 2012 Page 3 County Attorney: Please see attached letter from Rod Williams, County Attorney, dated October 2, 2012. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site History Previously RA in zoning, these properties were rezoned to B2 as a part of the Eastgate Commercial center in 2007. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy 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. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-1] Transportation The transportation modifications proposed are at a level of detail not addressed by the Comprehensive Plan. Other aspects of transportation, such as complete streets, have already been addressed by the previously approved development proffers. 3) Proffer Statement – Originally dated February 9, 2007, with final revision date of November 1, 2012. A) Residential Land Use B) Commercial Land Use C) Master Development Plan D) Allow left turn access into the parcel from Maranto Manor Drive. This access was previously proffered out. In addition the proffers construct the access point and clarify the limited access to the parcels on the north side of Maranto Manor Drive in this location. Transportation E) Community Facilities STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 12/05/12 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: This is a minor proffer revision to allow left turn access into the parcel from Maranto Manor Drive. This access was previously proffered out. In addition the proffers construct the access point and clarify the limited access to the parcels on the north side of Maranto Manor Drive in this location. Rezoning #08-12 – Eastgate Commercial November 13, 2012 Page 4 This modification has been modeled and VDOT and Staff are satisfied that it will function properly as proposed. 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. EASTGATECOMMERCE CENTERSubdivision 01522 ST642 ST642 ST642 RAIN V I L L E R D BRIDGE P O R T L N TASK E R R D F R O N T R O Y A L P I K E MA R A N T O M A N O R D R 76 A 53G 87 A 31 87 A 32 87 A 33 87 A 48 87 A 34 76 A 53K 87 A 42 87 A 41 76 A 53L 76 A 53M 76 A 53J 87 A 40 76 A 53I 87 A 39 87 A 38 76 A 53F 76 A59G76 A 57 76 A 58 76 A 53H 76 A 53E 76 A 57A 76 A 59C 76 A 53N 76 A 56 76 A 59J 76 A 53 76 A 55 76 A59H 76 A 54 76 A 59 76 A 60B Rezoning Parcels Building Footprints B1 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) HE (Higher Education District) M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District)0 150 30075 Feet I Note:Frederick County Dept ofPlanning & Development107 N Kent StSuite 202Winchester, VA 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: November 9, 2012Staff: afarrar Armel REZ # 08 - 12Eastgate CommercialPINs:76 - A - 53J, 76 - A - 53K, 76 - A - 53L, 76 - A - 53M, 76 - A - 53N REZ # 08 - 12Eastgate CommercialPINs:76 - A - 53J, 76 - A - 53K, 76 - A - 53L, 76 - A - 53M,76 - A - 53N c MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #06-12 SNOWDEN BRIDGE Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: November 14, 2012 Staff Contact: Candice E. Perkins, AICP, Senior Planner Reviewed Planning Commission: 12/05/12 Pending Action Board of Supervisors: 01/09/13 Pending PROPOSAL: To develop 285.40 acres of land zoned R4 (Residential Planned Community) District with a total of 1,234 residential dwelling units. The development will consist of a mix of single family, townhouse and multifamily residential units. This Master Development Plan (MDP) contains the majority of Landbay III of the Snowden Bridge development (see sheet 3 of the MDP). This MDP contains both a revision for a portion of Landbay III that was originally approved in 2008 and administratively revised in 2011, as well as additional acreage located in Landbay III. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT : Stonewall LOCATION: The properties are located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and east of Milburn Road (Route 662). STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 12/05/12 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Master Development Plan for Snowden Bridge depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the requirements of Article VIII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning Ordinance, and this MDP is in a form that is administratively approvable. The MDP is also in conformance with the proffers for Rezoning #06-03. All of the issues brought forth by the Board of Supervisors should be appropriately addressed by the applicant. It appears that the application meets all requirements. Following the presentation of the application to the Board of Supervisors, and the incorporation of your comments, staff is prepared to proceed to approval of the application. MDP #06-12, Snowden Bridge November 14, 2012 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 in the review of this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. LOCATION: The properties are located on the south side of Old Charles Town Road (Route 761) and Jordan Springs Road (Route 664) and east of Milburn Road (Route 662). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT : Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBERS : 44-A-31B, 44-A-292A, 44-A-293 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE : Zoned: R4 (Residential Planned Community) District Use: Residential Planned Community ZONING & PRESENT USE OF ADJOINING PROPERTIES: North: RA Use: Residential/Vacant South: RA, R4 Use: Residential/Vacant East: RA Use: Residential/Vacant/Agricultural West: RA Use: Residential/Vacant/Agricultural PROPOSAL: To develop 285.40 acres of land zoned R4 (Residential Planned Community) District with a total of 1,234 residential dwelling units. The development will consist of a mix of single family, townhouse and multifamily residential units. This Master Development Plan (MDP) contains the majority of Landbay III of the Snowden Bridge development (see sheet 3 of the MDP). This MDP contains both a revision for a portion of Landbay III that was originally approved in 2008 and administratively revised in 2011 as well as additional acreage located in Landbay III. REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Department of Transportation : A VDOT review has been conducted for the revised Snowden Bridge Master Development Plan (Rev #2) having a revision date of 10/31/12 that was received electronically in our office on 11/1/12. All previous VDOT comments have been satisfactorily addressed and the plan is therefore approved by VDOT. Frederick County Fire & Rescue: Plan Approved Frederick County Fire Marshal : N/A MDP #06-12, Snowden Bridge November 14, 2012 Page 3 Frederick County Inspections Department: Existing structures require a demo permit prior to removal. Engineer Design Required for foundations in wetland areas. Comments shall be made at site plan/subdivision master plan submittal. Frederick County Public Works : We offer no additional comments at this time. Frederick County Sanitation Authority: Review R5-1 approved as noted. Parks and Recreation Department: The plan appears to meet requirements. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed MDP revision 02 for Snowden Bridge has been reviewed and it should not have an impact on airport operations. Department of GIS: All street names are approved for use in the Frederick County Road Name System. Frederick County Schools: Frederick County Public Schools has reviewed the revised Snowden Bridge Master Development Plan Revisions #2 submitted to us on October 11, 2012. We note that proposed dwelling units have increased by 384. We also note that the cap on the total number of dwelling units approved by the County (2,465) is not proposed to increase, and that access to the school site will not be changed. As impacts on FCPS remain below planned, approval levels, we offer not comments. Planning & Zoning: A) A master development plan is required prior to development of this property. Before a master development plan can be approved, it must be reviewed by the Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors and all relevant review agencies. Approval may only be granted if the master development plan conforms to all requirements of the Frederick County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The purpose of the master development plan is to promote orderly and planned development of property within Frederick County that suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious with adjoining property and is in the best interest of the general public. Master Development Plan Requirement B) The original Frederick County zoning map (U.S.G.S. Stephenson Quadrangle) identifies the subject parcels as being zoned A-2 (Agricultural General). The County’s agricultural zoning districts were combined to form the RA (Rural Areas) District upon adoption of an amendment to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance on May 10, 1989. The corresponding revision of the zoning map resulted in the re-mapping of the subject properties and all other A-1 and A-2 zoned land to the RA District. Site History On September 24, 2003, the Board of Supervisors approved Rezoning #06-03 which rezoned the 794 acres to R-4 (Residential Planned Community) with proffers. A Master Development Plan was approved in 2005 for Phase 1 – Part A, and was then revised in 2005. A MDP revision was MDP #06-12, Snowden Bridge November 14, 2012 Page 4 then approved in 2008 that separated the Brookfield-Stephenson Village, LLC land holdings from the remainder of the development. C) Comprehensive Policy Plan: Site Suitability & Project Scope The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy 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. