PC 01-21-98 Meeting AgendaAGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The Board Room
Frederick County Administration Building
Winchester, Virginia
JANUARY 21, 1998
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Bi -Monthly Report .................................................. A
2) Committee Reports ................................................. B
3) Citizen Comments .................................................. C
PUBLIC HEARING
4) Proposed Amendment to Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts,
Sections 165-82.B, C, and D; Article IV, Section 165-48.7; and Article XXI, Section
165-145 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance to allow for `flex -tech'
development within the B2, B3, and Ml zoning districts of Frederick County. Performance
standards will be utilized to guide appropriate development scale and design.
(Mr. Lawrence) .................................................... D
PUBLIC MEETING
5) Master Development Plan #008-97 for Autumn Wind Apartments submitted by
Greenway Engineering for the development of a 9.24 -acre tract for garden apartments.
The property is located at Route 522/N. Frederick Pike, '/4 mile north of the Winchester
City limits behind Adelphia Cable Office, and identified with Property Identification
Number 53-A-60 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District.
(Mr. Wyatt) ....................................................... E
DISCUSSION ITEM
6) Discussion Regarding the 1998-99 Capital Improvements Plan
(Mr. Wyatt)............................................................ F
7) Other
BIMONTHLY REPORT OF PENDING APPLICATIONS
(printed January 8, 1998)
Application cation n
ewlY b i
m'
su
tted.
REZONING:
C. L. Robinson Ice & Cold
Storage Corp. (REZ #005-97)
Back Creek 26.895 ac. from RA to RP for 54 S.F.
residential dwellings
Location:
1-12/03/97
W side of Merrimans Lane (Rt. 621) at Winc./Western R.R. crossing
& E of Rt. 37. Approx. 1,100' south of Breckenridge Lane.
Submitted:
11/12/97
PC Review:
- recommended approval
BOS Review: 11
01/14/98
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS:
Autumn Wind Apartments
(MDP #008-97)
Gainesboro 92 Garden Apts. on 9.24 ac. (RP)
Location:
No. Frederick Pk. (Rt. 522N); 1/4 mi. north of Winchester City
Limits, behind Adelphia Cable Office
Submitted:
11/24/97
PC Review:
12/17/97 - tabled for 30 days to 01/21/98
BOS Review:
Admin. A roved:
02/11/98 - tentatively scheduled
Pending
Westridge III (MDP #006-97)
Location:
Creek
19 S.F. Detached Urban Residential
Lots on 9.81 ac. (RP)
nt to the Westridge Subd. (Sec. I & II) w/ access from West
ane via Middle Road (Rt. 628) in the City.
fAd
Submitted:
97
PC Review:
7 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
11/12/97 - approved
Admin. Approved:
Pending completion of review agency comments.
SUBDIVISIONS:
Woodbrook Village (SiTB#016-97)
Back Creek
81 multi- lex lots on 19.56 ac. (RP)
Location:
So. side of Opeguon Church Lane (Rt. 706)
Submitted:
12/02/97
MDP #004-97:
MDP approved by BOS 09/24/97; Admin. approved 12/10/97
Subd. Admin. Approved:
Ltending
Wythe Ave. Ext. (SUB #015-97)
No MDP
Opequon
4 S.F. lots on 1.4065 ac. (RP)
Location:
End of existing Wythe Ave. in Stephens City
Submitted:
11/20/97
PC Review:
not yet scheduled - waiting for review agency comments
BOS Review:
not yet schedulded
Approved:
Pending
Chapel Hill Subdivision
(SUB #014-97)
Shawnee 34 S.F. Det. Urban Lots on 14.4214
1 acres (RP)
Location:
East side of Rt. 522, 0.15 mi. south of Longcroft Rd. (Rt. 785)
Submitted:
10/30/97
MDP #006-96:
Approved by BOS 08/14/96; Admin. Approved on 09/17/96
Subd. Admin. Approved:
Pending
Dr. Raymond L. Fish
(SUB #012-97)
Stonewall
1
Subdivision of one lot (1.4962 ac.) (112)
1 off a 16.00 ac. parent tract (112 & 113)
Location:
Hopewell Rd. & new proposed street, Clearbrook Ln; 160' NW of
existing Winchester & Western 60' ri ht-of-wa
Submitted:
10/09/97
MDP #005-95:
Approved by BOS on 01/24/96; Admin. Approved on 07/15/96
Subd. Admin. Approved:
Pending
Briarwood Estates (SUB #011-97)
Stonewall
Subdivision of 9.79 acres for 20 S.F.
Det. Traditional Lots (RP)
Location.
East side of Greenwood Rd.(Rt. 656)
Submitted:
09/26/97 (Replaces Subdiv. #001-94)
Approved by BOS on 12/8/93
MDP #005-93
Subd. Admin. Approved:
Pending
Star Fort, Sect. II (SUB #010-97)
Stonewall Subdivision of 11.6182 ac. for 26 s.f.
detached traditional lots
Location:
U.S. Rt. 522 and VA Rt. 832
Submitted:
09/16/97
MDP #004-94
Approved by BOS 09/14/94; Admin. Approved 04/10/95
Subd. Admin. Approved:
Pending
Lenoir City Co. Lot 2; Stonewall
Indust. Pk. (SUB #007-97)
Gainesboro
Subdivision of a 2.6584 ac. lot (Ml)
Location:
McGhee Rd. (Rt. 861); approx. 1,000' from Tyson Dr. intersection
Submitted:
07/28/97
MDP #006-93
Approved by BOS 07/14/93; Admin. Approved 07/28/93
Subd. Admin. Approved:
Pending
Dominion Knolls (SUB #005-97)
Stonewall
75 s.f. zero lot line lots on 20.278 ac.
(RP)
Location:
So.west corner of Baker Ln. (Rt. 1200) & Ft. Collier Rd. (Rt. 1322)
Submitted:
05/16/97
MDP #001-97
Approved by BOS 04/09/97; Admin. Approved 06/30/97
Subd. Admin. Approved:
Pending
Lenoir City Co. of Virginia
(SUB #003-97)
Gainesboro
1 Ml Lot (2.000 acres)
Location:
Stonewall Industrial Pk.; McGhee Rd. (Rt. 861), approx. 700' west
of the McGhee Rd. and Tyson Dr. intersection.
Submitted:
05/15/97
MDP #006-93:
Approved by BOS 07/14/93; Admin. Approved 07/28/93
Admin. Approved:
Pending
Winc-Fred Co. IDC (SUB)
Back Creek
1 2 Ml Lots (0.552 acres & 20.285 acres)
Location:
Southeast side of Development Lane
Submitted:
09/08/95
MDP #003-87:
Approved by BOS 07/08/87; Admin. Approved 06/08/88
Pending Admin. Approval
Awaiting signed plats.
RT&T Partnership (SUB)
Back Creek --F
Lot - 29.6 Acres (B2)
Location:
Valley Pike (Rt. 11 So.)
Submitted:
05/17/95
MDP #003-91
Approved by BOS 07/10/91; Admin. Approved 09/03/91
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting submission of signed plat & deed of dedication
Abrams Point, Phase I (SUB)
Shawnee
230 SF Cluster &Urban Lots (RP)
Location:
South side of Rt. 659
Submitted:
05/02/90
PC Review:
06/06/90 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
06/13/90 - approved
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting deed of dedication, letter of credit, and signed plat
Harry Stimpson (SUB)
Opeguon
Two B2 Lots
Location•
Town Run Lane
Submitted:
09/23/94
PC Review:
10/19/94 - recommended approval
BOS Review:
10/26/94 - approved
Pending Admin. Approval:
Awaiting signed plat.
