PC 12-15-93 Meeting AgendaFILE 10T
AGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMNIISSION
The Old Frederick County Courthouse
Winchester, Virginia
DECEMBER 15, 1993
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB
1) Meeting'Minutes of November 3, 1993 ........................ A
2) Bimonthly Report ...................................... B
3) Committee Reports .................................... C
4) Citizen Comments ..................................... D
5) Memo regarding a waiver to shared private driveway width. This property, owned
by Mr. Hazel V. Rehbock, is located off of Cedar Grove Road (Route 654), in the
Gainesboro District.
(Mr. Miller) ......................................... E
6) Recommendation and Final Report on the Alternate Wastewater Treatment Study.
(Mr. Tierney) ........................................F
') The proposed 1994-95 Capital Improvements Plan.
(Mr. Tierney) ............................ . ........... G
8) Report on the 1993 Planning Commission Retreat
(Mr. Watkins) ........................................ H
9) Other (No Attachment)
MEETING MINUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Held in the Board Room of the Old Frederick County Court House in Winchester, Virginia on
November 3, 1993.
PRESENT: Planning Commissioners present were: James W. Golladay, Jr., Chairman; John
R. Marker, Vice Chairman/Back Creek District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon
District; Manuel C. DeHaven, Stonewall District; Robert Morris, Shawnee
District; Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; Todd D. Shenk,
Gainesboro District; Ronald W. Carper, Gainesboro District; John H. Light,
Stonewall District; Beverly Sherwood, Board Liaison; and James Barnett,
Winchester City Liaison.
ABSENT: George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; S. Blaine Wilson, Shawnee District
Planning Staff present were: Robert W. Watkins, Director/Secretary; W. Wayne
Miller, Zoning Administrator; Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Golladay called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
BIMONTHLY REPORT
Chairman Golladay accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's
information.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Comprehensive Plans & Programs Subcommittee (CP&PS)
Mrs. Copenhaver said that the CP&PS has submitted the revised Comprehensive -
Plan; which will be. presented to the Commission later in the meeting.
2
Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee /DR&RS) - 11/23/93
Mr. Shenk said that the DR&RS did not have a quorum at their last meeting so
they conducted some informal discussions
Historic Resources Advis= Board HRAB) - 11/16/93
Mr. Shenk said that the plaque design has been finalized and orders for
approximately 50 plaques have been placed.
:O, It W61 kII M
Subdivision Application #010-93 of L. H. Lipscomb to subdivide two lots for commercial.
use in the Stonewall Industrial Park. This property is identified as PIN #43-19-5 and is
located at the south side of Lenoir Drive in the Gainesboro District.
Action - Approved
Commissioner DeHaven said that he would abstain from this discussion and vote
due to a possible conflict of interest.
Mr. Miller, Zoning Administrator, read the background information. and staff
report. He said that there is an approved MDP for this industrial park and this proposed
subdivision conforms to the master plan. Mr. Miller said that L & L Builders' business is
located on Lot 5A and a site plan has been submitted for the construction of lease buildings on
Lot 5.
Mr. H. Bruce Edens of Greenway Engineering & Surveying Company, the project
engineer, was present to represent Mr. L. H. Lipscomb.
There were no citizen comments.
Since there did not appear to be any problems associated with this application, Mr.
Carper moved for approval. This motion was seconded by Mr. Light and unanimously
approved.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
approve Subdivision Application #010-93 of L. H. Lipscomb for two commercial lots in the
3
Stonewall Industrial Park.
(Manuel DeHaven abstained)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Conditional Use Permit #010-93 of Stacy and Debbir, Conard for a Cottage Occupation
to operate a cabinet and woodworking shop. This property is located off of Fairfax Pike
(Rt. 277) in the Opequou District.
Action - Approval
Mr. Miller said that the applicant proposes to do cabinet and woodworking
projects in a detached garage and is therefore required to have a CUP for a Cottage Occupation.
He said that the location is within a single-family home neighborhood on lots averaging 12,000
square feet. Mr. Miller said that the staff feels that the only potential problem with the use of
this site may be the noise generated by running equipment.
Mr. Stacy Conard, the owner and applicant, said that he has been doing cabinet
work in his garage since he built the garage three years ago. He was requesting the CUP at this
time for tax purposes.
The Commissioners were concerned about the intensity of the operation and their
questions centered on what Mr. Conard would be building, what tools he would be using, and
the storage of raw materials.
Mr. Conard explained that he will be building shelves, fiirniture, kitchen cabinets,
and picture frames and he will be using ordinary shop tools such as a table saw, joiner, band
saw, shaper, and planer. He said that he would not have a dust collection system and that
everything would be totally enclosed inside his garage. He said that there will be very little
storage of raw materials and no customers would be coming to his home.
Mr. DeHaven suggested that Mr. Conard check to see whether or not his
subdivision had any deed restrictions concerning this type of operation.
Mr. Miller said that he received one phone call from a neighbor concerning the
intensity of the use, but the caller did not object to the operation.
The Commissioners were satisfied that Mr. Conard's operation would not be
problematic for the neighborhood and upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr.
Shenk,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
4
approve Conditional Use Permit #{010-93 of Stacy and Debbie Conard for a Cottage Occupation
to operate a cabinet and woodworking shop in the Opequon District with the following
conditions:
All work shall be done in the enclosed building with the doors closed to limit any
potential noise pollution.
2. Hours of operation shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.
3. The applicant shall adhere to the State Fire Prevention Co& pertaining to woodworking
shops and obtain a change of use permit for the building in which the occupation will
occur.
Rezoning Application #002-93 of the UNIMIN Corporation to rezone 186.358 acres from
RA (Rural Areas) to EM (Extractive Manufacturing) for the operation of silica sand
mining. This property is identified with P.I.N_ #38-A-14 and is located east of Back
Creek Road (Route 704) in the Back Creek District.
Action - Approved
Mr. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director, said that subsequent to the Commission's
tabling of this rezoning at their meeting of September 1, 1993, representatives of the Gore
Community as well as a planning staff representative, Mrs. Copenhaver, and David Cress of the
Division of Mines, Minerals, & Energy met at the UNIMIN office on October 4 to discuss
citizen concerns. Mr. Tierney said that an open meeting for the public was also held that
evening in Gore and a meeting and tour for the Commission members and staff was held on
October 14.
Mr. Tierney said that UNIMIN has taken a number of steps to address
Commission and citizen concerns, including blocking of a jeep trail which was used as a
gathering place, cleaning up debris, establishing an ongoing dialog with community
representatives, and creating a periodic newsletter to be sent to area residents informing them of
relevant activities. He said that UNIMIN representatives are also looking into the possibility of
dredging out some of the siltation that has settled in behind the dam in Back Creek, as requested
by area citizens.
Mr. Tierney added that a request to modify the rezoning application has been
submitted to reduce the area to be rezoned from 211 acres to 186 acres. He said that this is a
result of excluding the land to the west of Back Creek from the application. He added that a
revised proffer had also been submitted. Item number three has been added which states that
siltation and sedimentation controls will be implemented as required by County, State, and
Federal regulations.
9
Mr. Douglas Swift, legal counsel for UNIMIN, came forward to introduce
Andrew Bradley from UND41N Corporation.
Mr. Andrew Bradley, Assistant General Counsel with UNIMIN, said that
UNIMIN feels that they have addressed or have Iaid the groundwork for addressing most, if not
all, of the concerns that were voiced at the last hearing and he felt they had developed a good
line of communication with the residents in the area.