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-1] Land Use Compatibility: The parcel comprising this MDP application is located within the County’s Urban Development Area (UDA) and Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The Urban Development Area defines the general area in which more intensive forms of residential development will occur. The subject properties are located within the boundaries of the Northeast Land Use Plan area. This Plan identifies the future land use as a Planned Urban Development; the present zoning is consistent with this PUD designation. The Northeast Land Use Plan also identifies the approximate path of the future Route 37 corridor. Site Access and Transportation: The Snowden Bridge development is accessed via Snowden Bridge Boulevard which is a major collector roadway that intersects with Old Charles Town Road (Route 661). The majority of the development is proposed to be served by public roads, but also contains some private streets and alleys (see sheet 7 of the MDP – Road Classification Table). The MDP also depicts the location of the proffered private pedestrian trail system (PTS). STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 12/05/12 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The Master Development Plan for Snowden Bridge depicts appropriate land uses and appears to be consistent with the requirements of Article VIII, Master Development Plan, of the Zoning Ordinance, and this MDP is in a form that is administratively approvable. The MDP is also in conformance with the proffers for Rezoning #06-03. All of the issues brought forth by the Board of Supervisors should be appropriately addressed by the applicant. It appears that the application meets all requirements. Following the presentation of the application to the Board of Supervisors, and the incorporation of your comments, staff is prepared to proceed to approval of the application. WOODS MILLSubdivision SNOWDENBRIDGESubdivision OPEQUONRIDGESubdivision EDGEHILLSubdivision MONASTERY RIDGE RD MORRISONS R D STARB U R S T S T BAL K A N C T SAW T O O T H D R SETT I N G S U N C T STEP H E N S O N R D OAK H I L L L N ED G E H I L L D R OLD CHARLES TOWN RD JOR D A N SPR I N G S R D SN O W D E N B R I D G E B L V D LEAVENWORTH CT 44 A 31A 55 7 15 55 7 15A 55 7 14 55 7 14A 44 A294A 44 A 294 45 4 1 2 45 4 1 1 44 A 31B 44 A 293 44 A294B 44 A292A 45 9 3 2 45 9 3 1 44 A 291 44 A 28744 A 28844 A 289 44 A 286 44 A 280 44 A 284 44 A 283 44 A282 44 3 A144 A233 44 A 23544 A236 44 A 234 44 A 238 44 A 237 44 A 28544 A 281 45 A 25A 44E 31 94 44E 31 104 44 A231B 44 A 232 44 A 24044 A 239 44 3 A 44E 31 89 44E 21 70 44E 21 67 44 A22844 A 22944 A 230 44 A231A 44 A242 44 A 279 44 A 31 44E 31 14 44E 21 64 44E 21 73 44E 2 180B 44E 11 68B 44E 21 77 44E 11 15 44 A 223 44 A 22444 A 22544 A 226 44 A 244 44 A 24344 A 245 44 3 B 45 A 25C 44E 21 58 44E 21 42 44E 21 36 44E 21 62 44E 11 18 44 A 21944 A 22044 A 221 44 A 222 44 A 24844 A 247 44 A 246 44 A 278 44 A278B 44 2 B 44 3 C 44E 21 30 44E 11 26 44E 11 24 44E 11 9 44E 11 11 44 A 218 44 A 259 44 A 249 44 A265 44 A278A44 A 277 44 A 266 44 A 267 44 A 275 44 A274A 44 A 27444E 11 30 44E 11 66 44E 11 8 44 A 21044 A 211 44 A 21244 A 213 44 A 21444 A 215 44 A 216 44 A 25444 A 253 44 A 252 44 A 250 44 A 251 44 A 260 44 A261 44 A269 44 A 273 44E 11 42 44E 1 168C 44E 11 53 44 A 292 44E 11 57 44 A 208 44 A 209 44 A 255 44 A201C 44 A 258 44 A201D 44 A262 44 A263 44 A264 44 A268 44 A267A 45 1 B44E 11 48 44E 4 115B 44E4 115A 44 A 201 44 A 207 44 7 3 9 44 6 3 44 A201B 44E 41 15D 44 A 202 44 A 205 44 A 206 44 75 13 44 A201A 44 6 4 44E 41 9 44E 41 15C44E 41 5 44E 41 7 44 A139 44 A 166 44 A 167 44 A 204 44 A138A 44E 41 14 44C 2 B 44C 2 D 44 A 163 44 A 161 44 A 165 44 A 170 44 A170C44 A169 44 A 203 44 6 5 44 A 153 44 A 15544 A 154 44 A 156 44 A 157 44 A158 44C2 A 44 A 173 44C 1 22 44 A 162 44 A 200 44 74 1044 A 14444 A 14544 A 14644 A 147 44 A 148 44 A14944 A 15044 A 151 44C 1 1344C 1 14 44 A174 44 A170A 44 74 1144 A 142 44 A 131 44C1 A 44C 1 1544C 1 17 44 A170B44C 1 8 44 A 17644C 1 11 44C 1 12 44 74 12 44 5 1 344 A 138 44 A 13444 A 133 44C 1 2 44C 1 7 44 A 177 44 5 1 5 44 5 1 4 Applications Parcels Building Footprints B1 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) HE (Higher Education District) M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District)0 380 760 1,140 1,520190Feet I Note:Frederick County Dept ofPlanning & Development107 N Kent StSuite 202Winchester, VA 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: November 14, 2012 Stephenson MDP # 06 - 12Snowden BridgePINs:44 - A - 31B, 44 - A - 292A, 44 - A - 293 MDP # 06 - 12Snowden BridgePINs: 44 - A - 31B, 44 - A - 292A, 44 - A - 293 D FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN DRAFT 2013-2014 Fiscal Year Adopted by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors Month, Day, 2013 Recommended by the Frederick County Planning Commission Month, Day, 2013 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 2013-2014 CAPITAL PROJECTS MAP………………………………………….. 7 2013-2014 COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL PROJECTS MAP……….. 9 2013-2014 COUNTY PARKS AND REC. CAPITAL PROJECTS MAP…………11 2013-2014 TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS MAP………………..……………. 13 2013-2014 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………………………. 28 Handley Regional Library…………………………………………………..35 Transportation Committee…………………………………………………..38 Winchester Regional Airport………………………………………………. 42 County Administration…………………………………………………….. 49 Fire and Rescue……………..……………………………………………….52 Individual Fire & Rescue Company Requests……………………….56 1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FREDERICK COUNTY 2013-2014 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 3, 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 2013-2014 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 reinforced through the effort of the Parks and Recreation Department and their identification of their comprehensively planned parks including community, neighborhood, and district parks. 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 James Wood Middle School parking lot safety enhancements, a project done in conjunction with the City of Winchester to address several traffic safety concerns identified in the vicinity of James Wood Middle School over the years, has recently been completed and has therefore been removed from this year’s CIP. Previously removed, and soon to be opened, is the new transportation facility located adjacent to Armel Elementary School. The facility will house administration, driver training areas, driver and staff meeting areas, mechanical service and repair bays, inspection bay, wash bay, and fueling bays. The school renovations proposed to prepare school facilities for an all day Kindergarten program have moved off the CIP as they have been programmed to be funded and initiated. The CIP has been reflected accordingly. 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 is very positive to see the all day kindergarten program progress through the joint efforts of Frederick County Public Schools and the Board of Supervisors. The Replacement of Frederick County Middle School is the School’s top Capital improvement priority with the construction of the County’s fourth High School the second highest priority. The new high school and both a replacement and new middle school have been requested in anticipation of the future demand of a growing student population. Previously, the Sherando High School Parking Lot Improvement project was combined with softball field improvements at the school. A new project, 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. 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 new elementary schools is recommended within the UDA (Urban Development Area). However, the timeframe for these facilities has been extended out several years. 3 Parks & Recreation Baseball field lighting at both Clearbrook and Sherando Parks is the number one capital improvement priority for Parks and Recreation. Last year for the first time, the CIP reflected the desire to provide Fleet Trip vehicles to further the programming of the Department. The Fleet Vehicles remain a high priority in order to offer a comprehensive package of trips to the population of Frederick County. 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. 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. The Parks and Recreation Department has proposed to acquire land in both the eastern and western portions of the county for the development of future regional park system. Both land acquisitions call for 150-200 acres of land to accommodate the recreational needs of the growing population. 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. The majority of the recommended projects are planned for the county’s two regional parks (Sherando & Clearbrook). 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. A project that has moved up in priority for Parks and Recreation is the Abrams Creek Greenway Trail. This capital project was first recognized in last year’s CIP. 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 continues to recommend four projects, consistent with their 2011-2012 requests. The library’s top priority is a parking lot sidewalk extension promoting sidewalk access at the Bowman Library as phase 2 of the parking lot expansion project. The parking lot expansion component of the project was completed during 2011. The library wishes to extend the sidewalks to serve residents traveling from the east to Lakeside Drive. The three remaining projects request that funding be provided for new library branches throughout the county which include the areas of Gainesboro, Senseny/Greenwood Road, and Route 522 South, with the latter two being located within the UDA (Urban Development Area). 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 fifteen projects. The fifteen 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 relocation of the Senseny Road bicycle and pedestrian improvements and the Eastern Road Plan are recent additions to the CIP, added in 2010-2011. 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 one new transportation project in this year’s CIP is the Route 277 Widening and Safety Improvement project. Ranked number five, the project identifies the construction of a 4-lane divided roadway beginning at I-81 and continuing to Sherando Park. The project would include the realignment of Aylor Road to align with Stickley Drive. This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas. 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. 5 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 meet Federal Aviation requirements for general aviation facilities. The vast majority of the funding for these improvements came from the FAA and VDA. The number one priority for the Airport is the construction of a Maintenance Facility. The construction of a new general aviation terminal to support future airport operations and associated parking improvements is a project that was added to last year’s CIP and remains in this years. A new project for the airport is the Fuel Storage Facility. The number of projects that are included in this CIP has been consolidated over last year 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 Gainesboro citizen convenience center project moving forward, the number one priority is a new facility proposed as a replacement for the Albin Convenience site. The other request is for the expansion/relocation of the Gore Refuse Site to allow for a trash compactor, which will reduce operational costs, by compacting trash before it reaches the landfill. 