SITE PLANS:
Carlyle & Anderson Tractor Sales
& Service (SP //048-97)
Stonewall
Truck office & repair; & tractor sales
& service; 201X20' addit.; 1.0659 ac.
disturbed on 3.2647 ac. site (M2)
Location:
1603 Berryville Pike
Submitted:
12/02/97
Approved:
Pending
1.
Middletown Elementary School
Addition (SP #047-97)
Opequon
2+ disturbed ac. on a 15.0 ac. site
1 (RA)
Location:
190 Mustang Lane
Submitted:
11/18/97
Approved:
Pending
Armel Elementary School
Addition (SP #046-97)
Opequon
6+ disturbed ac. on a 14.978 ac. site
1 (RA)
Location:
2239 Front Royal Pike
Submitted:
11/18/97
Approved:
Pending
Pegasus Bus. Cntr., Phase H
(SP #045-97)
Shawnee 17,920 s.f. office bldg.; 2.0 ac.
1 disturbed on a 4.18 ac. site (B2)
Location:
401 Pegasus Court, Pegasus Business Center
Submitted:
11/10/97
Approved:
Pending
Special Made (SP #043-97)
Shawnee
71,210 s.f. office/warehouse on 3.5 ac.
of a 3.6046 ac. parcel (Ml)
Location:
Lot 4; Eastgate Commerce Center
Submitted:
11/04/97
Approved:
pending
Fertig Cabinet Co. (SP #042-97)
Stonewall
Heating & A/C Sales in existing bldgs.
on 5 acres (B2)
Location:
706 Baker Lane
Submitted:
11/05/97
Approved:
pending
Negley Mini -Storage, Phase H
(SP #041-97)
Stonewail Office/ Mini -Storage on 3.57 ac. (B3)
Location:
127 Mercedes Court
Submitted:
11/03/97
Approved:
Pending
Westview Business Center, Lot 5;Shawnee
Charles Ricketts (SP #039-97)
District
20,600 s.f. warehouse for industrial/
commercial use (Ml); 3.5 ac. of a
3.7220 ac. site
Located:
Independence Drive, Westview Business Center, Lot 5
Submitted:
10/23/97
Approved:
Pending
Trex Outdoor Storage
(SP #035-97)
Back Creek
Outdoor Storage; 173,416 S.F. (M2)
Location:
158 Ca itot Lane
Submitted:
10-01-97
Approved:
Pending
Valley Cycle Center (SP #033-97)Shawnee
Stonewall
4,272 sq ft Veterinary Office on 1.4962
ac. parcel (B2)
16,000 s.f. bldg. for retail sales; 2 ac.
disturbed on a 2.0579 ac. site (B2)
Location:
We Business Center; Lot A; Approx. 2 miles east of I-81 on
Rt. 50 at Independence Drive
Submitted:
09/23/97
Pending
Approved:
Pending
Dr. Fairman VeterinaryOffice
(SP #029-97)
Stonewall
4,272 sq ft Veterinary Office on 1.4962
ac. parcel (B2)
Location:
1092 Hopewell Road
Submitted:
07/25/97
Approved:
Pending
Mobil-Wendys Rt. 50W Conven.
Center (SP #026-97)
Back Creek Gas-Conven. Cntr.; 3,783 sq ft floor
1 area; 1.072 ac. site disturbed (RA)
Location:
Rt. 50 West
Submitted:
07/23/97
Approved:
Pending
Seo Property (SP #025-97)
Shawnee
Video Store in existing bldg.;
2.04 ac. (Bl)
Location:
Front Royal Pike
Submitted:
07/23/97
Approved:
Pending
Ellis Self -Storage (SP #024-97)
Stonewall
3 additional self -storage bldgs; 9.211
ac. parcel disturbed; (Mi)
Location:
Intersection of Routes 761 & 664
Submitted:
07/03/97
Approved:
Pending
Agape Christian Fellowship
Church Sanctuary (SP #005-97)
Shawnee
Church Expansion; 2.5 ac. to be
developed of a 29.5115 ac. site (RA)
Location:
East side of Rt. 642; approx. 2,500' so. of the Rt. 37/I-81 Interch .
Submitted:
02/12/97
Approved:
Pending
Shenandoah Bldg. Supply
(SP #056-96)
Gainesboro Warehouse on 5 acres (M1)
Location:
195 Lenoir Drive (Stonewall Industrial Park)
Submitted:
12/16/96
Approved:
Pending
Stimpson/Rt. 277 Oil & Lube
Service (SP #030-96)
Opequon
Oil & Lube Serv., Car Wash, Drive -
Thru on 2.97 ac. (B2)
Location:
152 Fairfax Pk. (behind Red Apple Country Store)
Submitted:
07/03/96
Approved: 11
Pending
O/House of Gifts (SP
6)
Gainesboro
Gas Pump Canopy 880 sq. ft. area of a
0.916 acre parcel (RA)
n:
[Aroved:
3548 North Frederick Pike
ted:
05/08/96
II.Pending
Pending
Legion Post #021
96)
Stonewall
Addition to lodge building on 3.4255
acre site (B2)
UAroved:
1730 Berryville Pike
:
04/10/96
Pending
Pending
D.K. Erectors & Maintenance,
Inc. (SP #051-95)
Gainesboro Indust Sery/Steel Fabrication on a 10 -
acre site (M2)
Location:
4530 Northwestern Pike
Submitted:
12/28/95
Approved:
Pending
Wheatlands Wastewater Facility
(SP !#047-89)
Opequon
Treatment Facility on 5 Acres (R5)
Location:
So. West of Double Tollgate; ad. & west of Rt. 522
Submitted:
09/12/89
Note:
Being held at applicant's request.
Tech (SP #057-90)
--FFlex
Stonewall
MI Use on 11 Ac. (M1)
Location:
East side of Ft. Collier Rd.