Commissioners asked Mr. Bradley to explain the statement that UNEVEN was
looking into the possibility of dredging out some of the siltation behind the dam in Back Creek.
Mr. Bradley explained that the dam in Back Creek is maintained by UNIMIN and
some of the neighbors felt that the siltation behind the dam had gotten deeper over the years.
Mr. Bradley said that it hasn't proven to be an operational concern for them and they felt it acted
as a natural siltation barrier for downstream; however, since the residents asked that they
investigate it, they were going to see what was possible in terms of dredging it out. He said that
there are technical issues involved, such as the affect of putting a Iarger volume of water against
the dam and whether or not dredging equipment would sink if placed in there. Mr. Bradley said
that it was a fairly complex issue and will take a while to determine what they can do and
whether or not it will be beneficial.
Chairman Golladay called for citizen comments and the following people came
forward:
Mr. William C. Jeunette, resident of Gore, stated that UNIMIN has addressed the
concerns of the residents of the community, however, Mr. Jeunette was concerned about whether
the promises made by UNIMIN would be carried out long term. He said that the reclamation
is scheduled for spring and their stormwater management plan is still pending approval with the
DMME.
Mr. David Kohler, area resident, said that he has been involved with UNIMIN
over the last 14 years because they have used his company as a service supplier for industrial
maintenance. He said that over the years, he has observed that the UNIMIN Corporation and
management have continued to improve situations at the mine rather than make them worse. Mr.
Kohler said that his company works in a number of different mining and quarry operations
throughout the states of Virginia, Maryland, and West Virginia and he can not make that
statement about a lot of different mining corporations. Mr. Kohler said that speaking as an
individual citizen and as someone who has worked at the mine site and who has been involved
in making things better there, he felt that the environment at the mine site had improved over
the years.
Mr. Andrew Bradley said that David Cress of the DMME made it clear at the -
community meeting that if there are any problems down the road, community residents could call
Mr. Cress.
2
The Commission agreed that the UNIMIN Corporation had made a good faith
effort in that they had taken a number of steps to improve community relations and to correct
deficiencies at the site. They felt that the community's concerns had been addressed and the long
term commitments, such as reclamation and stormwater management, would be guaranteed
through monitoring by the DMME and the DEQ. A motion was made by Mr. Marker and
seconded by Mr. Light to approve the rezoning with the proffers submitted.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
recommend approval of Rezoning Application #002-93 of UNIMIN Corporation to rezone
186.358 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to EM (Extractive Manufacturing) for a silica sand surface
mine including all support and adjunctive activities related to such as described by the application
and plat submitted, subject to the following conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the
applicant and property owner:
1) No active quarrying or direct placement of overburden materials shall occur within 500
feet of either the present location of Route 704 or any currently existing dwelling.
2) No active quarrying or direct placement of overburden materials shall occur within 100
feet of the present location of Back Creek.
3) Siltation/sedimentation control will be implemented as required pursuant to applicable
County, State, and Federal laws and regulations, following receipt of all necessary
approvals, as mining advances along Cove Ridge.
Rezoning Application #004-93 of Hunts Cycle Shack to rezone 1.05 acres from RA (Rural
Areas) to B2 (Business General) for the sales and service of motor cycles and the sales
of used motor vehicles. This property is identified by PIN #28-A-133 and is located eight
miles west of Winchester on Northwestern Pike (Rt. 50 W) in the Back Creek District.
Action - Tabled for 30 Days
Mr. Tierney said that this business is currently operating under a CUP for
motorcycle sales and service. The applicant wishes to expand the use to include the sale of used
automobiles. He said that the original CUP was granted under the provision for reestablishing
a nonconforming use and the ordinance stipulates that the use shall be "...of equal or lesser
nonconformity than the original use in relation to intensity, type of use, dimensional requirements
or other requirements." He added that the CUP limits the activities on the parcel to interior sales
and service. The staff's position was that the expansion of the use to include exterior auto sales
would increase the intensity of the use over that of the original nonconforming use, therefore,
the applicant would require a rezoning to B2 in order to accommodate the desired use. -
Mr. Tierney added that the applicant has proffered that no more than 12 vehicles
would be kept for sale on the premises. He said that the staff felt the proffer was lacking in that
it did not address visual impacts and did not clearly indicate the intended use of the property.
The staff felt that the major issues appeared to be the visual impact from Route 50 of a used car
lot in an otherwise rural area and precedent setting for other rezonings along this corridor. The
staff recomended denial of the application.
Mr. Gary Ray Hunt, the property owner and applicant, was present to answer
questions from the Commission. Mr. Hunt said that had improved this lot by upgrading the
building and removing the trash. He said that he intended to keep his business here for the next
20 years. Mr. Hunt said that he proffered a maximum of 12 vehicles because as he gets older,
he may not be able to do all the mechanical work and may have to lean more towards sales than
service. He submitted a letter with signatures of business owners along the Route 50 corridor
recommending that the property be rezoned.
Chairman Golladay called for public comment and the following persons came
forward:
Mr. Lawrence Self said that he was in favor of rezoning the property.
Mr. David Kollar, a Gainesboro and Back Creek property owner, attested that Mr.
Hunt had improved the appearance of the property over the years. Mr. Kollar felt that this
particular piece of property couldn't be used for many other uses than what its currently being
used for.
The Commissioners were concerned about setting a precedent for future rezonings
in this area, however, they noted that this parcel has been the site of various commercial uses
for many years. They felt that the use of this parcel was limited because of its location and size
and they also recognized the fact that Mr. Hunt had greatly improved the appearance of the
property. They were concerned, however, that if the property was rezoned and sold, any
business use permitted under B2 zoning could be conducted here and those other uses would not
be compatible with the existing neighborhood. The Commissioners felt that the proffers were
not specific enough to preclude precedent setting in the area or other B2 uses, if the property was
resold. They felt that the proffers needed to specifically state Mr. Hunt's intended use for the
property, which was to continue the use of motor cycle sales and service with the addition of
automobile sales.
Mr. Hunt told the Commission that he would reword the proffer statement and the
Commission decided to table the rezoning to allow Mr. Hunt some time to accomplish that.
Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Carper,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
table Rezoning Application #004-93 of Hunts Cycle Shack to rezone 1.05 acres from RA (Rural
Areas) to B2 (Business General) for 30 days.
8
DRAFT UPDATE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Mr. Tierney presented a draft update of Frederick County's Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Tierney said that minor editorial changes have been made and the population, housing, and
employment figures have been updated to reflect the county's most recent data.
He said that no major policy changes were proposed.
Upon motion made by Mr. Thomas and seconded by Mr. Light,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously
agree to advertise the Comprehensive Plan for public hearing for their regular meeting of
December 1, 1993.
CANCELLATION OF THE NOVEMBER 17, 1993 MEETING
Upon motion made by Mr. Marker and seconded by Mr. Light, the Commission
unanimously voted to cancel their meeting of November 17, 1993.
0 0111,11 z
p.m.
No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjourned at 8:30
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Watkins, Secretary
James W Golladay, Jr., Chairman
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary
SUBJECT: Bimonthly Report
DATE: December 6, 1993
(1) Rezonings Pending: (dates are submittal dates)
Twin Lakes
4/04/90
Shaw
RA to
B2/RP
Unimin Corp.