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 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 two current fire stations in order to operate more efficiently. 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 6 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. 8 10 12 14 16 18 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 2013-2014 Capital Improvements Plan have a total project cost to the county of $697,389,668. 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 Replacement of Frederick County Middle School Description: Frederick County Middle School opened in 1965. The school contains 96,701 square feet and has a program capacity of 730 students. Currently, the building serves grades 6-8. The building is in passable condition; however, there are several major areas of concern. The replacement Frederick County Middle School (FCMS) project will have a program capacity of 850 students and will serve grades 6-8. It will have a floor area of approximately 166,000 square feet and have land acreage of approximately 35 acres. This project could be located in the western part of Frederick County between Route 50 west and Route 522 north or in the eastern part of Frederick County between Snowden Bridge and Route 50. Capital Cost: $TBD Justification: The replacement FCMS is listed as a priority project due to the near-term need to renovate the current FCMS, including major infrastructure and items dealing with ADA compliance. Further, replacement is the best option because of concern for the best building configuration for the delivery of instruction and the location of the facility. Construction Schedule: Construction will take 48 months. PRIORITY 2 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: $TBD 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 24 PRIORITY 3 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 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: $TBD 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 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 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. 25 Capital Cost: TBD 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 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: $TBD 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 7 Frederick County Administrative Office Expansion and Renovation Description: The facility contains 20,592 square feet, which does not include the 5,000 square foot Annex that has recently been constructed or the seven modular units that have been added to help address the need for additional space. The expansion and renovation will address the need for office and meeting space, will take advantage of advances in technology, and will provide mechanical, plumbing and electrical wiring to code. Capital Cost: $TBD Justification: The expansion will address the need for office & meeting space, will take advantage of advances in technology, and will update 50-year-old mechanical, plumbing and electrical wiring to code. Meeting space is at a premium, as we have only 2 sizeable meeting spaces. Electrical wiring is a safety issue, as existing circuits and outlets in overcrowded areas of the building are overloaded. All of these issues will continue to expand as the district and therefore the staff grows. Other issues to be addressed include building security, vehicular safety entering and exiting Amherst Street, conflicts between vehicles and pedestrian traffic in the parking lot, and asbestos. Construction Schedule: 30 Months 26 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: $TBD 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 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 10 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 27 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 11 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 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: $TBD 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. PRIORITY 12 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: $TBD 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. 28 Construction Schedule: Construction will take 42 months. Parks & Recreation Department Project Priority List PRIORITY 1 Baseball Field Lighting Upgrade Description: Upgrade the ballfield 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 13-14 29 PRIORITY 2 Fleet Trip Vehicles Description: 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, the department would need to upgrade our current vehicle fleet. The recommendation of replace the existing fleet with two buses and two vans to adequately offer the kind of trip package the department needs to gain active and maximum participation as well as serve existing programs that need transportation to maintain a high standard of programming. Bus #1 – 40-50 Passenger Bus, Bus #2 – 30-40 Passenger Bus, Bus #3 – 15 Passenger Bus w/Lift, Van #1 – 12 Passenger Van Capital Cost: $290,000 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 13-14 PRIORITY 3 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: $1,251,208 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 13-14. PRIORITY 4 Indoor Aquatic Facility Description: This facility would house a leisure and competitive lap swimming pool with an office, storage and locker rooms. This facility should be located on property owned or proffered to the County and would utilize approximately 8-12 acres with parking. Capital Cost: $15,163,000 Justification: There are no indoor public pools in Frederick County. By constructing the indoor pool, it would permit the department to meet citizen programming demands, provide an instructional facility, as well as provide the area with a facility that would 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 30 recreational programming for the residents of Frederick County and provide a facility for competitive scholastic programs. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 13-14. PRIORITY 5 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: $1,540,626 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 13-14. 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: $1,252,558 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 16-17. PRIORITY 7 Park Land - Eastern Frederick County Description: Parkland acquisition in the eastern portion of the county. Capital Cost: $4,490,510 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. 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 16-17. 31 PRIORITY 8 Park Land – Western Frederick County Description: Parkland acquisition in the western portion of the county. Capital Cost: $3,367,728 Justification: A new 150-200 acre regional park would be utilized by the entire county population. 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. The location of this project would provide parkland to create more accessible recreational facilities to residents in western Frederick County. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 16-17 PRIORITY 9 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: $671,062 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 16-17. PRIORITY 10 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: $1,121,998 32 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. 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 16-17. PRIORITY 11 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: $374,310 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 16-17. PRIORITY 12 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: $478,565 Justification: These facilities will provide recreational opportunities for the Clearbrook Park Service Area which will lessen the disparity between the number of passive 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 16-17. 33 PRIORITY 13 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: $1,360,610 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 16-17. PRIORITY 14 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: $513,089 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 16-17. PRIORITY 15 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: $526,355 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 16 Picnic Area- Sherando Park Description: This project includes a restroom/concession area; four picnic shelters; playground area; access paths; parking; and landscaping. Capital Cost: $804,243 34 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 17 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: $508,402 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 18 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: $8,802,605 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 19 Community Parks (5) Description: Acquisition of Parkland; 60 acres Capital Cost: $2,694,306 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 16-17. 35 PRIORITY 20 Neighborhood Parks (3) Description: Acquisition of Parkland; 20 acres Capital Cost: $447,928 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 16-17. PRIORITY 21 District Parks (Northeast and Southwest) Description: Acquisition of Parkland; 200 acres Capital Cost: $7,858,238 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 16-17. Handley Regional Library Project Priority List PRIORITY 1 Bowman Library Parking Lot and Sidewalk Extension Description: The parking lot addition is nearly completed. Phase 2, a sidewalk at Bowman Library, has been revised to reflect Frederick County’s emphasis on complete streets. A 10-foot-wide, 640-linear-foot shared use path will provide a safe means for people to reach Bowman Library by foot or bicycle from Lakeside Drive. Capital Cost: $42,880 Justification: In 2010/2011, 135,532 individuals entered the Bowman Library. The Library serves all age groups from very young children to senior citizens and provides recreational and education materials for them. The library is a favorite location for families to visit together and serves many children and adults when they are working on school assignments or self-improvement. The library supplies computer access for word processing and other office applications and for Internet usage. The Bowman Library has 36 proved very popular with children and families. Children from the Lakeside Drive side of the Library often bicycle or walk to the library. If they bicycle, they ride on Tasker Road where the traffic often goes faster than the 45 mph speed limit. If they walk, they can walk across the field between the library and Lakeside Drive, and many children jump the drainage ditch, rather than walk to the corner where it is easy to get across. Mothers, who want to walk, complain they have to walk on Tasker Road, where there is no sidewalk, when they have children in strollers. There is a bicycle rack near the entrance to the library. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY13-14 (3-6 Months) PRIORITY 2 Northern Frederick County – Gainesboro Library Branch Description: Construction of a 7,000 to 10,000 sq.ft. branch library. 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. The acquisition of the land of 3 to 4 acres would be in fiscal year 2013/2014. There is discussion of a possible reuse of the old Gainesboro School as a library branch, but this is a decision to be made by the Board of Supervisors after further study. Handley Regional Library currently has used furniture and shelving stockpiled at the old school with almost enough capacity (except for books and equipment) to open and run a library. It would be a mish mash of styles and colors but would be enough to function. If the Board of Supervisors decides the most cost-effective choice is to demolish the old school, the land could be a possible site for a new library building. Capital Cost: $2,279,575 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 15-16 PRIORITY 3 Frederick County Library Branch – Senseny/Greenwood Description: Construction of a 10,000 sq.ft. branch library with expansion possible to 37 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 PRIORITY 4 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 38 Transportation Committee Project Priority List PRIORITY 1 Planning, Engineering, Right of Way and Construction Work for Route 37 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 2 Interstate 81, Exit 310 Improvements Description: Construct improvements to Exit 310 interchange. Capital Cost: $30,000,000 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 3 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 4 East Tevis Street Extension 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. Capital Cost: $2,600,000 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 39 location is as identified by joint planning efforts between the county, VDOT, and the developer. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 5 Route 277 Widening and Safety Improvements 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: $40,000,000 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 6 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 7 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 8 Widening of Route 11 North to the West Virginia State Line Description: Improve Route 11 to a divided 4 and 6-lane facility as detailed in the Eastern Road Plan. 40 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 Fox Drive 41 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 PRIORITY 13 Renaissance Drive 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 is under construction. PRIORITY 14 Senseny Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Description: This project will construct bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Senseny Road from Greenwood Road to the I-81 crossover. Capital Cost: $2,000,000 Justification: This project will improve pedestrian safety along a corridor surrounded by residential development and centered upon the Senseny Road Elementary School. Construction Schedule: N/A PRIORITY 15 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: $2,000,000 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 42 Winchester Regional Airport Project Priority List PRIORITY 1 Maintenance Facility Description: Construction of a maintenance equipment and storage facility. Capital Cost: $550,000 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 13-14 PRIORITY 2 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: $14,284,210 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 13-14 PRIORITY 3 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: $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 17+ PRIORITY 4 Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64B-A-40 43 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: $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 17+ PRIORITY 5 Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 70 Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64 A 70 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is located within or near the airport primary surfaces. Capital Cost: $225,000 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 13-14 PRIORITY 6 Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 71 Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64 A 71 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is located within or near the airport primary surfaces. Capital Cost: $225,000 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 13-14 PRIORITY 7 44 Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 69 Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64 A 69 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 13-14 PRIORITY 8 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: $268,000 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 PRIORITY 9 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: $268,000 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 45 PRIORITY 10 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: $250,000 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 11 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: $2,500,000 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 14-15 PRIORITY 12 Expand 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 15-16 46 PRIORITY 13 Land Acquisition – Bufflick Road – Parcels 64 A 63 Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire parcel 64 A 63 on Bufflick Road. This parcel is critical to airport development because a portion is located within or near the airport primary surfaces. Capital Cost: $250,000 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 14 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: $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 15-16 PRIORITY 15 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. 47 Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 16-17 PRIORITY 16 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 16-17 PRIORITY 17 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 18 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: $250,000 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 48 safety on the airport once the parcels are acquired and vertical obstructions are minimized. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 17+ PRIORITY 19 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 17+ PRIORITY 20 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 13-14 49 County Administration Project Priority List PRIORITY 1 Gainesboro Convenience Site Relocation Description: The relocation of the Gainesboro citizens’ convenience site to property located within the Gainesboro community is planned for the FY 13/14. Design work will be completed in-house. A fenced, accessible two-acre site will be constructed along North Frederick Pike in close proximity to the existing site, located on Old Gainesboro Road. This project will require several months to complete and include fencing, earthwork, retaining wall, electric, equipment, lighting, paving and landscaping. It is intended that this facility be located on a portion of the Old Gainesboro Elementary School property. Capital Cost: $268,000 Justification: Approximately 12,400 residents (2009 population) are served by the Gainesboro facility. The refuse site serves a wide geographic area from Gainesboro westward to the Cross Junction, Whitacre and Reynolds Store communities. The number of vehicles using the site each month, 4,916, or an average of 189 a day, increased by 10 percent between 2009 and 2010. By far the busiest days are Saturday and Sunday when up to 224 residents use the facility each day, a number consistent with 2008 and 2009 figures which showed an increase of 28 percent in weekend traffic over the previous year. As more residents move into the western end of the county where curbside pickup is more expensive or nonexistent, this number will continue to grow. As an aside, it should be pointed out that a lack of adequate waste disposal facilities in this area will lead to an increase in illegal dumping and improper disposal. Construction Schedule: Start in FY 12-13 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: $374,850 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 50 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 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 14-15 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: $225,350 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 51 to general governmental facilities 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 governmental entities. Construction Schedule: N/A 52 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 treasure, commissioner of the 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 53 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, Treasurers 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 54 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 Round Hill Fire and Rescue Station (#15) Relocation Description: The new station RHCFRC plans to build will be a 17,801 sf, fully NFPA- compliant, single-story, pre-engineered structure with 4 double drive-thru bays and 14’ clearances. The bays will take up 5,340 sf and include a turnout gear alcove for 50 lockers, laundry room, tool shop and store rooms. The bays will be able to accommodate modern-sized apparatus, including a ladder truck, and will give the company ample room for future expansion. The drive-thru design will reduce the possibility of backing accidents, as well as ease the flow of apparatus into and out of the station. The bays will be equipped with spot drains for each vehicle to minimize slip-and-fall accidents. In 2006, a site inventory by Stewart Cooper Newell Architects identified more than 10 features of RHCFRC’s station not in compliance with NFPA standards. Perhaps the most serious is the lack of proper separation between sleeping and vehicles spaces. The men’s bunkroom door opens directly into the bays. Combined with inadequate hazardous exhaust controls, this creates serious safety concerns for those sleeping inside. This facility will also be able to accommodate living and sleeping quarters. A community center is also planned with this project and will be approximately 10,000 sq. ft. accommodating 400 persons for holding fundraising events. The entire project will be relocated to an area of 3 to 5 acres. Capital Cost: $4,281,696 Justification: The operational section of RHCFRC’s present station is a brick-and-block structure of approximately 2,277 square feet built in 1954. A wing of pre-engineered and block construction was added in 1981 to increase office and public space. Today, the station is no longer adequate to house the company’s 30 firefighters and 8 vehicles in a safe and efficient manner. The operating space is unsafe and cramped, and limits the 55 services that can be provided to a growing community. First due population for the 2000 censes was 8,089. The continued growth in the area has brought additional commercial development (Walmart, hotels, and planned development by the hospital, shopping and restaurants). The area includes a high school and elementary school. Construction Schedule: To be determined PRIORITY 7 Clear Brook Fire and Rescue Station (#13) Relocation Description: This project includes the relocation and building of a 22,000 square foot facility to accommodate ten or more pieces of emergency equipment and to house living and sleeping areas for staff. A community center of approximately 10,000 square feet, with a capacity of 400 people, is also planned; it would be used for fundraising events and other activities. The project would need a parcel of three to five acres. Capital Cost: $4,521,000 Justification: The existing facility serving the Round Hill area is 50+ years old and not large enough to accommodate the equipment needed to serve the commercial growth in the Round Hill community. This community includes approximately 9,000 households, two schools, and the Winchester Medical Center. 