Submitted:
10/25/90
Note:
Being held atapplicant's request.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Parkins
Mills (CUP #02497)
Shawnee
commercial telecommunications
1 facilities (RA)
Location:
Kni ht Drive (private gravel road), off Rt. 642
Submitted:
12/12/97
PC Review:
01/07/98 - recommended approval of monopole tower w/ conditions
and waiver of setbacks
BOS Review:
01/28/98
Shenandoah Mobile Co./
Sherando (CUP #023-97)
Opequon
commercial telecommunications
1 facilities (RA)
Location:
0.25 mi. off Rt. 636, 0.4 mi. from Rt. 636/277 intersection
Submitted:
12/12/97
PC Review:
01/07/98 - recommended approval of monopole tower w/ conditions
BOS Review:
01/28/98
Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Hunting
Ridge (CUP #022-97)
Back Creek
commercial telecommunications
1 facilities (RA)
Location:
0.5 mi. on Turtle Meadow Drive from Rt. 616
Submitted:
12/12/97
PC Review:
01/07/98 - recommended approval of lattice tower w/ conditions
BOS Review:
01/28/98
10
Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Little
Timber Ridge (CUP #021-97)
Back Creek
commercial telecommunications
facilities (RA)
Location:
0.38 miles off of Rt. 610
Submitted:
12/12/97
PC Review:
01/07/98 - recommended approval of monopole tower (Option #1) w/
conditions
BOS Review:
01/28/98
Shenandoah Mobile Co./ Bowling
Green Ridge (CUP #020-97)
Gainesboro
commercial telecommunications
facilities (RA)
Location:
0.13 miles off Rt. 688
Submitted:
12/12/97
PC Review:
01/07/98 - recommended approval of monopole tower w/ conditions
BOS Review:
01/28/98
Thomas A. & Kim L. Hazard
(CUP #018-97)
Opequon
Cott. Occup. for mfg. & assembly of
magic props & furniture in an existing
barn (w/ addition) (RA)
Location:
949 Canterburg
Road, Stephens City
Submitted:
11/07/97
PC Review:
12/03/97 - recommended approval w/ conditions
BOS Review:
01/14/98
11
T. P. & Susan Goodman
(CUP #010-97)
Stonewall
Social Center, Outdoor Recreation
Center, Catered Functions, Tours,
Meetings, Etc. (RA)
Location:
534 Redbud Road
Submitted:
06/09/97
PC Review:
09/03/97 - recommended approval with conditions
BOS Review:
10/07/97 tabled until 11/12/97; 11/12/97 - temporary approval until
12/31/97, subject to renewal and/or disposition on 01/14/98
12
COUNTY of FRFnFR1CW
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO- Planning Commission
FROM- Eric R. Lawrence, Planner II
SUBJECT- Public Hearing - Proposed Flex -Tech Amendment
DATE: January 7, 1998
The Development Review and Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) has been working on an amendment
to the Zoning Ordinance that would enable development proposals that include aspects of retail,
manufacturing, wholesaling, and warehousing on a single site. This development concept has been
encouraged by the local development community and, in particular, the Winchester -Frederick County
Industrial Parks Association (IPA). This amendment has been termed "Flex -Tech", after its flexible nature
and its ability to accommodate a range of permitted uses.
A definition for flex -tech has been created; flex -tech is "a development concept that accommodates aspects
of retail, manufacturing, wholesale, and warehousing by an individual user. Such development is designed
to accommodate users that require flexibility in their square footage allocation. Typical flex -tech users
might be a small business that initially requires a relatively small square footage but may increase the
business's square footage as the strength of the business improves."
It is believed that the Flex -Tech concept will provide the flexibility necessary to accommodate a growing
population of businesses. Typically, these users are smaller, start-up businesses that initially require
between 1,000 and 10,000 square feet of space. A flex -tech development would also accommodate small
businesses that might otherwise operate as Cottage Occupations.
Understanding that Flex -Tech is intended to allow flexibility in site design and permitted uses, the draft
amendment would permit "flex -tech" in the B2, B3, and M1 Zoning Districts with Performance Standards.
This would enable a user to incorporate elements of an M1 use within the B2 District, and vice -versa.
Performance standards would limit the extent to which an M1 use would be allowed to occupy a building
within the B2 District.
This information was presented to the Planning Commission during their December 3, 1997 meeting.
Based on the comments during the meeting, staff was directed to schedule a public hearing for this
amendment.
The DRRS reviewed this amendment at their meeting on November 13, 1997, and recommended the
amendment be presented to the Commission. Action on behalf of the Commission would be appropriate
this evening.
U:\ERIC\COMMON\JDRRS\FLEX-TEC\012198PC.PH
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Page I
Proposed Flex -Tech Amendment
For Planning Commission Public Hearing
This proposed amendment would allow for `flex -tech' development within the B2, B3,
and M1 zoning districts of Frederick County. Performance standards will be utilized to
guide appropriate development scale and design.
This proposal includes three elements:
P. Additions of "Flex -Tech" to B2, B3, and M1 as permitted uses;
Addition of "Flex -Tech" to the definition section of the Zoning Ordinance;
Addition of performance standards to the Supplementary Use Regulations
section of the Zoning Ordinance.
Each of these elements is further discussed on the attached pages.
Page 2
Article X
Business and Industrial Zoning Districts
§165-82 District use regulations.
B. B2 (Business General) District. The intent of this district is to provide large areas for
a variety of business, office and service uses. General business areas are located on
arterial highways at major intersections and at interchange areas. Businesses allowed
involve frequent and direct access by the general public but not heavy truck traffic on
a constant basis other than that required for delivery of retail goods. General business
areas should have -goad direct access to major thoroughfares and should be properly
separated from residential areas. Adequate frontage and depth should be provided,
and access should be properly controlled to promote safety and orderly development.
Nuisance factors are to be avoided.
Allowed Uses
Flex -Tech
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(SIC)
C. B3 Industrial Transition District. The intent of this district is to provide for heavy
commercial activities, involving larger scale marketing or wholesaling, in locations
that are separate from but in the vicinity of business and industrial areas. In some
cases, such areas may be transitional, located between business and industrial areas.
In these areas, there will be a mixture of automobile and truck traffic. Some of the
uses in this district will require large areas of land and may have outdoor storage and
display. It is intended that the uses in this district shall not be sources of noise, dust,
smoke or other nuisances. Such industrial transition areas shall be provided with safe
and sufficient access.
Allowed Uses
Flex -Tech
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(SIC)
Page 3
D. M 1 Light Industrial District. The intent of this district is to provide for a variety of
light manufacturing, commercial office and heavy commercial uses in well planned
industrial settings. Uses are allowed which do not create noise, smoke, dust, or other
hazards. Uses are allowed which do not adversely affect nearby residential or
business areas. Such industrial areas shall be provided with safe and sufficient access.
Allowed Uses
Flex -Tech
Article XXI
Definitions
§ 165-145. Definitions and word usage.
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(SIC)
Unless a contrary intention clearly appears, the following words and phrases shall have the
meaning given in this section. All words and terms not defined herein shall be used with a meaning
of standard usage.
FLEX -TECH -- A development concept that accommodates aspects of retail,
manufacturing, wholesale, and warehousing by an individual user within a single
structure. Such development is designed to accommodate users that require
flexibility in their square footage allocation. A typical flex -tech user would be a small
business that initially requires a relatively small square footage, but may increase
the businesses square footage as the strength of the business improves.
Page 4
Article IV
Supplementary Use Regulations
§165-48.7. Flex -Tech uses.
The intent of this section is to ensure that flex -tech development shall be designed
for safe, efficient traffic flow, and to complement its surroundings. The following minimum
standards shall apply to any property in which Flex -Tech developments are located, in
order to promote economic development and mitigate any negative impacts to adjoining
properties:
A. Permitted Uses. All uses allowed in the B2, B3, and M1 Districts will be
permitted in a Flex -Tech development.
1. Primary use. The primary use shall be a use permitted by the zoning
district in which the development is located. The primary use shall
occupy a minimum of seventy-five (75) percent of an establishment,
measured in gross floor area of the unit.
2. Accessory use. The accessory use shall be a use permitted in Flex -
Tech, but not necessarily in the district in which the development is
located.
B. The Flex -Tech development shall only be permitted within approved master
planned developments, the approved master plan shall indicate location of
the Flex -Tech development.
C. All Flex -Tech developments shall adhere to a site plan that has been
approved by the Frederick County Zoning Administrator, and complies with
the requirements set forth in the chapter, and to the following Flex -Tech
design standards:
1. Individual unit size dimensional requirements. Maximum unit sizes of
20, 000 square feet.