8/09/93
BkCk
RA to
EM
Woodside Estates
08/27/93
Opeq
RA to
RP
Hunts Cycle Shack
10/07/93
BkCk
RA to
B2
(2) Rezonings Approved: (dates are Bos meeting dates)
None
(3) Rezonings Denied: dates are BOS meeting dates
None
(4) Conditional_ Use Permits Pending: (dates are submittal dates)
Stacy Conard 10/11/93 Opeq Cottage Occup -Cabinet
and Woodworking
White Properties 11/02/93 Opeq Off Premise Sign
(5) Conditional Use Permits Approved: dates are approval dates
None
(6) Site Plans Pending: (dates are submittal, dates)
Wheatlands Wastewater
Fac. 9/12/89
Opeq
Trmt.facil
Grace Brethren Church
6/08/90
Shaw
Church
Flex Tech
10/25/90
Ston
Lgt. Industrial
Lake Centre
05/15/91
Shaw
Townhouses
Red Star Express Lines
05/24/91
Ston
Whse. Addition
2
Freeton
04/27/92
Opeq
Townhouses
Salvation Army
12/03/92
Ston
Ofc/Housing
Norandax
10/28/93
Shaw
Showroom/Of c. Addition
Franklin Mobile Home
11/30/93
Shaw
Mobile Home Park
(7) Site Plans Approved: (dates are approval dates)
White Hall Church 11/04/93 Gain Classroom/Social Room
Round Hill Church 11/19/93 BkCk Vestibule
(8) Subdivisions Pending: (dates are submittal dates)
Lake Holiday Sec. 1B 08/25/93
Gainesboro
(9) Subdivisions Pending Final Admin. Approval: (P/C or BOS approval
dates
Abrams Point, Phase I
6/13/90
Shawnee
Hampton Chase
02/27/91
Stonewall
Lake Centre
06/19/91
Shawnee
Coventry Courts
12/04/91
Shawnee
Freeton
05/20/92
Opequon
Village at Sherando
06/16/93
Opequon
Paul Negley
08/11/93
Stonewall
Fredericktowne Est., Sec
8 & 9 10/06/93
Opequon
(10) PMDP Pending: (dates are submittal dates)
None
(11) FMDP Pending Administrative Approval: (dates are BOS approval
dates
Battlefield Partnership 04/08/92 Back Creek
James R. Wilkins III 04/14/93 Shawnee
Briarwood Estates 08/11/93 Shawnee
(12) FMDP Administ. Approved (dates are admin. approval dates)
None
(13) Hoard of Zoning Appeals Applications Pending:(submit. dates)
Wendy's/GK Foods 11/23/93 Opeq
Santen Builders 11/29/93 Opeq
Fred. Co. Sanitation Auth 12/06/93 Shaw
Mill
50' height/sign
10' rear/deck
341front & 43'side
expansion of Parkins
Wastewater Trmt. Plar
3
(14) BZA Applications Approved• (approval dates)
None
(15)BZA Applications Denied•
None
(16) PYRANS RECD. FOR REVIEW FROM CITY OF WINCHESTER
None
E. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT - ACTIVITY REPORT #46 Nov. 16-30
1. Route 642
Kris Tierney met with John Riley and Bob Watkins on
November 22 to discuss the approach to be used in acquiring
necessary right-of-way for the Route 642 realignment.
2. GIS
The staff is working on the production of a monthly GIS
newsletter. It will be distributed to other departments, the Board
of Supervisors, and the Planning Commission.
The staff is also continuing to update the tax maps and
zoning layers. Evan Wyatt produced seven maps for the Parks &
Recreation Department so they could apply for Recreational Access
Funds.
On November 17, Bob Watkins, Kris Tierney, Mark
Lemasters, and Evan Wyatt met with the GIS working group to discuss
budget strategies.
Lanny Bise completed the GIS informational brochure,
which is available at the Planning Department.
3. Capital Improvements Plan
The Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee met with
various county department heads, the county school system, Trish
Ridgeway of the Handley Library, and John Riley to discuss CIP
project requests on November 23. The Committee agreed to the
recommended contents and priorities of the 1994-95 CIP. The
Planning Commission will be considering the recommendation at their
second meeting in December.
On November 16, Kris Tierney met with Jay Banks of the
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee to discuss the role of
the Committee in the CTP formulation process.
Lanny Bise is working on the final draft of the CIP which
will be forwarded to the Planning Commission.
4. 3= Staunton District Roundtable Meeting
Bob Watkins attended the VDOT Staunton District
Roundtable meeting in Verona. ISTEA, new VDOT funding legislation,
and other programs were discussed.
5. Alternative Wastewater Treatment Study
On November 30, The Technical Advisory Committee for the
Alternate Wastewater Treatment Study of the Rural Community Centers
met to consider the final report from the consultant. The report,
along with the TAC's recommendations, will be forwarded to the
Planning Commission for consideration in December.
Lanny Bise produced the final maps for the RCC
Alternative Wastewater Systems Report.
6. Plans Review
Evan Wyatt reviewed plans for the Paramount Pest Control
office building, the Parkins Mill Wastewater Treatment Facility,
and the B & M Plaza Addition.
7. Site Inspections
Evan Wyatt conducted site inspections at the Lakeside
Condominiums, the Corps of Engineers building, and the Southeastern
Container site.
8. Site Meetings
Evan Wyatt participated in the following meetings:
a) met with EDC for a company interested in a 450,000
square foot distribution center at the Airport Business Center.
b) met with Eric Reed of Stonewall Industrial Park to
discuss requirements for recycling operations.
C) met with Terry Bishop to discuss requirements for
the construction of a new warehouse in the Stonewall Industrial
Park.
d) met with Wellington Jones to discuss requirements
regarding the Parkins Mill Wastewater Treatment Plant expansion.
e) met with representatives of Jubilee Christian Center
to discuss requirements regarding the conversion of the old Miller
Honda building into a new church facility.
9. Violations
Lanny Bise visited the Luke Burleson dump site to ensure
its compliance. Lanny is also continuing with updating the
violations portion of the Plan Review Database.
10. Other
Evan Wyatt met with representatives of Village at
Sherando to revise plats for a bicycle facility easement (ISTEA).
Evan also met with representatives of the Top of Virginia
Builders Association to discuss RP density issues and RP design
requirements.
Lanny Bise has begun work on a house numbering brochure.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703 /665-5651
Fax 703/678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator m
SUBJECT: Waiver for Shared Private Driveway Width
DATE: December 2, 1993
The attached plat is the proposed division of a 76.36 acre tract of
Rural Area (RA) zoned land owned by Mrs. Hazel V. Rehbock located
off Cedar Grove Road (Route 654). Mrs. Rehbock desires to do a
minor rural subdivision and establish a 5.335 acre lot to permit
Mrs. Irene Cockerham to build a home there. The proposed
subdivision meets all the requirements of the zoning and
subdivision ordinances with the exception of Article V, Section
144-31, C. (3) of the subdivision ordinance. This section requires
a 50' shared private drive to service the internal lot. Relief
from this requirement requires Planning Commission recommendation
and Board of Supervisor ruling.
There is a variable width (14' to 16') strip of land from Cedar
Grove Road back to the Rehbock property that serves as access to
this property. This is not a right of way, but rather a part of
the Rehbock property, a pipestem 1,224.24 feet in length. The
surveyor has established a 50' right of way across the Rehbock
property as required but neither he or the other principals have
been able to get permission from the two adjoining landowners to
establish a 50' ROW along the pipestem of the property out to
connect with Cedar Grove Road.