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. 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 56 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 Ambulance Replacement Project Project Cost: $150,000 Greenwood Vol. Fire & Rescue Company Apparatus ventilation system project Project Cost: $100,000 North Mountain Vol. Fire & Rescue Company Building Expansion Project Cost: $314,766 E ATTACHMENT 1 ARTICLE IV AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Part 502 – R5 Residential Recreational Community District § 165-502.05 Design requirements. F. Open space. A minimum of 35% of the gross area of any proposed development shall be designated as common open space. This open space shall be for purposes of environmental protection and for the common use of residents of the development. No more than 50% of the required open space shall be within lakes and ponds, wetlands or steep slopes. The Board of Supervisors may allow a larger amount of steep slopes to be utilized where the developer can demonstrate a viable plan for the use of these areas. Where age-restricted When communities are approved with private streets, a minimum of 45% of open space shall be required. K. Streets. The residential recreational community development shall be provided with a complete system of public streets dedicated to the Virginia Department of Transportation. The road system shall conform with the Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan and with road improvement plans adopted by the County. (1) Within any portion of a residential recreational community which qualifies as an age-restricted community, the Board of Supervisors may waive the public street requirement and allow for the installation of private streets, provided that all road sections meet the minimum thickness based on the Virginia Department of Transportation pavement design standards and all storm sewer, signage, guardrails, and any other accessory features shall be designed following the VDOT Manual of Road and Bridge Standards streets conform to the construction details and materials of the Virginia Department of Transportation Standards and that a program for the perpetual maintenance of all streets by the property owner’s association is provided which is acceptable to the Board of Supervisors and the Transportation Planner. (a) Three classes of private streets shall be permitted in age-restricted communities and shall be identified on a MDP as follows: [1] Greenways. All private streets with a projected ADT of over 3,000 shall have a minimum right-of-way of 50 feet and shall have no direct lot frontage. Greenways shall be lined on both sides with street trees having a minimum caliper of two inches at the time of planting, spaced not more than 50 feet apart. Along the portions of right-of-way which abut mature woodland, the Planning Director may waive the requirement for street trees. The horizontal center line geometrics and vertical profile design shall meet the VDOT criteria for subdivision streets with a design speed of 30 miles per hour (mph). [2] Neighborhood collectors. All private streets with a projected ADT of over 400 shall have a minimum right-of-way of 50 feet and may have lot frontage. Neighborhood collectors shall be lined on both sides with street trees having a minimum caliper of two inches at ATTACHMENT 1 the time of planting, spaced not more than 50 feet apart. The horizontal center line geometrics and vertical profile design shall meet the VDOT criteria for subdivision streets with a design speed of 30 mph. [3] Local streets. All private streets with a projected ADT of 400 or less shall have a minimum right-of-way of 30 feet and may have lot frontage. Local streets shall be lined with street trees having a minimum caliper of two inches at the time of planting, spaced not more than 50 feet apart. The horizontal center line geometrics and vertical profile design shall meet the VDOT criteria for subdivision streets with a design speed of 20 mph. (b) The subdivision design plans and final subdivision plats for all lots contained within an age- restricted community that utilize private roads shall include the following language: The proposed private streets will not be maintained by the Virginia Department of Transportation or the County of Frederick. The maintenance and improvement of said private streets shall be the sole responsibility of the owners of the lots within the age-restricted community which are provided access via the private streets. (b) [ Developments utilizing private streets shall meet the following conditions: 1] The subdivision design plans and final subdivision plats for all lots that utilize private streets shall include language that states “The private streets within this development are not intended for inclusion in the system of state highways and will not be maintained by VDOT or Frederick County. Frederick County and VDOT have no, and will have no, responsibility for the maintenance, repair, or replacement of the private streets within this development. The maintenance and improvement of said private streets shall be the sole responsibility of the property owners’ association”. [2] The developer shall establish a reserve fund dedicated solely for the maintenance of the private streets within the development. The reserve fund shall consist of a minimum of ten percent of all dues collected from the residents. The percentage may be reduced by the developer or the property owner’s association only after a reserve study has been completed and said study shows that a lesser amount is necessary to maintain the private street system within the development. [3] Sales brochures or other literature and documents, provided by the seller of lots served by such private streets, shall include information regarding responsibility for maintenance, repair, replacement, and covenants pertaining to such lots, including a statement that the County has no, and will have no, responsibility for the maintenance, repair, or replacement of private streets. (2) Within R-5 residential recreation community developments approved prior to 1980, the Board of Supervisors may allow the extension of existing private roads if no other means of access is available. ATTACHMENT 1 (3) Within developments utilizing private streets, a certified professional engineer, licensed in the State of Virginia, shall be employed by the developer to monitor and supervise the materials used; the adequacy of the subgrade; the installation of drainage structures, curb and gutter and all concrete items; and all road, driveway and parking area construction activities, including material compaction, grading tolerances and compliance with the plans and specifications. Prior to issuance of the last certificate of occupancy, the certified professional engineer, licensed in the State of Virginia, shall provide the county with certification that each phase of construction met density requirements; that all material depths were verified for compliance; and that the road and parking areas have been constructed in strict accordance with the plans and specifications. L. Curb and gutter. All public and private streets shall be provided with curb and gutter. f DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 1 ARTICLE VIII DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND APPROVALS Part 801 – Master Development Plans § 165-801.01 Intent. The purpose of the master development plan (MDP) is to promote orderly and planned subdivision and development of property within Frederick County. It is the purpose of the MDP to ensure that such development occurs in a manner that suits the characteristics of the land, is harmonious with adjoining property and is in the best interest of the general public. The MDP shall be used to illustrate the characteristics of the property proposed for subdivision and/or development and of surrounding properties § 165-801.02 When required. and ensure that the requirements of the County Code have been satisfied. A. A preliminary Master Development Plan (MDP) and a final MDP shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Development, and shall be presented to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors as an informational item. for Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. approval Ultimately, the MDP must receive administrative approval from the Director of Planning and Development and the County Administrator prior to any subdivision or development of property in any of the following zoning districts: RP Residential Performance District R4 Residential Planned Community District R5 Residential Recreational Community District MH1 Mobile Home Community District HE High Education District MS Medical Support District B1 Neighborhood Business District B2 Business General District B3 Industrial Transition District OM Office-Manufacturing Park District M1 Industrial Light District M2 Industrial General District EM Extractive Manufacturing District DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 2 B. The MDP shall at least include the subject property proposed for subdivision or development as well as all contiguous land under single or common ownership in the above zoning districts. C. A preliminary MDP may be submitted with an application for a rezoning but shall not be considered binding until approval of a final MDP. § 165-801.03 Waivers. A. RP, R4, R5, MS