2. Site layout requirements.
a. Loading bays
[1] All loading bays shall be located so that they are not
visible from road right-of-ways. All loading bays shall
be screened from view by the building, landscaping,
walls or decorative fencing.
[2] Except during the process of loading or unloading,
trucks and trailers shall not be parked outside the
building, unless parked in screened areas not visible
from adjacent road right-of-ways or properties.
[3] The Planning Commission may waive any and all of the
loading bay location and screening requirements when
Page 5
a site is bordered by two or more road right-of-ways. In
no case shall a loading bay be visible from an arterial or
collector road, as identified by the Frederick County
Comprehensive Policy Plan.
b. Minimum on-site building separation:
Front yard. 30 feet
Side yard. 30 feet
Rear yard: 120 feet
C. Entrances onto the site shall clearly separate automobile traffic
from truck traffic. Automobile parking and truck loading areas
shall be clearly separated.
d. Parking areas shall be designed to accommodate the most
intensive use of the structures. Parking may be constructed in
phases to reflect required parking for the actual occupying
uses, as determined by the application for a Certificate of
Occupancy and/or change of use permit.
e. All uses shall be conducted entirely within enclosed structures.
§ 165-37 Buffer and Screening Requirements.
D. Zoning District Buffers
(9) When a flex -tech development is split by a zoning district line, the Planning
Commission may allow for a reduction of the distance buffer and the
relocation of the screening requirements. Such modifications shall be allowed
at the Commission's discretion, provided that all of the following conditions
are met:
(a) The zoning district boundary line for which the modification is
requested is internal to the land contained within the Master
Development Plan.
(b) The required landscape screen is relocated to the perimeter of the
Flex -Tech development. This relocated landscape screen shall
contain the same plantings that would have been required had the
screen been placed along the zoning district boundary line.
U:IERIC\COMMON\DRRS\FLEX-TEC\FT-DRAF5.WPD
P/C REVIEW: 12-17-97 (Tabled for 30 days); 1-21-98
BOS REVIEW: 2-11-98
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #008-97
AUTUMN WIND APARTMENTS
LOCATION: The property is located on Route 522, North Frederick Pike, '/4 mile north of
Winchester City limits behind Adelphia Cable office.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 53-A-60
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
Zoned: RP, Residential Performance District (9.24 acres) Use: Vacant
B2, Business General District (9.82 acres) Use: Vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE:
Property Zoning
North: B2, Business General District
South: RA, Rural Areas District
East: RP, Residential Performance District
West: RP, Residential Performance District
PROPOSED USE: 104 Garden Apartment Units
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Land Use
Commercial, Residential
Agricultural, Vacant
Residential
Residential, Vacant
Virginia De t. of Trans ortation: See attached letter from VDOT dated November 21,
199 7from Robert B. Childress.
Sanitation Authority: First review approved as noted; three items.
Inspections Dent.: Buildings shall comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building
Code and Section 303, Use Group A (Assembly) for the Recreational Center and Use Group
Autumn Wind Apartments MDP #008-97
Page 2
January 9, 1998
R (Residential), Section 310, of the BOCA National Building Code/ 1996. Other codes that
apply are CABO A117.1-92, Accessible and Useable Buildings and Facilities.
Fire Marshal: See attached letter dated November 20, 1997 from Doug Kiracofe.
Parks & Recreation: Based upon the master development plan, it appears that recreational
units and open space requirements are being met. The size of the tot lots, the recreation
building and pool area will need to be reviewed in the site development phase.
County Engineer: The proposed master development plan is approved as submitted on
11/11/97. A detailed review will be made at the time of the site plan submission. It is
suggested that a preliminary design meeting be scheduled prior to the initial site plan
submission to discuss design parameters for the stormwater design.
Planning and Zoning:
Site History
The original zoning maps of Frederick County demonstrate that parcel 53-A-60 was zoned
B2, Business General District from North Frederick Pike (Route 522) to a depth of 200 feet,
with the remaining acreage being zoned R-3, Residential General District. The R-3 portion
of this property was changed to RP, Residential Performance District on September 28, 1983,
when the RP District replaced the R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-6 Districts.
On March 8, 1989, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors rezoned 5.4465 acres of this
tract from RP District to B2 District, leaving 9.1669 acres of land remaining in the RP
District. (Please refer to attached letter from Andrew D. Evans dated September 17, 1997
with Minor Property Line Adjustment Plats prepared by Furstenau Surveying.)
Project History
1) December 17, 1997 Planning Commission Meeting
The proposed master development plan did not conform to the density requirements and the
environmental features disturbance requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed
master development plan called for 92 garden apartment dwelling units which would be
created through the disturbance of approximately 61.5% of the woodland area and 50% of
the steep slope area on the site. Staff advised the Planning Commission that waiver
provisions were not available for environmental features associated with residential
Autumn Wind Apartments MDP 9008-97
Page 3
January 9, 1998
developments. However, staff felt that other alternatives may be feasible, including the
acquisition of additional land to enhance the amount of woodlands and steep slopes on site,
and the development of a revised design layout to avoid a greater percentage of these
features. Staff also felt that a more detailed survey and evaluation of the woodland areas
should occur to determine exactly where the location of woodlands, by definition, existed on
site. Staff recommended that Planning Commission table this application to allow time for
these issues to be pursued. The Planning Commission agreed with staff and tabled this
application for 30 days.
2) January 8, 1998 Technical Review Committee Meeting
The design engineer presented a revised master development plan to the Technical Review
Committee (TRC) for discussion. The TRC did not have objections to the revised layout and
felt that it would be appropriate to forward this plan to the Planning Commission at this time.
Staff advised the TRC that the original review agency continents would be utilized for
discussion; however, a statement requiring all review agency comments to be adequately
addressed prior to final master development plan approval would be included in the staff
recommendation. This would ensure that additional review agency comments would be
addressed by the applicant subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting.
Project Scope
The applicant has proposed to develop the RP, Residential Performance, District acreage into 101
garden apartment units with recreational amenities. Access to these units is proposed to occur via
a private drive that will intersect North Frederick Pike (Route 522) at an existing crossover. A
connection will be provided to the Adelphia Cable office building to provide for northbound
access. The development is proposed to be served by underground utilities including public sewer
and water from the north, as well as natural gas and electric.
Revisions To Original Master Development Plan
1) Density
The applicant has acquired the entire parcel of land totaling 19.06 acres. The Zoning
Ordinance permits a maximum density of 5.5 units per acre; therefore, the applicant is permitted
to develop an overall gross density of 104 units which is proposed.
Autumn Wind Apartments MDP 9008-97
Page 4
January 9, 1998
2) Environmental Features
The applicant has acquired the entire parcel of land totaling 19.06 acres. This acquisition has
increased the total amount of steep slopes on site from 1.4 acres to 3.0 acres, and has
increased the total amount of woodlands on site from 3.9 acres to 5.4 acres. The design
engineer has revised the layout for this project to mitigate the disturbance to these features.
The disturbance of steep slopes has been reduced from 50% to 16.6%, while the disturbance
of woodlands has been reduced from 61.5% to 18.5%. The design engineer conducted a
survey of the property to determine the amount of existing woodlands by definition. The
design engineer inventoried one-quarter acre grove samples of the property to determine if
there were 10 or more trees that were 12 inches or greater in diameter in size. The design
engineer has advised staff that a significant amount of the secondary growth area did not meet
this criteria; therefore, disturbance in this area should be permitted. The design engineer will
present this information to the Planning Commission during the meeting.