Mrs. Cockerham, acting on behalf of Mrs. Rehbock, has requested
relief from this requirement since efforts to obtain the additional
ROW have been futile. Three lots could be established on this
tract before the requirement for a state maintained road would come
into play. A restriction could be placed on the property limiting
the division of this tract to 3 lots and no state road would be
required.
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of this request with the
restriction that only one more lot could be divided from the parent
tract unless the necessary right of way is acquired to permit
construction of a state maintained road. This restriction should
be required on the final plat so as to become a part of the
recorded instrument.
9 North Loudoun Strect P.O. Box 601
Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604
1263 CEDAR GROVE RD
WINCHESTER, VA 22603
DECEMBER 1, 1993
I AM WRITING THIS LETTER FOR MRS HAZEL REHBOCK, WHO OWNS A FARM
AT 1263 CEDAR GROVE RD, FREDERICK COUNTY. MRS REHBOCK IS EIGHTY
SEVEN YEARS OLD AND WOULD HAVE TROUBLE WRITING. SHE IS REQUESTING
A WAIVER FROM THE PLANNING COMMISION OF THE FIFTY FOOT RIGHT
OF WAY REQUIREMENT TO A NEW HOUSE SITE.
MY HUSBAND EARL AND I MANAGE THE FARM FOR MRS REHBOCK. OUR FAMILY
IS CURRENTLY LIVING IN A SMALL FOUR ROOM HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY.
MRS REHBOCK WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A BIGGER HOUSE TO TAKE THE
PLACE OF THIS ONE. SHE WILL CONTINUE TO OWN THE PROPERTY AND
THE HOUSE.
TO COMPLY WITH THE COUNTY PLANNING GUIDELINES, MRS REHBOCK HAS
DIVIDED OFF A FIVE ACRE LOT TO SURROND THE NEW HOUSE SITE.
THE PROBLEM WE ARE HAVING IS GETTING RIGHT OF WAY FROM OUR
NEIGHBOR. THERE IS CURENTLY A LANE LEADING TO THE NEW HOUSE
SITE. MRS REHBOCK OWNS FOURTEEN FEET OF FRONTAGE ON RT 654
AND IT IS HER PROPERTY THE LANE RUNS ON. FOR THE NEW HOUSE
SITE THERE WOULD BE A FIFTY FOOT REQUIREMENT, SO WE WOULD NEED
AN ADDITIONAL THIRTY SIX FEET TO COMPLY WITH THE FIFTY FOOT
REQUIREMENT.
WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO OBTAIN A RIGHT OF WAY FROM OUR NEIGHBOR,
WHICH HAS DELAYED THE START OF THE HOUSE BUILDING. WE HAVE
MET ALL OTHER CONDITIONS REQUIRED BY THE PLANNING COMMISION.
AS WE ARE ANXIOUS TO START BUILDING BEFORE WINTER STRIKES, WE
ARE REQUESTING A WAIVER OF THE FIFTY FOOT RIGHT OF WAY
REQUIREMENT FOR THE NEW HOUSE SITE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
-Er
cna Coc-Wer h n-)
MINOR RURAL SUBDIVISION.-
HAZEL V. REHBOCK
GAINESBORO DISTRICT
FREDERICK COUNTY
VIRGINIA
15 NOVEMBER /993
ZONED RA
LOCATION
y r = z,000
1
PI.nam Valley r ,
T 1
kel
654
!
C Irl nan
3
SURVEYOR'S CERTI ICATE.-
1 CERTIFY THAT THE LAND IN THIS SUBDIVISION IS A PORTION OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO HAZEL V. REHBOCK BY DEED
DATED 5 APRIL 1972 1 DEED BOOK 389, PAGE 417.
OWNER'S CERTIFICATE-
ERTIFICATETHIS
THISDIVISION, AS IT APPEARS ON THIS PLAT, IS WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
DESIRES OF THE UNDERSIGNED OWNER, PROPRIETOR OR TRUSTEE.
WINCHESTER -FREDERICK COUNTY
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
FREDERICK COUNTY
PLANNING DErARTMENT
CHAPTER 165, ARTICLE V, SECTION 165 - 54 - A.
L. ALLEN EBERT
�L A11Fn EBERT
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
RIMSE) No.
- 35 W. 80SGAM Sr
1498
W/Jlpf MR, VA 27601-4740
7173 667 3233
U)
w
z
z
5
U <D
M N
-+ w o
i
ir
-i10N
�00 M
ma
Q
NJ�
0
J
IJ
0
N\jE
�oZPBET P 4�
6
59.06
5,9.2237..ry-
OTHER LAND
S 35. 45' 24" W -
v
p—IRON PIN (FOUND)
0 --IRON PIN (SET)
DA -APPROVED DRAINFIELD AREA
RA -RESERVE DRAINFIELD AREA
A• �
i R• �
5.335
ACRES
Ie?� 0
o
P.Lx \ 2
OD 3/ (W) 3A
I
N
N
( O
N�
r
,s e
26 32 E '
N \Q.
1102
coo;
aoo
s o
20
CENTER LINE OF
50' RIGHT-OF-WAY:
A -B: S18'30'18 -W-8.03'
B -C: N66'47'24"W-25.08'
C -D: N18.30'18"E-920.75'
D - E : CHORD N 30. 2r 4r W - 78.29'
ARC 88.65' RADIUS SL973'
E -F: N79.13'39"W-250.83'
F - G : CHORD N 74, 37' Or W - 199.53'
ARC 199.74' RADIUS 1.24L068'
G - H : CHORD N 53. 15' 46- W - 128.60'
ARC 130.45' RADIUS 223J99'
H - J : CHORD N 55' 48' 05" W - 129.01'
ARC 13L48' RADIUS 195.340'
J - K ; N 75. 05'00- W - 459.99'
K -L: N14.26'32"E-130J1'
--50_-_----R/W -__-- --- ./
GORDON C. HILDP 8480 D
ND
D.B. 328 -
cq HAZEL V. REHBOCK
r v D.B. 389 - P. 417
i d SEE D.B. 150 - P. 234
Y
H r
7 m
� O
1" = 100'
Z
0 100 200 300
c - /
Rp �Rp�
q0 F
REHBOCK
P. 417
W - P. 234
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703 / 665-5651
Fax 703 / 678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director ,�v'T 1 514. -
RE: Alternate Wastewater Treatment Study; Final Report and Recommendations
of the Technical Advisory Committee
DATE: December 6, 1993
ALTERNATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT STUDY
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
E
Below are the Planning Staffs thoughts as to what recommendations and/or
conclusions can or should be drawn from the Brooks report.
The report amounts to a first step in solving the existing and anticipated wastewater problems
for the three study areas, however, key policy questions/issues remain to be addressed.
The study has investigated and recommended the most likely alternatives for providing reliable,
long term, wastewater disposal for the areas. A more detailed investigation of the alternatives
will be necessary in order to determine which of the alternatives is in fact the most feasible.
The common denominator for all of the areas is the use of existing (or repaired/replaced where
necessary) septic tanks for the removal of solids, combined with small diameter lines (3 to 4
inches) to carry liquid waste to a central collection/treatment system. The method of treatment
will vary depending on the particular circumstances of a given area.
