Loading...
CPPC 03-14-94 Meeting Agenda140131 FROM: RE: COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development LMEM Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Director 1 ` J, 7 Meeting Date and Agenda 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 DATE: March 9, 1994 There will e a meeting of the Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee on March 14, 1994, at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room of the Old County Court House. Members will recall that at the last meeting we discussed the results of the Alternate Wastewater Treatment study that had been conducted for three of the County's rural Community Centers. A number of issues need to be addressed regarding pressure for residential/commercial growth that might be expected to accompany the provision of some type of centralized wastewater treatment. Committee members requested additional information on the existing size and number of dwellings in the three Community Centers studied, details concerning the design of the recommended collection system, and the implications that providing conventional sewer service to Round Hill would have on rezoning requests in the area. Staff has attempted to answer these questions within the attached materials. Please let me know if you are unable to attend. AGENDA 1) Discussion of Round Hill, Clearbrook and Brucetown Community Centers. Attached is information pertaining to the size, number of dwellings and degree of sewage disposal problems for each of the three Community Centers. 2) Discussion regarding the impacts of providing access to central sewer on rezoning requests. See memo attached. 3) Discussion of Sanitary Districts. Attached is a memo containing information on the creation and administration of Sanitary Districts. 4) Other. 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 FACTS AND FIGURES ON THE COMMUNITY CENTERS COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development MEMO To: Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee From: Lanny Bise, Planner I Lc Re: Summary of Rural Community Center Information Date: March 7, 1994 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 The question was raised at our last meeting as to the size of the rural community center boundaries. Therefore, the staff has decided it would be helpful for the committee to have a recap of the information for each community center. As you may remember, the members of the staff, the Planning District Commission, and the Health Department surveyed the community centers from July 20 to the end of September, 1992. Most of this surveying was done in the evening, when the majority of people are home. Based on the responses to the survey, the septic system for each property was graded as follows: A. Septic system appears to be functioning with no limitations. If there were no negative responses to any of the survey questions this rating was given. B. Septic system appears to be functioning but there are minor limitations with the site. This rating was given if at least one negative response was given. C. Septic system appears to have major limitations. This rating was given when two or more negative responses were given but there was no sewage on the ground or in adjacent waterways. D. i=aiiing. This rating was given when there was sewage on the ground or there was running water in the house with only a pit privy for sewage disposal and a gray water discharge. SURVEY RESULTS Round Hill The Round Hill area consists of approximately 1,164 acres and contains 271 dwelling units. 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 Of the 271 homes in the Round Hill area, 141 (52%) were surveyed. Each home which was left out of this survey was visited at least once in an attempt to contact the occupants. Of the 141 homes surveyed, 54 (38%) of the systems were considered to be functioning properly, 57 (47%) were considered to have minor limitations, 21 (15%) were considered to have major limitations, and 9 (6%) were considered to be failing or have grossly inadequate septic systems. The most common limitation listed was inadequate area for repair. There were 47 homes (33%) having limited or no area for repair. Clearbrook/Brucetown The Clearbrook/Brucetown area consists of approximately 1,321 acres and contains 153 dwelling units. Of the 153 homes in the Clearbrook/Brucetown area, 78 (51 %) were surveyed. Just as in Round Hill, each home that was left out of this survey was visited at least once in an attempt to contact the occupants. Of the 78 homes surveyed, 26 (34%) of the systems were considered to be functioning properly, 27 (35%) were considered to have minor limitations, 20 (25%) were considered to have major limitations, and 5 (6%) were considered to be failing or have grossly inadequate septic systems. Just as in Round Hill, the most common limitation listed was inadequate area for repair. There were 25 homes (33%) having inadequate or no area for repair. Another contributing factor to the conditions in Clearbrook/ Brucetown is the age of the septic systems. At least 62 (81 %) of the systems surveyed were over 15 years old. A majority of the systems 15 years old and older were installed at least 30 years ago. The Health Department determined that the vast majority of the on-site systems are beyond their useful design life. Please contact me if I can be of further assistance. Breakdown of System Performance - Round Hill Total of 141 Systems Evaluated Inadequate 6.40/ Major Limitations 14.9% Satisfactory 38.3% Minor Limitations 40.4% Breakdown o4ftT System Age - Round Hill Total of 141 Systems Evaluated Over 15 Years Old 79.4 nder 15 Years Old 20.6% Breakdown of System Performance - Clearbrook/Brucetown Total of 78 Systems Evaluated Minor Limitations 35.1% Inadequate 6.5% Satisfactory 33.8% Reserve Area Availability -Round Hill Total of 141 Systems Evaluated Potential 66.7% Limited or None 33.3% Breakdown of System Age - Clearbrook/Brucetown Total of 78 Systems Evaluated Over 15 Years Old 80.5( nder 15 Years Old 19.5% Reserve Area Availability - Clearbrook/Brucetown Total of 78 Systems Evaluated Potential 64.9% Limited or None 35.1% IMPACT OF CENTRAL SEWER ON REZONING REQUESTS IN ROUND HILL COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 / 665-5651 Fax 703/678-0682 TO: Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Kris C. Tierney, Deputy Planning Direct9i�_7 RE: Round Hill; Impact of Central Sewer on Rezoning Requests DATE: March 9, 1994 A question was raised at our last meeting about what implications providing sewer to the Community Centers would have on requests for rezoning. In particular, this question focused on the