3) Transportation
The access to this site has been redesigned to provide a connection which aligns with an
existing crossover on North Frederick Pike (Route 522). This connection will be at a cross
intersection with the connection into Star Fort Estates located on the north side of North
Frederick Pike. An access easement and improvements are proposed that will connect with
the Adelphia Cable Office parking lot. This connection affords and opportunity for traffic
leaving the Adelphia site to access northbound North Frederick Pike without making a U-turn
movement. The VDOT has stated that this connection is preferred; however, they reserve
the right to require the applicant to make any necessary improvements to the existing
crossover during the review of the site plan. Staff will require a narrative to be incorporated
onto the final master development plan which reflects this concern.
New Issues
1) B-2 Zoning District Portion of Site
The applicant acquired the B-2, General Business District portion of this site to enhance the
amount of environmental features for this project. The acquisition of this additional acreage
provided the applicant with an opportunity to increase the overall gross density of this project
as well. Therefore, this acreage will be required to remain as a part of the Autumn Winds
Apartment development. A narrative needs to be incorporated onto the final master
development plan which states that no portion of the property zoned B-2 District is permitted
to be subdivided, sold, or developed. The requirements of the portion of the property zoned
B-2 District should be detailed, legally recorded, and provided to Frederick County to
maintain with the project file.
Autumn Wind Apartments MDP #008-97
Page 5
January 9, 1998
2) Review Agency Comments
During the TRC meeting, all review agencies agreed to allow this plan to be forwarded for
consideration without additional comments. The review agencies felt that the revised layout
was appropriate; however, they stated that they reserved the right to make additional
comments that would need to be addressed by the applicant prior to final approval. The
design engineer has forwarded revised master development plans to each review agency for
this purpose. Staff will ensure that all appropriate comments are reflected on the final master
development plan prior to administrative approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 1-21-98 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
Staff recommends approval of this revised master development plan provided that the Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors agrees with the results of the tree survey conducted by the
design engineer, and that all staff comments, review agency comments, Planning Commission
comments, and Board of Supervisor comments are adequately addressed.
O \AGENDAS\COMMENTS\AURVMD2.MDP
C'OMMONWEALT l of f"IRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT
DAVID R. GEHR £OW®URG RESIDENCY
00MUL131 NGR 14011 OCD VALLEY PIKE
P.C. BOX 278
EOINEIURG, VA 22824-0270
November 21,1
Mr. Mark Smith, P.E.
C/O Greenway Engineering
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, VA 22602
Dear Mark:
We have reviewed your Master Development Plan,
referenced project. As we discussed yesterday,
problem with the Master Plan for the property.
about the improvements you have shown within the
We feel a median crossover for a project of this si:
additional development through its access roadway,
median crossovers must be approved by our Centr
could prove extremely difficult as well as expensi,
Iocation. The narrow median width, north and soul
current crossover spacing could very well preclude c
I£ allowed, at the very least it would appear ba:
recorLstruction of the north bound lanes of Route 5Z
be necessary.
Other issues which will need to be considered are w
for the adjacent Star Fort Project which entails SM
your proposed location closer to you which compro
Additionally, the Star Fort Master Plan as well as t
Study identifies the need for a connector roadwa
Route 11. The Star Fort Master Plan showed tl
Route 522 North of where your proposed crossover i
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
JERRY A. COPP
RCSIOGHT 4A.GI1,.CCA
TEt.E m0) 9"-swo
FAX (0401 ftd- 007
Ref: Autumn Wind Apartrnents
Route 522 North
Frederick County
dated November 11, 1997 for the
onceptually we have no overall
however, we have some concerns
Zoute 522 right-of-way.
:, especially with the potential for
would be desirable. However, any
I Office. In this particular case it
e to construct a crossover at this
bound elevation deferentials, and
ie being permitted at this location.
2d on our field review that the
for a considerable distance would
are currently reviewing a site plan
ng the existing crossover north of
ses spacing requirements further.
e Winchester Area Transportation
in this area from Route 522 to
connector roadway tieing into
located_
N
MI. Mark Snuth
Raf: Autumn Wind ApaAmcnts
November 21,1997
N e1
154-1
nefore we can approve this Master Dever
engineering design be undertaken by the do
"oa5uver being constructedat this location.
Department will be necessary.
Other issues relating to the design of the p:
entrance requirements, and/or traffic signaliz
Route 522 can be addressed at the site plan stage.
If you have any questions, please Ict me know.
Sincerely,
Robert B. Child
Transportation En
RBC/rf
Attach.
xc: Mr. K. B. Downs
Mr. S. A. Melnikoff (w/ copy of MDP)
Mr. Kris Tierney
Plan we suggest a preliminary
to deters dne the feasibility of a
r and approval of same by this
d access roadway, commercial
needs at the intersection with
Thomas W. Owens
Director
November 20, 1997
Greenway Engineering
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, Virginia 22602
Atter: Mr. Mark Smith
Dear Mr. Smith,
COUNTY OF FREDERICK, YIRGINL
FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMEN
107 North Kent Sim
Wind"". VA 2250
Douglas A. Kiracof
Fire MxWm
I'm writing in response to your request for comments on the Autumn Wind Apartments
Master Development Plan.
There are several issues that need to be addressed in order to approve this project,
although I'm not sure they must all be addressed at this phase of planning. The plan, as
shown, does not give the Fire Department adequate access to the buildings, for
firefighting purposes. We must have access for a Ladder Truck on each side of all
buildings that are three (3) stories or more in height. This can be accomplished via Fire
Lanes, so long as the Fire Lane is 20' in width, capable of supporting 65,000 lbs. and is a
minimum of 32', from the face of the building, to the centerline of the Fire Lane. Further,
the space between the Fire Lane and the building cannot be encumbered by trees, which
could hamper firefighting and rescue efforts, from a Ladder Truck.
The configuration of parking and buildings, on this plan, is going to be very congested. If
parking occurs outside of designated areas, access to the buildings, for emergency
vehicles, would be blocked. There are no alternative routes for Fire and Rescue vehicles
to take in case of emergency. Further, the parking lot arrangement, as shown, will
severely hamper any fireground operations that may be necessary. Once a piece of
apparatus hooks to a hydrant, no other vehicles can access the site. This would hamper
additional Fire and Rescue vehicles from entering the area, and would prohibit the
evacuation of private vehicles from the site.
Hydrant locations are not shown on the Master Development Plan- Two (2) hydrants are
required within 300' of each building, and these must be on water mains with a minimum
8" diameter. Water main sizes should be shown on the site plan. Care must also be given
to placing the Automatic Sprinkler Siamese connections within 100' of hydrants. These
buildings, three (3) stories or more, will be required to have NFPA 13R Sprinkler systems
installed, and will have FDC connections.
Director (540) 665-5618 Fire Marshal (540) 665-6350 a Fax (540) 678-4739
N
Greenway Engineering
Page 2
The inherent fire potential and difficulty in fighting fires in garden apartments is widely
known to the Fire Service. There is a serious threat to the occupants of the buildings, and
to the firefighters who must fight fires in the buildings, if careful consideration is not
given to pre -planning, access, and firefighting operations. I would be glad to meet with
you to discuss these issues, or assist you in addressing these issues on the Site Plan.