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) feels that the next step in this process needs to be
that of addressing the outstanding policy decisions. The issues which need to be resolved are:
9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601
Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604
* Will the Round Hill area be permitted to tie into the existing sewer line lying just to the
east of Route 37? This will determine which of the alternatives suggested for this area
//should be pursued. AA
,/,,v—Q fIK'i — S,K�lt Sown �r 3��/c.�3 i..� �•c �����
* Will the Sanitation Authority accept the responsibility for operation and maintenance of
the proposed collection and treatment systems? If the Authority is unwilling or unable
to undertake this role then some other means of operating the proposed systems will need
to be developed.
* Will connection to a system (assuming ownership, maintenance, and design issues are
resolved) be mandatory? The feasibility and effectiveness of any of the proposed systems
will depend greatly on the participation of the residents/homeowners within the study
areas. (The TAC believes that some form of financial assistance to those households
unable to bare the cost of connecting to a centralized system will have to be part of
whatever program is ultimately developed.)
An issue somewhat outside the scope of this discussion, but one worth consideration, is whether
the County wants to entertain the possibility of running waterlines to the Clearbrook/Brucetown
area at the same time as the proposed central collection system? There could be significant
economic benefits in coordinating these two efforts.
As the above issues are being addressed, the Planning District Commission could be looking into
what types of funding sources might exist to assist with the next phase of planning, and
ultimately the design and installation of the chosen alternatives.
This "second phase" would involve a more thorough investigation of the feasibility of
alternatives. Field work to examine the sites proposed for non -discharge systems (spray
irrigation and/or constructed wetlands) would be required, as well as efforts to determine the
limits that would be imposed by regulatory agencies on discharges into the various streams.
Additional work would have to be done to determine the feasibility of obtaining the easements
that would be needed in order to implement any sort of central collection system. A significant
amount of work would be involved in the actual detailed design of the collection and treatment
systems.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703 / 665-5651
Fax 703 / 678-0682
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director �15w,
RE: Proposed 1994-95 Capital Improvements Plan
DATE: November 29, 1993
Attached is the 1994-95 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) as recommended by the
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee at their meeting of November 23, 1993.
A number of changes were made in the way in which projects were ranked as well as the
information which was required from departments submitting requests. Project request
forms were revised to provide additional information (such as how cost estimates were
derived) in a format that is more easily followed. In addition, the decisions concerning
project priority were made with the assistance of a structured evaluation process developed
by the Planning Staff. This evaluation rates proposed projects on the basis of how well they
meet seven established criteria. A more detailed description of the process is attached to
this memorandum.
COST SUMMARY
The proposed CIP contains 33 projects with a total cost of $87,986,001. This figure includes
the estimated debt service on all projects except the County Offices, as the means of funding
for this project is as yet undecided. The total does not include Sanitation Authority or
Landfill projects which are paid for out of fees generated and are made a part of the CIP
in the form of addendum. Of this amount, $51,724,700 would come from the County's
General Fund over a five year period (not including debt service). As presently proposed,
projects scheduled in the first year (1994-95 fiscal year) would have a total County cost of
$10,763,353 including estimated debt service for all projects with the exception of the County
Offices.
9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601
Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604
PROJECT SUMMARY
Schools: Sherando High School and the James Wood Ridge conversion have been
completed. These were the top two projects in the School Board request from last year.
The only new projects in this years request are the replacement of chillers at Aylor Middle
School and Bass Hoover Elementary and the replacement of a section of the roof at James
Wood. The rest of their projects were all in last years plan in one form or another.
Parks and Recreation: Parks and Recreation has proposed a new bicycle facility as their
number one priority. The bulk of the cost of this project will be funded through the ISTEA
grant which the County received. The remaining requests remain unchanged form the 1993-
94 CIP.
Airport Authority: This is the first year that the Airport has been included in the CIP. The
Airport Authority has their own Capital Improvements Plan which is reviewed and approved
by the FAA. Since many of these projects rely in part on County funding we felt it
appropriate that they be included in the County's CIP. The Airport projects include a
Taxiway relocation, land acquisition for, and the construction of a T -hanger taxiway and 16 -
unit T- hangar.
Engineering (Landfill): All but one of the projects included in the Engineering requests are
new. The Middle Road compactor site was included in last years plan, but it too has been
expanded. The new projects proposed are; closure of two landfill sections, development of
ten acres of new landfill space, construction of a leachate treatment facility, a
composting/waste inspection facility and the expansion of the citizens convenience center
at the landfill.
Sanitation Authority: The Sanitation Authority projects remain essentially the same as last
year with the exception of the Water Storage Tank and Department Headquarters being
moved ahead of the extension of certain waterlines.
FREDERICK
' rr COUNTY
CAPITAL P"ROWMENT PROGRANMENG
The forms discussed below were developed to be used to evaluate requested Capital
Improvement Projects. The first form (which is attached) contains a list of seven evaluation
criteria. Each criterion has been assigned a weight which reflects its relative importance
when compared to the other criterion. The second form is to be used to record the rating
which is given to each project.
In utilizing the evaluation forms, projects are listed by department. Each project is reviewed
against all of the criterion and given a rating between one and four. A score of one being
the lowest, indicating that the project does not meet that criterion and four being the
highest, indicating that the project fits the criterion perfectly. The rating is entered in the
corresponding cell, then the rating is multiplied by the weight assigned to that criterion and
this resulting score is entered to the right, in the same cell. The scores which are given to
the projects for each of the seven criteria are then totaled across the table and the total
entered in the far right hand column. Only the resulting scores after the ranking is multiplied
by the weight are totaled These total scores can then be used to assist in ranking projects.
The higher the score the higher the ranking.
Below is an example showing the total score derived for a hypothetical request for a new
elementary school. The weights corresponding to the criteria are shown beneath the
criterion. The ranking given to projects for each criterion has been entered to the left in
the corresponding cell. The score (the rating multiplied by the weight) has then been
entered the right of the cell. The total score of 39 was arrived at by adding up the scores
(the number to the right of each cell) for each individual criterion.
CRITERION
and
WEIGHT
cam— lo
C—P-
Plan
H—Itk
safes
welfare
txPuy
Required
Dian'bute
Scnim
FAMom;c
Impact
1 Related
to Otbcr
Projects
Public
support
T
O
T
A
3
4
4
2
2
3
3
DEPARTMENT
/PROJECT
S O R E = R AT I N G x
W E I G HT
L
SCHOOLS
New Elem.
School
2/6
2/8
2/8
3/6
1/2
1/3
2/6
39
FREDERICK COUNTY
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PR OGR A MMI V_
PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA
FJ_
-TOPIC
DESCRIPTION
WEIGHT
Does the Project conform to, or
Conformance to
contribute to the attainment of
1
Comprehensive Plan
goals/objectives of the Comprehensive
3
Plan? Is the project consistent with
established policies?
2
Public Health, Safety
Does the project improve conditions
or Welfare
affecting health safety or welfare? Does
4
it eliminate a clear health or safety risk?
Is the Project required in order to meet
3
Legal Requirement
a State or Federal mandate or some
4
other legal requirement?
Does the project meet a special need of
some segment of the population that
Equitable
has been identified as needing
4
Distribution of
assistance? Would the project provide
2
Services
equivalent services to a population
group that is currently under served
relative to other areas of the county?
Is the project essential to, or would it
encourage some form of economic
development? Would the project
5
Economic Impact
improve the tax base, reduce operating
2
expenses, produce revenue, or otherwise
have a positive effect on the local
economy.
Coordination with
Is the project necessary for the
6
other Projects
successful completion of other projects?
3
Is the project part of a larger project?