and MH1 Districts. The Director of Planning and Development may waive the requirements of a MDP in the RP (Residential Performance District), the R4 (Residential Planned Community District), the R5 (Residential Recreational Community District), Medical Support District and the MH-1 (Mobile Home Community District), if the proposed property for subdivision or development: (1) Contains 10 or less single-family detached rural traditional, single-family detached traditional or single-family detached urban traditional detached single-family dwelling units (all other permitted housing types shall require a MDP); (2) Is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for future development or subdivision; (3) Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding properties and land uses; and (4) Does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of its zoning district and the intent of this article. B. M1, EM and M2 Districts. The Director of Planning and Development may waive the requirement of a MDP in the M1 (Light Industrial), Zoning District, the EM (Extractive Manufacturing), Zoning District or the M2 (Industrial General) Zoning Districts if the proposed subdivision or development: (1) Includes no new streets, roads or rights-of-way, does not further extend any existing or dedicated street, road or rights-of-way and does not significantly change the layout of any existing or dedicated street, road or rights-of-way; (2) Does not propose any stormwater management system designed to serve more than one lot and does not necessitate significant changes to existing stormwater management systems designed to serve more than one lot; (3) Is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for future development or subdivision; (4) Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding properties and land uses; and (5) That such development does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of this chapter. C. B1, B2, B3, MS and HE Districts. The Director of Planning and Development may waive the requirement of a master development plan in the B1 (Neighborhood Business), B2 (Business General), B3 (Industrial Transition), MS (Medical Support) or HE (Higher Education) Zoning Districts if the proposed subdivision or development: DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 3 (1) Contains less than five acres in the B1 District and less than 10 acres in the B2, B3, MS or HE District; (2) Includes no new streets, roads or rights-of-way, does not further extend any existing or dedicated street and does not significantly change the layout of any existing or dedicated street; (3) Does not propose any stormwater management system designed to serve more than one lot and does not necessitate significant changes to existing stormwater management systems designed to serve more than one lot; (4) Is not an integral portion of a property proposed or planned for future development or subdivision; (5) Is planned to be developed in a manner that is harmonious with surrounding properties and land uses; and (6) That such development does not substantially affect the purpose and intent of this chapter. § 165-801.04 Review Preapplication Prior to submission of a preliminary master development plan for conference. review approval, the Department of Planning and Development staff may require, or an applicant may request a the applicant shall request a review preapplication conference with the County staff . The purpose of the preapplication review conference is to review and discuss the nature of the proposal in relation to the requirements of the County Code and to discuss the preparation of a master development plan. A. If required, at the preapplication conference the applicant shall provide a land use plan describing the following: (1) The general location of the site. (2) The general location of proposed roads. (3) The general location and types of proposed uses, environmental features on the site, housing types or open space. (4) The uses on adjoining properties. § 165-801.05 Preapplication conference. Applicants who are proposing a development with a mixture of housing types or uses or with housing types or uses that are different from those on adjoining properties shall request a preapplication conference with the Planning Commission. Applicants for other types of development proposals may request such a conference. DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 4 A. The purpose of the preapplication conference shall be to discuss the proposal in relation to the requirements of the County Code and to obtain advice on the preparation of the master development plan. B. At the preapplication conference, the applicant shall provide a land use plan describing the following: (1) The general location of the site. (2) The general location of proposed roads. (3) The general location of proposed uses, environmental areas, housing types or open space. (4) The uses on adjoining properties. C. The Planning Commission may, at its sole discretion, make or refuse to make recommendations as the result of the preapplication conference. Any recommendations made by the Planning Commission at or in response to the preapplication conference shall not be binding upon the applicant or upon the Planning Commission in its review of the preliminary master development plan. § 165-801.10 165-801.5 Contents of preliminary master development plans. A. The following items shall be required for MDP’s in all Zoning Districts. All required items shall be shown clearly on the plan. All preliminary MDP's shall be prepared in accordance with the following specifications: (1) The scale shall be one inch equals 100 feet or larger (the ratio of feet to inches shall be no more than one hundred feet to one inch) or at a scale acceptable to the Director. The scale shall be sufficient so that all features are discernible. (2) No sheet shall exceed 42 inches in size unless approved by the Director of Planning and Development. If the MDP is prepared on more than one sheet, match lines shall clearly indicate where the sheets join. (3) All MDP's shall include a North arrow, a scale and a legend describing all symbols. (4) A boundary survey of the entire property related to true meridian and certified by a certified Virginia surveyor, architect or engineer, with all dimensions in feet and decimals of feet, is required for all MDP'S. (5) The total area of the property shall be specified on the MDP. (6) The topography shall be shown at contour intervals acceptable to the Director. (7) The title of the proposed project; the date, month, year the plan was prepared or revised; the name of the applicant(s), owner(s) and contract owner(s); and the names of the individuals or firms preparing the plan shall be clearly specified. DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 5 (8) A schedule of phases, with the approximate location of phase boundaries and the order in which the phases are to be developed, shall be provided. (9) The use of all adjoining properties shall be clearly designated on the MDP. (10) All existing, or approved or planned public roads, streets or rights-of-way on the project or within 2,000 feet of the boundaries of the project. (11) Any approved proffers associated with property. (12) The location and treatment proposed for all historical structures and sites recognized as significant by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or as identified on the Virginia Historical Landmarks Commission Survey for Frederick County. (13) A history of all land divisions that have occurred in relation to the tract since the adoption of this requirement. (14) The approximate location of sewer and water mains with statements concerning the connection with and availability of existing facilities. (15) The ownership and use of all adjoining parcels, including parcels across road right of ways. B. Contents of a preliminary master development plan in the RP (Residential Performance) District, the R4 (Residential Planned Community) District, the R5 (Residential Recreational Community) District and the MH-1 (Mobile Home Community) District. The preliminary MDP shall contain a conceptual plan, showing the location and functional relationship between all proposed housing types and land uses, including the following information: (1) A land use plan, showing the location, arrangement and approximate boundaries of all proposed land uses. (2) The approximate acreage in common open space, in each use and housing type and in roads, streets or rights-of-way for each phase and the total development. (3) The location and approximate boundaries of proposed housing types conceptually shown in accord with residential performance dimensional requirements. (4) The proposed number of dwelling units of each type in each phase and in the total development. (5) The location and approximate boundaries of existing environmental features, including floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater retention areas, steep slopes and woodlands. (6) The location of environmental protection land to be included in common open space. (7) The approximate acreage of each type of environmental protection land, the amount and percentage of each type that is to be disturbed and the amount and percentage of each type to be placed in common open space. DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 6 (8) The amount, approximate boundaries and location of common open space, with the percentage of the total acreage of the site to be placed in common open space. (9) The location and general configuration of recreational facilities, with a general statement of the types of recreational facilities to be provided. (10) The location and extent of proposed buffers, with statements, profiles, cross sections or examples clearly specifying the screening to be provided. (11) The proposed location, arrangement, and right-of-way widths of roads and streets, including roads and streets providing access to adjoining parcels, shall be in accordance with § 165-202.04. (12) The location and arrangement of street entrances, driveways and parking areas. (13) The approximate location of sewer and water mains with statements concerning the connection with and availability of existing facilities. (13) A conceptual plan for stormwater management with the location of stormwater facilities designed to serve more than one lot. (14) Calculations describing all proposed bonus factors with the location of and specifications for bonus improvements, when proposed. (16) The location and treatment proposed for all historical structures and sites recognized as significant by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or as identified on the