If I can be of any further assistance on this project, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Sincerely,
Douglas A. Kiracofe
Fire Marshal
cc: Round Hill Fire and Rescue Co.
file
Master Development Plan #008-97 PIN: 53—A-60
Autumn Wind Apartments
Frederick County, Virginia Master Development Plan Application Package
APPLICATION
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Department of Planning and Development Use Only.
Date application received -L4- 7
Complete. Date of acceptance.
Incomplete. Date of return. .
Application # 008-1
1. Project Title
2. Owner's Name: Sohn -P L.cw; s
3.
4.
Applicant
Address:
Phone Number:
Design Company:
Address:
Phone Number:
Contact Name:
(Please list the names of all owners or parties in interest)
C-11- h�,V1e—Cr,r,c?
✓nrd a
\V►vtc-lnestc✓� VA- ZZCoGZ
(540) C,GZ-41'hS
(54o) &6,z - 41 b.';-
11AGV-,I- SYN +L,
Page I I
Frederick County, Virginia Master Development Pian Application Package
APPLICATION confd
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
S. Location of Property: L)V-S c 52Z - r^-reJ.-, L }�
6. Total Acreage: z4 A cy-cs
7. Property Information:
a) Property Identification Number (PIN): —J 53- U14)) - GD
b) Current Zoning: RP
c) Present Use: V a a, „
d) Proposed Uses: �Je„ ♦w,eKis
e) Adjoining Property Information:
Property Identification Numbers Property Uses
North 1 nn 63 -6[A) 61 CC. 1.4 C�►:� �c .
South —1," - (4A�) - 7-
East Trn "3 - a/0) - 60A a:+„►�
West 3- C( A') - 63
f) Magisterial District: -
8. Is this an original or amended Master Development Plan?
Original ✓ Amended
I have read the material included in this package and understand what is required by the
Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. I also understand that the master
development plan shall include all contiguous land under single or common ownership. All
required material will be complete prior to the submission of my master development plan
application.
Signature: AAO
Date:
� %s aF•
,DIV
Pae 12 r9�� �v
11/24/1997 15:16 154072 GREENWAY ENGI PAGE 02
Frederick County, Virginia Master Devpeloment Plan AP licatioa Package
r rrru •�rrr�r��� rr.r�r
Ad joiaing Property Owners
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Owners of property adjoining the land will be nodficd of the Planning Commission and the
Board of Supervisors moetings. For the purpose of this application, adjoining property is any
property abutting the requested property on the side or rear or any property directly
across a public right-of-way, a private right-o[-wsy, or a watercourse from the requested
PrOPOrti'• The applicant is required to obtain the following infortnation on each adjoi:>i
property including tie parcel identification number which may be obtained from the office of the
Cam missioncr of Revenue. The Commmioner of the Revenue is located on the 2nd floor of thre
Frederick County Administrative Building, 107 North Kern Street.
VAMP
w+ilnr,rnn 1 TT I1wr.�•rr..
N"I
U. r
�.�+..uv � t i��,/i L: ♦11 ; 1V V 1YlD�t�,
A*L'10" 117 N. arc .., �1, .
s Twt 53- CCAS - S
��s.5e 1 f � • 14 � e -ft
T•M - C c .4 �
o. x f 6"u" e.r t4
-ent
QI 1—za�I �'r Ale. 11.i•rlc�ae'ffy�
�irCLl/'�Ct4 �0�r►'�••1 ri'Vif"•
Gro"AcWes A bi-56C
Winchester Outdoor
355 S. Potomac Street
Hagerstown, MD 21740-6032
53-A-58
Lester and Carlin Elliott 54-A-1
P.O. Box 110, Winchester, VA 22604-0110
Russell K. Hiett 53 -A -61A
900 Autumn View Lane, Winchester, VA 22603-4200
Westminster Canterbury 54 -A -63B
300 Westminster -Canterbury Drive, Winchester, VA 22603-4216
�- PA&C Is
t r'.'�-",_�'�•�~° � �i^.:. - •Y'e'ti . - �• �. ^ ,.,��. �%'+�, ' • ? • '? . � w
S +' : ' .J .� t` 1 .. '•'A"�a'': r"1:•'„'.,�..: ..' • r - ��;� `�/ fl''-� ":��':. `S:. r''r ,�.,,,j, •..:. • , •+� r��':t�`s'1i�•7+• Y•:J.
75 7ft.
��.. .,�... _, _ • i .r y;:.• ae: '-irk; -.: � ~.:^-:.: •.
IC
C .►
�' .jam• • ••4'�•••t,..� •:� ./� l
m• •:'.:�.•''
- •• � ;. ' =•.O.r. � _ a >:! •: �:':. Qom•:
�t 6:A cZ.
.
tedenCk ' 1
y 4-!sett
.FCwntI a m Y" OW ra"w .es• m
GfOvAM
F� . hG w O r
t
Strotr dog .
• r,-A
A. Tv
ips:pA m /j.
.Q•
aye'che
Ezr„ r W �nser
R s D8 303 PQ 243 LGA ry put door• -
4 - 2809 g �.. Advert�su9
' 342•$5
APPROVED R = 1 77 b = 649 74
U S ROUTE 522 19 VIM T23 Y=
Frederick Co. Remi ng Oept. CCSEZPT AIM I]i 'A=
SIC,'= � Q? :E3
LAN 0 O F =yrs a► �
FA R'<FIELp ASSOCIA TES .
STONEWALL DISTR ICT
FR.E0 ER ICK COUNTY, V I RGI N IA
This 19 All Of The Land Conveyed To Parkfield Associates
December 298, 1978 Assd Recorded 1n The office Of The Clark Le n he Wetson Er Ux Deed Cased
Frederick County Virdinie In Oead Book 503. Pave 240, Circuit Ceucf 0f
MINOR - .PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT
BATE: Jan. 3, 1989
FURSTENAU SURVEYING SCAI-S: 1 = 200•
STEPHENS CITY, VIRGINIA 22655
`� 4 r+ ✓ it ...
r
t
• xiF OX709Pc5��62.
1 Strome, -
1 2e�
r• r
1
o Ori 9 in*! '-tel
3 �
'Ilrli
ion• vesr - 1
Gt0 Parcel A
hie to 1
A� ti
in I 2.0465 Ac.
s 33.08' 18•ti 352.1V >? �' Parcel 6
50Z 54
•�1 •--� •R••t�e.� 19.0669
�y � � •
34; air
— �sCL
>•]�.ov
arovews Assoc !3m•w 10 0. 504, Pa
_ �V7 o"'w"Im CoWt
1)" 503 ft 243
9'e - e"2
�ba 342 93
R •
�''�sJ'u o♦yf
Q Mlf>0 Il f�S7aLW
it
4 �
N �o SU
o
t
W t.ttett
0
4974
2
.NincM� .
Q1tLd3¢.
pd,AAsf4
r �
APPROVED
�Fl
ROUTE 522 =271J21a�Tnlit ,
1 COQ? An IY •CCmm=eederi V= Tu ZTnTtr!l or T= i=L
91t= am= i=C= ! t*''
LAND 0 Fp11R O bclAT=
Psrt"r
PARKFIELD ASSOCIATE'S -
STONEWALL DISTRICT
FREOERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Was It AC Of The Land Conveyed To P°rtt*W Atscoatet Br Leon Watson EI Us Deo DPW
December 29. 19TS And Recorded In 1+o 0"Ice Of TM Clark Of The Cirtuf C4v1 Of
edwick Countv Ver info In Deed Boor 503 Peae 240
MINOR - PROPERTY LINE AOJUSTMENT "19` Mart" 22, 1"19
FURSTENAU SURVEYING
STEPHENS CITY. VIRGINIA 22655
•
.. a�"....�+ftcoomcx muuL 3m
. ..