II % .I
1'nhlir tiippnvt I
Auecounty resiuents fully informed and
3 II
I
supportive of the proposed project? I
II
4-f,,federi"ck
CAPITAL IMPROvEMEyTS
?LAN
1994-1995
FISCAL YEAR
P
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ADOPTED BY THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS.
m
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
FREDERICK COUNTY
1994-95
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 plan as they are completed or as
priorities change. The plan is intended to assist the County 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.
The annual review process begins with the submission of capital expenditure requests from
County departments and citizens in the fall of the year. These requests are evaluated by the
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee, a subcommittee of the Planning Commission,
using a list of seven evaluation criteria. Each criterion is assigned a weight which reflects its
relative importance when compared to the other criterion. The Committee then meets with
representatives of departments making expenditure requests and determines a recommended
priority and amount for the various requests. This recommendation is passed to the Planning
Commission which in turn makes a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.
The CIP is strictly advisory. 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 to the future it is projected.
PROJECT RE COMMENDATIONS
1. SCHOOL BOARD PROJECTS
Construction of Sherando High School is complete and its doors opened in September of 1993.
The James Wood Ridge Campus was converted from a facility serving grades 11 and 12 to a
facility serving grades 9 through 12. The conversion of the James Wood Amherst Campus
serving grades 9 and 10 to the James Wood Middle School serving grades 6 through 8 has been
partially completed. The facility is now handicapped accessible and the interior renovations are
complete. The replacement of the air conditioning system for 12 interior classrooms has been
delayed until the summer of 1994.
The renovation of the air conditioning at James Wood Middle School was originally scheduled
to be completed during the summer of 1993 as part of the James Wood Amherst renovation
project included in last years CIP. However, due to a mathematical error during the bidding
1
process, the air conditioning portion of the project was not completed. The School Board did
retain money in the budget from the original allocation and this project is scheduled to be
completed in the summer of 1994. The school also has a number of leaks in the roof and is in
need of a partial roof replacement of approximately 10,000 square feet.
Some renovation of Senseny Road, Stonewall, and Robinson elementary schools, as well as
Frederick County Middle School, is also proposed. Senseny Road Elementary renovations
include the replacement of the existing roofing system that has been plagued by leaks and the
installation of air conditioning. Air conditioning is also proposed at Stonewall Elementary.
Proposed renovations to Robinson Elementary include the installation of air conditioning and the
replacement of large windows to improve energy efficiency. Frederick County Middle School's
proposed renovation includes the replacement of the existing windows with new, more efficient
units, upgrading of electrical capacity, and the installation of air conditioning. All of these
projects were included in last years CIP but were delayed until this year due to budget
considerations.
Federal regulations concerning the use of CFC's require that by 1995, their use be discontinued.
In order to comply with this regulation it is necessary that the chillers, which are part of the
HVAC system at Bass Hoover Elementary School and Robert E. Aylor Middle School, be
replaced.
Funding is being requested for a new transportation garage. This project involves the purchase
of land, construction of the new garage, bus parking, and refueling areas. The existing
maintenance facility has reached the point where it is difficult to house all of the school system's
buses and still provide service to an increasing number of County vehicles from other
departments, in particular the Sheriffs Office, as well as vehicles from Planning, Building, and
Parks and Recreation. As a result of recommendations in the recently completed management
study, additional planning for this project has been put on hold until a detailed analysis of the
County's transportation needs can be completed.
It is possible that the site recently purchased along Route 7 could serve as the location for a new
585 student elementary school, a 1250 student high school, and a new transportation garage.
Factors affecting this will be the availability of funds, the rate of increase in school enrollment,
and the haste with which a new transportation facility becomes necessary.
2• PARKS AND RECREATION PROJECTS
Master plans for the Clearbrook and Sherando parks were adopted in 1987, which describe a
complete program for park improvements. These Master plans reflect the recommendations of
County residents and conforms to national standards as outlined in the Virginia Outdoor Plan.
Several projects are planned in and around Sherando Park. The County was awarded an ISTEA
Transportation Enhancement Program grant to build a Bike Way System This 2.45 mile facility
�7Vi11 Cwn1P+ cw �reral LV Jldentlal areas in southern Frederick �^.,viiilly. The bi�y%ie pard 11aJ been
designed to link the residential developments and park land on the north side of Route 277 with
Sherando Park and Sherando High School. In addition to other improvements at Sherando Park,
two projects are planned that will be used by Sherando High School, the proposed soccer
complex and softball complex.
2
Several projects are planned for Clearbrook Park including a tennis/basketball facility, an open
play area, support facilities that includes landscaping and renovation of existing entrance road,
an exercise/picnic area, and a shelter with a sound stage and seating.
In an effort to reduce the gap in the provision of services to the western portion of the County,
the Parks and Recreation Department is proposing to purchase park land in western Frederick
County that will be the site of a nature center/picnic area.
3. SANITATION AUTHORITY PROJECTS
The Sanitation Authority is proposing five projects to be included in the CIP for the next five
years. In order of priority, they include:
The Expansion of the Parkins Mills Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Frederick County Water Treatment Plant (to be completed in December
1993)
The Water Storage Tank at the Authority Headquarters Site
5 Water Transmission Lines
2 Water and Sewer Lines
The Water Transmission Lines will include providing service to Miller Heights, Bufflick
Heights, Westview subdivision, Route 50Nictory Lane, and Stonewall Industrial Park/Lee
Avenue. The Water and Sewer Line project will provide service to a portion of Route 522 South
and Boundary Lane.
4. HANDLEY LIBRARY
As part of a master plan prepared for the Handley Library by a library consulting firm, it was
recommended that a library be built in southeastern Frederick County. A library in this area
would enable the Handley Library to provide service to the growing population in southern
Frederick County. The Library would need a minimum of 4.5 acres of land. A 34,00 square
foot building is proposed which could be expanded, in stages, ultimately to 50,000 square feet.
5. LANDFILL AND COMPACTOR PROJECTS
The Public Works Department is proposing seven projects to be included in the CIP for the next
five years. They include:
Landfill Closure - Existing 20 acre Site
Leachate Treatment Facility
3
Closure of Cells A and B, Phase I
Landfill Development - 10 acres
New Compactor Site
New Composting/Waste Inspection Facility
Expansion of Citizen's Convenience Area
The two Landfill closure projects, the development of 10 acres of new Landfill space, and the
Composting/Waste Inspection Facility are all projects that the Landfill is required to undertake
in order to comply with regulations imposed by the Department of Environmental Quality.
6. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
The County's administrative offices located at 9 Court Square and 9 North Loudoun Street are in
need of substantial renovation in order to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act.
Furthermore, additional space is presently needed to allow departments to operate efficiently. At
this point, no decision has been made as to where these offices might be built. The priority for
new office space is becoming increasingly urgent with the Americans With Disabilities Act
deadline of July 1995.
PROJECT FUNDING
Proposed funding for the new County Offices will be obtained either through a moral obligation
bond or general obligation bond.
School projects are funded through loans from the Virginia Public School Authority. Sanitation
Authority projects will be funded by the Sanitation Authority working capital funds and Virginia
Resource Authority Revenue Bonds. Landfill projects are funded by retained funds generated by
the landfill fees.
Funding for Parks and Recreation projects will come from the unreserved fund balance of the
County. The Bicycle Facility project will be funded through a Recreational Access Fund grant,
an ISTEA Transportation Enhancement Program grant, and a 20% match from the general fund.