extension of a sewer line to Round Hill. This would depend, in part, upon the manner in which the sewer was extended. If the County were to decide to provide a sewer line to Round Hill, we would first need to establish a clear policy governing the conditions under which it was being extended. Traditionally, sewer extensions have taken place only within the bounds of the sewer and water service area (in the case of commercial or industrial areas) and/or the Urban Development Area (in the case of residential development). For Round Hill, an extension of the Sewer and Water Service Area alone would not be appropriate as such an extension precludes residential hookups. An extension of the Urban Development Area would essentially eliminate Round Hill as a Rural Community Center. There would be little or no distinction between the Round Hill area and any other portion of the Urban Development Area An expansion of the Urban Development Area implies that the County is willing to entertain the idea of residential as well as possible commercial/industrial development. While having land located within the Urban Development Area does not in -and -of itself insure approval of a requested rezoning (there are areas presently within the Urban Development Area that, for one reason or another, are not likely to be rezoned for development in the near future) it does place land one step closer to receiving rezoning approval. The staff feels that the County could establish a policy which permits the extension of sewer (and\or water) to a Rural Community Center without extending the Urban Development Area. We have already ' touched on the possibility of a Sanitary District as a means of funding and administering the system(s) that might be installed in these areas. As is the 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 case with Shawneeland, a Sanitary District could be supplied with central sewer without being subject to a great deal of development pressure. We would simply establish boundaries for the area to be served and policies governing the established area(s). This approach would provide a means of addressing the immediate need of existing structures, with the possibility of some infill, without creating the potential for the scale of growth that might accompany inclusion within the Urban Development Area. Some additional research is necessary in order to determine the level of control which the County could exercise over requests for expansion of a sewer system within a Sanitary District. As we discussed at our February meeting, one of the issues that will need to be resolved is to what extent the County is ready and/or willing to allow additional commercial/residential growth in the Round Hill area and at what scale. Perhaps the best way to address this question is through the development of a landuse plan for the area. This would involve extensive staff time as well as the attention of this Committee. The participation of the residents of the area would also be essential. DISCUSSION OF SANITARY DISTRICTS COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703 /665-5651 Fax 703 / 678-0682 TO: Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee FROM: Lanny Bise, Planner I DATE: March 7, 1994 SUBJECT: Sanitary Districts Per the discussion at our last meeting, I have compiled the following information pertaining to sanitary districts by researching the Code of Virginia and talking with Wendy Jones, Jay Cook, and John Riley. A sanitary district may be created by the circuit court of a County when 50 of the eligible voters in a proposed district file a petition for the creation of a sanitary district. If there are less than 100 voters in the proposed district the petition can be filed by 50% of the eligible voters. This petition shall contain the proposed boundaries of the sanitary district and the reasons for wanting a sanitary district established. It is up to the citizens to initiate the petition process, the County can go on record as either endorsing or opposing the petition. Once the petition is filed, the court shall schedule a hearing on the question of the proposed sanitary district. At this time, all interested persons (including the County) shall have the right to appear and show cause why the property under consideration should or should not be included in the proposed district. After this hearing, the court shall decide whether a sanitary district will be created and will prescribe the metes and bounds of the new district. Once a sanitary district has been created, it's boundaries can be expanded by the circuit court upon petition from the Board of Supervisors and 25% of the eligible voters within the land proposed to be added. Once created, a sanitary district is a special taxing district and has the power to construct, maintain and operate water supply, sewerage, garbage removal and disposal, heat, light, fire -fighting equipment and power and gas systems, or to contract with any person, firm, or corporation to construct or provide these services. The Board of Supervisors can require owners or tenants of property within the district to connect with any systems and has the right of eminent domain for the acquisition of any needed right-of-way or easements. Without a sanitary district, the Board of Supervisors would have to pass a county -wide ordinance mandating hookups to either county water and sewer or to package systems. 9 North Loudoun Street P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Winchester, VA 22604 As a special taxing district, the Board of Supervisors can levy a tax on top of the Real Estate tax to cover operating expenses within the sanitary district. For example, the County assesses residents in Shawneeland $160 a year for unimproved property and $220 a year for improved property in addition to what they pay in Real Estate tax. The Board of Supervisors can raise that tax at any time after a public hearing. The Board of Supervisors is the sole governing body of the sanitary district. They can create an advisory committee, as is the case with Shawneeland, but can't create an entirely separate entity to oversee the sanitary district. In order to cover expenses such as start-up costs, the Board of Supervisors has the power to issue bonds for the sanitary district provided it does not exceed 18% of the assessed value of all real estate in the district subject to taxation. In summary, the advantage of creating a sanitary district is that it can address some of the financial problems of providing a service for a specific geographic area. Once established, residents can be required to hook up to services and only those benefiting from the service are paying for it.