S...t....3r.,.,.sees. .�..a t
ci.!
.r" --
.�1„ i R
04au3 I ' • 200
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director
RE: 1998-1999 Capital Improvements Plan Discussion
DATE: January 9, 1998
The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) has forwarded a recommended draft
of the 1998-1999 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to the Planning Commission for discussion. The
CPPS evaluated project requests provided by the Handley Regional Library, the Frederick County
School Board, the Frederick County Department of Parks and Recreation, the Regional Airport
Authority, Frederick County Administration, and the Frederick County Public Works Department.
Following this evaluation, the CPPS rated new project requests and modified the 1997 project
rankings and financial data accordingly. The CPPS directed staff to prepare the final CIP document
for consideration by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors following this discussion.
Included with this memorandum is a summary of the project requests, a summary of proposed project
costs, the evaluation form prepared by the CPPS, and project tables comparing projects from the
1997-1998 CII' and this plan. The Planning Commission received the new project justifications in
the previous agenda, therefore, staff asks that the commission keep that information and include it
in this agenda package. Staff asks that the Planning Commission review this information for
discussion purposes. Staff will advertise the proposed 1998-1999 CIP for the February 4, 1998
Planning Commission meeting; therefore, staff asks that commission members contact this department
to discuss concerns or other issues prior to the January meeting. This will provide staff with an
opportunity to research issues and present additional information to the commission if necessary.
UAEVAMCOMMOMCIP\DISCUSS PC
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
CAPITAL 1.IMPRON7EMENITS! DLAN SUMMARY
• The proposed draft 1998-1999 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) consists of 25 projects
compared to 21 projects recommended last year. All projects are proposed to be
developed over a period of five years.
• Five new projects are proposed as a part of the 1998-1999 CIP. Three new projects have
been submitted by the Frederick County School Board and two new projects by the
Frederick County Administration Office as follows:
NREP Addition
Indian Hollow Elementary Addition
Site Acquisition for New Elementary
School in SE Frederick County
Public Safety Center
Annex Facilities
• The Department of Parks and Recreation has proposed to combine the field house and
indoor pool project, thus increasing the scope. Funding for a feasibility study is proposed
in the upcoming budget for the Department of Parks and Recreation. A rating and
prioritization for this project is recommended to occur following the completion of the
feasibility study.
• The total cost of the projects proposed for the 1998-1999 CIP is $102,111,246. This does
not account for the costs associated with the proposed Public Safety Center, the
Transportation Maintenance Facility, the Annex Facilities, or the Field House & Indoor
Pool Complex.
• The total county cost of the projects proposed for the 1998-1999 CIP is $98,937,074. This
reflects a project cost of $64,998,052 and a debt service of $33,939,022.
PROJECTS COSTS & PROJECT EVALUATIONS
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
1998-1999
County
PriorityPriorityProjects
epartment
COT1N iY COi'4TRiHX, TMMON
bounty
Interest From Any
TOTAL COUNTY
Total Project
I
3
Airport Land Acquisition - Bufflick Road
1998-99
1999-2000 1 2000-01 2001-02
2002-03
Contrilsvtions
Notes
Debt Service
COSTS
Costs
2
I
Bicycle Facility
51,215
110,000
110,000
A
N/A
110,000
$ I ,400,000
3
2
NREP Addition
2,500,000
51,2 5
B
NA
J
51 2';I S
$318,387
4
I
New Library
2,420 240
2 837 700
2,500000
1,610,548
4,110,548
$4,110,548
5
I
Public Safety Cerrber
N JAr
.
5257;940
D
N!A
5 257,940
$5,257,940
6
2
Park Land -Western Frederick Co.
I ,181,332
1.68
0
$0
7
3 -
Transportation/Maintenance/Warehouse
NJA*
,332
N/A
.1 ,181,332
$1,181,332
8
1
New Back Creek Elementary School
9,200 000
0
C
N
0
$0
9
4
Third County High,School
2,000,000 14;000,000 s 4 000,
,......
9,200;000
30,000;000
5,926,816
18,338 9:18
I S 126 816
15,126,816
10
6
Open Play Area - CB
426,581
26
48,338,918
$98,338,918
1 1
7
Tennis/Basketball Complex - CB
337 163
,581
N/A
426,581
$426,581
12
8
Soccer Complex - SP
337,:163
N
337:163
$337, i 63
13
9
Tennis/Picnic Area -SP
1007 398
1.,007,398
N/A
1,007,398
$1,007,398
14
2
Annex Facilities
N/Ar
:::540111
544;61 I
NIA
544,611
$544,611
15
6
Indian Hollpw Ef6ni6n ary School Addition
2,000,000 "
0
2000;000
N/A
12
0
$0
16
7
New Gainesboro Elementary School
1500 000 8,500,000
10,00aow
88,438
6,442,192
3 288;438
$3,288;438
17
3
Softball Com lex -:SF
P
432;042
432,042
16,442,192
$16,442,192
18
I
Route 645 Relocation - Design
3,000
N/p+:
432,042
, $432,042
19
2
Route 645 Relocation -Construction
30.
3;000
A
N/A
3,000
$150,000
20:
5
Elementary School Site Acquisition SE Co.
500,000
,000
30;:000
A
N/A
30 000
$115001000
21
10
Shelter Stage Seating CB
500000
332,1 10
832 110
$832, 110
22
12
Maintenance Compound - SP
334172..::
334,;672
N/A'
.. 334 1.72
$334,172
23
4
Baseball Field Renovations - SP$200,000
677,998
200,000
200;000
N/A
200,0001
24 : '
11
Skateboard Park
677998
N/A
677,9981
$677,998 j
25:,.
5
Field HouseAndoor Pool
N/A**
204,600
204,600
204;600
N/A
204,600
TOTALS
$8,060,740 *---*--$23,844,561
$1,283,383
0
$64.9981052
N/A
$33,939,022
0
$98,937,074
$0
$102,1 f 1,246
A = Partial funding from Federal Airport Improvement Program
C
(FAIP) and State Commonwealth Airport Fund (SCAF) grants
B = Partial funding from State grants and local
= Debt
Service is unavailable at time of printing
gifts
D= Partial funding from private donations
N/A' = Project
Scope Not Determined At Time Of Printing
N/A" = Feasibility Study To Be Complete Prior To Project Scope Determination
12/29/97
1998CIP.WK4
1998 FREDERICK COUNTY
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
EVALUATION FORM
LISTED BY DEPARTMENT; IN ORDER OF DEPARTMENT PRIORITY
CRITERION
and
WEIGHT
LIBRARY
New Library
SCHOOL SYSTEM
New Back Creek Elementary School
NW Rey. Ed. Prov. (NAEP) Addition
Transportation Maintenance Facility
Third County High School
Southern Elam. School Site Acquisition
Indian Hollow Elementary Addition
New Gainesboro Elementary School
Administration Building Renovations
PARKS AND RECREATION
Bikeway System
Park Land
Softball Complex - SP
Baseball Field Renovations - SP
Field House/Indoor Pool
Open Play Area - CB
Tennis/Basketball Complex - CB
Soccer Complex - SP
Tennis/Picnic Area - SP
Sheher, Stage Seating - CB
Skateboard Park
Maintenance Compound - SP
AIRPORT
Route 645 Relocation - Design
Route 645 Relocation - Construction
Land Aquisition, BufBick Road
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
Public Safety Center
Annex Fadlities
Cmfam to
Health,
L-09vly
Diatn'buw
Economic
Refined
Public
Cousp. Plae
safety.