In order to carry out the remaining Parks and Recreation projects in this plan, the Parks and
Recreation Commission needs to actively. seek private sources of funding or cooperation.
Funding for a Frederick County Library will involve a contribution from the County general
fund, a bond, donation of land, and substantial fund raising efforts by the Library Board.
M
1 JINew County
Roof
Conditioning
ienseny Meme
kir Conditioning
itonewall EIemi
sir Conditioning
:obinson Eleme
Jr Conditioning
ennis/Basketbe
:mmniax -
gay cava -
learbrook
helter/Stage
eating -
learbrook
pen Play Area/
Iater Tower
I Gd -
learbrook
UA -
angar
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
DRAFT f `'ITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
1994-95
7,500,000
7,500,00011 Available
500,000 380,804
500,00011 380,804
FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGI, 4
DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
1994-95
-FOOTNOTES -
The
FOOTNOTES -
The New County Office Complex will be funded by either a General Obligation Bond or Moral Obligation Bond.
Information regarding Impact on debt service is not available for the New County Office Complex due to the fact
that It is not known which type of bond will be used, what the Interest rate will be, or how long it will be Issued for.
It may be possible to fund the Senseny Road Elementary Roof Replacement In the current Fiscal Year if there are
enough funds remaining from the Sherando High School project.
All Winchester Regional Airport Authority projects are based on Frederick County funding 50% of the project cost.
All School Board projects are funded through loans from the Virginia Public School Authority.
The Winchester Regional Airport Authority Is stili undecided about how the Aircraft Storage Hangar project will
be funded. Therefore, we have left the County Contribution columns blank.
7
FREDERICK COUNTY SANITATION AUTHORITY
SEWER AND WATER PROJECT PRIORITY LIST
PRIORITY 1 EXPANSION OF PARICINS MILLS WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
Description: Expand the existing 0.5 MGD Parkins Mills Plant to 2.0
MGD.
Capital Costs: $5,130,000
Justification: Must meet the demands of additional wastewater treatment
capacity between FY -92 and FY -94 and provide capacity for five to ten
years of growth in the Stephens Run Service Area.
Construction Schedule: Begin FY -93 with completion in FY -94.
PRIORITY 2 FREDERICK COUNTY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description: Construction of a 4.0 MGD plant to treat water drawn from
the quarries west of Stephens City.
Capital Costs: $2,493,000
Justification: To provide potable water for the Authority and the Town
of Stephens City more economically than relying solely upon purchase of
water from the City of Winchester.
Construction Schedule: Completion in December 1993.
PRIORITY 3 WATER STORAGE TANK AT AUTHORITY HEADQUARTERS
SITE
Description: Construction of a 0.5 million gallon hydro -pillar storage
tank. -
Capital Costs: Estimate $950,000
Justification: This water tank will provide reserve/emergency storage for
the Stephens Run Service Area.
Construction Schedule: Completion in October 1994
PRIORITY 4 WATER TRANSNIISSION LINES
a) Miller Heights Water Distribution Line
Description: Install 3,800 linear feet of eight -inch water line.
Estimated Costs: $72,000
Construction Schedule: Contingent on availability of funds
b) Bufflick Heights Water Distribution Line__
Description: Install 2,000 linear feet of eight -inch water line.
Estimated Cost: $60,000
Construction Schedule: Contingent on availability of funds.
c) Westview Water Distribution Line
Description: Install 1,100 linear feet of eight -inch water line.
Estimated Costs: $33,000
Construction Schedule: Contingent on availability of funds.
d) Route 50 - Victory Lane Water Loop
Description: Install 5,500 linear feet of twelve -inch water main.
Estimated Costs: $140,000
Construction Schedule: Contingent on availability of funds.
e) Stonewall - Lee Avenue Water Loop
Description: Install 7,900 linear feet of twelve -inch water line
connecting Stonewall Industrial Park to Lee Avenue.
Estimated Cost: $313,000
Construction Schedule: Contingent on availability of funds.
PRIORITY 5 WATER AND SEWER LINES
a) Route 522 South Sewer
9
Descriptio,.: Installation of approximately 14,300 ►near feet of
eight -inch pipe, 11,200 linear feet of twelve -inch pipe, 1,200 linear feet of
six-inch force main, and 50 manholes.
Estimated Cost: $72,000
Construction Schedule: Contingent on availability of funds.
b) Boundary Lane Water and Sewer Line
Description: Install 1,400 linear feet of eight -inch water line and 1,100
linear feet of eight -inch sewer line.
Estimated Cost: Water $45,400 =-
Sewer $46,750
Total $92,250
Construction Schedule: Contingent on availability of funds.
FREDERICK COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
LANDFILL PROJECT PRIORITY LIST
PRIORITY 1 LANDFILL CLOSURE
Description: This project includes the closure of 20 acres of existing
landfill space in accordance with current Department of Environmental
Quality requirements. The closure will include the placement of a 12 -inch
intermediate cover, 18 -inch impervious layer, a 40 mil liner, a drainage
geotextile, a 24 -inch soil/topsoil layer and gas vents spaced 200 feet.
Capital Cost: $1,600,000
Justification: The closure of the existing landfill is required by the
Commonwealth of Virginia's Solid Waste Regulations.
Construction Schedule: Begin FY -93 with completion in the summer of
FY -94.
PRIORITY 2 EXPANSION OF CITIZEN'S CONVENIENCE AREA
Description: This project will include an expansion of the existing
convenience area to accomodate an additional 50 cubic yard open top
10
container. This expansion will includc an extension of the existing
retaining wall and concrete slab, relocation of existing fencing,
minor grading and paving.
Capital Cost: $25,000
Justification: This expansion is needed to accommodate the increased
influx of bulky items such as furniture, construction debris, and other
wood products. Currently, there is a 50 cubic yard container which is
continuously being overrun on weekends and holidays.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY -94.
PRIORITY 3 COMPOSTING/WASTE INSPECTION FACILITY
Description: This project will include the construction of a pole building,
approximately 60'x 120' in dimension to accommodate sludge composting
and required random waste inspections. It is anticipated that the project
will include a wood pole building, a 6-111ch concrete floor and an
underlying leachate collection systen-L The project will be constructed on
landfill property to take advantage of the existing leachate collection
system.
Capital Cost: $85,000
Justification: This project is considered necessary for the following
reasons:
1) Composting sewage sludge would provide an economical source of
needed topsoil used to cover closure areas. The Landfill is currently
maintaining 60 acres of closed landfill and anticipate an additional 90
acres over the life of the new expansion. Composting sewage sludge will
assist us in meeting recycling mandates imposed by the Department of
Environmental Quality.
2) The proposed composting facility can also be used for the random
waste inspections required by the Landfill's new permit.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY -94.
PRIORITY 4 NEW COMPACTOR SITE
Description: This project includes the construction of a compactor site in
the vicinity of the intersection of Middle Road and Marlboro Road to
replace the container site on Middle Road. The development of a
compactor site includes site grading, paving, construction of a concrete
pad and a concrete retaining wall, and the installation of a trash
11
compactor. _.i addition, it is anticipated that the site ill be fenced and
landscaped.
Capital Cost: $51,000
Justification: The existing container site off of Middle Road is
continuously being overrun causing an excessive amount of litter on
adjacent property. This site is also experiencing a great amount of illegal
dumping from contractors and citizens outside of Frederick County. The
installation of a compactor site would afford the Landfill the opportunity
to monitor the inflow of refuse, control illegal dumping and eliminate the
unnecessary litter.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY -94.