Virginia Historical Landmarks Commission Survey for Frederick County. (17) A history of all land divisions that have occurred in relation to the tract since the adoption of this requirement. C. Contents of a preliminary master development plan in the M1 (Light Industrial) District, the M2 (Industrial General) District, the EM (Extractive Manufacturing) District, the HE (Higher Education) District, the B1 (Neighborhood Business) District, the B2 (Business General) District, the B3 (Industrial Transition) District, the OM (Office-Manufacturing Par)k District and the MS (Medical Support) District. The preliminary MDP shall contain a conceptual plan, showing the location and functional relationship between streets and land uses, including the following: (1) A conceptual plan, showing the location and arrangement of proposed uses. (2) The location and approximate boundaries of existing environmental features, including floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater detention areas, steep slopes and woodlands, as defined, and the approximate acreage of each type of environmental feature, including the amount and percentage of each type that is to be disturbed and the amount and percentage of each type to be placed in open or landscaped areas. (3) The proposed location and arrangement of all streets and proposed and existing utility systems. DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 7 (4) The proposed location of entrances to the development from existing public streets. The location and arrangement of existing and proposed public or private roads, existing or proposed entrances, and driveways from existing and proposed public or private streets. (5) A conceptual plan for stormwater management and description and the location of all stormwater facilities designed to serve more than one parcel. (6) The location and treatment proposed for all historical structures and sites recognized as significant by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors or identified on the Virginia Historical Landmarks Commission Survey for Frederick County. (7) All proposed buffering and screening required by this chapter. The location and extent of proposed buffers required by this Chapter, with statements, profiles, cross sections or examples clearly specifying the screening to be provided. (8) The use of adjoining parcels and the location of adjoining streets and utilities. § 165-801.06 Preliminary Master development plan Applicants shall submit 42 submission. the number of copies of the preliminary MDP to the Department of Planning and Development specified by the Department of Planning and Development MDP application, together with completed application materials required by the Department of Planning and Development. Final approval of the preliminary MDP shall be given by the Board of Supervisors. A. Applicants shall provide approval comments on the proposed development from various review agencies or departments as required by the Department of Planning and Development. The submission shall be complete and the application shall commence through the public meeting process when the plans, application materials and review agency approval comments have been received by the Director of Planning and Development, when a review conference has been held, when a preapplication conference has been held, if required, and when the preliminary master development plan has been reviewed by the Design Review Committee, if required. B. The Director of Planning and Development may require the applicant to present the preliminary MDP to a design for review. The committee shall make recommendations to the Planning Commission concerning whether the plan meets the requirements of the Frederick County Code. C B. When the submission is complete, the Director of Planning and Development shall submit the plans, application materials and review agency approval comments to the Planning Commission for its as an informational item. (1) The Planning Commission shall act on the preliminary MDP within 60 days of the date of the presentation of the plan to the full Commission. The Planning Commission shall either approve the plan, approve it with required changes or deny the plan. If the Planning Commission fails to act within 60 days, the plan shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors without recommendation. (2) The Planning Commission shall notify the Board of Supervisors of its action on the proposed preliminary MDP and of any required changes or reasons for denial. If the preliminary MDP is DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 8 denied by the Planning Commission, the applicant may choose to withdraw the application and resubmit it with changes as a new plan, rather than proceeding to the Board of Supervisors. However, the applicant may choose to proceed with the recommendation of denial to the Board of Supervisors. D C. Following the informational presentation of the MDP to action of the Planning Commission, copies of the plan, application materials and agency comments shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for its as an informational item. consideration. The Board shall either approve the preliminary MDP, approve it with required changes or deny the plan. E D. The preliminary MDP submitted to the Board of Supervisors for review shall not be substantially changed from plans reviewed by the Planning Commission. Changes may be made that were discussed or required by the Planning Commission. Other substantial changes to the plan shall require that the Planning Commission review the plan as a new preliminary MDP. F. Site plans or final subdivision plats may be submitted concurrently with preliminary master development plans for review according to the procedures set forth in this chapter and Chapter 144, Subdivision of Land, of the County Code. Any such plans may be considered concurrently by the Planning Commission and may be referred to the Board of Supervisors for approval. Master Development Plan Approval Process § 165-801.07 Final master development plan. Preapplication Conference with Staff if required or requested Applicant submits completed MDP application to Staff, including all agency approval comments. MDP is presented to the Planning Commission as an information item. All comments are forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. MDP is presented to the Board of Supervisors as an informational item. Final MDP approval by Staff. Final subdivision or site plan can be submitted for review. DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 9 A. The final MDP shall conform to all requirements of the County Code. A.B Applicants shall submit 14 a minimum of five copies of the final MDP to the Department of Planning and Development. Final approval of the final MDP shall be given by the Director of Planning and Development and the County Administrator. B. C. The Director shall approve the final MDP if all requirements of the County Code and all review agencies have been met, and if a preliminary MDP was presented to approved by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors and if all required changes have been made and all requirements of the County Code have been met, within 60 days of its submission. Failure of the Director to act in 60 days shall be deemed approval. D. A MDP shall not be considered final until it is signed by the Director of Planning and Development and the County Administrator. § 165-801.08 Changes to approved Master Development P Changes to an approved MDP shall occur only after lans. review § 165-801.12 approval by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors using the procedures required for the approval of a new plan. The Director of Planning and Development may approve minor changes without following the full procedures, if such approval does not violate the intent of this chapter and section. Such minor changes shall not include increases in the density or intensity of development, changes to entrance or street layout, changes to stormwater layout or other major design changes. 9 The Board of Supervisors may adopt a schedule of fees to be paid by the applicant to the County for the costs associated with the review of the MDP. Master development plan review fees. § 165-801.09 Preliminary master development plan submission. A preliminary MDP shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. The preliminary MDP is to serve as a conceptual review plan and is not intended to show the location of individual lot lines or structures. Master Development Plan Approval Process DRAFT REVISIONS TO PART 801 10 Various MDP References – Chapter 165 (Table of Contents) ARTICLE VIII DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND APPROVALS Part 801 – Master Development Plans 165-801.01 Intent. 165-801.02 When required. 165-801.03 Waivers. 165-801.04 Review conference. 165-801.05 Preapplication conference. Preapplication conference Contents of master development plans. 165-801.06 Preliminary Master development plan 165-801.07 Final master development plan. submission. 165-801.08 Changes to approved master development 165-801.09 Preliminary Master development plan submission. plans. 165-801.10 Contents of preliminary master development plans. Master development plan review fees. 165-801.11 Final master development plans. 165-801.12 Master development plan review fees. ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Part 101 – General Provisions § 165-101.02 Definitions & word usage. MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN - A general plan of development approved reviewed by the Board of Supervisors for new developments in certain zoning districts before subdivision or site plan approval, according to the requirements of this chapter. Part 202 – Off-Street Parking, Loading and Access § 165-202.04 Streets; Inter-parcel connectors. All residential subdivisions of more than 10 lots in the RP, R-4, R-5, and MS (with residential uses) Zoning Districts shall have streets connecting to adjoining parcels. If adjoining parcels are developed or have had a subdivision plat approved, the connecting street shall coordinate with the existing or platted streets in the adjoining parcel. If an adjoining parcel is undeveloped, the location of the connecting street shall be as shown on the Master Development Plan (MDP) approved reviewed by the Board of Supervisors. This requirement for inter-parcel connector streets may be waived by the Board of Supervisors upon approval of the Master Development Plan (MDP) if the Board finds: i) that a connector street to an adjoining parcel is not likely to be needed; ii) that the connector street would be required to be placed in a location which is impractical for location of a street; iii) that an adjoining undeveloped Various MDP References – Chapter 165 parcel is not likely to be developed in a manner to make a connector street necessary or appropriate; or iv) other good cause shown by the applicant not contrary to good planning policy. All inter-parcel connectors, public or private, shall be built to the Virginia Department of Transportation engineering standards. Part 402 – RP Residential Performance District § 165-402.01 Intent. B. Within this Part 402, a number of general performance requirements are identified. When a housing development has satisfied these requirements, this Part 402 is intended to provide a large degree of flexibility in development and housing design. This design process is accomplished through a master development plan which is designed in cooperation with the County staff and Planning Commission and adopted reviewed by the Board of Supervisors. The layout, phasing, density and intensity of a development is determined through the adoption of the master plan by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. C. It is the intent of this Part 402 to allow a mixture of housing types on the land within an approved master development plan. Within this Part 402, the permitted multifamily development percentages and densities are identified. Multifamily housing types are allowed only when they adjoin similar uses or are properly separated from different uses. The preliminary master development plan shall specify the amount and percentages of all proposed housing types. The preliminary master development plan requires specific approval of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. ARTICLE V PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS Part 501 – R4 Residential Planned Community District § 165-501.01 Intent. The intention of the Residential Planned Community District is to provide for a mixture of housing types and uses within a carefully planned setting. All land to be contained within the Residential Planned Community District shall be included within an approved master development plan. The layout, phasing, density and intensity of development is determined through the final approval adoption of the master development plan by the County the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Special care is taken in the approval of the master development plan to ensure that the uses on the land are arranged to provide for compatibility of uses, to provide environmental protection and to avoid adverse impacts on surrounding properties and facilities. The district is intended to create new neighborhoods with an appropriate balance between residential, employment and service uses. Innovative design is encouraged. Special care is taken in the approval of R4 developments to ensure that necessary facilities, Various MDP References – Chapter 165 roads and improvements are available or provided to support the R4 development. Planned community developments shall only be approved in conformance with the policies in the Comprehensive Plan. Part 502 – R5 Residential Recreational Community District § 165-502.02 Master development plan. All land to be contained within the Residential Recreational Community District shall be included within an approved master development plan. The layout, phasing, density and intensity of development is determined through the final approval adoption of the master development plan by the County § 165-502.05 Design requirements. the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Special care is taken in the approval of the master development plan to ensure that the uses on the land are arranged to provide for compatibility of uses, to provide environmental protection and to avoid adverse impacts on surrounding properties and facilities. Innovative design is encouraged. Special care is taken in the approval of R5 developments to ensure that necessary facilities, roads and improvements are available or provided to support the R5 development. Residential recreational community developments shall only be approved in conformance with the policies in the Comprehensive Plan. M. Alternative access. A combined system of pedestrian and/or bicycle access, in the form of paved sidewalks, interior walkways or bike paths, shall be provided to allow walking or bicycling between every use, structure or recreational facility. Such access shall be connected with existing travelways adjacent to the residential recreational community development. In age-restricted communities, at the time of master development plan approval review , the Board of Supervisors may allow local streets without sidewalks to be used and incorporated into the system of pedestrian and bicycle access. The type and nature of trails to be used shall be identified, detailed and approved on the master development plan. Part 504 – MS Medical Support District § 165-504.03 District area, floor-to-area ratios, and residential gross densities. C. The Board of Supervisors may provide for the administrative approval of a parcel subdivision which fronts on private street systems during the master development plan approval review process. ATTACHMENT 1 1 Chapter 122 – Nuisances § 122-1. Definitions. For the purpose of this chapter, the following words and terms shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them by this section: NUISANCE - That which annoys, vexes or creates a health hazard or that which, by its use or existence, works annoyance, injury or damage to others. OFFENSIVE MATTER - Feathers, offal, dead animals or portions thereof, meat wastes, blood, tankage or any putrescible, organic matter; provided, however, that the term "offensive matter" shall not be construed to apply to livestock manure and poultry manure. OWNER - Shall mean any person holding title to, or having an interest in the property according to the Frederick County Circuit Court Land Records for any lot or land in the county; a lessee, tenant or principal occupant of any land or lot in the county; or an agent of a person holding title to, or with an interest in, such land or lot, having care, custody, control or management of the land or lot; or fiduciaries holding title to, or with an interest in, such land or lot, or having the care, custody, control or management of land or lots in the county for others. § 122-5. Cutting of grass, weeds, and foreign growth required; notice. Prohibited growths generally. WEEDS - Shall mean grass, weeds, bushes, vines, poison ivy, poison oak or any other foreign growth, other than trees, ornamental shrubbery, flowers and garden vegetables. A. It shall be unlawful for the owners of developed or undeveloped property located in a platted residential subdivision, within a residentially zoned district (RP Residential Performance, R4 Residential Planned Community, R5 Residential Recreational Community, and MH1 Mobile Home Community) to permit grass, weeds and other foreign growth standing more than 18 inches in height to remain on property which lies within 100 feet of any dwelling or building. Any person who fails, refuses or neglects to cut or remove such grass, weeds and other foreign growth to a height not to exceed three inches, within 10 days after receiving written notice to do so from the Zoning Administrator or other properly designated official, shall be guilty of a violation. B. It shall be unlawful for the owner of any developed or undeveloped property zoned B1 (Neighborhood Business) or B2 (Business General) to permit grass, weeds and other foreign growth standing more than 18 inches in height to remain on property which lies within 100 feet of any dwelling, building or road right-of-way. ATTACHMENT 1 2 § 122-5.1. Inspection and notice to cut. § 122-5.1. 122-5.2. Work done by County; costs to become lien. When the Zoning Administrator, or his or her designee, has determined that a violation of Section 122-5 exists, he or she shall notify the owner of the land or lot on which the violation exists to cut or cause to be cut the weeds complained of to a height not to exceed three inches, within 10 days of receiving written notice. Such notice shall be in writing and shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the offending premises and sent by first-class mail to the last-known address of the owner and to the occupant of the offending premises, or may be served by a special conservator of the peace in any manner of delivering process authorized by law. For purposes of this article, one notice per growing season shall constitute "reasonable notice" so long as the notice indicates that the owner must cut the weeds as often as reasonably necessary during the growing season. A. In the event of a violation of § 122-5, the If weeds are not cut within the time required by the notice provided for in Section § 122-5.1., the Zoning Administrator or other properly designated official shall may have such grass, weeds or other foreign growth cut by its own agents or employees, in which event the reasonable cost thereof shall be chargeable to and paid by the owners of such property and may cause them to be cut and the cost and expense thereof assessed against the owner of such property. Such assessment shall be B. Every charge authorized by this section with which the owners of any such property shall have been assessed and collected by the County as taxes and levies are collected. which remains unpaid shall constitute a lien against such property. ATTACHMENT 1 ARTICLE IV AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Part 401 – RA Rural Areas District § 165-401.07 Setback requirements. The following setback requirements shall apply to all parcels within the RA Rural Areas Zoning District. A. Setbacks for all lots other than rural preservation lots shall be as set out below. (1) Front setbacks. The front setback for any principal or accessory use or structure located on a traditional five-acre lot shall be 60 feet from the property line or right-of-way of the street, road or ingress/egress easement. (2) Side or rear setbacks. The minimum side or rear setback for any principal use or structure shall be determined by the primary use of the adjoining parcel as follows: *§ 165-401.07B Remains Unchanged C. Board waiver. The Board may allow the above-referenced setbacks to be reduced if the constraints of the setbacks create an undue hardship on existing parcels of record. Such requests and justification to reduce the setbacks shall be presented to the Planning Commission for a recommendation that is forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Adjoining Parcel Size Setback (Side and Rear) (feet) 6 acres or less 50 More than 6 acres 100 Orchard 200 Agricultural and Forestral District 200