Required
services
lmpect
to Other
Support
TOTAL
Wdfam:
Wellue
Projecv
3
4
4
2
2
3
3
2/6
2/8
0/0
4/8
2/4
0/0
3/9
35
214
218
0 f
3.16
2./4
1 f
113
30
2/6
2/8
2/8
3/6
2/4
0/0
1/3
35
z/6
2./$
6/6
11
! 13
31
2/6
2/8
0/0
2/4
3/6
1/3
1/3
30
3/Q
I:f4
0jf)
214
AL2
7{3
113
25
2/6
2/8
0/0
1/2
2/4
1/3
1/3
26
2P¢
2./%
f1f0
1/2
2./4
113
113
26
o/0
112
I 1
,{6
211r
36
3/9
I/4
0/D
4/8
1/2
1/3
2/6
32
319
!/4
0/ €1
1
2/6
1/4
0/0
1/2
1/2
1/3
2/6
23
210
r.4
at,
2m
1 �
2j6
3.t -.v
3Y
3/9
1/4
0/0
3/6
1/2
1/3
2/6
30
31. 9
I/ 4
fl
316
j
} /'3
30
3/9
1/4
0/0
3/6
1/2
1/3
2/6
-
30
9
1/4
o1a
11:2
0:10
2,16
2/627
3/9
1/4
0/0
3/6
2/4
2/6
2/6
25
1f3
II4
tk/€►
1.12
1/2.
1f3
216
20
1/3
1/4
0/0
0/0
3/6
3/9
1/3
25
116
1/4
114
6/d
i/2
2,16
1 /..
25
2/6
1/4
1/4
0/0
1/2
2/6
1/3
25
2/4
2./6
2f'iS
44..
319
3/I2
0
1/2/6Iia
34
3/9
2/8
0/0
1/2
1/2
1 /3
1/ 3
27
FREDERICK COUNTY
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING
PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA
UAERICICOM MONTMEVALUATN.
TOPIC
DESCRIPTION
WEIGHT
1
Conformance to
Does the Project conform to, or contribute to
Comprehensive Plan
the attainment of goaWobjectives of the
Comprehensive Plan? Is the Project
3
consistent with established
2
Public Health, Safety or
-policies?
Does the Project improve conditions affecting
Welfare
health safety or welfare? Does it eliminate a
4
clear health or safety risk?
3
Legal Requirement
Is the Project required in order to meet a
State or Federal mandate or some other legal
4
requirement?
4
Equitable Distribution of
Does the Project meet a special need of some
Services
segment of the population that has been
identified as needing assistance? Would the
2
Project provide equivalent services to a
population group that is currently under-
served relative to other areas of the county?
S
Economic Impact
Is the Project essential to, or would it
encourage some form of economic
development? Would the Project improve the
2
tax base, reduce operating expenses, produce
revenue, or otherwise have a positive effect
on the local economy?
6
Coordination with other
Is the Project necessary for the successful
Projects
completion of other projects? Is the Project
3
art of a largerproject?
7
Public Support
Are county residents fully informed and
supportive of the proposed Project?
3
UAERICICOM MONTMEVALUATN.
1997 & 1998 PROJECT CO M.-PAMSO S
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS
* indicates new capital improvements project description
Parks & Recreation
98 Rank
97 Rank
Project Description 98 Cost
97 Cost
Difference
1
1
Bicycle Facility
$318,387
$318,387
$0
2
2
Parkland - Western
$1,181,332
$1,159,772
+$21,560
Frederick County
3
4
Softball Complex
$432,042
$422,328
+$9,714
Sherando
4
5
Baseball Field
$677,998
$662,755
+$15,243
Renovation - Sher.
5*
6 & 8
Field House and
$10,030,000
$3,495,200
+$6,534,800
Indoor Pool
6
3
Open Play Area -
$426,581
$416,992
+$9,589
Clearbrook
7*
7
Tennis &
$337,163
$533,586
-$196,423
Basketball
Complex -
Clearbrook
8*
9
Soccer Complex -
$1,007,398
$1,127,692
-$120,294
Sherando
9*
11
Tennis/Picnic -
$544,611
$612,495
-$67,884
Sherando
10
12
Shelter/Stage -
$334,172
$326,659
+$7,513
Clearbrook
11
13
Skateboard Park
$204,600
$200,000
+$4,600
12
10
Maintenance
$172,415
$168,539
+$3,876
Facility - Sher.
* indicates new capital improvements project description
Parks & Recreation addendums have been made to the plan that was presented to the CPPS last
year. The following describes the changes that have been identified in the table:
Project 5: Combines the field house and indoor pool projects into a 118,000 square feet
facility. Last year, the field house was estimated to be 29,900 square feet. The
project also calls for a 200 meter indoor track and additional courts.
Project 7: Has been scaled back from 8 tennis courts to 4 tennis courts and has eliminated the
racquetball courts.
Project 8: Has been scaled back from 3 soccer fields to 2 soccer fields and has eliminated 1
of the 2 picnic shelters.
Project 9: Has been scaled back to eliminate 4 racquetball courts.
Re ional Library 1
98 Rank
97 Rank
Project
98 Cost
97 Cost
Difference
Description
1
1
Frederick
$8,457,940
$8,041,485
+$416,455
County
Library
The square footage for this facility has been increased from 34,000 square feet to 35,000 square
feet. Build out of this facility is proposed to be 50,000 square feet.
Public Works
98 Rank
97 Rank
Project
98 Cost
97 Cost
Difference
Description
1
1
Construction
$800,000
$800,000
$0
Debris
Landfill
2
4
Active Gas
$500,000
$500,000
$0
Management
3
2
Cell Closure
$1,400,000
$1,400,000
$0
4
3
Landfill
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$0
Development
Priorities have been modified to satisfy DEQ monitoring requirements prior to the cell closures.
Re ional Airport
98 Rank
97 Rank
Project
98 Cost
97 Cost
Difference
Description
1
2
Airport Road
$150,000
$125,000
+$25,000
Relocation
Design
2
3
Airport Road
$1,500,000
$1,400,000
+$100,000
Construction
3
4
Bufflick
$1,400,000
$775,000
+$625,000
Road Land
Acquisition
The Regional Airport has various funding formulas for their capital improvement projects. The
following represents this list:
Project 1:
Requires a $3,000 local match.
Project 2:
Requires a $30,000 local match.
Project 3:
Requires a $110,000 local match.
Frederick County Public Schools
98 Rank
97 Rank
Project
98 Cost
97 Cost
Difference
Description
1
1
Back Creek
$9,200,000
N/A
+$9,200,000
Elementary
School
7
2
Gainesboro
$10,000,000
$8,700,000
+$1,300,000
Elementary
School
3
4
Transportation
N/A
N/A
$0
and
Maintenance
Facility
4
5
Third County
$30,000,000
$32,000,000
-$2,000,000
High School