PRIORITY 5 DEVELOP 10 ACRES OF NEW LANDFILL SPACE
Description: This project includes the development of approximately ten
acres of sanitary landfill space as outlined in Permit #529, Phase I - Cells
C and D. It is anticipated that this development will have a life between
three to four years.
Capital Cost: $2,000,000
Justification: This project is required by the Department of
Environmental Quality if Frederick County wants to continue to operate a
sanitary landfill.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY -95.
PRIORITY 6 CONSTRUCTION OF LEACHATE TREATMENT FACILITY
Description: This project includes the construction of treatment facility
to treat and discharge leachate which is currently -being collected and
transported to Parkins Mills Treatment Plant for treatment. The facility
would include an additional holding pond for biological treatment as well
as a chemical processing station prior to discharge into the Opequon.
Capital Cost: $150,000
Justification: The Landfill is currently collecting the leachate in a 1.5
million gallon lined lagoon. The leachate is then pumped and hauled to
the Parkins Mills Treatment Plant for treatment. The projected economic
analysis (25 year life) indicates that a treatment facility would provide a
more economical treatment alternative after leachate production reaches a
constant of 3,000 gallons per day.
Construction Schedule: Completion in FY -95.
12
PRIORITY 7 CLOSURE OF CELLS A AND B, PHASE I
Description: This project encompasses the closure of Cells A and B,
Phase I. This closure will be performed in accordance with the details and
guidelines set forth in Permit #529.
Capital Cost: $1,400,000
Justification: Required by the Department of Environmental Quality.
Construction Schedule: Begin in FY -96 and may carry over into FY -97.
13
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703 /665-5651
Fax 703 / 678-0682
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frederick County Planning Commission
FROM: Robert Watkins, Directorw`'.11,
SUBJECT: Report on 1993 Planning Commission Retreat
DATE: December 6, 1993
The following is a summary of some of the discussions at the retreat. More detailed notes
are attached.
1. John Foote - Mr. Foote discussed the role of the Comprehensive Plan, the
Virginia Growth Strategies Act, impact fees, community development authorities,
zoning decisions, and the federalization of land use.
2. General Discussion The following issues were discussed:
Route 37 - Means for speeding up the results were discussed.
Application fees - The possibility of phasing in increases to the CUP fee was
discussed along with other possible improvements to the CUP process.
Public meetings - Creative approaches to publicizing meetings were discussed.
3. Service Evaluation - The following are some conclusions that can be drawn from
the written evaluation:
More education on planning issues is needed for the Planning Commission.
Better information on various County activities is needed.
Responses to questions could stand some improvement.
Suggestions were made to improve information on history of applications,
provide better maps, improve presentations, and avoid hand outs at the
meeting.
9 North Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601
Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604
It was suggested that public meetings be limited to issues of great public
interest, and improve publicity with news articles and other means.
It was suggested that better information was needed on organizing public
support, education for new members, state regulations and legislation, updates
on projects, overall county plans to improve traffic, impact fees, community
development authorities, and mixed development ordinances.
It was suggested that the commission needed more information on options,
that more attention to citizen sensitivity was needed, and that more feedback
on Board actions was needed.
Notes on John Foote's Presentation
Planning Commission Retreat
November 1993
The Comprehensive Plan is playing an increasingly important role in land use
decisions. If a decision is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plans, it has a
90% chance of being upheld by courts. Political battles are shifting from zoning
decisions to planning policy.
The Virginia Growth Strategies Act is now a state planning act controlling capital
expenditures by the State. Under the act, the Planning District Commissions would
play a role of'regional moderator on land use disputes between jurisdictions. An
important new provisions is the specific legal requirement that zoning conform with
the Comprehensive Plan.
Impact fees are now possible for roads, sewer and stormwater management
facilities in Virginia.
A new possibility is Community Development Authorities. These are special
taxing districts that can provide for a broad range of public facilities. They would
be funded by a surtax imposed by the Board of Supervisors.
Zoning decisions can be upheld legally if they are reasonable. Procedures are
critical. Central to recent decisions is the question of whether legal procedures were
followed.
The federalization of land use control may result from new environmental
legislation and regulations.
NOTES FROM NOVEMBER 1993
PLANNING COMIVIISSION RETREAT
ISSUES DISCUSSED
Route 37 Study: How can we speed up progress on the study?
Suggested a meeting between appropriate agency representatives, especially
VDOT "higher-ups", and the County. Apply whatever pressure we can
politically.
Application Fees: How much should the fees be raised?
Suggested raising the CUP fee incrementally over a couple of years rather
than all at once. There seemed to be no objection to the site plan fee change.
Involve utilities in Corridor Studies: This was suggested as a means of making
corridor appearance efforts more successful. Witness the results achieved through
the coordinated approach used on Berryville Avenue.
CUP Procedures/Requirements• Are there ways to streamline the CUP application
process?
There were a number of suggestions offered. One was to look at the new
process adopted by the City of Winchester whereby CUPs are handled
administratively by staff. The staff can make the determination that the
nature of the application requires the traditional public hearings etc. There
was also discussion of a review of the entire CUP structure.
* Are there uses that should be allowed by right that now require a
CUP?
* Could we develop general standards that would determine when a use
requires a CUP? Such things as revenue and traffic generated
numbers of employees, and visibility should be considered.
* Could we allow for a limited size sign in association with a home
occupation without requiring a CUP?
* Could we broaden the definition of home occupation in order to
include additional uses currently requiring a CUP?
Public Meeting - Better, more creative notices are needed. A TV preview of the
meeting was suggested.
Other - Battlefields, the payment of county taxes before the acceptance of
applications, and the impact of the Disney proposal was discussed.
Frederick County Department of Planning and Development
Service Evaluation Form
November 13, 1993
RESULTS
L Please rate the following services provided by the staff:
Needs
Excellent SatisfactoEy Improvement
Information in Agendas 12 _ 4
Staff Presentations 12 4
Committee Meeting Materials 11 2 1
Information on County Activities 2 11 2
Responses to Questions g g
Education on Planning Issues 4 10 2
Organizing Public Meetings 13 1 2
General Staff Support 12 4
2. What improvements would you like to see in agenda materials, committee
materials, or other support materials?
• More on Administrative Approvals
• Prior history on rezoning or subdivision so we know more at public hearings
• Difficult to assess materials received at meeting
• Better maps and more aerial photos
• History of complaints on rezonings and cup's
• Don't recite written report, add additional info., reasons, precedents, laws and
practices that substantiate staff report.
• Less materials handed out at meetings
• Location maps from road name books
3. How could public meetings be better organized and conducted?
• Hold meeting only if great public interest
• More news articles publicizing meetings and not just general advertising
• More publicity and broader coverage
4. Are there particular issues about which you would like to receive better or
additional information?
• How to organize public support and activity to more effectively influence state and
federal agencies and actions which impact community
• Information on other county activities and decisions
• Education to new members on current county policies
• New state regulations and mandates
• Changes and additions to legislation
• ISTEA and VA. Growth Strategies Act
• Updates on particular projects
• Rezoning issues, phasing issues, traffic- studies and overall county plans to
improve traffic
• Impact fees, Community Development Authorities, Mixed Development
Ordinances
S. What general improvements would you like to see in the support provided you by
the staff ?
• Provide more information on options which the commission might pursue
• More attention to sensitivity to citizens and their concerns
• More feedback on actions taken by BOS